20,000 Earth-like planets across the Milky Way, if intelligent life evolved with equal frequency over the past two billion years, would leave 100,000 years separating the climax of each species if those climaxes were equidistant. We’ve only widely used electricity for a bit more than 100 years.
There is only 3 intelligent being in the whole universe mate. An Angel, Djinn and us Human. Unfortunely only 2 of those 3 being are alowed to colonize the whole universe. Which one you refer to??
True, but if one expands the search parameters to include the hundreds of billions of galaxies in our entire universe, then over a million intelligent alien species could be existing concurrently with us.
This is an enormous pro for the Rare Earth Hypothesis. (Please note; the Rare Earth Hypothesis allows for extra planetary simple lower life forms (bacteria, viruses etc...) but argues higher form complex life is incredibly rare).
Maybe it isn't just 1 cause that lead to intelligent life. Maybe it was all of the ones we thought of & more. Universe existing at all, perfect physics for life, rare earth, multi celled life happening, great filter, maybe another great filter, & finally intelligent life. What would the odds of all these being multiplied with each other happening? I personally find it cool, humans being the lone civilization in the universe, it's our mission to set off & spread life across the universe so that it may be experianced.
Rare Earth Hypothesis sounds to mining frenzy, like Lithium Hypothesis or Coltan Hypothesis. But nope: life finds a way, microbial life is almost everywhere and simulations suck. What is less clear every day is whether there is intelligent life anywhere, including Earth itself.
@@wildanS Yea but that's okay. We will die out or evolve into something unrecognizable at some point anyway. So being the species to spread the tree of life from earth to everywhere else would make us special, even compared to other intelligent life in the future.
@@lancebybee7962 probably many, humans and the earth are incredibly resilient. there are technologies and changes being made that will severely lessen the effects of climate change.
@@lancebybee7962 None because the crisis will trigger nuclear war. I've heard that roaches, maybe rats even, survive radiation quite well. But we won't.
Life is very rare in this entire universe. And our Earth is one of those very rare places to support life. Earth's orbit are also stable around the goldilocks zone. No wonder why the Earth never lost a specie by it's natural destruction. Even if we are destroying the planet, it would always heal up since it's in the goldilocks zone forever and ever.
I have to say you have some of the most interesting content I've been watching you for a bit and nobody else seems to find the interesting stuff like you do. Most channels either try to dumb down things to much or only talk about popular science news that I've seen 20 times or more else where. You always seem to be coming out with stuff I haven't seen done already as far as video content is concerned. Keep it up and thank you.
Thats a popular thought many scientists have, since the impact undoubtedly stirred and shifted the composition of the planet. Its possible even that it added a richer content of minerals as well as more iron prolonging the life of our magnetosphere. Other benefits are also plate tectonics. So far only earth is known to have such an active geological and atmospheric recycling and renewal mechanism, not even seen in similar sized local bodies like venus and mars. I remembering discussing this in the old sciam forums, and the consensus is that for one reason or another, the impact eas a net benefit, even essential for our unique position. As we have so farbobserved, simply being in the goldilocks zone and having a minimun size, are not by yhemselves sufficient facyors to sustain liquid water.
Yep. We got two planets worth of heavy radioactive elements and blew away a lot of the light crust. The spinning dynamo that is the earth's legacy of that impact resulted in a denser planet, spinning faster, with a molten conductive core. Our magnetic field attenuates the sun's variability (which is relatively minor in the cosmic sense) and retains our atmosphere. The enormous heat sink of our oceans also moderates the temperature swings and provides the heat engine that drives the weather putting potable water over most of the land masses facilitating life. Our CO2 shortage is being addressed by the use of fossil fuels and if the Climate Change advocates continue to fail, we should experience increase biosphere diversity. If the report concluded that it was an undefined stroke of luck, I would agree that it is lucky, but it has cause and effect. That is why I doubt that there will be any intelligent life anywhere near us. The odds are too remote. How many times to you think a planet is hit by another planet in just the right way to knock enough material off to make a large important moon that causes tides that wash life forms up onto land from the incubator of the ocean? Really small. Then, you need a species that is aggressive but weak and puny to survive by making tools and conquering the world. Not a common occurrence. Dolphins, whales, and octopi are examples of intelligent creatures that do not meet the criteria for intelligent life.
@@azmanabdula position in galaxy, size and brightness of the sun, jupiter sucking up asteroids, the moon's creation, the size of earth supporting a magnetic field, lack of asteroid collisions, early life creating oxygen, the ozone. So many things we are lucky helped us survive for so long!
@@xd-qg5dz after reading rare earth, I almost 100 percent convinced that earth is the only planet with complex life. Microbial life might be common though.
A flourishing droplet in the middle of a wasteland... luck? Theory: Extraterrestrial maintenance, we're something's little pet project. Yes, luck is apparent in many situations on Earth but the perfection of Earth in its ability to support life compared to every other known place is almost unbelievable.
Emu! 🤣 Also, I have a spare spaceship but the Dilithium Crystals were shattered on my last "night out", I really have an issue with the old Romulan Ale 😵
Tis why we need to go to Mars. Not because Mars is a "spare earth" (I never liked that theory either) but because in learning how to make Mars habitable, we will learn so much more on how to keep Earth habitable
@@Loki-sk7bi "tailor made"? By whom? I have a feeling I'm going to have a field day with the answer! 🤣 Let me guess, "gawd did it" has something to do with it? 🤣 The same gawd that can create everything but his own book and is so powerful and can do literally anything except convince people who actually have minds of their own to believe such a misogynistic, psychopathic bully exists, because he's somehow not powerful enough to appear to everyone and finally put that argument to rest? That gawd? 🤷🏻
When we describe something as "Luck" it just means there are too many details to describe exactly what or why it happened so it's simpler to just say luck
@@LuisAldamiz @Kettu It's called "humour" you should try it some time, maybe you both wouldn't be so miserable all the time, chill out, geez! And yes, I've done it many times, it's part of another concept you both might find hard to understand, it's called "fun", seriously, you really should try it! 🤣
Perhaps also worth mentioning is the possible role of the literally tons of bacteria living as deep as 12 miles or more underground, and estimated to contain more mass than all the _living_ material currently found 'above ground'.
Ayup. If we couldn't be here we wouldn't be here. Conditions are "just right" whether rare or common. Some species, somewhere in the universe, was first. Or only.
And if conditions are necessarily such that human life can exist, it seems unlikely that those conditions would ALSO be such that ONLY human life can exist.
@@TedToal_TedToal That's not really how the Anthropic Principle works. We can't say "The required conditions for life happened on Earth therefore it'll happen on other planets." It's more "The required conditions for life happened on Earth because there is life on Earth."
@@BenoHourglass I thought the anthropic principle said that the conditions in the universe (strengths of the fundamental forces, natures of interactions of quantum particles, etc.) are “tuned” to values that permit the evolution of earth life, because if they were tuned differently there wouldn’t be earth life? And if so, then what tuning would be necessary for life to exist on other planets too? Would it not in general be the SAME tuning, because those parameters are such as to make it LIKELY that the right conditions will exist for earthly life, and if it is likely that those conditions exist throughout the universe, why would it not be likely there would be life elsewhere? For that NOT to be the case, we are demanding a “double” set of tuning - tuned for earthly life, but tuned also to make any slightly different type of life unlikely.
@@TedToal_TedToal Well, it isn't really a "double set of tuning." Just that a universe that contains life has to have the necessary conditions to have life. It says nothing about how common that life is. Every planet in the universe could have some form of life, or this planet could contain the only living organisms in the universe. Well, what this study states is that out of every solar system that is identical to ours, we should expect 1 out of every 100,000 to be suitable for life... which doesn't really bode well.
@MetraMan09 Virtually every biochemists who have looked into abiogenesis have agreed that proteins never kickstarted life, let alone its evolution. Knowing that, how exactly is your protein shuffle thought experiment supposed to be relevant in any way? Oh, by the way, we don't know what size the universe could be, or whether this question even makes sense. All we really know is that we a have a pretty good _model_ for the _apparent_ size of the _observable_ universe. For all we know, the model could be wrong, appearances could be deceiving us, and most importantly: we can't know whether there is or isn't 'more universe' beyond the observability horizon.
To me, you are that 'Lucky Earth', Anton. There may be others, but they ain't as special as you are. I just love your simple yet smart way of explaining ridiculously complex topics. Keep going, buddy.
Moon, Jupiter, habitable zone of Sun, Earth's core, tectonic plates, carbon molecules (did I miss anything?) ... These are the ingredients of Earth's 'luck'
Mars and Venus lack two significant things that Earth has: The Moon, and position. We know the Moon affects Earth's core and rotation equilibrium. That's the most significant points for Earth's balance of life support. Basically the Moon regulates Earth's inherent volcanism too through the same tidal forces on the mantle by keeping it semi-evenly stirred.
Mars lacks mass venus got unlucky after 2+ billion years a volcanic resurfacing event happened and that boiled the oceans and carbon out of rocks same will happen to earth not because of volcanos but because of the sun growing larger and in 1 billion years earth's surface will be worse then venus
@Ryan Herst Planets wobble all the time and it is not seosonal... It wouldn't happen in a month, year or decade. So literally no great effect on life or it disappearence.
@@mertc8050 how wrong are you trying to sound lmao. The moon effects our surface plenty!!!! Stirring the water to create our common ancestor single cell
@@becausereasons3168 😂 While I love these videos. Many in the y2b space community take things way too seriously and everyone thinks they’re a scientist.
To keep with the theme of the video, no it doesn't. Earth is the only lucky planet life lucked it's way through. Life did not find a way on any other planet in our system.
This is perfect! With odds that low, the chance of two advanced species having to share rare resources is minimal; we'd only have to share data to get each other to worlds best suited for all involved parties
Einstein : luck? god doesnt play dice Neil Bohr: dont tell god what to do with his dice Alien supervising earth: Yeah dont tell god what to do with his dice
@@dbsti3006 There are tons of quite different concepts of what are gods, not only one. Even in the most brutal days of the inquisition and the reformation people still had quite different concepts of what is god, and as long as they shut up and repeated like parrots the "official" dogma they weren't persecuted. Those who didn't were exterminated.
Also having a strong enough magnetosphere could play a big part, but yeah I believe Luck or maybe probability is important. Thanks for another great video Anton!
...or from Theodore Woodward's dictum "When you hear hoofbeats, think of horses not zebras"... and I add to this: ..."if you are not in the middle of a group (I forgot the correct word for this) of zebras"
@@virtualrealitychannel2276 Plastic now is what hard wall cellouse cell walls was hundreds of millions years ago, when plants invented tree trunks. At first no bacteria could digest them, so dead trees just lay there littering the landscape. That became our coal reserves, but eventually bacteria figured it out. The same thing will happen with plastics. It will be as degradable as soggy cardboard as it represents high energy food to bacteria if they just could eat it, so in a few hundred to 100k years, most plastics will dissapear by themselves if left outside.
Excellent presentation, Anton. Thanks! Three things about Earth: a) you can't talk about Earth without including the Moon, the cycle of tides having an enduring and dramatic effect upon the planet; b) Earth has a liquid (and therefore differentially rotating) center that generates our magnetosphere--without which we would cook; and c) Earth isn't immortal--we could go any day. Love your channel...keep it up.
@@futavadumnezo No, they are not out of the question. We just haven't gotten there, but we are gaining speed. Revisit the subject in a couple of centuries.
Habitable for 4 billion years? Earth is a paradise of paradises!!!! The range where humans can flourish is so limited and yet we have had a million of years of this on Earth. Earth is a paradise of paradises!!!
I too really enjoyed this video, I hope you do more on the subject, I think the comments this time showed the interest... we all want to know more. It's fun to imagine there are other lucky beings out there. What are the chances they would be a lot like us? I feel lucky, and I am going to buy a lotto ticket, for fun. thank you Anton.
I always was of the mind that the answer to the fermi paradox was just the vast distances and the math of large numbers. But the more i watch you, the more i am convinced of the rare earth hypothesis...
There will be a few places that beat the odds in a cosmos this vast. We’re lucky. Or not. Make sure your life is a good one while you can. There is no do over.
The more we learn, the more scientists have to dance around the fine-tuned universe and intelligent design. Philosopher: God? Scientist: No, We got lucky.
"The more we learn, the more scientists have to dance around the fine-tuned universe and intelligent design. " Uh..? no? something being rare doesn't mean in any way that it was designed by a cosmic wizard. The arrogance of some people to think that we're ever so important that we have to be "fine tuned" is laughable. You're not that important. It also misses the forest for the trees, this planet was not "designed" so that us special chosen ones could be placed on it, like some sort of cosmic level editor, we exist because we adapted to the conditions on this planet. We are a form of universe matter only special because we give ourselves that condition.
@@FrikInCasualMode The best God would create something that works without intervention. Natural Laws work like that. Conclusion: God isn't in the gaps but also the bricks. . I actually espouse the NOM philosophy of science and religion, that they are "Non-overlapping magisteria," and think that all these arguments all show how funny it is to mix supernatural and natural domains. Mixing religion and science is like trying to prove that Beethoven was brilliant by measuring the spectra of his piano shellac.
I was developing this theory ever since I used to operate a bread dough making machine for pizza. As the machine churned the dough I would think about how close the moon was to earth it literally churned the earth. The yeast in the bread would be triggered to rise .
Interesting. After reading a book called The Social Leap by William Von Hippel I have started to think that intelligent life, least like us, will be very rare. The way we went from chimp-like to human was an amazing journey with us barely surviving to make it this far.
@@wiss256 - Just time: abiogenesis explains life and its easy development, life tends towards complexity because of competition, survival of the fittest, but it needs a very long time to reach "us" (or equivalent). Even "we" needed a very long time to reach civilization and even longer to reach science. We may well destroy all that in a blink as well.
Just look at the Carboniferous period. The CO2 was dropping to the point that would end life because of the woody plants creating lignin that couldn't be broken down. Along comes organisms that evolved to break down that lignin and stopped the CO2 from being sequestered forever. Life solved a problem that other life created.
The first of the two hypotheses you mentioned, that Earth's biosphere as a whole provides the necessary feedback loops to maintain habitability for itself, has been called the "Gaia Hypothesis ". Once Life gets started, it evolves to find a way to persist quite robustly.
I hope we’re not alone in the universe However, I hope there’s no widespread intersollar civilisation in the universe anywhere nearby. Let’s be honest, if our solar system gets seeked for ressources/colonisation, any space civilisation capable of coming to us would also have the technology to wipe us out like you crush an ant We currently do not posses the energy required to accelerate huge colony ships to 95% light speed If a civilisation posses the technology to supply enaugh energy to do that, it has plenty of energy to direct to a planet and kill everyone on it Even without any sort of weapon we might think of from games/movies, or nuclear/watever, they could do it Their ships technology themselves could be a weapon, they could accelerate a bullet shaped or sphere shaped, or a large asteroid from the edge of our solar system, and aim it right to earth at 95%+ light speed. The kinetic energy from 1k radius rock would definately kill everyone at such speed And there’s nothing we could do to stop it If we find any interstellar civilisation, it is in our best interest to everything we can go stay in good relationship with them, even if they literally take advantage of it by asking us lots of ressources/watever, as a war is the last thing we’d want For example, If they want to take 50% of our oceans, then we would have no choice but to accept to give that water to them, despite how terrible it would be for us
Even if they do, we're never going to know. The nearest galaxy is 25,000 light years away. Humanity will be extinct by the time ANY of our signals reach that far, let alone to get a response. Whether we're actually alone or not, we're effectively alone.
Humans require a whole ecosystem to be able to create viable colonies. The only reasonable way forward is A.I. doing the colonization. Turn some planets into something similar enough to Earth, even if it takes a billion years. All that to introduce humans to that planet by modifying the genetic code of local animals with potential, and finally teach them about civilization.
It will take 45,000 years for Voyager 1 just to get beyond the Oort Cloud. You think we can all fit inside a Voyager 1 space craft? one prevailing assumption even for a mission to Mars is the idea that there will be just one rocket to take everything up there all at once. I think it will take a hundred or 500 rockets to take all the supplies up there to establish a base. Even to the Moon, we should be sending up self-assembling modules right now. Look how many missions it took to assemble the "international" space station. More fundamentally, why we would we even go there, anyway? Robots would be far more efficient in exploring the various regions of the Moon and sending data back to Earth. We're centuries away from interplanetary travel, even if we don't destroy ourselves in the meantime.
@@rick9870 I agree. I'm fairly certain Elons "recruitment" of astronauts is purely performative; But he is absolutely a psychopath. I wouldn't be terribly surprised to learn that he is sending these people on an information-gathering suicide mission, fully aware there is no hope of them actually being able to accomplish anything :/
Before we run out of luck, we really should do everything to protect this planet's beautiful natural environment and not ruin it for future generations. Unless we make some radical breakthrough in fundamental physics that would allow us to build a warp drive so that we can explore the galaxy and look for second Earths, we can only reach other planets in our solar system. The financial cost of building a colony on Mars that would sustainably support even a few thousand astronauts would be absolutely massive, and that money could do far more good if spent on Earth to remedy the environmental mess we have collectively created. We need to care for what we've got, because there is no Plan B.
Abiogenesis. I think iBio channel has some good ones on that: it's reasonably pretty well solved nowadays (much better than just a few decades ago for sure, although there may still be some loose ends to fix).
@@LuisAldamiz Thanks! I'll have a look. Yeah, I know it's mostly solved, but from what I had heard it isn't completely, like you said, I think there are a few things yet to be found.
"chance" is simply a cop-out explanation that proves we don't know as much as think we do. Gravity isn't a force and chance isn't anything either. The Nova series on the planets speaks to how having a couple giant planets like Jupiter and Saturn intercepted a lot of asteroids that could have destroyed the Earth over and over, so the factors regarding the survival of the Earth are not all down here, but up there, too. The fact that Earth has a liquid core is a big factor, too. Then, there's all the elements on Earth which would have required probably many supernova explosions to cause so many fusions of atoms to create all the stable isotopes that exist on the earth. My bet is on Fermi.
James Lovelock had a lot of theories about this back in the 70s. He wrote a book early on called "Spaceship Earth". Over the next few decades he fleshed out his Gaia Hypothesis. Life and planet acting in harmonious union. I know it sounds like hippy shit, but it's the best explanation we have.
@@ronantaylor736 YI agree actually, even though the paper says that it is an alternative to Gaia it also is compatible, because if random feedbacks can stabilize a planet by luck, perhaps it only takes a small dose of Gaia type feedbacks to make a lot more planets stable.
It is overwhelmingly likely that other lucky sentinent beings are now asking the same questions, concluding that distances defeat us all - assuming that the evolution of intelligence does not always result in aggression driven weapons of mass self destruction. 🧑🚀
While I agree on 4th D beings being real. The amount of energy required to interact with us, is unfathomable. The technology would be so advanced that the desire of them to interact with us would not exist. Do you care about the bugs on your skin? The ant? The roach? Are you willing to spend your life trying to communicate with them? Just to say hi, or to let us know they exist? What do we have to offer them? Other than maybe being a good food source! For that matter let's hope they don't communicate with us! I hope for our fellow 3rd D brings in our own universe. Levels the playing field, with out laws of physics!
@@ricofico there are actually some very ancient greek myths that say that the gods feed on human suffering ... so yeah ... maybe these 4D beings do indeed see us as food as you suggested.
@@BrutusAlbion what if we are part of some shitty game where these beings can get to influence us, so that we can simulate the reality that they want us to. A way for them to experience outcomes that they normally wouldn't want to experience themselves.Think of how we for example can play gta 5. The main characters are being played or influenced by them, and we are just a bunch of unaware npcs.
@@ricofico Well, there are entomologists who spend their lives studying insects and are deeply fascinated by them, so that analogy doesn't entirely work. I'm not sure that projecting human power dynamics on to 4D beings gives us an actual picture of them. We humans are intellectually superior to our furry cat, dog, and rabbit domestic companions, yet we care for them and love them. If a 4D being has progressed significantly in that direction, then perhaps they see us the way we do small children or pets who need to be cared for. I realize this is again an anthropomorphism and there's no way to prove any of these speculations, but I'm just saying that one can make very different assumptions about 4D beings based upon what human traits we choose to anthropomorphize and project upon them.
Not enough credit given to the Moons role in preserving our planets dynamo and stability. We are essentially a binary planet system. Very rare and fortunate indeed!
Regardless. With our idea of the known age of the universe, the odds of Life emerging by random chance are so far astronomically past what would be considered a miracle, that it is absurd. Being alone, or surrounded in the universe by life, either way, is a miracle. You should give God the glory.
@@Xeridanus Chances and luck is somhow acceptable as scientific. Nah mate, you are so close minded, you can't even see it. You are the type of people who persecuted Keppler and Galileo for going against the grain.
Hi Anton, Great video as always, I did enjoy your perspective on this topic. Would like to raise a couple of questions, that are worth thinking about. 1. When you mentioned "... purely by chance. It was nothing but luck that created the planet that we know today..." (5:31), I would inquire as to what would be an opposing view to luck and/or chance besides creationism? Furthermore, I'd like to note that if given the possibility to account for all of the variables (not within our lifetime), in my opinion, it should be possible to successfully predict which planets are habitable, and which are not. Luck is like an enigma, and when we can't understand (mostly due to a lack of discovered variables) the predictability of an occurrence, it surely is the answer. 2. While you've covered a great deal of elements relating to planet's habitability, it looks like geomagnetic field was omitted. Wouldn't this be an important factor, that could potentially influence planet's habitability? Has it in the past? Will it in the future? Good day
The study left out one big factor: it only looked for Earth like planets and not Earth like moons orbiting gas giants. Such a moon could be further away from its star and still be habitable thanks to the extra energy from its parent gas giant, and the gas giant would absorb asteroids, shield it from cosmic rays, and regulate its rotation so it won't get extreme fluctuations in climate. Consider all the moons around our own gas giants vs the three planets in the habitable zone of our Sun, that means there could easily be a lot more moons with intelligent life than planets. As for why we haven't received any radio waves from a distant world, that's simple: distance. Our scientists can barely hear Voyager 2 and it's still in our Solar System. How the heck could they hear a transmission from a planet light years away that is broadcasted within its atmosphere?
Two planets meet in the void. "How do you do?" - "Oh, not so well. I have humans." - "Don't worry, that passes. I had it, too, a few billion years ago."
Yes we're the vermin and the planet has started the covid cull killing us off like a bad case of lice. And if that doesn't work one big eruption to knock us into another ice age will finish us of. Earth has sheltered us for billions of years and all we've done to it in return is destroy everything ravage the planets natural fuels and gasses I was thinking maybe the planet needed that to keep the core going. 🌋🌎🌐🏔️
1. Once enough elemental diversity is achieved on any astronomical object, life spontaneously can emerge by emerging pattern theory. (Regardless of billions of years of total sterile conditions). 2. Adaptive regenerating evolving organic chemical systems adapt to different conditions. 3. Nuclear elements in early Earth and weak sun changed over time by increasing powerful sun and weaker Earth nuclear elements. 4. Oscillation by asteroid impact and antipode volcanic activity also puts an overlay of natural fluctuation to organic chemistry, but also provide the complex elements needed for point 1.
Adds a new element to the Fermi paradox. Even taking into consideration the big things that lead to life on earth, like the the sun's relative stability, our orbit, the water, the moon, the magnetic field, plate tectonics, etc. To know that simply getting close may not be good enough to maintain that life long term is daunting. On the other hand, as it becomes more likely that humanity may be the first space capable species within a large causal volime of space, it adds motivation for humanity to spread life to other planets. It also may mean that snowball planets may be of great potential, as melting them may be all that's required to get a fairly earth-like planet with potential to stay that way way for an extended period of time
It's the other way around. Because we're here (intelligent life), it must have been a 'lucky' planet we're on. If it wasn't a 'lucky' planet we wouldn't made it and ponder about our luck.
@Eastern fence Lizard I would say more like a statistical inevitability. At least one planet (we know of) fulfilled the conditions for life, therefore life is there.. here. So rather like a duh-thropic principle
@Eastern fence Lizard I know, I was taking life too seriously, but you convinced me now. So I'll go and shutdown the computation farm your Universe is running on. I was too serious about life in it. Time to start anew.
You are so space oriented. You forget about things like the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation which is enormous in moving our planet from one cycle to another. You melt the polar icecaps, but that then drastically cools the oceans, bringing down temperatures everywhere, and a swing towards an ice age, which then starts the cycle all over in the other direction.
But you only need 1 another intelligent life in the universe to make contact. If there is another one is very primitive or is probably million of years more advanced than us, by chance it is hard that it is on the same stage than we are.
@@MicroClases_Ciencia Yeah that’s true. There’s bound to be intelligent life out there too. And like you said maybe even a million years more advanced than us. Who knows?
More and more reasons to hold to the Rare Earth Hypothesis; we're a Privaleged Planet for sure. Not only is Earth in the middle of the Liquid Water Habitible Zone, but it's also in the middle of the Ultra Violet Habitible Zone; look it up. Maybe Anton can do a VLOG on that...
*Humans get rid of all the plastic and pollution* Earth to humans- "Did somebody turn down the thermastat" Humans-"Hey look on the brightside! Endless snow day!!"
Carbon dioxide is required for plant photosynthesis. It was all getting locked up underground, and CO2 levels were edging down to a level where plants would become extinct. Then an ape evolved that dug oil and coal out of the ground and burned it.
I love that while he talks about Earth being so stable, all the Earths smack each other in the background. XD If you want to read a story where we see exactly how rare our type of life is, you should try out the "Long Earth" series. The characters travel to tons of different parallell Earths and there are so many that don't have any life at all...
Sean Carol said on les Fridman’s podcast that he doesn’t believe we’re in a simulation because there isn’t any aliens (not sure if he referred to the dyson dilemma) because the visible universe is so big just to simulate us... Isaac Arthur had a video on simulation hypothesis talking about ancestor simulation(basically people from the future simulating the past), and there were many interesting notions (e.g zooming in and finding more about our world...he explains it better) and the simulation could run till we explore the universe.
To the people reacting to the word "luck", give a few trillion trillion trillion tries for a non-zero probability and you'll likely get at least one right.
@Alan Sutella Absurd? Chance is integral to physics, my friend. Without accounting for chance, we could never hope to manufacture our technology nor tailor metallic alloys for specific purposes. Probability theory isn't the easiest for humans to wrap their heads around, though. The mind likes to have things explained less fuzzily. But maybe a crude probability experiment helps to think about this: If chances of earth remaining habitable in one year averages to 0.999 999 999. Formula: [Chance]^[years] 0.999999999
@@XGD5layer still clearly possible since you’re living here!!! “You’re fears are dumb” you realize there’s no intelligent design right? What a dumb thing to imply
@Alan Sutella Did you even understand what he told you? Doesn't seem like you do, because you just used the words "absurdly unlikely probabilities" when he just told you there are trillions of trillions of trillions of tries. It doesn't matter how low the probability is, it's the number of TRIES that matters. Probability x number of tries = number of expected successes. As long as the number of expected successes is higher or equal to 1, then we cannot conclude that there is intelligent design or that Earth was created by chance. All we can conclude is that we don't know.
In an old Outer Limits episode titled 'Wolf 359' a scientist recreated conditions on another planet to see if life would emerge but not in a computer simulation but physically real. Not an idea I would totally dismiss.
Indeed! If there were another planet even somewhat nearby, with human-like life forms, but are just 200 years behind us, we would almost certainly not detect them. Even if they are just 75 years behind us they would be difficult to detect. You can adjust time with distance, combined with the sensitivity of available instruments. If those inhabited worlds are a few years or centuries ahead of us, we could detect them, and they could also detect us - which would beg the question of why we don't have any visitors.... or colonizers.
@@noobFPV The Milky Way Galaxy is a big place. We have already found earth-like rocky planets in the goldilocks zone within a few light years. Exactly like earth - certainly not. Enough to develop life or intelligent life? Probably. The issue is when, and even if just off by a few centuries (over 4 billion years), and they're undetectable with current instruments.
@@rudra62 Yea, you hear, "same as earth", and than rocky planet 10 times the size of earth or some other BS, and you know you are talking to moron. Or "goldylocks zone" and then they say: around a red giant or binary star.... And you are like wow, really ?
I'm probably over-simplifying, but I thought there was a theorized feedback mechanism based on co2 between biosphere and plate tectonics? I.e. if planet gets colder, biosphere shrinks and slows on Co2 scrubbing whilst volcanic activity continues to pump co2 into atmosphere. As temperature increases biosphere expands and scrubs out more co2 reducing temperature. plate tectonics is important since is a continuous source of recycled co2 to eventually reset snowball earth periods. Would the simulations in the paper have accounted for plate tectonics? NB: Love this channel!
Ive joked about this when talking to a friend - almost every video makes earth feel even bigger and bigger snowflake. And now there is an actual video about how that is clearly the case.
That is called publication bias. Because we only know life on Earth, there are thousands and thousands of papers explaining why the Earth is so unique. If tomorrow we find life in an exoplanet, then there will be thousands and thousands of papers explaining how it is likely that life evolves in other planets. But the truth is we don't know how frequent life is.
@@MicroClases_Ciencia every scientist keeps using the life on earth. Like they think life would be on these earth like planets when they could probably exist on the hottest or coldest parts of other planets. Our understanding of life is only based of earth's life. Maybe if we find one on titan or europa maybe we will stop basing life that's like earth.
Life has survived multiple extinction events, including a snowflake earth global glaciation and the oppossite runaway greenhouse warming, it's kinda demeaning to compare it to "extra special" whinners.
20,000 Earth-like planets across the Milky
Way, if intelligent life evolved with equal frequency over the past two billion years, would leave 100,000 years separating the climax of each species if those climaxes were equidistant. We’ve only widely used electricity for a bit more than 100 years.
Sadly we will likely never see another civilization unless they are highly advanced.
fancy seeing you here you absolute legend
There is only 3 intelligent being in the whole universe mate. An Angel, Djinn and us Human. Unfortunely only 2 of those 3 being are alowed to colonize the whole universe. Which one you refer to??
True, but if one expands the search parameters to include the hundreds of billions of galaxies in our entire universe, then over a million intelligent alien species could be existing concurrently with us.
Chocolate rain
This is an enormous pro for the Rare Earth Hypothesis. (Please note; the Rare Earth Hypothesis allows for extra planetary simple lower life forms (bacteria, viruses etc...) but argues higher form complex life is incredibly rare).
It also would be an answer to why aliens would be interested in us: life is rare, intelligent life perhaps some orders of magnitude moreso.
Absolutely...and planets with alien life doesn't mean with carbon, oxygen and hydrogen. 👍
Maybe it isn't just 1 cause that lead to intelligent life. Maybe it was all of the ones we thought of & more.
Universe existing at all, perfect physics for life, rare earth, multi celled life happening, great filter, maybe another great filter, & finally intelligent life.
What would the odds of all these being multiplied with each other happening?
I personally find it cool, humans being the lone civilization in the universe, it's our mission to set off & spread life across the universe so that it may be experianced.
Rare Earth Hypothesis sounds to mining frenzy, like Lithium Hypothesis or Coltan Hypothesis.
But nope: life finds a way, microbial life is almost everywhere and simulations suck. What is less clear every day is whether there is intelligent life anywhere, including Earth itself.
Its clear that the chances of complex space faring life is about 400 trillion to 1 the same kinda number of habital planets.
"Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying."
--- Arthur C. Clark
if we're alone, there's more pressure on us to survive no matter what in order to preserve life... so it's more terrifying to me
haha, very cool
I hope we are alone because that would make us the ancients when the rest finally start popping up after we seeded life everywhere :D
@@DinosaurEmperor84 Most likely long extinct ancients at that point. Future life forms wondering what happened to the old ones.
@@wildanS Yea but that's okay. We will die out or evolve into something unrecognizable at some point anyway. So being the species to spread the tree of life from earth to everywhere else would make us special, even compared to other intelligent life in the future.
Definition of "Unlucky": Having a 3.5 billion year lucky streak come to an end during your lifetime.
climate change is not gonna end the world lmfao. its gonna suck, but it wont be the end. the earth has bounced back from much worse
@@sneakycactus8815 The question that is important is how many people will be inhabiting our favorite planet after that change?
@@lancebybee7962 probably many, humans and the earth are incredibly resilient. there are technologies and changes being made that will severely lessen the effects of climate change.
You wouldn't have liked Roman slavery either.
@@lancebybee7962 None because the crisis will trigger nuclear war. I've heard that roaches, maybe rats even, survive radiation quite well. But we won't.
Or how Todd Howard once said:
It just works.
Ahh, another human of Spiffing culture as well, i see
I've been a skeptical kinda person all my life but here in my latter years I wonder is this design of a creator?!
LOOOOL
Godd Howard is the best
Yeah, Mother Nature.
How rare life may be in the universe we can only guess, but it always seems wise to hug onto the life you have with maximum love and appreciation.
Nicely said. I love civilised comments, with no expectation of response. old UK duffer here :)
@@tim40gabby25 yea it is nice, I agree too :)
Life is very rare in this entire universe. And our Earth is one of those very rare places to support life. Earth's orbit are also stable around the goldilocks zone. No wonder why the Earth never lost a specie by it's natural destruction. Even if we are destroying the planet, it would always heal up since it's in the goldilocks zone forever and ever.
Our planet is pretty amazing
I have to say you have some of the most interesting content I've been watching you for a bit and nobody else seems to find the interesting stuff like you do. Most channels either try to dumb down things to much or only talk about popular science news that I've seen 20 times or more else where. You always seem to be coming out with stuff I haven't seen done already as far as video content is concerned. Keep it up and thank you.
I tried to stay a wonderful person but it wasn't enough for me. So I became a stupendously wonderful person.
Heavy cringe
I'm a stupendously stupid stupidhesd
@@wokedisease4277 lol
It's very hard to be a wonderful person due to ego and gluttony inherent in humans. Thanks for staying wonderful!
" a stupendously wonderful person. "
we lucky,
My theory is we wouldn't have lasted without the Moon impact and actually having the moon.
it is a theory but actually.. it has to be true so.. yes sir
What would happen if you drove the moon a few thousand kilometers away from earth? global flooding :)
Thats a popular thought many scientists have, since the impact undoubtedly stirred and shifted the composition of the planet. Its possible even that it added a richer content of minerals as well as more iron prolonging the life of our magnetosphere. Other benefits are also plate tectonics. So far only earth is known to have such an active geological and atmospheric recycling and renewal mechanism, not even seen in similar sized local bodies like venus and mars.
I remembering discussing this in the old sciam forums, and the consensus is that for one reason or another, the impact eas a net benefit, even essential for our unique position. As we have so farbobserved, simply being in the goldilocks zone and having a minimun size, are not by yhemselves sufficient facyors to sustain liquid water.
I agree. But I don't think you get to take credit for that one buddy 😀
Yep. We got two planets worth of heavy radioactive elements and blew away a lot of the light crust. The spinning dynamo that is the earth's legacy of that impact resulted in a denser planet, spinning faster, with a molten conductive core. Our magnetic field attenuates the sun's variability (which is relatively minor in the cosmic sense) and retains our atmosphere. The enormous heat sink of our oceans also moderates the temperature swings and provides the heat engine that drives the weather putting potable water over most of the land masses facilitating life. Our CO2 shortage is being addressed by the use of fossil fuels and if the Climate Change advocates continue to fail, we should experience increase biosphere diversity.
If the report concluded that it was an undefined stroke of luck, I would agree that it is lucky, but it has cause and effect. That is why I doubt that there will be any intelligent life anywhere near us. The odds are too remote. How many times to you think a planet is hit by another planet in just the right way to knock enough material off to make a large important moon that causes tides that wash life forms up onto land from the incubator of the ocean? Really small. Then, you need a species that is aggressive but weak and puny to survive by making tools and conquering the world. Not a common occurrence. Dolphins, whales, and octopi are examples of intelligent creatures that do not meet the criteria for intelligent life.
Luck or the moon, either way I'll take it.
The collision that made the moon was very lucky
So....luck my man
Dont forget the big asteroid vacuum, Jupiter, which may have saved us a few civilization ending collisions
@@AH-lw2bj True
and our position in the galaxy
@@azmanabdula position in galaxy, size and brightness of the sun, jupiter sucking up asteroids, the moon's creation, the size of earth supporting a magnetic field, lack of asteroid collisions, early life creating oxygen, the ozone. So many things we are lucky helped us survive for so long!
@@xd-qg5dz after reading rare earth, I almost 100 percent convinced that earth is the only planet with complex life. Microbial life might be common though.
A flourishing droplet in the middle of a wasteland... luck?
Theory: Extraterrestrial maintenance, we're something's little pet project.
Yes, luck is apparent in many situations on Earth but the perfection of Earth in its ability to support life compared to every other known place is almost unbelievable.
Look after mother earth peeps,its the only spaceship we got 😘
Emu! 🤣
Also, I have a spare spaceship but the Dilithium Crystals were shattered on my last "night out", I really have an issue with the old Romulan Ale 😵
Tis why we need to go to Mars. Not because Mars is a "spare earth" (I never liked that theory either) but because in learning how to make Mars habitable, we will learn so much more on how to keep Earth habitable
Our bodies are tailor made for it. I can’t imagine us doing so well in other environments both natural and artificial
@@Loki-sk7bi "tailor made"? By whom? I have a feeling I'm going to have a field day with the answer! 🤣
Let me guess, "gawd did it" has something to do with it? 🤣 The same gawd that can create everything but his own book and is so powerful and can do literally anything except convince people who actually have minds of their own to believe such a misogynistic, psychopathic bully exists, because he's somehow not powerful enough to appear to everyone and finally put that argument to rest?
That gawd? 🤷🏻
I hate the word "peeps"
When we describe something as "Luck" it just means there are too many details to describe exactly what or why it happened so it's simpler to just say luck
I can't be the only one here that smiles and waves back at Anton at the end of these videos, am I?
uh...
Weirdo
You fanbois are the worst!
@@LuisAldamiz @Kettu It's called "humour" you should try it some time, maybe you both wouldn't be so miserable all the time, chill out, geez!
And yes, I've done it many times, it's part of another concept you both might find hard to understand, it's called "fun", seriously, you really should try it! 🤣
@@DoctaOsiris - Humor is funny, you aren't.
Perhaps also worth mentioning is the possible role of the literally tons of bacteria living as deep as 12 miles or more underground, and estimated to contain more mass than all the _living_ material currently found 'above ground'.
Whenever they don't know the answer to something they say it's luck or chance. The truth is that they don't know it.
We'll have to whip out the ol' anthropic principle for this one..
Ayup. If we couldn't be here we wouldn't be here. Conditions are "just right" whether rare or common.
Some species, somewhere in the universe, was first. Or only.
And if conditions are necessarily such that human life can exist, it seems unlikely that those conditions would ALSO be such that ONLY human life can exist.
@@TedToal_TedToal That's not really how the Anthropic Principle works. We can't say "The required conditions for life happened on Earth therefore it'll happen on other planets." It's more "The required conditions for life happened on Earth because there is life on Earth."
@@BenoHourglass I thought the anthropic principle said that the conditions in the universe (strengths of the fundamental forces, natures of interactions of quantum particles, etc.) are “tuned” to values that permit the evolution of earth life, because if they were tuned differently there wouldn’t be earth life? And if so, then what tuning would be necessary for life to exist on other planets too? Would it not in general be the SAME tuning, because those parameters are such as to make it LIKELY that the right conditions will exist for earthly life, and if it is likely that those conditions exist throughout the universe, why would it not be likely there would be life elsewhere? For that NOT to be the case, we are demanding a “double” set of tuning - tuned for earthly life, but tuned also to make any slightly different type of life unlikely.
@@TedToal_TedToal Well, it isn't really a "double set of tuning." Just that a universe that contains life has to have the necessary conditions to have life. It says nothing about how common that life is. Every planet in the universe could have some form of life, or this planet could contain the only living organisms in the universe.
Well, what this study states is that out of every solar system that is identical to ours, we should expect 1 out of every 100,000 to be suitable for life... which doesn't really bode well.
I like those odds, looking at the size of the universe, Life is still throughout.
Microbial life, probably
Intelligent life, probably not
@MetraMan09 bro what's the point of your message . Universe is good enough, stop size shaming
@@09Ateam and you know this because......
@MetraMan09 look at the youtube expert 😂
@MetraMan09 Virtually every biochemists who have looked into abiogenesis have agreed that proteins never kickstarted life, let alone its evolution. Knowing that, how exactly is your protein shuffle thought experiment supposed to be relevant in any way?
Oh, by the way, we don't know what size the universe could be, or whether this question even makes sense. All we really know is that we a have a pretty good _model_ for the _apparent_ size of the _observable_ universe. For all we know, the model could be wrong, appearances could be deceiving us, and most importantly: we can't know whether there is or isn't 'more universe' beyond the observability horizon.
To me, you are that 'Lucky Earth', Anton. There may be others, but they ain't as special as you are. I just love your simple yet smart way of explaining ridiculously complex topics. Keep going, buddy.
Excellent Video. Great topic. Love your channel. Thank you for doing this work.
Agree very much😊
Forgetting the influence of the moon on the Earth for being habitable.
And Jupiter
and Goldilocks zone and our star
Moon, Jupiter, habitable zone of Sun, Earth's core, tectonic plates, carbon molecules (did I miss anything?) ... These are the ingredients of Earth's 'luck'
Mars and Venus lack two significant things that Earth has: The Moon, and position. We know the Moon affects Earth's core and rotation equilibrium. That's the most significant points for Earth's balance of life support. Basically the Moon regulates Earth's inherent volcanism too through the same tidal forces on the mantle by keeping it semi-evenly stirred.
Mars has a moon that causes minor earthquakes
Actualy moon has 0 role on conditions on surface other then tides and axial tilt of the planet. moon is NOT a factor here
Mars lacks mass venus got unlucky after 2+ billion years a volcanic resurfacing event happened and that boiled the oceans and carbon out of rocks same will happen to earth not because of volcanos but because of the sun growing larger and in 1 billion years earth's surface will be worse then venus
@Ryan Herst Planets wobble all the time and it is not seosonal... It wouldn't happen in a month, year or decade. So literally no great effect on life or it disappearence.
@@mertc8050 how wrong are you trying to sound lmao. The moon effects our surface plenty!!!! Stirring the water to create our common ancestor single cell
To use a movie reference: Life finds a way!
It's also very lazy way of saying I don't know and or it's to hard.
@@clevertaco328 it's a joke salty taco
Your telling me that all males could produce babies?
Don't be preposterous man!..... Oh look there's a young velociraptor!
How'd that bloody happen?
@@becausereasons3168 😂 While I love these videos. Many in the y2b space community take things way too seriously and everyone thinks they’re a scientist.
To keep with the theme of the video, no it doesn't. Earth is the only lucky planet life lucked it's way through. Life did not find a way on any other planet in our system.
3.5 billion years is one helluva long winning streak.
I can't help but think of certain episodes of Star Trek. Still waiting for first contact!
This is perfect! With odds that low, the chance of two advanced species having to share rare resources is minimal; we'd only have to share data to get each other to worlds best suited for all involved parties
watching your videos at night before i go to sleep is the perfect thing for me, they're entertaining and interesting!
Einstein : luck? god doesnt play dice
Neil Bohr: dont tell god what to do with his dice
Alien supervising earth: Yeah dont tell god what to do with his dice
What if aliens have no concept of what a god is? What if it turns out just to be a human concept?
@@dbsti3006 What if God exists regardless of what Aliens believe?
@@dbsti3006 There are tons of quite different concepts of what are gods, not only one. Even in the most brutal days of the inquisition and the reformation people still had quite different concepts of what is god, and as long as they shut up and repeated like parrots the "official" dogma they weren't persecuted. Those who didn't were exterminated.
@@dbsti3006 if they have the concept of control then they could get the idea
@@JorgeAraujo97 I don't know honestly. It's just interesting to me if we would ever find out.
Also having a strong enough magnetosphere could play a big part, but yeah I believe Luck or maybe probability is important. Thanks for another great video Anton!
Giorgio A. Tsoukalos - "I'm not saying it's aliens controlling the thermostat of earth, but it's aliens"
? :D
...or from Theodore Woodward's dictum "When you hear hoofbeats, think of horses not zebras"... and I add to this: ..."if you are not in the middle of a group (I forgot the correct word for this) of zebras"
George Carlin told us why-
“Because it’s a self-correcting system.”
The Gaia hypothesis is probably true
it's a shame we're doing everything in our might to destroy it anyway lmao
I guess the point of this paper is that self-correcting systems that actually work are pretty rare.
He also said that from the Earth's perspective the purpose of humanity was to add plastic.
@@virtualrealitychannel2276 Plastic now is what hard wall cellouse cell walls was hundreds of millions years ago, when plants invented tree trunks. At first no bacteria could digest them, so dead trees just lay there littering the landscape. That became our coal reserves, but eventually bacteria figured it out. The same thing will happen with plastics. It will be as degradable as soggy cardboard as it represents high energy food to bacteria if they just could eat it, so in a few hundred to 100k years, most plastics will dissapear by themselves if left outside.
Hello WONDERFUL ANTON!!!! YOURE AWESOME! Thank you, man. From Gainesville, FL. Home of The Uni. of Florida!
Earth has daimond hands and it likes to hold onto 2 stocks, namely $OXYGN and $WTR
To. The. Moon.
Excellent presentation, Anton. Thanks! Three things about Earth: a) you can't talk about Earth without including the Moon, the cycle of tides having an enduring and dramatic effect upon the planet; b) Earth has a liquid (and therefore differentially rotating) center that generates our magnetosphere--without which we would cook; and c) Earth isn't immortal--we could go any day. Love your channel...keep it up.
I think a big problem with this analysis is probably the lack of alternative forms of life.
@@TheTechmaster1999 yep, and it seems that, sadly, silicone based life forms is out of the question, by recent studies. So again, it narrowed down.
@@futavadumnezo No, they are not out of the question. We just haven't gotten there, but we are gaining speed. Revisit the subject in a couple of centuries.
Agreed.
Habitable for 4 billion years? Earth is a paradise of paradises!!!! The range where humans can flourish is so limited and yet we have had a million of years of this on Earth. Earth is a paradise of paradises!!!
Scientists: It's luck!
Mother Earth: Sure?
I too really enjoyed this video, I hope you do more on the subject, I think the comments this time showed the interest... we all want to know more. It's fun to imagine there are other lucky beings out there. What are the chances they would be a lot like us? I feel lucky, and I am going to buy a lotto ticket, for fun. thank you Anton.
Think of it this way. " The Chaos Theory".
I always was of the mind that the answer to the fermi paradox was just the vast distances and the math of large numbers. But the more i watch you, the more i am convinced of the rare earth hypothesis...
I am Galactic lucky humanoid. Thank you wonderfully lucky Anton.
You are the lucky one!
Intergalactic planetary planetary intergalactic
There will be a few places that beat the odds in a cosmos this vast. We’re lucky. Or not. Make sure your life is a good one while you can. There is no do over.
Is great filters all the way down and up.
An episode about the Yellowstone supervolcano would be interesting to watch :)
The more we learn, the more scientists have to dance around the fine-tuned universe and intelligent design.
Philosopher: God?
Scientist: No, We got lucky.
I totally agree. It's insane to call it stupid luck.
"The more we learn, the more scientists have to dance around the fine-tuned universe and intelligent design. "
Uh..? no? something being rare doesn't mean in any way that it was designed by a cosmic wizard.
The arrogance of some people to think that we're ever so important that we have to be "fine tuned" is laughable.
You're not that important.
It also misses the forest for the trees, this planet was not "designed" so that us special chosen ones could be placed on it, like some sort of cosmic level editor, we exist because we adapted to the conditions on this planet.
We are a form of universe matter only special because we give ourselves that condition.
@@KaiserMattTygore927 Relax. They are looking for a gap in our knowledge. God needs living space...
@@FrikInCasualMode The best God would create something that works without intervention. Natural Laws work like that. Conclusion: God isn't in the gaps but also the bricks.
.
I actually espouse the NOM philosophy of science and religion, that they are "Non-overlapping magisteria," and think that all these arguments all show how funny it is to mix supernatural and natural domains.
Mixing religion and science is like trying to prove that Beethoven was brilliant by measuring the spectra of his piano shellac.
I was developing this theory ever since I used to operate a bread dough making machine for pizza. As the machine churned the dough I would think about how close the moon was to earth it literally churned the earth. The yeast in the bread would be triggered to rise .
The Churn
And by chance, we're the apex species of this planet.
Crazy.
For now
Interesting. After reading a book called The Social Leap by William Von Hippel I have started to think that intelligent life, least like us, will be very rare. The way we went from chimp-like to human was an amazing journey with us barely surviving to make it this far.
The long wait for hands is perhaps the second greatest mystery in biology, after the quick start to life.
The “luck” is probably life itself.
Exactly! Gaia is not just a rock, it's a living rock!
Also simulations suck: the map is not the land.
Or more like you'd need a ridiculous amount of luck for organisms to appear, evolve and be intilligent.
@@wiss256 - Just time: abiogenesis explains life and its easy development, life tends towards complexity because of competition, survival of the fittest, but it needs a very long time to reach "us" (or equivalent). Even "we" needed a very long time to reach civilization and even longer to reach science. We may well destroy all that in a blink as well.
Just look at the Carboniferous period. The CO2 was dropping to the point that would end life because of the woody plants creating lignin that couldn't be broken down. Along comes organisms that evolved to break down that lignin and stopped the CO2 from being sequestered forever. Life solved a problem that other life created.
The first of the two hypotheses you mentioned, that Earth's biosphere as a whole provides the necessary feedback loops to maintain habitability for itself, has been called the "Gaia Hypothesis ". Once Life gets started, it evolves to find a way to persist quite robustly.
I think each galaxy has at least one planet with intelligent life. We can't be the only ones.
I hope we’re not alone in the universe
However, I hope there’s no widespread intersollar civilisation in the universe anywhere nearby. Let’s be honest, if our solar system gets seeked for ressources/colonisation, any space civilisation capable of coming to us would also have the technology to wipe us out like you crush an ant
We currently do not posses the energy required to accelerate huge colony ships to 95% light speed
If a civilisation posses the technology to supply enaugh energy to do that, it has plenty of energy to direct to a planet and kill everyone on it
Even without any sort of weapon we might think of from games/movies, or nuclear/watever, they could do it
Their ships technology themselves could be a weapon, they could accelerate a bullet shaped or sphere shaped, or a large asteroid from the edge of our solar system, and aim it right to earth at 95%+ light speed.
The kinetic energy from 1k radius rock would definately kill everyone at such speed
And there’s nothing we could do to stop it
If we find any interstellar civilisation, it is in our best interest to everything we can go stay in good relationship with them, even if they literally take advantage of it by asking us lots of ressources/watever, as a war is the last thing we’d want
For example,
If they want to take 50% of our oceans, then we would have no choice but to accept to give that water to them, despite how terrible it would be for us
I think each galaxy has at least one planet with intelligent life. And that's not ours....
Even if they do, we're never going to know. The nearest galaxy is 25,000 light years away. Humanity will be extinct by the time ANY of our signals reach that far, let alone to get a response. Whether we're actually alone or not, we're effectively alone.
😂 you guys live in an illusion
You know, we always dreamed of ancient civilisations living among stars. Maybe we are those ancients. The first ones.
Love Anton always reminds me I'm not the only one asking questions and looking for answers!!
Before we run out of luck we really should do everything to colonize other planets.
We ain’t getting off this rock
Humans require a whole ecosystem to be able to create viable colonies. The only reasonable way forward is A.I. doing the colonization. Turn some planets into something similar enough to Earth, even if it takes a billion years. All that to introduce humans to that planet by modifying the genetic code of local animals with potential, and finally teach them about civilization.
It will take 45,000 years for Voyager 1 just to get beyond the Oort Cloud. You think we can all fit inside a Voyager 1 space craft?
one prevailing assumption even for a mission to Mars is the idea that there will be just one rocket to take everything up there all at once. I think it will take a hundred or 500 rockets to take all the supplies up there to establish a base.
Even to the Moon, we should be sending up self-assembling modules right now. Look how many missions it took to assemble the "international" space station. More fundamentally, why we would we even go there, anyway? Robots would be far more efficient in exploring the various regions of the Moon and sending data back to Earth. We're centuries away from interplanetary travel, even if we don't destroy ourselves in the meantime.
@@rick9870 I agree. I'm fairly certain Elons "recruitment" of astronauts is purely performative; But he is absolutely a psychopath. I wouldn't be terribly surprised to learn that he is sending these people on an information-gathering suicide mission, fully aware there is no hope of them actually being able to accomplish anything :/
Before we run out of luck, we really should do everything to protect this planet's beautiful natural environment and not ruin it for future generations. Unless we make some radical breakthrough in fundamental physics that would allow us to build a warp drive so that we can explore the galaxy and look for second Earths, we can only reach other planets in our solar system. The financial cost of building a colony on Mars that would sustainably support even a few thousand astronauts would be absolutely massive, and that money could do far more good if spent on Earth to remedy the environmental mess we have collectively created. We need to care for what we've got, because there is no Plan B.
I wish world's leaders would have a look at this video and actually grasp the meaning of life as we know it and how lucky we are. Thank you Anton :)
We still need to find out how exactly life got/gets ignited though, no?
Abiogenesis. I think iBio channel has some good ones on that: it's reasonably pretty well solved nowadays (much better than just a few decades ago for sure, although there may still be some loose ends to fix).
@@LuisAldamiz Thanks! I'll have a look. Yeah, I know it's mostly solved, but from what I had heard it isn't completely, like you said, I think there are a few things yet to be found.
@@LuisAldamiz the channel, it's iBiology, right?
@@rockbarcellos - Yes, my bad. I meant iBiology: they have a lot of great lectures, including some on abiogenesis which I found very interesting.
@@rockbarcellos - AFAIK it's not fully solved but much better understood than just a few decades ago.
"chance" is simply a cop-out explanation that proves we don't know as much as think we do. Gravity isn't a force and chance isn't anything either. The Nova series on the planets speaks to how having a couple giant planets like Jupiter and Saturn intercepted a lot of asteroids that could have destroyed the Earth over and over, so the factors regarding the survival of the Earth are not all down here, but up there, too. The fact that Earth has a liquid core is a big factor, too. Then, there's all the elements on Earth which would have required probably many supernova explosions to cause so many fusions of atoms to create all the stable isotopes that exist on the earth. My bet is on Fermi.
Chance is a huge factor in our live, being the cumulative effect of all the others.
James Lovelock had a lot of theories about this back in the 70s. He wrote a book early on called "Spaceship Earth". Over the next few decades he fleshed out his Gaia Hypothesis. Life and planet acting in harmonious union. I know it sounds like hippy shit, but it's the best explanation we have.
I think this study really supports his hypothesis despite the findings putting it down to "chance"
@@ronantaylor736 YI agree actually, even though the paper says that it is an alternative to Gaia it also is compatible, because if random feedbacks can stabilize a planet by luck, perhaps it only takes a small dose of Gaia type feedbacks to make a lot more planets stable.
It is overwhelmingly likely that other lucky sentinent beings are now asking the same questions, concluding that distances defeat us all - assuming that the evolution of intelligence does not always result in aggression driven weapons of mass self destruction. 🧑🚀
It sounds to me like some 4D being is playing a game.. And we're the game.
While I agree on 4th D beings being real. The amount of energy required to interact with us, is unfathomable. The technology would be so advanced that the desire of them to interact with us would not exist. Do you care about the bugs on your skin? The ant? The roach? Are you willing to spend your life trying to communicate with them? Just to say hi, or to let us know they exist? What do we have to offer them? Other than maybe being a good food source! For that matter let's hope they don't communicate with us! I hope for our fellow 3rd D brings in our own universe. Levels the playing field, with out laws of physics!
@@ricofico there are actually some very ancient greek myths that say that the gods feed on human suffering ... so yeah ... maybe these 4D beings do indeed see us as food as you suggested.
@@BrutusAlbion what if we are part of some shitty game where these beings can get to influence us, so that we can simulate the reality that they want us to. A way for them to experience outcomes that they normally wouldn't want to experience themselves.Think of how we for example can play gta 5. The main characters are being played or influenced by them, and we are just a bunch of unaware npcs.
@@ricofico Well, there are entomologists who spend their lives studying insects and are deeply fascinated by them, so that analogy doesn't entirely work. I'm not sure that projecting human power dynamics on to 4D beings gives us an actual picture of them. We humans are intellectually superior to our furry cat, dog, and rabbit domestic companions, yet we care for them and love them. If a 4D being has progressed significantly in that direction, then perhaps they see us the way we do small children or pets who need to be cared for. I realize this is again an anthropomorphism and there's no way to prove any of these speculations, but I'm just saying that one can make very different assumptions about 4D beings based upon what human traits we choose to anthropomorphize and project upon them.
@@rageagainstthedyingoftheli7956 The Humanz by AE
Not enough credit given to the Moons role in preserving our planets dynamo and stability. We are essentially a binary planet system. Very rare and fortunate indeed!
I’m so glad that Earth is lucky.
Is
Regardless. With our idea of the known age of the universe, the odds of Life emerging by random chance are so far astronomically past what would be considered a miracle, that it is absurd. Being alone, or surrounded in the universe by life, either way, is a miracle. You should give God the glory.
Conciousness seeks to emerge.
'Chance' is just a placeholder for 'variables which currently confound us.'
Im not going to complain about RNG anymore
It still catches me off guard the quality upgrade of his face cam.
The Thunderbolts Project, Anton.
A third option to look into.
Neither chances nor luck. Just the path of least resistance.
Cultist.
@@Xeridanus LOL. Pot calling kettle black?
How is a scientific hypothesis model is cultism?
More like you are not open minded enough.
@@goidogoi There's nothing scientific about it. I'm open minded but what you believe in is a solution in search of a problem.
@@Xeridanus Chances and luck is somhow acceptable as scientific.
Nah mate, you are so close minded, you can't even see it.
You are the type of people who persecuted Keppler and Galileo for going against the grain.
Hi Anton,
Great video as always, I did enjoy your perspective on this topic. Would like to raise a couple of questions, that are worth thinking about.
1. When you mentioned "... purely by chance. It was nothing but luck that created the planet that we know today..." (5:31), I would inquire as to what would be an opposing view to luck and/or chance besides creationism? Furthermore, I'd like to note that if given the possibility to account for all of the variables (not within our lifetime), in my opinion, it should be possible to successfully predict which planets are habitable, and which are not. Luck is like an enigma, and when we can't understand (mostly due to a lack of discovered variables) the predictability of an occurrence, it surely is the answer.
2. While you've covered a great deal of elements relating to planet's habitability, it looks like geomagnetic field was omitted. Wouldn't this be an important factor, that could potentially influence planet's habitability? Has it in the past? Will it in the future?
Good day
I feel like the title of this scientific paper is calling me out here....
The study left out one big factor: it only looked for Earth like planets and not Earth like moons orbiting gas giants. Such a moon could be further away from its star and still be habitable thanks to the extra energy from its parent gas giant, and the gas giant would absorb asteroids, shield it from cosmic rays, and regulate its rotation so it won't get extreme fluctuations in climate. Consider all the moons around our own gas giants vs the three planets in the habitable zone of our Sun, that means there could easily be a lot more moons with intelligent life than planets. As for why we haven't received any radio waves from a distant world, that's simple: distance. Our scientists can barely hear Voyager 2 and it's still in our Solar System. How the heck could they hear a transmission from a planet light years away that is broadcasted within its atmosphere?
Two planets meet in the void. "How do you do?" - "Oh, not so well. I have humans." - "Don't worry, that passes. I had it, too, a few billion years ago."
Yes we're the vermin and the planet has started the covid cull killing us off like a bad case of lice. And if that doesn't work one big eruption to knock us into another ice age will finish us of. Earth has sheltered us for billions of years and all we've done to it in return is destroy everything ravage the planets natural fuels and gasses I was thinking maybe the planet needed that to keep the core going. 🌋🌎🌐🏔️
1. Once enough elemental diversity is achieved on any astronomical object, life spontaneously can emerge by emerging pattern theory. (Regardless of billions of years of total sterile conditions).
2. Adaptive regenerating evolving organic chemical systems adapt to different conditions.
3. Nuclear elements in early Earth and weak sun changed over time by increasing powerful sun and weaker Earth nuclear elements.
4. Oscillation by asteroid impact and antipode volcanic activity also puts an overlay of natural fluctuation to organic chemistry, but also provide the complex elements needed for point 1.
Don't forget about the moon in this equation ?
I recommend a book by the British researcher David Waltham, I think the title was "Lucky Planet".
It’s a good thing we are doing everything we can to protect this little blue ball....oh wait, not in this timeline.
Adds a new element to the Fermi paradox.
Even taking into consideration the big things that lead to life on earth, like the the sun's relative stability, our orbit, the water, the moon, the magnetic field, plate tectonics, etc. To know that simply getting close may not be good enough to maintain that life long term is daunting.
On the other hand, as it becomes more likely that humanity may be the first space capable species within a large causal volime of space, it adds motivation for humanity to spread life to other planets. It also may mean that snowball planets may be of great potential, as melting them may be all that's required to get a fairly earth-like planet with potential to stay that way way for an extended period of time
It's the other way around. Because we're here (intelligent life), it must have been a 'lucky' planet we're on. If it wasn't a 'lucky' planet we wouldn't made it and ponder about our luck.
@Eastern fence Lizard I would say more like a statistical inevitability. At least one planet (we know of) fulfilled the conditions for life, therefore life is there.. here. So rather like a duh-thropic principle
@Eastern fence Lizard I know, I was taking life too seriously, but you convinced me now. So I'll go and shutdown the computation farm your Universe is running on. I was too serious about life in it. Time to start anew.
The more I learn about our world and its history the more convinced of the rare earth hypothesis I become
Earth life matters!!
You are so space oriented. You forget about things like the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation which is enormous in moving our planet from one cycle to another. You melt the polar icecaps, but that then drastically cools the oceans, bringing down temperatures everywhere, and a swing towards an ice age, which then starts the cycle all over in the other direction.
Outro Music ?
Great video and topic. Thanks for all you do here.
btw, what do you think about Bob Lazar?
After watching this video, i just feel so lucky to have this epic of a planet.
Life is undoubtedly common in the universe, but the odds of intelligent life is probably slim to none. Earth is definitely special.
But you only need 1 another intelligent life in the universe to make contact. If there is another one is very primitive or is probably million of years more advanced than us, by chance it is hard that it is on the same stage than we are.
@@MicroClases_Ciencia Yeah that’s true. There’s bound to be intelligent life out there too. And like you said maybe even a million years more advanced than us. Who knows?
More and more reasons to hold to the Rare Earth Hypothesis; we're a Privaleged Planet for sure. Not only is Earth in the middle of the Liquid Water Habitible Zone, but it's also in the middle of the Ultra Violet Habitible Zone; look it up. Maybe Anton can do a VLOG on that...
Maybe all that plastic in the sea keeps the climate stable
*Humans get rid of all the plastic and pollution*
Earth to humans- "Did somebody turn down the thermastat"
Humans-"Hey look on the brightside! Endless snow day!!"
Carbon dioxide is required for plant photosynthesis. It was all getting locked up underground, and CO2 levels were edging down to a level where plants would become extinct. Then an ape evolved that dug oil and coal out of the ground and burned it.
I love that while he talks about Earth being so stable, all the Earths smack each other in the background. XD
If you want to read a story where we see exactly how rare our type of life is, you should try out the "Long Earth" series. The characters travel to tons of different parallell Earths and there are so many that don't have any life at all...
Luck? No. Missing variable? Most probably. GOD? Yes!
Sean Carol said on les Fridman’s podcast that he doesn’t believe we’re in a simulation because there isn’t any aliens (not sure if he referred to the dyson dilemma) because the visible universe is so big just to simulate us... Isaac Arthur had a video on simulation hypothesis talking about ancestor simulation(basically people from the future simulating the past), and there were many interesting notions (e.g zooming in and finding more about our world...he explains it better) and the simulation could run till we explore the universe.
To the people reacting to the word "luck", give a few trillion trillion trillion tries for a non-zero probability and you'll likely get at least one right.
@Alan Sutella in what way probability is absurd for you?
@Alan Sutella Quantum mechanics is a branch of physics, and it's ruled by probability...
@Alan Sutella Absurd? Chance is integral to physics, my friend. Without accounting for chance, we could never hope to manufacture our technology nor tailor metallic alloys for specific purposes.
Probability theory isn't the easiest for humans to wrap their heads around, though. The mind likes to have things explained less fuzzily.
But maybe a crude probability experiment helps to think about this:
If chances of earth remaining habitable in one year averages to 0.999 999 999.
Formula: [Chance]^[years]
0.999999999
@@XGD5layer still clearly possible since you’re living here!!! “You’re fears are dumb” you realize there’s no intelligent design right? What a dumb thing to imply
@Alan Sutella Did you even understand what he told you? Doesn't seem like you do, because you just used the words "absurdly unlikely probabilities" when he just told you there are trillions of trillions of trillions of tries. It doesn't matter how low the probability is, it's the number of TRIES that matters. Probability x number of tries = number of expected successes. As long as the number of expected successes is higher or equal to 1, then we cannot conclude that there is intelligent design or that Earth was created by chance. All we can conclude is that we don't know.
In an old Outer Limits episode titled 'Wolf 359' a scientist recreated conditions on another planet to see if life would emerge but not in a computer simulation but physically real. Not an idea I would totally dismiss.
The question is not so much "where is everybody" as "when"
Indeed! If there were another planet even somewhat nearby, with human-like life forms, but are just 200 years behind us, we would almost certainly not detect them. Even if they are just 75 years behind us they would be difficult to detect. You can adjust time with distance, combined with the sensitivity of available instruments. If those inhabited worlds are a few years or centuries ahead of us, we could detect them, and they could also detect us - which would beg the question of why we don't have any visitors.... or colonizers.
@@rudra62 Chances of another planet like earth being in same galaxy as ours is zero. So the question is irrelevant.
@@noobFPV The Milky Way Galaxy is a big place. We have already found earth-like rocky planets in the goldilocks zone within a few light years. Exactly like earth - certainly not. Enough to develop life or intelligent life? Probably. The issue is when, and even if just off by a few centuries (over 4 billion years), and they're undetectable with current instruments.
@@rudra62 Yea, you hear, "same as earth", and than rocky planet 10 times the size of earth or some other BS, and you know you are talking to moron. Or "goldylocks zone" and then they say: around a red giant or binary star.... And you are like wow, really ?
@@noobFPV There are some planets, similarly-sized to earth, around a star of similar brightness to earth. Again, the galaxy is a BIG PLACE.
Hello wonderful Anton!
From random chance Earth.
I guess they will call me luck from now on
-God
Luke
I'm probably over-simplifying, but I thought there was a theorized feedback mechanism based on co2 between biosphere and plate tectonics? I.e. if planet gets colder, biosphere shrinks and slows on Co2 scrubbing whilst volcanic activity continues to pump co2 into atmosphere. As temperature increases biosphere expands and scrubs out more co2 reducing temperature. plate tectonics is important since is a continuous source of recycled co2 to eventually reset snowball earth periods. Would the simulations in the paper have accounted for plate tectonics? NB: Love this channel!
Ive joked about this when talking to a friend - almost every video makes earth feel even bigger and bigger snowflake. And now there is an actual video about how that is clearly the case.
That is called publication bias. Because we only know life on Earth, there are thousands and thousands of papers explaining why the Earth is so unique. If tomorrow we find life in an exoplanet, then there will be thousands and thousands of papers explaining how it is likely that life evolves in other planets. But the truth is we don't know how frequent life is.
snowflakes aren't unique at all
@@MicroClases_Ciencia every scientist keeps using the life on earth. Like they think life would be on these earth like planets when they could probably exist on the hottest or coldest parts of other planets. Our understanding of life is only based of earth's life. Maybe if we find one on titan or europa maybe we will stop basing life that's like earth.
Life has survived multiple extinction events, including a snowflake earth global glaciation and the oppossite runaway greenhouse warming, it's kinda demeaning to compare it to "extra special" whinners.
Great Video.
I guess that the Study should be performed on the Other Suns we know about.
Thanks Anton.