安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题
Ther ARE eareas of the world where we don't know what's in there. But we can assume quite cloesly.
The fact is if we don't know in detail what's in there, we can look at EVIDENCE - left over stuff.
And the fact remains if there were LOADS of people living therein , the evidence of them marching around of just living would be apparent.
So with srespect, we DO know and can can give a pretty damned good assessment of how many people there are.
And in any case, even if ther were say, 1% out on however many billions it is now, so what? Does that it's completely useless and should be thrown out as you seem to suggest?
Of course not, that's bloody stupid. It dones't change anything meaningful.
I found an interesting article about the Sentinelese. They were not so much getting aid but, boats of scientists and tourists were leaving gifts for them up to very recent times. I knew they were getting some kind of "aid", I just thought it was the government doing it.
As for the Fermi Paradox, it is mostly referring to a tech tree R&D problem. There is a level of tech that could be found that wipes out that civilisation. e.g. When human morons figured out splitting the atom, they had no idea if that would start an unstoppable chain reaction in our one and only atmosphere... they did it anyway. That time they got lucky and only killed a load of civilians and contaminated land and the atmosphere with radiation on a relatively small scale considering what could have happened.
No, it is blatant guess work and assumptions, not fact. Go hang out with the homeless for a while and talk to them about if they exist on the system. Nobody knows how many people are homeless in just one city the size of London (population size approximately 10 million) never mind the rest of the world. Nobody is head counting in remote regions of the world. People in remote areas don't have a birth & death register, nor did the West until fairly recent history for that matter.
You cant look into every corner of a vast jungle for evidence, that will take forever and be nigh impossible. I can stay in one area for a month and leave no trace, natives can also do that.
You're thinking of the great filter, which is a proposed solution to the (nonexistant) Paradox. Supposedly the Fermi Paradox is that if there is so much alien life, why haven't we detected it? Despite me not yet hearing a reason they would have to contact us. I've heard people say that it's because we're looking that it's a Paradox, but (assuming radio is the end-all of communications and they haven't created something better we can't detect), a radio signal would have to be pointed directly at us and be fairly powerful for us to detect it, meaning they would still need to go out of their way to find us. As for visual telescopes, one of the features of the JWST is that it should be able to detect the shape of continents on exoplanets. If that's the pinnacle of our telescope technology it's no wonder why we can't see anything.
Xenomorphs? Nah.
Stereotypical green ayylmaos? That's cap my guy.
Microscopic organisms living inside an asteroid somewhere "out there"? Yes, aliens do exist.
I think being able to reach other system is only an indication of certain types of advancement.
Like what if they have starships but still don't have an internet, or democracy.
As I said we KNOW to within a certain degree of variance.
What you are not answering is of what difference does it make? If we're ONE out or several tens of thousands, what does that demonstrate according to you?
That science is wrong or something?
I have only heard the subject used in lectures on the Fermi Paradox but yeah, the great filter is part of it.
The message issue is that space is huge, there are a ridiculous amount of places to target in the hope to detect a signal. That is supposing that we even have the tech to detect such signals, should such signals even exist. When it comes to distance and our limited tech, it would take quite some time to send and receive messages over X light years distances. Unlike TV sci-fi where they have no lag in real time messages travelling light years instantly.
Humans have only recently created space tech. MW 18014 was a German V-2 rocket test launched in 1944. It was the first man-made object to reach "outer space".
The first man made object to actually go into orbit was the USSR's Sputnik I satellite in 1957. The SETI Institute was not even created until the mid 1980's. People need to keep that in mind when wondering where are all the alien signals are.
The JWST could end up catching unexpected events. It would be hilarious if the first thing it sees in a UFO diner parking lot on a galactic highway route. Turns out that we are backwater hicks in the middle of S creek nowhere near anywhere.
I hope they don't have Facebook or Twit etc. they are supposed to be more advanced than us if they have starship tech level.
The Strugatsky brothers would be laughing in their graves if that really is the case.
What relevance is this?
If I believe these figures (which I have NOT said I do so stop asserting that ♥♥♥♥), or I believe they're not accurate, so what?
What does it demonstrate please?
Are you saying it shows science is wrong? What?How can these figures being wrong to this degree do anything? Please explain your claim.