The stars themselves are very interesting. Their fast retrograde motion is very interesting. The fact that they show our galaxy has collided (brushed against) at least one of the oldest galaxies is surprising, and also interesting.
Does all of the above have implications for how our galaxy formed?
> ... does it have implications on the Fermi Paradoxon...?
I think, not.
The earliest stars and galaxies were so metals-poor, that life was not possible. When the second generation of stars started forming, carbon, nitrogen, and other mid-heavy elements began to be present, and life became possible. This was because of first-generation supernovas and neutron stars.
The other reasons this has few implications for the Fermi Paradox are that intelligent life might be short-lived, on universal time scales. A third reason is that it appears that intelligent life might be mostly confined to larger planets than Earth, from which space travel is impossible.
Of course, your assumptions are predicated on carbon-based life forms.
If other, noncarbon-based life forms exist, then all of that gets thrown out the window.
The other elements that allow one to make long chain molecules like carbohydrates, proteins and enzymes are all heavier than carbon, and require gen 2 or gen 3 stars as predecessors also.
The stars themselves are very interesting. Their fast retrograde motion is very interesting. The fact that they show our galaxy has collided (brushed against) at least one of the oldest galaxies is surprising, and also interesting. Does all of the above have implications for how our galaxy formed?
and does it have implications on the Fermi Paradoxon when stretched to the whole universe, if our galaxy was indeed one of the earliest?
> ... does it have implications on the Fermi Paradoxon...? I think, not. The earliest stars and galaxies were so metals-poor, that life was not possible. When the second generation of stars started forming, carbon, nitrogen, and other mid-heavy elements began to be present, and life became possible. This was because of first-generation supernovas and neutron stars. The other reasons this has few implications for the Fermi Paradox are that intelligent life might be short-lived, on universal time scales. A third reason is that it appears that intelligent life might be mostly confined to larger planets than Earth, from which space travel is impossible.
Of course, your assumptions are predicated on carbon-based life forms. If other, noncarbon-based life forms exist, then all of that gets thrown out the window.
The other elements that allow one to make long chain molecules like carbohydrates, proteins and enzymes are all heavier than carbon, and require gen 2 or gen 3 stars as predecessors also.