Where are they? Why I hope the search for extraterrestrial life finds nothing.(technologyreview.com) |
Where are they? Why I hope the search for extraterrestrial life finds nothing.(technologyreview.com) |
One way or another, the "sends radio waves into space hoping for contact" phase is probably very short. The possibilities for what phases come next are not all bad, but whatever the "usual" is, it probably doesn't involve sending radio waves out anymore. It's possible the next step is to evolve into something that wouldn't like talking to us very much. Maybe that's not bad.
(Anybody else reading this, human or alien, may also enjoy the book.)
1. Any species will place its own survival before that of a different species.
2. Any species that has made it to the top on its planet of origin will be
intelligent, alert, aggressive, and ruthless when necessary.
3. They will assume that the first two rules apply to us.
I would argue the exact opposite--any species that makes it to the top of the food chain will likely have collaboration ingrained in their nature, and the more advanced, the greater their collaborative nature will be.
Also, our record with regards to polluting our own environment doesn't recommend us highly as "good citizens of the galaxy." (This was brought up as a possibility in David Brin's Sundiver series.)
And this isn't even considering the vast differences in culture and even basic mental models there will likely be. It's far from a sure bet that this openness will extend to us.
Also, one can readily imagine how a "innocuous" act from the point of view of one species might be considered a greivous crime by another. (The Ender's Game books are one example.)
There is also at least one example of a pacifist society that was completely butchered when they were discovered by less pacifist people, even though they gave those people a friendly welcome.
Canned food, sanitation, nuclear power, computers, all first developed in a wartime capacity
We are not seeing any other aliens because our creators (not god, but some aliens) are so powerful that they destroyed them or kept them away.
Well, just a random thought I had after reading the article.
We think in human terms, but they might not have the need to spread to every planet. But they may want to stop other civilizations, because they can become threats to them. Perhaps they just monitor the galaxy and stops other civilizations from spreading too far?
That could also explain why UFO observations have increased so much after WWII. When they noticed that we could make nuclear bombs, we were put on the "no fly list" :-)
They became faster. Foreseeing the heat depth of the universe, they invented a way to squeeze an eternity of subjective time into a second of real time, and stayed there. Or turned around in time. Or started oscillating back and forth in the same time interval.
They invented wish control, eliminated the survival instinct and went extinct.
They contacted God and ascended.
Really, the only reason we are as intelligent as we are is because intelligence turned out to be helpful for survival. But that same intelligence lets us defeat our own survival instincts (which is why we have obesity, drug addiction, and porn). This suggests that for continued survival, either our instincts must become stronger than our intellects or our intellects must become weaker than our instincts -- both of which lead to the same place: exhaustion of resources before we actually accomplish anything.
(Disclaimer: I recently rented "Idiocracy".)
1. The singularity. (Though that begs the question: Why wouldn't robots be observable? Perhaps they exist at a largely "virtual" level, as code, even as they replace life.)
2. Dysgenics, aka, Idiocracy. At some point, it may be evolutionarily advantageous to not become more advanced. This is certainly true at present, on average, though the distribution of intelligence is becoming bimodal. The actual filter might ultimately involve a great genocide by Morlock-esque creatures.
3. Gamma ray bursts. Could wipe out millions of civilizations all at once.
4. Ice nine. This is the author's suggestion, basically. Some sudden discovery that wipes out humanity too quickly for us to recover.
....certainly, the author is correct in observing that there are no intelligent aliens, nor could they hide themselves unless they purposefully disabled every radio transmitter for the duration of their hiding.
ED: The wiki article is actually pretty good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox
I believe that in order to develop space technology a species(let's call it that) has to be technologically advanced but in order to be technologically advanced the specieshas to be innovative and competitive.
But competition is the trait that can cause conflict and wars so any species that has the capability to colonize foreign worlds also has the ability to annihilate itself.
Thus I have this idea that every species that has been able to get this technology has killed itself off. It's a morbid view but just an idea that I have.
What I like to think is that we are getting more and more in line with nature and less and less pugnacious so at one point maybe we'll get along with the world - hopefully these advanced aliens have reached that point.
Assuming "competition" and ONLY the negative consequences of the competitive process somehow trump all else, in particular cooperation, is depressing, counterproductive and inconsistent with what I've seen in my own life.
I, for one, hope that we aren't the only ones, because if we fail, then its all over. If there are more, intelligence will be able to carry on.
There is apparently a prejudice on what an ET manifestation should or might be. If there is no match, people mistakenly conclude that ET don't exist instead of calling back into question their assumptions on what an ET manifestation should be.
Most reasoning about ET naively project humans constrains or interests on them as well as our rationale. This is quite naive.
The author suggest filters, I suggest barriers.
The most important barrier is interstellar travel which requires to be able to collect energy somehow during the travel (i.e. from dark matter) or the be able to completely freeze any activity and energy spending on board during the travel (i.e. as do plant seed) and using the destination sun as energy source to trigger to reactivation.
When a civilization has reached this stage, he most probably has become independent of the need to be on firm ground like an earth or so. He will be much more comfortable in a fully artificial, customized and big enough space ship. What I mean to say is that their constrains may be totally different than what we may expect based on our experience.
From this perspective I assume the real value (St Graal) is scientific and engineering knowledge and mastering, and for this, if avoiding direct contact and obvious manifestation can simplify the task, they'll do it.
We have no idea on their constrains, their knowledge and how humans are positioned regarding it.
There are enough facts and data on UFOs however to learn and deduce things about their technology. (i.e. electro magnetic propulsion, very intense magnetic fields, supra conductive vehicle shell at room temperature and above, protecting against magnetic field, etc...). These are not just speculations, there are hard facts justifying them. (i.e light polarization due to intense EM field around the UFO made visible on a photograph), etc.
Apparently very few people really take the time to investigate objectively and in detail the data at hand and the hard facts.
How would an advanced Alien intelligence view human beings, who exploit and slaughter intelligent life around them on a daily basis, including other human beings, and helpless animals who they raise under torturous conditions and then dismember while conscious in order to consume them -- needlessly, as our physiology does not require animal products.
Not to mention the warmongering, as the majority of the U.S. public supported war -- as long as it seemed convenient. No anti-war stance on principle for most U.S. citizens, bogglingly, especially after the lessons of Vietnam.
A lack of human rights or environmental laws in the most populous country on Earth.
Widespread environmental destruction, wiping out forests and ecosystems all over the globe.
I don't think Aliens would be too impressed with humanity in general, including SETI researchers who retire to the cafeteria for a nice plate of murdered intelligent being on a daily basis.
What if the resources required to leave the home planet (including here the resources required for generations of technological steps to reach that point) are more than an Earth-like planet can sustain? In other words, of necessity or as close to it as probability allows, intelligent life must destroy the sustainability of its home planet before it achieves the technology capable of leaving it.
Of course, by leaving it I'm talking on the scale required to explore and interact with neighbouring solar systems, not just sending Voyager 1 out there with a picture on its side.
Either way, on a cosmic scale, all this is beyond our control (I'd worry about the sun going nova some day, but I have more pressing things to do), so not much point worrying about it.
Also, stuff like nanopond makes me want to think self replication is easier than he's making it out to be.
1. Aliens are not in the Bible, but nothing says they don't exist. 2. The Bible is God's message to man, and surely the Aliens will have their own message from the same God. (Actually, considering the similarities of Earth's religions, wouldn't that be something?) I digress.
Point being, the search for God will continue forever. It's part of human nature, and is ultimately an unknowable equation. Even with a thousand known species, people will ask why we are, and that can often lead to "because you were made to be".
I think it's foolish to expect a mass awakening on the discovery of ET. It's not going to happen. You'll have a few that will alter their beliefs, a few that will go wacko (thinking crazy white haired dude from Contact here) and everyone else will just ponder it for a while and carry on.
There is also the possibility of wormhole travel/other spacetime exotics...
The plant seed, or bacteria spore, analogy invalidates the claim that inter stellar travel is impossible for living bodies. Inter stellar travel is thus possible, even without energy source available on the way.
We also have to call back in question our assumptions on how a contact would happen and how the ET would look like.
The abduction data is on this aspect very interesting because no one could have predicted such a contact scenario. Note that I don't pretend it's true, but the thing is that there is a striking piece of evidence on this subject which out rules the theory of false memory. It is the Betty Hill star map that Joachim Koch recognized as to be our solar system. This interpretation makes much more sense than other interpretation for multiple reasons and the killing detail in it is that Betty has drawn in 1962 a ring around Jupiter and the ring was only discovered by Voyager 1 in 1979 !
say an alien civilization comes along and is as far beyond us as we are beyond cows. I think we'd raise some objections if they started eating us, even though it is logically sound.
Collaboration leads to advancement and that trend applies to higher levels of advancement than we are at. For example, imagine there was no war. Trillions of dollars of economic activity could instead be directed toward, say, curing cancer. The more collaborative a society, the farther and faster it can advance. Learning from another species (thanks for the cool warp drive tips, Xarcon!) is a type of collaboration that offers benefits that a species doesn't get following the approach in the parent post. So, as a matter of policy, extending the openness to other species can be sound strategy.
The rest of what you're saying is not really related to my argument, which was focused solely on the "personality" of highly advanced species.
Learning from another species' technology is likely to be a largely one-way transaction. Instead of trading warp drive tips, it's much more likely that the "Xarcon" will have warp drive and we will not. (Or vice-versa.) In any case, if the other side has things like antimatter fueled starships, they may still have the potential to wipe out the other civilization, or at least preemptively cause huge damage to it. Why would another intelligent species give up a potential technological advantage without first assuring the safety of their own species? Of course, there are many ways of assuring such safety. In the case of practical warp drive, one way of doing this would be to withhold warp technology and use the intervening time to propagate your own species. Another option might be to absorb the less advanced species into some sort of confederation. Actually, a really savvy species would do both!
Definitely
>and is in someway required as part of the foundation for civilization
I disagree. The foundation of a civilization is energy and how much energy a civilization can use. See the Kardashev scale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale
I'm trying to say that something could exist that is so fundamentally different from us that it really doesn't care about our existence. Right now, the biggest organisms on earth are fungi. There are some truly enormous fungi. Imagine a fungus or set of fungi that start converting radiation directly to mass for itself to grow. It could expand to surround its local sun. In certain ways, this fungus is more advanced than us, but it would eat us alive without noticing it was doing anything wrong, because it isn't capable of having the thought required to have morality.