• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Why Haven't Aliens Contacted Us Yet? (Fermi Paradox)

That reminds me of this article, especially the ff. paragraph:

Some scientists believe that life on Earth is a freak accident of chemistry, and as such must be unique. Because even the simplest known microbe is breathtakingly complex, they argue, the chances that one formed by blind molecular shuffling are infinitesimal; the probability that the process would occur twice, in separate locations, is virtually negligible. The French biochemist and Nobel laureate Jacques Monod was a firm believer in this view. "Man at last knows he is alone in the unfeeling immensity of the universe, out of which he has emerged only by chance," he wrote in 1971. He used this bleak assessment as a springboard to argue for atheism and the absurdity and pointlessness of existence. As Monod saw it, we are merely chemical extras in a majestic but impersonal cosmic drama—an irrelevant, unintended sideshow.
Click to expand...

From "E.T. and God"
 
ralfy said:
That reminds me of this article, especially the ff. paragraph:

Some scientists believe that life on Earth is a freak accident of chemistry, and as such must be unique. Because even the simplest known microbe is breathtakingly complex, they argue, the chances that one formed by blind molecular shuffling are infinitesimal; the probability that the process would occur twice, in separate locations, is virtually negligible. The French biochemist and Nobel laureate Jacques Monod was a firm believer in this view. "Man at last knows he is alone in the unfeeling immensity of the universe, out of which he has emerged only by chance," he wrote in 1971. He used this bleak assessment as a springboard to argue for atheism and the absurdity and pointlessness of existence. As Monod saw it, we are merely chemical extras in a majestic but impersonal cosmic drama—an irrelevant, unintended sideshow.
Click to expand...

From "E.T. and God"
Click to expand...

There are some explanations on how complexity can arise. I like this one:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-thermodynamics-theory-of-the-origin-of-life-20140122
For people worried with quanta in the link, this is not woowoo. My abstract is, complexity arises because it provides pathways for energy dissipation.

My own opinion on of what happens under evolution is that it is fully explainable by natural causes; it has to occur in the realm of matter. If there is a designer or not behind it comes into Fortean territory--as in not falsifiable by the scientific method, hence, a Creator is not suited to analysis by science.
 
ralfy said:
That reminds me of this article, especially the ff. paragraph:



From "E.T. and God"
Click to expand...
I just don't think people understand just how vast the universe actually is, its like buying 10 million lottery tickets your going to get something (note I have not worked out the maths on that one)
 
packshaud said:
If there is a designer or not behind it comes into Fortean territory--as in not falsifiable by the scientific method, hence, a Creator is not suited to analysis by science.
Click to expand...
Forteanism works off generally incomplete datasets which allows multiple potential causes and potential outcomes. We see slivers and attempt to construct a picture from it. Science does so too, but works within a more rigid framework which automatically discounts some potential causes and outcomes: this is where Forteanism diverges. All potentials are theoretically valid - that said, we do assign a degree of likelihood to each.

Crucially, though, we don't make an event or state conditional on explanation. We can accept that some things "are" whilst having no idea "why" or "how".
 
Again we ask the question why have they not contacted us, perhaps they don't know how to communicate with us? One can study an ants neat and still get quite enough information about ant society, but can we talk to the ants?

Or perhaps they are trying to communicate some deeper truth, and it's like peeling an onion

I rather take the Keel and Valle view, that what we consider to be extraterrestrial life, is actually something to do with this planet or a dimension that sits in parallel with us ( or several)
 
Let's look at how we (i.e. homo sapiens) treat our nearest relatives, the chimpanzees, who share 98+% of our genetic material, and obviously are native to the same planet. To us, they are zoo animals, pets, experimental subjects, or bush meat.

Has anyone ever mooted the idea of "sending an embassy to the chimpanzees?" Which chimps would we even approach? IIRC, they don't have any unified government with which we could make deals. Why would we expect more advanced aliens to treat US any better?

Now let's consider technological development. Our technological civilization is about ~250 years old if we go back to the beginnings of practical steam power, ~2500 years old to the first clockwork devices, or about 4 million years old if we count the first tools. Technological civilization may not be viable in the long run, but if it is, then there could be civilizations billions of years old out there. By this point, they would exist in some sort of virtualized or other non-physical state that we can't even imagine.

Could we explain the internet to paleolithic hunters? How would a fully virtual civilization explain itself to us? Why would it even try?
 
Aether Blue said:
By this point, they would exist in some sort of virtualized or other non-physical state that we can't even imagine.
Click to expand...
Fabulous post!

It so happens I am in touch with many leading intellectuals on this subject and have highlighted your comments.

This first respondent is 'Jimbo', who replies...

b77256abfb7b4b902dd29568d8ff94b7_resize_71.jpg
 
eburacum said:
You'd be surprised how many cultures which were at a roughly palaeolithic level a hundred and fifty years ago are now using smartphones.
Click to expand...

While that is a fair observation, it is not really shedding any light.
For example, my partner drives the family car and marvels when I come back and ask, did you notice the noise of the brake pads squeelling, after I had found the back plate on the drive way.

Usage and understanding are two different things. I can use a smart phone, and I understand the basic concepts, but could I build one?
Could I, feck!

A more useful analogy might be to grasp how to explain a bicycle to a fish.

Think how many concepts one wqould have to introduce just to get as far as "then, you go 'wheee', down a hill!"
 
I collect solutions to the Fermi Paradox, and one of the more interesting ones is the one sometimes named after the novel Permanence, by Karl Schroeder. This solution suggests that a long-lived civilisation would become dependent on its automation, and the biological inhabitants would regress to a simpler state - becoming something like the various long-lived species that exist on Earth, like sharks or crocodiles. Or perhaps like the tortoises that have barely changed since the Permian era.

We don't need to understand technology, if that technology is self-perpetuating.
 
eburacum said:
...This solution suggests that a long-lived civilisation would become dependent on its automation, and the biological inhabitants would regress to a simpler state - becoming something like the various long-lived species that exist on Earth, like sharks or crocodiles. Or perhaps like the tortoises that have barely changed since the Permian era.
We don't need to understand technology, if that technology is self-perpetuating.
Click to expand...

Or it could be completely integrated with the biological life like in The Culture ideas by Banks as mentioned above.
 
eburacum said:
I collect solutions to the Fermi Paradox, and one of the more interesting ones is the one sometimes named after the novel Permanence, by Karl Schroeder. This solution suggests that a long-lived civilisation would become dependent on its automation, and the biological inhabitants would regress to a simpler state - becoming something like the various long-lived species that exist on Earth, like sharks or crocodiles. Or perhaps like the tortoises that have barely changed since the Permian era.

We don't need to understand technology, if that technology is self-perpetuating.
Click to expand...

Most of us don't but are happy to use it.
 
eburacum said:
I collect solutions to the Fermi Paradox, and one of the more interesting ones is the one sometimes named after the novel Permanence, by Karl Schroeder. This solution suggests that a long-lived civilisation would become dependent on its automation, and the biological inhabitants would regress to a simpler state - becoming something like the various long-lived species that exist on Earth, like sharks or crocodiles. Or perhaps like the tortoises that have barely changed since the Permian era.

We don't need to understand technology, if that technology is self-perpetuating.
Click to expand...
So he is suggesting sufficiently advanced technology is Indistinguishable from magic... ?
 
I prefer to think of it as being a case of 'advanced technology is indistinguishable from life'. That is to say, a technosphere complex enough and responsive enough to adapt to new environments will take on a life of its own. We might be able to interact with it very successfully, but we will no longer completely be its master.
 
eburacum said:
You'd be surprised how many cultures which were at a roughly palaeolithic level a hundred and fifty years ago are now using smartphones.
Click to expand...

Actually, I am under the impression that virtually all homo sapiens have been at the neolithic or higher level of technology for thousands of years now. If you look at the tool kits of various native peoples, they were all quite complex, even before the Columbian exchange. I am also aware that various native groups have effectively co-opted modern technology, for example to make videos about how environmental destruction is affecting them.

I used "paleolithic" as an example of the earliest technology that we can imagine. Really, there's no way for us even to grasp what a civilization a billion years ahead of us might be like.

Greg Bear's _Eon_, and the Orion's Arm project scratch the surface of what's possible, but I really think that civilizations of that sort would have concerns so far removed from our ken that only a few curious individuals would bother with us.

That actually brings me to my pet hypothesis for the Alien encounter/UFO phenomenon: what we are experiencing is all the work of a few juvenile delinquents, doing the Kardeshev III equivalent of torturing squirrels in the park. The incompetent piloting skills, the bizarre sexual experiments, the incoherent and shallow messages imparted to contactees, and many other aspects of the phenomenon make perfect sense if we are dealing with entities that are emotionally immature and not fully in control of their technology or themselves. This hypothesis also explains why earthly authorities might not want to admit to the public that we are at the mercy of such beings.
 
Aether Blue said:
That actually brings me to my pet hypothesis for the Alien encounter/UFO phenomenon: what we are experiencing is all the work of a few juvenile delinquents, doing the Kardeshev III equivalent of torturing squirrels in the park. The incompetent piloting skills, the bizarre sexual experiments, the incoherent and shallow messages imparted to contactees, and many other aspects of the phenomenon make perfect sense if we are dealing with entities that are emotionally immature and not fully in control of their technology or themselves. This hypothesis also explains why earthly authorities might not want to admit to the public that we are at the mercy of such beings.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the film 'Explorers'.
 
eburacum said:
I prefer to think of it as being a case of 'advanced technology is indistinguishable from life'. That is to say, a technosphere complex enough and responsive enough to adapt to new environments will take on a life of its own. We might be able to interact with it very successfully, but we will no longer completely be its master.
Click to expand...
But then doesn't the original question become "why hasn't advanced technology contacted us yet"?
 
Aether Blue said:
That actually brings me to my pet hypothesis for the Alien encounter/UFO phenomenon: what we are experiencing is all the work of a few juvenile delinquents, doing the Kardeshev III equivalent of torturing squirrels in the park. The incompetent piloting skills, the bizarre sexual experiments, the incoherent and shallow messages imparted to contactees, and many other aspects of the phenomenon make perfect sense if we are dealing with entities that are emotionally immature and not fully in control of their technology or themselves. This hypothesis also explains why earthly authorities might not want to admit to the public that we are at the mercy of such beings.
Click to expand...
Ah - the D.R. and Quinch hypothesis. One of Alan Moore's early triumphs.
d r quinch.png
 
Aether Blue said:
That actually brings me to my pet hypothesis for the Alien encounter/UFO phenomenon: what we are experiencing is all the work of a few juvenile delinquents...
Click to expand...
Add the alien equivalent of Arthur Daley...

'Guys, you got a moment. I hear you wanted to take a trip to Earth... look if it's strictly unauthorised, then 'no questions asked'. I have taken a trade-in spaceship which will do the job and yours as a bargain. Been serviced by our fully qualified 'master Interstellar engineers', only a trillion miles on the travel display and comes with a 2,000 year back to planet warranty. Auto-pilot, so no worries'.

Then shit like Roswell happens.
 
eburacum said:
... This solution suggests that a long-lived civilisation would become dependent on its automation, and the biological inhabitants would regress to a simpler state - becoming something like the various long-lived species that exist on Earth, like sharks or crocodiles. Or perhaps like the tortoises that have barely changed since the Permian era.
We don't need to understand technology, if that technology is self-perpetuating.
Click to expand...

Assuming the technological developments were configured to maintain / nurture their biological creators I would agree with the notions that (a) this would impart a progressive dependence and (b) the biological progenitors might 'regress' in some sense.

However, I don't think the relative sophistication of the technosphere versus its progenitive species is the sole key factor in addressing the Fermi Paradox in this context. If a technological 'civilization' were to achieve a state of reliably comfortable operational stasis the biological beneficiaries would (IMHO) invariably turn inward on themselves and direct their attentions and energies to whatever struck their fancy. It could be artistry, it could be partying, or it could be wholly immersing themselves in virtual domains of imaginative social interaction analogous to what we monkey-folk have most recently been doing with 'social' media.

Whether or not they regressed in any sense they would cease to worry about controlling their environment, leave the dirty work to their technological support systems, and drift off into self-centered la-la-land. There would be little or no need to undertake interplanetary, much less interstellar, travel unless it was necessary to acquire basic resources (e.g., raw materials). Such acquisition tasks could be accomplished by robots.

In other words, the most mature technological 'civilizations' would most likely be preoccupied with discretionary trivia within the confines of the 'heaven on {insert name of planet}' they'd built for themselves. The paradigmatic motif for a successfully matured civilization isn't a race of cosmic conquistadors - it's the Eloi.
 
I like this idea. If mindless paradise is a universal goal/attractor, then most technological species will end up like this, and fail to colonise the galaxy.
 
Lots of interesting ideas on why no contact but in the end we are always ascribing human ideology onto what aliens might do. It's imposible for us not to since our minds are geared to human patterns. In the end who knows why an alien might or might not wish to interact with us.
 
dr wu said:
Lots of interesting ideas on why no contact but in the end we are always ascribing human ideology onto what aliens might do. It's imposible for us not to since our minds are geared to human patterns. In the end who knows why an alien might or might not wish to interact with us.
Click to expand...
That is the top and tail of the whole paradox
 
Robbrent said:
That is the top and tail of the whole paradox
Click to expand...
If indeed there are any aliens with the ability to communicate with us currently active. We have only been capable of communication off our planet for the fraction of a tick of universe time. And on current evidence we'll be darn lucky if we are still here in a couple more ticks.
 
Jenny Randals has a good article on this, in this months FT
 
Twitter:

it's ludicrous how few people know about this paper, so, friendly reminder that the fermi paradox was completely resolved in 2018 and it turned out to be because multiplying point estimates of highly uncertain parameters is very bad actually

https://t.co/c7NSHTruyb https://t.co/uZjynZA9dG

This sounds reasonable:

20201015_215842.png
 
Maybe most of them have self-destructed in various ways, think of the Milky Way as the detritus of their civilizations.

Most of the alien civilizations that ever dotted our galaxy have probably killed themselves off already.

That's the takeaway of a new study, published Dec. 14 to the arXiv database, which used modern astronomy and statistical modeling to map the emergence and death of intelligent life in time and space across the Milky Way. Their results amount to a more precise 2020 update of a famous equation that Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence founder Frank Drake wrote in 1961. The Drake equation, popularized by physicist Carl Sagan in his "Cosmos" miniseries, relied on a number of mystery variables — like the prevalence of planets in the universe, then an open question.

This new paper, authored by three Caltech physicists and one high school student, is much more practical. It says where and when life is most likely to occur in the Milky Way, and identifies the most important factor affecting its prevalence: intelligent creatures' tendency toward self-annihilation. ...

https://www.livescience.com/milky-way-alien-life-map.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top