Asklemmy

43953 readers

967 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

158

What is something that definitely should not exist? (endlesstalk.org)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

220 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Okay, yeah, I'm familiar with the argument. I'm not alone in being unconvinced, though. There's a lot of exoplanets, including rocky ones around very old stars. Honestly, I felt assuming just a billion years of potential alien arrival was conservative.

There is also probability that milkyway had an active center in early days that kept things nice and sterile.

Fairly unrelated to this discussion, but I'll link it because it's cool: there's a detectable echo of radiation from our galaxy being more active just a couple centuries ago, at least momentarily.

I don't know enough about the radiation one of those galaxies produce to comment on whether it could be sterilising. A thick enough atmosphere can block pretty much anything, though.