Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday July 24 2015, @03:47AM   Printer-friendly
from the To-Serve-Man dept.

Since at least 2010, Hawking has spoken publicly about his fears that an advanced alien civilization would have no problem wiping out the human race the way a human might wipe out a colony of ants. At the media event announcing the new project, he noted that human beings have a terrible history of mistreating, and even massacring, other human cultures that are less technologically advanced — why would an alien civilization be any different?

And yet, it seems Hawking's desire to know if there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe trumps his fears. Today (July 20), he was part of a public announcement for a new initiative called Breakthrough Listen, which organizers said will be the most powerful search ever initiated for signs of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.
...
  Jill Tarter, former director of the Center for SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) also has expressed opinions about alien civilizations that are in stark contrast to Hawking's.

"While Sir Stephen Hawking warned that alien life might try to conquer or colonize Earth, I respectfully disagree," Tarter said in a statement in 2012. "If aliens were to come here, it would be simply to explore. Considering the age of the universe, we probably wouldn't be their first extraterrestrial encounter, either.

"If aliens were able to visit Earth, that would mean they would have technological capabilities sophisticated enough not to need slaves, food or other planets," she added.

So, who's right, Jill Tarter, or Stephen Hawking? Will advanced aliens have no need of human popplers, or will survivors of the Centauran Human Harvest & BBQ of 2057 call this moment, "Pulling a Hawking?"

See also our earlier stories: Stephen Hawking and Yuri Milner Announce $100 Million "Breakthrough Listen" SETI Project and More Warnings of an AI Doomsday — This Time From Stephen Hawking.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Friday July 24 2015, @04:29AM

    by maxwell demon (1608) on Friday July 24 2015, @04:29AM (#213007) Journal

    If the aliens might wipe us out, it is a very good idea to search for them, because that way we are at least warned, and can try to prepare (for example, intensify our space programs so we have a better chance for at least some humans to escape when they come). If we expect them to be dangerous for us, then we shouldn't try to contact them, but we definitely should try to find out about them.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Underrated=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by arslan on Friday July 24 2015, @04:41AM

    by arslan (3462) on Friday July 24 2015, @04:41AM (#213010)

    I think the premise of the people against this are typically that our actions of searching/reaching out could trigger them finding out about us without us knowing so we would have no time to prepare for when they come and stick probes in us...

    • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday July 24 2015, @04:45AM

      by maxwell demon (1608) on Friday July 24 2015, @04:45AM (#213013) Journal

      Why should listening allow the aliens to detect us? If anything, they detect the signals we actively send out (for example, to control space probes).

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday July 24 2015, @05:02AM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday July 24 2015, @05:02AM (#213019) Journal

        Why should listening allow the aliens to detect us?

        Because they'll see their quantum-entangled tentacles suddenly collapsing and will come on us with a righteous revenge taste in their beaks?

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday July 24 2015, @05:30AM

          by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Friday July 24 2015, @05:30AM (#213028) Journal

          Real quantum computers are actually ansibles. The government is lying to you and propping up D-Wave quantum annealers as a soft alternative approach to quantum computing that won't reveal the existence of aliens.

          --
          [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
        • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday July 24 2015, @05:39AM

          by maxwell demon (1608) on Friday July 24 2015, @05:39AM (#213033) Journal

          Sorry, but entanglement doesn't work that way. You cannot detect at one part of an entangled system whether someone did a measurement on another part of the entangled system.

          --
          The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
          • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday July 24 2015, @06:28AM

            by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday July 24 2015, @06:28AM (#213047) Journal

            Sorry, but entanglement doesn't work that way.

            Correction: human entanglement doesn't work that way.
            (grin)

            On a more serious side (hehe), aliens may do some spooky actions at a distance. If you don't believe it, here's one published March 2015 [nature.com] (arxiv version [arxiv.org]) - (crazy alien aussies with no respect for Einstein).
            For the layman, some "explanation" [griffith.edu.au] (warning: reading it may make one feel too stupid for a layman; it certainly happened to me):

            According to quantum mechanics, a single particle can be described by a wave function that spreads over arbitrarily large distances, but is never detected in two or more places.

            This phenomenon is explained in quantum theory by what Einstein disparaged in 1927 as “spooky action at a distance”, or the instantaneous non-local collapse of the wave function to wherever the particle is detected.
            Almost 90 years later, by splitting a single photon between two laboratories, scientists have used homodyne detectors — which measure wave-like properties — to show the collapse of the wave function is a real effect.

            Professor Wiseman says this phenomenon is the strongest yet proof of the entanglement of a single particle, an unusual form of quantum entanglement that is being increasingly explored for quantum communication and computation.

            “Einstein never accepted orthodox quantum mechanics and the original basis of his contention was this single-particle argument. This is why it is important to demonstrate non-local wave function collapse with a single particle,” he says.

            Wiki on Homodyne detection [wikipedia.org]

            --
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @08:03AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @08:03AM (#213063)

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem [wikipedia.org]

              I wish people would stop speaking about "spooky action at a distance" when speaking about entanglement. If you don't already know this stuff well, it makes you believe wrong things.

              To detect entanglement, you absolutely 100% need access to both parts of the entangled pair (either by having access to them yourself, of by having someone else send you information about measurements he did on his part). There is absolutely no way in quantum mechanics to detect a measurement on one part of an entangled pair by measuring the other part. It would violate fundamental principles of quantum mechanics. So if anyone should ever manage to experimentally determine a measurement on a far-away particle, that would be big news, since that would an effect beyond quantum mechanics (and BTW would enable lots of things, like FTL communication, breaking quantum encryption, and if the many worlds interpretation is right — which would then be a testable claim — even communication with parallel universes).

              • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday July 24 2015, @09:27AM

                by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday July 24 2015, @09:27AM (#213078) Journal

                If you don't already know this stuff well, it makes you believe wrong things.

                Given the fact that I slided the thread with a "tongue in cheek" message, would a whoosh be Ok with you, sir? (I believe nothing in relation with quantum entanglement)

                To detect entanglement, you absolutely 100% need access to both parts of the entangled pair (either by having access to them yourself, of by having someone else send you information about measurements he did on his part).

                Begging the question [arxiv.org], eh?

                --
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 1) by AnonymousCowardNoMore on Friday July 24 2015, @05:31PM

        by AnonymousCowardNoMore (5416) on Friday July 24 2015, @05:31PM (#213223)

        Because no individual state has control over all possible transmitters and some idiot will reply. Imagine what damage these fools [wikipedia.org] could do with a known target instead of crapshoots.

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday July 24 2015, @05:18AM

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Friday July 24 2015, @05:18AM (#213024) Journal

      If passive SETI (as opposed to active SETI - sending signals) has the potential to trigger the attention of advanced aliens, then check your behind, because you may be probed at any moment.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday July 24 2015, @05:28AM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Friday July 24 2015, @05:28AM (#213027) Journal

    I blame LiveScience for their terrible headline. Stephen Hawking has supported SETI (but not "active SETI"). Yuri Milner likes spending money to support science and scientists. Milner probably approached Hawking to get a little star power to help launch this new SETI project.

    SETI basically doubles as radio astronomy anyway (although I heard they are going to be looking for lasers too). There's no shortage of things in the universe to point our telescopes at, and with the Kepler data cascading in, we have a legitimate list of nearby planetary targets for SETI (although just about every star will have planets orbiting it). It is a good idea to focus on Kepler objects ahead of the next generation telescopes that will be looking for the signatures of exoplanet atmospheres.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]