Switch Theme:

Sci Fi Aliens General  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

LordofHats wrote:Signs is a wonderful example of just how much M. Night Shamalama sucks at his job (I know! Lets invade a planet where a substance toxic to us is an abundant resource!) and just how good Mel Gibson is at his.


Professional antisemite?

But yes, Signs is awful.

The new War of the World is also awful.

What's that you say? Alien microbes that are lethal to us? Clearly, we would be best advised to leave our giant death walkers.

LordofHats wrote:
I think I pissed off everyone watching that movie. I couldn't stop laughing at how absurd so many of its plot points were.


To be fair, alien invasions are all predicated on rule of cool. A "realistic" plot would entail humanity losing in minutes. Sort of like Battlefield Earth without everything that made it awful. So, an entirely different book with mass alien superiority.

chaos0xomega wrote:
AtoMaki wrote:
I keep hearing about that...how is it possible to shield against an EMP attack?


There are several methods... one is to build a faraday cage around the object (basically a mesh enclosure) or specific components of the object. The cage acts as a conductor for any energy it absorbs, and this energy is usually dissipated by antenna or grounding.

Another method is not to use transistors... unfortunately that requires vacuum tubes (AFAIK) which nobody uses anymore. EMP is not voodoo, its a scientific phenomenon and as such there are other scientific phenomenon to counter it.


A third method is unobtainium.

chaos0xomega wrote:
As for why sci fi aliens never do it, there are lots of potential reasons:
1. They haven't developed weaponized EMP.
2. They are unfamiliar with the concept of EMP (plausible but not probable)
3. Alien electronics operate on principles different to our own. Their tech is EMP resistant and as such they havent developed weaponized EMP due to its uselessness or they dont utilize it because they assume our tech is similarly resistant.
etc.


A 4th option is that EMPs are generally useless due to resistance across multiple species (any alien race that encounters human life has probably encountered other alien life), so they simply don't build them.

You don't build a wildly impractical shoe to step on ants, when your very practical shoe does the job just fine.

Well, unless you're the US military.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/03/06 07:43:51


Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






LordofHats wrote: So we have depleted uranium shells. They have death lazors


Goddamn those death lazors. Straight Hax.
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





dogma wrote:To be fair, alien invasions are all predicated on rule of cool. A "realistic" plot would entail humanity losing in minutes. Sort of like Battlefield Earth without everything that made it awful. So, an entirely different book with mass alien superiority.


Only if we grant the aliens are willing to use any and all weapons at their disposal to fight the war.

Once we recognise the only practical reason for the aliens to come to Earth is us, then it opens up all kinds of reasons they wouldn't just blow us up from space. Perhaps they're here to convert us to their religion, and will only use force against those who refuse to convert to Zafegism Perhaps its a commercial concern, they're trading something for something (perhaps there is a notion that what is in our solar system is ours by right, and they have to offer us stuff to take it), and they'd limited in their use of force against any violent resistance by political concerns back home (roughly the Avatar situation). Or maybe they like hunting humans, and simply want to do it man vs man (or Grathanari vs man).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/06 08:25:02


“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in gb
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

There was a quote by somebody (Arthur C Clarke? Stephen Hawkins? Carl Sagan? I can't remember unfortunately ) that said that any civilization which had developed the technology to travel between stars, yet had not purged its destructive tendencies, would long since have destroyed itself before it was in the position to threaten another species millions of light years away.

So, it would be far more likely that aliens would be benevolent and enlightened (although that would make for a somewhat less interesting film!) Certainly nothing like the Klingons from Star Trek, who in reality would never have left their caves, let alone travelled the gulfs in-between stars.

I sometimes wonder however if the need to fight, to struggle, that is a inherent component of organisms and of evolution, has meant that every single alien species that has developed sapience has ultimately destroyed itself simply because it is within its nature. A million times a million worlds, over the huge expanse of time and the universe, where an observer might have seen a pretty light show as mushroom clouds cover the surface of a planet.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/06 11:04:31


Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

Pacific wrote:There was a quote by somebody (Arthur C Clarke? Stephen Hawkins? Carl Sagan? I can't remember unfortunately ) that said that any civilization which had developed the technology to travel between stars, yet had not purged its destructive tendencies, would long since have destroyed itself before it was in the position to threaten another species millions of light years away.


That sounds like Clarke to me, but possible Sagan. Definitely not Hawking he is of...the opposite opinion.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

sebster wrote:The other question is why would aliens bother invading Earth? If they want water well it's floating around the fringes of the solar system in vast quantities, and while it might be frozen heating it up is a lot easier than landing on and taking off from a gravity well like Earth.

If they want other materials... well go to any other planet in the solar system. Plenty of gold, uranium or whatever minerals you want on each of those.


Well its highly likely the aliens are space zombies, and thus, want earth for our BRRRAAAAAIIIINNNZZZZZZ...
(hence Frazzled is perfectly safe in an alien invasion)

Alternatively, aliens have to have weaknesses. They can't all be the Andromeda Strain. Its kind of boring if aliens come and are so powerful they accidentally wipe us out without even knowing we were alive, much less sentient.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
dogma wrote:
Pacific wrote:There was a quote by somebody (Arthur C Clarke? Stephen Hawkins? Carl Sagan? I can't remember unfortunately ) that said that any civilization which had developed the technology to travel between stars, yet had not purged its destructive tendencies, would long since have destroyed itself before it was in the position to threaten another species millions of light years away.


That sounds like Clarke to me, but possible Sagan. Definitely not Hawking he is of...the opposite opinion.


Indeed. If we presuppose Texas fire ants become intelligent, there is no reason they couldn't go forth a' nuking.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/03/06 12:04:42


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in gb
Major





Pacific wrote:There was a quote by somebody (Arthur C Clarke? Stephen Hawkins? Carl Sagan? I can't remember unfortunately ) that said that any civilization which had developed the technology to travel between stars, yet had not purged its destructive tendencies, would long since have destroyed itself before it was in the position to threaten another species millions of light years away.


Perhaps, but that would only apply if the Aliens concerned had developed in an metaphorical vacuum. It's quite possible that a brutal Klingon type race could have gained technology beyond their own capabilities from another race who sold/gave it to them. It's not dissimilar to backwards countries on earth still having access to technologies that they could never have developed themselves.

"And if we've learnt anything over the past 1000 mile retreat it's that Russian agriculture is in dire need of mechanisation!" 
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon





Bradley Beach, NJ

LuciusAR wrote:
Pacific wrote:There was a quote by somebody (Arthur C Clarke? Stephen Hawkins? Carl Sagan? I can't remember unfortunately ) that said that any civilization which had developed the technology to travel between stars, yet had not purged its destructive tendencies, would long since have destroyed itself before it was in the position to threaten another species millions of light years away.


Perhaps, but that would only apply if the Aliens concerned had developed in an metaphorical vacuum. It's quite possible that a brutal Klingon type race could have gained technology beyond their own capabilities from another race who sold/gave it to them. It's not dissimilar to backwards countries on earth still having access to technologies that they could never have developed themselves.


If they gained the tech, they'd use it against each other before using it to explore space, it doesn't matter how the get it.

Hive Fleet Aquarius 2-1-0


http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/527774.page 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

Unless they were already united.

Earth in 2013 accidently discovers faster than light travel. In 2015 Earth discovers Pandora. How is that going to go down for Pandora?

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in gb
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot





Southampton, Hampshire, England, British Isles, Europe, Earth, Sol, Sector 001

Frazzled wrote:Unless they were already united.

Earth in 2013 accidently discovers faster than light travel. In 2015 Earth discovers Pandora. How is that going to go down for Pandora?

Nuke'm from orbit then strip mine the planet...its the only way that film...hang on...?

<--- Yes that is me
Take a look at my gallery, see some thing you like the vote
http://www.dakkadakka.com/core/gallery-search.jsp?dq=&paintjoblow=0&paintjobhigh=10&coolnesslow=0&coolnesshigh=10&auction=0&skip=90&ll=3&s=mb&sort1=8&sort2=0&u=26523
Bloodfever wrote: Ribon Fox, systematically making DakkaDakka members gay, 1 by 1.
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Chicago

There's only two reasons aliens would ever invade Earth:

1) Because they view humanity as a potential threat in the future and want to wipe us out before that can happen. In this scenario, we'll all be dead. Quite probably before we even realize that aliens exist.

2) The aliens have been nearly wiped out by even more advanced aliens. The aliens fleeing Earth are refugees who lack the resources to continue spaceflight and need to settle down somewhere habitable.



And, although it is a nice thought that aliens will have purged all destructive tendencies, all they really need to have done is purge all self-destructive tendencies. They very well could (and quite probably would) view all other alien life as potentially dangerous and wipe it out before it has a chance to threaten them.

6000pts

DS:80S++G++M-B-I+Pw40k98-D++A++/areWD-R+T(D)DM+

What do Humans know of our pain? We have sung songs of lament since before your ancestors crawled on their bellies from the sea.

Join the fight against the zombie horde! 
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon





Bradley Beach, NJ

Grakmar wrote:
And, although it is a nice thought that aliens will have purged all destructive tendencies, all they really need to have done is purge all self-destructive tendencies. They very well could (and quite probably would) view all other alien life as potentially dangerous and wipe it out before it has a chance to threaten them.


If they weren't fighting each other, it's only reasonable to assume they wouldn't be preparing for a fight. Unless they had previous experience with other ETs, they would probably lose all violent tendencies. Assuming they themselves could come to a similar conclusion, they wouldn't see humans as a threat because we would destroy ourselves before being able to reach them.

Hive Fleet Aquarius 2-1-0


http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/527774.page 
   
Made in ie
Norn Queen






Dublin, Ireland

There was a quote by somebody (Arthur C Clarke? Stephen Hawkins? Carl Sagan? I can't remember unfortunately ) that said that any civilization which had developed the technology to travel between stars, yet had not purged its destructive tendencies, would long since have destroyed itself before it was in the position to threaten another species millions of light years away.


Yup it was Sagan. However, the flipside which he also pointed out, was that if said Civilisation had developed the tech for Interstellar travel it is also possible they would have "outgrown" their more destructive tendancies and been living/developing for billions of years.

Whilst loath to quote wiki a very interesting related piece is here, The Fermi Paradox with a wall of text warning.

Spoiler:
Certain theoreticians accept that the apparent absence of evidence implies the absence of extraterrestrials and attempt to explain why. Others offer possible frameworks in which the silence may be explained without ruling out the possibility of such life, including assumptions about extraterrestrial behaviour and technology. Each of these hypothesized explanations is essentially an argument for decreasing the value of one or more of the terms in the Drake equation. The arguments are not, in general, mutually exclusive. For example, it could be both that life is rare, and technical civilizations are short lived, or many other combinations of the explanations below.[39]

[edit] Few, if any, other civilizations currently existOne explanation is that the human civilization is alone (or very nearly so) in the galaxy. Several theories along these lines have been proposed, explaining why intelligent life might be either very rare, or very short lived. Implications of these hypotheses are examined as the Great Filter.[6]

[edit] No other civilizations have arisenSee also: Rare Earth hypothesis
Those who believe that extraterrestrial intelligent life does not exist argue that the conditions needed for life—or at least complex life—to evolve are rare or even unique to Earth. This is known as the Rare Earth hypothesis, which attempts to resolve the Fermi paradox by rejecting the mediocrity principle, and asserting that Earth is not typical, but unusual or even unique. While a unique Earth has historically been assumed on philosophical or religious grounds, the Rare Earth Hypothesis uses quantifiable and statistical arguments to argue that multicellular life is exceedingly rare in the universe because Earth-like planets are themselves exceedingly rare and/or many improbable coincidences have converged to make complex life on Earth possible.[40] It is possible that complex life may evolve through other mechanisms than those found specifically here on Earth,[40] but the fact that in the history of life on the Earth only one species has developed a civilization to the point of being capable of space flight and radio technology; or, more basically, abstract ideas such as music, art, or religion lends more credence to the idea of technologically advanced civilizations being rare in the universe.

For example, the emergence of intelligence may have been an evolutionary accident. Geoffrey Miller proposes that human intelligence is the result of runaway sexual selection, which takes unpredictable directions. Steven Pinker, in his book How the Mind Works, cautions that the idea that evolution of life (once it has reached a certain minimum complexity) is bound to produce intelligent beings, relies on the fallacy of the "ladder of evolution": As evolution does not strive for a goal but just happens, it uses the adaptation most useful for a given ecological niche, and the fact that, on Earth, this led to technological intelligence only once so far may suggest that this outcome of natural selection is rare and hence by no means a certain development of the evolution of a tree of life.

Another theory along these lines is that even if the conditions needed for life might be common in the universe, that the formation of life itself, a complex array of molecules that are capable simultaneously of reproduction, of extraction of base components from the environment, and of obtaining energy in a form that life can use to maintain the reaction (or the initial abiogenesis on a potential life-bearing planet), might ultimately be very rare.

Additionally, in the nondirectional meandering from initial life to humans, other low-probability happenings may have been the transition from prokaryotic cells to eukaryotic cells (with separate nucleus, organelles, specialization, and a cytoskeleton allowing the cell to take on different shapes) and the transition from single-cellular life to multicellular life, which was recorded in the Cambrian Explosion of 530 mya when significant numbers of organisms had evolved hard body parts, although multicellular life perhaps first started to evolve a couple of hundred million years before that. Single celled life emerged c. 3.5 billion years BCE, and for most of Earth's history and for reasons not fully understood there have only been single-celled creatures.

And there are many other potential branching points. For example, perhaps the transition from ocean creatures to land-dwelling creatures crucially depends on an unusually large moon and significant tides. Many astronomers refer to our Earth Moon pairing as a double planet. This ratio between parent planet and satellite is rare in our solar system. There is no observational data on the numbers of 'double planets' in other planetary systems. And even fundamental conditions such as the chemical composition of the nursery nebula from which a planetary system forms could have unusual or detrimental consequences for the emergence and survival of life.

It is also possible that intelligence is common, but industrial civilization is not. For example, the rise of industrialism on Earth was driven by the presence of convenient energy sources such as fossil fuels. If such energy sources are rare or nonexistent elsewhere, then it may be far more difficult for an intelligent race to advance technologically to the point where we could communicate with them. There may also be other unique factors on which our civilization is dependent. Or, on a water world, where the intelligent creatures are something like dolphins, it may be difficult to build fire and forge metals.

Another possibility is that Earth is the first planet in the Milky Way on which industrial civilization has arisen.[41] However, critics note that according to current understanding, many Earth-like planets were created many billions of years prior to Earth, so this explanation requires repudiation of the mediocrity principle.[42]

Insofar as the Rare Earth Hypothesis privileges life on Earth and its process of formation, it is a variant of the anthropic principle. The variant of the anthropic principle states the universe seems uniquely suited towards developing human intelligence. This philosophical stance opposes not only the mediocrity principle, but also the wider Copernican principle,[citation needed] which suggests there is no privileged location in the universe.

Opponents dismiss both Rare Earth and the anthropic principle as tautological—if a condition must exist in the universe for human life to arise, then the universe must already meet that condition, as human life exists—and as an argument from incredulity or lack of imagination. According to this analysis, the Rare Earth hypothesis confuses a description of how life on Earth arose with a uniform conclusion of how life must arise.[43] While the probability of the specific conditions on Earth being widely replicated is low, we do not know what complex life may require in order to evolve.[44][45]

[edit] It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy itselfSee also: Doomsday argument
This is the argument that technological civilizations may usually or invariably destroy themselves before or shortly after developing radio or space flight technology. Possible means of annihilation include nuclear war, biological warfare or accidental contamination, nanotechnological catastrophe, ill-advised physics experiments,[Note 4] a badly programmed super-intelligence, or a Malthusian catastrophe after the deterioration of a planet's ecosphere. This general theme is explored both in fiction and in mainstream scientific theorizing.[46] Indeed, there are probabilistic arguments which suggest that human extinction may occur sooner rather than later. In 1966 Sagan and Shklovskii suggested that technological civilizations will either tend to destroy themselves within a century of developing interstellar communicative capability or master their self-destructive tendencies and survive for billion-year timescales.[47] Self-annihilation may also be viewed in terms of thermodynamics: insofar as life is an ordered system that can sustain itself against the tendency to disorder, the "external transmission" or interstellar communicative phase may be the point at which the system becomes unstable and self-destructs.[48]

From a Darwinian perspective, self-destruction would be an ironic outcome of evolutionary success. The evolutionary psychology that developed during the competition for scarce resources over the course of human evolution has left the species subject to aggressive, instinctual drives. These compel humanity to consume resources, extend longevity, and to reproduce—in part, the very motives that led to the development of technological society. It seems likely that intelligent extraterrestrial life would evolve in a similar fashion and thus face the same possibility of self-destruction. And yet, to provide a good answer to Fermi's Question, self-destruction by technological species would have to be a near universal occurrence.

This argument does not require the civilization to entirely self-destruct, only to become once again non-technological. In other ways it could persist and even thrive according to evolutionary standards, which postulate producing offspring as the sole goal of life—not "progress", be it in terms of technology or even intelligence.

[edit] It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy othersSee also: technological singularity and Von Neumann probe
Another possibility is that an intelligent species beyond a certain point of technological capability will destroy other intelligence as it appears, as is exemplified by the theorised extermination of Neanderthals by early man. The idea that something, or someone, is destroying intelligent life in the universe has been well explored in science fiction[Note 5] and scientific literature.[4] A species might undertake such extermination out of expansionist motives, paranoia, or simple aggression. In 1981, cosmologist Edward Harrison argued that such behavior would be an act of prudence: an intelligent species that has overcome its own self-destructive tendencies might view any other species bent on galactic expansion as a kind of virus.[49] It has also been suggested that a successful alien species would be a superpredator, as is Homo sapiens.[50]

This hypothesis requires at least one civilization to have arisen in the past, and the first civilization would not have faced this problem.[51] However, it could still be that Earth is alone now. Like exploration, the extermination of other civilizations might be carried out with self-replicating spacecraft. Under such a scenario,[Note 5] even if a civilization that created such machines were to disappear, the probes could outlive their creators, destroying civilizations far into the future.

If true, this argument reduces the number of visible civilizations in two ways—by destroying some civilizations, and forcing others to remain quiet, under fear of discovery (see They choose not to interact with us) so we would see no signs of them.

[edit] Life is periodically destroyed by naturally occurring eventsOn Earth, there have been numerous major extinction events that destroyed the majority of complex species alive at the time. The extinction of the dinosaurs is the best known example. These are believed to be caused by events such as impact from a large meteorite, massive volcanic eruptions, or astronomical events such as gamma ray bursts.[52] It may be the case that such extinction events are common throughout the universe and periodically destroy intelligent life (or at least destroy their civilizations) before the species is able to develop the technology to communicate with other species.[53]

[edit] Human beings were created aloneReligious and philosophical speculation about extraterrestrial intelligent life long predates modern scientific inquiry into the subject. Greek philosophers Leucippus, Democritus, and Epicurus (5th and 4th century BC) suggested that there may be other inhabited worlds. Some religious thinkers, including the Jewish philosopher Rabbi Hasdai Crescas (c. 1340–1410/1411) and the Christian philosopher Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464), also put forward their views of the possibility of such extraterrestrial intelligence.

On the other hand, philosophers such as Aristotle and religious thinkers such as Thomas Aquinas claim that human beings are unique in the divine plan and counsel against belief in intelligent life on other worlds.[54] Aristotle believed the element of the heavens was Fire, as opposed to Earth, and so the heavens could not support life.[55] Thomas Aquinas additionally believed the uniqueness of God implied the uniqueness of Earth, and also notes the Bible refers to the world in the singular.[56]

Religious reasons for doubting the existence of extraterrestrial intelligent life resemble some forms of the Rare Earth Hypothesis. The argument here would be a teleological form of the strong anthropic principle: the universe was designed for the express purpose of creating human (and only human) intelligence.[57] This argument presupposes that a prior advanced intelligence existed in order to create human life, which might pose the question whether that intelligence was the only one to exist before it created us, but the perspective is a philosophical and abstract one.

[edit] Inflation theory and the Youngness ArgumentCosmologist Alan Guth proposed a multi-verse solution to the Fermi Paradox. In this theory, using the synchronous gauge probability distribution, young universes exceedingly outnumber older ones (by a factor of e1037 for every second of age). Therefore, averaged over all universes, universes with civilizations will almost always have just one, the first to develop. However, Guth notes "Perhaps this argument explains why SETI has not found any signals from alien civilizations, but I find it more plausible that it is merely a symptom that the synchronous gauge probability distribution is not the right one."[58] Notably, however, in the interest of this topic, SETI received at least one questionably intelligent signal known as the Wow! signal in 1977.

[edit] They do exist, but we see no evidenceIt may be that technological extraterrestrial civilizations exist, but that human beings cannot communicate with them because of constraints: problems of scale or of technology; because they do not wish to communicate or their nature is simply too alien for meaningful communication, or perhaps even be recognized as technology.

[edit] Communication is impossible due to problems of scaleSee also: Relativity of simultaneity
[edit] Intelligent civilizations are too far apart in space or time
NASA's conception of the Terrestrial Planet FinderIt may be that non-colonizing technologically capable alien civilizations exist, but that they are simply too far apart for meaningful two-way communication.[59] If two civilizations are separated by several thousand light years, it is very possible that one or both cultures may become extinct before meaningful dialogue can be established. Human searches may be able to detect their existence, but communication will remain impossible because of distance. This problem might be ameliorated somewhat if contact/communication is made through a Bracewell probe. In this case at least one partner in the exchange may obtain meaningful information. Alternatively, a civilization may simply broadcast its knowledge, and leave it to the receiver to make what they may of it. This is similar to the transmission of information from ancient civilizations to the present,[60] and humanity has undertaken similar activities like the Arecibo message, which could transfer information about Earth's intelligent species, even if it never yields a response (or does not yield a response in time for humanity to receive it). It is also possible that archaeological evidence of past civilizations may be detected through deep space observations—especially if they left behind large artifacts such as Dyson spheres.

The problem of distance is compounded by the fact that timescales affording a "window of opportunity" for detection or contact might be quite small. Advanced civilizations may periodically arise and fall throughout our galaxy, but this may be such a rare event, relatively speaking, that the odds of two or more such civilizations existing at the same time are low. There may have been intelligent civilizations in the galaxy before the emergence of intelligence on Earth, and there may be intelligent civilizations after its extinction, but it is possible that human beings are the only intelligent civilization in existence now. The term "now" is somewhat complicated by the finite speed of light and the nature of spacetime under relativity. Assuming that an extraterrestrial intelligence is not able to travel to our vicinity at faster-than-light speeds, in order to detect an intelligence 1,000 light-years distant, that intelligence will need to have been active 1,000 years ago. Strictly speaking, only the portions of the universe lying within the past light cone of Earth need be considered, since any civilizations outside it could not be detected. Another issue is the possibly very small length of time (even in historical timescales) that a civilization might be 'loudly' broadcasting material that could be reasonably detected (see below).

A related argument holds that other civilizations exist, and are transmitting and exploring, but their signals and probes simply have not arrived yet.[61] However, critics have noted that this is unlikely, since it requires that humanity's advancement has occurred at a very special point in time, while the Milky Way is in transition from empty to full. This is a tiny fraction of the life of a galaxy under ordinary assumptions and calculations resulting from them, so the likelihood that we're in the midst of this transition is considered low in the paradox.[62] Work on the theory of Neocatastrophism, wherein galactic and even super-galactic dynamics are seen as possibly frequently injurious to extant biospheres in a way that is roughly analogous to the way geological and climatological catastrophes have occasionally set back biological developments on Earth, might be given as a partial, if not full, resolution to the paradox, as advanced species might well be fragile to major events at a pace that would argue against a short transition.

[edit] It is too expensive to spread physically throughout the galaxySee also: Project Daedalus, Project Orion (nuclear propulsion), and Project Longshot
Many assumptions about the ability of an alien culture to colonize other stars are based on the idea that interstellar travel is technologically feasible. While the current understanding of physics rules out the possibility of faster than light travel, it appears that there are no major theoretical barriers to the construction of "slow" interstellar ships. This idea underlies the concept of the Von Neumann probe and the Bracewell probe as evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence.

It is possible, however, that present scientific knowledge cannot properly gauge the feasibility and costs of such interstellar colonization. Theoretical barriers may not yet be understood and the cost of materials and energy for such ventures may be so high as to make it unlikely that any civilization could afford to attempt it. Even if interstellar travel and colonization are possible, they may be difficult, leading to a colonization model based on percolation theory.[63] Colonization efforts may not occur as an unstoppable rush, but rather as an uneven tendency to "percolate" outwards, within an eventual slowing and termination of the effort given the enormous costs involved and the fact that colonies will inevitably develop a culture and civilization of their own. Colonization may thus occur in "clusters," with large areas remaining uncolonized at any one time.

A similar argument holds that interstellar physical travel may be possible, but is much more expensive than interstellar communication. Furthermore, to an advanced civilization, travel itself may be replaced by communication, through mind uploading and similar technologies.[64] Therefore the first civilization may have physically explored or colonized the galaxy, but subsequent civilizations find it cheaper, faster, and easier to travel and get information through contacting existing civilizations rather than physically exploring or traveling themselves. In this scenario, since there is little or no physical travel, and directed communications are hard to see except to the intended receiver, there could be many technical and interacting civilizations with few signs visible across interstellar distances.

[edit] Human beings have not been searching long enoughHumanity's ability to detect and comprehend intelligent extraterrestrial life has existed for only a very brief period—from 1937 onwards, if the invention of the radio telescope is taken as the dividing line—and Homo sapiens is a geologically recent species. The whole period of modern human existence to date (about 200,000 years) is a very brief period on a cosmological scale, while radio transmissions have only been propagated since 1895. Thus it remains possible that human beings have neither been searching long enough to find other intelligences, nor been in existence long enough to be found.

One million years ago there would have been no humans for any extraterrestrial emissaries to meet. For each further step back in time, there would have been increasingly fewer indications to such emissaries that intelligent life would develop on Earth. In a large and already ancient universe, a space-faring alien species may well have had many other more promising worlds to visit and revisit. Even if alien emissaries visited in more recent times, they may have been interpreted by early human cultures as supernatural entities.

This hypothesis is more plausible if alien civilizations tend to stagnate or die out, rather than expand. In addition, "the probability of a site never being visited, even [with an] infinite time limit, is a non-zero value."[65] Thus, even if intelligent life expands elsewhere, it remains statistically possible that such extraterrestrial life might never discover Earth.

[edit] Communication is impossible for technical reasons[edit] Humans are not listening properlyThere are some assumptions that underlie the SETI search programs that may cause searchers to miss signals that are present. For example, the radio searches to date would completely miss highly compressed data streams (which would be almost indistinguishable from "white noise" to anyone who did not understand the compression algorithm). Extraterrestrials might also use frequencies that scientists have decided are unlikely to carry signals, or do not penetrate our atmosphere, or use modulation strategies that are not being looked for. The signals might be at a datarate that is too fast for our electronics to handle, or too slow to be recognised as attempts at communication. "Simple" broadcast techniques might be employed, but sent from non-main sequence stars which are searched with lower priority; current programs assume that most alien life will be orbiting Sun-like stars.[66]

The greatest problem is the sheer size of the radio search needed to look for signals (effectively spanning the entire visible universe), the limited amount of resources committed to SETI, and the sensitivity of modern instruments. SETI estimates, for instance, that with a radio telescope as sensitive as the Arecibo Observatory, Earth's television and radio broadcasts would only be detectable at distances up to 0.3 light years.[67] Clearly detecting an Earth type civilization at great distances is difficult. A signal is much easier to detect if the signal energy is limited to either a narrow range of frequencies (Narrowband transmissions), and/or directed at a specific part of the sky. Such signals can be detected at ranges of hundreds to tens of thousands of light-years distance.[68] However this means that detectors must be listening to an appropriate range of frequencies, and be in that region of space to which the beam is being sent. Many SETI searches, starting with the venerable Project Cyclops, go so far as to assume that extraterrestrial civilizations will be broadcasting a deliberate signal (like the Arecibo message), in order to be found.

Thus to detect alien civilizations through their radio emissions, Earth observers either need more sensitive instruments or must hope for fortuitous circumstances: that the broadband radio emissions of alien radio technology are much stronger than our own; that one of SETI's programs is listening to the correct frequencies from the right regions of space; or that aliens are sending focused transmissions such as the Arecibo message in our general direction.

[edit] Civilizations only broadcast detectable radio signals for a brief period of timeIt may be that alien civilizations are detectable through their radio emissions for only a short time, reducing the likelihood of spotting them. There are two possibilities in this regard: civilizations outgrow radio through technological advance or, conversely, resource depletion cuts short the time in which a species broadcasts.

The first idea, that civilizations advance beyond radio, is based in part on the "fiber optic objection": the use of high power radio with low-to-medium gain (i.e., non-directional) antennas for long-distance transmission is wasteful of spectrum, yet this "waste" is precisely what makes these systems conspicuous at interstellar distances. Humans are moving to directional or guided transmission channels such as electrical cables, optical fibers, narrow-beam microwave and lasers, and conventional radio with non-directional antennas is increasingly reserved for low-power, short-range applications such as cell phones and Wi-Fi networks. These signals are far less detectable from space. Analog television, developed in the mid-twentieth century, contains strong carriers to aid reception and demodulation. Carriers are spectral lines that are very easily detected yet do not convey any information beyond their highly artificial nature. Nearly every SETI project is looking for carriers for just this reason, and UHF TV carriers are the most conspicuous and artificial signals from Earth that could be detected at interstellar distances. But advances in technology are replacing analog TV with digital television which uses spectrum more efficiently precisely by eliminating or reducing components such as carriers that make them so conspicuous. Using our own experience as an example, we could set the date of radio-visibility for Earth as December 12, 1901, when Guglielmo Marconi sent radio signals from Cornwall, England, to Newfoundland, Canada.[69] Visibility is now ending, or at least becoming orders of magnitude more difficult, as analog TV is being phased out. And so, if our experience is typical, a civilization remains radio-visible for approximately a hundred years. So a civilization may have been very visible from 1325 to 1483, but we were just not listening at that time. This is essentially the solution, "Everyone is listening, no one is sending."

More hypothetically, advanced alien civilizations evolve beyond broadcasting at all in the electromagnetic spectrum and communicate by principles of physics we don't yet understand. Some scientists have hypothesized that advanced civilizations may send neutrino signals.[70] If such signals exist they could be detectable by neutrino detectors that are now under construction.[71] If stable wormholes could be created and used for communications then interstellar broadcasts would become largely redundant. Thus it may be that other civilizations would only be detectable for a relatively short period of time between the discovery of radio and then switch to more efficient technologies.

One counter to this argument is that although broadcast communication may become difficult to detect, other uses for radio such as radar and power transmission cannot be replaced by low power technologies or fiber optics. These will potentially remain visible even after broadcast emission are replaced by less observable technology.[72]

A different argument is that resource depletion will soon result in a decline in technological capability. Human civilization has been capable of interstellar radio communication for only a few decades and is already rapidly depleting fossil fuels and confronting possible problems such as peak oil. It may only be a few more decades before energy becomes too expensive, and the necessary electronics and computers too difficult to manufacture, for us to continue the search. If the same conditions regarding energy supplies hold true for other civilizations, then radio technology may be a short-lived phenomenon. Unless two civilizations happen to be near each other and develop the ability to communicate at the same time it would be virtually impossible for any one civilization to "talk" to another.

Critics of the resource depletion argument point out that alternate energy sources exist, such as solar power, which are renewable and have enormous potential relative to technical barriers.[73] For depletion of fossil fuels to end the "technological phase" of a civilization, some form of technological regression would have to invariably occur, preventing the exploitation of renewable energy sources.

[edit] They tend to experience a technological singularitySee also: Sentience Quotient and Matrioshka brain
Another possibility is that technological civilizations invariably experience a technological singularity and attain a posthuman (or more properly, post-biological) character. Theoretical civilizations of this sort may have altered drastically enough to render communication impossible. The intelligences of a post-singularity civilization might require more information exchange than is possible through interstellar communication, for example. Or perhaps any information humanity might provide would appear elementary, and thus they do not try to communicate, any more than human beings attempt to talk to ants—even though we do ascribe a form of intelligence to them.

Even more extreme forms of post-singularity have been suggested, particularly in fiction: beings that divest themselves of physical form, create massive artificial virtual environments, transfer themselves into these environments through mind uploading, and exist totally within virtual worlds, ignoring the external physical universe. Surprisingly early treatments, such as Lewis Padgett's short story Mimsy were the Borogoves (1943), suggest a migration of advanced beings out of the presently known physical universe into a different and presumably more agreeable alternative one.

A further argument, suggested by Charles Stross in Accelerando, is that although advanced virtual civilizations - possibly en route developmentally to a Matrioshka Brain - could engage in travel to other star systems, they choose not to. This is not due to a lack of curiosity, but more through a set of energy-information economic choices, whereby in an information market predicated on available solar energy and planetary matter for building more computing capacity, the most successful virtual intelligences have to remain central to the star. Energy and proximity (and therefore wireless communication bandwidth and speed) are much greater closer to the matter and energy sources of the star, and larger planets, and so to be successful requires intra-solar-system focus. In this scenario, economic incentives to travel out of the solar system are inhibited.

One version of this perspective, which makes predictions for future SETI findings of transcension "fossils" and includes a variation of the Zoo hypothesis below, has been proposed by singularity scholar John Smart.[74]

[edit] They are too alienAnother possibility is that human theoreticians have underestimated how much alien life might differ from that on Earth. Aliens may be psychologically unwilling to attempt to communicate with human beings. Perhaps human mathematics is parochial to Earth and not shared by other life,[75] though others argue this can only apply to abstract math since the math associated with physics must be similar (in results, if not in methods.)[76]

Physiology might also cause a communication barrier. In Contact, Carl Sagan briefly speculated that an alien species might have a thought process orders of magnitude slower (or faster) than humans. Such a species could conceivably speak so slowly that it requires years to say even a simple phrase like "Hello". A message broadcast by that species might well seem like random background noise to humans, and therefore go undetected.

[edit] They are non-technologicalIt may be that at least some civilizations of intelligent beings are not technological, perhaps because it is difficult in their environment, or because they choose not to, or for other reasons yet unknown. Such civilizations would be very hard for humans to detect.[77] While there are remote sensing techniques which could perhaps detect life-bearing planets without relying on the signs of technology, none of them has any ability to tell if any detected life is intelligent. Not even any theoretical methods for doing so have been proposed, short of an actual physical visit by an astronaut or probe. This is sometimes referred to as the "algae vs. alumnae" problem.[77]

[edit] The evidence is being suppressedIt is theoretically possible that SETI groups are not reporting positive detections, or governments have been blocking extraterrestrial signals or suppressing publication of detections, perhaps in response to National Security and Trade Interests from the potential use of advanced extraterrestrial technology or weapons. It has been suggested that the detection of an extraterrestrial radio signal or technology could well be the most highly classified military information that exists.[78] Claims that this has already happened are common in the popular press,[79][80] but the scientists involved report the opposite experience – the press becomes informed and interested in a potential detection even before a signal can be confirmed.[81] Another issue is the diverse number of organisations and governments involved in science activities that might chance upon detections, of which SETI forms only a small part.

[edit] They choose not to interact with usIn these scenarios, alien civilizations exist that are technically capable of contacting Earth, but explicitly choose not to do so. This is the official position of the Earth today; we listen (SETI), but except for a few small efforts, do not explicitly transmit. Of course if all, or even most, civilizations act the same way, the galaxy could be full of civilizations eager for contact, but everyone is listening and no-one is transmitting. This is the so-called SETI Paradox.[82]

[edit] They don't agree among themselvesThe official earth policy among the SETI community [83] is "No response to a signal or other evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence should be sent until appropriate international consultations have taken place.". However, given the possible impact of any reply[84] it may be very difficult to obtain any consensus on "Who speaks for Earth?" and "What should we say?". Other civilizations might suffer from this same lack of consensus, and therefore send no messages at all.

[edit] Earth is purposely not contacted (The zoo hypothesis)
Schematic representation of a planetarium simulating the universe to humans. The "real" universe is outside the black sphere, the simulated one projected on/filtered through it.Main article: Zoo hypothesis
The zoo hypothesis states that superintelligent extraterrestrial life exists and does not contact life on Earth to allow for its natural evolution and development.[85] .

These ideas are perhaps most plausible if there is a relatively universal cultural or legal policy among a plurality of extraterrestrial civilizations necessitating isolation with respect to alien life. In a Universe without a hegemonic power, random civilizations with independent principals would, in all likelihood, make contact. This makes a crowded Universe with clearly defined rules seem more plausible.

This theory may break down under the uniformity of motive flaw: all it takes is a single culture or civilization to decide to act contrary to the imperative within our range of detection for it to be abrogated, and the probability of such a violation increases with the number of civilizations.[12] However, perhaps a civilization with one billion years of intellectual and technological evolution would be capable of enforcing rules.

T. W. Hair [86] has done Monte Carlo analysis of the inter-arrival times between civilizations in the galaxy based on common astrobiological assumptions that suggest that since the initial civilization would have such a commanding lead over the later arrivals, it may have established what we call ZH as a galactic/universal norm and the resultant "paradox" by a cultural founder effect with or without the continued activity of the founder.

(Compare the Star Trek Prime Directive.)

[edit] Earth is purposely isolated (planetarium hypothesis)A related idea is that the perceived universe is a simulated reality. The planetarium hypothesis[87] holds that beings may have simulated a universe for us that appears to be empty of other life, by design. The simulation argument[88] by Bostrom holds that although such a simulation may contain other life, such life cannot be much in advance of us since a far more advanced civilization may also be far harder to simulate. If we treat this matter literally, then the truth is entirely inaccessible, there being an infinite regress problem (see simulated reality).

[edit] It is dangerous to communicateAn alien civilization might feel it is too dangerous to communicate, either for us or for them. After all, when very different civilizations have met on Earth, the results have often been disastrous for one side or the other, and the same may well apply to interstellar contact.[89] Even contact at a safe distance could lead to infection by computer code[90] or even ideas themselves[91] (see meme). Perhaps prudent civilizations actively hide not only from us but from everyone, out of fear of other civilizations.

[edit] The Fermi paradox itself is what prevents communicationPerhaps the Fermi paradox itself—or the alien equivalent of it—is the ultimate reason for any civilization to avoid contact with other civilizations, even if no other obstacles existed. From any one civilization's point of view, it would be unlikely for them to be the first ones to make first contact. Therefore it is likely that previous civilizations faced fatal problems with first contact. So perhaps every civilization keeps quiet because of the possibility that there is a real reason for others to do so.[4]

[edit] They are here unobservedIt may be that intelligent alien life forms not only exist, but are already present here on Earth. They are not detected because they do not wish it, human beings are technically unable to, or because societies refuse to admit to the evidence.[92] Several variations of this idea have been proposed:

Carl Sagan and Iosif Shklovsky[93] argued for serious consideration of "paleocontact" with extraterrestrials in the early historical era, and for examination of myths and religious lore for evidence of such contact. Sagan and Shklovsky noted that many or most religions were founded by men who claimed contact with supernatural entities who bestowed wisdom, guidance and technology, citing the fish-god Oannes as a particularly salient example. On this hypothesis, there is in fact ample evidence of alien visitation – it is simply not recognized as such.

It is possible that a life form technologically advanced enough to travel to Earth might also be sufficiently advanced to exist here undetected. In this view, the aliens have arrived on Earth, or in our solar system, and are observing the planet, while concealing their presence. Observation could conceivably be conducted in a number of ways that would be very difficult to detect. For example, a complex system of microscopic monitoring devices constructed via molecular nanotechnology could be deployed on Earth and remain undetected, or sophisticated instruments could conduct passive monitoring from elsewhere.

UFO researchers note that the Fermi Paradox arose within the context of a wave of UFO reports, yet Fermi, Teller, York and Konopinski apparently dismissed the possibility that flying saucers might be extraterrestrial – despite contemporary US Air Force investigations that judged a small portion of UFO reports as inexplicable by contemporary technology. (Mainstream scientific publications have occasionally addressed the possibility of extraterrestrial contact,[94] but the scientific community in general has given little serious attention to claims of unidentified flying objects.) Given that UFO investigators argue compelling evidence supports the reality of UFOs as anomalies, but that extant UFO evidence does not support an extraterrestrial origin, it is suggested that closer examination of UFO data may confirm or falsify the Fermi paradox and/or the extraterrestrial hypothesis of UFO origins: “Any refusal of interest [by mainstream scientists] in investigating the UFO phenomenon, using an ETI [extraterrestrial intelligence] concept as one working hypothesis, should surely be astonishing.”[95]

This extraterrestrial hypothesis was jokingly suggested in response to Fermi's paradox by his fellow physicist, Leó Szilárd, who suggested to Fermi that extraterrestrials "are already among us—but they call themselves Hungarians",[96][97] a humorous reference to the peculiar Hungarian language, unrelated to most other languages spoken in Europe.[96][Note 6]

Dman137 wrote:
goobs is all you guys will ever be

By 1-irt: Still as long as Hissy keeps showing up this is one of the most entertaining threads ever.

"Feelin' goods, good enough". 
   
Made in gb
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

Grakmar wrote:There's only two reasons aliens would ever invade Earth:

1) Because they view humanity as a potential threat in the future and want to wipe us out before that can happen. In this scenario, we'll all be dead. Quite probably before we even realize that aliens exist.

2) The aliens have been nearly wiped out by even more advanced aliens. The aliens fleeing Earth are refugees who lack the resources to continue spaceflight and need to settle down somewhere habitable.



And, although it is a nice thought that aliens will have purged all destructive tendencies, all they really need to have done is purge all self-destructive tendencies. They very well could (and quite probably would) view all other alien life as potentially dangerous and wipe it out before it has a chance to threaten them.


Yes I guess that could be a possibility - in fact, I read a similar thing in a sci-fi novel where the Aliens were in a position to destroy Earth but were waiting to see how far we took our aggression into outer space. The key word here is 'destructive'. I think by eliminating the tendency to kill members of its own species, by extension that would also include all other life as part of that enlightened state. This could come from a philosophical viewpoint (destruction of life is wrong), or a greater pragmatism, but perhaps they would only act if they saw themselves as under threat.

You could argue that perhaps at some point an Alien species might have stopped killing members of its own kind in order to obtain resources/power. This could have been achieved through a massive over-abundance of resources, so that fighting for them becomes meaningless. However, it doesn't account for 'power', and if the aliens had evolved in a similar way to ourselves, and the 'beating of chests' and control over others was still wrapped up in their DNA, this still would not expunge their destructive tendencies.
So, perhaps the only way they could have done it is through alteration of their own DNA, or perhaps transformation into something where such concepts are meaningless?

Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: