I took an astronomy class a few years ago and in that class we learned about the drake equation. This mathematical formula is a theoretical formula that predicts the number of intelligent (communication-able) life forms in our universe based some known and unknown variables (that require estimations).
The equation is as follows:
R + Fp + Ne + Fl + Fi + Fc + L = N
Where,
R is the number of stars in our galaxy that form (like our sun) per year.
Scientists figured out that in infant galaxies stars form rather quickly...about 50 per year. Meaning the number here must be smaller than 50 for our older galaxy...(lets use 50)
Fp is the fraction of these stars that develop planets.
Scientists have found about 500 planets around other stars. knowing we don't have the technology to find them all, and knowing that there are between 200 - 400 billion stars in the milky way, a guess of 1/1000 or .001 stars would be more than a conservative guess (that's 200 million to 600 million stars with planetary systems...)
Ne is the number of Earth like planets in these planetary systems.
Your guess is as good as any astronomers. Lets say that like our system, only 1-2 planet will be Earth like.
Fl is the fraction where life develops on these Earth like planets?
Who knows? Lets say .2
Fi is the fraction of these planets where intelligent life develops.
Well the only life we know of is on Earth, and we developed intelligent life. but that doesn't mean anything so lets say .25
Fc is the fraction of these planets where communication develops.
Again, using Earth as a baseline, lets go with 1.
L is the lifespan of these communicative civilizations.
There are two points to add here. first, Humans have only known about radio waves since 1865. That is about 150 years ago. With that said, we have only been listening and transmitting for a shorter amount of time. Lets say we have been transmitting for 100 years.
Second, if you ignore technological improvements that make past means of communications useless, imagine where humans were 1000 years ago. Now imagine 1000 years from now. Lets say we communicate for the same way for about 1000 years (a very very conservative estimate).
Ok, lets plug in the numbers. If my math is correct, that 500 planets with intelligent life. Now while that is completely speculative, there are more things to consider.
Forget language barriers
Forget technology barriers
Think about the size of our galaxy (100,000 light years). using simple probability, that means that in our hypothetical universe each life form is an average of 200 light years away. Meaning, if we send them a message, now, we will receive a response in 400 years (there and back)...that means we can talk to them twice in our 1000 year communication capable lifetime.
Many hypothetical possibilities and assumption, but you get the gist. Here is a handy site for your calculations:
http://www.pbs.org/lifebeyondearth/listening/drake.html
I'm skeptical about finding this life if it exists. And if it does, I probably (hypothetically) won't know about it in my life time..
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Friday, June 25, 2010
Inventions
Have you ever wondered how some foods came to be?
Like how did bread come about? Someone must have found a grain, crushed it up, mixed it with water and placed over a fire. That's not exactly intuitive.
What about cola flavored sodas. Where did this flavor come from? How many other failed flavors did it take before they found the Cola flavor that we all love?
Ketchup...what is it even made of?
Who was the first one to mix peanut butter and jelly?
Also, the chocolate bean? I don't even know the relationship between the bean and chocolate.
There are so many foods that I wonder how people thought to make them. Was it because of boredom? Unemployment?
Who knows...
Like how did bread come about? Someone must have found a grain, crushed it up, mixed it with water and placed over a fire. That's not exactly intuitive.
What about cola flavored sodas. Where did this flavor come from? How many other failed flavors did it take before they found the Cola flavor that we all love?
Ketchup...what is it even made of?
Who was the first one to mix peanut butter and jelly?
Also, the chocolate bean? I don't even know the relationship between the bean and chocolate.
There are so many foods that I wonder how people thought to make them. Was it because of boredom? Unemployment?
Who knows...
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Atoms
Here is something to think about.
An atom is made up of protons and electrons. You can do a quick easy search and you will find that within the entire area of an atom 99.9999999999999% is empty space.
That's right. When you clap your hands, .0000000000001% of matter in you left hand stops the .0000000000001% of matter in your right hand.
Hmmmm
An atom is made up of protons and electrons. You can do a quick easy search and you will find that within the entire area of an atom 99.9999999999999% is empty space.
That's right. When you clap your hands, .0000000000001% of matter in you left hand stops the .0000000000001% of matter in your right hand.
Hmmmm
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Magical Machines
It often bothers me that people use machines and technology while having no idea how they work. Now I am not talking about knowing all the exact details on how to build a computer chip or maintain a car, but rather the basic understanding of computer and auto parts. You don't need to know how the combustion of gas in a car propels the vehicle to get from place to place, however one should. When someone doesn't know those details, I feel like they are ignorantly living.
There are two instances in my life that illustrate this point. The first is from literature. In a new book from the fantasy genre, a magical character tries to explain how magic is a tool just like technology. She argues to the protagonist that just like he doesn't know how the phone works, so too -- she doesn't know why magic works and what it does. She says something along the lines of: "you don't know how the voice is recorded by the phone and passed through the air to any location to another person whose device interprets the data..." However, I think we should know how that works. We should know about radio waves and how they are transmitted and received, we should know about cell towers and satelites, we should know about electro-magnetism and speakers, and we should know about electricity and digital storage and transmission of information. This doesn't mean we should be able to build a phone from scratch, but rather that we have a general understanding of how things work.
Another example comes from an Android commercial. The Claim: Android searches the sky and projects an image of the sky on your phone - with labels for the astronomical features. To the ignorant user, that is what the phone does - it searches the sky. However, the user should understand GPS and digital sky charts, and physics and astronomical calculations that make such programs feasible.
It is not that technology is magical, but rather there are simple techniques and devices that are used ingeniously to fulfill certain functions. For example, a CD is is just a thin string miles long that either has spot with indents or not indents that reflect a laser to send information --- 1's or 0's. Similarly, ones Hard-drive functions the same way but on a much larger scale, but slightly different. Understanding how data is stored, how cars work, how phones work, allows people to appreciate the world without the lens of ignorance.
I am not saying that we need to be able to understand things to the point of perfect detail, but rather we should learn things as much as possible and appreciate the brilliance behind the technology which we possess. Its often not to hard to grasp. Websites like www.howthingswork.com are great resources. Take a peek and open your eyes...
There are two instances in my life that illustrate this point. The first is from literature. In a new book from the fantasy genre, a magical character tries to explain how magic is a tool just like technology. She argues to the protagonist that just like he doesn't know how the phone works, so too -- she doesn't know why magic works and what it does. She says something along the lines of: "you don't know how the voice is recorded by the phone and passed through the air to any location to another person whose device interprets the data..." However, I think we should know how that works. We should know about radio waves and how they are transmitted and received, we should know about cell towers and satelites, we should know about electro-magnetism and speakers, and we should know about electricity and digital storage and transmission of information. This doesn't mean we should be able to build a phone from scratch, but rather that we have a general understanding of how things work.
Another example comes from an Android commercial. The Claim: Android searches the sky and projects an image of the sky on your phone - with labels for the astronomical features. To the ignorant user, that is what the phone does - it searches the sky. However, the user should understand GPS and digital sky charts, and physics and astronomical calculations that make such programs feasible.
It is not that technology is magical, but rather there are simple techniques and devices that are used ingeniously to fulfill certain functions. For example, a CD is is just a thin string miles long that either has spot with indents or not indents that reflect a laser to send information --- 1's or 0's. Similarly, ones Hard-drive functions the same way but on a much larger scale, but slightly different. Understanding how data is stored, how cars work, how phones work, allows people to appreciate the world without the lens of ignorance.
I am not saying that we need to be able to understand things to the point of perfect detail, but rather we should learn things as much as possible and appreciate the brilliance behind the technology which we possess. Its often not to hard to grasp. Websites like www.howthingswork.com are great resources. Take a peek and open your eyes...
Monday, March 22, 2010
Hiding Behind Anonymity
I think it is obvious that when people can hide their identity, they will do things they normally would not do. Often times I find myself doing embarrassing actions in public, but not really caring because nobody knows who I am. Conversely, had I been in a room with people who are always with me, then I probably would feel more embarrassed.
This distinction is obvious. When we are worried about our reputation and "ruining our names" then we are extra aware of the people who around us who may know us. If we are convinced that people don't know us, then we feel comfortable doing things we normally wouldn't do.
However, I think there is more to this than just inconsequential things. For example, one of the interesting things about Youtube is that the people who comment do so anonymously. They can say whatever they want no matter how prejudice or hateful. Since there are no consequences to their actions, they can be outright rude to others without having to worry about ruining their own reputation. (Compare to Facebook where the people who right on your wall are identifiable and therefore accountable)
I think also, this could be applied to crime in general and to more broader social settings. Think about the New York subway for a moment. Plenty people graffiti and trash the subway system. However what if people were identinfied as having been on a certain car at a certain time. Each person could hold a radio emitting ID card that could identify them. Then each car can scan for the IDs and people will be linked to the cars that they are on. In other words, you can only ride the subway if you identify who you are. And once you do that, then you are less likely to commit a crime. (The problem would be if someone lost their Id card...but then they should cancel it ASAP like a credit card)
If people are identified in real life (and online) then I am convinced that a lot of the information on the internet would be more trustworthy and the slander will be limited - because people will only want to communicate with people who they can trust and with people who do not need to hide behind anonymous personalities. Also, crime will be less because people then would be identifiable.
Setback? Big Brother is watching...
This distinction is obvious. When we are worried about our reputation and "ruining our names" then we are extra aware of the people who around us who may know us. If we are convinced that people don't know us, then we feel comfortable doing things we normally wouldn't do.
However, I think there is more to this than just inconsequential things. For example, one of the interesting things about Youtube is that the people who comment do so anonymously. They can say whatever they want no matter how prejudice or hateful. Since there are no consequences to their actions, they can be outright rude to others without having to worry about ruining their own reputation. (Compare to Facebook where the people who right on your wall are identifiable and therefore accountable)
I think also, this could be applied to crime in general and to more broader social settings. Think about the New York subway for a moment. Plenty people graffiti and trash the subway system. However what if people were identinfied as having been on a certain car at a certain time. Each person could hold a radio emitting ID card that could identify them. Then each car can scan for the IDs and people will be linked to the cars that they are on. In other words, you can only ride the subway if you identify who you are. And once you do that, then you are less likely to commit a crime. (The problem would be if someone lost their Id card...but then they should cancel it ASAP like a credit card)
If people are identified in real life (and online) then I am convinced that a lot of the information on the internet would be more trustworthy and the slander will be limited - because people will only want to communicate with people who they can trust and with people who do not need to hide behind anonymous personalities. Also, crime will be less because people then would be identifiable.
Setback? Big Brother is watching...
Monday, March 8, 2010
Music
Have you ever noticed the different ways you listen to music?
I think it is interesting that when we listen to music it is hard to take in everything all at once. Yes we can "hear" all of it, but it is very hard to pay attention to all the details of the song. We can usually hear a song over and over again and pick up on small musical facets that we have never heard before.
Usually there is some harmony that I miss, or a chord that really hits home. Sometimes, I try to listen to the instruments to see if I can name them all, and often discover melodies and beats that were completely lost in the whole.
Moreover, I think music is something that we often underestimate. We often see it as a means for entertainment. However, we allocate much of our memory to lyrics and often find ourself humming tunes throughout the day. I don't think this allocation is a waste of space. Rather I think these memories are capital that we use at later times to support and remember feelings that are not immediately available. The feelings that songs evoke remain with us and return to us whenever we hear those same songs.
Music is more than just some sounds. It is rather a complex collection of sounds that ultimately capture our attention over and over again and continually invoke memories and emotions. I think we too often underestimate its power and importance.
I think it is interesting that when we listen to music it is hard to take in everything all at once. Yes we can "hear" all of it, but it is very hard to pay attention to all the details of the song. We can usually hear a song over and over again and pick up on small musical facets that we have never heard before.
Usually there is some harmony that I miss, or a chord that really hits home. Sometimes, I try to listen to the instruments to see if I can name them all, and often discover melodies and beats that were completely lost in the whole.
Moreover, I think music is something that we often underestimate. We often see it as a means for entertainment. However, we allocate much of our memory to lyrics and often find ourself humming tunes throughout the day. I don't think this allocation is a waste of space. Rather I think these memories are capital that we use at later times to support and remember feelings that are not immediately available. The feelings that songs evoke remain with us and return to us whenever we hear those same songs.
Music is more than just some sounds. It is rather a complex collection of sounds that ultimately capture our attention over and over again and continually invoke memories and emotions. I think we too often underestimate its power and importance.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Meat
I think one of the interesting things about eating meat is how removed we are from the process. We never see the animal, kill the animal, skin the animal, carve the animal, drain the blood and dispose of the corpse. Moreover, when we get the finished product, we remove ourselves further by hardly even calling the meat what it really is.
We call it beef, hamburgers, brisket, bologna and never cow.
We often call chicken white meat, dark meat or buffalo wings...
I think that the very fact that we get queasy when thinking about skinning cows and carving the meat off their bones demonstrates a quintessential fact about our common meat eating tendencies.We think it is gross, but we like how it tastes.
However, I think that by removing ourselves so much from the this process, we downplay the status of living animals. From an standoffish place, we begin to equate objects and animals as equal objects. Just like how my chair underwent some sort of production and assembly line, so too did my meat. I don't care about the process, I only care about the end result.
This line of thinking is unfair. Not to say that we should not eat meat, but rather that when we eat meat, we should at least acknowledge that process and try to think a little bit more about where meat comes from. Animals and Minerals are not equal.
Interestingly, if you are to agree that we should think a little bit more about where meat comes from and not take it for granted, I think that you can also apply that to many aspects of life. The labor put into the creation of your possessions and the natural processes that enabled nature to produce the materials for our possessions both demonstrate a level of meaning that we often ignore, that I think can only enhance our daily experiences.
We call it beef, hamburgers, brisket, bologna and never cow.
We often call chicken white meat, dark meat or buffalo wings...
I think that the very fact that we get queasy when thinking about skinning cows and carving the meat off their bones demonstrates a quintessential fact about our common meat eating tendencies.We think it is gross, but we like how it tastes.
However, I think that by removing ourselves so much from the this process, we downplay the status of living animals. From an standoffish place, we begin to equate objects and animals as equal objects. Just like how my chair underwent some sort of production and assembly line, so too did my meat. I don't care about the process, I only care about the end result.
This line of thinking is unfair. Not to say that we should not eat meat, but rather that when we eat meat, we should at least acknowledge that process and try to think a little bit more about where meat comes from. Animals and Minerals are not equal.
Interestingly, if you are to agree that we should think a little bit more about where meat comes from and not take it for granted, I think that you can also apply that to many aspects of life. The labor put into the creation of your possessions and the natural processes that enabled nature to produce the materials for our possessions both demonstrate a level of meaning that we often ignore, that I think can only enhance our daily experiences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)