Thinking that in our infinite universe, full of infinite possibilities, you can say for certain there aren't other intelligent life forms that could visit us is peak arrogance. We understand so little of what is possible technologically, let alone our ignorance regarding the universe. Humans in 1000 years (if we're still here) will almost certainly look back and see us as even more primitive than we see those who lived in 1023, and the universe is many billions of years old.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
UFOs?
- Thread starter nittany03
- Start date
There is lots to unpack here. That recognition of scale, both time and space, goes both ways in this argument. Which is where things get interesting.
Fermi paradox says if intelligent life is common and the galaxy (not even considering the universe here) is so immense, why isn't there more evidence of intelligent life? Where are the dyson spheres? Where are the radio transmissions? Would we be even able to recognize or detect them? Does intelligent life have a very limited lifespan until it gets to a point where it snuffs itself out? Maybe it evolves in on itself into virtual worlds where there would be no need to expand beyond their native star systems. Maybe all intelligent life sees other intelligent life as a potential threat, or at least that they might be thinking the same thing so as protocol they would wipe out any other intelligent life as a precaution (check out the dark forest theory).
I mentioned von Neumann probes before which are from a thought experiment that assumes an advanced civilization with technology that can exist in the realm of physics (as we know it) can create self-replicating space probes driven by AI that would travel to the nearest star, explore, gather resources, create another probe(s) and then off to the next star. Assuming 10% speed of light travel and a nominal stay of a few thousand years in each system, the entirety of the galaxy could be "colonized" that way within a few million years. So on the scale of billions of years, why haven't they consumed the galaxy with this method? Mabye a sufficiently advanced civilization that can get to this point of building said probes would recognize this danger and value galactic sustainability and thus limit these probes?
But yea, anything is possible given the scale of the universe, but is it probable? What if there are thousands of interstellar space faring civilizations in our galaxy alone, but what if they don't exist at the same time?
What are the chances they would, could, or should visit us?
Speed of light is the real buzz-killer here. Hard to get around that, no matter how advanced you are. Its not arrogant either to assume at least most of our physics is correct.
In your post you repeatedly make the same mistake as those who think they know for certain that aliens don't exist... Namely, you think, with our little human brains and limited intelligence, that you can explain everything. There are plenty of explanations for all the questions you asked, and I'm sure you've come across them in your research. For example, speed of light need not be a buzz killer at all, as theorized by Einstein and many others. Let alone what possible explanations exist that we have not theorized or maybe even could not, because they're beyond our ability to comprehend.
To look out and say, "well, if aliens exist, then where are the radio signals? Where are the Neumann probes?" is silly. It'd be like spiders saying, "if humans exist, then where are their giant webs?"
Last edited:
Seems even more arrogant that you have such a strong grasp that our brains are little and limited, based on what? A comparison to spiders?
Bringing current scientific understanding and probability to the discussion is not arrogance. Its all we have to go by, or else things quickly get into FSM territory.
The Oracle - The Oatmeal
theoatmeal.com
Sure such lifeforms could exist, but IMO the evidence that they are visiting Earth is very slim.
You lost me at infinite. Nothing that exists is infinite. It's a metaphysical impossibility.
The universe may be boundless (one could travel an infinite distance)...many physicists suspect this, but the universe itself is not infinite in any measurable dimension. So probability still holds, Douglas Adams notwithstanding, and not everything is possible, and many things are highly improbable - so much so that it's not worth worrying our pretty little heads over.
If you believe in a god, then how much smarter must they be than us? If you don't, then consider this. There is a spectrum of intelligence, with us at the high end of the evolved life that we know of. Why should the spectrum stop at us? Do you think it's impossible evolution couldn't keep going and create even more intelligent life? You might find it interesting to read about superintelligent AI, as in our life times we might even experience a level of intelligence that makes us look like spiders in comparison.
Likewise, we represent a tiny fraction of evolved species possible needs, wants, ways of thinking, etc. But it's all too easy to project our ways onto everything around us.
With that as a backdrop, do you really think you can predict the possible motives, capabilities, etc of possible more intelligent life forms?
Because there exists a possibility of intelligences more advanced than ours, does not mean we toss out all of our current scientific understanding.
Until strong evidence presents itself that ET intelligent life is extremely common, space and time is way too vast and empty to make it a probable occurrence.
Friendly reminder from your local neighborhood tech nerd that AI as it exists today is nothing more than a highly-sophisticated pattern-recognition device that is essentially your phone's autocorrect on steroids. It does not have any kind of cognition or self-awareness, and we're nowhere near that.
I never said let's toss out all scientific understanding. I said let's recognize how little scientific understanding we actually have, and not make premature conclusions, such as that space is empty.
Give the tech some time to mature.
The problem with trying to get AI to simulate human intelligence is that we don't really know how human intelligence functions. We know the general areas of the brain responsible for this and that and the numbers of neurons generally in the brain, but we don't know much about just how those neurons all work together to create intelligence. Neurons are not like an electronic digital computer where each neuron = a transistor. Similarly, we also don't know how ant colonies act intelligently. As a colony, ants are kind of like a brain that can move itself around. Ant colonies are capable of solving various problems. However, individually, ants are very stupid. But it is not known how specifically the ants act together to form an intelligence.
Regarding aliens, if the UFOs/UAP being observed are them, this raises some questions:
1) Do they want us to know they're here? If so, they're doing a poor job of it. You'd think they'd be more explicit.
2) Do they not want us to know they're here? Again, poor job. And also, if they are capable of space travel, and are much more advanced than we are, then you'd think they could build robotic space probes that look and move identically to lifeforms like bees, flies, seagulls, etc...a Navy pilot seeing a seagull fly by wouldn't suspect anything. We are very much on the verge of creating such with our current tech (well robots) so aliens would most definitely be capable of it I'd think.
3) Maybe they're just screwing with us? But again, then why not be more explicit? Like have a flying saucer fly up to an aircraft carrier and fly around it in some circles or something.
Regarding aliens, if the UFOs/UAP being observed are them, this raises some questions:
1) Do they want us to know they're here? If so, they're doing a poor job of it. You'd think they'd be more explicit.
2) Do they not want us to know they're here? Again, poor job. And also, if they are capable of space travel, and are much more advanced than we are, then you'd think they could build robotic space probes that look and move identically to lifeforms like bees, flies, seagulls, etc...a Navy pilot seeing a seagull fly by wouldn't suspect anything. We are very much on the verge of creating such with our current tech (well robots) so aliens would most definitely be capable of it I'd think.
3) Maybe they're just screwing with us? But again, then why not be more explicit? Like have a flying saucer fly up to an aircraft carrier and fly around it in some circles or something.
We need not understand intelligence to create AI. The idea is to create a self-improving algorithm that then improves itself further with each iteration as it gets smarter and smarter.
2 points:
1. Which one of your options applies to us when we study the ocean depths? What if we discovered monkeys on another planet.. would it be any different?
2. Why must a possible visitor have humanized motivations or thought processes like you describe? For example, maybe we wouldn't be that important to them, and they couldn't give a damn if we know about them or not. Maybe they're probes that are neither programmed to avoid or seek us out. Countless possibilities outside your small list.