Re: Time to scrap SETI?
From: Ray Vingnutte (rvnospam_at_againnospam.our.uk)
Date: 12/15/04
- Next message: Jeff Findley: "Re: Brainstorm -- Uses for a small 'construction shack' in 28deg LEO"
- Previous message: Henry Spencer: "Re: Delta 4 Heavy -- the engine for humans beyond LEO?"
- In reply to: Joe Strout: "Re: Time to scrap SETI?"
- Next in thread: Rob Dekker: "Re: Time to scrap SETI?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:42:59 +0000
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 08:54:32 -0600
Joe Strout <joe@strout.net> wrote:
> In article <5l4592-784.ln1@redfox.00102345.dfhgjtyuk>,
> Ray Vingnutte <rvnospam@againnospam.our.uk> wrote:
>
> > > That's the $200M question, isn't it?
> >
> > But if you are going to put forward a view that we one day will be able to
> > colonise the galaxy in a few million years then you need to take into account
> > why has this not been done already by another race and where are they?.
>
> Have I been unclear? That question is exactly the whole point. And
> there are two possible answers: either they're not out there at all
> (because life/civilization is an extreme fluke and we're all there is),
> or they are out there, right next door, and concealing their presence
> from us.
Yeah sure..
>
> > They don't have to evolve at or near the same time as us, the time scales and
> > the material required for life to startup is ample in both respects.
>
> They DO have to develop at almost exactly the same time as us if you
> want to believe that they're out there but have not yet settled pretty
> much the whole galaxy.
Rubbish.
>
> > > Nope; that's contrary to basic and universal principles of selective
> > > pressure. If these races have any variation among their individuals,
> > > and if they are able to reproduce in any form, then these principles
> > > apply and they will expand to other star systems.
> >
> > You cannot know that for sure, we have no idea how any race could or would
> > evolve, or what they would do with themselves.
>
> Yes, you CAN know that, just as you can know that 2 plus 2 is 4 even for
> aliens in the Andromeda galaxy. That's what it means for these to be
> basic, universal principles.
Nope sorry, you cannot possibly know what a technological alien race will be like or what they will do or anything, unless you have already met them of course.
>
> > If that is so then again you need to explain why they are not here now,
> > because really if it is like that and the technology is capable of doing it
> > then you load yourself up with a real big problem that at the moment you seem
> > to be avoiding ;-)
>
> Not at all; that is exactly the point I am making, repeatedly. The
> "where are they?" issue is the central mystery, to which there are two
> possible answers, neither of which predicts any success for SETI. I'm
> not avoiding this problem; I'm pointing it out. It's the SETI
> proponents who valiently try to ignore this issue, so they can imagine
> they live in a Star Trek universe where the galaxy is teeming with
> civilizations all at just about the same level of development as us
> (i.e., capable of EM communications but not yet colonizing the galaxy).
Err sorry, but I think you will find the SETI people have more going for them that that, oh dear.
>
> > > Please demonstrate if you can. So far, you've listed either different
> > > ways of stating the two main alternatives, or ones that don't hold water.
> >
> > Use your imagination because at this time that is all we have, there could be
> > a million and one reasons.
>
> OK, you get the Massive Hand-Waving Award of the Year. I say that there
> aren't any other reasons that are both plausible and not a subtype of
> the two main alternatives. If there are a million and one, surely you
> ought to be able to propose at least one. I don't believe you can, but
> that's not because you're unimaginative; it's because such other
> alternatives don't exist.
Yeah point taken I'll leave it at that, thanks anyway.
>
> > Ok, lets assume you can find people who don't mind being put into some form
> > of hibernation for a few thousand years, you strap then into their tin can
> > and send them on their way. Is that it?
>
> That's one (very crude) possibility. In reality, I'm sure it will be
> something much more sophisticated (e.g.
> <http://www.ibiblio.org/jstrout/uploading/business.html>), but the point
> is that there are lots of different ways to tackle long travel times.
> Any one of them will result in the galaxy being settled, in what seems
> like a long time to us (hundreds of millions of years), but is quite
> quick on the evolutionary time scale.
>
> > We cannot explain life, we don't know how life starts, we can only largely
> > guess at how it evolves.
>
> Perhaps you can't. "We" (meaning humanity as a whole, including
> biologists, population ecologists, etc.) understand a great deal of the
> principles governing life and evolution.
OK.
>
> Best,
> - Joe
>
> ,------------------------------------------------------------------.
> | Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
> | joe@strout.net http://www.macwebdir.com |
> `------------------------------------------------------------------'
- Next message: Jeff Findley: "Re: Brainstorm -- Uses for a small 'construction shack' in 28deg LEO"
- Previous message: Henry Spencer: "Re: Delta 4 Heavy -- the engine for humans beyond LEO?"
- In reply to: Joe Strout: "Re: Time to scrap SETI?"
- Next in thread: Rob Dekker: "Re: Time to scrap SETI?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
