The most interesting part of the conversation was the discussion of the Drake equation. The Drake equation is a probabilistic function used to predict the number of extraterrestrial civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy. The equation has seven components, but what is fascinating is that Professor Goodman mentioned that we really cannot say with certainty what any of the components are. This is because, despite our substantial knowledge of the universe, there is still so much we don't know with absolute certainty, such as the fraction of planets that could support life that actually develop life at some point, the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space, or even the fraction of stars that have planets. I think this speaks to a more significant point about prediction in general, as even if you are interested in predicting a hugely important number with several ramifications if you cannot express the inputs to your model with confidence, your prediction will certainly be off. I think the Drake equation is an excellent example of how people generally need to step back when asking or predicting a big question and start by answering the necessary smaller problems that will lead them to the eventual question they want to answer. As such, the question I would ask Dr. Jill Tarter is, "What are the current estimates of the inputs to the Drake equation, and how have you seen those estimates change over your lifetime? How are the estimates obtained, and with what certainty can we confirm them?" To me, this is the most critical question to ask because to answer the question that everyone wants to know, "Where are all of the aliens," we first need to handle the necessary initial steps that will lead us to a conclusion.
top of page
bottom of page