Do you believe we are alone in the universe?

The universe is far, far, far too big and ancient a place to reasonably rule out life elsewhere. Even if the galaxy is currently lacking intelligent life other than our own (and I'm not convinced it is - our expectations of what intelligent life should be doing with itself is, obviously, prejudiced toward our own ideals), I don't think it was nor will be. I'm also much more optimistic about FTL.

 

[Eltab]

Also consider how technology escalates exponentially − on an upwards ‘curve’.

Even if an intelligent species was merely a thousand years older than us humans, that species would already be many magnitudes more technologically advanced than we are. Nevermind millions of years early than us. Presumably such a hypothetical species would already have overcome any technological challenges for communication and transportation.

Western Civilization, certainly, values invention and technological progress. Not all other civilizations have.
Chinese invented gunpowder and the printing press, but never looked at what the limit of those gadgets' use might be.

An alien civilization like Traveller's Vilani, who value stability and shun change, could be perfectly content to stay in their corner of the universe for millennia. The effect would be the same as if they deliberately camouflaged themselves and hid away.

(I am using Toynbee's definition of 'civilization': a web of cultural values.)

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The hypothetical alien species must be of such technological advancement, the human species cannot be a threat to them.

A recent missionary excursion to a certain island suggests differently. By analogy, while their SPECIES may be safe from harm from us, by no means might individuals be similarly immune. Depending on their nature, ethics, risk aversion- and hypothetical exposure to still other sentient species- they may be loathe to contact us until after we cure ourselves of our fascination with instruments of war.

This hypothetical species can communicate with humans at the human level, similarly to how we can communicate at the level of cats and dogs − and parrots.

So far, most such communication with cats, dogs and parrots has either been one way or relatively shallow. Not to much discussion of literature or theoretical physics.

Now, imagine if you will, taking the time and effort to make a Transatlantic video call to a random dog and telling it to “Come here, good boy.” I’m thinking that happens close to never.

Your line of debate appears to be: perhaps speed-of-light is an insurmountable obstacle. Thus it is IMPOSSIBLE for the humans species to EVER communicate with aliens EVEN IF they hypothetically existed.

No, I’m countering your assertion, “If technological communication is possible at all, then it would have already happened.” (Post #55, this thread.) Your attempt to reframe my line of debate is completely inaccurate.


In fact, my point has been technological communication over interstellar distances may be possible, but we probably cannot currently access/understand such transmission because we lack the requisite technology. Why? Because, AFAIK, most of our theoreticians doubt FTL communication is possible based on what tech we currently have and what we believe we understand.

And the flip side is that communication we CAN currently grasp may not be used by a more advanced species simply because it is insufficient for the task.

Imagine, if you will, teaching someone to code in C++ by sending them messages in smoke signals or semaphores.

 

[Shasarak]

Further, you’re assuming they recognize us as being intelligent enough* worth talking to. When was the last time someone discussed Proust with a parrot?

Even if we were an equivalent to a parrot, it would be sad to think that we were not interesting enough for them to even try.

 

[Umbran]

‘Methods’ means methodologies. The results are as useful as the methods are. There are conflicting methods that scientists apply to estimating the age of the earth.

If you know of an estimate other than the standard that has some claim to accuracy, then cite it. Heck, just give us a wikipedia entry.

Here's the one for the standard measure for the age of the Earth, including discussion of the currently accepted radiometric dating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

This vague hinting is not an appropriate approach to a science thread. Give us some evidence, not unsubstantiated claims.

 

[Yaarel]

We do not know that all of these species originate from Australopithecus. There are a couple of other known contenders in that mix, and there may be others we do not know about yet, but may discover as we advance archaeology further in central Africa.

All humans descend from Australopithecus. Note, there are several species of Genus Australopithecus, and our Genus Homo descends from one of them, via the species Homo habilis.

 

[practicalm]

I think there is intelligent life out there but the is a Great Filter that is doing something to make it either harder to communicate or removing civilizations. David Brin's novels Earth and Existence had some suggestions that alien civilizations do not want the competition.

I think self-replicating probes may show up at Sol sometime and if we are lucky they won't destroy us building more of them.

I agree that FTL is unlikely but that once we get to the point of putting conscience into computer hardware, we can send that instead of meat. Space and meat is not a healthy combo for the meat.

 

[Maxperson]

Also consider how technology escalates exponentially − on an upwards ‘curve’.

Even if an intelligent species was merely a thousand years older than us humans, that species would already be many magnitudes more technologically advanced than we are. Nevermind millions of years early than us. Presumably such a hypothetical species would already have overcome any technological challenges for communication and transportation.

We would already have met them.

We humans are alone − the first intelligent life in this universe.

The bold is a bit presumptuous. The universe is mind boggling big. Even if they were 100,000 years ahead of us and spent every waking moment of that 100,000 years investigating every star in their galaxy, they wouldn't even finish that task in that 100,000 years, let alone every star in every galaxy in the universe, which is what you are claiming can be done in a mere 1000 more years than us. And that's assuming that we're only 1000 years away from faster than light travel. And you are assuming that they even want to travel and find new races.

 

[Umbran]

Our *understanding* of biology, evolution, and the universe − is our mythology

Um, no.

Our understanding of biology, evolution, other sciences - these things can be replicated by experiment, in a way that no "mythology" ever can. We create new, objective events on the basis of our science, so it isn't just a matter of how we organize our understanding. It is how we impact the universe around it.

You are typing away at a computer. No "paradigm shift" that says that computer doesn't work is going to happen, because, in the end, the computer still demonstrably works, and we already know how, because we built it.

If tomorrow there is a paradigm shift, it can easily be, a consensus emerges saying aliens are strictly impossible.

Since science, as a practice, took hold, our paradigm shifts have all been in areas of new observation - we have paradigm shifts when we can see bigger and smaller things, gain precision and scope. But, that means that all the stuff we have previously been able to observe, theorize about, and test are still true. Einstein's relativity reduces to Newtonian mechanics down in the areas that Newton was able to measure in - because Newton was basically correct. The paradigm shift was about things bigger and faster than we could generally see before.

But the development of life is about things on the scales we already see - life is, in the end, about chemistry and self-organizing systems.

 

[Maxperson]

Especially if the hypothetical species is over a billion years older − with its own exponentially accelerating technology!

You are also assuming that technology doesn't have a cap.

 

[Maxperson]

So far, most such communication with cats, dogs and parrots has either been one way or relatively shallow. Not to much discussion of literature or theoretical physics.

Now, imagine if you will, taking the time and effort to make a Transatlantic video call to a random dog and telling it to “Come here, good boy.” I’m thinking that happens close to never.

He's also assuming that any given alien race are dog people and would want to try to talk to the dog they are passing, or that they don't have a Prime Directive, or...

Just because they might be capable of talking to us, doesn't mean that they will even make the effort.