I may have misspoke when using the term statistical fact, maybe I should have used statistical probability. I am also basing my statement on the idea that the scientific community at large believes that life did not originate on Earth, rather it was carried here by an asteroid or as the Earth was formed. And therefore can conclude with some certainty, however small a percentage, that there must be other life out there.
I never said it deteriorates to zero, I said it reduces in intensity according to the inverse square law. At some point it will be undetectable.
I wasn't aware that the scientific community believes in panspermia. It's an interesting theory, but I haven't seen any real evidence.
To be clear, I am arguing radio waves, electromagnetic radiation, not sound waves. I am stating that electromagnetic radiation travels until it is either scattered or absorbed. Therefore, if a radio wave travels through space without being absorbed or scattered, it will travel indefinitely.
Yes. The scientific community, amongst cosmologists, support the theory that life did not necessarily begin on Earth, rather that microbial life was brought here.
You are scattering the signal though. The signal will propagate at the speed of light in a sphere radiating away from the source. The intensity of the signal (or light) will be directly proportional to the area of the sphere. At 70 light years that signal is spread out over 2.13 * 10[SUP]30 [/SUP]square miles. The signal must be dispersed over that area because you should be able to receive the signal from 70 light years away in all directions.
Gravity warps space which can then bend EM. The specific example I was talking about was your grow light. The gravity gradient is totally negligible when discussing the inverse square law as it relates to grow lights.
How do you support a theory that something didn't necessarily happen? I was under the impression the current consensus was "we don't know". It may have started on earth. It may have started elsewhere and been brought to earth. So far I haven't seen any definitive evidence.
Dude, the further you get from the sun the darker it gets because the light the that it emits is less dense per sq meter than when you're close. The photons are getting less 'strong' there's just less of them the further you get a way from the source. The photons would be subjected to radiation and a plethora of other interferences as well. Who knows what's out there.
Gravity....
SETI has never discovered a single signal. And depending on how concentrated you make the beam, this is true. You can focus it like a laser so that at the 70 light year mark it has only dispersed to the area of 1 square mile, and the signal would be very very strong. However that would only be covering 1 square mile out of the 2.13 * 10[SUP]30 [/SUP]possible square miles of the surface area of the 70 light year sphere, so the odds of anyone hearing your signal is approaching 0 regardless of how strong it is. The more area you let your signal cover, the less intense it will become. Even at a half sphere I have a hard time believing we could send out a powerful enough signal to be detected hundreds of light years away.
A very few cosmologists propose this as a hypothesis. For it to be theory there would have to be something observable/testable. This borders on metaphysics imo.
