3 ms·

I rather like the first article. It resonates with my own perspective on the absurdity of some steps in the Drake Equation which seems to assume that there shou

I rather like the first article. It resonates with my own perspective on the absurdity of some steps in the Drake Equation which seems to assume that there should be some kind of deterministic drive towards exactly our kinds of technology. If nothing else, for me this resolves the Fermi Paradox in a satisfactory manner. We don't find aliens, because we are not really looking for aliens. Just for a glimpse of ourselves in a cosmic mirror. I guess that's what can happen when you stare into the Rule 30 abyss for 40 years.

lovemenot 4y ago
Rather than waiting for replies to my comment, like Wolfram, I will just proceed with my own train of thought. There's arguably scientific value in what he sets out here. So far, our definition of intelligent alien life has just been: we will know it when we see it. iiuc Wolfram provides a framework with which we can measure and classify "alien" intelligences in their myriad forms. And we can begin that process right here. Working from home.
- wolverine876 4y ago
  > So far, our definition of intelligent alien life has just been: we will know it when we see it. Where is this discussed?
giantrobot 4y ago
We can't look for aliens that are so alien we can't recognize their intelligence. There's little point in waxing philosophical about those theoretical intelligences when the scale of the universe suggests if we exist then there probably a decent probability of other intelligences like us. We know our solar system produced us and there's hundreds of millions similar to ours. With a limited budget it only makes sense to look for the low hanging fruit, intelligences we have a high likelihood of recognizing. Just as an example, one of the reasons to look for SETI in the molecular hydrogen bands is the sky is filled with those signals from natural sources. The moment you build a radio telescope you detect those emissions. Anyone wanting to map the structure of the galaxy will be mapping molecular hydrogen emissions. So if you want to fire off an interstellar beacon doing so on a frequency alien astronomers will already be looking at is a very good use of your radio antenna time.

lovemenot 4y ago

Rather than waiting for replies to my comment, like Wolfram, I will just proceed with my own train of thought. There's arguably scientific value in what he sets out here. So far, our definition of intelligent alien life has just been: we will know it when we see it. iiuc Wolfram provides a framework with which we can measure and classify "alien" intelligences in their myriad forms. And we can begin that process right here. Working from home.

wolverine876 4y ago
> So far, our definition of intelligent alien life has just been: we will know it when we see it. Where is this discussed?

giantrobot 4y ago

We can't look for aliens that are so alien we can't recognize their intelligence. There's little point in waxing philosophical about those theoretical intelligences when the scale of the universe suggests if we exist then there probably a decent probability of other intelligences like us. We know our solar system produced us and there's hundreds of millions similar to ours. With a limited budget it only makes sense to look for the low hanging fruit, intelligences we have a high likelihood of recognizing. Just as an example, one of the reasons to look for SETI in the molecular hydrogen bands is the sky is filled with those signals from natural sources. The moment you build a radio telescope you detect those emissions. Anyone wanting to map the structure of the galaxy will be mapping molecular hydrogen emissions. So if you want to fire off an interstellar beacon doing so on a frequency alien astronomers will already be looking at is a very good use of your radio antenna time.