Reality Straight Up!

Thoughts & Observations of a Free Range Astrophysicist

Looking for E.T.

Where Are They?

Why E.T. might stay home

It would be fun to think there is a flourishing interstellar civilization of humanoid aliens out there. But then it would also be nice to believe in unicorns and midichlorians. It would be nice, but they probably aren’t there.

This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.


Along with a lot of you out there, I grew up on stories of sprawling interstellar societies full of creatures very like us. Spacecraft powered by unexplained technologies sidestep the laws of physics as we know them, allowing various species of bipedal humanoids to get together and do what we bipedal humanoids are wont to do. I still love a good space opera. But, alas, such things are not to be.

Enrico Fermi wondered, “If E.T. is out there, why aren’t they here?”

During an informal lunchtime conversation at Los Alamos in 1950, a group of physicists were joking about a cartoon in The New Yorker depicting aliens and a flying saucer. The cartoon inspired Enrico Fermi to ask a simple question: “Where are they?”

Enrico Fermi

Enrico Fermi was a brilliant, Nobel-Prize-winning nuclear physicist, but his name is perhaps just as widely recognized for his question, “Where is E.T.?”

If the universe contains numerous intelligent civilizations whose inhabitants routinely travel among the stars, then, Fermi reasoned, those civilizations should quickly spread throughout the galaxy. Yet, fantastical claims about UFOs aside, there is no evidence that we have been visited. Fermi never thought of this as a paradox. (That term didn’t appear for another 25 years.) He just took it as evidence that interstellar travel must be really hard, and that coming to Earth isn’t worth the effort.

For biological creatures, interstellar travel is hard

Concerns about the difficulty of interstellar travel are well founded. In the real world, you don’t get to sidestep physics, and physics says that sending humans across interstellar distances would require vast resources and journeys lasting many lifetimes.

From suspended animation to zygote-laden incubator ships to multigenerational vessels, people have played with lots of ideas for how we might mount such a campaign. But any way you slice it, space is a hostile environment for biological organisms. Protecting passengers and keeping them alive and healthy for centuries or more is a formidable task.

Then there are the extraordinary psychological stresses involved. Drawing on experience with Antarctic exploration, long-duration space flight, and numerous experiments aimed at understanding the human factors encountered during a quick trip to Mars, one thing seems clear. Managing the isolation, confinement, culture, and other psychosocial aspects of interstellar travel could be as daunting as the challenges facing spacecraft engineers. It seems likely that any intelligent social species would face their own versions of such hurdles.

E.T. and humans doubtless have very different biochemistry

Evolution has no destination. Each time you push the “go” button, you end up someplace different. Start things over on Earth (or on another Earth-like planet) and not only would there be different species with perceptions and intelligences that vary wildly from our own, the very chemistry of life would be altered as well!

That’s conjecture — but it’s pretty safe conjecture. To see why, let’s do a quick back-ofthe-envelope calculation.

Among other things, our DNA contains instructions for building proteins out of sequences of amino acids. For simplicity, let’s assume that life always evolves that same basic molecular machinery. There are 500 or so known amino acids, of which life on Earth uses only 23. Sticking with our KISS (keep it simple, stupid) approach, let’s assume all life uses those same 23.

Protein Molecule

There are 10613 different possible proteins with a length of 450 amino acids. Only about 10 million of those are used by life on Earth. The likelihood that life elsewhere uses any of those same proteins is effectively zero.

The average protein in a eukaryotic (nucleus-containing) cell on Earth is about 450 amino acids long. There are therefore 23450 (=10613) different proteins of that length that the machinery of our DNA might construct. That’s a huge number! Not surprisingly, terrestrial life has stumbled upon uses for only a small fraction of those possible proteins — about 10 million.

So now let’s take those 10613 possible proteins and split them into planet-proportioned groups of 10 million each. With no overlap at all, there would be 10606 of those piles! There are no more than about 1023 habitable planets in the entire observable universe. You could spread those stacks of proteins over the planets in 10583 similar universes without having to duplicate a single protein on any two planets!

The takeaway is this: The likelihood that any two lifebearing planets in the universe share even remotely compatible biochemistry is effectively zero.

That interstellar civilization might still exist. Watch this space.

Put all of that together, and a civilization looking at Earth as an interstellar destination might reasonably assume three things: 1) The existence of life means that Earth is at best useless and at worst highly poisonous, 2) communication might be as problematic as communication between humans and octopuses, and 3) a decision to send emissaries in our direction would be costly indeed.

So perhaps the answer to Fermi’s question is that everybody out there with technology that might allow them to travel the stars in search of life understands that there is no reason to do so.

Or perhaps not.

Personally, I think there probably is a thriving civilization out among the stars. Watch this space.

Where Are They? ^ Why E.T. might stay home  © Dr. Jeff Hester
Content may not be copied to other sites. All Rights Reserved.

Reality Straight Up!

  • COVID-19 Arrives  The Humanitarian Disaster is HerePosted in Thoughts
  • Correctly Predicting Failure  It’s time for scientists to get loudPosted in Thoughts
  • Typhoid Mary on Two Wheels  Spreading COVID one lap at a timePosted in Thoughts
  • Pine Boxes  Invest now, the numbers are going upPosted in Success & FailureThoughts
  • Scientists Stuck Inside  Curiosity in the Time of COVIDPosted in For Your ConsiderationThoughts
  • After COVID’s First Wave  No getting back to normalPosted in Success & FailureThoughts
  • COVID-19  Cutting through the confusionPosted in Success & FailureThoughts
  • Great Deceiverism 101  Explanation or Theory? Therein lies the rub.Posted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • One Step at a Time  The  not-so-mysterious origin of lifePosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • The Mind’s Siren Call  Being certain is a primrose pathPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Constrained Hallucinations  How the brain uses science to perceive the worldPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Entropy Redux  Why our universe isn’t boringPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • COVID-19 Arrives
    The Humanitarian Disaster is Here

    Currently new cases of COVID-19 in Arizona are doubling every 7 days. ICU beds in the state are already full. The rest of the country isn’t that far behind us. You do the math.

    Read Article

  • Correctly Predicting Failure
    It’s time for scientists to get loud

    Now is not the time for scientists to be circumspect and silent. We are on the short end of a battle over whether truth even matters. If scientists do not stand up for what is real, who will?

    Read Article

  • Typhoid Mary on Two Wheels
    Spreading COVID one lap at a time

    The morning cyclist in my neighborhood may not be standing in the Michigan Statehouse carrying a gun and demanding her right to spread contagion far and wide, but she may as well be.

    Read Article

  • Pine Boxes
    Invest now, the numbers are going up

    You know those nice charts and graphs that make it look like we are over the hump of COVID-19 and that things are about to get better? Those predictions are dead wrong, with an unfortunate emphasis on “dead.”

    Read Article

  • Scientists Stuck Inside
    Curiosity in the Time of COVID

    Imagine three gregarious scientists, each with the gift of the gab, all coping with stay-at-home orders. Of course we started a livestream/podcast talk show! What else would we do? Welcome to the kickoff episode of Scientists Stuck Inside.

    Read Article

  • After COVID’s First Wave
    No getting back to normal

    Even after COVID-19 kills hundreds of thousands in the U.S. over the coming weeks, we will still be almost as vulnerable to the pandemic as we are today. We’d all love to “get back to normal” after that, but the price could be a second wave, worse than the first. Some see us facing either economic Depression or allowing vast numbers of preventable deaths, but that is a fool’s choice. There are better options if we have the will to find them.

    Read Article

  • COVID-19
    Cutting through the confusion

    There is a lot of information about COVID-19 out there, much of it misleading. When looking at the future, start with what the science really says.

    Read Article

  • Great Deceiverism 101
    Explanation or Theory? Therein lies the rub.

    If someone can’t tell you how they would know that they are wrong, they don’t have a clue whether they are right.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • One Step at a Time
    The not-so-mysterious origin of life

    Once seemingly incomprehensible, the origin of life no longer seems such a mystery. Most of what once appeared as roadblocks are turning out to be superhighways.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • The Mind’s Siren Call
    Being certain is a primrose path

    Being certain lights up our brains like a junkie’s next hit. Literally. Unfortunately, being certain and being right are two very, very different things.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • Constrained Hallucinations
    How the brain uses science to perceive the world

    The unique worlds we each consciously inhabit – the only worlds we will ever experience – are constrained hallucinations, products of hypothesis testing by our predictive brains.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

  • Entropy Redux
    Why our universe isn’t boring

    A month’s worth of sunlight could pay the entropy bill for a billion years of biological evolution. Entropy is evolution’s best friend.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

    Read Article

Click on thumbnail to select post:

  • COVID-19 Arrives  The Humanitarian Disaster is HerePosted in Thoughts
  • Correctly Predicting Failure  It’s time for scientists to get loudPosted in Thoughts
  • Typhoid Mary on Two Wheels  Spreading COVID one lap at a timePosted in Thoughts
  • Pine Boxes  Invest now, the numbers are going upPosted in Success & FailureThoughts
  • Scientists Stuck Inside  Curiosity in the Time of COVIDPosted in For Your ConsiderationThoughts
  • After COVID’s First Wave  No getting back to normalPosted in Success & FailureThoughts
  • COVID-19  Cutting through the confusionPosted in Success & FailureThoughts
  • Great Deceiverism 101  Explanation or Theory? Therein lies the rub.Posted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • One Step at a Time  The  not-so-mysterious origin of lifePosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • The Mind’s Siren Call  Being certain is a primrose pathPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Constrained Hallucinations  How the brain uses science to perceive the worldPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Entropy Redux  Why our universe isn’t boringPosted in For Your ConsiderationUnreasonable Faith
  • Currently new cases of COVID-19 in Arizona are doubling every 7 days. ICU beds in the state are already full. The rest of the country isn’t that far behind us. You do the math.

  • Now is not the time for scientists to be circumspect and silent. We are on the short end of a battle over whether truth even matters. If scientists do not stand up for what is real, who will?

  • The morning cyclist in my neighborhood may not be standing in the Michigan Statehouse carrying a gun and demanding her right to spread contagion far and wide, but she may as well be.

  • You know those nice charts and graphs that make it look like we are over the hump of COVID-19 and that things are about to get better? Those predictions are dead wrong, with an unfortunate emphasis on “dead.”

  • Imagine three gregarious scientists, each with the gift of the gab, all coping with stay-at-home orders. Of course we started a livestream/podcast talk show! What else would we do? Welcome to the kickoff episode of Scientists Stuck Inside.

  • Even after COVID-19 kills hundreds of thousands in the U.S. over the coming weeks, we will still be almost as vulnerable to the pandemic as we are today. We’d all love to “get back to normal” after that, but the price could be a second wave, worse than the first. Some see us facing either economic Depression or allowing vast numbers of preventable deaths, but that is a fool’s choice. There are better options if we have the will to find them.

  • There is a lot of information about COVID-19 out there, much of it misleading. When looking at the future, start with what the science really says.

  • If someone can’t tell you how they would know that they are wrong, they don’t have a clue whether they are right.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • Once seemingly incomprehensible, the origin of life no longer seems such a mystery. Most of what once appeared as roadblocks are turning out to be superhighways.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • Being certain lights up our brains like a junkie’s next hit. Literally. Unfortunately, being certain and being right are two very, very different things.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • The unique worlds we each consciously inhabit – the only worlds we will ever experience – are constrained hallucinations, products of hypothesis testing by our predictive brains.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

  • A month’s worth of sunlight could pay the entropy bill for a billion years of biological evolution. Entropy is evolution’s best friend.

    This article originally appeared in my Astronomy Magazine column, For Your Consideration.

Over his 30 year career as an internationally known astrophysicist, Dr. Jeff Hester was a key member of the team that repaired the Hubble Space Telescope. With one foot always on the frontiers of knowledge, he has been mentor, coach, team leader, award-winning teacher, administrator and speaker, to name a few of the hats he has worn. His Hubble image, the Pillars of Creation, was chosen by Time Magazine as among the 100 most influential photographs in history.
©Dr. Jeff Hester LLC, 5301 S. Superstition Mountain Dr., Suite 104 #171, Gold Canyon, AZ 85118