Should We Phone E.T.? Hawking Says No
Noted astrophysicist Stephen Hawking raised some eyebrows this past weekend when he made some statements about extraterrestrial life that were as unexpected as they were frightening.
A scientist mentioned in the same breath as Einstein, Hawking weighed in on the debate over the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) in a program he helped write and produce on the Discovery Channel. Into the Universe with Stephen Hawking is airing over the next two weeks and will feature the paralyzed scientist’s thoughts on aliens, time travel, and other cosmological subjects.
“To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational,” he says on the episode dealing with aliens. “The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like.”
Indeed, the emerging science of astrobiology is tasked with hypothesizing how aliens may appear to us. But it is a speculative field of inquiry, with one planetary scientist calling astrobiology “a field of natural philosophy, grounding speculation on the unknown, in known scientific theory.” With a pedigree like that, the astrobiologists have a hard time being taken seriously when they stray beyond studying the chemical and physical properties that allow for life to exist.
Hawking went beyond stating his belief in intelligent life when he injected himself into the debate over passive SETI inquiry, where scientists employ radio telescopes to “listen” for signs of life, versus active SETI, which takes a more proactive approach and advocates various measures to make Earth stand out in the cosmos as a planet harboring life.
He suggests that aliens might simply raid Earth for its resources and then move on: “We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet. I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonise whatever planets they can reach.”
He concludes that trying to make contact with alien races is “a little too risky.” He said: “If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans.”
Hawking reflects the views of most SETI astronomers in this matter. But it has been a couple of decades since SETI began in earnest and scientists have nothing to show for their labors. According to David Brin, this has led to some frustration within the community and some scientists have proposed taking matters to another level by lighting the Earth up like a Christmas tree in the darkness of space and attracting the aliens’ attention:
Their intention is to change the observable brightness of Earth civilization by many orders of magnitude, in order to attract attention to our planet from anyone who might be out there.
A sci-fi writer and scientist, Brin has served the SETI community in a wide variety of positions. Notably he serves on a SETI subcommittee of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) charged with developing protocols and policies regarding our SETI efforts. It was this subcommittee that came up with the very first SETI protocol (“Declaration Of Principles Concerning Activities Following The Detection Of Extraterrestrial Intelligence”) — a great read if you are at all interested in this stuff.
Brin thinks that the active SETI proponents are being, if not irresponsible, then misguided in their efforts at this kind of interstellar outreach. In an article for Seed magazine, David Grinspoon quotes SETI pioneer John Billingham, a senior scientist at the private SETI Institute in California, as advocating that we adopt a Hippocratic Oath when it comes to reaching out to the cosmos: “First, do no harm.” Billingham believes that “[a]t the very least we ought to talk about it first, and not just SETI people. We have a responsibility to the future well-being and survival of humankind.”
Well,too late for any of that…this planet has been broadcasting out radio waves for nearly a century now….which means that any civilization within 100 light years could have conceivably monitored any one of a number of signals on various frequencies….just think about it…somewhere,some alien tech type first tuned in to earth and heard the 1st broadcast of “The Grand Ol’ Opry” on WSM Nashville that went out in 1925…and they concluded that the entire planet was dead stone country…until they saw the first “I Love Lucy” TV broadcasts…and now earth has some serious ‘splainin’ to do
An interesting posit. Do we try to contact life beyond ourselves in the galaxy and take a chance that they will overwhelm us or do we stay quiet? I think the scientists actually miss the mark on that one. If an alien civilization was adept enough to travel in space without any consequences to themselves, then if they wanted to come here there really would be no way to stop them. Whether we us SETI or meager radio waves is immatierial. An advanced civilizaton would probably laugh at our infantile technology and decide for themselves whether we were worth the trouble or not. I only suspect that since we are all still here we are seen as just some inane children playing at being grownups and they are waiting for us to mature. Heaven help us though if they are of a different nature. Not sure a viral microbe or a viral computer program will do the job sufficiently to protect humankind.
This has been a subject of discussion in the “Hard SF” community (of which David Brin is a part) for a very long time. The gist of it, as Charles Pellegrino says, is as follows;
1. Their Survival Will Be More Important Than Our Survival- If an alien species has to choose between them and us, they won’t choose us. It is difficult to imagine a contrary case; species don’t survive by being self-sacrificing.
(The leaders of such a culture- think united and having overcome all prior obstacles- will probably be pragmatists, not “idealists” or even “enlightened intellectuals”. Asimov went into this in detail in “The Foundation Trilogy”. There is nothing more dangerous than a pragmatist. H.G. Wells’ Martians were pragmatists, to cite only one SF example; they invaded the Earth for survival, not out of a fit of pique’.)
2.Wimps Don’t Become Top Dogs- No species makes it to the top by being passive; the species in charge of any given planet will be highly intelligent, alert, aggressive, and ruthless when necessary.
(The evolution of any such “homogeneous” planetary culture will be a highly Darwinian one. “Nice guys finish last” won’t even be in it- “nice guys” probably won’t live long enough to finish, period.)
3. They Will Assume The First Two Laws Apply To us.
(And they will be correct; the most successful cultures in human history are the ones that did not fall victim to a belief in the innate goodness of other, more exotic cultures. Unlike our present Western “cultural leaders”.)
As to how they might respond in concrete and aggressive terms, Dr. Hawking has overlooked a serious possibility. Rather than being nomadic “locusts” (as per “Independence Day”), it is more likely that they would view an emerging culture like ours as a competitor for usable biospheres.
(Think “Class M planets”, as per “Star Trek”; I personally admit to being a bit prejudiced in favor of carbon-based lifeforms operating at temperatures we find livable, just on the basis of amino acids. If amino acids can’t form and remain stable in a given environment, “life” is highly unlikely. Silicon-based and cryogenic lifeforms I consider unlikely: such forms developing high IQ I consider even more improbable; and if they exist, they wouldn’t be interested in the sorts of worlds that would interest us, anyway.)
As such, once they realize that we are here, their most likely response would be, as Brin postulates, immediate attack. This wouldn’t necessarily require “warp drive” or even an “invasion”; the spate of “space rock” movies of a few years ago (“Armageddon”, etc.) points out that if somebody is really serious about removing us from the Universe, a chunk of nickel-iron of the requisite size traveling at a decent fraction of c (the speed of light, 300,000 km/sec) will get the job done, assuming their aim is good enough.
Please note that any culture advanced enough for interstellar colonization will have the requisite technology to launch such a “relativistic bomb”- the ones that aren’t, we don’t have to worry about. (We fall into the second category.)
In short, Dr. Hawking is correct, but he’s worried about the wrong potential problem.
For a more detailed discussion of this subject, go to
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3aa.html
which includes links to Brin’s own paper on the subject, among other things.
clear ether
eon
You have already stated better than I could mosif not all of my reservations with the pie in the sky types. Reality can be a real B!tch sometimes. Either survival of the fittest is a universal truism or it is not. I tend to believe that it is true and easily verifiable and only makes sense. All possible contacts or attempted contacts should aleays be passed through the filter of survival first. That does not mean we should shut down and retreat into a hideyhole but reasonable caution should always be considered. We are actually reducing our Radio Spectrum Output not increasing it because of the adaptation of newer technologies such as fiber optics and low power Microwave communications.
Hawking: “aliens might simply raid Earth for its resources and then move on: “We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet. I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonise whatever planets they can reach.”
Surely the above is enough justification for Obama to immediately declare an immediate emergency. Democrats vote for a special bailout and trillions in funding for SETI to maximize their “messaging.”
“Brin thinks that the active SETI proponents are being, if not irresponsible, then misguided in their efforts at this kind of interstellar outreach.”
Outreach? Did someone say Outreach? Obama sings, “I’ll be There.”
“Stephen Hawking points out, the potential for catastrophe in making contact with an alien civilization — no matter how small the odds — deserves at least a thorough discussion before any major effort is undertaken.”
MSM has declared Hawking a dangerous and potentially violent racist. Homeland Security is investigating him as a potential terrorist.
Think of Earth as a big oasis in a celestial desert; why would “aliens” want to destroy that? Instead, they arrive, do a little prospecting, replenish their supplies, and move on.
If anything, the “aliens” need to be more wary of human folly.
Hawking is paranoid.
The threat of that isn’t necessarily aliens so much as Von Neuman machines, which many theorists reckon will precede any alien arrival.
Or the aliens unleash a genocidal chemical, biological or neutron bomb attack on our population centers and just call Earth their new home.
Unless of course they’re M. Night Shamalayan aliens who stupidly land on a planet composed of 70% poison. (Ever see “Signs?”)
If you’re wrong, we’re dead. No second chances. No “Gee, sorry ’bout that.” Earth is toast.
Paranoid? I vote cautious.
Rick,
Caution was thrown to the wind when humans developed the atomic bomb.
Could there have possibly been a more provocative act, (paralleling the aims of active SETI) than when the human race began high altitude atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons back in 1958? In my opinion, this was the equivalent of turning on the beacon in the lighthouse!
If there is (or was) anyone out there listening, rest assured that in much the same way as SETI filters out natural background noise, they got the message.
If they are capable of detecting nuclear bursts at light year distances, it’s a sure bet that they have weapons that would put the biggest nuke to shame.
Remember, all you bumpkins, don’t discharge any of your firearms at alien space craft, otherwise you might start an interstellar war.
Why not put Hillary and Michelle together on this? Their fat asses would be visible for light-years.
Thanks, I haven’t had a good laugh in ages!
I agree. Now that was funny. Didn’t know we had more than one moon!
So the SETI project has been another colossal waste of grants and government funds for a lunatic idea . This is similar to the giant scam called fusion research which is a black hole for money . Not even a reflected particle of light from a shiny dime escapes the pull of fusion research. Soon it will be the attempt to steer asteroids from a collision path with earth that will be getting all the mad research money.
Astro Science ! It is insanity on a scale so vast that only God can cope with the dilemma.
In fact, I’m betting on Gods plan . Because mans plan is so ludicrous it defies belief.
Parasitic shape-shifters are already here and running congress. Their only agenda is to weaken, enslave and destroy.
The idea that we are “using up” our resources is one of the laughable results of the environmentalist movement. Metals are never used up, they are just converted from one form to another. Even when they are thrown away, they are still available for future generations to use. Today’s dumps are tomorrow’s mines.
As technology advances, societies ability to efficiently utilize it’s available resources grows. Which means in practical terms, the more advanced a civilization is, the more resources it has, not less. So a society with a civilization thousands of years ahead of ours is not likely to need to scour the galaxy in order to find new raw materials.
You (and some others) will need to look up Kardaschev to grasp Hawking’s argument.
I don’t know, GL — it seems to me that even a K2 civilization would have so much energy available that “natural resources” wouldn’t be an issue: there’s lots of everything in space, and a type-2 civilization wouldn’t seem to have much use for natural planets, either. Easier to build new than terraform. And Mark has a point that given enough energy, with the exception of a trivial few thousands kilograms, we have all the resources we started with, ready to be re-refined out of whatever we’ve turned it into.
We’re already to the point that its cheaper in most cases to re-refine iron and aluminum — basic metal production in this country is nearly extinct.
I tend to believe that a civilization advanced enough to have whipped the FTL problem would also be advanced enough not to need to worry about raw materials. They would be able to find or make anything they needed. In such a society, the most valueable thing of all would be more likely to be something like new forms of entertainment.
Such a society might decide that “I Love Lucy” re-runs are more valueable than our entire planet. If they visit us at all, it would be more likely be the same way we visit a zoo. Watch the natives in their natural habitat.
I’d referred specifically to the K-scale re when a society *must* go interstellar.
However, you do bring up an interesting point re resources. It seems in human history there’s always a point where a certain resource seems to undergird a given critical technology, and there’s not enough of it. Thus if e.g. rare unobtainium is needed for FTL and unobtainium can’t be synthesised, there would be exploratory impetus. Or maybe there’s just not enough spice to go around.
The history of technology is one of moving on to the next “critical” resource.
When wood for heating started getting scarce, society switched to coal.
When whale oil for lamps became scarce, society switched to kerosene. (Gasoline used to be a waste product in kerosene production. The oil companies were glad to find someone to buy it.)
As a given resource starts to become scarce, it’s price starts rising. This gives millions of inventors incentive to start looking for the next big thing. Every year that passes we have more minds available for the next search, and a larger technological base to devote to that search.
MarkTheGreat — As a given resource starts to become scarce, it’s price starts rising. This gives millions of inventors incentive to start looking for the next big thing. Every year that passes we have more minds available for the next search, and a larger technological base to devote to that search.
Remarking on the apparent decline of progress speed, a famous physicist (whether Dyson or Feynmann or Bussard or someone else entirely escapes me at the moment) said that this was due to all of the easily solvable problems having been solved. Progress, once you reach a certain stage and no matter how many minds are working on something, isn’t linear, but more like a logarithmic curve. The next big discovery is an order of magnitude more difficult than the previous.
Technology has the same problem and for the same reason; e.g. the reason we don’t have fusion is certainly not for the lack of minds, effort, or cash. Your ‘resources’ argument seems premised on seeing the linear portion of the curve and assuming that the linearity — or close to it — keeps going on like that. (I’ve seen the ‘resources’ argument in many forms before now.)
Sooner or later, there will come a time when more of a critical resource is needed NOW, and the next discovery to supplant this is difficult enough to get to that exploration and acquisition makes sense.
Progress has slowed?
Not in any industry that I know of. Progress is moving faster than ever.
Don’t forget that aliens would be competing among themselves and excluding some members of their own society. Aliens out there who have the ability to get to Earth, even if they have abundant resources, will still not be egalitarian. Some members of their society will make it their business to deny resources to the others even if their technology makes natural resources abundant. Most members of such a society need not even be greatly advanced over ours in many areas of technology. They just have to be ahead of us when it comes to the ability for targeted interstellar travel. They just have to be able to make the journey one way, and then be able to deal with what they have to compete with when they arrive here.
Is it ok to believe in aliens and UFOs, now?
‘Cause consensus reality hasn’t been very open to the math and science.
…The Anthropic Principle, The Habitable Zone, The Drake Equation (modified or otherwise)…and then there’s that pesky Kardashev Scale. Throw in some numerological games involving trillions of stars in billions of galaxies and the numbers really don’t add up any other way. All that remains as an argument, is deciding that no one else in the galaxy is as smart or as technologically advanced as we are. (The old, ‘the earth is the center of the universe and everything revolves around us’ argument.)
Actually, these are two separate questions.
1. Do aliens exist? The sheer size and age of the Universe makes this pretty much a slam-dunk. There are apparently more than enough habitable planets in this galaxy alone (based on recent astronomical research) that the chances that we are the only intelligent life in even this galaxy are a lot smaller than the chances that we’re just one of at least several.
2. Are UFOs real? If you define them as “unexplained phenomena in the atmosphere”, yes. If they are defined as “supposedly interstellar spacecraft without the volume or mass for enough propellants, reaction mass, and/or life support to get their crews to the Moon and back safely”, the answer is, very likely not.
By the way, a poll of readers of Astounding SF in 1950 showed that the majority of them believed in intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe, including technologically-advanced species. However, by almost the same proportion (about 90% each way), the readers did not believe that UFOs were in fact spacecraft from such species. Mostly for the reasons given above.
clear ether
eon
Actually, no habitable planets have been found so far. In all of the systems in which planets have been found, habitable ones are more than likely, not possible.
Just because a planet would not support human life..it does not mean there is “no” life form there.
So, why not indeed!?!
Humans are probably one of God’s haha’s….no not ahha..haha Space groupies are probably trying to avoid us..or saving us for a snack.
I said habitable, not human habitable.
Aliens yes, UFOs — in the colloquial sense of actual alien space ships visiting earth right now — maybe not so much.
I recommend the book “Rare Earth” for an argument regarding the incredible number of things that had to go right in order for intelligent life to have a chance of developing on the earth. It’s quite possible that intelligent life is very rare in the galaxy.
The earth is about 4.3 billion years old. It appears that life formed very soon after the surface cooled, but for over 3 billion years, it was single celled life. Complex life is a very recent invention. If this is true to form, then a planet must be capable of supporting life for a very long time, before complex, and then intelligent life to form.
Just a short list of the things mentioned.
The star has to be in the right place in it’s galaxy.
To far out and there haven’t been enough super nova to seed the stelar clouds with heavier metals.
As you get in closer, because gas density increases, the average size of stars increases, so the number of stars big enough to super nova increase. Additionally, stars get closer together as you get closer to the center. Combined, the odds of a super nova going off close enough to sterilize your planet goes up dramatically.
Few stars in the galaxy are single stars, most are pairs, triplets, etc. It is very difficult to get a planet to orbit in the goldy locks zone (not too hot, not too cold) for long enough for complex life to form.
A planet needs a moon near the size of our moon, primarily to help stabilize the rotation of the planet. The moon, especially in the early years when it is much closer to the planet, helps to protect against asteroid/comet impacts. The current favorite theory is that very early in the formation of the earth, a mars sized body collided with the planet at an oblique angle. To steep an angle, and all the debris will fall back into a single body. To shallow an angle and most of the debris will fly off into space. At just the right angle, most of the debris flies off into space. The result of this collision has moon being formed mostly from the crust of the impacting body, while the heavy core is captured by the earth. Which explains why the earth has a much bigger core than either mars or venus, which are both similar in size. A large core is necessary to create and maintain a magnetic field, which in turn keeps the solar wind from eroding away the atmosphere.
You need a planet about the size of jupiter, about the position of jupiter to help clear out the asteroids and comets from the inner solar system. Much further out, or much smaller, it couldn’t perform this task. Much bigger or much closer and it perturbs the orbits of the inner planets too much, causing them to be flung out of the goldylocks zone.
These are just a few of the things covered by the book.
Are we alone in this galaxy? I have no idea.
Is the galaxy teeming with intelligent life? Highly unlikely.
Sounds like he’s been watching too many 1950′s bad sci-fi movies. Or maybe he’s been watching “V”.
All this debate is really quite funny. Even the serious thoughts of Dr Hawking, who is probably the most brilliant man on Earth at this time!
As has been said above, humanity has been broadcasting radio waves into the Milky Way for over one hundred years now; so if there is a sufficiently advanced civilization within one hundred lightyears or so that has been spending a decent amount of time and resources on an analog of our own SETI program, then they are well aware of us. Such a civilization, even if they are the “cold, pragmatic types” that have been theorized for decades by SF writers and scientists alike, the odds are with us that they won’t be attacking or even visiting us any time soon.
Galactic distances, even realtively small ones like one hundred lightyears, are truly immense. As The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy says: “you just have no idea how really big space is”. And since no current Earth scientist will go out on a limb and say, CONCLUSIVELY, that faster than light travel CAN BE A REALITY, and show us the mathematics that would make it so; well, I would not worry too much about aliens making it here any time soon.
Any civilization so advanced that they COULD find a way around the physics of this universe to allow FTL travel would have to be able to harness energies several orders of magnitude greater than anything humanity has developed or has been able to create. Such a civilization wouldn’t need to conquer or colonize. With energies like that at their disposal they wouldn’t need earth-type planets or the natural resources on them. Such civilizations would just harvest matter and construct any size biosphere they might need to suit them.
I know plenty of people will dispute my post and these blatherings…
But, is my view of what is out there and what might be happening any more ridiculous or far-fetched than the musings of Dr Hawking or anybody else?
There is no reason to assume life is anyplace else in the universe. Not one reason, interesting to speculate about, we used to speculate about life on Mars or the moon, both as lifeless as the rest of the universe.
Nobody enjoys warp speed, Data or debating Vulcan philosophy more than I do, but I don’t think I ever took it to heart or to head either.
Before we concern ourselves about a hostile take over by E.T., maybe we should experience a blip of proof there is anything out there. We’ve been trying for 40+ years now to decipher and haven’t heard so much as a yodel.
That argument of a 100 billion galaxies works both ways. Since our own galaxy relatively new in comparison to many, I would think it would follow that advanced civilizations would have been sending out trillions of “signals” for billions of years now reaching earth.
I am afraid we are going to find ourselves very lonely in the cosmos – the ultimate paradox of mathematics.
Since our own galaxy relatively new in comparison to many, I would think it would follow that advanced civilizations would have been sending out trillions of “signals” for billions of years now reaching earth.
That would assume some amount of concurrency *and* technological stasis. Here’s the flip side: man has been around for 200k years. Finally, we develop electromagnetic signaling, and this will last for another 100 years max. (We’ll figure out how to do this optically with high focus or something before too long.) So that puts inadvertant scattershot signaling for our species in an extremely tiny temporal window. There’s no reason to assume we’re unique.
Depending on when any given species has this same tiny temporal window there isn’t really any concurrency, hence we don’t detect them. Say there was a species 10k light years out rougly 10k years ago that had their window and we were bombarded with alien TV from 1536 to 1776. We’d never have been able to detect it, and the window is closed.
True. And so far, there’s no reason to assume we’re not.
Except that according to your and Hawkins probability of existence, there should have been millions of species transmitting their “alien TV and radio” over billions of years from all different periods. Surely, a few would correlated over the forty year time frame of SETI? In fact, mathematically we should have been inundated with signals the moment SETI was turned on.
Rare earth…
But a fun argument.
Except that according to your and Hawkins probability of existence,
That would be the Drake Equation. Hawkings suggests there could be lots of life, yes, most of it likely to be basic. I don’t think he’s saying there’s many (if any) advanced civilisations in THIS galaxy. It’s more of an argument regarding how vast space is.
In fact, mathematically we should have been inundated with signals the moment SETI was turned on.
My guess is that we could devote 10% of the planet’s resources to SETI for the next 500 years and never catch a single signal. There might be life on 10000 planets in the milky way, but if it’s mostly microbes, fungi, or trilobytes, there’s no signal to expect.
There’s also the possibility that an advanced civilization would develop a new method for communicating, say sub-space or K’Appa. Until we also develop these unknown technologies, we wouldn’t be able to hear their transmissions anyway.
Lots of IFs in all this speculation Mark. One point that a lot of this boils down to is the big if of the long-term continuance of intelligent species. The temporal window of primitive electro-magnetic communication waves broadcast into the cosmos, the multiple probabilities that lead to intelligent civilization, the lack of evidence for ET civilizations in general, etc etc; all leads to the realization that WE are extremely lucky to have made it this far! Remember the dinosaurs? Had they survived, may they not have developed an intelligent species? I don’t know. But they didn’t get the chance.
We know enough about our own solar system to understand that there are better odds for a civilization ending event occuring than an ET flying saucer landing on the White House lawn, popping the hatch and saying hello. Knowing all these probabilities should be pushing humanity toward the goal of ensuring the continuance of our species and our civilization. But it is not. What does that say about us?
#12 Warren Bonesteel — All that remains as an argument, is deciding that no one else in the galaxy is as smart or as technologically advanced as we are.
“Local” aliens are handled via Fermi’s Paradox.
On the other hand my understanding was that Hawking was saying the universe is mighty big. Might be aliens in a galaxy somewhere. It doesn’t seem possible that aliens hop from galaxy to galaxy, but if they somehow can, what probability would there be that they hop to ours?
Walk softly and carry a big missile. We’ve been broadcasting for a long time. Either intelligent life is, wisely, hiding from us or there’s nothing “out there” capable of being nastier than human beings.
Ok all you poo pooers of the possibility of aliens that could cause great destruction for earth think about this. Would you be perfectly fine with our current world suddenly developing star travel? Do you believe the various nations now current would be altruistic to a fault when discovering primitive worlds?
I didn’t think so. So why should any other civilization HAVE to be altruistic?
Humans are what they are because that is what has worked. Aliens will be what they are because that is what worked for them.
For the one that doesn’t believe that advanced civilizations need more resources you are wrong. Volatiles can be used up. Radioactives can be used up. Besides, aliens might just want more living space. Lebensraum any one?
Radioactives and volatiles can also be created. Then again, what are the odds of an advanced civilization even needing radioactives and volatiles.
As for living space, there’s lots of that available without taking over inhabited worlds.
I see that you believe that the future would probably be rosey but I am not convinced. You have as many unsubstantiated beliefs as the other side of the argument does. I would just say that I would err on the side of caution as what one does not know can hurt very much indeed.
And we do not know.
Isn’t it pleasant to speculate in an absence of evidence ?
Except, of course, for Fermi’s Paradox: If the universe is
inhabited, where are they, and why are they silent ?
Spider Robinson gives one answer: They noisy ones have been destroyed,
and the quiet paranoids are hiding from the Hunters.
David Weber gives one explanation for the Hunt: The first Others were,
and are still, genocidal xenophobes, acting from emotion, not reason.
Which, curiously enough, also describes the motivations of the
active SETI advocates, who intend to put all our lives at (greater) risk
based on their emotional conviction that all advanced societies are
altruistic; Back in the Day, the argument was that all such societies
would be communist, that being the end point of social evolution.
It is the same flaw in the human mind, whether supporting strong SETI,
Global Warming, or any of the other Great Causes which, having sprung
from the mind of a True Believer, must be both True, and Trump: Of
overriding importance, an End which justifies any means.
What resources could Earth possibly hold that might be valuable to them? A Lifeform advanced enough to have the potential to project power many lightyears off their homeworld will have no need for that in my view. Compared to other planets Earth is small and scarce in resources. And we are already altering matter in small amounts. They can almost certainly produce whatever they want given enough energy and there are far better sources of energy then Earth. If they can travel this far even with only a small crew or robots we aren’t even useful as slave workers or food.
What is interesting is that so many people seem to buy into Hollywood and left-wing narratives so easily. Top dogs are always aggressors? Isn’t there a difference between top dog America and the old all-time second Soviet Union? Isn’t there even a difference between America of the 18th and 19th century and the America of today that came along with more wealth and advanced technology? Isn’t it true that wealthier and more advanced societies are more likely to keep the peace between each other? Look at Pinker’s lecture at TED (available on youtube) to see that we are in a comparatively peaceful age (even counting in WW1+2).
Aliens might laugh at the self-loathing of modern man. If they are advanced and Individuals they are surely pro free market. If they are some insect-like hive beings it is unlikely they will ever reach space age. Intelligence is only advantageous if cooperation, reasoning, and social rules are likely to succeed over anarchy and brute force.
There is a difference between man and beast. The question is will they see us as beasts and ignore us?
If they are hostile and in range we are doomed anyway. If their life style depends on it they will have the means to detect earth not matter what we do.
But back to the topic. The proposals are idiotic in the sense that there might already be an intergalactic messenger system (you see, one wouldn’t want to travel this distance if there is a way of trans-light communication to be beneficial to each other) but we are still too stupid to even detect it. We should focus on advancing by our own means instead of seeking shortcuts that are likely to evade us. If you are a member of the club you will know it imho.
My guess is some ‘scientists’ have found a new source of taxpayer funding. “If the climatology esoterics can run a scam, why shouldn’t we? And ours is also entertaining!”
Oh ho! What resources? Human brains are the yummiest! The ultimate delicacy on my planet.
Heavy water, which can be used to power fusion reactors.
n [Si(CH3)2Cl2] + n [H2O] -> [Si(CH3)2O]n + 2n HCl
unless Hollywood has all that cornered..they could just zap em!!, bounce, insulate,and protrude….They would be the talk of the universe!!!
..
Oh hell, get a life, who cares what aliens would want. If they can get here they’ll take what they want and not ask questions.
Who decided Stephen Hawking is an authority on anything?
Unfortunately Hawking has fallen for the trap that many smart people fall into. He has come to believe that since he is so smart and has become a world recognized authority on one very difficult subject, that he is equally an expert in all other subjects.
Perhaps his Phd. stands for post hole digger?
http://www.hawking.org.uk/index.php/about-stephen
BS, MS, PHD. Bull Sh*t, More of the Same, Piled Higher and Deeper.
His Phd isn’t in anything that ends in studies. If you read his bio, you’ll see he’s also a professor of mathematics. I’ll assume, like me, you’re not. No need to over compensate. If it’s merely “piled higher and deeper”, why the apparent animosity? Then again, he doesn’t refer to himself as Stephen The Great. You could be right.
Well he is as great an authority on this subject as anyone in the world. (Not that that says very much)
This question was irrefutably answered over a year ago:
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/dburge/2009/01/16/mark-your-time-hu-mans/
You’ve been warned, Hu-mans!
They want our!!!…
n [Si(CH3)2Cl2] + n [H2O] -> [Si(CH3)2O]n + 2n HCl
.
unless Hollywood has all that cornered..they could just zap em!!, bounce, insulate,and protrude….They would be the talk of the universe!!!
..
Oh hell, get a life, who cares what aliens would want. If they can get here they’ll take what they want and not ask questions.
So put your pencils away and quit trying to overpower Hawking in intelligence.
Some of you really should contact Hawking and tell him dumb you think he is..
I’m afraid aliens from another planet might intercpt TV broadcasts like the Jerry Springer Show and decide Earth is one giant trailer park not worth visiting.
This discussion echos ASF of the 50′s, John Campbell in particular, and it is far too speculative to be taken seriously. The odds are so far against contact that we shouldn’t worry.
All we can hope for is growth and achievement in our scientific and engineering world, perhaps to equip ourselves to be ready for contact in the 29th century, or much, much later.
As my wife’s pillow says: “Work (radiating messages) won’t kill you, but why take a chance?”
man, many people here and including Hawkings miss what’s right in front of them. We, a NOT very technologically advanced race have already found large planets 1000′s of light years away and we’ve also been able to determine much about their composition. We are also on the verge of being able to find Earth size planets. While we have been actively advertising our existence for 100 years or so, Earth has been doing it for millions of years! We can’t hide from any life that has technology and is at all interested in space! the conclusion…. any technological life must surely know we are here or at least that a planet perfect for carbon based life is.