Text 337, 134 rader
Skriven 2004-10-08 06:25:00 av Michael Ragland (1:278/230)
Ärende: Re: Alien Life
======================



New to this group but an ardent evolutionist I have a question. I have
noticed a similar thread but this is not quite the same. 
Suppose a spaceship lands in central park and out pops the aliens - what
(logically) will they look like. For instance they are unlikely to look
like a green blob of jelly as they would have no mechanism for building
tools and steering a spaceship.Can we therefore assume that such
creatures would have hands similar to us, one head,two eyes and two ears
and probably two legs. Maybe the star-trek idea of alien life is not far
from the truth. I am not saying that green blobs will not exist but that
space-travellers must necessarily look similar (though not identical to
us). A dolphin cannot pilot a machine however smart it is unless there
are 'speech' driven controls and even then there would have to be an
evolution in technology from the primitive stage to get there in the
first place.Or is this arrogance?Can somebody invent a fictional
character that could pilot a spaceship that was radically different from
the basic human form and that makes sense in an evolutionary framework. 

Hi Tom:

I think your question is interesting but it relies on what is known as
the "anthropic principle". In short, the anthropic principle is a
concept that states fundamentally that the Universe is the way it is
because if it were different we would not exist to pose the question or
that we see the universe the way it is because if it were different we
would not be here to observe it. The anthropic principle has a tendency
to believe if there are other life forms in the universe they must be
similar to us e.g. carbon based, etc. Darwinian evolution is the
evolutionary framework on earth but that doesn't necessarily mean it is
the evolutionary framework of other possible alien life forms in the
universe.

Therefore, we can't assume that such creatures would have hands similar
to us, one head, two eyes and two ears and probably two legs. In all
liklihood, the star-trek idea of alien life is far from the truth. I
understand your belief  space-travellers must necessarily look similar
(though not identical to us) but this isn't necessarily the case and
relies on the anthropic principle.

I will give you a fictional idea of what an alien life form would be
like in an evolutionary form but even here I'm going to have to rely
somewhat on the anthropic principle. Why? Because as humans we have yet
to encounter any alien life forms or to understand their possibly very
different evolutionary processes from us. So what I will say will be
pure speculation and not based on any scientific evidence.

But first I want to try to tear away at the anthropic principle to an
extent. Again, it states in short, the anthropic principle is a concept
that states fundamentally that the Universe is the way it is because if
it were different we would not exist to pose the question or that we see
the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be
here to observe it.

There are a few major problems with this principle. First, we don't
really know "the way the universe is". Physicists don't really
understand blackholes, dark energy, dark matter and ultimately can't
even scientifically prove the origins of the universe. The "Big Bang"
model is the most widely accepted but it can't be scientifically proved.
There is a tremendous (perhaps infinite) amount of knowledge we don't
know about the universe. We know some things but we certainly don't know
"the way the universe is".

The second half of this is, "because if it were different we would not
exist to pose the question". But the universe is different from the way
we scientifically observe it or perceive it. Newton's Laws on Gravity,
Einstein's General and Special Theory of Relativity, Hawking's discovery
of blackhole radiation, etc. may all be universals but they are not the
"beginning and the end" of the way the universe is. In other words, the
statement "The universe is the way it is because if it were different we
would not exist to pose the question" is static. For example, centuries
ago it was common to consider the earth the center of the universe and
the planets revolved around it. This was the way humans actually saw the
universe. If humans were different wouldn't they possibly  be able to
pose the question "the universe isn't the way it is" (opposing
prevailing theories of the way the universe really is) by providing
scientific evidence? The anthropic principle itself is static because it
doesn't allow for evolutionary changes (Darwinian and in the future
genetic engineering) and cultural evolution and advances in science and
technology. 

Another definition of the anthropic principle is that we see the
universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here
to observe it. This is presumptous. Let's say a huge comet hit the earth
wiping out all "intelligent" life or there was a prolonged nuclear
winter or deadly genetically engineered virus which wiped out all
"intelligent life". The universe is immense and there are likely other
"intelligent" life forms in the universe (although there is no
scientific evidence) and even though "intelligent" life on earth had
vanished some of these alien life forms may be much more advanced than
we are and have a much better undestanding of the way the universe is.
Possibly these alien life forms are so advanced their knowledge of the
universe is very different from ours. So if we become extinct with no
descendants on earth than our abscence of being an oberver of the
universe will not effect other possible alien life forms from continuing
to have a much more advanced and different understanding of the way the
universe really is.
Without trying to diminish the value and importance of human life on
earth we are cosmologically insignifigant.

As for you question of what an alien in a spaceship landing in Central
Park might look like I can say personally I don't believe any organic or
chemical life forms would be aboard such a spaceship. I say this because
in such long space travel such forms would likely degrade and could not
be sustained. It would really be difficult to say where the evolutionary
starting point for such an alien life form might be. Look at us. We most
likely came from RNA and started out as bacteria. In another hundred
million years (assuming we don't destroy ourselves or can't genetically
engineer ourselves) we may be similar in some ways to that alien life
form in Central Park, having evolved beyond our DNA. How? I don't know
exactly. Maybe through "conscious" intelligent nanotechnological
machines, computers, etc. 
It would be quite an evolutionary trip from being a prokaryotic
bacterium to a scientifically and technologically advanced life form
which travels throughout the galaxies. Perhaps I'm wrong but if there
are such advanced alien life forms in the universe I can't imagine them
starting out at that level of advancement. They need not necessarily
advanced as we have through Darwinian evolution e.g. natural selection
or been carbon based but it seems they would have had to have evolved
from more primitive to advanced stages.

Michael Ragland 

"It's uncertain whether intelligence has any long term survival value.
Bacteria do quite well without it."
 Stephen Hawking
---
ū RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info@bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2á˙* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 10/8/04 6:25:30 AM
 * Origin: MoonDog BBS, Brooklyn,NY, 718 692-2498, 1:278/230 (1:278/230)