60 years later, is it time to update the Drake equation?

Re:60 years later, is it time to update the Drake equation? by kadoban on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @02:50PM (#27199266)

If we're the first, that also requires just about as much explanation really. There are how many galaxies, and how many systems per galaxy, and how many planets per galaxy? If the chance of life per planet is anything more than on the order of 1/trillion, laws of big numbers suggest we just _can't_ be the first or only.

None of this is any kind of _hard_ proof of course, it's just attempting to reason through what we expect without having enough data to prove either way.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:60 years later, is it time to update the Drake equation? by tsimionescu on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @03:42PM (#27199994)

Again, some civilization will be the first, that is a certainty. Now, you may ask 'why did civilization only arise X billion years in the universe' s history' perhaps, but not 'why are we the first and not someone else' (assuming we were, which I have no opinion on).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:60 years later, is it time to update the Drake equation? by kadoban on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @10:28PM (#27203861)

Of course. But if we have reason to expect _many_, then betting that we're the first is a terrible bet.

If we conclude for some reason that we are the first, with enough evidence, sure, like you say someone has to be first.

But with so little data, the priors for "are we first or are we just missing the others" just have to be tilted heavily away from "we're first".

[ Parent | on HN ]