dino wrote:

The Drake equation is a probabilistic argument used to estimate the number of active, communicative extraterrestrial civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy

 Even with the lowest numbers it suggests in the milky way alone there are 50,000 sentient civilisations.

Unlikely wrote:

Just explaining "nonsense" perspective.

Diluted Dante wrote:

Unlikely wrote:

Unless I'm missing something only the first three of those variables at the most can be defined, so that's complete nonsense.

It's a way of giving you probabilities, so everything after 3 is indeed a guess. It wasn't intended as a factual equation, just the start of a discussion point.

There is considerable disagreement on the values of these parameters, but the 'educated guesses' used by Drake and his colleagues in 1961 were:[17][18] R∗ = 1 yr−1 (1 star formed per year, on the average over the life of the galaxy; this was regarded as conservative) fp = 0.2 to 0.5 (one fifth to one half of all stars formed will have planets) ne = 1 to 5 (stars with planets will have between 1 and 5 planets capable of developing life) fl = 1 (100% of these planets will develop life) fi = 1 (100% of which will develop intelligent life) fc = 0.1 to 0.2 (10–20% of which will be able to communicate) L = 1000 to 100,000,000 years (which will last somewhere between 1000 and 100,000,000 years) Inserting the above minimum numbers into the equation gives a minimum N of 20 (see: Range of results). Inserting the maximum numbers gives a maximum of 50,000,000. Drake states that given the uncertainties, the original meeting concluded that N ≈ L, and there were probably between 1000 and 100,000,000 civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy.

Diluted Dante wrote:

Yossarian wrote:

Which then leads us neatly onto the Fermi paradox: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox Edit: outathaway, Unlikely.

Diluted Dante wrote:

It depends what you're using it for. If you're using it as mathamatical proof that They Are Out There... Then yes its nonsense. If you're using it for it's intended purpose, which this gives a nice explanation of, then its absolutely fine.

Diluted Dante wrote:

I'm guessing you didn't click on the link then, as it might as well have been an answer to the question Unlikely asked. This is what Unlikely asked:

Unlikely wrote:

Unless I'm missing something only the first three of those variables at the most can be defined, so that's complete nonsense.

Which you'll see is rather similar to the question below.

Dear Dr. SETI: I read about the Drake Equation, but I find it´s pure guesswork to predict anything specific about the number of existing technological civilizations in our neighbourhood. I guess it is rather a matter of belief, and one guess can be about as good as another even if they ar wildly different. Am I completely wrong about that? Jan, Denmark The Doctor Responds: Not at all, Jan! The importance of the Drake Equation is not in the solving, but rather in the contemplation. It was written not for purposes of quantification at all, but rather as the agenda for the world's first SETI meeting, in Green Bank WV in 1961. It was quite useful for its intended application, which was to summarize all the various factors which scientists must contemplate when considering the question of other life. It is interesting that when the Equation was first written, the only factor which we had any basis to estimate with reasonable accuracy was the first, the rate of stellar formation. In the four decades since, we have learned something about extra-solar planets, so we can now estimate the second factor. We also have direct evidence as to the existence of two planets in their star's habitable zones, so (though the sample size is small) we can roughly estimate the third factor. At this rate, we should have three more factors nailed down by the middle of the next century! A value for the seventh will probably always elude us. For the record, I consider the Drake Equation to be a marvelous tool for quantifying our ignorance. But in case you'd like to have a go at solving it, here's a downloadable spreadsheet which will let you plug in your own estimates for each of the seven factors, and see what results from your assumptions.

Andy wrote:

Pardon?

bad_hair_day wrote:

Kow wrote:

The alien tech thing has been a conspiracy since the 50s. Funny how it starts just as the cold war starts. If they've been looking at this tech since Roswell in the 50s then where is all our space stuff? There's nothing we have that doesn't have a clear history of scientific research. There's no magic tech appearing out of nowhere.

How much tech would cavemen get from a space shuttle?

dynamiteReady wrote:

Sorry.

bad_hair_day wrote:

How about taking a portable nuclear reactor back to the 17th century?