RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
--- Joseph Z. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why would a species out there that was enjoying a eutopian existance even want to communicate with a planet of self-destructive apes? The worst cliche in science fiction, I think, is the tired story of an alien race that discovers humans, decides they're useless and worthy of destruction, and then, through a single person's act of altruism (or something like that), decides that maybe we're worth redemption after all. See The Abyss, The Fifth Element, or about every other Star Trek episode for examples. However, the converse is just as bad. I'm equally put off by the defeatist, humans-are-worthless-apes sort of attitude. I doubt we're any worse or any better at this stage than any other alien race that crawled up out of the muck. Why would we be so surprising? Why does sf never portray us as typical? And while we're at it, if we WERE considered more self-destructive or merciless or murderous than other races, isn't it conceivable that we'd be considered interesting BECAUSE of that? Don't we ourselves study great white sharks, army ants, hyenas, and other alpha predators? I dare say that aliens living a Utopian existence would have a CONSIDERABLE interest in us if we were as destructive as you've implied and we were just starting our venture into space. But, as I said, I don't subscribe to the thesis that we're all that different or bad. --Mark __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
Return Receipt Your RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research document : was Olga Prieto Ballesteros/Inta received by: at: 07/02/2005 09:19:22 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
Return Receipt Your RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research document : was Olga Prieto Ballesteros/Inta received by: at: 07/02/2005 09:19:25 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
i agree! - Original Message - From: Eugen Leitl [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: europa@klx.com Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 2:51 AM Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
i agree ! - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: europa@klx.com Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 3:19 AM Subject: RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research Return Receipt Your RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research document : was Olga Prieto Ballesteros/Inta received by: at: 07/02/2005 09:19:22 == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
i agree!
- Original Message -
From: Reeve, Jack W. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: europa@klx.com
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 1:49 AM
Subject: RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
I doubt that the aliens will make the same exponential tech leap at the
same rate that we do. We're human after all and therefore special ;-{
I feel the admin coming on, about to admonish us for going extra-Europa.
And Michael, I'm 48, chrono-years that is. Or about 1.3 to 10,000 tech
years ahead of you, depending upon whether it's 2005 or 2050.
Jack W Reeve
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
-Original Message-
From: Michael Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 1:45 PM
To: europa@klx.com
Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
Jack Reeve writes:
I wryly note the massive volume of speculation perpetually raging on
all
regions of the space-alien sphere of thought.
Most of it very anthropomorphic in its assumptions about alien thinking.
Some see panspermian-spawned humanoids, some see robots, some see gods
or demons. Some see galactic bliss, some see extinction.
Nobody seems to see yet another source of spam, however. Puny humans,
your imagination is SO limited.
All I see are a bunch of singularities hurtling toward us, all set to
coincide about 2018 - 2020 or so, beyond which, I am happy to assure
one
and all, not a soul amongst us has any inkling of what approaches.
I think this is a point that many miss: in a relative eyeblink of time,
aliens are likely to make the same technological transit that we
probably
will - from the rudiments of electronic communication to machine
intelligences that dwarf the alien's own - and our own.
A case in point in the here and now is the existence of the internet -
unforeseen before its current ubiquity.
Wait a minute, you're forgetting Al Gore. He predicted all this, he
even
invented it. Right? ;-)
As we race toward the phenomenon of the technological advancement line
going vertical, things are going to get very murky. Using the 365
days
of the year 2000 as a base tech year, 2020 is likely 400-1000 tech
years
from now - 2100 is perhaps 20,000 - 100,000 tech years away.
Uh oh, Jack, there you go predicting. If I may play Devil's Advocate
against the Singularity hypothesis: what if ALL life that
evolves to the point of being able to enable Singularity responds in
the same way: by forbidding it? This idea has been played with, of
course. Gibson's Neuromancer supposed there would be a Turing
Police, a global agency aimed at preventing the rise of superhuman
machine intelligence. Frank Herbert's Dune hypothesized the
Butlerian Jihad, to explain - or explain away - why a human
empire sprawling across many star systems, millenia hence,
did not have any appreciable machine intelligence. In his future
history, the appearance of machine intelligence thousands of
yeas earlier had spurred a backlash in which all major religions
agreed that machine intelligence should be prohibited: Thou
shalt not make a machine in the image of the human mind.
Gary McMurtry writes:
One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely
not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to
offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves.
It may not have anything to do with what we have to offer now
and everything to do with us as a possible long-term threat -
or as a source information about defenses against possible
long-term threats.
With their novel The Killing Star (which I read most of, in a
bookstore - I can't recommend it on literary qualities alone)
George Zebrowski and Charles Pellegrino introduced an interesting
twist on Asimov's Three Laws - a machine superintelligence
might evolve, but would be limited to protecting the species
that gave it life. Earth life is destroyed by relativistic bombing -
projectiles sent from this other civilization by accelerating them
so close to the speed of light that detection, interception and
destruction of the projectiles was virtually impossible. The
actual biological species being protected from us didn't come
up with this brilliant invention. Rather, the machines did - in
fact, they ignore any order from their masters to turn off
the defense system - or themselves. They also send
nanotech scrubbers to mop up any remnants. This
requires deceleration into the target star system, but that's
not too unreasonable: relativistic bombing to strike a shattering
initial blow, then nanotech scrubber to clean up any potential
sources of resistance or return fire arrive not too long afterward.
I truly loathe this hypothesis - the idea that all intelligent life
in a stellar locality could be destroyed by the first intelligence
in that locality to come up with this hyperparanoid defense
scheme, and that the existence of such a civilization can't
be ruled out. However, it doesn't lend itself to easy refutation.
And the lack of refutability may lead to an inevitable deployment
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research - Europa relevance
1 agree ! - Original Message - From: Gary McMurtry [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: europa@klx.com Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 2:31 AM Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research - Europa relevance It appears we inadvertently kicked over the stove at Michael's house in Japan. Good stuff, Michael, and Europa relevant. Gary What if most life in the universe evolves on worlds like Europa? I've called this the Common Europa Hypothesis. Gas giants appear to be abundant. Water appears to be abundant. The main energy source for biochemistry in the universe might be tidal forces rather than stellar input. The main form of space radiation protection might be thick layers of ice, not magnetic fields and atmospheres. Civilizations may become quite developed long before they discover the existence of space per se. They may rely on wired or optical fiber communication or something like it, in preference to radio communication, given how poorly radio signals travel through water. And when they finally penetrate to the ice surfaces of their worlds, having long since inferred the existence of a surface, and much empty space beyond it, they may also have long since hypothesized the Killer Star, and would avoid broadcast radio communications on the surface to the extent possible - not hard, given that it would probably be mainly a curiosity technology to them in the first place. The only Killer Star scenario they might be worried about would be some alien defense system that seeks out and relativistically bombs all ice-covered ocean worlds - many more candidate targets than would be revealed by assuming Rare Earths out there, with possible threats narrowed down by picking up radio wave broadcast activity. A Rare Earth is far more vulnerable to total ecosystem destruction by relativistic bomb impact. A world like Europa is protected by miles of ice. It would take many more bombs, and much larger bombs, a total shotgun approach. A world like Europa might also be more resistant to nanotech infections, given the enormous energy requirements for penetrating the ice shield. Also, a world like Europa will have a vestigial atmosphere at best, and will probably rotate synchronously around its gas giant, so it might offer a better surface for hosting SETI efforts than the surfaces of planets like Earth. Their space elevator might largely amount to building a strong tube going to the surface. And they will, of course, look for life somewhat more like their own, on worlds somewhat like their own. I think it's not unreasonable to suppose that they may be more likely to engage in their own Active SETI. After all, SETI presupposes Active SETI to a great degree. And they'd be facing less Killer Star risk, and have less reason to believe that the risk was significant in the first place. If worlds like Europa are common, quite a few systems might have more than one. If intelligent, spacefaring life evolves on one such world, their first exploration target is likely to be the others in the local planetary neighborhood. With enough of a long-range view, they might forgo Europaforming the others and set up Active SETI on the other Europoids (maybe preferring one orbiting another gas giant, if there's another one orbiting their own), as bait for anyone's Killer Star defense system. If, after some decent interval, say a millenium, the decoy world still hasn't been relativistically bombed, they might reasonably assume that nobody is going to do it, and broadcast a signal to any neighbors saying that the coast seems to be clear. (Of course, that signal has to be credible. There's always a leap of faith somewhere, isn't there?) Finding out whether there's life on (in?) Europa, and seeing how far it has developed, what the intrinsic limitations might be, could tell us a lot about how to conduct Active SETI safely. So might a focus on trying to find other likely Europas elsewhere, to see if they are common. First contact might be an expression of disbelief - You live on the OUTSIDE of your planet, and breathe gases? You're the first world in 50 communicating so far to have intelligent life much different from ours. Only in science fiction -michael turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research - Europa relevance
i agree! - Original Message - From: Michael Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: europa@klx.com Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 1:57 AM Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research - Europa relevance What if most life in the universe evolves on worlds like Europa? I've called this the Common Europa Hypothesis. Gas giants appear to be abundant. Water appears to be abundant. The main energy source for biochemistry in the universe might be tidal forces rather than stellar input. The main form of space radiation protection might be thick layers of ice, not magnetic fields and atmospheres. Civilizations may become quite developed long before they discover the existence of space per se. They may rely on wired or optical fiber communication or something like it, in preference to radio communication, given how poorly radio signals travel through water. And when they finally penetrate to the ice surfaces of their worlds, having long since inferred the existence of a surface, and much empty space beyond it, they may also have long since hypothesized the Killer Star, and would avoid broadcast radio communications on the surface to the extent possible - not hard, given that it would probably be mainly a curiosity technology to them in the first place. The only Killer Star scenario they might be worried about would be some alien defense system that seeks out and relativistically bombs all ice-covered ocean worlds - many more candidate targets than would be revealed by assuming Rare Earths out there, with possible threats narrowed down by picking up radio wave broadcast activity. A Rare Earth is far more vulnerable to total ecosystem destruction by relativistic bomb impact. A world like Europa is protected by miles of ice. It would take many more bombs, and much larger bombs, a total shotgun approach. A world like Europa might also be more resistant to nanotech infections, given the enormous energy requirements for penetrating the ice shield. Also, a world like Europa will have a vestigial atmosphere at best, and will probably rotate synchronously around its gas giant, so it might offer a better surface for hosting SETI efforts than the surfaces of planets like Earth. Their space elevator might largely amount to building a strong tube going to the surface. And they will, of course, look for life somewhat more like their own, on worlds somewhat like their own. I think it's not unreasonable to suppose that they may be more likely to engage in their own Active SETI. After all, SETI presupposes Active SETI to a great degree. And they'd be facing less Killer Star risk, and have less reason to believe that the risk was significant in the first place. If worlds like Europa are common, quite a few systems might have more than one. If intelligent, spacefaring life evolves on one such world, their first exploration target is likely to be the others in the local planetary neighborhood. With enough of a long-range view, they might forgo Europaforming the others and set up Active SETI on the other Europoids (maybe preferring one orbiting another gas giant, if there's another one orbiting their own), as bait for anyone's Killer Star defense system. If, after some decent interval, say a millenium, the decoy world still hasn't been relativistically bombed, they might reasonably assume that nobody is going to do it, and broadcast a signal to any neighbors saying that the coast seems to be clear. (Of course, that signal has to be credible. There's always a leap of faith somewhere, isn't there?) Finding out whether there's life on (in?) Europa, and seeing how far it has developed, what the intrinsic limitations might be, could tell us a lot about how to conduct Active SETI safely. So might a focus on trying to find other likely Europas elsewhere, to see if they are common. First contact might be an expression of disbelief - You live on the OUTSIDE of your planet, and breathe gases? You're the first world in 50 communicating so far to have intelligent life much different from ours. Only in science fiction -michael turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
i agree! - Original Message - From: Michael Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: europa@klx.com Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 12:44 AM Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research Jack Reeve writes: I wryly note the massive volume of speculation perpetually raging on all regions of the space-alien sphere of thought. Most of it very anthropomorphic in its assumptions about alien thinking. Some see panspermian-spawned humanoids, some see robots, some see gods or demons. Some see galactic bliss, some see extinction. Nobody seems to see yet another source of spam, however. Puny humans, your imagination is SO limited. All I see are a bunch of singularities hurtling toward us, all set to coincide about 2018 - 2020 or so, beyond which, I am happy to assure one and all, not a soul amongst us has any inkling of what approaches. I think this is a point that many miss: in a relative eyeblink of time, aliens are likely to make the same technological transit that we probably will - from the rudiments of electronic communication to machine intelligences that dwarf the alien's own - and our own. A case in point in the here and now is the existence of the internet - unforeseen before its current ubiquity. Wait a minute, you're forgetting Al Gore. He predicted all this, he even invented it. Right? ;-) As we race toward the phenomenon of the technological advancement line going vertical, things are going to get very murky. Using the 365 days of the year 2000 as a base tech year, 2020 is likely 400-1000 tech years from now - 2100 is perhaps 20,000 - 100,000 tech years away. Uh oh, Jack, there you go predicting. If I may play Devil's Advocate against the Singularity hypothesis: what if ALL life that evolves to the point of being able to enable Singularity responds in the same way: by forbidding it? This idea has been played with, of course. Gibson's Neuromancer supposed there would be a Turing Police, a global agency aimed at preventing the rise of superhuman machine intelligence. Frank Herbert's Dune hypothesized the Butlerian Jihad, to explain - or explain away - why a human empire sprawling across many star systems, millenia hence, did not have any appreciable machine intelligence. In his future history, the appearance of machine intelligence thousands of yeas earlier had spurred a backlash in which all major religions agreed that machine intelligence should be prohibited: Thou shalt not make a machine in the image of the human mind. Gary McMurtry writes: One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. It may not have anything to do with what we have to offer now and everything to do with us as a possible long-term threat - or as a source information about defenses against possible long-term threats. With their novel The Killing Star (which I read most of, in a bookstore - I can't recommend it on literary qualities alone) George Zebrowski and Charles Pellegrino introduced an interesting twist on Asimov's Three Laws - a machine superintelligence might evolve, but would be limited to protecting the species that gave it life. Earth life is destroyed by relativistic bombing - projectiles sent from this other civilization by accelerating them so close to the speed of light that detection, interception and destruction of the projectiles was virtually impossible. The actual biological species being protected from us didn't come up with this brilliant invention. Rather, the machines did - in fact, they ignore any order from their masters to turn off the defense system - or themselves. They also send nanotech scrubbers to mop up any remnants. This requires deceleration into the target star system, but that's not too unreasonable: relativistic bombing to strike a shattering initial blow, then nanotech scrubber to clean up any potential sources of resistance or return fire arrive not too long afterward. I truly loathe this hypothesis - the idea that all intelligent life in a stellar locality could be destroyed by the first intelligence in that locality to come up with this hyperparanoid defense scheme, and that the existence of such a civilization can't be ruled out. However, it doesn't lend itself to easy refutation. And the lack of refutability may lead to an inevitable deployment, if it's possible: hit 'em before they have the capability to hit you, and detect them by detecting the first signs of radio communication. It seems game-theoretically determined. If we were to receive some signal via SETI efforts that seemed to utterly refute such a possibility, there would still be the chance that the signal is only a kind of intellectual decoy or camouflage for incoming relativistic bombs. In this dim view of things, the only other intelligent life in the universe is life that has decided to maintain radio silence, or life that is incapable of radio
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
i agree! - Original Message - From: Reeve, Jack W. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: europa@klx.com Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 9:15 PM Subject: RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research I wryly note the massive volume of speculation perpetually raging on all regions of the space-alien sphere of thought. Some see panspermian-spawned humanoids, some see robots, some see gods or demons. Some see galactic bliss, some see extinction. All I see are a bunch of singularities hurtling toward us, all set to coincide about 2018 - 2020 or so, beyond which, I am happy to assure one and all, not a soul amongst us has any inkling of what approaches. A case in point in the here and now is the existence of the internet - unforeseen before its current ubiquity. As we race toward the phenomenon of the technological advancement line going vertical, things are going to get very murky. Using the 365 days of the year 2000 as a base tech year, 2020 is likely 400-1000 tech years from now - 2100 is perhaps 20,000 - 100,000 tech years away. For me there is no meaningful speculation of events on the other side of this unprecedented horizon. Only awe and wonder. And joy at being here to bear witness. Jack W Reeve Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia -Original Message- From: Gary McMurtry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 4:50 AM To: europa@klx.com Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research A bit off topic, but interesting op-ed. I didn't know about SETI being active; I thought it was mostly passive, a much safer approach. Personally, I'm wildly optimistic that SETI will never achieve its goals. Therefore, there's no need to get worked up about aliens visiting us with mal intent, although the concept is great fodder for entertaining science fiction (War of the Worlds, etc., etc.). If you have no opinion or disagree, please read Rare Earth by Peter Ward and David Brownlee and get back to me. One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. Gary == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
It is quite possible that humans become extremely paranoid when speculating on an alien race that is more advanced and intelligent than us. The question proposed in an earlier e-mail asking what we have to offer them is a good one, but the answer of nothing but glass beads is just naive if not flat out ignorant. Just think back through history and the way that we have pioneered this planet. For cry it out loud, what did the native americans have to offer the European settlers? It is all perspective. After thinking about them not having the same value system, there was still something worth taking obviously. So, if the aliens have any sort of similarity to our disgusting race when it comes to exploring new worlds then by all means be scared. However, that thought rationale comes from a human mind. Maybe humans should worry more about getting along with their own race, or even moreso their entire planet before trying to interact with another species. Why would a species out there that was enjoying a eutopian existance even want to communicate with a planet of self-destructive apes? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael Turner Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 12:45 AM To: europa@klx.com Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research Jack Reeve writes: I wryly note the massive volume of speculation perpetually raging on all regions of the space-alien sphere of thought. Most of it very anthropomorphic in its assumptions about alien thinking. Some see panspermian-spawned humanoids, some see robots, some see gods or demons. Some see galactic bliss, some see extinction. Nobody seems to see yet another source of spam, however. Puny humans, your imagination is SO limited. All I see are a bunch of singularities hurtling toward us, all set to coincide about 2018 - 2020 or so, beyond which, I am happy to assure one and all, not a soul amongst us has any inkling of what approaches. I think this is a point that many miss: in a relative eyeblink of time, aliens are likely to make the same technological transit that we probably will - from the rudiments of electronic communication to machine intelligences that dwarf the alien's own - and our own. A case in point in the here and now is the existence of the internet - unforeseen before its current ubiquity. Wait a minute, you're forgetting Al Gore. He predicted all this, he even invented it. Right? ;-) As we race toward the phenomenon of the technological advancement line going vertical, things are going to get very murky. Using the 365 days of the year 2000 as a base tech year, 2020 is likely 400-1000 tech years from now - 2100 is perhaps 20,000 - 100,000 tech years away. Uh oh, Jack, there you go predicting. If I may play Devil's Advocate against the Singularity hypothesis: what if ALL life that evolves to the point of being able to enable Singularity responds in the same way: by forbidding it? This idea has been played with, of course. Gibson's Neuromancer supposed there would be a Turing Police, a global agency aimed at preventing the rise of superhuman machine intelligence. Frank Herbert's Dune hypothesized the Butlerian Jihad, to explain - or explain away - why a human empire sprawling across many star systems, millenia hence, did not have any appreciable machine intelligence. In his future history, the appearance of machine intelligence thousands of yeas earlier had spurred a backlash in which all major religions agreed that machine intelligence should be prohibited: Thou shalt not make a machine in the image of the human mind. Gary McMurtry writes: One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. It may not have anything to do with what we have to offer now and everything to do with us as a possible long-term threat - or as a source information about defenses against possible long-term threats. With their novel The Killing Star (which I read most of, in a bookstore - I can't recommend it on literary qualities alone) George Zebrowski and Charles Pellegrino introduced an interesting twist on Asimov's Three Laws - a machine superintelligence might evolve, but would be limited to protecting the species that gave it life. Earth life is destroyed by relativistic bombing - projectiles sent from this other civilization by accelerating them so close to the speed of light that detection, interception and destruction of the projectiles was virtually impossible. The actual biological species being protected from us didn't come up with this brilliant invention. Rather, the machines did - in fact, they ignore any order from their masters to turn off the defense system - or themselves. They also send nanotech scrubbers to mop up any remnants. This requires deceleration into the target star system, but that's
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
Why would a species out there that was enjoying a eutopian existance even want to communicate with a planet of self-destructive apes? Hm. Planet of the Self-Destructive Apes. I wonder if we can get Charlton Heston to take a break from his NRA role and star in a new series? The problem is that Pellegrino and Zebrowski's Killer Star hypothesis could be an argument to some that we self-destructive apes should not only turn any emerging superhuman intelligence into a system for protecting us from ourselves, but also from any ET threat. Do all civilizations that stabilize do so at a level where they are not paranoid? That's what I hate about the Killer Star hypothesis - one reason we can't rule it out is that it reminds us of us. If we happened here, creatures like us might have happened somewhere else, and might do what we would do. Zebrowski and Pellegrino's ETs were conveniently icky: when you finally meet them in their novel, they are disgusting octopus-like creatures. A more honest and interesting treatment of the concept would have been a portrait of global political struggles over whether the human race should pursue the same relativistic bombing strategy - or how it might deal with the threat of a superhuman machine intelligence, having been tasked with protecting us, coming up with such a strategy themselves. Civilization is a weird thing. We believe in continuous progress, but progress has been halting, and backsliding has happened. The Romans never did quite master Greek technology at its height. After the Spanish drove the Moors from Spain, Europe didn't reach the technological level of the Moors for several centuries. The Japanese responded to Western learning and technology receptively at first, then rejected it, and other East Asian cultures had similar reactions. Ahead of us, there may be some stasis point, but the desire for stability at that level may mean that we start our own paranoid relativistic bombing program, or that we give that problem to superhuman machine intelligences to solve. And if it can happen to us, maybe it can happen out there somewhere as well. I hate the Killer Star hypothesis, but mainly because I can't figure out how to rule it out. Just because a civilization has been around for a million years longer doesn't mean that it's ethically more evolved than our own. Evolution doesn't always move fast. Or at all. How long did the dinosaurs roam? Chimps have been around longer than we have. Why aren't they smarter? The human race has faced the prospect of obliteration before. The H-bomb progenitors had to prove that a thermonuclear explosion couldn't start a chain reaction in the atmosphere. Once they did that, however, there was still the looming scenario of a full-blown thermonuclear exchange. We still live under that threat to some extent. Maybe paranoia pushes technology during some periods, pushes against it during others. I think it's absurd, for example, to worry about back- contamination of Earth from Martian sample return, some organism that can wipe out life on this planet. At the same time, however, even if the chances are miniscule, the downside is rather dramatic. Sure, chunks of Mars have landed here before, but they flew through sterilizing space for a long time first. So I buy this argument, even though it sticks in my craw - it's anti-progress, another obstacle to exploration. But there are certain astronomically small risks that you still don't want to take. We don't know how ET civilizations evolve. All we know is that we haven't heard from one yet. The deafening silence might be because Earths are Rare, and only Earths work. It might be because most intelligent life never gets to the point of being able to communicate. Or it might be that any race that survives is preemptively killing off all others - precisely because they were very much like us, and fell into a technological trap that prevented further cultural evolution, and promoted extinction of all possible threats. Well anyway, I've contributed my Europa Meme for the Day: discovery of life on Europa, combined with a Common Europa hypothesis gaining some support from observations, might take us some distance in the direction of hope that the universe is a pretty peaceful place after all. Hope that the icky octopoidal ocean creatures of the cosmos aren't out to get us, in some program of Unilateral Assured Destruction, because ... they don't have much to fear from us in the first place. If nothing else, repeating that point keeps me on-topic for this list. ;-) -michael - Original Message - From: Joseph Z. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: europa@klx.com Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 11:40 PM Subject: RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research It is quite possible that humans become extremely paranoid when speculating on an alien race that is more advanced and intelligent than us. The question proposed in an earlier e-mail asking what we have to offer them
RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
It appears to me that any advanced civilization will have several obstacles to overcome when it relates to traveling across the gulf of space to check out some suspected intelligent species. Technology: Even if we were to discover an extra-terrestrial civilization today as near as 11 light years away -we couldn't do anything about it for many years. Economic: To build a starship and fuel it with anti-matter or similar exotic fuel would cost the equivalent of the entire world GNP for decades. No one would accept that cost. Third, Cultural: Our outlook, are we Xeno-phobic or Xeno-philic? As long as a civilization's economy and energy is tied to their local star they aren't likely to leave. On the otherhand and I cannot see how a race could become totally space-faring: a race that is entirely space-faring like the Aliens in Independence Day or the Borg must go looking for raw materials. I believe it would be easier to raid asteroid belts and icy moons than fight a civilization but that's just me. In my opinion the paranoia over the interaction of alien races is a wasted effort. Mickey Schmidt == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
On Mon, Feb 07, 2005 at 09:37:48AM -0700, Schmidt Mickey D Civ HQ USAFA/DF wrote: It appears to me that any advanced civilization will have several obstacles to overcome when it relates to traveling across the gulf of No problem, given that your average alien is some 10-100 megayears more advanced than us. What's the probability of discovering an alien in just your age group? Zero. space to check out some suspected intelligent species. Technology: Even if we were to discover an extra-terrestrial civilization today as near as 11 light years away -we couldn't do anything about it for many years. Economic: To build a starship and fuel it with anti-matter or Time is cheap. (Everything which doesn't survive doesn't count a priori). similar exotic fuel would cost the equivalent of the entire world GNP So don't. Use phased array radiators (which can be terrestrial), and a gray sail carrying a tiny probe. If you can push at 1 g for several months, things turn funky fast. We could do that right now, you know. for decades. No one would accept that cost. Third, Cultural: Our outlook, are we Xeno-phobic or Xeno-philic? We're evolutionary agents, overall. So the local variations don't count whether spatially, or long-term. As long as a civilization's economy and energy is tied to their local star they aren't likely to leave. On the otherhand and I cannot see how You can't make such sweeping statements over a large population of evolutionary agents over long time periods. Also, fusion is trivial (we can almost do it), and costs of dispatching a ~kg probe are negligible in return to what you'll get -- a whole universe on a silver plate. Solid-state culture can travel by encoded relativistic matter or by laser. Subjective transfer time: zero. And it will get crowded, fast. a race could become totally space-faring: a race that is entirely space-faring like the Aliens in Independence Day or the Borg must go looking for raw materials. I believe it would be easier to raid asteroid belts and icy moons than fight a civilization but that's just me. Of course, but a) they would be awfully advanced b) asteroid belts and icy moons are finite resources, and hence will run out (quickly enough, if you'll do the math). In my opinion the paranoia over the interaction of alien races is a wasted effort. Absolutely. If they'd passed here, we'd never happened. If they'd pass right now (probability: zero), we'd be dead. A few more years, and we'll pass them. No harsh feelings, I hope. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net pgpq35lNC9CwZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
Why would a species out there that was enjoying a eutopian existance even want to communicate with a planet of self-destructive apes? That was precisely my point, Joe. Any civilization hearing our call and capable of coming over to visit, will not bother themselves with us. I also doubt that they would even return the call. (Hey, maybe that's why SETI gets no results?) Gary It is quite possible that humans become extremely paranoid when speculating on an alien race that is more advanced and intelligent than us. The question proposed in an earlier e-mail asking what we have to offer them is a good one, but the answer of nothing but glass beads is just naive if not flat out ignorant. Just think back through history and the way that we have pioneered this planet. For cry it out loud, what did the native americans have to offer the European settlers? It is all perspective. After thinking about them not having the same value system, there was still something worth taking obviously. So, if the aliens have any sort of similarity to our disgusting race when it comes to exploring new worlds then by all means be scared. However, that thought rationale comes from a human mind. Maybe humans should worry more about getting along with their own race, or even moreso their entire planet before trying to interact with another species. Why would a species out there that was enjoying a eutopian existance even want to communicate with a planet of self-destructive apes? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael Turner Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 12:45 AM To: europa@klx.com Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research Jack Reeve writes: I wryly note the massive volume of speculation perpetually raging on all regions of the space-alien sphere of thought. Most of it very anthropomorphic in its assumptions about alien thinking. Some see panspermian-spawned humanoids, some see robots, some see gods or demons. Some see galactic bliss, some see extinction. Nobody seems to see yet another source of spam, however. Puny humans, your imagination is SO limited. All I see are a bunch of singularities hurtling toward us, all set to coincide about 2018 - 2020 or so, beyond which, I am happy to assure one and all, not a soul amongst us has any inkling of what approaches. I think this is a point that many miss: in a relative eyeblink of time, aliens are likely to make the same technological transit that we probably will - from the rudiments of electronic communication to machine intelligences that dwarf the alien's own - and our own. A case in point in the here and now is the existence of the internet - unforeseen before its current ubiquity. Wait a minute, you're forgetting Al Gore. He predicted all this, he even invented it. Right? ;-) As we race toward the phenomenon of the technological advancement line going vertical, things are going to get very murky. Using the 365 days of the year 2000 as a base tech year, 2020 is likely 400-1000 tech years from now - 2100 is perhaps 20,000 - 100,000 tech years away. Uh oh, Jack, there you go predicting. If I may play Devil's Advocate against the Singularity hypothesis: what if ALL life that evolves to the point of being able to enable Singularity responds in the same way: by forbidding it? This idea has been played with, of course. Gibson's Neuromancer supposed there would be a Turing Police, a global agency aimed at preventing the rise of superhuman machine intelligence. Frank Herbert's Dune hypothesized the Butlerian Jihad, to explain - or explain away - why a human empire sprawling across many star systems, millenia hence, did not have any appreciable machine intelligence. In his future history, the appearance of machine intelligence thousands of yeas earlier had spurred a backlash in which all major religions agreed that machine intelligence should be prohibited: Thou shalt not make a machine in the image of the human mind. Gary McMurtry writes: One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. It may not have anything to do with what we have to offer now and everything to do with us as a possible long-term threat - or as a source information about defenses against possible long-term threats. With their novel The Killing Star (which I read most of, in a bookstore - I can't recommend it on literary qualities alone) George Zebrowski and Charles Pellegrino introduced an interesting twist on Asimov's Three Laws - a machine superintelligence might evolve, but would be limited to protecting the species that gave it life. Earth life is destroyed by relativistic bombing - projectiles sent from this other civilization by accelerating them so close to the speed of light that detection, interception and destruction of the projectiles was virtually
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
A bit off topic, but interesting op-ed. I didn't know about SETI being active; I thought it was mostly passive, a much safer approach. Personally, I'm wildly optimistic that SETI will never achieve its goals. Therefore, there's no need to get worked up about aliens visiting us with mal intent, although the concept is great fodder for entertaining science fiction (War of the Worlds, etc., etc.). If you have no opinion or disagree, please read Rare Earth by Peter Ward and David Brownlee and get back to me. One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. Gary == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
of course you are right, gary ! seti ranks with the many religions humans dream up. the worst of them which is the religion belief, coined creation . of all the religious dogma it gets the prize... second prize seti hummm... on second thought maby seti runs neck and neck... oh.. well they are both baloney. in all seriousness... we must admit that humans have an enormous imagination ...one that drives them to dream up a religion or belief and then be willing to kill to defend it ...maby the human imaginatin should be the # 1 subject of study for the human race ! one thing for sure ... religions and overpopulation is fast on its way to destroying the inhabidents of this faze of earths evolving organisms . WOW! having said all that ... ben franklin said that the worst ... the very worst thing one can do to his friends is to tell them the truth about what they are realy like ! and that what they believe is pachyderm dreck ! john l. mccowen 174 duck rd. fitzgerald, ga. 31750 - Original Message - From: Gary McMurtry [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: europa@klx.com Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 3:50 PM Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research A bit off topic, but interesting op-ed. I didn't know about SETI being active; I thought it was mostly passive, a much safer approach. Personally, I'm wildly optimistic that SETI will never achieve its goals. Therefore, there's no need to get worked up about aliens visiting us with mal intent, although the concept is great fodder for entertaining science fiction (War of the Worlds, etc., etc.). If you have no opinion or disagree, please read Rare Earth by Peter Ward and David Brownlee and get back to me. One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. Gary == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
needless conversation ...any alien group or civilization that can reach earth has already got the very first siginal that left earth and if it has not reached them yet they will get it when the time for it to get ther passes... this is a sure known fact ... it needs no speculation ! so we dont need to fret about sending out signals ... they are allready on the way !!! actualy " seti" is a joke on the jokers! john l. mccowen 174 duck rd. fitzgerald, ga. 31750 - Original Message - From: LARRY KLAES To: europa Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 1:34 PM Subject: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research http://www.setileague.org/editor/actvseti.htm Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research by Michael Michaud Member of the SETI Permanent Study Group, International Academy of Astronautics Recent discussions within the SETI community have thoroughly explored the issue of whether people with access to radio telescopes should send powerful signals to alien civilizations without some process of prior international consultation. In particular, those exchanges have focused on the question of "Active SETI." Some people who oppose prior consultation have framed their arguments in terms of our right to free speech. Few have addressed the other side of this coin, which is our responsibility to the human species. Lets be clear about this. Active SETI is not scientific research. It is a deliberate attempt to provoke a response by an alien civilization whose capabilities, intentions, and distance are not known to us. That makes it a policy issue. We can not assume that we already have been detected or that detection is inevitable. Extraterrestrial civilizations might not be looking for the kinds of signals we normally radiate. More importantly from a policy perspective, our leakage signals may be below their detection threshold. An Active SETI signal much more powerful than the normal background emitted by the Earth might call us to the attention of a technological civilization that had not known of our existence. We can not assume that such a civilization would be benign, nor can we assume that interstellar flight is impossible for a species more technologically advanced than our own. This is not just the concern of a few paranoids. Many significant people have argued against our actively seeking contact. Pulitzer Prize-winning author and scientist Jared Diamond, calling astronomers visions of friendly relations "the best-case scenario," warned that "those astronomers now preparing again to beam radio signals out to hoped-for extraterrestrials are naive, even dangerous" (he was even harsher about the Pioneer plaques, which provided any species that found them with a kind of map to our location in the galaxy). Nobel Prize-winning biologist George Wald declared that he could think of no nightmare so terrifying as establishing communication with a superior technology in outer space. Even the New York Times questioned the view that the effect of signals from extraterrestrials would be beneficial, stating that the astronomers were "boyishly defiant" of our inherited wisdom. Astronomer Robert Jastrow, addressing the consequences of possible future contact with an alien civilization, wrote that he saw no reason for optimism. Astronomer Ronald Bracewell warned that other species too would place a premium on cunning and weaponry; an alien ship headed our way is likely to be armed. Astronomer Eric Chaisson thought that physical contact could lead to a neo-Darwinian subjugation of our culture by theirs. Astronomer Zdenek Kopal was more specific: should we ever hear the space-phone ringing, for Gods sake let us not answer, but rather make ourselves as inconspicuous as possible to avoid attracting attention! Other scientists who are less widely known have warned of potential dangers. Biologist Michael Archer said that any creature we contact will also have had to claw its way up the evolutionary ladder and will be every bit as nasty as we are. It will likely be an extremely adaptable, extremely aggressive super-predator. Physicist George Baldwin predicted that any effort to communicate with extraterrestrials is fraught with grave danger, as they will show innate contempt for human beings. Robert Rood warned that the civilization that blurts out its existence on interstellar beacons at the first opportunity might be like some early hominid descending from the trees and calling "here kitty" to a saber-toothed tiger. Consider the cautionary views of SETI Institute astronomers. Seth Shostak wrote in one of his books that we can no better guess the motivations of alien intelligence than goldfish can guess ours. Jill Tarter asked rhetorically: who knows what values might drive an alien culture? Aliens might not
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
But as I always like to ask, how else are we going to search for intelligent life in the Universe? Wait for it to come knocking on our door? And star probes are not going to happen any time soon. SETI at least offers us some chance of picking up something from out there. Larry - Original Message - From: john mccowen To: europa@klx.com Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 5:02 PM Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research of course you are right, gary ! seti ranks with the many religions humans dream up. the worst of them which is the religion belief, coined "creation ". of all the religious dogma it gets the prize... second prize "seti " hummm... on second thought maby seti runs neck and neck... oh.. well they are both baloney. in all seriousness... we must admit that humans have an enormous imagination ...one that drives them to dream up a religion or belief and then be willing to kill to defend it ...maby the human imaginatin should be the # 1 subject of study for the human race ! one thing for sure ... religions and overpopulation is fast on its way to destroying the inhabidents of this faze of earths evolving organisms . WOW! having said all that ... ben franklin said that the worst ... the very worst thing one can do to his friends is to tell them the truth about what they are realy like ! and that what they believe is pachyderm dreck !john l. mccowen174 duck rd.fitzgerald, ga.31750- Original Message - From: "Gary McMurtry" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: europa@klx.comSent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 3:50 PMSubject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research A bit off topic, but interesting op-ed. I didn't know about SETI being active; I thought it was mostly passive, a much safer approach. Personally, I'm wildly optimistic that SETI will never achieve its goals. Therefore, there's no need to get worked up about aliens visiting us with mal intent, although the concept is great fodder for entertaining science fiction (War of the Worlds, etc., etc.). If you have no opinion or disagree, please read "Rare Earth" by Peter Ward and David Brownlee and get back to me. One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. Gary == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ ==You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.comProject information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
I wryly note the massive volume of speculation perpetually raging on all regions of the space-alien sphere of thought. Some see panspermian-spawned humanoids, some see robots, some see gods or demons. Some see galactic bliss, some see extinction. All I see are a bunch of singularities hurtling toward us, all set to coincide about 2018 - 2020 or so, beyond which, I am happy to assure one and all, not a soul amongst us has any inkling of what approaches. A case in point in the here and now is the existence of the internet - unforeseen before its current ubiquity. As we race toward the phenomenon of the technological advancement line going vertical, things are going to get very murky. Using the 365 days of the year 2000 as a base tech year, 2020 is likely 400-1000 tech years from now - 2100 is perhaps 20,000 - 100,000 tech years away. For me there is no meaningful speculation of events on the other side of this unprecedented horizon. Only awe and wonder. And joy at being here to bear witness. Jack W Reeve Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia -Original Message- From: Gary McMurtry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 4:50 AM To: europa@klx.com Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research A bit off topic, but interesting op-ed. I didn't know about SETI being active; I thought it was mostly passive, a much safer approach. Personally, I'm wildly optimistic that SETI will never achieve its goals. Therefore, there's no need to get worked up about aliens visiting us with mal intent, although the concept is great fodder for entertaining science fiction (War of the Worlds, etc., etc.). If you have no opinion or disagree, please read Rare Earth by Peter Ward and David Brownlee and get back to me. One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. Gary == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
widespread and radical dispersion of intelligence in a star system, together with nanotech antibodies against any possible scrubbers, making complete eradication effectively impossible. And this possibility may embolden the Singulatarians: they may argue that this defense capability would be more quickly developed by a Singularity intelligence than relativistic bombing technology, while also being the more ethical defense. And they'll have a basis for an argument from urgency: for all we know, a wave of relativistic bombs started heading our way long before Zebrowski and Pellegrino hypothesized it. A Singularity intelligence that evolves any such dispersed-intelligence/antibody strategy, and that determines its robustness to 100% confidence, might then confidently engage in Active SETI, with the content of the signal being, naturally, this very defense design. The subtext of any such signal would be obvious: You have nothing to fear from our intelligence, we have nothing to fear from your, and you may have everything to lose from ignoring the warning implicit in what we're communicating. On the other hand ... well, see what I say about decoys and camouflage, above. If WE were to receive such a signal, it might suggest to some people only that the intelligence that sent it actually knows better, and is sending us the design for a fortress with a Trojan Horse access point built right in. One way or another, you're looking at a leap of faith somewhere. Jack again: For me there is no meaningful speculation of events on the other side of this unprecedented horizon. Only awe and wonder. And joy at being here to bear witness. Well, we'll have to see how it turns out. I'm 49, and I can't exactly rule out seeing the beginnings of it. -michael turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Gary McMurtry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 4:50 AM To: europa@klx.com Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research A bit off topic, but interesting op-ed. I didn't know about SETI being active; I thought it was mostly passive, a much safer approach. Personally, I'm wildly optimistic that SETI will never achieve its goals. Therefore, there's no need to get worked up about aliens visiting us with mal intent, although the concept is great fodder for entertaining science fiction (War of the Worlds, etc., etc.). If you have no opinion or disagree, please read Rare Earth by Peter Ward and David Brownlee and get back to me. One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves. Gary == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
RE: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
I doubt that the aliens will make the same exponential tech leap at the
same rate that we do. We're human after all and therefore special ;-{
I feel the admin coming on, about to admonish us for going extra-Europa.
And Michael, I'm 48, chrono-years that is. Or about 1.3 to 10,000 tech
years ahead of you, depending upon whether it's 2005 or 2050.
Jack W Reeve
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
-Original Message-
From: Michael Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 1:45 PM
To: europa@klx.com
Subject: Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
Jack Reeve writes:
I wryly note the massive volume of speculation perpetually raging on
all
regions of the space-alien sphere of thought.
Most of it very anthropomorphic in its assumptions about alien thinking.
Some see panspermian-spawned humanoids, some see robots, some see gods
or demons. Some see galactic bliss, some see extinction.
Nobody seems to see yet another source of spam, however. Puny humans,
your imagination is SO limited.
All I see are a bunch of singularities hurtling toward us, all set to
coincide about 2018 - 2020 or so, beyond which, I am happy to assure
one
and all, not a soul amongst us has any inkling of what approaches.
I think this is a point that many miss: in a relative eyeblink of time,
aliens are likely to make the same technological transit that we
probably
will - from the rudiments of electronic communication to machine
intelligences that dwarf the alien's own - and our own.
A case in point in the here and now is the existence of the internet -
unforeseen before its current ubiquity.
Wait a minute, you're forgetting Al Gore. He predicted all this, he
even
invented it. Right? ;-)
As we race toward the phenomenon of the technological advancement line
going vertical, things are going to get very murky. Using the 365
days
of the year 2000 as a base tech year, 2020 is likely 400-1000 tech
years
from now - 2100 is perhaps 20,000 - 100,000 tech years away.
Uh oh, Jack, there you go predicting. If I may play Devil's Advocate
against the Singularity hypothesis: what if ALL life that
evolves to the point of being able to enable Singularity responds in
the same way: by forbidding it? This idea has been played with, of
course. Gibson's Neuromancer supposed there would be a Turing
Police, a global agency aimed at preventing the rise of superhuman
machine intelligence. Frank Herbert's Dune hypothesized the
Butlerian Jihad, to explain - or explain away - why a human
empire sprawling across many star systems, millenia hence,
did not have any appreciable machine intelligence. In his future
history, the appearance of machine intelligence thousands of
yeas earlier had spurred a backlash in which all major religions
agreed that machine intelligence should be prohibited: Thou
shalt not make a machine in the image of the human mind.
Gary McMurtry writes:
One last thought: any civilization capable of responding would likely
not be too interested in us. I mean, really, what do we have to
offer? Some pretty glass beads? People are so full of themselves.
It may not have anything to do with what we have to offer now
and everything to do with us as a possible long-term threat -
or as a source information about defenses against possible
long-term threats.
With their novel The Killing Star (which I read most of, in a
bookstore - I can't recommend it on literary qualities alone)
George Zebrowski and Charles Pellegrino introduced an interesting
twist on Asimov's Three Laws - a machine superintelligence
might evolve, but would be limited to protecting the species
that gave it life. Earth life is destroyed by relativistic bombing -
projectiles sent from this other civilization by accelerating them
so close to the speed of light that detection, interception and
destruction of the projectiles was virtually impossible. The
actual biological species being protected from us didn't come
up with this brilliant invention. Rather, the machines did - in
fact, they ignore any order from their masters to turn off
the defense system - or themselves. They also send
nanotech scrubbers to mop up any remnants. This
requires deceleration into the target star system, but that's
not too unreasonable: relativistic bombing to strike a shattering
initial blow, then nanotech scrubber to clean up any potential
sources of resistance or return fire arrive not too long afterward.
I truly loathe this hypothesis - the idea that all intelligent life
in a stellar locality could be destroyed by the first intelligence
in that locality to come up with this hyperparanoid defense
scheme, and that the existence of such a civilization can't
be ruled out. However, it doesn't lend itself to easy refutation.
And the lack of refutability may lead to an inevitable deployment,
if it's possible: hit 'em before they have the capability to
hit you, and detect them by detecting the first signs of radio
communication. It seems game
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research - Europa relevance
It appears we inadvertently kicked over the stove at Michael's house in Japan. Good stuff, Michael, and Europa relevant. Gary What if most life in the universe evolves on worlds like Europa? I've called this the Common Europa Hypothesis. Gas giants appear to be abundant. Water appears to be abundant. The main energy source for biochemistry in the universe might be tidal forces rather than stellar input. The main form of space radiation protection might be thick layers of ice, not magnetic fields and atmospheres. Civilizations may become quite developed long before they discover the existence of space per se. They may rely on wired or optical fiber communication or something like it, in preference to radio communication, given how poorly radio signals travel through water. And when they finally penetrate to the ice surfaces of their worlds, having long since inferred the existence of a surface, and much empty space beyond it, they may also have long since hypothesized the Killer Star, and would avoid broadcast radio communications on the surface to the extent possible - not hard, given that it would probably be mainly a curiosity technology to them in the first place. The only Killer Star scenario they might be worried about would be some alien defense system that seeks out and relativistically bombs all ice-covered ocean worlds - many more candidate targets than would be revealed by assuming Rare Earths out there, with possible threats narrowed down by picking up radio wave broadcast activity. A Rare Earth is far more vulnerable to total ecosystem destruction by relativistic bomb impact. A world like Europa is protected by miles of ice. It would take many more bombs, and much larger bombs, a total shotgun approach. A world like Europa might also be more resistant to nanotech infections, given the enormous energy requirements for penetrating the ice shield. Also, a world like Europa will have a vestigial atmosphere at best, and will probably rotate synchronously around its gas giant, so it might offer a better surface for hosting SETI efforts than the surfaces of planets like Earth. Their space elevator might largely amount to building a strong tube going to the surface. And they will, of course, look for life somewhat more like their own, on worlds somewhat like their own. I think it's not unreasonable to suppose that they may be more likely to engage in their own Active SETI. After all, SETI presupposes Active SETI to a great degree. And they'd be facing less Killer Star risk, and have less reason to believe that the risk was significant in the first place. If worlds like Europa are common, quite a few systems might have more than one. If intelligent, spacefaring life evolves on one such world, their first exploration target is likely to be the others in the local planetary neighborhood. With enough of a long-range view, they might forgo Europaforming the others and set up Active SETI on the other Europoids (maybe preferring one orbiting another gas giant, if there's another one orbiting their own), as bait for anyone's Killer Star defense system. If, after some decent interval, say a millenium, the decoy world still hasn't been relativistically bombed, they might reasonably assume that nobody is going to do it, and broadcast a signal to any neighbors saying that the coast seems to be clear. (Of course, that signal has to be credible. There's always a leap of faith somewhere, isn't there?) Finding out whether there's life on (in?) Europa, and seeing how far it has developed, what the intrinsic limitations might be, could tell us a lot about how to conduct Active SETI safely. So might a focus on trying to find other likely Europas elsewhere, to see if they are common. First contact might be an expression of disbelief - You live on the OUTSIDE of your planet, and breathe gases? You're the first world in 50 communicating so far to have intelligent life much different from ours. Only in science fiction -michael turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/ == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: europa@klx.com Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
Re: Active SETI Is Not Scientific Research
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 05:37:29PM -0500, LARRY KLAES wrote: But as I always like to ask, how else are we going to search for intelligent life in the Universe? Wait for it to come knocking on our door? And star probes are Of course. If you can send a signal, you can come in person (=send self-rep automation). not going to happen any time soon. SETI at least offers us some chance of What's soon, in your time frame? Century, half a century? picking up something from out there. -- Eugen* Leitl a href=http://leitl.org;leitl/a __ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net pgpUcWW5GSbem.pgp Description: PGP signature
