Slashdot Mirror


Stephen Hawking Wants To Find Aliens Before They Find Us (cnet.com)

Stephen Hawking is again reminding people that perhaps shouting about our existence to aliens is not the right way to go about it, especially if those aliens are more technologically advanced. In his new half-hour program dubbed, Stephen Hawking's Favorite Places, the theoretical physicist and cosmologist said (via CNET):"If intelligent life has evolved (on Gliese 832c), we should be able to hear it," he says while hovering over the exoplanet in the animated "U.S.S. Hawking." "One day we might receive a signal from a planet like this, but we should be wary of answering back. Meeting an advanced civilization could be like Native Americans encountering Columbus. That didn't turn out so well." Hawking manages to be both worried about exposing our civilization to aliens and excited about finding them. He supports not only Breakthrough: Listen, but also Breakthrough: Starshot, another initiative that aims to send tiny nanocraft to our closest neighboring star system, which was recently found to have an Earth-like planet.

23 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. With all due respect to Mr. Hawking and us... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's no possibility that aliens capable of FTL would find us remotely interesting. Once you get to that technology, energy and resource problems either have been solved, or become very easily solvable. In addition, given that FTL is far more likely to be developed using AI rather than human intelligence, space faring races (if they bother to be space faring) are more likely to be 2nd order intelligences (i.e. artificial intelligences),rather than 1st order, genetically based naturally developing intelligences).

    Bottom line? To space faring AIs, we're squirrels. Our nuts are safe. Really.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:With all due respect to Mr. Hawking and us... by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Uh, FTL travel is not possible. Ever. This is known already. Because, you know, physics. What you are describing is pure fantasy.

    2. Re:With all due respect to Mr. Hawking and us... by joe_frisch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think its possible to predict what a more advanced civilization might want. Are we squirrels? Are we rats to be exterminated? Are we dogs to be bred for cuteness? Is the relationship something we are not capable of comprehending?

    3. Re:With all due respect to Mr. Hawking and us... by Immerman · · Score: 2

      Not quite. FTL implies the *potential* for time travel - not the inevitability of it. Fly to Andromeda and back in an afternoon, and there will be no time travel involved, you have to jump through extra hoops to accomplish that.

      And you're also assuming Relativity is *perfect*. Yes, we have a *lot* of data backing it up, but we had a *lot* of data backing up Newtonian mechanics too, before minor anomalies in extreme situations proved it was flawed, openin the door for GR to replace it. And frankly, we already have really huge anomalies in GR, in the form of the "here there be dragons" kludges of Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    4. Re:With all due respect to Mr. Hawking and us... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is also impossible for us to hide from them. It requires an immense leap of faith to think that an advanced alien civilization would require us to send an intentional radio signal for them to detect, rather than being detectable from the (much stronger) signal that is the change in the Earth's atmosphere over the last 200 years. If they are even a few centuries (cosmically, a blink of an eye) ahead of us technologically, they will have imaged the Earth and seen our atmospheric nuclear tests in the last century. All it takes is a space telescope at a scale that we can already design (a mirror a few miles in diameter), and enough curiosity to catalogue and observe planets with life on them (again, detectable from atmospheric composition with near-future technology).

    5. Re:With all due respect to Mr. Hawking and us... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      In fact, we achieved a manned trip with a successful return less than 1 lifetime after we first achieved controlled, powered flight.

      I think about that a lot, I think it's pretty crazy that humans have had some form of civilization for tens of thousands of years, and we only learned how to build a machine capable of controlled powered flight just over 100 years ago, and it was only a little more than 50 years after that when we put people on the moon. It took so long to get the understanding and technology needed for the first steps, and after that it just took off (literally!). It's pretty amazing. It's also pretty amazing that there are people out there who think we know everything by now.

      When people say FTL isn't possible, time travel isn't possible, etc. they do so because they know what they're talking about.

      Just like everyone thought that Newton knew what he was talking about, until Einstein came along. We're always going to have people who are capable of thinking about things in a way that no one ever has, and those people are going to once again figure something out that no one else had before. Maybe one of those things is going to concern moving from one place to another in less time than would be possible if you actually traveled that entire linear distance.

      I'm not going to try and argue with you whether or not any human today knows how to travel large distances through space quickly, but if you're going to try to argue that the things that we know today are never going to change then I think your entire premise is stupid and ignorant of history. The amount of things that we don't know about the universe is staggering. Any scientist worth their salt will tell you as much.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    6. Re:With all due respect to Mr. Hawking and us... by swb · · Score: 2

      That's probably true, but we don't know.

      FTL may wind up being possible due to some unknown property of physics but it may only be useful for movement through spacetime and not necessarily for the production of useful energy.

      I'd wager an FTL capable but also not a free energy civilization is also a civilization that is resource hungry and would likely be exploiting sources of easy to obtain resources. It could also turn out that the atomic elements aren't well-distributed in the galaxy and that one all the min-maxing of options is done ends up being the easiest place to get them.

      The challenge for Earth is that any civilization capable of easy space flight only needs to drop a couple of rocks into our gravity well to neutralize our civilization. They don't need a massive energy surplus or a lot of advanced technology beyond a useful FTL to get to us and wipe us out.

    7. Re:With all due respect to Mr. Hawking and us... by StormReaver · · Score: 2

      Uh, FTL travel is not possible. Ever.

      There are several ways in which that statement is both true and, at least potentially, untrue at the same time.

      True:
      1) We have discovered no way to break what we understand to be the highest velocity at which a particle can travel: light speed.

      2) No experiment we have ever conceived and/or tested has discredited (1) above.

      3) There are several more, but I don't want to articulate them.

      Untrue (or potentially untrue):
      1) Our best understanding is that matter in the universe moved faster than light during a time following the Big Bang. This invalidates your assertion that FTL is never possible. Otherwise, matter could not have spread as far as it has in the given time since the Big Bang. This suggests that the speed of light may not be an absolute limit, but that we have no way to reproduce it. See (1) under the True heading. A sufficiently advanced civilization may, hypothetically speaking, possess such technology. This, if it exists, is so far beyond the state of our knowledge as to be indistinguishable from magic.

      2) Reproducing the effects of FTL, without actually moving at FTL speeds, is an acceptable alternative. A sufficiently advanced civilization may, hypothetically speaking, possess such technology. This, if it exists, is so far beyond the state of our knowledge as to be indistinguishable from magic.

      3) Again, there are several more, but I don't want to articulate them.

  2. Think about it by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful
    We got to the top of the food chain by being the grand champions of the solar system at killing shit. We're so good at killing things that we pass laws against slaughtering animals to keep us from wiping them out. The Dodo Bird and Carrier Pigeon are examples of species we've exterminated and we nearly killed off a bunch of others.

    It makes sense to guess that the dominant species on other worlds got to the top of the food chain because they're also the most skillful killers. It's wishful thinking to suppose that a more technically advanced civilization would be more peaceful and tolerant. Just like it was wishful thinking for the Aztecs to give the Spanish gold and hope they'd go away.

    He's right. We should be careful about broadcasting our presence around the 'verse.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:Think about it by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      They probably meant passenger pigeon. Too tasty for their own good.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Think about it by swillden · · Score: 2

      It's wishful thinking to suppose that a more technically advanced civilization would be more peaceful and tolerant.

      I don't think so, for two reasons.

      The first is that our own history is one of increasing peace and tolerance. If you don't believe this, you should read Stephen Pinker's "The Better Angels of our Nature". I won't attempt to restate his arguments here, but there's very compelling evidence that we've become dramatically less violent and more tolerant in step with our increased technology.

      The second is that advanced technology is impossible without extremely high levels of cooperation. For one example, the massive, interlocking global supply chains that are needed to produce all of our more advanced technologies today (such as the computer I'm typing this on or the phone sitting next to the computer) are mind-bogglingly complex and involve a significant fraction of the world. Broad negotiation and cooperation requires empathy, the ability to understand the minds and goals of both your collaborators and your opponents, and that same empathy slowly -- but inevitably -- results in discomfort with violence and suffering.

      Indeed, we've become uncomfortable with violence to and suffering of even non-human creatures. Up to the 19th century cat burning was a popular mass entertainment in much of Europe. They'd hang a sack full of live cats over a bonfire, or douse a cat in oil and light it's tail on fire and chase it through the street. Although there were people who found these activities distasteful, the vast majority found them hilarious. Today, that would be reversed, and the vast majority would call such "entertainment" sick. In many jurisdictions, such animal cruelty is a felony.

      It's clear that we're rapidly proceeding further down this road. We devote large areas of land and resources to preserving other species. Vegetarianism and veganism are on the rise, and I expect that within a few decades we'll have good cultured meats and that we'll virtually cease killing other animals for food. As the human population declines (it's rising towards a peak but will then begin to fall) and our wealth increases we'll be better able to indulge our empathy and go ever further to minimize future killing and we'll work hard to try to repair the damage we've done to other species.

      Your argument is that it seems likely that advanced alien species would have followed much the same course that ours did. I agree, I think it stands to reason they'll have followed that course to become very peaceful and tolerant, particularly if they have achieved FTL travel which should completely eliminate any need to compete for resources. To reach the stars (assuming that's possible) will require openness and scientific inquisitiveness that are incompatible with violence and subjugation, and make them unnecessary.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  3. Likely cover story by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    We all know that "Mr. Hawking" is in fact an alien, residing on our planet to observe us.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  4. Re:What a dumb-ass by kuzb · · Score: 5, Informative

    He was the guy who basically married general relativity to quantum mechanics, and catapulted our understanding of stellar phenomenon forward by a substantial amount. Long after your bones are dust, people are going to remember him for his important contributions to science.

    --
    BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  5. Re:You'd think someone as smart as Hawking ... by ArtemaOne · · Score: 2

    Satellite communications tends to shoot up a lot more directed radiation than reaches the satellites. Even as we move past Ka and into EHF, the more directed energy will suffer less from the inverse square law. That's a lot of energy being directed into space.

  6. Re:You'd think someone as smart as Hawking ... by ArtemaOne · · Score: 2

    7... But anyway, the earth is also spinning and revolving around the sun, so those directed beams are not always pointing in the same direction despite generally focusing on geosynchronous orbits. It's a mixed bag for sure. Since it is so focused, it might be able to be picked up at those particular moments of clarity when the orbits make the beams hit, but that will last a very short period of time. Not enough to make out the signal, but possibly long enough to make out the fact that it is modulated, unnatural.

  7. Re:To late .. they are already here by sexconker · · Score: 2

    So basically Hillary pulls off the mask and goes from President to Reptillian overlord?

  8. Re:You'd think someone as smart as Hawking ... by Immerman · · Score: 4, Informative

    I seem to recall hearing that, if an identical society to our own were currently orbitting Alpha Centauri, our current radio telescopes would probably be able to detect any high-power military radar sweeps that pass their horizon in our direction, but not much else. So for now at least it seems unlikely that we'll be able to detect planetary "radio leakage", regardless of vertical attenuation.

    And the radar point raises another good one: vertical attenuation probably wouldn't make a huge amount of difference for detection. Even if they somehow transmitted a signal perfectly horizontally, it would still head into space as the planet's surface curved away from it, and transmission frequencies would almost certainly be tuned to the most transparent bands in the atmosphere, so atmospheric attenuation probably wouldn't make a huge difference. We'd only get relatively brief, regular bursts of signal as the the transmitter's horizon aligned with Earth each day, but for detection that's all you need.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  9. Resolution of the Fermi Paradox? by shanen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I actually started my analysis of the Fermi Paradox from the other side. What if some civilization wanted to be noticed? Turns out to be a relatively minor problem, which strongly indicates that no one wants to be noticed. Alternatively, they tried it and got shut up quickly. Bottom line is that no one is trying right now (where now includes the 100,000 years it would take to span our galaxy--still an extremely small value of "now" on the galactic scale).

    My position has evolved over the years, but I'm basically standing on the position that the synthetic intelligences (ASIs) that replace the naturally evolved intelligences like us are amused. They are watching and probably gambling quatloos on whether we create ASI successors before exterminating ourselves. Longer version at:

    https://ello.co/shanen0/post/v...

    Again hoping for "funny" or "insightful" comments at Slashdot, but it's a young article, soon to become an obsolete article...

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  10. Too late... by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    Some of them are just catching "I Love Lucy" and "Abbott and Costello". Maybe it will keep them occupied for 50 years or so... If they were more advanced than we are, they won't be for long.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  11. Re:What a dumb-ass by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No they won't. They'll remember him for being a cripple that speaks with a monotone robotic voice machine.

    Hawking is on the lower rung of great scientists, a lot of this theories have been debunked. He just throws out so many that when a couple turn out right, we all give him a standing ovation. If he wasn't crippled, you wouldn't have any idea who he is.

    I wasn't sure if you were joking or not, then I noticed you posted this garbage anonymously, so I must assume you were indeed joking. Hawking's greatest achievement may not be his scholarly work but instead the great success he has had in communicating arcane science to the masses and convincing them to think about matters like this in an intelligent, inquisitive way. Guys like Hawking, Tyson, Sagan, and even Bill Nye and Don Herbert have arguably had as big of an impact on society as have Einstein, Bohr, or Tesla. They make otherwise dense and dry topics exciting and interesting, and if there's one thing we need it's more people of all ages maintaining an interest in science, and being open to learning and continuing to investigate the workings of the universe.

    You could have said your piece in a less offensive way, too.

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  12. More alarmist nonsense from Hawking by Sqreater · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The likelihood that another life form traveled the 4.5 billion year path to intelligence, as we did, is close to zero. It assumes that there is a bias toward intelligence in evolution, of which there is no evidence whatsoever. The dinosaurs ruled the Earth for hundreds of millions of years and probably still would if the Chicxulub asteroid had not hit the Earth 65 million years ago, part of a very particular series of events over 4.5 billion years. Chimpanzees, who share 99.9 percent of our DNA are not us. They build no cities, write no great books, land on no moons. Hawking has a teenagers' science-fiction understanding it seems outside of Black Holes. And as far as the "Fermi Paradox" is concerned, it is not a paradox at all. We are not living on the Earth, we ARE the Earth. We are not going to settle the Galaxy, or even the Solar System. We can live nowhere else. We are not mere visitors to the surface of the Earth. We are an intrinsic part of the Earth. It would be the same for any "intelligent species." End of question.

    --
    E Proelio Veritas.
    1. Re:More alarmist nonsense from Hawking by Rei · · Score: 2

      You have a strange definition of "intrinsic". And "are", for that matter. Particularly given that as you speak there are humans orbiting over your head.

      --
      "You abandoned me! You abandoned my hatred!" "I... I have cuttlefish..."
  13. Re:What a dumb-ass by rubycodez · · Score: 2

    No, he did nothing of the sort. No one has successfully "married general relativity to quantum mechanics", that is beyond present day physics.

    He has applied quantum thermodynamics to certain aspects of a black hole, but that is not the same thing.