Stephen Hauking doubtful on intelligent life anywhere close

[blacknblue]

I was not bad mouthing Hawking. Certainly not. I am in no position to sneer at that man. I was poking derision at the mere idea of anyone being in a position to make any type of definitive statement at this early hour on the subject. We haven't not even learned enough about our own ignorance yet to be able to define what constitutes "life", much less make anything close to a half-assed guess about how common it might be. Nor do we have an inarguable definition of intelligence yet. The debate on that subject has been ongoing for generations as well. Is a quid intelligent? An octopus? A porpoise? A chimp? A chimp is a tool making, tool using, language learning social animal. Does that constitute sapience?

[Kevin Thomas Riley]

They reason why we don't "hear" anything from extra-terrestrials in our SETI is of course that they use subspace channels, which we cannot monitor!

As for normal radio signals, I read somewhere that the belief that our own inadvertent transmissions (TV and radio broadcasts for example) could be monitored by other civilizations is mistaken. The signals would quickly dissipate into the background noise after just a light-year or so. So Hitler opening the Berlin Olympics wouldn't even make it to Alpha Centauri!

[JadziaKathryn]

As for normal radio signals, I read somewhere that the belief that our own inadvertent transmissions (TV and radio broadcasts for example) could be monitored by other civilizations is mistaken. The signals would quickly dissipate into the background noise after just a light-year or so. So Hitler opening the Berlin Olympics wouldn't even make it to Alpha Centauri!

That's good. Really, if there is intelligent alien life, we don't want Hitler do be their first impression of us!

[justTripn]

Here's something depressing for SETI: I heard that IF intelligent species were already communicating back and forth and we hoped to listen in we'd be out of luck because the most efficient way to package the information would be to code it in a certain way (I'm no computer expert so I don't know the specifics), that unfortunately for us would be indistinguishable from background noise.

[justTripn]

Oh, and the SETI community ITSELF is saying we'll know one way or another in 20 years. (If there are any nearby civilizatons trying to communicate.)

[Elessar]

Here's something depressing for SETI: I heard that IF intelligent species were already communicating back and forth and we hoped to listen in we'd be out of luck because the most efficient way to package the information would be to code it in a certain way (I'm no computer expert so I don't know the specifics), that unfortunately for us would be indistinguishable from background noise.

Yeah, that has to do with the fact that a lot of modern computer scientists are saying that one day the compression methods we'll use will be so incredibly powerful and efficient that the patterns would seem mind-bogglingly random (and therefore resemble "noise", which is random) to a race in their "comp sci infancy" as we currently are.

Actually, I don't know, we might be in the terrible 2's now

[blacknblue]

It keeps occurring to me that for interstellar communication the most efficient method would be lasers, or cosmic rays, or some other type of radiation that would be less prone to distortion and dissipation than radio.

Unless, of course, they really ARE communicating through Hilbert space.

[Elessar]

It keeps occurring to me that for interstellar communication the most efficient method would be lasers, or cosmic rays, or some other type of radiation that would be less prone to distortion and dissipation than radio.

Unless, of course, they really ARE communicating through Hilbert space.

Hilbert space is just a mathematical construct... it's not a concept of an actual extraspatial dimension.

I've heard scientists talk about gamma rays as use for communication because they maintain signal strength over vast distances but require tremendous power output to generate.

[blacknblue]

I realize that Hilbert space is just a mathematical concept. Lighten up, Lad. Sheesh!

Subspace is also a theoretical concept, isn't it? For that matter, an electron is a theoretical concept. You ever see one? Taste one? Hear one? Most of what we accept as consensus reality is actually constructed from a complex arrangement of theoretical beliefs that we have collectively agreed to accept as facts, even when there may be little or not objectively verifiable evidence to prove their existence. All of the evidence to support our current theories on the structure of the atom, and the nature and behavior of subatomic particles, are based on indirect observation and interpolation from observed phenomena, since it is inherently impossible to see anything that is smaller than the photons that we use to see with. In fact, the theoretical existence of, structure and behavior of photons themselves are based on theoretical concepts. Granted they are supported by the preponderance of available experimental data (or so we are told). But it still comes down to an act of faith in accepting their existence.

I don't doubt the existence of the great wall of china, or the golden gate bridge. But I have never seen either one with my own eyes. Ultimately, I have to take somebody else's word for it. Accepting their existence is an act of faith on my part.

I use Hilbert Space as my personal catch all substitute term for other dimensional space. I dislike the term "subspace" since it was never explained in Trek. The tired old "hyperspace" is meaningless to me. "Warp Space" sounds like white noise to me.

At least Hilbert space carries some actually significance. When I say Hilbert Space, most people who have a clue what the name refers to will at least grasp the general concept of what I am talking about. And since I am talking about sci-fi, I claim literary license to make shit up until and unless I am proven wrong by new discoveries. Until then, I will paste the generic label of Hilbert Space on that weird part of the universe that I can't see, smell, taste, touch, hear, etc.