Ancient Aliens

[Herkimer Jitty]

emerging exponential technologies like brain uploading/downloading (circa 2025-2050 tech)

Sorry, I had to LOL.

Um...why? There's actually been some progress on this in the last few months since this thread was active..

RAMA

Your enthusiasm is almost infectious, but let's be frank, it's more like cloning or copying. There's no "transference" in the same way that a fan-made 3d model of the Enterprise is not the original filming model from the 60s.

Brain transfer is not a particularly accurate term to use for the animal brain simulation that's been done.

Facts are facts, when you don't require space, food and fuel for humans, the trip becomes easier, cheaper and faster. Arguing otherwise seems ludicrous.

The easiest, cheapest and fastest spaceflight in the world is the one that never leaves the planning stages. You haven't provided a coherent reason yet why any mission more expensive than that would be beneficial to anyone.

There wouldn't BE any benefits in that case since the people who launch the probe will have entered the fossil record by the time the probe gets anywhere interesting, and their evolutionary descendants will join them by the time anyone on Earth finds out about it, assuming they ever do.

The position that seeding the universe with human DNA on million-year-long fully automated spaceflights has no concrete scientific or monetary value to anyone currently alive or likely to be alive within the next thousand years?

I think I'll let the scientists speak for themselves on this one.

I'll still say it's almost inevitable this is the way to explore the galaxy.

It isn't, because we're not going to explore the galaxy until we're finished exploring our own solar system IF THEN. We'll have human beings born and raised on space colonies out to ten generations before exploring the galaxy becomes anything more than a sci-fi pipe dream. Otherwise, you're basically in the position of a Polynesian fisherman proposing a moon mission using a canoe strapped to a hot air balloon.

I posted this about a month ago on here somewhere. Look under: "It's Easier for Aliens to Visit than previously thought

http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2013/07/galactic-self-reproducing-probes-plus.html

There is also the video I posted here from a lecture which suggested a similar timeframe to seeding other galaxies as it is to seed this one.

Just make sure our probes don't collide with anybody else's.

 

[RAMA]

Sorry, I had to LOL.

Um...why? There's actually been some progress on this in the last few months since this thread was active..

RAMA

Your enthusiasm is almost infectious, but let's be frank, it's more like cloning or copying. There's no "transference" in the same way that a fan-made 3d model of the Enterprise is not the original filming model from the 60s.

Brain transfer is not a particularly accurate term to use for the animal brain simulation that's been done.

The easiest, cheapest and fastest spaceflight in the world is the one that never leaves the planning stages. You haven't provided a coherent reason yet why any mission more expensive than that would be beneficial to anyone.

There wouldn't BE any benefits in that case since the people who launch the probe will have entered the fossil record by the time the probe gets anywhere interesting, and their evolutionary descendants will join them by the time anyone on Earth finds out about it, assuming they ever do.

The position that seeding the universe with human DNA on million-year-long fully automated spaceflights has no concrete scientific or monetary value to anyone currently alive or likely to be alive within the next thousand years?

I think I'll let the scientists speak for themselves on this one.

It isn't, because we're not going to explore the galaxy until we're finished exploring our own solar system IF THEN. We'll have human beings born and raised on space colonies out to ten generations before exploring the galaxy becomes anything more than a sci-fi pipe dream. Otherwise, you're basically in the position of a Polynesian fisherman proposing a moon mission using a canoe strapped to a hot air balloon.

I posted this about a month ago on here somewhere. Look under: "It's Easier for Aliens to Visit than previously thought

http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2013/07/galactic-self-reproducing-probes-plus.html

There is also the video I posted here from a lecture which suggested a similar timeframe to seeding other galaxies as it is to seed this one.

Just make sure our probes don't collide with anybody else's.

Not likely, if there's so much space between stars and objects that a galaxy collision won't produce collisions, I doubt a few trillion swarming bots will either.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

STERILIZE

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I posted this about a month ago on here somewhere. Look under: "It's Easier for Aliens to Visit than previously thought

http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2013/07/galactic-self-reproducing-probes-plus.html

There is also the video I posted here from a lecture which suggested a similar timeframe to seeding other galaxies as it is to seed this one.

Which, as usual, doesn't address the point at all: a civilization that does not explore/colonize its own solar system is in no position to explore/colonize OTHER solar systems.

In much the same way a culture that has not yet discovered air travel probably isn't going to be putting astronauts into orbit.

 

[RobertVA]

I'm suspecting asteroids will eventually be utilized as a source of construction material for orbiting research and manufacturing activities. Governments on Earth will continue the long tradition of a central power wanting to impose its "benevolent" will on distant territories. Some groups of independent minded miners will take a few asteroids in tow to establish a slowly moving colony beyond the reach of government authorities in interstellar space. They will plot their course toward another system so their distant descendents will have the option of settling that system (on a planet or in orbit) or slingshoting back into interstellar space.

 

[RAMA]

I posted this about a month ago on here somewhere. Look under: "It's Easier for Aliens to Visit than previously thought

http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2013/07/galactic-self-reproducing-probes-plus.html

There is also the video I posted here from a lecture which suggested a similar timeframe to seeding other galaxies as it is to seed this one.

Which, as usual, doesn't address the point at all: a civilization that does not explore/colonize its own solar system is in no position to explore/colonize OTHER solar systems.

In much the same way a culture that has not yet discovered air travel probably isn't going to be putting astronauts into orbit.

As usual it DOES address the issue, you just have a narrow view of it. The whole point of the lecture was that you very well CAN reach other galaxies in the same timeframe as this one. I almost feel that the solar system(s) is an afterthought at this point, it's a given that we'll either be forced to exploit/settle it or we won't be around for a 100 year starship. We can certainly enhance/mitigate those scenerios with a starseed project.

As for the discovery that aliens might have it easier in settling the galaxy, well of course that's related because it means the timeframe is accelerated more than I originally posted about, and it's analogous to us...so far the only known "alien" species that might colonize the galaxy.

RAMA

 

[Crazy Eddie]

As usual it DOES address the issue, you just have a narrow view of it.

Actually, I have a realistic view of it. A society with finite resources and a limited lifespan is not going to make an open-ended commitments to support an unproven technology on an untested concept whose prospects for success are entirely unknown and whose tangible benefits will never be returned to the people who actually built it. There is no PRACTICAL reason to attempt to colonize other galaxies -- or even other solar systems -- when you do not yet have the technology to explore your OWN solar system.

The fact that it's impractical doesn't mean the attempt will fail. Quite the opposite, in fact, if it was just a matter of technology it would be easy to conceive of a 100 year starship design that could succeed even using modern technology. On the contrary, the fact that it's an impractical endeavor means that no one who wields the resources to BUILD such a thing would have any logical reason to do so. Put simply: if you were the kind of altruistic dreamer who had a trillion dollars sitting in a bank account somewhere, there are a thousand more important things you would try to do with that money before "100 year starship" even came up in conversation.

The whole point of the lecture was that you very well CAN reach other galaxies in the same timeframe as this one...

In much the same way that you CAN stick your head up an elephant's ass and yell "Geronimo!" at the top of your lungs. Much harder to do is convincing anyone who matters that this is a productive use of one's time.

As for the discovery that aliens might have it easier in settling the galaxy

That's not a discovery, that's a hypothesis with no factual support whatsoever. The reason it's unrelated is because it still assumes the presence of an interstellar exploratory imperative that is not known to exist even in OUR OWN species. You might as well assume that intelligent species on other worlds will have lower population densities because they're more likely to practice cannibalism.

 

[Edit_XYZ]

Crazy Eddie
A society with limited resources/etc will support an untested technology with only symbolic value just fine if it's cheap enough.
And RAMA just pointed out it can be quite cheap - for a society that has colonised its solar system (a very probable step for an intelligent/technological species - we're on the verge of doing it).

BTW, humans do have an exploratory imperative; that's why we don't presently live in a cave in Africa.
That is to say, a fraction of humanity always desired/desires to explore, seek its fortunes beyond the next hill, the next horizon. As for the rest of humanity: in the long term, it becomes irrelevant - just ask those half-monkeys who died in that cave in Africa after their betters left.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Crazy Eddie
A society with limited resources/etc will support an untested technology with only symbolic value just fine if it's cheap enough.
And RAMA just pointed out it can be quite cheap - for a society that has colonised its solar system (a very probable step for an intelligent/technological species - we're on the verge of doing it).

We are about a hundred years short of really beginning the process and at least a thousand short of completing it. It is far from certain along that progression that we actually WILL colonize the solar system, though most of us would like to think so.

What's significant is that we cannot speculate on what a system-spanning society will or will not do with its technology because that society looks dramatically different from ours and has different pressures and priorities. It would also have different capabilities; by the time they have the ability to feasibly construct an interstellar mission, they might not NEED to.

BTW, humans do have an exploratory imperative

In pursuit of a concrete objective, yes. We trek across the plains in search of useable farmland, we sail across an ocean in search of trade routes, gold and other natural resources.

The one thing we have NEVER done is conducted generation-long exploration missions purely out of curiosity. That's the thing about planetary exploration: we haven't figured out yet how to exploit the resources of the other planets, so there's no huge rush of people/governments trying to colonize it now. An interstellar voyage that has no prospects at all to return those resources to Earth (Mars, Ganymede, the People's Republic of Saturn, etc) would be a symbolic gesture AT MOST.

As for the rest of humanity: in the long term, it becomes irrelevant - just ask those half-monkeys who died in that cave in Africa after their betters left.

You DO know people still live in Africa, right?

 

[Edit_XYZ]

Crazy Eddie
A society with limited resources/etc will support an untested technology with only symbolic value just fine if it's cheap enough.
And RAMA just pointed out it can be quite cheap - for a society that has colonised its solar system (a very probable step for an intelligent/technological species - we're on the verge of doing it).

We are about a hundred years short of really beginning the process and at least a thousand short of completing it. It is far from certain along that progression that we actually WILL colonize the solar system, though most of us would like to think so.

Far from certain, but quite probable - barring self-destruction.

What's significant is that we cannot speculate on what a system-spanning society will or will not do with its technology because that society looks dramatically different from ours and has different pressures and priorities. It would also have different capabilities; by the time they have the ability to feasibly construct an interstellar mission, they might not NEED to.

Of course we can speculate - our descendants will still be human. Unless you assume a singularity, changing human nature, is coming.
If your horizon for speculation is so limited, what are you even doing on this forum?

And it will not be one society, but many of them, with different values.
And a relatively small group of people belonging to any of them will be enough to launch the kind of interstellar probes RAMA talked about. Enough to launch even more - and that's assuming no technologies not predicted today.

BTW, humans do have an exploratory imperative

In pursuit of a concrete objective, yes. We trek across the plains in search of useable farmland, we sail across an ocean in search of trade routes, gold and other natural resources.

The one thing we have NEVER done is conducted generation-long exploration missions purely out of curiosity. That's the thing about planetary exploration: we haven't figured out yet how to exploit the resources of the other planets, so there's no huge rush of people/governments trying to colonize it now. An interstellar voyage that has no prospects at all to return those resources to Earth (Mars, Ganymede, the People's Republic of Saturn, etc) would be a symbolic gesture AT MOST.

Yes, it would be symbolic, in large part; it will return information to you/your descendants*.
But humans are big on symbolism; a lot of actions/programs were undertaken due to it, in all or in part.
If interstellar probes become cheap enough (as they will for a solar system spanning species), they will enter this category.

BTW, launching RAMA's probes will not be a generations-long undertaking. FAR from it.

*Unless we're talking about interstellar colonisation - which is not symbolic at all.

As for the rest of humanity: in the long term, it becomes irrelevant - just ask those half-monkeys who died in that cave in Africa after their betters left.

You DO know people still live in Africa, right?

Not in the cave where the humans too scared to leave stayed. And even if their descendants would still be living there, they would be utterly irrelevant by now - little more than an afterthought.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Of course we can speculate

Not without making some fundamental assumptions what paths humanity will take to GET there. You can extrapolate all kinds of possibilities based on those starting assumptions, but that won't tell you whether or not those assumptions are justified.

And it will not be one society, but many of them, with different values.
And a relatively small group of people belonging to any of them will be enough to launch the kind of interstellar probes RAMA talked about. Enough to launch even more - and that's assuming no technologies not predicted today.

Strictly speaking, we've ALREADY launched two interstellar probes out of the solar system. It's the very specific scenario RAMA talks about that is unlikely, as it seeks to superimpose 20th century assumptions about technology on a speculative future humanity that will not be limited by -- or even related to -- 20th century culture OR technology.

Basically, it's like Jules Verne trying to extrapolate what a 21st century space program would look like. Apart from the generalities (astronauts land on the moon at some point), his best guesses weren't even close, and had no chance of being so because there was too much about the future that 19th century writers couldn't have even BEGUN to predict.

Yes, it would be symbolic, in large part; it will return information to you/your descendants.

Assuming it returns anything at all. We have never built anything designed to function over that long of a time scale, and even if we did, such a technology is impossible to test.

BTW, launching RAMA's probes will not be a generations-long undertaking. FAR from it.

Unless somebody discovers a working FTL drive or a power/fuel source a thousand times more powerful than anything we have conceived of at the moment, it will.

But that's kinda my point. If we had such a propulsion system, we probably wouldn't use it for "star seed" projects or interstellar colonization. The technology ITSELF would be such a game changer that the new social/political paradigm that comes with it would govern a different set of uses than we would imagine.

You DO know people still live in Africa, right?

Not in the cave where the humans too scared to leave stayed.

Seeing how ancient Africans never actually LIVED in caves, that sort of goes without saying.

And even if their descendants would still be living there, they would be utterly irrelevant by now

To the extent that any particular human being anywhere could be called "relevant."

 

[Metryq]

Just make sure our probes don't collide with anybody else's.

Not likely, if there's so much space between stars and objects that a galaxy collision won't produce collisions, I doubt a few trillion swarming bots will either.

From THE MAKING OF KUBRICK'S 2001 by Jerome Agel:

Thousands of color still photographs were taken in primordial-looking southwest Africa for use in M-G-M's Boreham Wood studio near London. (In the middle of Absolutely Nowhere, Africa, the 2001 car ran into an oncoming truck and two of the photographers were injured.)

People are often surprised to run into someone they know while visiting a distant city. The "coincidence" is really not all that surprising when one considers the tiny portion of the Earth's surface that is land. One can further reduce the "randomness" of the event because people move in fixed areas, like cities, and the people involved probably have common interests that narrow their movements, etc.

So while the universe is very large -- a star system is also very large -- the odds of two biosphere probes running into each other is thus reduced. Besides, Nomad did not collide with the alien probe. Nomad was damaged by a meteoroid and later found by the alien probe. Nomad was probably still within the system where it was damaged when the alien probe found it.

 

[RAMA]

Just make sure our probes don't collide with anybody else's.

Not likely, if there's so much space between stars and objects that a galaxy collision won't produce collisions, I doubt a few trillion swarming bots will either.

From THE MAKING OF KUBRICK'S 2001 by Jerome Agel:

Thousands of color still photographs were taken in primordial-looking southwest Africa for use in M-G-M's Boreham Wood studio near London. (In the middle of Absolutely Nowhere, Africa, the 2001 car ran into an oncoming truck and two of the photographers were injured.)

People are often surprised to run into someone they know while visiting a distant city. The "coincidence" is really not all that surprising when one considers the tiny portion of the Earth's surface that is land. One can further reduce the "randomness" of the event because people move in fixed areas, like cities, and the people involved probably have common interests that narrow their movements, etc.

So while the universe is very large -- a star system is also very large -- the odds of two biosphere probes running into each other is thus reduced. Besides, Nomad did not collide with the alien probe. Nomad was damaged by a meteoroid and later found by the alien probe. Nomad was probably still within the system where it was damaged when the alien probe found it.

I would really think I was crazy or being picked on by the universe if I ran into a truck in the middle of nowhere..but even that example doesn't take ito account the vastness of the galaxy. There's also no reason for anyone to make this a hub activity, there probably wouldn't be anything to make us stand out to increase the odds of occurrences.

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

As usual it DOES address the issue, you just have a narrow view of it.

Actually, I have a realistic view of it. A society with finite resources and a limited lifespan is not going to make an open-ended commitments to support an unproven technology on an untested concept whose prospects for success are entirely unknown and whose tangible benefits will never be returned to the people who actually built it. There is no PRACTICAL reason to attempt to colonize other galaxies -- or even other solar systems -- when you do not yet have the technology to explore your OWN solar system.

The fact that it's impractical doesn't mean the attempt will fail. Quite the opposite, in fact, if it was just a matter of technology it would be easy to conceive of a 100 year starship design that could succeed even using modern technology. On the contrary, the fact that it's an impractical endeavor means that no one who wields the resources to BUILD such a thing would have any logical reason to do so. Put simply: if you were the kind of altruistic dreamer who had a trillion dollars sitting in a bank account somewhere, there are a thousand more important things you would try to do with that money before "100 year starship" even came up in conversation.

The whole point of the lecture was that you very well CAN reach other galaxies in the same timeframe as this one...

In much the same way that you CAN stick your head up an elephant's ass and yell "Geronimo!" at the top of your lungs. Much harder to do is convincing anyone who matters that this is a productive use of one's time.

As for the discovery that aliens might have it easier in settling the galaxy

That's not a discovery, that's a hypothesis with no factual support whatsoever. The reason it's unrelated is because it still assumes the presence of an interstellar exploratory imperative that is not known to exist even in OUR OWN species. You might as well assume that intelligent species on other worlds will have lower population densities because they're more likely to practice cannibalism.

Ironically I just saw an article that basically supports my entire speculation on this subject which is why I was looking for the thread. Unfortunately it was days ago and have yet to find it again. Stay tuned.

In lieu of that, yet another of a numerous list of sites that support my position on the efficiency of this method which you erroneously disagreed with: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Self...hould-Underlie-Space-Exploration-265189.shtml

RAMA

 

[Metryq]

Ironically I just saw an article that basically supports my entire speculation on this subject...

We keep going round and round on this one point that Crazy Eddie already nailed down on the first page of this thread when he said:

The producers aren't desperate to make a connection, they're just pandering to the kinds of people who already believe this anyway and are looking for something to reinforce their beliefs

One speculative article about interstellar colonization techniques or ancient aliens does not "support" or "prove" another. Evidence must be empirical. No amount of mathematical modeling can "prove" anything either, nor are models and speculations "statistics," such as Drake's equation.

Speculation is useful to science because it can suggest avenues for research. Mathematical models can be used to reduce complex problems to a manageable size—but don't confuse the math in technology/engineering (which is grounded in empirical data) with the mathematical models in science (venturing into the unknown).

As for self-replicating probes, I see that as a potential disaster waiting to happen. Suppose some of the "parts" the probe needs to make a copy of itself turn out to be a living creature? I read that the first computer virus was a self-replicating party invitation that eventually overwhelmed the system's resources (aka "The law of unintended consequences").

 

[DarthTom]

Ironically I just saw an article that basically supports my entire speculation on this subject which is why I was looking for the thread. Unfortunately it was days ago and have yet to find it again. Stay tuned.

Daily Mail

Each month a new planet is discovered that bears similarities to our own - and it is becoming increasingly apparent Earth is not unique.

So it stands to reason that of the billions of Earth-like planets in our galaxy alone, there might be another that hosts life.

It’s a thought that is gaining more credence all the time, and now Nasa has released a fascinating book detailing how, or if, we might communicate with some of these worlds.

Some of the most interesting chapters tackle the issue of alien communication in the past, present and future.

In one section, for example, William Edmondson from the University of Birmingham considers the possibility that rock art on Earth is of extraterrestrial origin.

‘We can say little, if anything, about what these patterns signify, why they were cut into rocks, or who created them,’ he writes.

‘For all intents and purposes, they might have been made by aliens.’


The book is titled Archaeology, Anthropology and Interstellar Communication.

​

The drawings in question:



​

 

[sojourner]

They came hundreds of light years to paint graffiti.

 

[Metryq]

Thanks for the link, Darth Tom. I will give the book a reading. A quick search found one passing mention of the Nazca lines in Peru where the author cautions against "believing is seeing."

Yet the article talks of "Earth-like" planets based on the sketchiest of information and attributes rock art to aliens. It didn't say "created by humans after ancient encounters with aliens." The quoted passage above says "the possibility that rock art on Earth is of extraterrestrial origin," meaning aliens made it.

Poor, stupid humans are incapable of anything, such as stylized art or building huge stone structures without powered equipment.

Bizarre petroglyphs with semi-human figures can be found all over Earth. Did the alleged aliens touch down everywhere to leave this art? Humans have amazing imaginations. Take a look at the "dreamtime" art of Australian aborigines. Does all art today represent only things from the real world?

 

[Metryq]

They came hundreds of light years to paint graffiti.

With primitive tools, too.

 

[DarthTom]

They came hundreds of light years to paint graffiti.

Hey, don't shoot the messenger. And interestingly enough this is the first time to the best of my knowledge, that a reputable scientist from a prominent university actually forwards the ancient aliens notion and in fact to none other than NASA IN a 350 page report. [read the PDF in the article linked]