
Why Can't We See Evidence Of Alien Life? - olalonde
http://www.33rdsquare.com/2012/03/why-cant-we-see-evidence-of-alien-life.html
======
quandrum
One argument I like is that alien civilizations are going to be either
extremely more advanced than us, or extremely less advanced.

Human intelligence is only 5k years old, on a 4.5BB year old planet in a 14BB
year old universe. Yet, our level of technological advancement means if FTL
travel or communication is possible, we'll probably discover it in the next
couple of hundred years, and we would probably get rid of the inferior EM
waves as a medium.

How long would the average civilization be detectable by our current means
under these conditions? Makes a needle in the haystack seem simple.

~~~
evincarofautumn
Did you really mean to say that human intelligence began a millennium after
the start of recorded history?

~~~
batista
More like it he meant to give an order of magnitude correct answer, and could
not care less about give or take 2-3 millennia.

~~~
evincarofautumn
Behavioural modernity is generally accepted as 50–40kya, and anatomical
modernity 200kya. That’s more than a few millennia of difference. I was mainly
curious as to whether there were a religious reason for such a comment.

~~~
batista
Oh, I think he meant technological modernity (well, not modernity but relative
maturity).

------
lunaru
Maybe we're galatic lottery winners wondering why no ones else has won the
lottery? Our existence is a survivorship bias.

Also, take into account the possibility that other intelligent life might be
more biological than technological (e.g. interconnected intelligence without
technology like in Avatar).

Then factor in that intelligent life might be microscopic or just tiny.

It's really not hard to imagine that the search for alien life is a problem of
asking a question for a rare/over-specified solution.

~~~
bluekeybox
> interconnected intelligence without technology like in Avatar

I have a feeling that the Avatar scenario is no more likely than tall blue-
skinned humanoids. Our notion of intelligence pretty much defines it as
collection of thought processes that end up manifesting themselves in the
development of technology. Dolphins may be extremely intelligent on some scale
unknown to us, but we don't observe them building submarines or decoding radio
signals, so we don't consider them to be human-level intelligent. Similarly,
to them, we may appear as these strange shore-bound small amphibious
quadrupeds who carry various strange amulets on their bodies with which they
do various strange things, all of them being of completely no use or interest
to an average cetacean. I'm probably exaggerating cetacean intelligence a fair
bit, but I just wanted to illustrate how closely our definition of
intelligence is bound to the availability/use of technology.

~~~
grepherder
Yes, also yes to the exaggeration bit, but intelligence is just, well,
intelligence. A complex "brain" can be about emotional depth, about being able
to communicate that emotional complexity, it can be about processing senses in
amazing ways or many other functions we may not even think of. That is just
the complexity of a certain nervous system though, not intelligence per se,
for us what matters is indeed problem solving capabilities which lead to
technology.

~~~
bluekeybox
Sure emotional intelligence may be more important than most of us realize (the
theory of mind, the ability to "read" other people's thoughts, sometimes also
more cynically called Machiavellian intelligence, is thought by some to be the
primary driver behind the development of sentience in humans), but I was
developing the following thought experiment:

Suppose bottlenose dolphins have an uncanny ability to "read minds" and
interpret thoughts and emotions of other bottlenose dolphins (but _only_ of
individuals of their own species -- not of porpoises, humans, etc.) to the
same or even better extent than we humans can read minds of other humans, but
due to the accidental specifics of their bodily layout and environment (no
limbs with which to grasp and manipulate objects, unsuitable environment for
the use of fire) are unable to develop any semblance of technology. What would
those "super-dolphins" look like to us? I have a feeling they would still look
a lot like dolphins, and we, without some very specific/expensive/targeted
research, probably would have never even realize that we are living right next
to some "super-intelligent" animals.

------
acqq
A bit of perspective:

Our technological civilization in the sense of being capable of wireless
electromagnetic signaling exists only around 120 years -- it started only ten
years before my granddad was born. 120 years is nothing compared to the
existence of life on Earth -- at least 3 billion years: one part of 25
millions.

Only around seventy years the humanity also produces nuclear bombs. Now at
this moment there are around 5000 actively deployed nuclear warheads in the
world, waiting for a press of some button to fly to their targets, every one
more orders of magnitude more powerful than the ones that destroyed Hiroshima
and Nagasaki.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_wea...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons)

Now the oil reserves, if we continue only to use them without any growth
(which is not what politicians and the electorate are used to expect) will
last only for next 64 years:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves>

How many years are left to the humanity to enjoy the possibilities of the
electromagnetic communication?

We're sitting here discussing most of the time the solutions to the following
big problems of humanity:

[https://plus.google.com/117114202722218150209/posts/KhMRNmgG...](https://plus.google.com/117114202722218150209/posts/KhMRNmgGniP)

(the companies) "make these apparati that draw a box on somebody's computer
screen. That person then types words into that box on their screen. Then, the
Internet Startup uses some computer codes to copy those words onto somebody
else's computer screen, so that other person can then read them."

~~~
eru
Why do you mention oil? Oil's useful for driving cars and flying planes, but
we do not need to depend on oil for energy.

------
kamaal
Why we can't find Evidence of Alien Life - We are not looking seriously. And
that is because -

1\. We waste far too much money on wars, weapons and fighting than what we
should be spending on this sort of problems.

2\. The pressing needs of human kind at this time are photo sharing apps and
'bird in pig' games.

3\. No serious, I mean real serious intent on developing space travel,
exploration and colonization.

4\. Misplaced priorities, the people who can solve tough problems like
educating kids, finding cures for diseases and space research are paid peanuts
in comparison with people who are doing far easier jobs than them. There by
scaring off more people working on those jobs.

5\. Nation states must collaborate on working these kind of issues instead of
developing weapons, wasting brain power, energy, money and resources to
destroy each other.

------
ericb
I think SETI is horribly misguided. It may be there are other civilizations,
but that they are smart enough to avoid each other.

I posit that the only aliens we want to meet are ones that _are not interested
in us_. Any interest, given the likely difference in technological levels, is
unlikely to end well for us. The book Guns, Germs, and Steel painted a not-so-
rosy picture of the meetings of societies at even small differences of
technological advances. These differences are likely to be magnified for races
without a common ancestral history and similar starting point in time.

The wishful thinking of people hoping to meet alien civilizations includes
assumptions like:

* Alien civilization began just like ours.

* Time passed.

* ????????

* Magically altruistic alien society arises.

If this is true, great. But do I want to bet humanity on it? Hell no.

~~~
nhaehnle
I don't want to discuss whether your pessimistic outlook is more realistic
than an optimistic outlook. However, I'd like to point out that SETI isn't
misguided in any case.

Heck, if your pessimistic outlook is correct, SETI is even _more_ important,
because it might provide the only early warning of an incoming invasion. That
may not help in the end, but it's better than nothing.

~~~
ericb
I could be wrong on this point, but isn't the underlying assumption with SETI
that when we listen that we will also respond?

~~~
nhaehnle
Well, it's called _Search_ for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence, not
_Communication_ with Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence. At least right now they
aren't sending anything, and I'm sure there will be plenty of time to discuss
this issue before and if they ever find anything.

I agree with you that it makes sense to be careful. Sending high-powered
directed radio signals before we really know what we're dealing with does
sound like a bad idea.

------
RandallBrown
I've always wondered why humans are the only species on earth to build huge
complex societies.

Why aren't there multiple species of intelligent life on earth? (yes some
animals are pretty smart, but they don't build cars, make movies, have laws,
etc.)

~~~
blhack
Because we're the only ones with language. Language gave us a _huge_ technical
advantage over all of the other animals.

Typically, in species without language, it takes many generations for a
"mutation"[1] to propagate across the species.

If I instinctually figure out a better way of hunting deer, which gives me an
advantage over my competitors for mates, and I pass it on to my children, who
pass it on to theirs, etc. eventually the new instinct will be present in most
of the species.

(This is basic basic natural selection).

Language changed all of that. Now instead of waiting for offspring to carry a
mutation, I can just _tell people_ about the better way of hunting deer, they
can do it, and they can tell people too.

Stuff spreads quickly. It makes humans able to evolve at a much, much, much
faster rate than any other animal on the planet.

(And yes, really, humans are the only animals on the planet with language.
Bird song, whale song, and tree-pheromones don't count.)

[1] In quotes because consciously iterating over a problem (like hunting deer)
isn't a "mutation" in the classic sense.

~~~
joejohnson
There were other species with language (Neanderthals, other proto-humans).
Some of these species coexisted, and there is some evidence that they fought
one another, and maybe killed each other off.

~~~
eru
They not only fought, but also pro-created. I heard that genes for red hair
might actually come from the Neanderthals. (There are lots of news reports
about that on the web.)

------
bane
Because we aren't looking close enough yet. Reverse the question, an alien 200
light years from Earth, using technology at our current state-of-the art would
likely not see any life on Earth either.

~~~
yanowitz
The odds that we all evolved to that point of technology at the same time is
tiny. It's far more likely that there are many civilizations in advance of us
and far enough away that we'd detect something. Unless they already went quiet
(deliberately or through extinction).

~~~
lisper
Or because they plugged themselves into virtual realities that are more
attractive to hang out in than physical reality.

~~~
nextparadigms
Or maybe they don't need virtual realities anymore because they can reshape
their world anyway they want through nanotechnology.

At that point I doubt it would be too hard for them to hide from us, anyway.
They could cover their planet in a shield that makes it look and act like a
non-planet to us ( whatever that would be).

~~~
pavel_lishin
Larry Niven has posited that perhaps all those red giants are just Matrioshka
Brains - Dyson spheres enclosing suns and radiating mostly infra-red waste
heat.

------
fpp
A much simpler explanation ;-)

[http://images.cryhavok.org/v/Calvin+and+Hobbes+-+Intelligent...](http://images.cryhavok.org/v/Calvin+and+Hobbes+-+Intelligent+Life.jpg.html)

(Calvin & Hobbes: Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life
exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.)

------
jcfrei
so let's assume SETI is mostly looking for electromagnetic emissions as a
trace for aliens. let's also assume that exchanging information via e.e.
happens only during a very short timeframe for any given civilization (eg.
~200 years), because soon more advance communication methods arise (eg.
quantum teleportation) and the communication via e.e. is left to a few
nostalgic nerds (via transmitors far too weak to reach our galaxy). on a
timeline of several billion years, this means that the chance that two
civiliations are per chance roughly in the same state of development (eg. 200
years window of e.e. + the delay in lightyears for the emissions to reach our
planet), is probably close to zero. (and this is probably true for any given
technology).

at least that's my take on it. i'm pretty darn sure we're not the only ones
out there.

------
cr4zy
The probabilities all point to advanced life being close by, we just can't see
it. Most likely because they don't want to disturb us. Like a lost tribe in
middle of the Amazon, coming in to too close of contact with us would mean
almost certain extinction.

Either that, or SETI is completely off.

------
rosebush
Because they are hiding the evidence. They don't want us to find them. I don't
blame them.

------
wunderland
Aaah! Why did they show the beginning of the universe as God sneezing? I know
this is for kids, so that's all the more reason why they shouldn't be
including such nonsense like a god or religion in this video. That makes me
angry.

------
maeon3
1: We are unique in the galaxy because life is rare.

2: The galaxy is teaming with life, but just like a flower in the amazon rain
forest is wondering why there is not life all around it, the flower simply
lacks the basic tools necessary to find any evidence whatsoever of the
lifeforms all around it.

3: Radio silence is required, as there is a bully in our solar system who
sterilizes any life forms found. And as soon as we have the technology to
broadcast our location, we will be extinguished by a process designed to keep
this galaxy pure.

4: Life is right next to us, inside us, all around us. Just in alternate
dimensions which make our galaxy look like a drop of rainwater. We just can't
see it.

5: The human race is an experiment by a higher life form, and it's empty
because it was designed to be empty. This one planet was seeded, and we are
being watched.

6: DNA based life, like a virus, extinguishes all resources it can get it's
hands onto, Humans will explode with productivity until we exhaust every
resource available to us. We do not understand the word sustainable, even the
green weenies acknowledge growth of O(n^n)

7: Humans are a weapon of mass destruction, and we have been planted, as a
terrorist would plant a bomb in the other guy's house. We humans will consume
every last calorie of energy from this universe. We are a weapon, and our
growth is the explosion which will knock out the enemy alien.

8: When species get advanced enough to travel throughout the galaxy, we figure
out that this isn't a universe at all, and we hack into the holodeck
projectors in the wall and then forget about the useless projection that we
call the universe.

9: The suns and phenomenon around us in the universe is an alien life form's
abdominal fat, and we are bacteria who is growing inside it. As soon as we
start consuming too much, demanding our life is more important than the
natural decay of suns, the white blood cells will come to our planet and
destroy us.

10: We will find life in other parts of the galaxy, as surly as the homo
sapiens on the earth figured out that when you cross the great blue expanse,
other strange cultures, much like our own, were growing there.

11: What we understand as the universe, with height width and depth, velocity,
time, inertia and such, is a completely incorrect view of the universe. It's
the same problem with how the flower sees the universe in terms of it's own
life and needs. The flower only knows it's root structure and the properties
of the ground, wondering why it doesn't find other flowers in its root
structure. The flower simply cannot fathom that the life is actually touching
it, around it, and inside it.

------
carsongross
Lots of pat answers from the smart kids here at HN.

I dunno guys, maybe the universe is a lot stranger than we can get our heads
around, and we should admit that we don't know.

~~~
cousin_it
Embracing ignorance is not the right answer to ignorance.

For an example of a genuinely strange resolution to the Fermi paradox, see
Paul Almond's "Civilization-level quantum suicide": [http://www.paul-
almond.com/CivilizationLevelQuantumSuicide.p...](http://www.paul-
almond.com/CivilizationLevelQuantumSuicide.pdf)

~~~
carsongross
Admitting our own limitations in the face of a bizarre situation is not
embracing ignorance.

There are a lot of scientistic answers in this thread that are as
scientifically valid as "God created us uniquely in his own image". Admitting
that would be a good first step.

MOAR DOWNVOTES!

