I think you're thinking in very human terms.
Contacting Aliens 'A Bad Idea', Warns Hawking
- Thread starter Edinburgh
- Start date
I think you're thinking in very human terms.
Not necessarily. All it requires is the guy who has the better idea to continually win arguments. It would take them longer, but they would eventually do it.
Most technological innovations result from small sporadic contributions from small groups of individuals working collectively or in parallel. They don't have to be actually cooperating with each other to steal/borrow/copy/inspire one another's innovations. An environment where they can do this freely without giving anyone credit is often very conducive to progress. This is part of the reason why authoritarian countries like the Soviet Union were able to develop certain technologies--in some cases--much faster than the United States: as long as you work for the State, you can rip off whatever you want without fear of being sued.
Presumably the Bozos--who don't care much about personal liberty and are used to thinking collectively about things--would only fight over disagreements on a particular innovation, but not over property rights or who gets the credit for a particular invention. This might slow things down since the superior inventor isn't always the superior fighter; on the other hand, the invention of the dead scientist is still on file, and they can just as easily re-implement it if the victorious scientists' idea flops.
Here is an interesting article refuting Dr. Hawkin's claim.
Canadian DM: LCDs, Microchips Come from Aliens
Canadian DM: LCDs, Microchips Come from Aliens
^Let me guess: he's from the Very Silly Party (formerly Slightly Silly party)?
Microchips and optical fibres
Now, If I were to tell a story like that I would probably be able to come up with some technologies that are a little more believable as 'alien'...
Microchips and optical fibres
Now, If I were to tell a story like that I would probably be able to come up with some technologies that are a little more believable as 'alien'...It is my understanding that, because of the inverse-square law, our broadcast do not make it very far into space before becoming very faint.
Intentionally beaming a signal toward another solar system is another matter.
It's been suggested that none of our transmissions to date are able to leave the heliosphere, that they become indistinguishable from background noise when penetrating the heliopause.
Well it may not have been "Hello" but we have been sending signals to control deep space probes.
Those signals could be received.
Those signals could be received.
Yes, intentionally and in a tight beam with enough power to cut through all the interference. TV signals are not intended for deep space recipients and are pretty much just noise that happens to escape from our transmitters.
It's like the difference between a flashlight and a laser beam. You can send morse code to somebody down the street using a flashlight, but sending that same message to the MOON requires a fairly powerful laser.
David Brin has a thoughtful and interesting reaction on the subject, and he appeared on Larry King to talk about it:
RAMA
http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/
Btw for those mentioning our signals are out in space...if we WANT to contact someone, Brin points out that its much better to use a laser pointer across a lake than throw a stone and let the ripples reach the other side...its not likely I Love Lucy would be detected by anyone but the most dedicated alien astronomer.
ZRAMA
RAMA
http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/
Btw for those mentioning our signals are out in space...if we WANT to contact someone, Brin points out that its much better to use a laser pointer across a lake than throw a stone and let the ripples reach the other side...its not likely I Love Lucy would be detected by anyone but the most dedicated alien astronomer.
ZRAMA
Here is another claim.
Really? What if they have different senses/perceptions of the Universe and their mathematicl constructs make use of those perceptions in a way we can't understand or relate to?
There may be corporeal alien intelligence out there taht we can see; but honestly may NOT ne able to relate to or communicate with in any meaningful way.
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
If they have different senses/perceptions, then the symbols won't be written - they'll be heard, etc.
But the mathematical logic structure they express will be identical. Why? Because there's only one set of physical laws throughout the universe and one one set of logical constructs explains them.
And, make no mistake - ANY species that has technology knows about these physical laws and about the mathematics that expresses them (they are prerequisites for technology).
It'll be understandable, but hardly identical. One variation on that theme right here on Earth is the handling of "zero." Romans considered "zero" and "empty set" to be the same, while other systems did not. Another obvious possibility is an alien mathematical system to have a different logical solution to the "divide by zero" paradox; humans simply disallow that operation, while aliens might invent another symbol--say, the "Abstractor"--to represent non-real numbers that are equivalent too zero (again, similar to the "empty set").
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
The 'zero' example is not inspired. You see, for advanced mathematics - the kind needed for starships or computers - one needs 'zero' - and however it's called, the concept is the same.
About 'divide by zero' - this operation can either be viewed as meaningless or as 'equal infinite'.
As I said - any civilization that achieves advanced tech is fluent in the language of mathematics - and its logical fundaments and conceps don't change, simply because it would then become inapplicable.
Neither of which can be used in logical operations. There are, on the other hand, non-conventional logical systems that can consistently handle Divide By Zero scenarios. I worked for a company that considered implementing one for a database project; they concluded the altered logical framework would have compatibility problems with other databases.
The same can be said for ANY complex language regardless of structure or vocabulary: the fundaments and concepts don't really change, you'll always have verbs, nouns, adjectives, etc, and some combinations of concepts that our idea of language may not even possess.
This is why I doubt mathematics will be any easier than ordinary language to translate. Both would be deciphered the same way: point to an object, say its name; perform an action, say what you're doing.
I agree. Mathematical operations could be useful for one entity to prove to another that it is intelligent, but can't serve as a language on its own.
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
But you can't choose any logical framework you want to build mathematics with it - not if you want your mathematics to be applicable to the physical universe.
The axioms must correspond to objective realities, the rules of logic must apply to the real universe,etc.
The essence of mathematics remains the same - only the form changes.
All this, unlike any other languages used by humans to comunicate - languages that involve arbitrary rules, illogical constructions, concepts that a non-human is likely not to have, etc.
