Search For Aliens Should Include Intelligent Machines, Says SETI Astronomer

Havent they seen, Stephen Hawking speech on, not trying to attract the attention of aliens on our existence cause it is more then likely that if an intelligent life finds us, that they would end up annihilating us for our planetary recources.

Anyway, its the battle of Star Trekers Vs Hawking, Good Vs Evil aliens.

@Max Who says us Trekkies are against the Hawk?

so Autonomous robotic organisms (Autobots) could be real.

@ManHubert: it could be autobots vs decepticons too :P

well life does exist in our universe, either at a microbial level or be it civilized or mechanized civilization, maybe they have just began the space race, or they already know how to get here.

On one side there's the search and trying to contact them, then if they do visit the plant, everyone knows what kind of welcome awaits them.

@MaxHubert: Well that's just absurd. There are no resources on Earth a spacefaring life form could possibly want. The only thing that could bring such a species here would be curiosity, which is good for us.

Shostak's argument is one I've tended to agree with for quite some time. It's all to do with this exponential growth of complexity we see looking at Earth's history on a geologic time scale. Star Trek had to McGuffin around it with the Preservers, hint that all the humanoid species had a common ancestor and such. Otherwise, since biological evolution isn't deterministic, there's no reason to believe that the same advances would happen on the same time scales from system to system. In that sense, Hawking is right to say that any other species we could possibly encounter would be far more advanced. He's wrong to think that they'd follow predictable human paths of conquest, especially since there's nothing on Earth they'd need to conquer, certainly nothing worth the walk. = )

The last line in the article is silly, though. We can't send anything to galactic cores, even radio messages. Not at light speed.

"There are no resources on Earth a spacefaring life form could possibly want" Couldn't agree more. Why bother when lifeless rocks contain everything you need? Anyway, how's this change anything? We're machines, just of biological construct.

The Cylons are coming, the Cylons are coming!!

This discussion just underscores the very real possibility that complex biological organisms just aren't suited for exploring the galaxy. We may have to leave that honor and responsibility, to our successors, the truly intelligent machines, which are better-suited to deep space environments than we are.

Our wanting to explore further than our own solar system might be compared to fish wanting to climb mountains and cross deserts. Our fish-like ancestors had to evolve into creatures with very different configurations and capabilities, before deserts and mountains could be explored.

Just as we have accepted that the universe does not revolve around the Earth, we have to realize that we are just one step in the story of evolution. We are not it's culmination. The next step could be Machine Life. We'll swim in our pools and enjoy the bounty that our progeny have provided us, and we'll wave to them as they set off in their star ships to look for others like themselves. Or we might just be like mice scurrying to avoid being crushed underfoot.

This article made me think of this information I recently came across, as it pertains to gathering of energy from stellar sources. . .
From the wikipedia page on Dyson Spheres
" [. . .] a Dyson Sphere, constructed by life forms not dissimilar to humans, who dwelled in proximity to a Sun-like star, made with materials similar to those available to humans, would most likely cause an increase in the amount of infrared radiation in the star system's emitted spectrum. Hence, Dyson selected the title "Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infrared Radiation" for his published paper.[1]

SETI has adopted these assumptions in their search, looking for such "infrared heavy" spectra from solar analogs. As of 2005[update] Fermilab has an ongoing survey for such spectra by analyzing data from the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS).[24][25]"

"There are no resources on Earth a spacefaring life form could possibly want"

Who says the machines are not protein based? I could go to this lifeless ball of dirt and harvest mineral and then turn those minerals into proteins? Or I could go to that green planet with all these protein bags just walking around (Humans). So would I want to waste energy trying to turn minerals into proteins, or do I save energy and just "harvest" this "Earth" place?

And who says that the machines can distinguish/care about life? They could just ignore the nukes while digging into mineral deposits under New York or any populated center. Who says that they just dont strip whole systems bare?

"There are no resources on Earth a spacefaring life form could possibly want."

Yep. No iron or silica or Hydrogen or Nitrogen and certainly no protein (Read: us) no calcium (our bones).

If anyone says "Why wouldnt they just GET TEH ASTEROIDS!?!?"
They will get the asteroids... then us.

So, if we come across life that is not carbon based (say silicon based), is it still life? If it is ferrous based?

Would a ferrous based creature, with electrical impusle driven memory and nervous control, with micro-pumps for movement, and a slow-burn combustion system for energy be life or a machine?

Is the transition from carbon to iron (or any other element) that important?

I'll admit, for most things carbon is chemically more efficient - but efficiency is normally keyed to brevity (compare a very efficient insect's life to a very inefficient tortoise).

Still, the notion that such life would propegate around energy centers is ridiculous.

(1) Energy is abundant in the universe. Even a small star has energy on such a level that its measurement would be meaningless. Remember that all life and energy (including that stored in fossil fuels and moved by the wind) are driven by a brief glipse of a fraction of the sun's cast off energy at great distance. In other word's, why would they need to pick such high energy areas, when others would do?
(2) Space is big - even if you were an eternally sustaining and growing AI, and you were contacted by man, why would you bother even replying? Either you would be following evolutionary principles and be too concerned expanding or replicating, or you would be following entropic laws, and merely reducing and solving things down to a singular principle. So man is (A) unreachable and/or (B) uninteresting.
(3) Space is big - we send a radio wave (like the one sent last year). It is recieved and returned in kind (it would respond in the mode sent to it, because it knows we have that capability of transmission and reception). So, a 21 year old signal gets a 21 year old responce. 41 years from now, the original sender is trying to maintain bowel control as he finds out his life's work only suceeded in saying "hello."

It is obvious why an alien intelligence would want to find us: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WudBfRa0ETw

@Dirk Mcbratney

"There are no resources on Earth a spacefaring life form could possibly want. The only thing that could bring such a species here would be curiosity, which is good for us."

That could only be based on a lack of your imagination (no disrespect intended). Thousands of years ago, mankind couldn't fathom what possible technological wonders the resources of this planet could provide that exist today; based on a lack of advanced scientific knowledge and understanding. This planet could very well hold the key resources (used in the proper way with more time and scientific/technological advancement) we will one day use to journey towards the stars. Our efficiency will only increase by using resources elsewhere so that we don't succeed in destroying this planet too soon (because that will likely happen anyway).

If I were an intelligent being looking to increase my pool of resources to support my industrialized society in space, I could easily venture towards a primitive rock and take what I need. Cybernetic organisms or Biological, if they come across a world with something they need and they also cross the presence of intelligent life they can do one of two things: establish diplomatic and trade relations (assuming these beings are less primitive than we are and have a greater respect for the autonomy of other sovereignties amongst the stars), or take what they want by force with little contest (assuming they are more advanced but also more primitive; i.e. their technology advances faster than their sentient intelligence: think nuclear bomb development in the late 19th Century instead of the early 20th Century; and don't care for the sovereignty of other nations especially if they are deemed technological or militaristically deficient).

If this planet has what an advanced race needs, how enlightened they are and/or how desparate they may be will determine how they would respond to us. When you're in a school yard as a child, a bigger kid doesn't have to watch their step with you because you're physically deficient to them, plus they have the element of psychological terror. An advanced race wouldn't need to ask our permission for resources or try to establish a business relation. If they know they could take it with ease they could just take it. Think Vulcans and Romulans. It's a philosophical divide between a benevolent species and one that uses logic to expand and endure by any means necessary.

@MarcusM

"This discussion just underscores the very real possibility that complex biological organisms just aren't suited for exploring the galaxy. We may have to leave that honor and responsibility, to our successors, the truly intelligent machines, which are better-suited to deep space environments than we are...Our wanting to explore further than our own solar system might be compared to fish wanting to climb mountains and cross deserts."

With all due respect, fish (which still exist beyond other vertebrate lifeforms they eventually evolved into) have not created mechanized vehicles which would allow them to explore their universe with a form of life support that would sustain them (thoughts of a fish bowl on robotic all-terrain legs and/or tank treads comes to mind). Your belief that we may not be destined to journey into space is only based on a limited imagination of our technological advancement (which is faster than our physiological evolution).

I know robots are becoming a bigger trend in everything, but all trends die out. I'm not saying the technology will die out, just the trend. Robotic space probes have been in existence since the 1970s. Only now are they coming into greater use in space exploration worldwide (especially in nations with space programs that do not have human lifting capabilities like Russia, China, or the U.S.). This being said, once more people have the ability to reach space, more will want to do so, which will drive industry into producing more vehicles for human space travel (this point only being about technological trends based on technological, political, and economic barriers).

About our ability to survive in space, scientific study is going towards finding ways we can improve our ability to survive in the space environment, which will only get better results over time. By the time we even get towards the outer Solar System (where the Gas Giants are), we'll probably be so efficient at it that we'll be able to actively simulate the Earth environment on space vehicles (Let alone terrestrial planets not chemically like Earth).

Let's talk microgravity/zero-g. There is a field of study in gravitomagnetism that could one day lead to the creation of the first artificial gravity generator (and in turn the inverse; an anti-gravity propulsion system).

Then we can talk Cosmic radiation. The alloys in spacecraft now, are designed in regards to protecting astronaut crews from solar radiation, and these spacecraft only fly into orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field which shields the Earth from some solar radiation (the Ozone layer get most of the rest). In an environment as volatile as 60 miles above solid ground and higher, technology has been developed in a way that can protect us from this environment. There is study right now into creating spacecraft superstructures that can protect a crew while in transit to the moon and or mars. By the time we talk about journeying past the heliopause (when the cosmic radiation really starts to hit) We will have made enough technological advancement to beat this problem with energy fields (sounds like science fiction, well so did spacecraft, airplanes, cellphones, Facebook, and robots once upon a time).

It's amazing to conceptualize us using technology to supplement the human experience where our abilities fall short, but the only way we can survive and truly evolve as a race is to push the boundaries of our existence. We must remember that our technology is only an extension of our natural abilities not a supplement, and we must use it as a means to push our physiological evolution in the desired direction that will allow us to become more compatible to the endeavor of exploring and learning everything there is to know about the universe.

"Welcome! to the Federation Starship SS Buttcrack!!!"

It is an interesting consideration I have to admit, having read Ray Kurzweil's books about 10 years ago, and the fact that my favorite science fiction writer is Greg Egan, especially with his books "Permutation City" and "Diaspora", which books heavily lean on the concept of machine intelligence.

Ten years ago, after reading Ray's book, I believed it to be possible; for us to eventually capturing consciousness in silicon.
Today I am not so sure any more. Scientists now believe that quantum processes are most likely involved in our own consciousness, which fact probably prohibits to downright copy the contents of our brains.

The alternative might be to copy just the hardware of our brain (that should be possible) and use it as a platform to evolve consciousness on.
It is going to be mighty difficult though to set up an evolutionary environment that would result into something meaningful on that platform. After all; it took our own realm 4 billion years to get there; and some might even say 13 billion years if you start counting from the point of origin.

Regardless of that being possible, it still would require carbon-based intelligent life forms to create such an intelligent machine. And I actually believe the chance of other life being out there (let alone it being intelligent) is smaller than astronomical.

Why? The reason again lies in quantum physics. Quantum physics dictate that from any given point in time, an almost endless number of possible outcomes happen (in parallel realities). So as you are reading this, there is an outcome where you decide to go drink a cup of coffee and another where you go for tea. Even incredible unlikely events will happen just because they can; in one possible quantum realm you might suddenly decide to jump out of the window.

So right after the Big Bang, numerous parallel realities happened where the laws of physics would not have allowed matter to coalesce into meaningful building blocks for life. But a very small number actually DID start with such favorable laws of physics. Of those few, some lead to planets (and solar systems) initially stable enough for the conditions to be right for life to be able to occur. And an even smaller number lead to matter coming together such that a chemical process could sustain itself and multiply. And from there an incredibly large number of coincidents had to happen for it eventually resulting into consciousness. Let alone that the consciousness lead to the ability to create technology.
Which it did obviously for ONE particular realm; the one that resulted in us.

What I am saying here is that the chance of life taking hold in our own universe was so incredibly small (but not zero; we are the proof of that) that it can not be explained to happen in a single universe. Many multiple (possible) outcomes are needed to make such a development possible. Only if you consider every possible outcome after the Big Bang (which is what Mother Nature had available to itself thanks to quantum physics), it is possible somewhere for matter to come together purely by chance such that it can sustain itself in a particular complex chemical reaction which we call life. And from there, in an even smaller act of chance, to evolve into something that is sentient.

The morale of the story? The chance for that to happen in just a SINGLE universe actually TWICE, is practically ZERO. So I say: Looking for intelligent life other than ourselves, be it silicon or carbon based, is a useless waste of time. Unless we develop the capacity to travel between parallel quantum realms.....

But then; people by their very nature are predisposed to spend a lot of time on useless activities. The success of Twitters, Facebooks and Myspaces is proof of that. So I have no illusions that my opinions will change anything.

Aliens could include Autonomous Robotic Organisms. At least that's what I would like to believe.