Topic: General Discussion
Posted By: PBS Online
Date: 11 Nov 1999 12:14 PM
Is there basic life on other worlds? Does intelligent life exist out
there -as there is on Earth today? Or not - as was the case for most of
Earth'shistory? Do tales of UFOs and alien abductions tell us anything
about the facts of extraterrestrial life?What are the best ways of
finding out whether we're alone in the universe?Space exploration costs
each American taxpayer about $70 per year. Should webe spending more...
or less? What do you think? Post your message below.
Responses:
Subject: Bravo!
From: W Perta
Date: 11 Nov 1999 10:36 PM
First off, I have two words for the creators of this website and the tv
program it refers to: "bravo!" and "wow!" I certainly don't have any
definitive answers to the questions posed at the beginning of this
discussion group. At first glance it appears that we have so much
information already, and yet there is so much more to be learned. I
certainly think that we are on the right path. I wholeheartedly
support the efforts of SETI, the Planetary Society and similar
scientific organizations. And I'm also very pleased by the efforts of
scientists (such as Timothy Ferris, Carl Sagan, etc.) to share this
pursuit of knowledge with anyone and everyone who will listen. And
there are so many people whose lives are being enriched by the sheer
wonder of it all. We live in such an exciting time! I am simply amazed
by the scale of it all. As a species we have come so far, and yet
everyday we are witness to new wonders. Thanks to those who dedicate
their lives to sharing these new discoveries and ideas! PS to anyone
as moved and inspired by this as I am: check out the links page! You
can do your part through the SETI@home program. It's a good feeling, I
definitely recommend participation. There's no way to know if we're on
the threshold of discovery in this endeavor, but for the first time in
the short history of the human race, we have the means to try.
Subject: tax dollars for space research
From: christina
Date: 11 Nov 1999 3:58 AM
i believe that the $70 per year amount is a bare minimum that i, or
almost any ohter taxpayer, should be willing to pay for space
exploration. not many areas of science have such far reaching
possibilities and resposibilities as understanding the very nature of
life both on our planet and throughout our universe as a whole. we all
know that this kind of research is very expensive. i think that $70
doesn't pay for very much. however, i would like to see the funds
spent more wisely and reponsibly, as it should be by all areas of our
industrial/military complex.
Subject: Tax Dollars for Space Research
From: Emily
Date: 11 Nov 1999 1:35 AM
I feel that it is very important that tax dollars be spent on space
exploration, especially in this day and age. With the millinium
approaching, we are closer than ever for finding important research in
space. Technological advances in space research has helped us discover
the unknown and make important advances in space research. Space
exploration is extremely important and tax dollars should be spent on
this important task, because we may one day be living out in space.
Subject: General Comments about the program
From: Bill Zukoski
Date: 11 Nov 1999 11:44 AM
The program struck me as an updated version of Cosmos, which is not all
bad.In regards to Mr. Ferris's little lobster play questioning the
logic of Fermi's paradox, I wanted to make two points:1. Lobster's live
by the seashore, not in the middle of cities. The earth by contrast
in an integral part of space, just like an ET's home planet would
be. In order for Mr. Ferris's test to be fair, his open door and his
house should be down by the beach. If he tried his experiment
again, and repeated it a number of times, he would probably come up
with a different result on some occasions.2. As far as Mr. Ferris's
comments that the purposes and motives of ET's may be different than
we expect, his logic only prevails if the number of ET's is small.
Look at the great range of human behavior. There are 6 billion
humans exhibiting an immense amount of different behaviors, yet if
you randomly sample only 500 or so of them, you will pretty closely
approximate the total range of behavior of the 6 billion. As an
example, let's say Mr. Ferris's house is by the beach and there are
a million lobsters around. There is an excellent chance one will
walk in. If there are only a few hundred, there will be much less of
a chance. Therefore, while Fermi's paradox cannot be overinterpret-
ed to preclude other ET's, it does indicate that their number is
small (no more than 500 - 10000 in the Milky Way). Astronomical
discoveries of the last 40 years have pointed in the same direction,
confirming the soundness of Mr. Fermi's logic in asking the
question.There are two questions which may have very different results
regarding life beyond the earth. They are:1. How common is life beyond
the earth? and2. How common if INTELLIGENT life beyond the earth?The
answer to 1 may be a lot. The answer to 2 is not many (less than
10,000 and probably less than 500). Ubiquitous nonintelligent life
will challenge humans ability to be good stewards of our likely
"empire" surrounding this jewel of intelligence called the earth. This
possibility needs to be considered more forcefully, and the program was
the poorer for not doing it.
Subject: Sagittarius Home Page
From: John Becker
Date: 11 Nov 1999 12:34 PM
Excellent post, Bill. Near the end of the second hour, mention was
made of the "Sagittarius home page." Do you, by chance, have a link
for the site? I've looked everywhere without success.Thanks
Subject: Fermi's paradox
From: ting wang
Date: 04 Apr 2000 10:52 AM
I watched PBS program "Life beyond Earch" last night and was
particularly interested in Ferris lobster experiment. I agree with you
that his experiment was not conducted correctly. The conclusion could
not be drawn. Instead, if his experiment is to see whether any
stranger will wonder in for a lobster dinner, he probably would have
very different result.Please tell me more about Fermi's paradox. My
research is to extend the preservation of donor heart for
transplantation. Human hearts need to be transplanted within 4-6 hours
after procurment. I have prolonged the time to 40 hrs in dogs. This
research should increase the number of donor heart available. Many
people argue, however, there is no need for this, because transplant
centers over the country use all the hearts they can get immediately.
Meanwhile, people are dying from donor heart shortage. Research in
this area is important, but this opinion of no need for prolonged
preservation previals in many proposal reviewing committees, including
those in Federal and major private granting agencies. Because there is
no research, there is no data to show that longer heart storage time
would increase the donor pool, I need philosophical arguments to
counter their self-fulfilling fallacy.
Subject: ...now if I had to edit this script...
From: S. Tupper
Date: 11 Nov 1999 1:33 PM
OK, nice discussion of most of the issues, with a few glaring
exceptions. The dismissal of Fermi's question (if there's life out
there, why aren't they here?) was trivial and simplistic. Intelligent
and presumably curious beings are not lobsters. Not only that, but the
nearly equally silly dismissal of UFOs a few minutes earlier seems to
have the filmmakers contradicting themselves. In other words, either
we are being visited (and Fermi was wrong) or we aren't being visited
(and Fermi was right). You can't have it both ways.One issue with SETI
that wasn't brought up is the possibility that a civilization will only
use broadcast technology for a relatively short period of its
existence, switching to something else after a couple of centuries or
so. No broadcast, no signal to pick up. Let's not forget that as a
technological civilization, ours is exceedingly young.The dismissal of
interstellar probes was also rather lightweight, considering that
engineers had quite serious plans 40 years ago for rather simple
ion-driven probes.
Subject: It's a big universe inhabited by lobsters!?
From: J Howard
Date: 04 Apr 2000 7:24 PM
I agree that the producers/Ferris seem to want to simultaneously
magnify their solution space, and at the same time limit it. The
producers/Ferris of the program imply that there would be a lot of
"wasted space", if the universe did not contain some other; and
probably many other forms of life beside our own. Yet, when responding
to Fermi's criticism: "if they exist, why aren't they here?", the
producers/Ferris answer: there is but a single, uncommunicative
species, besides our own.
Subject: Gotta
From: Brian
Date: 11 Nov 1999 6:29 PM
Amazing show, I want to buy it, but I only own a DVD player, is this
going to be released on DVD. It's a must in my collection. Please sell
this on DVDThanks, Brian.
Subject: Feasibility of Communication
From: Matt Cunningham
Date: 11 Nov 1999 12:16 AM
Q1: Assuming a non-directional 1 Megawatt extra-terrestrial
transmitter, in what part of the Milky Way could the transmitter be
located so that the signal strength on earth would exceed
ten-to-the-minus-23 watts per square meter, the power level mentioned
by Paul Horowitz? ... A1: Assuming inverse-square energy propagation
(neglecting complications), a 1 Megawatt transmitter would need to be
within about 1/100th of a light-year of earth. This is far short of
even the nearest star. If a signal was beamed directionally, it could
arrive from much farther away, but we probably wouldn't receive it for
very long -- if we were lucky enough to be in its path at all. ---
Q2: Wouldn't reception of a TV-type signal be required for us to learn
details of an extra-terrestrial civilization? ... A2: If we receive
no pictures, nothing to correspond to what is being signified by their
language, then I'm afraid we'll be unable to learn very much about
their civilization. It would be like trying to decode the Easter
Island tablets, for which there is no equivalent of the Rosetta Stone.
Subject: Evolution
From: Jenny Doehring
Date: 11 Nov 1999 1:45 PM
I believe that species can become more advance through evolution. I do
,however, disagree with some of the items discussed through evolution.
I believe in God and that he created the world. Evolution goes against
what I have been borught up to believe, but I do feel that things can
grow and mature and eventually become more advanced.
Subject: Frozen methane in the Gulf of Mexico ?
From: Robert Reed
Date: 11 Nov 1999 9:41 PM
At about 45 minutes into the program, the statement is made - "at the
bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, researchers were startlet to discover
worms, living in methane ice".This startles me as well !I believe that
methane freezes at about minus 300 degrees Farenheit (at standard
atmosphereic pressure).While increases in pressure raise the tempature
at which things solidify, shouldn't the surrounding water obey they
same rules, and freeze at a much higher tempature, long before methane
?I would be most interested to understand how solid methane can exist
in in liquid water in the Gulf of Mexico.Anyone ?
Subject: "Methane Ice"
From: Matt Cunningham
Date: 11 Nov 1999 9:11 PM
I reviewed that segment of the program from our videotape. Most likely
they meant that the worms are living in water ice that has methane gas
dissolved in it.
Subject: Methane Ice
From: Eric
Date: 05 May 2002 4:26 PM
The "Methane Ice" being refered to here are better described as
methane-hydrates. A gas-hydrate is a solid crystalline structure
wherein a gas molecule (usually methane) is "caged in" by water
molecules owing to the great pressure. Methane hydrates are stable
below ~300 m water depth. (In most college level organic chemistry
courses, there is a "flaming snowball" lab that deals with these).
Subject: Wasteful Government Spending
From: Gabe
Date: 11 Nov 1999 3:14 PM
I think it is a waste of taxpayer funds to spend $70 per person per
year (I think that's what it said) on space exploration. The US
government should put that much effort into improving things here on
earth. And another thing: In the "Life Beyond Earth" movie, that guy
was trying to talk to aliens via a large, expensive-looking satellite
walkie-talkie device. What's up with that?? And what makes him think
the aliens are fluent in English? He needs to get back into his little
racecar and fly himself to the aliens if he wants to have a productive
discussion with them.
Subject: Evolution vs. Communication
From: Harold Cooley
Date: 12 Dec 1999 3:39 AM
I suspect that, given the speed of light, and other limiting factors,
that our technology isn't advanced enough to keep up with our lack of
patience to communicate. If time is the real factor to overcome, then
evolution, or our manipulation of it will see to it that we change
ourselves into beings to whom communication as we think of it isn't
important (perhaps because of some newly uncovered, more advanced, more
interesting activity), or we will eventually be able to evolve into a
species that has enough patience, or power, or knowledge (i.e.
faster-than-light) to make communications feasible. It is possible
that communications ARE going on right now, over our heads, but in a
way we can't yet imagine. If this were the case, it may be that we are
a species that doesn't warrent attention... yet.Another possibility is
that the Universe as a whole hasn't reached a "critical mass" of
communicating civilizations yet to make the Drake equation suitably
heavier. If life as we know it does not spread through the galaxy like
bacteria in a Petri dish, then I favor the idea that technology as we
know it is not enough to sustain any given communications program
before evolution has some major effect.
Subject: How the world came to be.
From: Julie Slotten
Date: 12 Dec 1999 2:12 PM
I believe that God created the world. He put all of us on this earth.
He gave us the power to evolve the world after he began it. So God
started the earth. It is our duty to perserve and make the universe
grow.
Subject: does that make sense?
From: katie
Date: 12 Dec 1999 3:25 AM
if "God started the earth" and "put all of us on this eartb", then
where does this leave evolution. there is no longer a place for
evolution in your theory, so what does "He gave us the power to evolve
the world after he began it" mean?
Subject: Reply
From: Dave Dickey
Date: 01 Jan 2000 12:10 AM
How do you know that a god created the underpinnings of the universe?
If you have even rudimentary knowledge of physics you know that the
expanse of the universe is likely far beyond our comprehension (as we
understand space/time). If there is a god, she is far beyond my means.
I envy your omniscient perspective.
Subject: Think
From: Rene
Date: 01 Jan 2000 5:32 PM
Religion was created thousands of years ago for the people of those
times. For the ignorant people of those time, the ego system it self
changes in the jungle, if the pray doesn't change, anniolation of that
species is inevitable. That species disappears from the food chain.
Change is needed in order to survive, religion changes nothing during
the years. Christianity put Galileo in house arrest for the rest of
his life for discovering that the earth was not the center or the
universe, when he discovered the moons of jupiter circling around it.
Chistianity accepted that the earth was not the center of the universe
until 1992 and you bet they apolyzed for what they did to Galileo.
Right there faith in christianity has been broken, and what that of
just barelly accepting in 1992 that the earth is not the center of the
universe. If we did not have science the study of reality through
testing, we would still have the same knowledge since 2000 years ago.
Know that would be scary.
Subject: WENDY BLACKSTONE
From: RICK SPIEGEL
Date: 12 Dec 1999 4:27 PM
THIS WAS ONE OF THE MOST EXCEPTIONAL PROGRAMS PRESENTED.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET A COPY OF WENDY
BLACKSTONES SCORE?
VERY MUCH APPRECIATED,
RICK
Subject: Radio a dinosaur
From: Industrial Chemist
Date: 12 Dec 1999 2:39 AM
Let's face it, the processes that create life are pretty well observed
on earth though fairly poorly replicated by our superior intelligence.
LOL.So if it wasn't for that damn rock that hit this planet, it's
obvious that we'd still be surrounded by those huge monsters that lived
here for a major part of earths history.Don't expect a talking or
flying lizard or a silicon blob looking for extraterrestrial sex when
you search our heaven. Expect another man & woman. But... here's the
question... if locating a planet with the same solar conditions has a
very low probability then surely that probability must be diluted by as
much again by the necessity to destroy dinosaur life with a meteor in
order for human beings to evolve.The bottom line is... the biochemical
soup always cooks up the same sequence of forms...!!! This is science,
not Hollywood.
Subject: Radio an intelligent dinosaur?
From: Harold
Date: 12 Dec 1999 6:16 PM
Very humorous... and a point worth thinking about. But I'd say I have
to disagree on the point that the biochemical soup gives rise to the
same forms. The whole process, despite Einstein, is like rolling dice.
And if you were to run Earth's evolutionary history again, the same
path might not occur, possibly with better results. (or worse).
Subject: Slanted links
From: Nathan
Date: 01 Jan 2000 2:48 PM
I find it interesting that of the three UFO links posted, two are
debunker sites who explain away the phenomena as imagination, Venus,
meteors, aircraft, clouds, or my favorite: swamp gas. Maybe PBS is wary
of any other links that might make them squeemish. Give me a break PBS.
The U.S. gov't knows of the UFO reality and it has been leaking out for
over 50 years now. When will the public wake up?
Subject: Sigh
From: Harold
Date: 03 Mar 2000 5:26 AM
That view is a perfect example of the fact that, until we do meet
extraterrestrials, our minds will provide us with everything we want to
argue about/believe in, etc.
Subject: Best example right here.
From: Harold
Date: 03 Mar 2000 5:40 AM
You know, considering the sparsity with which people post messages to
and/or reply to this discussion forum, this is an excellent example of
the life-out-there communications problem. And this discussion is a
case where a network is already set up, and millions have access to,
with negligable time delay!!One other thing... there's probably some
civilization out there wondering why the heck WE haven't contacted
THEM... and you already know the answer to that one. Unshared
wonderment is one of this Universe's intelligent being's pastimes...
Subject: Answer List
From: Harold
Date: 03 Mar 2000 7:11 AM
Thought I'd give my answers to the questions at the top of this page,
and as they are presented in the Topic Description.Are we alone? No.
Whether anybody wants to talk to us is a different question.Is anybody
listening? Yes, especially us.Is there basic life on other worlds?
Yes. The basic chemicals of life fill the cosmos, and in places where
conditions are favorable (like here), life will emerge.Does intelligent
life exist out there - as there is on Earth today? Intelligent life
does exist out there... but as on Earth, probably not more than a few
occurances per galaxy. Intelligences more advanced than ours are VERY
rare (since the Universe has only been around about 15 billion years,
but probably has 50 billion or more to go. The proportion of heavy
elements cooked in stellar interiors that make up the chemicals of life
happens only so fast, and in the early Universe, there wasn't enough
around except to produce life in a few EXTREMELY rare cases...(those
civilizations were truely lonely, but if they survived, they are
advanced beyond our comprehension or detection). But as the melting
pot grows richer, more life and intelligence will emerge. 25 billion
years from now, things will be much more exciting. Currently, the
Hubble Space Telescope is showing us vast fields that are in a
PRIMORDIAL state, as well as ancient remnants, but no giant, bustling
colonies or technology. (That's our job to build for now...)[[Or not -
as was the case for most of Earth's history?]]- see previous
question/answer.Do tales of UFOs and alien abductions tell us anything
about the facts of extraterrestrial life? Evidence says no. They do
appear to tell us more about our insatiable, unconscious desire to be
contacted by aliens than real facts about real aliens.What are the best
ways of finding out whether we're alone in the universe? Continue
listening and searching, continue to refine our studies of how life
emerges, and evolve experimental models of future societies and
civilizations.Should we be spending more or less of the taxpayer's
money on space exploration? Current levels are satisfactory. Space
exploration is critical to mankind's survival in the LONG run. For the
short term, our emphasis should be heavy on planetary defense against
catastrophic impacts, and better management of Earth's environment and
resources.
Subject: Back again
From: Harold
Date: 03 Mar 2000 12:34 AM
What is the most likely form we are to come into contact with
intelligent alien life?Coming across the equivalent of an ancient,
abandoned library seems fairly good. Before we humans become extinct,
we will want to leave our mark on the universe. But what about active,
present-time interaction? Being visited by a huge mother ship large
enough to carry a self-supporting culture has perhaps the least
plausibility, if only because flesh and blood (or whatever it might be)
doesn't seem built to withstand the awful distances and time scales
involved. Even if they had an inexhaustible source of energy,
replicators for perfect recycling and zero waste, and plenty of ship's
counselors or pharmaceutical answers to keeping themselves sane or
happy, the biological organism and the dynamic society it builds seems
just too inefficient for interstellar travel. We are talking time
scales and distances that put even the best machines we can think of
beyond their limits to endure. A society of machines with artificial
intelligence might be better equipped, so instead of flying IN
spaceships, we need to BECOME spaceships. Backing off from really high
speculation, alien probes and/or machines seems a more possible
encounter. I would like to see some more ideas on the possible
feasibility of how life might actually spread across the stars... and
if so, in what form? As a kind of eternally patient seed? As pure
information? Try reading chapter 37 of 2001: A Space Odyssey, called
Experiment. In two pages A.C. Clarke describes how the
monolith-builders evolved, and I still consider it the best speculative
writing I've ever seen on the subject of how life may evolve and what
it would do when presented the enormous Universe.
Subject: Emergent Properties
From: Harold
Date: 04 Apr 2000 1:03 AM
One very nice portion of the program makes the emergence of
intelligence analogous to the emergence of Beethoven's 5th among a
group of orchestra players. The idea is put that if intelligence
emerges like this, then it may not be incidental, but somehow the point
of it all. This brings to light a subtle implication... that there IS
a point to be made. Perhaps by a deity over the universe? Be that as
it may, what then is the real difference between incidental, and a
point to be made? I must admit I have been posting a lot to this
discussion -- perhaps I would do well to consider what Freeman Dyson
wants to say to the extraterrestrials: please forgive us (me) for
making so much noise. -----perhaps you all out there on the Internet
ARE different, and you keep quiet...
Subject: methane ice
From: stephen
Date: 04 Apr 2000 10:50 PM
In tonight's program, there was mention of "methane ice" at the bottom
of the Gulf Of Mexico. I am interested in any info or maybe a site
where I can get more about this. Thanks.. cc
Subject: Methane Ice
From: Matt Cunningham
Date: 04 Apr 2000 10:21 PM
For "methane ice," see the article entitled FLAMMABLE ICE by Erwin
Suess et al in Scientific American, Nov. 1999, p.76ff.
Subject: one sided story
From: Henry A. Depue
Date: 04 Apr 2000 9:49 PM
You say everything as though it was proven facts. Yet you are telling
of things which their is a wide diversity of educated oppinions. Would
you consider giving equall time to those who speak from a diferent
informational point? It takes more faith to believe that everything
came into existance from nothing than to believe that their is a GOD
who created this vast universe which we are blessed to enjoy.
Subject: Re: one sided story
From: Phil Carson
Date: 04 Apr 2000 1:24 PM
You say everything as though it was proven facts. Yet you
are telling of things which their is a wide diversity of educated
oppinions. Would you consider giving equall time to those who speak
from a diferent informational point? It takes more faith to believe
that everything came into existance from nothing than to believe that
their is a GOD who created this vast universe which we are blessed to
enjoy. Um, not really. Speaking as someone who believes
that the scientific view is much more rational than the religious view,
I find it interesting that you would take it upon yourself to tell me
how difficult it is to believe what I believe. What do you know of my
philosophical struggles? And of course "educated opinion" is always in
the mind of the beholder. These are theories worked out from scientific
evidence. It doesn't mean they are yet considered fact, and they will
most likely change radically when we learn more, but there is much more
evidence for them than there is for the existence of a god. Of course,
you could easily refer to "God" as the sum total of physical processes
that caused the universe to come into existence, and pray to it anyway,
and that answers all the discrepancies. "The laws of physics are God"
kind of philosophy.
Besides, this isn't a show about religion.
I assume that most discussions about religion don't discuss the details
of scientific theories.
Question for you, Mr. Depue: Does the
idea of extraterrestrial intelligence somehow threaten the existence of
your god?
Subject: Re: one sided story
From: Gary I.
Date: 01 Jan 2001 9:07 AM
"It takes more faith to believe that everything came into existance
from nothing than to believe that their is a GOD who created this vast
universe which we are blessed to enjoy."
And yet God created the
Earth and the heavens from nothing. You are just choosing to believe in
a different "something from nothing" philosophy than scientists do.
Personally, I think the truth is a nice, neat combination of God and
Big Bang.
Subject: Life priorities.
From: Tony
Date: 04 Apr 2000 12:53 AM
I really think there is life out there. However in what form we can
only imagine or with minimal evidence a guess at best. I think we need
to bring it back to Earth a little and think about more effecient ways
to tarvel in space. The rocket ship seems childish to me! haha. Why
cant we use gravity as our fuel source. Fuel is the problem. We can
only go so far with limited fuel, but if we can use gravity to star or
planet hop then we could have it made. I have have a few questions
about this for a long time. One can gravity be messured and captured.
Two, how does the size of an object affect and effect gravity. Jupiter
has more mass and therefore has a bigger pull so is that a general
ratio? So if I could create an electromagnet with a polarity that can
be adjustable in a spherical manner (in all directions) could I "push"
myself off the planat and controll my direction??? i.e. Trying to push
two magnets together at the same poles. Try to use your imagination.
Is this in any way somthing that is close to plausible? I am sure
there are many holes in this but if someone could give me an educated
opinion or give me a good resource were I might find some answers that
would be great. I want to find thoes critiers out there! hehe
Subject: how aliens talk
From: stefan karos
Date: 04 Apr 2000 9:19 PM
Any civilization at least as advanced as us would have the same problem
we have- bandwidth shortage. Packet based communication is more
efficient than circuit based communication, so any advanced
civilization would be using this mode. We aren't even listening for
this. All SETI searches are for a signal. If SETI were let loose on
internet traffic, Would intelligence be found?I think the technology is
already upon us. There are certain Govt agencies that have the
capability to parse and evesdrop on internet traffic. These agencies
need merely turn their ears to the heavens to hear the cacophony of a
cosmic cocktail party. Like Galileo who turned the telescope ( a
military tool for spying on advancing navies ) up to the sky and found
that the earth is not the center of the solar system-we too will find
that our puny civilization is laughably peripheral when we hear the
issues that concern the rest of the universe.Who can convince our GOVt
to listen up?karos@ultranet.com
Subject: World Geography
From: Brenda A Mendoza
Date: 04 Apr 2000 3:44 PM
My name is Infinity Mendoza and I'm in a world geography class I will
whant to ask alot of things but I pretty sure that no body will answer
my question only people who really live out of the earth and thats why
I'm going to ask some questions. My first question will be What kind
of language do alien speak? I'm really intrested in what kind of
language cause, I dont think that the people who life out of the space
will speak english because if people that live out of the continent.
My second question will be In what kind of homes do you guys live in?
Is it like us like bricks or other kind of material or some material
the people in earth dont know about it. I'm also intrested in How you
look? Many people picture the aliens green three leg or three eyes. I
will also like to know about the goverment can you just do what you
whant or no? well thanks for your all your attention hope you will
write and answer my questions.
Sincerly, your friend
Infinity Mendoza
Subject: Belief, belief...
From: Harold
Date: 05 May 2000 8:04 PM
After browsing through all of the messages posted to this forum so far,
I am struck by how much people (including me) can be blinded (or
deafened) by their own belief and opinions... and not even hear or see
what was presented in the program. What a day it will be when we can
see the Universe anew, with an objective clarity undreamt of before.
Subject: Listening and not sending
From: Harold
Date: 07 Jul 2000 10:20 PM
Tim Ferris asks: what if everyone's listening, and nobody's sending?
While my answer might sound rather Zen, I like to think there's a
point: What if listening is in a strange way a kind of sending? Not in
the cheap sense of ESP or something like that, but that listening is
part of the purpose built into us... and aren't we purpose built for
the universe? Carl Sagan wrote a chapter in Pale Blue Dot titled "A
Universe not Made for Us", which primarily covered the hazards of
living in the universe. But the question of the purpose of
intelligence I think very much has to include listening as a form of
the universe "talking to itself."
Subject: The way we think.
From: Harold
Date: 01 Jan 2001 11:18 PM
I have decided that the most interesting thing about the subject of ETs
is how it reveals the way people think (or don't think). I have
decided to write a book on the subject and will be contacting everyone
who has posted in this discussion forum to ask for permission to
include their posts. My conclusion will be an evaluation of whether
our minds at their current level of sophistication/adaptability are
prepared for contact with extraterrestrial intelligence. Now if I can
just get a foreword by Mr. Ferris...
Subject: What SETI is up against
From: Harold
Date: 05 May 2002 1:57 AM
The "lights on the tree" section of this program demonstrates very well
what the Search for ExtraTerresrial Intelligence is up against.Suppose
for a moment you were able to plug into a cosmic network which had
millions of users. Suppose there were some way in which you could
communicate with any one of them without any time delay. Suppose the
civilizations those users were part of were all at a technological
level comparable to yours.Suppose there were no language barrier;
everyone could understand everyone else.Yes, there would be fascinating
things to find out about these other cultures -- their music, their
philosophy, their science, politics, etc. Other than that, how
different would using this system be from using what we call the
Internet? Millions of users, no time delay, no super-sentients, no
protoplasmic users, no language barrier.And yet consider: It has been
2 years since anyone other than myself has posted a message to this
discussion board. So Tim Ferris has it right within the first minute
of part two of the program: " - - if there are intelligent beings out
there, who want to communicate."There is a better than 90% chance that
the human species will exist no longer than 7 million years if left to
evolve naturally without technology. But since our brains evolved to
discover and invent technologies, those figures are unpredictable.
Whether the technology is a stone knife used to kill for food or a Cray
supercomputer calculating the orbits of potentially Earth-destroying
asteroids, it will all have an extremely powerful influence on whether
we survive long enough to evolve to become a member on the
communications stage.We call ourselves a communicative species. But
our brains are built to expect the exchange time of our communications
to be within reasonable limits or else we lose patience. This makes
sense because we wouldn't survive otherwise; our earthly environment
wouldn't favor us as lifeforms if we were patient enough to not eat,
sleep, or avoid danger. So our communication expectations are of the
"Type 1 Biologic Scale". My belief is that, given the whole Universe,
many types exist. The situation is rather like that of an ant that
realizes it wants to communicate with humans. So it sets up the
equivalent of an ant radio telescope - - perhaps a drop of a chemically
receptive secretion (since ants communicate via chemical "kisses")that
could somehow detect the presence of a human being as far away as the
next anthill 20 yards away. Though there are billions of humans on our
Earth, I would have to be an entemologist, interested in this
particular ant's anthill, and this particular ant before we could even
try to communicate.A silly analogy? Not necessarily. That's how big
the time scales and the Universe is. Einstein's famous equation that
equates matter with energy is just the beginning. One day, some
blessed member of our species may be able to glimpse how time, matter,
energy, gravity, and space can come together in one great equation.
And they will see what countless other beings elsewhere in the Universe
already discovered themselves millions, or even billions of years ago.
As generations of stars create more and more carbon, oxygen, silicon,
nitrogen and blow it off into space to make it available for more and
more systems with planets, life, and intelligence, the overall
intelligence quotient of the cosmos will rise, like an evolving
single-celled organism. Maybe a critical threshold will be reached in
which it can do something about changing itself; just what the cerebral
cortex of the human brain has done for us - - given us the ability to
change ourselves.From this highly speculative perspective, the
13-billion-year-old (latest figures) history of the cosmos, with at
least 50 or more billion to go, it seems like not enough time has
passed for the brew to thicken. There may be a few hundred "Type 3
Interspace" civilizations in the cosmos right now made of
ultra-sentient beings who came from the very first life forms our
Universe ever saw, and are now utterly beyond our comprehension (Low
overall percentages of heavy elements in the early universe support the
idea that perhaps only a few hundred civilizations could ever have
arisen). But all one needs to do is look at the latest Hubble
photographs to get the impression that though there may be a few
hundred ultra-advanced civilizations right now, the Universe is still
way too big for even them to make any presence known. Especially if
we're looking for them in only one way... or a way that makes sense to
just us. But for now, we can't be expected to do otherwise.There is
one other factor to consider. Barring the discovery of ways around
this problem, time and the expansion of the Universe itself is working
against us. The machinery of what creates life and intelligence, and
one hopes, a critical communications threshold to be reached, may not
be working fast enough to counteract the constant expansion and
eventual dissipation of the cosmos. To this, the only answer would be
to artificially create more life and intelligence, which of course, the
studies of which are in their infancy in our biology and computer labs.
And yet, despite the tremendous odds going against SETI, we can still
do it, because we have hope. And human hope is something the cosmos
can be proud of.
Subject: hey
From: Dragonice
Date: 05 May 2002 10:26 PM
humm... I bileave in aliens
|
