Do aliens ask - Are we alone?

[lost_shaman]

Excelent post psyche!

Hi All

I see things getting a little heated here, but if we all look at the question posed above, I am hoping the above question might start to get moving in a happier direction. Personally, I see what Lost Shaman is saying, and I have to agree, it seems to me that a bipedal creature with multiple appendages offer the ability not only to manipulate, but to assist with leverage, work in any environment, and create what is necessary to achieve hypothetical constructs. Many creatures have risen on this earth, very few have managed to get beyond predator or prey. We are the only species to initiate an Industrial Revolution, and we had to eliminate the competition to do so. We did this by way of good design that allowed us to outcompete every other species on the planet, including our own type as we are the surviving species out of Sapiens, Neanderthal , Flores Hominid and the Denisovians (that we know of). We even can compete with and beat out own model, yet nothing else has come close to that abilities we have displayed. Mining, refining raw materials, ad using them in the way we have to make our lives easier, and to progress faster. To just think, the monitor I type this on was once many elements spread out inside of a star and survived amazing explosions that you and I can only read about.

Exactly, these other points you've raised show that this can be easily expounded upon as I suggested should be the case. The rest of your post carries the proverbial torch forward. I obviously argee with you.

[psyche101]

Excelent post psyche!

Exactly, these other points you've raised show that this can be easily expounded upon as I suggested should be the case. The rest of your post carries the proverbial torch forward. I obviously argee with you.

Thank you very much mate. I think it is an excellent question you have raised yet again there, and I think it would be more than interesting to see the fine minds at UM tackle such a cerebral question. What can life do? I am not sure if I listened well enough to pick up what Richard Dawkins was saying when he carved that Giraffe up, but I thought his comments indicated that the Giraffe had reached it's evolutionary pinnacle. Many say that is not achievable, but if I heard Dawkins right, it seems it might be for the environment at hand. Although having said that, a sudden change to that environment I am sure would be a precursor to further adaptions. There seems to be no more the Giraffe can do to make it's body better adapted to it's environment. Right down to the calves that are required to hold immense amounts of pressure. Everything has a job to do, and I think that this body shape is suited to an Industrial Revolution, and I think looking at the fossil record we can see we are the first shape that manipulates objects to the level we can. Considering convergeant evolution, it seems to me highly likely that this shape is at the very least, what many intelligent species require to rise to intelligence.

One thing with this hypothesis, is that all discussing must understand this has nothing to do with ego, or man having to be the ultimate creature, It simply has to do with having the right tool for the right job. We are lucky to be selected as an integral part of this evolutionary process. Just like the canine shape worked for both Marsupials and canines, I think the bipedal shape might be successful for more than one species as well.

[lost_shaman]

Thank you very much mate. I think it is an excellent question you have raised yet again there, and I think it would be more than interesting to see the fine minds at UM tackle such a cerebral question. What can life do?

Thanks psyche. So far I seem to have accidentally run into a brick wall here where the opposition maintains the position that "we can't know so we don't want to think about it and that is what makes us right and you wrong" attitude. I'd like to see that change but... I'm not betting the proverbial "farm" on it happening.

I am not sure if I listened well enough to pick up what Richard Dawkins was saying when he carved that Giraffe up, but I thought his comments indicated that the Giraffe had reached it's evolutionary pinnacle. Many say that is not achievable, but if I heard Dawkins right, it seems it might be for the environment at hand. Although having said that, a sudden change to that environment I am sure would be a precursor to further adaptions. There seems to be no more the Giraffe can do to make it's body better adapted to it's environment. Right down to the calves that are required to hold immense amounts of pressure. Everything has a job to do, and I think that this body shape is suited to an Industrial Revolution, and I think looking at the fossil record we can see we are the first shape that manipulates objects to the level we can. Considering convergeant evolution, it seems to me highly likely that this shape is at the very least, what many intelligent species require to rise to intelligence.

I agree. What are the alternatives? A species with four legs and two arms? If so, is it not true that six appendages are not needed as evolution shows? Are extra limbs not an evolutionary burden, species on Earth tend to loose appendages as opposed to growing new appendages. Some might argue that the Tail is an exception in some species and acts as the fifth limb but that is a somewhat weak argument in that 'tails' typically are not needed or simply augment balance in species that clearly have four limbs. So four limbs is the norm that evolution favors, if biology favors bi-lateral symmetry how many combinations are likely? Not many but the bi-pedal design is obviously favorable for technological civilizations is it not? I argue it is.

One thing with this hypothesis, is that all discussing must understand this has nothing to do with ego, or man having to be the ultimate creature, It simply has to do with having the right tool for the right job. We are lucky to be selected as an integral part of this evolutionary process. Just like the canine shape worked for both Marsupials and canines, I think the bipedal shape might be successful for more than one species as well.

I agree, but also feel this should be self evident. It seems to me that this type of logic is not self evident to others. Unfortunately.

ETA: Grammar.

Edited February 14, 2012 by lost_shaman

[psyche101]

Thanks psyche. So far I seem to have accidentally run into a brick wall here where the opposition maintains the position that "we can't know so we don't want to think about it and that is what makes us right and you wrong" attitude. I'd like to see that change but... I'm not betting the proverbial "farm" on it happening.

No worries LS, I hope that bolding the pertinent question in your post gives everyone a reason to put personal musings and ideals aside, and try to solve something with logic. Lets take the personal out of the equation of we can here. If a person thinks an alternate shape will work, I have no doubt all will be happy to discuss the possibilities, perhaps even a shape nobody has seen that would be viable under certain conditions. Anything would be good. I think it can change for the better. I hope we can also find why such animosity seems to cloud these threads of late. I am hoping it is a simple language barrier of some sort, but the frustrating part for someone like me is I like all of you, and think everyone has great input.

I agree. What are the alternatives? A species with four legs and two arms? If so, is it not true that six appendages are not needed as evolution shows? Are extra limbs not an evolutionary burden, species on Earth tend to loose appendages as opposed to growing new appendages. Some might argue that the Tail is an exception in some species and acts as the fifth limb but that is a somewhat weak argument in that 'tails' typically are not needed or simply augment balance in species that clearly have four limbs. So four limbs is the norm that evolution favors, if biology favors bi-lateral symmetry how many combinations are likely? Not many but the bi-pedal design is obviously favorable for technological civilizations is it not? I argue it is.

Mate, you dead set have me at a loss for words. I have to agree with all of this, and to me it makes for perfect sense. I will be more than interested to see if anyone is able to come up with a more viable proposal than a bipedal hominid. 4 Limbs is great for speed, but what does one need with speed if one can you build an F22 Raptor? Manipulation and leverage is the key I think, and not too many designs are built to favor an Industrial Revolution, just survival. That is how I see humans as Darwin Mk II.

I agree, but also feel this should be self evident. It seems to me that this type of logic is not self evident to others. Unfortunately.

ETA: Grammar.

It should be self evident I agree, but I have seen this argument from accomplished people. I just want to make sure motives are established from the onset so that hopefully if any debate to this notion arises that we can get it out of the way as quickly as is possible and move onto the more serious business of designing aliens .

[DONTEATUS]

So what are your ideas of a possible creature of extraordinary evolution ? WHos to dream the ultimate dream ?

How about a being that has no limbs.or eyes,or whats ever on the list of must have goodies to flip all those switches and buttons.

What If they have evolved with the true power of thought ? Can manifest out of pure star stuff ?

Or What If they are just three tenths of an inch tall but rule over trillions of Star systems ?

IT coud happen , Or not.

My Ideal E.T. would be This !

[lost_shaman]

No worries LS, I hope that bolding the pertinent question in your post gives everyone a reason to put personal musings and ideals aside, and try to solve something with logic. Lets take the personal out of the equation of we can here.

I applaud your effort here to do so, but I can only lament the fact that what I said provoked personal musings in the first place. I didn't provoke that with what I said in my opinion.

If a person thinks an alternate shape will work, I have no doubt all will be happy to discuss the possibilities, perhaps even a shape nobody has seen that would be viable under certain conditions. Anything would be good. I think it can change for the better. I hope we can also find why such animosity seems to cloud these threads of late. I am hoping it is a simple language barrier of some sort, but the frustrating part for someone like me is I like all of you, and think everyone has great input.

I'd love to discuss other possibilities but I don't think that very many people have ever thought about "other possibilities" I think that they just assume these must be limitless and therefore assume it is futile to think about.

Mate, you dead set have me at a loss for words. I have to agree with all of this, and to me it makes for perfect sense. I will be more than interested to see if anyone is able to come up with a more viable proposal than a bipedal hominid. 4 Limbs is great for speed, but what does one need with speed if one can you build an F22 Raptor? Manipulation and leverage is the key I think, and not too many designs are built to favor an Industrial Revolution, just survival. That is how I see humans as Darwin Mk II.

I agree with you again. Isn't that a tad bit boring? Too agree.

It should be self evident I agree, but I have seen this argument from accomplished people. I just want to make sure motives are established from the onset so that hopefully if any debate to this notion arises that we can get it out of the way as quickly as is possible and move onto the more serious business of designing aliens .

I think you've hit the nail on the head here psyche. Designer Aliens will be the norm simply because physics dictates the posibilities.

Edited February 14, 2012 by lost_shaman

[psyche101]

So what are your ideas of a possible creature of extraordinary evolution ? WHos to dream the ultimate dream ?

How about a being that has no limbs.or eyes,or whats ever on the list of must have goodies to flip all those switches and buttons.

What If they have evolved with the true power of thought ? Can manifest out of pure star stuff ?

Or What If they are just three tenths of an inch tall but rule over trillions of Star systems ?

IT coud happen , Or not.

My Ideal E.T. would be This !

Hiya D

Non corporeal beings are something of a favourite when people think of higher evolution in science fiction. To be perfectly honest I do not even know if we have a soul, I know that some people have soul, but not quite the same thing. I do not know if an energy like state for a being is at all possible. If it is, I think it would take more than just dying to attain it. It's a nice notion and all, but it is all too easy. All your loved ones, instant knowledge, total control over your appearance, and all by just seeing through the circle of life. I dunno, I thought things that were sugar coated so heavily were supposed to be bad for one.

But who would think one could make a Plasma telly from the remnants of star stuff. The Mind boggles. and Scrabbles.

In any case, a non corporeal being would have a hard time attaining intelligence when they can only float around I would think, that strikes me as an existence that would limit on to one's own planet? I am wondering how could such a being get to the heightened state of enlightenment without doing the hard yards that we are doing right now. As I said above. the death thing is just too easy. Anyone can do that, as such I cannot see that as being the way forward. Everything of value to me, I find I have to work for. There are no free rides, of that much I am certain.

As no substances in the universe resemble non-corporeal beings, I have to say, I do not think they can be possible. Not with what we know for sure. I would expect such a being to be devoted to hanging around the atmosphere soaking up whatever nutrients it requires to keep existing.

I think your idea ET is pretty much right on the mark. I was going for a planet of Marilyn Monroe's, but I have a good feeling that you and I can quite easily strike a mutual agreement on this one

I'd be happy to meet in the middle for a planet of Bridget Bardot's, hot damn. She is the sexiest woman in history I reckon.

Cheers.

Edited February 14, 2012 by psyche101

[psyche101]

I applaud your effort here to do so, but I can only lament the fact that what I said provoked personal musings in the first place. I didn't provoke that with what I said in my opinion.

Is that glass half full? I am an optimist, I agree, but I think we can strike a middle ground here. Big D Started of with the non-corporeal being, but could a non corporeal being manage a thought process? I do wonder. I think the challenges such a life from would have to overcome to create something would be immense, and with sentience, I do not think the Universe is old enough to attain that level of evolution. If it was proposed that such a being would be the culmination of a corporeal beings life experience.

I'd love to discuss other possibilities but I don't think that very many people have ever thought about "other possibilities" I think that they just assume these must be limitless and therefore assume it is futile to think about.

Indeed, but we have some very cerebral people here. It seemed a good enough exercise when Hawking, Kaku and Spielberg came up with Alien Planet. They went for just life, we are taking a slight deviation with intelligent life. If such incredible minds find the exercise worthwhile, it seems a discussion worthy of having here.

I agree with you again. Isn't that a tad bit boring? Too agree.

LOL, I did have a chuckle at that, and again, you are right! We get plenty of opposition in the Roswell debates and so forth, I like to hope we will see some good ideas with the question outlined and pointed at the forum.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here psyche. Designer Aliens will be the norm simply because physics dictates the posibilities.

But physics is pretty strict, I hope we can tighten some parameters. As we all know, I agree with you, intelligent life will look much like us because we a are a well designed chemical machine that nature produced. Lets try and get some engineering in there to back the physics and see what is left standing at the end of the day. I just know Quillius is going to have a good one for us to toss around. I expect Hazz will poop some interesting links for debate as well. I will look forward to following these links up. This could be quite stimulating.

Cheers.

[lost_shaman]

He's stating his opinion, as is done in any healthy debate. It wouldn't be a discussion or debate if he just agreed with any theory thrown on the table, would it? And the universe is believed to be made up of the same stuff, so I think it would be reasonable to think that an alien civ would have to perform generally the same physical tasks as we do now and we did in the past in order to become "advanced".

Hey Legaia,

Yes that's right. How could it not be?

Isn't the alternative that "Aliens" can preform "imaginary" tasks that lead to civilization? I don't buy into that view! At least not without a substantial discussion of viability.

[DONTEATUS]

We may have to just wait and see, Remember life is what we all try to call it. And Skynet just may become a electronic version of life. All things are possible !

[lost_shaman]

We may have to just wait and see, Remember life is what we all try to call it. And Skynet just may become a electronic version of life. All things are possible !

What then would you make of an exoplanet that we could see has a significant amount of oxygen in it's atmosphere?

On Earth this is a direct sign of the biosphere but also allows us to use fire and have a true technological civilization.

Would it be wrong for an Astrobiologist to suggest looking for Oxygen in the atmospheres of exoplanets if the goal is to look for other technological civilizations?

[psyche101]

We may have to just wait and see, Remember life is what we all try to call it. And Skynet just may become a electronic version of life. All things are possible !

I do not think we will be around to see, so I think rather than wait, lets put together what we know, how things worked in our pool of one, and why, see what is out there, and try to marry some bits and pieces up!

The answer to life, the universe, and everything is only 42, how hard can it be?

BTW Big D, kudos on the non-corporeal suggestion. This is exactly the type of discussion I am hoping to stimulate. Lets throw everything we have, and see what comes out in the wash. I am wondering what we will be left with. Lets talk about these possibilities my good man! Just what are they?

Edited February 14, 2012 by psyche101

[lost_shaman]

I do not think we will be around to see, so I think rather than wait, lets put together what we know, how things worked in our pool of one, and why, see what is out there, and try to marry some bits and pieces up!

Sorry psyche, couldn't help it.

Edited February 14, 2012 by lost_shaman

[psyche101]

Sorry psyche, couldn't help it.

I am seeing the funny side of it, I have always appreciated your sense of humour

[lost_shaman]

1

I am seeing the funny side of it, I have always appreciated your sense of humour

Pfft... I was attempting to show my taste in Art! Oh nevermind!

[lost_shaman]

BTW Big D, kudos on the non-corporeal suggestion. This is exactly the type of discussion I am hoping to stimulate. Lets throw everything we have, and see what comes out in the wash. I am wondering what we will be left with. Lets talk about these possibilities my good man! Just what are they?

Ok can I start off by saying "non-corporeal" beings are B**ls**t! Can I say that?

BTW, these posibilities are actually fun to think about.

Edited February 14, 2012 by lost_shaman

[psyche101]

Ok can I start off by saying "non-corporeal" beings are B**ls**t! Can I say that?

BTW, these posibilities are actually fun to think about.

You can say they are BS, but I would ask in fairness to all to explain why they are BS As you say, many feel the possibilities are as far as one can imagine, lets stretch that imagination and see how these ideals hold up or of they snap! Look at me, I can't tell the difference between art and mirth! WIth these oceans keeping many of us apart, I think it is a great idea to break these things down to the most basic levels of why and why not. I think we will find it interesting, for those that feel up to engaging the conversation After all, anyone can say "we do not know" Who is going to dazzle us with a non anthropomorphic model that can fit the Industrial Revolution bill?? Anyone? Come on you lot, where are all these open minds now?

Top song Very fitting.

[quillius]

As such, why woud a similar environment (seeing as we are more likely to find life as we know it on planets similar to ours due to water) not produce a similar outcome?

I see Quillius offered an idea from a known case, but it still looks pretty humanoid to me.

Cheers all, and good luck with nutting out a new species

Hey Psyche, very good post mate (apologies for snipping it)!

The bolded part about 'similar environments' is quite important I think. I have been tossing around this argument for days now after LS initiated a challenge so to speak. My gut reaction was in line with most...i.e. how can we possibly know its just speculation, however I am know thinking my initial thought process was rash.

going back to the environment issue. If we firstly look at greater gravity, we know we would have to be stronger to have the same movement we do now, my question though is if the down force is much stronger wouldnt four legs provide more of a spread for the weight. I suppose even if this was to be the case it doesnt effect 'intelligence' or 'capability'.

I then move onto senses...which are required for intelligence to flourish?

I posted the hypothetical from Pascagoula case to try and ascertain how this creature would be classed? Personally I think it still falls into the humonoid type, I was curious to see how LS and Lilly classed this creature in relation to said argument.

I then think about the various aliens depicted through experiences/abductions (alleged), and I find it interesting that a majority all conform to the humanoid type again...Grays and Nordics obviously being the most popular. Now if these are imagination it shows that humans are still forming these creatures in line with humanoid types as opposed to some of the wild movie/science fiction aliens we have seen..invading earth without no thought as to how they achieved intelligence to enable travel.

Jumping back to the senses...would eyes and mouth suffice in reaching intelligence?

this is one hell of a jumbled post, apologies but I will try and pull it together at some point to post something a little more coherent.

I trust you guys are intelligent enough to see where I am going with some of this...although please do explain it to me once figured out

anyway I must go now and invent this alien that doesnt conform

[lost_shaman]

You can say they are BS, but I would ask in fairness to all to explain why they are BS As you say, many feel the possibilities are as far as one can imagine, lets stretch that imagination and see how these ideals hold up or of they snap! Look at me, I can't tell the difference between art and mirth! WIth these oceans keeping many of us apart, I think it is a great idea to break these things down to the most basic levels of why and why not. I think we will find it interesting, for those that feel up to engaging the conversation After all, anyone can say "we do not know" Who is going to dazzle us with a non anthropomorphic model that can fit the Industrial Revolution bill?? Anyone? Come on you lot, where are all these open minds now?

Top song Very fitting.

Your right psyche, I should discuss these as they are presented.

O.k. non-corporeal beings...

Did I mention these are B**ls**t? Oh yes nevermind I did already mention that. So anyway "non-corporeal" beings exist out side the realm of physics. Natural selection would not favor pure intelligence to the point a species could simply will the world as it wishes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg7eekklfvQ&feature=related

"sunshine in a bag" might be possible but not by a "non-corprial" species. Just sayin.

[elite1974]

Considering that we don't, for example, how long it takes advanced intelligence to evolve and based on the fact that we have not yet meet any alien species (that we know of), but we do know how long most stars last, what types of planets are best suited to life, etc., then I believe it is reasonable to assume that there are indeed other planet bound species that sit around and question the nature of otherworldly life. It would be an awfully big waste of space if there weren't other life, intelligent or not.

Considering the 100 billion plus galaxies with 100 billion plus stars each along with the 13.7 billion years our universe has been around and add to that the rate at which we are finding planets....I think we may just have an answer to your question in our lifetimes.

it took us 100,000 years to get from living in caves to here and in the last hundred years we went from riding horses around the country to flying there in a few hours so within a hundred years we should at the veryleast begin colonizing mars at that rate and given how long most stars live and how long the universe has survived there should be super intellegent life by now unless god exists and he decided to waste all of that space plus as little we know about life any planet that isn't right next to it's star is a canidit for life

[DONTEATUS]

I do not think we will be around to see, so I think rather than wait, lets put together what we know, how things worked in our pool of one, and why, see what is out there, and try to marry some bits and pieces up!

The answer to life, the universe, and everything is only 42, how hard can it be?

BTW Big D, kudos on the non-corporeal suggestion. This is exactly the type of discussion I am hoping to stimulate. Lets throw everything we have, and see what comes out in the wash. I am wondering what we will be left with. Lets talk about these possibilities my good man! Just what are they?

Well good points all ans L/S is correct also when looking for evolved life O2 would be a great start. There just maybe a fine line between life as we know it and excited energy or atomic life ,afterall we are all made of star stuff. There must be trillions of levels of active energy that may of developed into deep thought. And the answer my friends is blowing in the stellar wind 42 id the answer.

It never hurts to keep the idea open minded. What if we are but an evoloution of pure energy ?

[psyche101]

Hey Psyche, very good post mate (apologies for snipping it)!

The bolded part about 'similar environments' is quite important I think. I have been tossing around this argument for days now after LS initiated a challenge so to speak. My gut reaction was in line with most...i.e. how can we possibly know its just speculation, however I am know thinking my initial thought process was rash.

Hi Quillius

Cheers, and thank you my friend.

I think I am onto it, do you mean How do we know, as the planet environments on exoplanet's can only be speculated about? If that is right, yes, I agree, all we do know at this point in time is that some exoplanet's are in the Goldilocks Zone. They are capable of retaining water and an atmosphere due to their vicinity to the parent star. Red Dwarfs seem to be an interesting concept as the cooler sun allows for that Goldilocks zone to reach closer to the sun itself. Although it pays to note that with HD 209458b, when the planet passes in front of the parent star, the shape of the planet turns into a an extended ellipsoid, indicating that the atmosphere is being drawn away, but from what I understand the major factors are gravity and heat. If an atmosphere is to exist, it must be below the planets escape velocity, which is determined by the gravity of the planet, which in turn is determined by the size of the planet. As such, escape velocity and gravity are proportional. Should the escape velocity become less than the mass of the planets atmosphere, of course, the atmosphere escapes. But that is not all. If the planet is close to the star, heat as we know excites molecules. Excited molecules move faster. If that speed exceed escape velocity, again, you lose an atmosphere.

Using these parameters, as far as I know, one can determine if a planet is likely to have an atmosphere or not. To small, can't hold onto it, too big, gravity is too immense and anything over ten earth masses will be a gas giant with no real planet surface. We not only need a goldilocks zone, we need a Goldilocks planet the way I see it.

going back to the environment issue. If we firstly look at greater gravity, we know we would have to be stronger to have the same movement we do now, my question though is if the down force is much stronger wouldnt four legs provide more of a spread for the weight. I suppose even if this was to be the case it doesnt effect 'intelligence' or 'capability'.

Rather than more limbs, I would expect such a being's body to have a low center of gravity. I think that woud be more important.

I then move onto senses...which are required for intelligence to flourish?

Again, I would suspect so, to manipulate your environment, one must be fully aware of it. I think senses are a most rudimentary must for any being, and all types of life would have them. I was watching the evolution of the eye a short time back, started of as a light sensitive cell to assist with orientation. The first eye just knew light and dark, but any creature with it has an advantage over any without. I think such would be determined quite early in the evolutionary time line.

I posted the hypothetical from Pascagoula case to try and ascertain how this creature would be classed? Personally I think it still falls into the humonoid type, I was curious to see how LS and Lilly classed this creature in relation to said argument.

I would agre with you, and if I feel Lost Shaman would classify such as humanoid as well. It still has arms fingers and legs. That basic hominid model.

I then think about the various aliens depicted through experiences/abductions (alleged), and I find it interesting that a majority all conform to the humanoid type again...Grays and Nordics obviously being the most popular. Now if these are imagination it shows that humans are still forming these creatures in line with humanoid types as opposed to some of the wild movie/science fiction aliens we have seen..invading earth without no thought as to how they achieved intelligence to enable travel.

I think that is influenced by Science Fiction to be honest. Particularly before the days of CGI, the options for aliens were more limited and suits and the like were used. As people wore the suits, and budgets had to be considered, that seems to me to be more likely what has influenced the tales of things like Nordics and Greys I feel. Billy Mier is responsible for the Nordics isn't he (Pleiadians at the very least). I would bet rags to riches that you would be pushing to find pre-1980 usage of the term. Around the time Roswell Grey Aliens hit the scene funnily enough. I hate Nordics, most of them seem to be male. I would hate to be whisked of to a planet of men, that sounds like a personal hell, the beers would be great, but I do not want to wake up near the read headed guy tied to the goat.

Jumping back to the senses...would eyes and mouth suffice in reaching intelligence?

Both would be essential to make it to the top of the food chain to survive long enough to attain intelligence I would think.

this is one hell of a jumbled post, apologies but I will try and pull it together at some point to post something a little more coherent.

I trust you guys are intelligent enough to see where I am going with some of this...although please do explain it to me once figured out

anyway I must go now and invent this alien that doesnt conform

Hope I got it right Cannot wait to see the first UM designed alien!

Cheers.

Edited February 14, 2012 by psyche101

[psyche101]

Well good points all ans L/S is correct also when looking for evolved life O2 would be a great start. There just maybe a fine line between life as we know it and excited energy or atomic life ,afterall we are all made of star stuff. There must be trillions of levels of active energy that may of developed into deep thought. And the answer my friends is blowing in the stellar wind 42 id the answer.

It never hurts to keep the idea open minded. What if we are but an evoloution of pure energy ?

Indeed, O2 makes a good start particularly for life as we know it.

I believe we are an evolution of pure energy. As you say, we are all made of star stuff, but I do not think that energy can become sentient. I see not reason why that would be so.

Indeed, lets spark up these open minds, come all, lets see those alien designs, Pictures or words are good, just explain why your species needs to be the body shape that it is Let's see the open minds in action. Come on you lot with big talk when hypotheses are running wild is on the table, Zoser always has something to point at, come on lead the way with your Aliens, give me a reason to consider something more than a bipedal hominid form can arise to intelligence! Or is that too hard! Come on guys, shut me up! Show me what Dr Conway Morris has missed!

[psyche101]

it took us 100,000 years to get from living in caves to here and in the last hundred years we went from riding horses around the country to flying there in a few hours so within a hundred years we should at the veryleast begin colonizing mars at that rate and given how long most stars live and how long the universe has survived there should be super intellegent life by now unless god exists and he decided to waste all of that space plus as little we know about life any planet that isn't right next to it's star is a canidit for life

Hi elite1974

The real problem with this theory is there is no end to it. It just keeps assuming that people will keep moving at the same rate, and that we can keep getting faster, but lets face it, there has to be an upper limit. Everything has one. Everything. A spurt in technology does not mean that spurt will continue either. The main problem with space is that it is mind boggolingly big. Even at light speed, crossing the Universe is not going to happen.

[psyche101]

Your right psyche, I should discuss these as they are presented.

O.k. non-corporeal beings...

Did I mention these are B**ls**t? Oh yes nevermind I did already mention that. So anyway "non-corporeal" beings exist out side the realm of physics. Natural selection would not favor pure intelligence to the point a species could simply will the world as it wishes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg7eekklfvQ&feature=related

"sunshine in a bag" might be possible but not by a "non-corprial" species. Just sayin.

I quite like Gorillaz, and indeed, most appropriate! I only have the first 2 albums.

It might be possible to have such a being, I really do not know, I would have thought not, but in Stephen Hawking's "Into The Universe" the good professor mentions them as one possibility living on the surface of the Sun. He does not however describe them as capable of sentience. I agree, it might be possible, but not capable of an industrial revolution, and if evolved to live on or in the Sun, one would expect space to be a death sentence due to the massive temperature difference. So one has to wonder how they would ever leave such an environment.