|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 11:18:44 [Permalink]
|
There are only two ways extra-solar creatures could detect us as far as I know,
1. Receiving our transmissions, this was recently found to be a virtual "impossibility" as our transmissions would degrade into background noise before reaching even the closest star.
2. Detecting the spectra of non-natural substances, not impossible but really, really improbable. These compounds ususlly exist in relativly small quantites and are not usually emitting light in any significant quantities. Either way you need to account for the time it takes for light to get anywhere and the few short years these substances have existed here.
Oh I forgot direct psychic contact, thats completely feasable as you well know. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
 |
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
 Posted - 10/23/2008 : 11:32:48 [Permalink]
|
1. Receiving our transmissions, this was recently found to be a virtual "impossibility" as our transmissions would degrade into background noise before reaching even the closest star. |
That... I didn't know.
Does that mean the SETI is a fool's dream? |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 11:36:22 [Permalink]
|
Filthy.....
| But would it, with all of the rest of the universe to explore, be worth it considering all of the probable & vicious conflicts with the dominant species that would occur? Not even God could be so stupid. |
Why do you feel that "vicious conflicts with the dominant species" is so probable? I will grant that it is a hackneyed theme - "bug eyed monsters" - that science fiction writers have written about since long before H.G. Wells. But that doesn't make it probable!
Sheer speculation, but I think that the probability of conflict would depend heavily upon the nature of and intentions of the "aliens"!
And who the hell knows what that might be when large numbers of "critical thinkers" feel that the very presence of "intelligent alien life forms" upon our planet now, in the past, or any time in the future is a near-impossibility! What I hear around here is that there is excellent reason to believe that Carl Sagan's fantasy of "Contact" is impossible because there is no evidence supporting such a possibility.
It becomes a loose cannon artillery shell of imagination inside of a looser cannon of speculation, because the whole notion of intelligent alien life visiting earth (or it's converse; humans visiting alien life elsewhere) is so preposterously absurdly ridiculous that it is at the point of impossibility! Right?
Hey!.....anybody else in this club have an opinion on this? |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 10/23/2008 : 13:08:31 [Permalink]
|
| Speed of light limitations and the known Laws of Physics make visits from extraterrestrial species unlikely to the very point of impossibility, and therefore unworthy of consideration other than for amusement. |
I'll stand by my statement.
It is all slightly less preposterous than Invisible Pink Unicorns and Basement Leprechauns, and even Great, Planet-Eating Star Goats & Hypnotoads, but even at that, so less than likely that I wonder at the hordes of otherwise sensible people that buy into it.
And then, of course, there's the industry that these hordes (including, to a minor extent, myself) support. It's the only thing that keeps Roswell, NM on the map, and some really terrible movies and TV series' on the screens.
Now then, if some sort of 'warp' drive and/or a system of navigating worm holes, and/or some shiny, new Laws of Physics are discovered, I'll start taking it a bit more seriously. But at that, I'll question if we've actually been visited.
Edit: Why do you feel that "vicious conflicts with the dominant species" is so probable? I will grant that it is a hackneyed theme - "bug eyed monsters" - that science fiction writers have written about since long before H.G. Wells. But that doesn't make it probable!
|
Human nature is one of the most reliable things on this Earth, as the second & third quotations in my signature state.
And there is always the possibility that these creatures would be so alien that communication would be extremely complex, leading to both the usual and some exotic misunderstandings -- alas, the Bablefish is fiction.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 10/23/2008 13:23:05 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 14:56:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
...all I am saying is that a position that certain things are "impossible' because no evidence has yet been discovered is a massively arrogant statement of omniscience! |
Does anyone here hold such a position?| The only thing that is certain beyond any question is that our understanding of all things will change - in degrees varying from extreme to very small - with the passage of time and the progress of careful, disciplined scientific enquiry fully following every detailed step of the scientific method of investigating the unknowns of the universe. |
But that's not predictive that any particular conclusion we hold now will change. Does your blanket statement "all things" include a modification to our understanding that the Earth goes around the Sun? What might it be modified to?| I would not possibly position myself as to the details of what will and will not be discovered in any future time frame. But to state that anything that is logically conceivable in principle is next to the point of impossibility because currently there is no evidence for it, is the same as saying that it is statistically extremely unlikely that such an event will ever occur. I see this as presumptive of a prescience and possessive of a omniscience that no human being can possibly possess. |
Good thing nobody is saying that, then.| Except in certain very narrow meanings, the word 'Impossible" is anathema to me! |
Then perhaps you will buy Ricky some iron supplements so he can get to work on defecating an Escalade. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 21:20:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Hey!.....anybody else in this club have an opinion on this?
|
I love both Star Trek, Babylon 5, and Red Dwarf...
My wife finds the new Battlestar Galactica to be too depressing to watch more than 2-3 episodes in a week.
If aliens really do show up, I hope they'd had sense enough to show up in a flying DeLorean.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 23:15:29 [Permalink]
|
Dave.....
| Does anyone here hold such a position? |
Maybe!
| Does your blanket statement "all things" include a modification to our understanding that the Earth goes around the Sun? What might it be modified to? |
Yes. Our concepts of what constitutes "motion" and "circumnavigation" might concievably change with a deeper understanding of geometric space relationships. Further developments in symplectic geometry may indeed change our understanding of the current Riemannian concepts, which of course evolved out of and tangential to the classic Euclidian ideation available to Copernicus. However, topology is not my forté and also.....
.....I am not a mathematician, and my dim grasp of these concepts cannot begin to approach your mastery of this particular calculus, Dave. I bow to your superior understanding of these extremely complex abstractions, and if it is your considered judgment that the rotational relationship between the planets and their star is totally and forever unchangeably described in totally complete detail by the heliocentric model of Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo; I, of course, will have to reconsider my heresy!
I only suspect that more detail as to the actual nature of what constitutes motion of one object or entity relative to another, will develop as mathematics eternally refines with the passage of time and great labor in the field!
However, I feel..... No, I know,..... that all branches of mathematics, as well as all other forms of human understanding, do evolve, grow, and change with time!| What might it be modified to? |
I have no idea, lacking your prescience as to the development, or lack thereof, of future events. What do you think? | Good thing nobody is saying that, then. |
Bad thing that some are implying it!| Then perhaps you will buy Ricky some iron supplements so he can get to work on defecating an Escalade. |
Far better that I send him a copy of Motor Trend so that his Herculean colonic efforts will bring forth something superior to a fucking Cadillac! |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2008 : 23:52:39 [Permalink]
|
Dave.....
Further thoughts on your question and statement....| Does anyone here hold such a position? |
and| Good thing nobody is saying that, then. |
This.....| ....the known Laws of Physics make visits from extraterrestrial species unlikely to the very point of impossibility, |
and| I'll stand by my statement |
Maybe!
|
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2008 : 01:47:50 [Permalink]
|
Considering speculations about extraterrestrial life aside from aliens visiting Earth in spaceships (UFOs)...the Fermi Paradox is based on a notion of alien "civilizations" that conform to our concepts of what a civilization is.
As brilliant as Mr. Fermi was in many areas, he and his colleagues were discussing 1940s comic book aliens who, no matter how strange they were drawn, were essentially advanced reflections of us. Fermi failed to consider what "alien life" might actually be like.
Because of this, in terms of our understanding of biology, one could just as easily imagine a galaxy teeming with advanced alien life and not one of them comes here or contacts us in all the years of human evolution so far. There is nothing in nature to preclude that or make it any less likely. It is no more likely or unlikely than rare aliens. Though we can make informed speculations based solely on our understanding of chemistry and biology on Earth, thus far the real answer about life elsewhere in the galaxy is: we don't know.
If one objects to this notion, then one has to introspect and admit that you are embracing a concept of aliens that think like us and are essentially reflections of us. But in reality, if they exist, they're aliens, so they are not obligated to be like us at all
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2008 : 02:06:52 [Permalink]
|
Chippewa.....
A well reasoned, well written and completely accurate and to the point post. I totally agree with everything you have said. Speculation in this field is just that. No evidence exists today that lends credence to either the view that alien visitation is probable, or that it is "impossible". This is not a matter of "evidence", it is strictly a matter for the imagination - as was the dream of flying for the Montgolfier brothers. Following their invention of the hot air balloon, evidence did exist for further imagineering regarding flying. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2008 : 07:00:39 [Permalink]
|
bng asked:
| Hey!.....anybody else in this club have an opinion on this? |
Yes.
And yes.
Also, you are entirely mistaken about "impossible".
Just get some video of Ricky pooping out a fully functional SUV to win this argument, and you will silence your critics on the topic.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
| Edited by - Dude on 10/24/2008 07:02:06 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2008 : 07:03:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
.....I am not a mathematician, and my dim grasp of these concepts cannot begin to approach your mastery of this particular calculus, Dave. I bow to your superior understanding of these extremely complex abstractions, and if it is your considered judgment that the rotational relationship between the planets and their star is totally and forever unchangeably described in totally complete detail by the heliocentric model of Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo; I, of course, will have to reconsider my heresy! |
While Einsteins work on Relativity was revolutionary, it didn't cause a paradigm change from Newton's laws.
When Niels Bohr discovered that the atom consisted of mostly void, buildings didn't experience structural failures because their walls weren't solid anymore.
Our discoveries haven't changed how we interact with reality in any fundamental way.
It just gave us a deeper understanding of the reality in which we live. Planets are still solid, and planets are still orbiting the sun in near circular ellipses, which can be still be fairly well described using Newtons ancient formula.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2008 : 08:52:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Chippewa
Considering speculations about extraterrestrial life aside from aliens visiting Earth in spaceships (UFOs)...the Fermi Paradox is based on a notion of alien "civilizations" that conform to our concepts of what a civilization is.
As brilliant as Mr. Fermi was in many areas, he and his colleagues were discussing 1940s comic book aliens who, no matter how strange they were drawn, were essentially advanced reflections of us. Fermi failed to consider what "alien life" might actually be like.
Because of this, in terms of our understanding of biology, one could just as easily imagine a galaxy teeming with advanced alien life and not one of them comes here or contacts us in all the years of human evolution so far. There is nothing in nature to preclude that or make it any less likely. It is no more likely or unlikely than rare aliens. Though we can make informed speculations based solely on our understanding of chemistry and biology on Earth, thus far the real answer about life elsewhere in the galaxy is: we don't know.
If one objects to this notion, then one has to introspect and admit that you are embracing a concept of aliens that think like us and are essentially reflections of us. But in reality, if they exist, they're aliens, so they are not obligated to be like us at all
|
It all depends of how you define 'advanced' life-form.
As a microbiologist, I sometime argue that bacteria, often referred to as the 'most primitive life form on earth' are, in fact, more advanced than us. Just, their evolution was toward efficiency and streamlinedness rather than complexity...
One could argue, however, than, in most worlds, there exist an ecological niche for a 'human-like' social and intelligent creature.
After all, this formula was so successful here that it would seem surprising to me that it is not represented anywhere else on the likely billions of inhabited worlds in the universe...
Such a creature, occupying a very similar ecological niche as the one our ancestors did would be submitted to very similar ecological pressure and, due to convergent evolution, develop many characteristics similar to our own... It would need a group to survive, and hence develop empathy and complex communication. This in turn would require a development of its brain, helping it to develop 'technology' as well as group hunting strategy. Leading to a richer diet, contributing to the development of the brain and the acquisition of more complex tools...
Ecosystems are complex and varied, but I think that many of them share some 'archetypes': the primary producers; the alpha-predator... I wonder if, in the very long run 'the intelligent social specie' may not be one of these archetypes.
In my opinion, the development of civilization is the logical outcome of such a 'social intelligent specie'.
Of course, the basic idea at the core of both UFOlogy and Drake's equation, that earth would be visited/contacted by aliens already make the pre-supposition that such a civilization occurred somewhere...
Neither aim to apply to the 'non civilized' life forms... |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2008 : 09:25:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Yes. Our concepts of what constitutes "motion" and "circumnavigation" might concievably change with a deeper understanding of geometric space relationships. |
I asked about a plain, unnuanced Euclidian conclusion, "the Earth goes around the Sun," and you are forced to bring all sorts of stuff that you don't understand into the discussion to support your conclusion that our understanding of it will (not "might conceivably") change. You further this utter nonsense by insisting that I believe something that I never even hinted at ("that the rotational relationship between the planets and their star is totally and forever unchangeably described in totally complete detail by the heliocentric model of Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo") and which is totally irrelevant to the question I asked. All a massive and falsely humble smokescreen to try to rescue your over-generalized hypothesis.| However, I feel..... No, I know,..... that all branches of mathematics, as well as all other forms of human understanding, do evolve, grow, and change with time! |
Nobody is arguing that they do not. The point is that such changes are unpredictable in their particulars and so insisting for no other reason than that because things have changed in the past we should leave the door open to the possibility of FTL travel is ridiculously illogical. The fact that our knowledge has evolved gives us no predictive ability to say how or if it will evolve in any particular way in the future. Thinking otherwise (that past apparently random events are predictive of future events) is how people lose badly at the roulette table.| I have no idea, lacking your prescience as to the development, or lack thereof, of future events. What do you think? |
You are the one who insists that our understanding will change, doctor. So your powers of prognostication must be a bazillion times better than mine. All I can see is the history of our understanding of the relationship between Earth and Sun, and it clearly shows that in the 20th century, our grasp of how and why the Earth moves the way it does changed, but our understanding that the Earth goes around the Sun hasn't changed one iota since Copernicus, and I see no evidenciary basis upon which to suggest that such a conclusion will be overturned within the next five billion years (or so).| Bad thing that some are implying it! |
Nobody is. You are reading things into people's posts which do not exist. filthy, whose example you stress, is speaking plainly and in the present tense, offering no hint that he thinks that the way things are understood now will be the way they will be understood always. You argue against a straw man built by your own hands. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2008 : 09:46:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
While Einsteins work on Relativity was revolutionary, it didn't cause a paradigm change from Newton's laws.
When Niels Bohr discovered that the atom consisted of mostly void, buildings didn't experience structural failures because their walls weren't solid anymore.
Our discoveries haven't changed how we interact with reality in any fundamental way.
It just gave us a deeper understanding of the reality in which we live. Planets are still solid, and planets are still orbiting the sun in near circular ellipses, which can be still be fairly well described using Newtons ancient formula.
|
Exactly. We build upon our past theories adding more detail and a deeper understanding. We don't whole hog replace them. Darwin's theory of evolution is another perfect example of this.
My thoughts: There is most likely massive amounts of life scattered throughout universe. Some of it is even bound to be highly intelligent. The odds of us ever coming into contact with any other intelligent life form is exceedingly small....not completely impossible, but damn close. |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
UK UFO sightings declassified
