• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Stephen Hawking is wrong, aliens wouldn't want our resources and would be friendly. .

yhelothar

yhelothar

Lifer
If aliens can contact us, they would have the basic technology of fusion and fission. They can make whatever resource they want. And an intelligent lifeform of this magnitude would have a curiosity that would want to learn about us. Heck, we have the curiosity to study anything imaginable. We're attracted to novelty. Tis is the nature of us, and it is a fundamental contributor to our intelligence. Thus it's far more likely that an intelligent race would have a novelty trait than not.
 
i am going to go with hawking on this one.

The only reason to expend so much energy on expanding is because your home planet is over crowded or all your resources are used up. The same reason we have to figure out a way off this rock. Otherwise you just send a robot.
 
If one actually studies UFO/aliens (described in stories/reports) then there is a sense that there is a lot less emotionality associated with such beings. (Besides, communication is pretty much exclusively via telepathy; ie, true feelings/intent cannot be hidden). They may be perhaps (and necessarily so) be more machine like.

Current humankind's emotional makeup may actually be a hindrance to achieving Type I (and beyond) civilization status. Driven by emotionality and hormonal reactions appears to be a foundation for the many planetary issues (over breeding and wars) and until these become sufficiently managed, then current civilization is unlikely to be able to evolve seriously beyond earth confines. Also there is every reason to believe that the current path for humankind might even lead to a planetary wide eco-collapse/catastrophe.

As for contact by alien civilizations, that may actually have already formally occurred.
http://www.cropcircleresearch.com/articles/arecibo.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KoR2t-iM9k
 
herm0016 said:
i am going to go with hawking on this one.

The only reason to expend so much energy on expanding is because your home planet is over crowded or all your resources are used up. The same reason we have to figure out a way off this rock. Otherwise you just send a robot.
Click to expand...

Curiosity isn't a good enough reason?
 
The science fiction author Greg Bear suggested aliens might hear our radio signals and send self-replicating robots to strip the solar system and earth of heavy metals. Sure we can use transmutation to create such things, but the energy and equipment requirements are outrageous. Stripping natural resources has always been magnitudes faster and more cost effective and to this day countries fight for access to such things as oil which we can also already create synthetically or use substitutes for. The speed of light merely imposes a limitation on alien access to such resources which might make the solar system all that much more tempting a target just as the middle east having easy to access oil makes them a tempting target.

As is often the case, Hawking's logic is seriously flawed whenever he talks outside his field of expertise.
 
Last edited:
We are still faced with a time dilema. Self replicating world stripers, such as Silver Surfer's boss, would still have to get the resources back in a timely manner so they would be useful.
 
wuliheron said:
The science fiction author Greg Bear suggested aliens might hear our radio signals and send self-replicating robots to strip the solar system and earth of heavy metals. Sure we can use transmutation to create such things, but the energy and equipment requirements are outrageous. Stripping natural resources has always been magnitudes faster and more cost effective and to this day countries fight for access to such things as oil which we can also already create synthetically or use substitutes for. The speed of light merely imposes a limitation on alien access to such resources which might make the solar system all that much more tempting a target just as the middle east having easy to access oil makes them a tempting target.

As is often the case, Hawking's logic is seriously flawed whenever he talks outside his field of expertise.
Click to expand...

I don't know... what seems to be more efficient and easier, going half way across the galaxy to mine natural resources or to build reactors that can create it.
Keep in mind that if aliens have the level of technology to send self-replicating robots halfway across the galaxies to mine resources and send it back home, they're going to be much much more efficient at producing energy.
Also as our understanding of physics progresses, it seems that we would eventually be able to make matter out of energy. It's theoretically possible given our understanding of E=mc^2.
 
herm0016 said:
not for multi-generation or very long distance space travel.

like is said, they would send a robot just like we do.
Click to expand...

We're not to far away from creating an "avatar" like level of neural control of our robots. Amputees already have the capability of full brain control of robotic arms complete with sensation.
It seems that even if it robots that they send, it's no different from sending their own bodies. It seems much more plausible that they'd have their minds computerized before them having the technology to send robots half way across the galaxy to destroy alien civilizations. And with this technology, their bodies can essentially exist in many forms and in multiple places at once.
 
lord_emperor said:
What if alien Hitler won WW2 on their planet and their race is highly xenocidal and bent on purifying the galaxy.
Click to expand...

If Hitler won WW2 and were xenocidal, I don't think our humanity would advance nearly as much as if it didn't. As history shows, humanity grows the most when it's under competition through other cultures. It is the driving force of innovation and advancement. Supremely dominant countries time and time again throughout history is shown to stagnate and fall into traditionalism, only until other cultures catch up and put pressure onto them.
 
astroidea said:
I don't know... what seems to be more efficient and easier, going half way across the galaxy to mine natural resources or to build reactors that can create it.
Keep in mind that if aliens have the level of technology to send self-replicating robots halfway across the galaxies to mine resources and send it back home, they're going to be much much more efficient at producing energy.
Also as our understanding of physics progresses, it seems that we would eventually be able to make matter out of energy. It's theoretically possible given our understanding of E=mc^2.
Click to expand...

We already have the ability to transmute elements. Every time two particles are smashed together in an accelerator they convert their kinetic energy into mass producing more more particles then they started out with. However, the more massive and complex elements from iron on up require outrageous amounts of energy found only in the most energetic supernovas. The cost and technology required to produce the same results safely anywhere near the earth and with any appreciable quantity is simply beyond the astronomical. We're talking about something like a synchrotron the size of the solar system powered by a black hole.

In comparison a robotic factory capable of crossing a few tens or hundreds of light years is primitive technology with almost negligible costs.
 
astroidea said:
If aliens can contact us, they would have the basic technology of fusion and fission. They can make whatever resource they want. And an intelligent lifeform of this magnitude would have a curiosity that would want to learn about us. Heck, we have the curiosity to study anything imaginable. We're attracted to novelty. Tis is the nature of us, and it is a fundamental contributor to our intelligence. Thus it's far more likely that an intelligent race would have a novelty trait than not.
Click to expand...

I don't know, assume an alien species evolved at the same basic rate we did. Give them a million year head start and it becomes impossible to know how exactly they would view us. Heck it becomes impossible to even assume they would/could care to interact with us at all. I'd be careful in assigning human traits to an alien species. What if they evolved from a predator species? Or a prey species? Or they were genetically engineered to the point of not resembling their native species at all? It's hard to know, really, what they would think or do. Stanisław Lem to me gets it more than most for his portrayal of alien intelligence compared to our own. Stephen Hawking also gets it for just wanting to warn us that maybe our curiosity will indeed be what killed the proverbial cat.
 
Last edited:
herm0016 said:
i am going to go with hawking on this one.

The only reason to expend so much energy on expanding is because your home planet is over crowded or all your resources are used up. The same reason we have to figure out a way off this rock. Otherwise you just send a robot.
Click to expand...

i thought about this alot. notably, it really doesnt matter if we find another planet to habit, we will still have to preserve earth for those people who cant go to the new place.

the only way we could leave this place and let it naturally resolve itself would be to transport all 7 billion people, and there is just no way that is going to happen. by the looks of it, we will only be able to send a couple dozen people at once, with the hopes they can interbreed and start a new civilization. its not going to solve any problems we have here though.

technology can make it work though. i bet this planet can support 100 billion people if we just keep building up (and down underground!). we are figuring out how to keep pollution down, we just need more tech to make it all work right. im not worried about aliens though, i honestly think theyve been watching us the whole time and still dont think were mature enough to want to talk to us.
 
wirednuts said:
i thought about this alot. notably, it really doesnt matter if we find another planet to habit, we will still have to preserve earth for those people who cant go to the new place.

the only way we could leave this place and let it naturally resolve itself would be to transport all 7 billion people, and there is just no way that is going to happen. by the looks of it, we will only be able to send a couple dozen people at once, with the hopes they can interbreed and start a new civilization. its not going to solve any problems we have here though.

technology can make it work though. i bet this planet can support 100 billion people if we just keep building up (and down underground!). we are figuring out how to keep pollution down, we just need more tech to make it all work right. im not worried about aliens though, i honestly think theyve been watching us the whole time and still dont think were mature enough to want to talk to us.
Click to expand...

i was thinking about much further in the future than you are, survival of our species. The earth will get hit by an astroid, the poles will switch (there is evidence that when they do there will be very high cosmic radiation on the surface), the Yellowstone caldera will explode again. there is no getting around any of that.
 
Stephen Hawking is only right if the aliens live in the vicinity of this solar system. However, there is nothing that close to us. The only thing you could worry about is microbes inside an asteroid or inside a meteorite. But this would only be the case if that asteroid used to be in an orbit in a solar system so that life could develop inside the meteor or asteroid. It is energetic enough to form complex atom structures. Something i expect has happened here as well billions of years ago. These microbes would very likely not that intelligent. Even as a large group these microbes would still not exist a group conscience. Perhaps behavior governed by laws of self organization as can be seen in nature at the bacterial level or as with flocks of birds and schools of fish.



Here Stephen Hawking is wrong because if you come from real far :
If you would want to live long, you want a peaceful nature.
The problem is that having a peaceful nature makes you susceptible to all kind of hostile threats. Living and non living. Thus you need to make sure you have the technology and the knowledge to survive everything that can happen to you.

* In empty space you would want to make it less empty if needed.
* No physics must influence you or your means of travel.
* you need to be able to control enormous amounts of energy in the order of supernovae for starters.

If you accomplish this then you would be free to go where ever you want.
None could harm you. And you do not have to harm others.
But this requires a very different state of mind. Being part of something without playing an active part in it. You could always decide to play an active part , but that would have to be done in a less obvious way.

Of course this is all strictly academic interest.
 
Last edited:
herm0016 said:
not for multi-generation or very long distance space travel.

like is said, they would send a robot just like we do.
Click to expand...
The aliens may well not have the same notions of mortality or individual preservation as we do. Maybe they wouldn't think of a multi-generational ship as a big deal. "So the ones who launch with it will be dead by the time it gets where it's going. So what?" Or maybe they will have the ability to enter a state of suspended animation more easily than us, whether it's brought on naturally or artificially.


astroidea said:
If Hitler won WW2 and were xenocidal, I don't think our humanity would advance nearly as much as if it didn't. As history shows, humanity grows the most when it's under competition through other cultures. It is the driving force of innovation and advancement. Supremely dominant countries time and time again throughout history is shown to stagnate and fall into traditionalism, only until other cultures catch up and put pressure onto them.
Click to expand...
And that may well be the case - for our species.
Evolutionary influences from the past have great influence on our daily behavior, including our tendency toward stagnation without some significant competing motivator. Maybe another sentient species wouldn't have such influences, or maybe they'll have gone to the extent of modifying their own genome (or whatever it is they've got) to tweak some of these behaviors, for better or for worse.




And maybe there's an alien LulzSec group out there who just likes to troll the rest of the galaxy by occasionally screwing with the development of other star systems. One system is broadcasting signs of primitive sentient life? Time to see how they cope with some stress - send a pod to the broadcasting planet with a few billion self-replicating nanobots, whose sole purpose is to consume the planet and turn it into a giant trollface.
 
I agree with Michio Kaku on this: if aliens could travel across the galaxy, then they're far far more advanced than us. Them to us is like us to ants. We don't go up to ant hills saying "I've come to bring you technology, to share our secrets." For the most part, you ignore them. Maybe put a few under a microscope and examine them. Maybe just step on them if they get in your way.

Why would they necessarily be curious about us, as the OP claims? If life is widespread throughout the universe, certainly there are more interesting things than us. But, the OP apparently shares that conceited characteristic of the human species: we're the best thing this universe has ever seen. Why wouldn't they want to visit us and give us all their technology?
 
DrPizza said:
For the most part, you ignore them. Maybe put a few under a microscope and examine them. Maybe just step on them if they get in your way.
Click to expand...
You ignore ants not directly because they are an 'inferior' intelligence, you ignore them because they can't talk back.
 
Okay. We don't go into the jungle and find a bunch of monkeys and say "here! We come in peace. We wish to give you trinkets and technology." Monkeys have all sorts of vocalizations. Monkeys communicate. We don't really care what they're talking about because the thoughts that they can convey are far inferior from the thoughts conveyed in our communication.

Better now?
 
DrPizza said:
Okay. We don't go into the jungle and find a bunch of monkeys and say "here! We come in peace. We wish to give you trinkets and technology." Monkeys have all sorts of vocalizations. Monkeys communicate. We don't really care what they're talking about because the thoughts that they can convey are far inferior from the thoughts conveyed in our communication.

Better now?
Click to expand...
Well, it's better. Except that:

1) I doubt the monkeys would see your presence as a potential sign of great leaps in their technological ability, which is the way we'd inevitably view any alien civilization.
2) Monkeys don't live on a completely different planet from us.

But there are people whose research involves communication with monkeys and other animals.
 
Cpt Zerg! Intelligent life detected!

CZ: Good good. Composition?

1-1.5 matrons, carbon flesh over calcium skeleton

Z: Excellent excellent. Condition Red, all hands to picnic stations!
 
Mr. Pedantic said:
You ignore ants not directly because they are an 'inferior' intelligence, you ignore them because they can't talk back.
Click to expand...

No, you ignore ants because socially they are so different from you that it would be almost impossible to communicate with them in any meaningful way even if they were "intelligent". Put us in that situation with some advanced alien species and you'd probably get the same thing happen. Intelligence is highly subjective anyway. I just don't see us having anything in common with some alien species at all other than we're both alive so to speak.
 
Mr. Pedantic said:
You ignore ants not directly because they are an 'inferior' intelligence, you ignore them because they can't talk back.
Click to expand...

Ant's do not communicate on a level as we do.
This is about the realm of self awareness and being aware of your environment.
The only way you can communicate to an ant is laying out a chemical path that explains that there is food or by vibrations perhaps.
This is all about what the "higher" intelligence deems important. And that is a philosophical discussion. If you wish that ant to survive, you may want to change the environment a bit to help it out. By removing a predator or a pathogen. But the issue is that no matter how much you tweak that ant, it will never reach your level of conscience. When you start to add genes to make it a human, it is no longer an ant. In the most extreme scenario, you would have a human that follows chemical trails primarily and cultivates aphids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top