Are we ready for extraterrestrial life ?

Reply to Seeker

You have supplied a pretty good answer to your own question. Welcome to the forum. :cool:

Yeah, we're ready for "extraterrestrial life".

We may never be "ready" for (the tender mercies of spacefaring) extraterrestrial intelligence, however, especially so long as we remain a mostly Earth-bound species.

Reply to jgill

Thanks! :smile:

It depends on whether the aliens have any resources that we can exploit more cheaply than from anywhere else. For example, if we need minerals, we might get them more cheaply from the asteroid belt. But if the aliens have a miracle plant that streamlines manufacturing, the question becomes: Does the cheapest way to manufacture those products involve getting that plant directly from the alien planet?

If the import costs are not prohibitive, and it's not cheaper to import seeds and grow them artificially on earth, then the aliens had better be technologically superior to us. Otherwise, it will be the 19th and 20th centuries all over again.

I believe there's a fantasy novel called Orconomics that deals with themes like these.

Did you know that the Saudis used to control a tiny state in the desert that was repeatedly beaten back until they made a deal with Western powers? Now they control Mecca, and they have broken Islam all over the world. Before that, the British Raj used to stay in power partly by allying themselves with the most conservative elements of Hindu society.

Either way, I'm sure there will be tons of humans who romanticize alien society and wish they were born there.

The above possibilities are not comprehensive. Eg. I have ideas to write a science fiction novel where humans take over an alien civilization that we're allied with against a stronger alien civilization because we are paranoid about our allies betraying us. We settled that problem by betraying them first.

Quoting absoluteaspiration

It depends on whether the aliens have any resources that we can exploit

Or would it be more likely that they come to exploit whatever they can find here? Somehow they will have achieved technology that we can only dream up to have gotten here in the first place. Many episodes of early Star Trek demonstrated in thought how vulnerable we might be with our primitive brains and machines.

Reply to absoluteaspiration IMHO, there is nothing Earth has that an interstellar spacefaring ETI cannot acquire – without conflict with "the natives" – in exponentially greater abundance between here and wherever they come from (or simply engineer themselves). ETI will only take notice of us, I think, iff we somehow appear to be an existential threat to them, which, at Earth civilization's current level of technoscientific development by comparison to ETI's interstellar spacefaring technoscience, would be analogous to an anthill compared to a team of earthmovers or a coral reef compared to an aircraft carrier group. Apply the mediocrity principle. Here in the exurbs of an approximately twelve billion year old Milky Galaxy, it's quite reasonable to assume that h. sapiens is johnny-come-lately 'intelligent' species and that the ETIs out there roaming the stars are descendants, or autonomous artifacts, of xenospecies tens of thousands / millions of years older than us.

Quoting absoluteaspiration

It depends on whether the aliens have any resources that we can exploit more cheaply than from anywhere else.

It could come down to that and it is very likely we obsess over their energy science(s).

Quoting magritte

Or would it be more likely that they come to exploit whatever they can find here? Somehow they will have achieved technology that we can only dream up to have gotten here in the first place. Many episodes of early Star Trek demonstrated in thought how vulnerable we might be with our primitive brains and machines

Considering their advanced knowledge and science there wouldnt be all that much we would have to offer them (back) in the first place. Perhaps the best we could hope for is for such visitors to be non-invasive scientific explorers who actually come in peace.

Quoting Seeker

Considering the way humans generally behave towards different cultures and beliefsystems I'm having serious doubts about our level of maturity and I actually wonder if we ever get to a (collective) maturity level fitting for such a contact.

I think tribal aboriginal people can handle making contact with ETs just fine. And there are already myths in many tribes of encountering ETs.

I think most people could handle it, actually.

The problem is the Power Obsessed wouldn't want to lose their status, so there is a chance they would spread mass hysteria about the ETs.
Think about how governments banned psychedelics.
Why should they be made illegal rather than regulated? Who benefits?

The majority will believe whatever their leaders tell them about the coming ETs, and the ETs would probably contact the leaders first before revealing themselves to the masses. This has likely already occurred and it was agreed to not happen.

Ready? As in prepared for? Against what? Keeping our sanity or defending ourselves?

Benevolent or malevolent, I see a problem.

Reply to magritte Why do you assume that they found us in this scenario? We have programs actively trying to locate ETs.

Even if they found us, there are many possibilities you've overlooked:

1. Maybe the group of aliens that actually found us is not the one we target for exploitation. We could use the first group as a channel to locate the second.

2. You're underestimating what can happen in the timespans involved in interstellar travel. Many Asian societies were more advanced than Europeans when the first explorers arrived.

3. You're underestimating the drive of corporations to turn a profit. The advanced Asian societies were left behind because they were mainly focused on internal matters. Meanwhile, immense wealth poured into Europe from the various East India companies.

Reply to 180 Proof You are theoretically correct, but there are many practical exceptions. There is a large number of organic molecules, and they are not easy to synthesize. A civilization that can contact ETs need not be masters of chemical synthesis. Although it's not the most likely, it is easy to conceive of a situation where the cheapest method to obtain large quantities of the organic molecules required by their industrial machinery is to turn the earth into a plantation.

This situation is more likely if the aliens are also capitalist, capitalist-adjacent, competing with capitalists, etc. We don't know the likelihood of that happening, but we know that humans are and will remain capitalist in the foreseeable future.

Another scenario where we may be threatened by aliens is the one where they are so advanced that they require an entire block of galactic matter as raw material, and the solar system just happens to be included in it by accident. Imagine humans shoveling large quantities of dirt. Somewhere in it was an anthill that was beneath our notice.

Reply to Seeker I wonder if the aliens will share their energy sciences before they know they can trust us. Also, see the above.

Reply to absoluteaspiration A lot of fantasy "what ifs" ... which don't persuade me we have any more significance to interstellar spacefaring ETI than pond scum has to us.

Reply to 180 Proof Which aspects do you consider to be fantastic? If you think pond scum has no significance to us, you're much mistaken: https://youtu.be/jCZq0yWBQMk https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29999416/ We also kill pond scum all the time even if we're not planning to use it.

Quoting Seeker

Considering their advanced knowledge and science there wouldnt be all that much we would have to offer them (back) in the first place. Perhaps the best we could hope for is for such visitors to be non-invasive scientific explorers who actually come in peace.

Maybe we should expect little green intelligent robots built for the longevity of space voyages but who would come without superfluous morality chips. They would quickly learn to communicate with us leading to serious negotiations with our leaders. Then we would have to gauge the truth content of their utterances. Perhaps all they wish for is our labor for who knows what end and we wouldn't like to be trading our lives and efforts for handfuls of glassy beads they can freely manufacture onboard from atmospheric CO2.

Quoting Yohan

I think tribal aboriginal people can handle making contact with ETs just fine. And there are already myths in many tribes of encountering ETs.

I think most people could handle it, actually.

The problem is the Power Obsessed wouldn't want to lose their status, so there is a chance they would spread mass hysteria about the ETs.
Think about how governments banned psychedelics.
Why should they be made illegal rather than regulated? Who benefits?

The majority will believe whatever their leaders tell them about the coming ETs, and the ETs would probably contact the leaders first before revealing themselves to the masses. This has likely already occurred and it was agreed to not happen.

You are probably right as all tribal wisdom tends to get ignored in the name of 'progression' always. The morally wisest wisdom always seems to get shoved under whatever oppertunistic carpet.

There is a lot of factual truth to your words and which has been proven many times throughout history, our gullibility has always been used to keep us under and controllable to the likes of the power hungry. During whatever intergalactic contact politics most probably wouldnt be much different from what we allready know is occuring albeit on another scale entirely. Come to think of it, perhaps it also wouldnt be that hard for an advanced species to throw us into total chaos by eliminating the very same groups we so much depend upon.

Quoting Seeker

Considering the way humans generally behave towards different cultures and belief systems I'm having serious doubts about our level of maturity and I actually wonder if we ever get to a (collective) maturity level fitting for such a contact. T

I agree. You are very right to doubt about our maturity regarding this matter.

There are still places on the planet --inhabited by primitive communities-- where people are not ready to receive most of the technology existing and used in the civilized and developed world. (Some of them, e.g. consider airplanes passing over their territory as (threatening) huge flying beings.)

But even in developed countries, people are ignorant of things most of the rest of the world is aware of. It is known that Chinese people were among the last to know about Man walking on the moon, and they did after a few years thus had happened. Tis also known, that Chinese, even today, are ignorant about their neighboring countries.

It all has to do with education, government and living conditions. A lot of information is just missing or, in some regimes, even forbidden, from the education of people.

And when I talk about forbidden knowledge, I'm not referring to authoritarian governments, but to democratic ones too.

Since you believe that extraterrestrial life exists --which is very logical-- you might also believe that the US government had always hidden and is still hiding information about extraterrestrial life. Which, of course, gives food to conspiracy theories and ... mystery or horror movies! :smile: And this of course, creates mainly fear about extraterrestrials.

How can then one expect from people to be ready to accept and receive extraterrestrial life?

Extraterrestrial life must be included in the curriculum of Anthropology or other kind of courses in schools. And the governments must start to disclose to the public and inform it about any information on extraterrestrial life they have. Only in this way can people get ready to receive extraterrestrial life.

In the meantime, science fiction --which also plays a role in our education-- must get more mature on the subject of extraterrestrial life and start presenting it from a logical aspect. For example. why would a much more advanced civilization than ours would travel that far a distance to destroy or even occupy our planet, which is on the verge to be destroyed by itself? Would we have done that if we were in their place? Is this the spirit in which Man regards space exploration? And so on.

Reply to absoluteaspiration I guess the analogy is lost on you ...
Consider: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/380306 :nerd:

We're never going to encounter extra terrestrial life face to face (assuming there is none in our solar system) so it doesn't matter whether we are ready for it or not. We may see a mossy rock through our telescopes and have reasonably good evidence it really is full of life. We might get a signal but civilizations will come and go in the span of time needed to say hello.

Space is too vast. Consider just 1 light year; that is just too long for us. If we move 5 miles per second, it'd take 37,200 human years to cover that distance, or so says google. Only 4.25 light years to our closest star.

Imagine seeing an old planet rich with life but which stands in it's own time long annihilated.

Quoting Nils Loc

We're never going to encounter extra terrestrial life face to face

The odds are categorized as "impossible" due to the infinitesimally small chance.

Reply to Nils Loc :nerd: :up:

Clearly, if Einstein is correct, light speed/faster than light speed travel is impossible (set aside worm holes for the moment). All we can hope for and should expect from aliens is their consciousness/minds - encoded in powerful lasers - to do all the travelling across the vast distances of space (vide Michio Kaku). What's interesting about this theory is that it might've already happened/is happening as we speak. :snicker:

Quoting Agent Smith

Clearly, if Einstein is correct, light speed/faster than light speed travel is impossible ...

Old Uncle Albert is correct and yet it's physically possible (not yet demonstrated to be technically possible) to travel at – not accelerate to – the speed of light e.g. the proposed Alcubierre drive.

:nerd: NB: I think AFAL propulsion (my guess – (somehow) negating the Higgs fields around a spacecraft effectively making its atoms massless like photons / neutrinos) is far more plausible than FTL propulsion (SR suggests sends the spacecraft back in time); also, that STL velocities at or greater than .2C transforms the interstellar vacuum into extremely "hot" plasma, so significant relativistic speed transits will have to be "around" rather through spacetime. "Warp drive" or "stargate" or "hyperspace" (à la Kip Thorne's idea in Interstellar) – some "sufficiently advanced technology ..." – so if and when ETI show up any millennium soon in this solar system (let alone in Earth's orbit) their starship will be almost certainly "indistinguishable from magic" to us (or our descendents). Think: Monolith :monkey:

Reply to 180 Proof Oh! Interesting stuff, eh?

Speculative physics trying hardta keep it real! I like that! Heads up in the clouds, yeah, but feet firmly planted on the ground. Way to go, science guys & gals! These are privliged times we live in, oui mon ami?

Quoting Alkis Piskas

For example. why would a much more advanced civilization than ours would travel that far a distance to destroy or even occupy our planet, which is on the verge to be destroyed by itself? Would we have done that if we were in their place

Perhaps only if 'they' consider us a threat in which case we most probably would never see their 'face' as they would merely send us any mass destruction weapon of choice.


Quoting Alkis Piskas

Extraterrestrial life must be included in the curriculum of Anthropology or other kind of courses in schools.

But only if based on facts rather than assumptions. For now we have only myth, legend and anecdotal reviews to work with but the fact that even some former US government employees have produced such anecdotal reviews paves the way for the acceptance of any truth that may arise in that particular field.


Quoting Nils Loc

We're never going to encounter extra terrestrial life face to face

Since humans have merely started scratching the surface of what is possible in a(ny) scientific sense such an assumption has little to no value in the light of progression, days are gone when the earth was still flat.

[quote=OP]Are we ready for ET?[/quote]

If you mean have we anything to brag about?, no! If you mean, can we defend ourselves from an invasion?, still no! In the latter case, they (little green men) maybe counting on us not being ready in any sense of that word!

Quoting Agent Smith

you mean, can we defend ourselves from an invasion?, still no! In the latter case, they (little green men) maybe counting on us not being ready in any sense of that word!

Completely agree :up: I want to share an interesting opinion from Liu Cixin:
The universe is a dark forest. Every civilization is an armed hunter stalking through the trees like a ghost, gently pushing aside branches that block the path and trying to tread without sound. Even breathing is done with care. The hunter has to be careful, because everywhere in the forest are stealthy hunters like him. If he finds another life—another hunter, angel, or a demon, a delicate infant to tottering old man, a fairy or demigod—there’s only one thing he can do: open fire and eliminate them.

Quoting javi2541997

I want to share an interesting opinion from Liu Cixin:
The universe is a dark forest. Every civilization is an armed hunter stalking through the trees like a ghost, gently pushing aside branches that block the path and trying to tread without sound. Even breathing is done with care. The hunter has to be careful, because everywhere in the forest are stealthy hunters like him. If he finds another life—another hunter, angel, or a demon, a delicate infant to tottering old man, a fairy or demigod—there’s only one thing he can do: open fire and eliminate them.

There's truth to that but from a (human) military point of view and without taking any other variables into account.

Reply to javi2541997 :up: Gloomy Guses & Negative Nancies please converge on this post by javi2541997.

Superb!

Reply to Seeker

Yes that's right. But I guess that the appearance of an extraterrestrial life would makes us to stay alert and probably to act in the military way.

Reply to Agent Smith :up:

Quoting javi2541997

Yes that's right. But I guess that the appearance of an extraterrestrial life would makes us to stay alert and probably to act in the military way.

Any response to whatever stimuli totally depends on whoever is at the receiving end, the (collective) size of the receiving end and the interpretation of gesture, motivation and movement at both ends.

Quoting Seeker

Any response to whatever stimuli totally depends on whoever is at the receiving end, the (collective) size of the receiving end and the interpretation of gesture, motivation and movement at both ends.

:up: :100:

Quoting Seeker

Perhaps only if 'they' consider us a threat ...

Yes, but I can't see why they would. Except if they are afraid of being contaminated by our coronavirus --and thoushands other viruses-- if we visit their place. Which, BTW, is a mutual threat.

Quoting Seeker

But only if based on facts rather than assumptions.

(Re: Including extraterrestrial life in academic curricula).
Facts come first of course. But Cosmology and Physics are plenty of theories which are based more on theories than on facts. (Although I'm far from an expert in these fields to talk in detail.)

Quoting Seeker

We're never going to encounter extra terrestrial life face to face.

Isn't this a huge assumption? What happened to the facts you were talking about?

Bottom line for me is that I don't care about this subject. But I prefer to know that it --as a lot of similar subjects-- is handled based on logic and whatever scientific evidence we have, rather than superstition, pseudo-science and other weird stuff and confusions of our time.

Quoting Alkis Piskas

We're never going to encounter extra terrestrial life face to face. — Seeker

Isn't this a huge assumption? What happened to the facts you were talking about?

I did not write that but user "Nils Loc" did, please re-evaluate.

Quoting Seeker

We're never going to encounter extra terrestrial life face to face. — Seeker
I did not write that but user "Nils Loc" did, please re-evaluate.

You are right. I considered the whole reply as addressed to me and that this was a statement you just quoted to support your views. My mistake. So, I "re-evaluate" my judgement: You are innocent! :smile:

Quoting Alkis Piskas

You are innocent! :smile:

:grin:

Quoting Alkis Piskas

Facts come first of course. But Cosmology and Physics are plenty of theories which are based more on theories than on facts. (Although I'm far from an expert in these fields to talk in detail.)

Very true however a lot of physics as well as cosmology (to an extent) are calculable based on (related) factual data while the possible existence of an extraterrestrial entity needs proof of existence for such to be considered fact.

Quoting Seeker

the possible existence of an extraterrestrial entity needs proof of existence for such to be considered fact.

Certainly. And, BTW, I wonder, do we have any proof? Real I mean. Who can answer that, who is both honest and knowledgeable on the subject? (Jimmy Carter, maybe? :grin:)

Setting the distance/durability problems aside, I guess we'd better discover them before they discover us.

Quoting Seeker

such an assumption has little to no value in the light of progression

Why would you take "progression" to be a sure thing given the time scales involved? Don't you think there are a lot of existential threats that might support the assumption that we don't have enough time to advance a miracle that defies the current limitations of physics. Have you heard of the Great Filter in relation to the Fermi Paradox?

It might be more likely that we meet our relatives in time (who we mistake as aliens due to separation in space and time), than we meet organisms from an independent event of abiogenesis.

Alkis Piskas:What happened to the facts you were talking about?

Do you mean the facts of distance and time? The farther out we look the older the universe is. Doesn't help with navigation toward a supposed location with life, in addition that the time getting to a location doesn't help with navigation. Everybody just seems to gloss over this in hopes for a miracle.

Quoting Alkis Piskas

Certainly. And, BTW, I wonder, do we have any proof? Real I mean. Who can answer that, who is both honest and knowledgeable on the subject? (Jimmy Carter, maybe? :grin:)

Up until now quite a few high profiled people have put their reputation (and careers) on the line to voice the truth about their personal experiences concerning unidentified objects and specimens, from military pilots to former area 51 employees all the way up to a US senator Harry Reid.

Quoting Nils Loc

Don't you think there are a lot of existential threats that might support the assumption that we don't have enough time to advance a miracle that defies the current limitations of physics

There are few variables to consider, for one modern science being as young as it is, having progressed so much in such a relatively short amount of time. Second the fact that we as a species are still so young does not imply for any (possible other) spacefaring species to be at the same level of development as we currently are. For all we know there might be species whose science surpass our current level of scientific development with several millennia allready.

Quoting jorndoe

Setting the distance/durability problems aside, I guess we'd better discover them before they discover us.

For (our) peace of mind's sake, no doubt. My guess is that's very unlikely; it seems more likely they (ETI) have discovered, even rediscovered, us (Earth) and passed by on their way to more interesting destinations. :smirk:

Reply to javi2541997 My own take on the "dark forest" analogy is much less anthropic (or anthropocentric) than Liu Cixin's. Here are links to old posts on two old threads:

"The Fermi Paradox & The Dark Forest"
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/387545 (with 2 more deeper links)

"Aliens!"
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/437155

Quoting 180 Proof

My own take on the "dark forest" analogy is much less anthropic (or anthropocentric) than Liu Cixin's. Here are links to old posts on two old threads:

:up: :100: Thanks for sharing!

Quoting 180 Proof

For (our) piece of mind's sake, no doubt. My guess is that's very unlikely; it seems more likely they (ETI) have discovered, even rediscovered, us (Earth) and passed by on their way to more interesting destinations. :smirk:

Yep, that's a possibility. We're, well, inedible/ignorable! :snicker: People do disappear under mysterious circumstances though. :chin:

Quoting Seeker

Up until now quite a few high profiled people have put their reputation (and careers) on the line to voice the truth about their personal experiences concerning unidentified objects and specimens, from military pilots to former area 51 employees all the way up to a US senator Harry Reid.

Yes, the famous "Area 51" ... Well, I have stopped being interested in these things since a very long time ago. But I would be glad to see the facts you are talking about being disclosed publicly --I mean widely-- and in an official way --I mean by competent agents. With details, evidences and all. The sooner the better!

Quoting Alkis Piskas

But I would be glad to see the facts you are talking about being disclosed publicly --I mean widely-- and in an official way --I mean by competent agents. With details, evidences and all. The sooner the better!

If a 'Harry Reid' isnt a competent enough representative for you I wonder who would be.

This particular ex US senator has gone public about the very subject many times. Other well known important representatives of the US government, including military personnel (fighter pilots and radar personnel), have provided their first-hand (UFO) encounters via different pieces of footage and other documents (documentaries). It seems you have kinda missed out on that as the footage and the documentaries are widely en publicly available via Google since the past few years.

Quoting Seeker

If a 'Harry Reid' isnt a competent enough representative for you I wonder who would be.

I didn't question this guy's --whom I didn't know anything about and I wonder how many people in the world know about him-- general competence. I just checked and saw he is a politician. When I talked about "competent agents", I was obviously referring to technical competence. And particularily in the field of Space and more particularily in Research.

Well, I shouldn't have been involved in all that. So, allow me now to go back to my indifference-about-the-subject state. :smile: