Aliens?

[mcbigski]

22 hours ago, maarsen said:

If aliens are into butt probing, they would be on the dating thread.

I suspect there is more than one alien in that thread, in fact.  Probably not leading with Anal Probes has a higher success rate?

[maarsen]

1 hour ago, mcbigski said:

I suspect there is more than one alien in that thread, in fact.  Probably not leading with Anal Probes has a higher success rate?

As long as they don't fall asleep with the anal probe inside you.

[S John]

14 hours ago, Loge said:

Not really. If you look at Western countries in 2021, there's a huge disconnect between science and the general population. People will happily use their smartphone to organise a Flat Earther meeting. 

And use GPS to navigate there! Flat earth may be the only thing in this world that I have less patience for than Q-anon. You have to be a real dumbass. People in the ancient world with far less tools at their disposal figured this out and now there are a not insignificant amount of internet morons with every possible advantage in terms of harvesting the accumulated knowledge of mankind at their literal fingertips running around claiming we live on a domed cake stand and wanting to debate actual scientists. They can fuck off.

[IheartIheartTesla]

Wait, wait, wait.....going by Star Trek, in the future when there is plenty, there are still 5 year scientific missions going on to explore strange new worlds, to boldly go etc etc...

My sense is that when times are good, there is more appetite for endeavors that dont have utility to them, but are more philosophical/existential/aesthetic or what have you.  Liberal arts. philosophy, even science that doesnt have immediate practical applications but unlocks profound truths about the universe should all flourish.

[DMC]

Yeah a big part of the argument for the space program or going to Mars or whatever is simply "discovery."  It's normative, not empirically based.  Don't see any reason some other beings couldn't have the same impetus, regardless of getting all sciency about resources and whatnot.

[S John]

While the assumption that discovery for its own sake is a concept that all intelligent life would share is obviously very human-centric way of looking at it, that is the only benchmark we have. 

I recently read a post on Reddit where someone was complaining about the small-mindedness of human scientists in the search for life bearing planets because the criteria they are using is ‘earth-like’ planets. Well… yeah. There are billions of planets out there and the only recipe we know of that has borne intelligent life is Earth. That doesn’t discount the possibility that there are other conditions that may yield intelligent life, but it makes perfect sense to start looking from a baseline that you at least sort-of understand. It is the only thing that makes sense within the constraints of our current understanding of science. Anyway, I fucking downvoted that guy.

[Rippounet]

Discovery is one thing. There are many logical reasons why an intelligent lifeform would want to explore and map the universe. But again, that would probably not be "in person" / physically, as the benefits of doing that (for a super-advanced species) would be highly doubtful.

And interest in other lifeforms is something else entirely, and there are even more logical (not to mention logistical) reasons why such an interest would be extremely limited. Bearing in mind that, in the worst-case scenario, such interest might even be limited to pre-emptive destruction.

I'll concede that "interest" might occur if, through some cosmic coincidence, two species happen to meet shortly after they have both discovered interstellar travel - and thus have both reached a comparable level of civilization. But even in the immensity of the known universe, the odds of that occurring are actually small. I can't do the maths, but they may even be infinitesimal.
I'm pretty sure that's for the best. I really think we don't want to talk with aliens.

[Free Northman Reborn]

It is becoming increasingly likely that we are the only intelligent life in the galaxy and potentially the observable universe.

Simply put, given the billions of years available for intelligent life to have arisen before us, and given the immense progress we have made in a mere 200 years, the universe is simply too natural and pristine on galactic scales for billion or even million year old civilizations to have existed. We should be seeing their signs all over the place. But instead we see absolutely nothing, no matter which stars or galaxies we look at.

[Varysblackfyre321]

28 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

It is becoming increasingly likely that we are the only intelligent life in the galaxy and potentially the observable universe.

Simply put, given the billions of years available for intelligent life to have arisen before us, and given the immense progress we have made in a mere 200 years, the universe is simply too natural and pristine on galactic scales for billion or even million year old civilizations to have existed. We should be seeing their signs all over the place. But instead we see absolutely nothing, no matter which stars or galaxies we look at.

Eh this seems to rely on the idea that intelligent life would manifest in some anthropomorphic ideal.

It's possible that some forms “intelligent life” simply does not have the physical capabilities or the environmental incentives to go beyond their planet or leave some sort permanent footprint on the cosmetic scale.

I personally don't think we will either whether that be in a hundred years, a thousand, or million. 

There's very little incentive for humanity to try for the sci-fi fantasy galactic empire.

What's driven human expansion is trying to acquire power. The reason the US and USSR had space race 

[polishgenius]

20 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

and given the immense progress we have made in a mere 200 years, the universe is simply too natural and pristine on galactic scales for billion or even million year old civilizations to have existed. We should be seeing their signs all over the place.

 

 

I mean this really doesn't follow (it's Femi's Paradox essentially and I always hated that name coz even if you buy into the principle behind it, it's not a paradox). Space is big. Really big. Even if it's possible to cross interstellar distances, which as has been discussed we don't really know, we can't pick out details in exoplanets or the systems they're in. You might expect radio or other electromagnetic signals if there were a active technological civ in the range that their light is reaching us now, but if they're dead or not yet stepped up to that level, or, hell, moved on to other kinds of communication, there's no way we'd be seeing anything more than the most massive structures.

That goes double for 'other galaxies/the observable universe', which we have no chance of observing anything of the sort in. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

1 hour ago, polishgenius said:

 

 

I mean this really doesn't follow (it's Femi's Paradox essentially and I always hated that name coz even if you buy into the principle behind it, it's not a paradox). Space is big. Really big. Even if it's possible to cross interstellar distances, which as has been discussed we don't really know, we can't pick out details in exoplanets or the systems they're in. You might expect radio or other electromagnetic signals if there were a active technological civ in the range that their light is reaching us now, but if they're dead or not yet stepped up to that level, or, hell, moved on to other kinds of communication, there's no way we'd be seeing anything more than the most massive structures.

That goes double for 'other galaxies/the observable universe', which we have no chance of observing anything of the sort in. 

Well it’s not a paradox unless one refuses to accept that we are alone.

As for the points raised above - they are based on insufficient imagination. When we say we should be seeing evidence of aliens out there, we don’t mean radio signals or direct imaging of exoplanets with cities on them. No.
 

Why should other civilizations across the vast cosmos be at such a similar level of development to us? Some of them should be millions or billions of years ahead of us.

If we continue for a million years, we WILL have done mega engineering at a solar system level. Energy needs would demand that. A billion year old civilization would have engineered STARS and GALAXIES to suit their needs.

You would easily see these signs in even distant galaxies. And all the solutions trying to counter this have to hold true not just for some or most civilizations, they have to hold true without a single exception, which is simply not plausible.

[Luzifer's right hand]

12 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Well it’s not a paradox unless one refuses to accept that we are alone.

As for the points raised above - they are based on insufficient imagination. When we say we should be seeing evidence of aliens out there, we don’t mean radio signals or direct imaging of exoplanets with cities on them. No.
 

Why should other civilizations across the vast cosmos be at such a similar level of development to us? Some of them should be millions or billions of years ahead of us.

If we continue for a million years, we WILL have done mega engineering at a solar system level. Energy needs would demand that. A billion year old civilization would have engineered STARS and GALAXIES to suit their needs.

You would easily see these signs in even distant galaxies. And all the solutions trying to counter this have to hold true not just for some or most civilizations, they have to hold true without a single exception, which is simply not plausible.

There is no reason to assume the tech using civilizations do not die out quickly. We are on the best way.

[Free Northman Reborn]

10 minutes ago, Luzifer's right hand said:

There is no reason to assume the tech using civilizations do not die out quickly. We are on the best way.

Well actually, there are plenty of reasons to assume that. Once you are a multi planetary species the number of disasters that can wipe out your civilization decreases rapidly. 

Asteroid impact - nope.

Super volcano - nope.

Climate change - no.

Global thermo nuclear exchange - no.

Global pathogen - no again.

Gamma ray burst - no, that hits one specific planet only.

And once you inhabit multiple star systems even a supernova of your home star is no longer an existential threat. 

And again, even if some catastrophe still manages to slip through and kill you, it is not enough for this doomsday to be possible, or even to happen many times. Nope. It has to happen to EVERY single civilization, without exception. Which is implausible.

[Luzifer's right hand]

15 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Well actually, there are plenty of reasons to assume that. Once you are a multi planetary species the number of disasters that can wipe out your civilization decreases rapidly. 

Asteroid impact - nope.

Super volcano - nope.

Climate change - no.

Global thermo nuclear exchange - no.

Global pathogen - no again.

Gamma ray burst - no, that hits one specific planet only.

And once you inhabit multiple star systems even a supernova of your home star is no longer an existential threat. 

And again, even if some catastrophe still manages to slip through and kill you, it is not enough for this doomsday to be possible, or even to happen many times. Nope. It has to happen to EVERY single civilization, without exception. Which is implausible.

That assumes that any of that is possible before low tech civilizations wipe themselves out. That seems really optimistic at this point.

[Free Northman Reborn]

7 minutes ago, Luzifer's right hand said:

That assumes that any of that is possible before low tech civilizations wipe themselves out. That seems really optimistic at this point.

Look, I get that including some form of critical social commentary  is pretty much mandatory for this board, but even if we were to wipe ourselves out in the next century, that would again need to apply without exception to the billions of potential civilizations that might have existed across the entire observable universe, to prevent all of them from developing any further beyond our 21st century equivalent level of technology.

This despite widely different histories, biologies, cultures and circumstances applying to each unique species. All of them wiped out without exception.

Nope. Not as plausible as the alternative, which is that intelligent life is simply extremely rare.

[Luzifer's right hand]

14 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Look, I get that including some form of critical social commentary  is pretty much mandatory for this board, but even if we were to wipe ourselves out in the next century, that would again need to apply without exception to the billions of potential civilizations that might have existed across the entire observable universe, to prevent all of them from developing any further beyond our 21st century equivalent level of technology.

This despite widely different histories, biologies, cultures and circumstances applying to each unique species. All of them wiped out without exception.

Nope. Not as plausible as the alternative, which is that intelligent life is simply extremely rare.

Why not both?

Just a single forever chemical that is deadly to life in the long term and is inevitable if you use a certain level of tech would be enough. We are using thousands with unknown long term effects. 

We might be the smartest species ever with the most robust planet. We don't know.

We are incredible far away from having self sustaining habitats on other planets too. We can't even keep this environment stable which sustains itself. 

 

[Rippounet]

If we're discussing this seriously (or half-seriously), I think it'd be useful to begin with this infographic:

https://wordlesstech.com/havent-found-aliens-infographic/

I'm -obviously- voting for "The Great Silence" + "Not Life As We Know It" : I don't believe that aliens would contact us even if they could.

What I really don't buy is the "Rare Earth" hypothesis.

I also found this one:

https://bluesat.com.au/the-fermi-paradox/

But the vocabulary seems off. I know "Destroy or be destroyed" as the "Dark Forest" theory. Though I confess I don't know where the term came from. Was it Liu Cixin who coined it?

"Down the Rabbit Hole" is another discussion entirely I think (which we've had here a while back).

[Free Northman Reborn]

8 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

If we're discussing this seriously (or half-seriously), I think it'd be useful to begin with this infographic:

https://wordlesstech.com/havent-found-aliens-infographic/

I'm -obviously- voting for "The Great Silence" + "Not Life As We Know It" : I don't believe that aliens would contact us even if they could.

What I really don't buy is the "Rare Earth" hypothesis.

I also found this one:

https://bluesat.com.au/the-fermi-paradox/

But the vocabulary seems off. I know "Destroy or be destroyed" as the "Dark Forest" theory. Though I confess I don't know where the term came from. Was it Liu Cixin who coined it?

"Down the Rabbit Hole" is another discussion entirely I think (which we've had here a while back).

It’s not Rare Earth. It’s Rare Intelligence.

[Rippounet]

58 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

It’s Rare Intelligence.

That's what the expression "Rare Earth" describes. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

25 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

That's what the expression "Rare Earth" describes. 

Ok. I would just point out that Rare Intelligence does not have to mean Rare Complex Life. There could be billions of planets where dinosaurs or dolphins rule. But none beyond earth where technological intelligence emerged.