Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Speciality Forums >> Science! Astronomy & Space Exploration, and Others

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | >> (show all)
Jarad
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/28/03

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Otto Piechowski]
      #5450199 - 10/01/12 01:58 PM

Quote:

Is it possible there is more likely a chance of being visited by extra-terrestrial intelligent civilizations then being communicated with by them. I know...intuitively...it sounds like a silly question. But, let's run with it, if we can at all.




Is it possible? Sure. Just assume that there are aliens and that they want us to use for food. You don't talk to food, you just go harvest it.

Is it likely? I doubt it, for the reasons that Dave said, and for the intuitive ones you have given, and based on the assumption that it will be easier to communicate with us than to visit us.

Even with my friends, I usually follow the rule of "Call first." With strangers who may or may not be friendly, that goes double...

Jarad


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
llanitedave
Humble Megalomaniac
*****

Reged: 09/26/05

Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Jarad]
      #5450203 - 10/01/12 02:01 PM

I talk to my food, but it rarely initiates the conversation.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jarad
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/28/03

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: llanitedave]
      #5450460 - 10/01/12 04:40 PM

Talk all you want after it's cooked. Just not while it's still moving around.

"Be vewwy quiet.... I'm hunting Wabbits!"

Jarad


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Andy Taylor
Twisted, but in a Good Way
*****

Reged: 09/24/08

Loc: Epsom - UK
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: simpleisbetter]
      #5450487 - 10/01/12 05:06 PM

Quote:

Thanks, so basically it's just not going to happen using SETI's current search methods, so we're wasting a lot of time and money on it.




Otto et al...

I've been following this thread very closely and the waters have become very muddied...

I have no head for the math - just a leap of "faith" - or more likely a "gut" feeling.

I see the Hubble deep fields images and to me the number of walls and strings of galaxies shown in just this small area numbs me.

The number of stars in the whole sphere would be just beyond conception.

These odds tell me that there MUST be life elswhere - intelligent or not.

But we'll never know - that is the tragedy.

Restrict the search to G zero type stars in the local vicinity - 2nd generation at least. These stars are stable enough to allow life enough time to develop.

If nothing then forget it. We are bottled up like Larry Nivens Moties.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
llanitedave
Humble Megalomaniac
*****

Reged: 09/26/05

Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Andy Taylor]
      #5450752 - 10/01/12 08:03 PM

G through at least the first half of K are all probably reasonable choices.

I don't think our ignorance here is a tragedy -- even if it's destined to be very long-term. The tragedy would be if we stopped wondering, stopped exploring, and stopped dreaming.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
deSitter
Still in Old School


Reged: 12/09/04

Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Andy Taylor]
      #5450775 - 10/01/12 08:17 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Thanks, so basically it's just not going to happen using SETI's current search methods, so we're wasting a lot of time and money on it.




Otto et al...

I've been following this thread very closely and the waters have become very muddied...

I have no head for the math - just a leap of "faith" - or more likely a "gut" feeling.

I see the Hubble deep fields images and to me the number of walls and strings of galaxies shown in just this small area numbs me.

The number of stars in the whole sphere would be just beyond conception.

These odds tell me that there MUST be life elswhere - intelligent or not.

But we'll never know - that is the tragedy.

Restrict the search to G zero type stars in the local vicinity - 2nd generation at least. These stars are stable enough to allow life enough time to develop.

If nothing then forget it. We are bottled up like Larry Nivens Moties.




it seems unfair that the universe is so big and mostly empty. But that's the price we pay for a benign, long lasting environment.

-drl


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Qwickdraw
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 03/03/12

Loc: Ann Arbor, MI
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Otto Piechowski]
      #5451365 - 10/02/12 05:51 AM

Quote:

I believe I am correct in asserting the position taken here on the issue of intended and unintended communications with extra-terrestrial intelligence is:

1. It has not happened.
2. It makes sense it has not happened for "this" reason, or for "that" reason.
3. Such communication may happen sooner rather than later, man happen later rather than sooner, or may never happen.

Might I suggest we put aside the issue of communication, intended or otherwise, and now turn our thoughts and words to the issue of transportation.

a. Do we agree there is no evidence of extra-terrestrial intelligence having visited us human persons?

b. How could such transportation occur? Within the possiblities of the technologies we think are real and likely? Within imaginary but possible technologies of the future?

c. How likely is it that such beings will come to us?




Otto,

If we focus on possible >light speed travel than we must also consider the possibility that intelligent alien life forms are within our possible perception range to intercept an EM signal. You cannot dismiss one and not the other.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Qwickdraw
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 03/03/12

Loc: Ann Arbor, MI
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: llanitedave]
      #5451369 - 10/02/12 06:05 AM

Quote:

G through at least the first half of K are all probably reasonable choices.

I don't think our ignorance here is a tragedy -- even if it's destined to be very long-term. The tragedy would be if we stopped wondering, stopped exploring, and stopped dreaming.




My way of thinking is that an Earth like planet is much rarer than we estimate. Of course, out of the hundreds of exoplanets discovered none have been found to be Earth like. Sure there have been some bingo moments only to be refined later to something much less then. One factor that I find limiting is that estimates are ~1/3 of all stars are in a binary system. It seems intuitive to me that most planets in a binary system are going to be either ejected from the solar system or possess such an erratic orbit that life would be impossible. Then we have the fact that maybe another 1/4-1/3 of planets are very close or in the galactic core which again intuitively seems to me like it would be a very hostile place for life to form and thrive.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Otto Piechowski
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 09/20/05

Loc: Lexington, KY
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Qwickdraw]
      #5451451 - 10/02/12 08:01 AM

In phenomenology, a branch of philosophy, we call this investigatory technique "bracketing". I am speaking in reference to the choice to lay aside what seems to be and very well may be an insurmountable objection to ruling out what seems to be an intuitively clear consideration.

Specifically, let us assume, for whatever reason that communication is more difficult than transportation. This is, in all likelihood an incorrect assumption that transporation is easier than communication. (However, I believe it was Asimov who composed a science fiction narrative in which two intelligent species never connected because they relied on the assumption of communication which, because of their different biologies was simply not possible; and, because of their different biologies, was never even recognized as impossible; i.e. one species transmits its information in recordings of sound and sight whereas the receiving species has neiter of these two sensory capabilities).

We bracket the obvious to see to what unimagined conclusions can be reached should we direct our full attention to what has not been fully considered; understanding, of course, that once we have drained the counter-intuitive assumption of all its wealth, we can and must return to the issue we bracketed and involve a consideration of it in any real and final conclusions we might draw.

Science itself often brackets, with very beneficial effecs; for example, all of its assumptions and axioms are brackets. However, because science does not play well with philosophy, though it makes philosphical assumptions all the time, it rarely gets back to the stage of reconsidering its assumptions; largely because to do so, the scientist would then need to step out of the realm in which she/he feels most comfortable (i.e. science) and investigate philosophically.

Thus, my question is simply to invite us scientists to consider an issue from one focused scientific perspective, to see to what it will lead us, knowing later we still need to include in any substantive consideration the issue(s) we bracketed.

Thus, let us assume the hyper-intelligent ones have chosen to go the travel-route rather than the communication route...perhaps they have learned the first is easier than the second...perhaps their sensory constellation has made them immune to the concept of distance and the hesitancies that assumption creates...perhaps it never crossed their minds to think contact was more difficult than communication....whatever....so

Within the technologies we know are possible, is contact by travel/transporation more likely over time compared to contact by communication?

Within the hypothetical technologies we think might be possible but of which we have no use as yet, is contact by travel/transporation more likely over time compared to contact by communication?

Otto


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jarad
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/28/03

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Otto Piechowski]
      #5451469 - 10/02/12 08:25 AM

Quote:

However, because science does not play well with philosophy, though it makes philosphical assumptions all the time, it rarely gets back to the stage of reconsidering its assumptions; largely because to do so, the scientist would then need to step out of the realm in which she/he feels most comfortable (i.e. science) and investigate philosophically.




I don't think this is true. Scientists are usually very aware of the assumptions made, and test them as often as possible. There are a few untestable assumptions that we do accept, like the one that what we measure is real and not an illusion, but otherwise we do look very carefully at the assumptions and consider whether they may not be correct.

And the issue about stepping out of science is less an issue of discomfort than an issue of practicality. No, we can't prove that everything we sense isn't an illusion. So we can either sit here and worry about that issue, or make the assumption that everything isn't an illusion and move forward. If someone ever comes up with a way to conclusively test that assumption, we'll be happy to test it, but in the meantime lets not let it stop progress. If it turns out that it's all an illusion, at least we kept ourselves entertained.

Quote:

Thus, let us assume the hyper-intelligent ones have chosen to go the travel-route rather than the communication route...perhaps they have learned the first is easier than the second...perhaps their sensory constellation has made them immune to the concept of distance and the hesitancies that assumption creates...perhaps it never crossed their minds to think contact was more difficult than communication....whatever....so

Within the technologies we know are possible, is contact by travel/transporation more likely over time compared to contact by communication?



Well, this is sort of circular. If we assume the hyper-intelligent species have mastered interstellar travel but not interstellar communication, then of course it would be more likely that we would make contact by transportation than by communication. It's built into your assumption.

The real question is what are the odds of there being a hyper-intelligent species that has mastered interstellar transport but not communication. Again, based on our N of 0, we can't really say. Intuitively I would guess the odds of that are pretty low, but that's just my personal gut feeling. We have no data to base such odds on.

Jarad


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Otto Piechowski
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 09/20/05

Loc: Lexington, KY
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Jarad]
      #5451654 - 10/02/12 10:37 AM

Yes, I was talking about the explicitly philosophical assumptions upon which science relies, such as objectivism.


Edited by Otto Piechowski (10/02/12 11:39 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jarad
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/28/03

Loc: Atlanta, GA
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Otto Piechowski]
      #5451860 - 10/02/12 12:27 PM

Quote:

Yes, I was talking about the explicitly philosophical assumptions upon which science relies, such as objectivism.





Okay. But again, it's not an issue of discomfort nor that we are unaware of the assumption. It's that not making the assumption leaves us unable to make progress. So we make it, we acknowledge it as a basic assumption, and we move on.

Jarad


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ira
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 08/22/10

Loc: Mitzpe Ramon, Israel
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Jarad]
      #5451878 - 10/02/12 12:37 PM

I am not reading this thread and the silence is quite pleasant.

/Ira


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mister T
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 02/01/08

Loc: Upstate NY
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Ira]
      #5451906 - 10/02/12 12:55 PM

it seems to me that philosophy is the the "science" of coming up with assumptions and analyzing all of them as hypothetical possibilities.

But true science uses logical processes to rule out unrealistic assumptions and spends it's time and effort on following provable (or falsifiable) assumptions to make a foundation for further assumptions and research.

I hope that made sense


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
llanitedave
Humble Megalomaniac
*****

Reged: 09/26/05

Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Mister T]
      #5452847 - 10/02/12 11:08 PM

More falsifiable than provable. I always wince at the phrase "scientific proof".

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rick Woods
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/27/05

Loc: Inner Solar System
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: llanitedave]
      #5452991 - 10/03/12 01:25 AM

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
If a man utters the words "chrono-synclastic infundibulum" in the woods and there's nobody there to hear him, was it still a silly thing to say?
Why is there air?
Am I just babbling here?

We may never know the answers to these questions. But True Facts backed by Scientific Proof are definitely one of many things that may or may not have anything to do with whatever it was I was talking about in the first place.

Can we at least agree on that?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
llanitedave
Humble Megalomaniac
*****

Reged: 09/26/05

Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: Rick Woods]
      #5453014 - 10/03/12 02:08 AM

You made me wince again.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mister T
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 02/01/08

Loc: Upstate NY
Re: The silence is deafening.... new [Re: llanitedave]
      #5453110 - 10/03/12 06:39 AM

okay

my bad

how about 'testable'


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ColoHank
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 06/07/07

Loc: western Colorado
Re: The silence is deafening.... [Re: Mister T]
      #5453236 - 10/03/12 09:07 AM

And then, on the opposite end of the spectrum, there's what one of my geology profs contemptuously termed "research into the obvious."

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dickbill
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/30/08

Re: The silence is deafening.... [Re: ColoHank]
      #5453401 - 10/03/12 11:18 AM

Beside radio signals and lasers, Earth (i.e particles accelerators) must emit some weird stuff. We don't have a Higgs boson telescope, but if anybody outside us had one such telescope, we would shine like the only source of Higgs in a pitch black Universe.
Probably that the Higgs is not a good example, but some neutrinos produced by our accelerators or nuclear explosions are making us a very bright source in the Universe.

Edited by dickbill (10/03/12 11:19 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | >> (show all)


Extra information
0 registered and 4 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  LivingNDixie, FirstSight, JayinUT 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 19339

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics