The Drake Equation is essentially two parts: what is known or can be easily approximated with existing technology, times what is virtually impossible to determine but essential for even trying to make a guess. This made it useless, unfortunately. All we know is that intelligent life is possible, or may not be possible depending on what you put into the equation. Not exactly helpful. I think later approaches that try use hard physics, such as advanced cosmology concepts, have proven more helpful.
How many of these things are instrinsically virtually impossible to determine though?
I was born in '86 and since that time we've discovered thousands of exoplanets. Maybe we've crossed 10k by now. Blows my mind.
If you were born only 50 years prior the idea of a big bang would have been even more revolutionary.
I'm kind of drunk right now so I can't recall offhand when the idea of multiple galaxies was cemented but it was what, a decade or two prior to the bang innovation?
So I wonder what are the absolute hard limits to pinning down the variables in the Drake equation from a vantage point of a single star system and at this point in time actually are?
Like it seems to me that as time goes on we are able to do more and more from this singular vantage point, and that as time goes on we will be able to put some realistic parameters if not absolute values on many of these variables, enough at least that the Drake equation stops being an inspirational equation and starts being an objectively useful one like Ek = 1/2mv^2.
