
NASA estimates 1B ‘Earths’ in our galaxy alone - 51Cards
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/07/24/nasa-estimates-1-billion-earths-in-our-galaxy-alone/
======
idlewords
Missions like Kepler are what finally set me against human space flight.
Consider the incredible amount of science coming out of projects like this
($600M), New Horizons (750M) or the Planck telescope ($750M), compared to the
cost of the international space station (~$100B).

For less than the cost of a Shuttle launch, you can get scientific
breakthrough after breakthrough, as long as you're not trying to keep primates
alive on the thing.

~~~
rgawdzik
"It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet earth in the next 100
years, let alone the next 1000 or million. The human race shouldn't have all
its eggs in one basket or on one planet. Getting a portion of the human race
permanently off the planet is imperative for our future as a species." \-
Stephen Hawking

~~~
x5n1
Yet we have no idea how to build a self-sustaining colony of human beings
anywhere other than planet earth. And even here it does not seem to be the
case that we are self-sustaining, hence the need to leave the planet in the
first place.

A much better statement should be we need to create a self-sustaining
civilization here on Earth at any cost. Don't take it easy, it's no longer
business as usual.

~~~
rgawdzik
I don't think Hawking's primary concern was in the self-sustaining sense,
rather with the more immediate threats as in the 'asteroid/epidemic/natural
disaster' sense.

Hawking believes humanity needs to figure out space colonization ASAP.

~~~
x5n1
Well then what would be the point? Any thing that can cut off the life support
mechanism of the Earth to the Astronauts or the colony, would mean their
survival was no longer guaranteed.

~~~
rgawdzik
I assume in his quote when he means "Getting a portion of the human race
permanently...", he means resource independence from Earth, which would be the
point.

------
MrBra
And now this becomes even more relevant: [http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-
paradox.html](http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html)

~~~
elorant
"They're made out of meat"
[http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html](http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html)

~~~
Jemaclus
This has always been one of my favorites. I love it all over again every time
I read it! So creative -- and hilarious!

------
afro88
I think we're approaching another shift in our perception of our surroundings:

* The world is flat -> no, round

* The sun revolves around the earth -> no, Earth revolves around the sun

* Earth is a special unique snowflake -> no, there are 1B "Earths"

* Life is an incredibly rare event -> no, life is common throughout the galaxy and universe, just not how we thought it would be?

~~~
sktrdie
This is such a bad analogy (I think you got it from Neil Tyson or something).
What you've done is that you've taken examples of things that we got wrong.
However, there's _a lot more things_ we got right back then, that are still
right nowadays!

So your point that whenever we make predictions, we get them wrong, is totally
unfounded.

~~~
afro88
> (I think you got it from Neil Tyson or something)

Lol no, I haven't actually watched any stuff from him, I'm more of a Brian Cox
guy.

My point wasn't "whenever we make predictions we get them wrong", it was that
our accepted model of our universe is always in a state of flux - new
revelations come about every so often that totally change this model.
Hopefully the next revelation is that there is in fact a lot of life in the
universe and we aren't alone.

------
zw123456
One thing that I have thought about a few times is not just the time scale but
also the technological advancement and where we might sit in that continuum.
For example, spread spectrum radio technology that is used for some wireless
communications would be virtually impossible for us to detect even a couple of
decades ago. So even efforts like SETI may not see anything because you would
have to focus in on one of the habitable planets, at the moment in time when
they are using the type of radio technologies we know of, in the spectrum we
are looking at. It is possible that there are technologically advanced
civilizations out there but they moved past radio and are using something more
advanced like quantum entanglement modulation or something we don't yet have
the technology to decode. If there is a Galactic Internet, it is probably not
based on the modulation of electromagnetic radiation which is limited to the
speed of light.

~~~
sebastianconcpt
Exactly, electromagnetism is too primitive. Quantum entanglement modulation is
more plausible. Or some other phenomenon that could factor out space and time
like some hypotetical tech that can interface with Consciousness.

~~~
strange_quark
Unless we have a huge breakthrough in physics; one in which almost all our
previous knowledge is proved wrong, you can't transmit information with
quantum entanglement. Doing so violates relativity. Now maybe you can make a
wormhole or something, but it seems like EM waves are all we've got.

------
sktrdie
I really think that the great filter (of the fermi paradox) is behind us.
Meaning, some stupefying rare event happened either when (i) life began in the
first place, or when (ii) we evolved into advanced technological species.

For (i) I remember watching a documentary by Brian Cox which explained it
quite well (can't find the video anymore). Essentially it was about how all
species branch from DNA. The fact that there's only DNA, and not other types
of life constructs spread around our earth (heck not even 1), would make the
beginning of life (abiogenesis) a very rare event.

For (ii) it is an obvious rare event because out of the billions of species
that ever existed on earth, we're the only ones to have developed
technological intelligence. This "characteristic" evolved only once on earth -
where life is prolific -, hence by no means a certain development of
evolution.

~~~
x5n1
\- FTL is not possible.

\- Technological life exists for a few thousand years. They are a small blip
so basically nothing in terms of cosmic timelines.

\- Even if it sends out probes, those probes generally fall into the gravity
wells of the planets they are sent to over the millions of years.

\- Hence why intelligent life is common, but not often seen.

One thing to do, and we should do it fast... is to make self replicating
robotic probes that spread throughout the galaxy. I guess it should collect
samples of life once it finds it and find ways to seed the universe with it.
Or create some sort of Ark of Life to carry DNA from intelligent life forms to
other places where they could perhaps be cloned.

We should not focus on our own survival, but increasing the chances of
intelligent life in general to survive in the universe and find each other. We
are probably doomed as a species, but we can do that for the universe.

~~~
pavel_lishin
> _\- Even if it sends out probes, those probes generally fall into the
> gravity wells of the planets they are sent to over the millions of years._

[citation needed]; a civilization wouldn't just shotgun these things and wave
farewell, it would have instrumentation, guidance and engines on board.

~~~
x5n1
it might have all these things, but if you don't have ftl then they take a
very long time to get to their destination. tens of thousands to millions of
years. There are a few planets between 4 and 42 light years from here. At 4
light years using a Nuclear pulse propulsion it would take 100 years. At 40 it
would take 10x that, so 1,000 years. That's nuclear which requires a immense
amount of fuel which probably does not make sense for satellites. Other
mechanisms for prop. are much slower. By the time any of these get to their
destination, people who built them will be dead and possibly the civilizations
which have launched them will have gone extinct.

------
personlurking
Can anyone recommend documentaries or non-fiction shows that explore the what-
ifs of finding other earth-like planets?

In the previous thread on the discovery of this other Earth, an HNer commented
that since the other Earth is older, they could have sent probes over which
would have filmed the dinosaurs in HD, and that maybe we could request that
data from them. Here's another related thought
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9937353](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9937353)

Here's another what-if, in the form of a sci-fi film called Another Earth (a
personal drama wrapped around the idea of a twin Earth)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8hEwMMDtFY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8hEwMMDtFY)

~~~
pavel_lishin
Try
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Planet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Planet)

------
dharma1
I think is incredibly fascinating research , but to me it seems extremely
unlikely we as a species will ever leave earth.

Maybe we build some sentient AI who will be the next step in intelligence and
colonise space but the distances and hostily of space, as well as our total
dependence on the rest of the ecosystem on earth makes me think having a plan
B for humanity outside earth is a just a folly.

~~~
Sir_Cmpwn
I used to work at SpaceX. I firmly believe that Elon Musk will establish a
colony on Mars within my lifetime, and I hope to be there. Everything SpaceX
does is working towards that conclusion, and the plan is solid.

~~~
dharma1
Cool. I think SpaceX is doing incredible work and am positive we will see a
manned journey to Mars within our lifetime. But a sustainable colony? Sorry
but I don't see it happening.

The earth is a paradise, life depends on so many fundamentals which are
missing from Mars, as well as an intricate network of trillions of
interactions in the ecosystem which took hundreds of millions of years to
form. I think we are deluded if we think we can replicate that

~~~
Sir_Cmpwn
We can replicate that on a small scale. I don't think we'll see Mars
terraformed any time soon, but a sustainable colony is possible for sure. Mars
is rich in water and we can bring our own plants and animals.

~~~
dharma1
Sounds like prison sentence at best, where do I sign up? Sounds extremely
fragile without an atmosphere/magnetosphere

~~~
Sir_Cmpwn
It's not like you'd be alone. Plans are to have a thousand people or more.
This isn't an amateur effort, you know. You're viewing this scenario through a
pessimist's lens and you won't be convinced otherwise.

------
kctess5
"the solar neighborhood within 33 light-years"

How tragic, that even if humanity were to receive signal from another
intelligent species, we couldn't even close to possibly reach them with
current technology. Intelligent species watch each other rise and fall from
afar.

~~~
sktrdie
Actually with time dilation the people on the spacecraft could reach several
close stars in decades - if we construct fast enough spacecrafts (just needs
to be a small fraction of light of speed).

~~~
pavel_lishin
It would be a pretty great endeavour. We'd have to carry enough fuel to
accelerate and decelerate at the end, and enough fuel to push that fuel, etc.,
etc. (Unless Bussard drives work.)

I wonder if anyone's written that story - a relativistic vehicle is headed
towards the Earth, launched by a civilization that could get it up to speed
but not decelerate, trusting and hoping that our technology is advanced to
slow them down on arrival...

------
nowey
theres 500 stars in a radius of 50 light years. hopefully we will find plantes
there, a planet 1400 ly away is cool but very distant still if we want to
study it in detail

