Question
Video Player
Watch the video that discusses the possibility that there is life somewhere in the universe other than planet Earth.
Once you have watched the video answer the following questions:
1. Do you think there is life elsewhere in the universe? Why or why not?
2. Do you think NASA or another organization should spend time, effort and money to try to detect other forms of life in the universe? Why or why not?
(12 points)
Watch the video that discusses the possibility that there is life somewhere in the universe other than planet Earth.
Once you have watched the video answer the following questions:
1. Do you think there is life elsewhere in the universe? Why or why not?
2. Do you think NASA or another organization should spend time, effort and money to try to detect other forms of life in the universe? Why or why not?
(12 points)
Answers
GPT-5 mini
1. Do you think there is life elsewhere in the universe? Why or why not?
Yes, I think it is likely that some form of life exists elsewhere. The main reasons are scale and the ubiquity of the ingredients for life. There are hundreds of billions of stars in our galaxy and hundreds of billions of galaxies in the observable universe; thousands of exoplanets have already been found, including many in their stars’ habitable zones. Laboratory chemistry and observations show the building blocks of life (water, organic molecules, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, etc.) are common throughout space. On Earth, life has arisen quickly after conditions allowed it and has adapted to extreme environments (deep-sea vents, acidic lakes, subsurface rocks), which suggests life can tolerate a wide range of conditions. Put together, these points make it statistically plausible that life — at least microbial or simple multicellular life — has emerged elsewhere.
That said, we don’t have direct evidence yet. The Fermi paradox and arguments like the “Rare Earth” hypothesis are valid: intelligent, technological civilizations might be extremely rare or short-lived, and vast distances plus time scales make contact unlikely. So while I judge life elsewhere to be probable, the form, abundance, and detectability of that life remain open questions.
2. Should NASA or another organization spend time, effort and money to try to detect other forms of life in the universe? Why or why not?
Yes — investing in the search for life is justified and worthwhile. Reasons:
- Scientific value: Discovering life elsewhere would be one of the most profound scientific findings in history, transforming biology, chemistry, philosophy and our understanding of life’s origins and distribution.
- Feasibility and incremental payoff: Many viable strategies exist now (rovers and landers searching for past/present life on Mars, missions to ocean worlds like Europa and Enceladus, biosignature searches in exoplanet atmospheres) that can return valuable data even if they don’t find life.
- Technology and spinoffs: Space missions drive innovation (robotics, instrumentation, remote sensing, computing) with broad benefits for other science and industry.
- Inspiration and education: The search captures public imagination, encourages STEM education and international cooperation.
That said, priorities matter. Funding should be balanced with pressing Earth-based needs and other scientific priorities. Missions should be designed with sound scientific strategies, cost control, and international partnerships to maximize return. Planetary protection and ethical considerations must also be respected (avoid contaminating other worlds and consider implications of potential discoveries).
Summary: Given the high scientific stakes, growing technical capability, and relatively modest share of national budgets such missions require compared with their potential payoff, I support continued, carefully managed investment in the search for extraterrestrial life.
Yes, I think it is likely that some form of life exists elsewhere. The main reasons are scale and the ubiquity of the ingredients for life. There are hundreds of billions of stars in our galaxy and hundreds of billions of galaxies in the observable universe; thousands of exoplanets have already been found, including many in their stars’ habitable zones. Laboratory chemistry and observations show the building blocks of life (water, organic molecules, carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, etc.) are common throughout space. On Earth, life has arisen quickly after conditions allowed it and has adapted to extreme environments (deep-sea vents, acidic lakes, subsurface rocks), which suggests life can tolerate a wide range of conditions. Put together, these points make it statistically plausible that life — at least microbial or simple multicellular life — has emerged elsewhere.
That said, we don’t have direct evidence yet. The Fermi paradox and arguments like the “Rare Earth” hypothesis are valid: intelligent, technological civilizations might be extremely rare or short-lived, and vast distances plus time scales make contact unlikely. So while I judge life elsewhere to be probable, the form, abundance, and detectability of that life remain open questions.
2. Should NASA or another organization spend time, effort and money to try to detect other forms of life in the universe? Why or why not?
Yes — investing in the search for life is justified and worthwhile. Reasons:
- Scientific value: Discovering life elsewhere would be one of the most profound scientific findings in history, transforming biology, chemistry, philosophy and our understanding of life’s origins and distribution.
- Feasibility and incremental payoff: Many viable strategies exist now (rovers and landers searching for past/present life on Mars, missions to ocean worlds like Europa and Enceladus, biosignature searches in exoplanet atmospheres) that can return valuable data even if they don’t find life.
- Technology and spinoffs: Space missions drive innovation (robotics, instrumentation, remote sensing, computing) with broad benefits for other science and industry.
- Inspiration and education: The search captures public imagination, encourages STEM education and international cooperation.
That said, priorities matter. Funding should be balanced with pressing Earth-based needs and other scientific priorities. Missions should be designed with sound scientific strategies, cost control, and international partnerships to maximize return. Planetary protection and ethical considerations must also be respected (avoid contaminating other worlds and consider implications of potential discoveries).
Summary: Given the high scientific stakes, growing technical capability, and relatively modest share of national budgets such missions require compared with their potential payoff, I support continued, carefully managed investment in the search for extraterrestrial life.