(Mostly) Water Worlds

Imagine a super Earth that is mostly covered in water. Landmasses are few and scattered. What would be the consequences for the development of an advanced civilization?

Landmass Size

For development of an advanced civilization on a super water world, I think it would have to be a water world where the landmasses are not miniscule. Tiny scattered islands would not give much evolutionary chances, or pressures, for life to leave the ocean (there would be but one ocean on a water world). What benefit would there be? There would not be enough territory for land creatures to have a go at it. There may be creatures that learn to live in the shallows, and there would probably be more shallow areas than areas above the ocean surface; and those creatures may venture at times on the land. Maybe some would evolve to use the land to lay eggs - protection from egg eaters. Some plant life that survive on the surface of the ocean could also end up being OK on the tiny islands - being small land masses, on a very large water world would mean waves, storms, rain, as well as a humid atmosphere (we suspect super Earths would have thick atmospheres, and may be steamy or humid). This atmosphere would potentially offer more protection from ultra violet radiation than our atmosphere, making it easier for surface water plants to survive periods on the land masses.

But for larger land masses - large enough to support evolution of land creatures - that is a different tale. Large land masses allow room for life to evolve permanent settlers, for a complex enough, and large enough, ecosystem to allow for permanent land adaptation. Once life evolves species to permanent adapt to land, they can then spread to smaller, relatively nearby, landmasses.

Landmass Separations

On a super Earth, even large land masses, close to Earth continents in size, would be separated by vast stretches of water - a vastness that would make our oceans seem like large lakes by comparison.

On Earth, landmasses separated for long periods show us divergent evolutionary paths. Each continent on a super Earth water world would have little biological communication with each other, at least for creatures that become fully established as land creatures. Semi-aquatic could eventually find their way to other landmasses, but those that evolve to be on land - each landmass would be a separate evolutionary laboratory.

An Aside

I have to stop for a moment here. While the evidence for evolution is overwhelming, it still has its holes, and thus it needs refining. But I also think that the Grand Designer of the universe has created the marvelous, awe inspiring, supremely elegant and beautiful natural laws that brought the universe to life. It's a sonnet, controlled by some regulations and restrictions, but allowing for so much expression within. For me, evolution is not anti-spiritual, but is evidence of a grand design, a remarkable design, that allows for such an incredible range of life in this universe. Many, many different songs of life, a Universe Symphony. And so, as science uncovers more truths of the universe, we will learn more of this Grand Design, and discover more of the beauty, the genius, the elegance of the Universe. This outlook informs my speculations. See "Introduction" for more on this blog's focus.

Evolutionary Laboratories

While the landmass lifeforms will have evolved from the same one ocean, the greatly separated major landmasses would allow for different evolutionary paths. Convergent evolution, where organisms not closely related (not monophyletic) independently evolve similar traits, would come into play, of course: lifeforms evolving similar adaptations because the occupy similar niches such as climbing trees, hunting at night, and eating burrowing insectoids. They would be on the same planet, within that planet's gravity well, magnetic field, and living through the planet's seasons as it orbits its star. But there will be variations in how each landmass' lifeforms specifically adapt. Natural disasters may affect one landmass while another is barely even touched by it - for instance, a supervolcano exploding on one landmass, but as the planet is a super Earth, and the landmasses greatly separated, the devastating effects of a supervolcano on this super Earth would not have the same global impact as a supervolcano explosion on Earth would. A meteor strike on a super water world would have less of a global impact, for the same size meteor, as that strike would on the Earth. A tsunami from an ocean strike would have much further to go, on a world with higher gravity, dissipating more of the tsunami's energy by the time it strikes a landmass than it would on the Earth. Not that there still would not be global effects from major disasters, it is just that with vast distances between at least some of the landmasses the effects for some areas of the planet would be much reduced. This would allow for very different end results. 

Dinosaurs Kingdoms and Mammal Kingdoms?   

If the Earth was a super water world, where it had, say, the same overall landmasses but with much, much greater distances between some of them due to the vastness of the global ocean, one result is that one continent would still have dinosaurs evolving, while another continent would have the dinosaurs wiped out, and the mammals evolving. Would this result in a sentient warm-blooded dinosaur race (probably feathered) on one continent, and sentient warm-blooded furry mammal race on another continent - intelligent descendants of the dinosaurs ruling one continent while intelligent humans ruling another? If the dinosaurs were not wiped out, could they have continued evolving, surviving the changing Earth to become sentient? Birds are the descendants of dinosaurs. Some birds, like crows, have brains twice the size needed for control of their bodies - they are much smarter than the other birds. Some even make tools (Caledonia crows can take a twig, strip it, and then work it until it has a hook at one end so that it can use it to hook insects burrowed in holes). If the dinosaurs were not wiped out by natural disaster(s) (some think more than one disaster ended their reign), could some have evolved to human level intelligence? 

What a world that would be. One day, an explorer from the dinosaur kingdom coming across the human kingdom, or vice versa.

Exploration

Which leads to my next speculation for this long post. For a world where continents are separated by distances many times what our continents are separated by, what would that mean for exploration? A sentient being is probably a curious one, and with a need to do some exploring, expanding territory. 

But as we see from our past, a large ocean is perilous to traverse. Many of our ancestors still did - we are finding that they traveled more, and farther, than we first thought. But it was perilous, and many resisted. For a continent that had only a few islands nearby and then nothing else, many early ships would leave to either never return or to return with no sightings of land. This would hold true for centuries as their sailing technology would not be enough to cover the incredible distances needed to get to another continent. The pressure to develop this technology would not be great - there is just no evidence for them, no tales of far off countries - just the known boundaries of their continent, the small islands off the coast, and that is it. The known world. The center of the world, and of the universe, as known to them. 

This separation, this loneliness, would allow the separated sentient beings on the separated continents to progress on their own, focusing on their known world, their center of the world. Until one day at least one progresses to the point where they can begin to think of exploring the universe. As knowledge increases, as they being to realize their world is a giant sphere, they may again wonder if some continent lies far, far away, just like we use to wonder if sentient life existed on Mars, or the Moon. Scientific exploration leads to technology that finally enables them to send a probe around the planet, or a long range probe to cross the seas (though a planet orbiting probe is the much more efficient means), and they spot it - another continent. 

Contact

And now the final speculations for this long post What myriad of ways that could play out? A civilization more advanced but for some reason didn't launch an orbiting probe (their culture focused more inward for whatever reasons - political,  theological, or distracted by a more harsh environment and needing to spend more energies there). Or a civilization less advanced. People similar in body form, but still different enough: humanoid but with tails, or humanoid but much smaller. Or more aggressive. Or not humanoid at all. The first contact hidden by the government of the country that sent the probe because of the differences - delaying actual contact. Or used by the government to rally their dissafected people against a perceived enemy?  Or this other land thought of as being heaven, or hell, or .... So very many different ways that first contact could play out.

Genosia - Hive Races

I was watching Star Wars: Clone Wars episode 2.7, "Legacy of Terror," and, as usual, am skeptical about insectile sentient beings ("insectoids"). As discussed in my past insectoids post, the anatomical structure of insects precludes them from obtaining great size. Although, there are instances were they could obtain larger size: a humid, oxygen rich atmosphere, or water environment. A dry environment like Genosia is not a likely habitat. However, universal biology will allow for a great range of diversity - insectile creatures on other planets may have some similarities to Earth insects, but they may well have differences, especially if they were able to evolve to high level (i.e., technological using) sentience.

But my main query from watching the episode is one of the several topics I keep returning to: hive cultures. The Genosians have a queen, who spawns the entire civilization, much as an ant queen spawns all the members of her colony. This raises some questions.

Would one queen for an entire planetary civilization even make sense? Many separate colonies ensures the species as a whole survives because a) if an accident or disease strikes down one queen, only her colony dies, the others survive and b) one queen, even if constantly laying eggs, can not hope to produce as many offspring as multiple queens. But as a species evolves to higher order sentience, it is possible that they can eventually go against biological logic: and one queen becomes dominant - eradicating all others. Sentient beings do not always have to make "natural" sense (as we humans have shown repeatedly).

Why always a queen? Even the Borg eventually has a "queen." Why can not a species have a male king who is the only one that spreads his genetic material. Much like a queen sits around constantly (24/7) producing eggs, a king could be doing not much more than just fertilizing female eggs.

If a queen, or a king, is primarily involved in replenishing the species, would they really have that much control over their subjects? Lower species control via instinct and chemical signals. Higher species may be able to fight instincts - an underground, at first, resistance to the monarchy. A non-queen individual could have a mutation that reduces the queen's influence on them. For a lower species, that probably not pose much of a threat to the queen, but for a higher level sentient species, it may prove to be a major threat.

However, let us say for argument sake that the instinct is just too deeply embedded into their makeup, and so they keep their loyalty to the queen even into their technological age. Would such an alien race be bent on making all subject to their queen? Would our shocking level of independence from each other be too much of a philosophical threat? If a queen can not stop reproducing, and the population overruns the planet (especially if "minor" queens are allowed to have colonies of their own, all ultimately loyal to the dominant "alpha" queen), they would be pressured to go out into space and find new places to colonize. It would make sense that they would find safe places such as places that are not populated by a species that would fight back and endanger a queen, or which have microbial life forms which could threaten the queen's health (though there is the scenario that if a queen dies, their species may have a mechanism for one of the subjects to take her place).

And, I wonder, what kind of theologies would a hive-minded sentient culture develop?


Image credit: Animation Factory

Music to an Alien's Ears?

Interstellar Message Composition

The SETI Institute has an interesting (but not unexpected if you think about it) department: Interstellar Message Composition. Is Director, presently Dr. Douglas Vakoch, a psychologist, is charged with figuring out how to create a message that would communicate, inform, aliens about Earth and humanity. It is a most challenging task. To help him with this task, he is gathering mathematicians, scientists, and artists.

Mathematically Speaking?

Mathematics is considered, at least by mathematicians, to be a universal language. After all, it seems logical that all higher order intelligent sentient species would need to devellop an understanding of mathematics if they are to explore and apply the physical laws of the universe. If physical laws are constant in the universe, or at least in our region, then the mathematics would be the same as well.

Of course, there are some limitations to communication via mathematics. Sure, we can establish that we are both burdened with trying to solve differential equations. We can show each other that we all know the Fibonacci sequence (though the aliens will, undoubtedly, call it by a different name), but how do we use mathematics to communicate a smell of coffee in the morning, the beauty of a butterfly fluttering between flowers, or the incredible delicious taste of Mochi cream (the best Japanese sweet ever made).

Making Sense With Different Senses

There is a connection between music and mathematics. As explained in the Exploratorium article on the SETI mission to craft a message to the stars

Music is largely rooted in math, a quality that makes it a good candidate as a form of interstellar communication. Aesthetically, humans seem to seek patterns, and many of the melodies we find pleasing often contain some sort of mathematical pattern.

I grant you that music is largely rooted in math. Bach's music, which I love, is very mathematical. Humans are pattern seekers, and it could be argued that most intelligent sentient beings would be likewise. Also, I understand that since a love for music is inherent in humans, generally speaking, informing aliens about music is helping to inform them of what it is to be human. However, what is music to our ears, may be just a strange mish-mash of mathematical patterns to an alien's. To them, at best it could be a strange noise.

What if  the aliens communicate with each other through light - changing colors as well as intensity, or, if they have several light producing organs, via changing the number of lights visible as well as pulse lengths. The mathematical patterns for what passes as music to them - a light symphony - could be very different from the mathematical patterns produced by human musical instruments, or the human voice.  These human produced sounds may not translate well, and have the aliens pondering the meaning behind the weird signal they were receiving. Would they think to convert the radio pulses into light pulses? But how to convert? Which radio frequency or pulse should be three lights blinking twice, and which should be two lights blinking three times and changing color? It would be a meaningless message - a failed message.

And what of the possibility that some aliens may communicate through their version of a sense of smell? As some languages have a limited syllabary which still yields a large number of meaningful words created from combining different syllables in different orders, so could a olfactory language be made up of a limited "syllabary" of orders or chemical signals. Such signals would be difficult to overlap, and so there would be no equivalent for chords, or harmonies. How would our music translate to them? Would they have anything equivalent to music, something they could see our music as an analogy to of theirs, or would our music leave them utterly confused?

Lost in Translation

If there is difficulty in translating between two Earth languages, how much more so would there be between an Earth language and an alien language? Different Earth languages have different rhythms, different patterns, and different idioms. It is difficult enough to translate technical manual (as comedians like to poke fun at from time to time), but to translate poetry can sometimes be nearly impossible. It may very well be the same with sending music out as a way to communicate the Earth and humanity to the aliens. They may find what we send the mathematical equivalent of a babbling fool, or dismiss what they "hear" as mysterious noise that may, or may not, have an artificial origin.

And then there is cultural differences. What if music is only used as a means of communicating aggression, or to mate, or to mark territory? They may see the mathematical roots, and realize it is a message sent by another sentient species, but they may have quite a different interpretation of what it means.

Pardon My Alien Faux Pas.

Maybe that is why aliens have been silent. If some of the reports of UFO are authentic, and there are aliens observing us, they have been rather quiet and evidence has been fleeting - maybe it is because there are such differences between them and us that observation of culture is first needed - so that dangerous faux pas are avoided. Alien cultures can be, and most likely are, extremely different from ours. If communication problems have caused painful faux pas between Earth cultures then it is highly likely that communication problems between us and aliens would be astronomically more difficult and fraught with faux pas.

The desire to communicate with aliens is understandable. It is in our nature to explore. And any aliens venturing out into the stars will be explorers themselves. The thirst for knowledge is hard to resist. However, communicating with aliens is something we should approach with much caution and patience.

Freshman Interstellar Message Composition 101

But if we could communicate, what new and exciting classes would be taught at college!

Interesting stuff, this.


Reference:

"Douglas Vakoch and Interstellar Message-Making." Origins: Astrobiology: The Search for Life.n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2009. <http://www.exploratorium.edu/origins/arecibo/tools/vakoch.html> Exploratorium.

Image credits: 1. Lynette Cook.  2. Animation Factory

Wrong Way Planet

Scientists have discovered that WASP-17 is orbiting its star in the opposite direction (retrograde) of its star's spin. Most planets orbit their stars in the same direction of their star's spin. WASP-17 must have had a violent past, such as a near collision early in its life, for it to be in a retrograde orbit. Because of this violent past, it does not have a circular orbit.

This got me to wondering - if, in this possibly infinite universe, there exists a life harboring planet that orbits its star in the wrong direction, and by an extremely rare stroke of luck, orbits its star in a nearly circular orbit (eccentric orbits are not as conducive to life). Would the sentient species that arises, seeing that their planet orbits in the opposite direction from all the other planets in their star system (and later, they discover, around other star systems as well), think that this is a sign that they are special above all others? When they later find life on other planets, and find that those planets orbit with their star, would they think them inferior, or infidels?

Of course maybe they would reason differently than humans. Maybe they would think the opposite. Or have little emotions and thus not really moved one way or the other, other than curiosity as to why their planet is different.

By they way, the planet gets its name for the SuperWASP (Wide Angle Search for Planets) program, not because it is a planet inhabited by hymenopterans, or by white Anglo-Saxon protestants...


References

Alexander, Amir. "Scientists Detect 'Wrong-Way' Planet." Planetary News. The Planetary Society. 12 Aug. 2009. Web. 31 Aug. 2009. <
http://planetary.org/news/2009/0812_Scientists_Detect_WrongWay_Planet.html>

"SuperWASP Homepage." SuperWASP - Wide Angle Search for Planets. 3 June 2009. Web 31 Aug. 2009. <http://www.superwasp.org/>


Image credit: ESA/C. Carreau

Blog in Space III: The Beatles' "Across the Universe"

© NASA/JPL

"Nothing's going to change my world..."

Beatles in Space

At 7 pm on 4 February 2008, NASA beamed the Beatles' song "Across the Universe" toward Polaris (the North Star) 431 light years away via NASA's Deep Space Network. This was done to celebrate several anniversaries that occurred in the first week of February 2008:

• 5oth anniversary of the founding of NASA
• 50th anniversary of the founding of the Beatles
• 50th anniversary of the launch of the first U.S. satellite, Explorer I
• 45th anniversary of the founding of the Deep Space Network
• 40th anniversary of the production of the first version of the Beatles "Across the Universe" by George Martin.
  

For NASA to pick "Across the Universe" to beam makes sense, from the shared anniversaries, to the title of the song itself. However, for NASA to beam the song in the first place may not make as much sense.

A Moot Question?

As mentioned in an earlier post, on one hand the question whether we should or should not send a message into space for aliens to detect may be a moot point as we've been leaking radio and TV signals into space for over 60 years now. And the amount of signals we're leaking out into space has increased. However, weakly leaking out man-made radiation isn't the same as purposely beaming out a strong focused signal into deep space.

© Lynette Cook

The chance that there is, or will be by the time the signal reaches it, a technologically advanced sentient alien race who are not only able to detect the signal and understand that it is artificially produced, but who also just happen to be listening with their electronic ears pointed toward our region of space at the right moment to pick up our one "Across the Universe" transmission is rather minute.

Possibly decreasing the chances even further is the nature of Polaris. It is a Cepheid variable star in a triple-star system. A Cepheid variable is a star 5 - 20 times the mass of the Sun that regularly cycles between expanding and contracting in size. This may impact the stability of the habitable zone for the star system.

Finally, the chance of an alien space probe (not necessarily from Polaris) happening across our transmission beam, or for another sentient race around a star beyond Polaris detecting the beam is also rather minute (even astronomically minute).

The Problem of Blasting Music toward Your Neighbors 

So what's the problem with introducing the Beatles to the Polarians, and whoever else may hear it after them?

We do not know the nature of the Polarians, or of any alien that may intercept our message. We do not know how they will react to it. Too often on Earth, when a technologically advanced civilization meets (or "discovers") a less advanced civilization, it usually ends up disastrously for the less advanced one. This does not mean that the aliens would behave the same way, but it does point to the distinct possibility that they could. If we can, others can - I seriously doubt that there is a universal natural law that only one arrogantly aggressive sentient race can exist in a galaxy.

The aliens may be xenophobic because they were invaded once themselves by an alien race, and their leader(s) decide that it is better to do preemptive strikes. Or maybe their world leader is a megalomaniac who isn't satisfied with ruling just one planet. Is it impossible for someone to want to try to rule the galaxy, even if that is a deluded desire? Or the aliens may have a religious reason to attack, one that we can not fathom. The aliens may misinterpret our message as one of aggression or of grave insult to their faith, leader, or way of life.

Or they may want to come and "help us" - parent us. They may feel it is their inherent right to do so. Some imperialistic nations in Earth's history had that philosophy - they conquered other nations to help them. They may see us as uneducated, lost heathens who need to be shown the light, and they know, from experience with other planets or their own history, that heathens won't listen unless you use "tough love" on them.

Technological advances do not always come with the appropriate advances in culture or society. A technologically advanced alien race does not have to be morally advanced as well (though one sentient species morality may not be the same as another's).

Yes, there is also the chance that the aliens that happen to hear our transmission will respect our sovereignty in all aspects of our world. They may be merely knowledge seekers, explorers, curious to learn more about us, and nothing more.

Or the aliens may even be rather indifferent to us, like the aliens in Dan Abnett's short story "Point of Contact" (found in The Solaris Book of New Science Fiction, Volume Two, edited by George Mann).

We just do not know. Is it worth the risk to announce ourselves?

Ah, but, you may say, at 431 light years away are we not safe?

Vast Distances, Like Fences, Good Neighbors Make?

It would be if the speed of light is the fastest any one can travel, and the aliens are short lived as we are and are adversed to multi-generational space journeys. Recent research over the last 15 years shows that "warp drives" may be possible one day after all. A more technologically advanced civilization than ours may have figured out warp drives.

© Animation Factory

Such an advance in spaceflight technology could make moot another related barrier - long interstellar distances can, with sub light spaceships, take many generations to traverse. This, of course, assumes that an alien race has short life spans like ours. With great medical advances, and their own different biology that may allow longer life spans to begin with, it is not inconceivable that an alien race could live long enough to make the trip to Earth and back in one generation or less. Of course they would have to be able to deal with being cooped up in the small (compared to the open air or water of their home planet) spaceship, as well as be able to produce enough sustenance and breathable atmosphere. But again, faster than light travel would take care of most of those problems.

Another barrier to traveling interstellar distances is the danger of cosmic radiation. It is difficult to shield from it. Our atmosphere is thick enough (60 miles) to protect us, but out in space, travelers just have the skin of their spacecraft. Though researchers are looking into creating magnetic bubbles around spacecraft to protect the humans within it from cosmic radiation. So that is probably not a problem for a more technologically advanced space faring civilization.

They, Robot

However, even if an alien race is too far away to send some of their own out to travel to Earth, they could send robots in their place. Sending robots solves many problems - no need to grow food, maintain a breathable atmosphere, or worry about the trip taking generations. Robots would also be able to explore a greater variety of planets as they would be able to tolerate a far wider range of physical environments as well as be essentially immune to any alien virus or bacteria. They could even be more resistant to attack from many biological creatures. This is one reason why some ufologists believe that the aliens known as "Grays" are actually advanced robots.

The robots would need to have sufficiently sophisticated AI (Artificial Intelligence) though, so that they can operate mostly on their own due to a 862 year round trip for any communications - unless the aliens are able to develop something akin to subspace communications like in Star Trek (would such robots be sentient?). Of course, if their mission is simple, like "observe from a distance, take notes and report" or "destroy all humans," there wouldn't be a great need for two way communication. Just sending reports updating on their progress (either to the home planet, or to a second wave of robots coming after them so that they can adjust their game plan if need be before arriving at Earth).

"Nothing's going to change my world..."

Outro

The irony of it is, the song could change our entire world by its being beamed into space by a radio telescope. Yes, I know that what John Lennon means is that when you achieve a pristine state of consciousness, you are in a mental and spiritual state where you are free of worldly distractions: "Nothing's going to change my world..." However, if, and it is a big if, the song does get the attention of aliens, most of us will find our worlds changing as most of us haven't reached the mental and spiritual state sung about in the song.

What do you think about this?



Some additional information about the Polaris star system

© NASA

Like most triple star systems, the Polaris system contains a close binary with a more distant star circling the binary.

In the Polaris system, the central binary pair is made up of Polaris A, the giant Cepheid (somewhere between 4.3 to 5.4 times the mass of the Sun), and Polaris Ab, a dwarf star (1.4 solar mass).

Polaris A is the brightest Cepheid as seen from Earth. Polaris Ab circles Polaris A in a highly eccentric orbit, with the distance between it and Polaris A varying from 27 AU to 6.7 AU, taking over 29 years to orbit Polaris A (about the time it takes Saturn to orbit the Sun).

Comparing those distances to our solar system, Pluto's closest approach to the Sun is 29.7 AU, and Jupiter's furthest distance from the Sun is 5.5 AU. By the way, recall that while Pluto is further away than Neptune, on average, it has a much more eccentric orbit than Neptune and thus actually can be closer to the Sun than Neptune.

The third companion, Polaris B, is a main sequence Sun-like star (1.1 to 1.25 solar masses) which orbits some 2400 AUs from the center binary pair, or 60.8 times the distance from our Sun to Pluto (at its furthest point in its orbit). It takes Polaris B 29,000 years to orbit Polaris A.



References:

"About the Deep Space Network." Deep Space Network Home Page. NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. 20 Mar. 2008. Web. 11 Aug. 2008. <http://deepspace.jpl.nasa.gov/dsn/>.

Borland, John. "Physicists Do the Math on Warp Drive Science." Wired Science. Wired News. 14 Dec. 2007. Web. 11 Aug. 2008. <http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/12/physicists-do-t.html>.

"Cepheid Variables - Introduction." Imagine The Universe! NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Web. 11 Aug. 2008. <http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/mysteries_l1/cepheid.html>.

Kaler, Jim. "Polaris." Stars. University of Illinois. Web. 11 Aug. 2008. <http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/polaris.html>.

Knight, Will. "Repelling cosmic rays with magnetic bubbles." New Scientist.com news service. 19 Nov. 2004. Web. 11 Aug. 2008. <http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6694>.

"NASA Beams Beatles' 'Across the Universe' Into Space." NASA. 5 Feb. 2008. Web. 11 Aug. 2008. <http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/across_universe.html>.

Nave, Carl R. "Solar System Data." HyperPhysics. Georgia State University. 2006. Web. 11 Aug. 2008. <http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/solar/soldata2.html>.

Tytell, David. "Probing Polaris." News from Sky and Telescope. Sky and Telescope. 10 Jan. 2006. Web. 11 Aug. 2008. <http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/3311001.html>.

"Warp Drive, When?" NASA. 17 Mar. 2006. Web 11 Aug. 2008. <http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/research/warp/warp.html>.

Hypervelocity Stars (updated)

© Ruth Bazinet/Harvard-Smithsonian
Center for Astrophysics

Hypervelocity stars are stars that are moving, on average, around 7x than the average for, well, your average star. OK, in other words the average velocity for most stars is around 223,694 mph, which seems plenty fast but your average hypervelocity star moves at 1,615,068 mph (1.6 million mph)!

What causes these stars to become dragsters? A binary star system tangling with a black hole. If the conditions are right, one of the binary will be captured by the black hole, while the other star gets flung away at great velocity.

Not many of these hypervelocity stars have been found so far. One recent discovery, HE 0437-5439, has not been ejected from the Milky Way, but from the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC), a small neighbor galaxy. This star is strong indirect proof of a black hole somewhere in the LMC.

What would that mean for any life on a habitable planet around such a star? They would see constellations change about 7 times faster than we do and they would experience a slight relativistic time dilation (1.5 minutes per year).

But most importantly, they would either pass by other stars several times more often than our own Sun, or be flung out into intergalactic space - far from any other star. The latter would be lonely civilizations indeed, unless they could somehow develop faster than light speeds, as it may take a few billion years for sentient life to arise on such a planet; after a few billion years they would be thousands of light years out into intergalactic space by the time they developed a technological civilization. They would be even further out if they had the unfortunate luck of being ejected from the galaxy, or the LMC, in the opposite direction of the galaxy's trajectory (the Local Group of galaxies, of which the Milky Way and the LMC are members of, is moving at 1.34 million miles per hour in the direction of the constellation Hydra) ¹.

There is an additional effect of being flung out into intergalactic space: being so far from other stars would mean the chances of being effected by a nearby supernova would be nearly zero. As mentioned in a previous post, for the Earth, a supernova 30 light years or closer would be quite devastating for life - for other planets, the distance could be greater, depending upon how thick their protective atmospheres are (to show you how protective our atmosphere is, for astronauts outside the Earth's atmosphere, a supernova 3,000 light years away could be deadly). Some scientist conjecture that maybe a supernova was involved in past extinction events on Earth.

In addition, the solar system would not be affected by galactic disturbances (compression waves, for instance). Thus, the system might be more "boring" than our own, and thus allow sentient life to form more rapidly. HE 0437-5439 is a young star, only 35 million years old, so if there are any planets around it (and it is a big if), and if one of those planets is habitable and in the habitable zone, most likely hasn't arisen yet. But if it does, and it evolves into a sentient race, it will be a very isolated race.

Would they feel themselves blessed by being alone in the universe? Will it appear, to them, that the entire universe revolves around them - even the galaxies? Though if their parent galaxy is racing away from them, what would the make of it? Would they instead feel abandoned? Any thing they create would be lost when their star dies - there would be no one else to ever come along to explore their world. Would this affect how they lived? And if so, how?

Of course, if faster than light travel is somehow possible, by some "trick" (like worm holes), maybe they would be more pressured to discover it than would other, galactic, civilizations; and solve their isolation that way.

Another example of counsel given by Hamlet: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy" (Hamlet Act 1, scene 5, 159–167). Speculating on on possible extrasolar (alien) biological, psychological, societal, technological, and theological realities stretches the dreams of any of our philosophies here on Earth!

Notes:

1. A light year is the distance light travels in mph: 186,000 miles/second * 60 seconds/minute * 60 minutes/hour = 669,600,000 mph.

The distance light travels in a year: 186,000 miles/second * 60 seconds/minute * 60 minutes/hour * 24 hours/day * 365 days/year = 5,865,696,000,000 miles/year.

A hypervelocity star traveling at 1,615,000 mph would be traveling at 0.04145 light years per year: 1,615,000 mph/669,600,000 mph = 0.0024119 or 0.24119 % the speed of light.

Thus, the hypervelocity star would cover 0.24119% of 5,865,696,000,000 miles/year; it would take the star 414.611 years to cover a light year.

For a hypervelocity star leaving a galaxy, in 4 billion years it could be (depending upon relative velocity of it with its parent galaxy) 9,647,597.386 light years away from its parent galaxy! If sentient life takes as long to develop on a planet around such a star as it did on Earth (4.5 billion years), it would be 10,853,547.06 light years away.


References:

Kraan-Korteweg, Renée C. & Ofer Lahav. "Galaxies Behind The Milky Way." Scientific America. October 1998.

Przybilla, N. et al. "LMC origin of the hyper-velocity star HE 0437-5439. Beyond the supermassive black hole paradigm." Astrophysical Journal Letters. Submitted on 29 Jan 2008. 17 Feb 2008. <http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.4456>.

"What is a Light Year?" How Stuff Works. 17 February 2008. < http://www.howstuffworks.com/question94.htm>.

Anthropocentric Religion

"Regis" © DigitalBlasphemy.com

In discussing speculations on alien religion, one thing needs to be kept in mind: while looking to our own planet for some insight is a good place to start (after all, here are examples of what can exist), we need to beware of the temptation to slide into anthropocentricity.

I came across today an old entry on the Speculist entitled "Alien Religion." His article brought up some good food for thought, and I will definitely try to track down a copy of Intelligent Life in the Universe? Catholic Belief and the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligent Life, by the Jesuit Astronomer Brother Guy Consolmagno. However, there is a passage that I must respectfully disagree with:

From reading their history, we will discover that they count certain religious leaders among the most influential members of their species and contributors to their civilization. Religion itself will have had a long and spotty history: nurturing the loftiest of ideals in one place and time and sanctioning atrocities in another. One day a tool of oppression plied by tyrants and scoundrels, the next day a tool of liberation used to smash the oppressors' chains. Here the friend of learning, there it's enemy.
In other words, meeting aliens will teach us exactly nothing about religion or about ourselves; nothing, that is, that we shouldn't already know.

He claims that "mono-cultural alien races" don't exist. It is true that humans are not mono-cultural. However, while mono-cultures may be rare in the universe, I doubt they are impossible. For instance, an alien sentient race that operates in a hive social structure will probably be essentially mono-culture. There may be some slight difference due to geographical variations on their planet, but overall, what the would essentially have is a mono-culture. Just because we do not see something existing on our planet does not mean that it can not exist on other worlds - "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy" (Hamlet Act 1, scene 5, 159–167).

Take, for another example, a long lived race who has, over the long millennia, somehow managed to have only one religion left standing - yes, it would probably be an extraordinary long process, but once it has been achieved, and all children brought up in it, and in a world that knows of no other religion (all references to past ones long erased), it would essentially be a mono-culture. It may not last as one, but for a while it would be a mono-culture. And yes, some may outwardly act as if they believed, while inwardly be agnostic or even atheistic, that happens quite a bit on our own planet, but essentially, in practical purposes, they would be a mono-culture.

We must keep in mind that while there probably is a universal biology, it will still allow for a great diversity of biologies and there may be creatures out there that have no inherent need for religion (as blasphemous as that may sound to our own ears). They may not understand our need for it - and it does seem we have a need for it.

Think about our own little silly superstitions - those actions taken before a game, or before watching your favorite team, or before going on stage, or before going on a date, and so forth. While these actions are not the religious rituals of an organized religion, they are still religious acts - rituals to appease "something" so that we will be blessed in some way. Even some atheists will admit to missing the rituals of church. We humans, generally speaking, love ritual. And this love for ritual is connected, to a degree, to our need for religion.

Is this love for ritual, or is this greater need for religion an inescapable result of developing abstract thought, of developing high order sentience, of being pattern seekers? Is it the inevitable result of sentient beings being able to detect, to see, and to create abstract patterns? Is it the ineluctable result of sentient beings being able to ponder abstract questions?

If the answer is yes, then all sentient aliens will have, at least at some point in their histories, an inherent desire and need for religion.

If the answer is no, then there will be sentient aliens who will not understand the need for religion.

However, even this is too simple. If the answer is yes to the above question, it is still anthropocentric to assume that their religious history will reflect the "long and spotty" religious history of Earthlings (a short history compared to some aliens). Aliens will be part of the grand biological diversity in the universe. And they will be at the mercy (at least at first) of the randomness that is inherent in the evolutionary process. They will also have originated on planets with a wide range of diverse environmental conditions. And so, they may have different emotional characteristics and needs (which will definitely affect how they interpret and apply religion), including a possible lack (at least by our standards) of emotions. That doesn't necessarily mean they will all be Spock like in logic, just that they may seem emotionally limited.

I said "at least at first" above as it is not inconceivable that some, or many, alien races could at some point take over control of their own evolutionary process. Depending upon a number of social, political, and biological factors, if an alien race who is at this point technologically is being ruled by a dictator, it is possible that some dictators in that position would take advantage of the technology to create a people who will be controlled by the few ruling elite - and thus essentially a mono-culture. Yes, so far no dictator on Earth has been able to take over the entire planet, but that does not automatically mean it is impossible here or on other worlds. As we have so far thankfully seen on Earth, dictators do have a hard time keeping their power - thus it would seem logical that if a dictator had access to biological technology that could alter his people to make them easier to control, that he would be very tempted to use it.

It is also a form of anthropocentric thinking to judge an alien's history by our short history - theirs may be millions of years longer, even a billion years longer. Much can happen in that time i the way of physical, mental, emotional, and cultural evolution. Their religious history may only be spotty in the beginning (the first few dozen millennia, for example), and settle down as the aliens evolve. At some point their cultures could become unified. Just because it hasn't happened in our short history does not automatically mean it can not happen in an alien race's history, especially one with a much longer history and thus more chances for it to finally develop a mono-culture (not saying that a mono-culture is necessarily a good thing, mind you).

Finally, technological advances on our own planet have begun to make the planet a truly smaller place. There is much talk about the Earth being "Flat" (connected) of late (see the book The World is Flat by Thomas L. Friedman), where global communication and business can occur almost instantaneously - we are becoming increasingly connected at an accelerating rate, and, in some ways, more and more like a hive, or, for the more pessimistic, like the Borg.

Ah, the Borg - there is a model to be considered. Is it impossible for a sentient race to go down that path, whether intentionally (good or bad intentions) or by accident or by force? Such a society would very well be a mono-culture.

I will close by revisiting Mr. Bowermaster's words above: "In other words, meeting aliens will teach us exactly nothing about religion or about ourselves; nothing, that is, that we shouldn't already know." I disagree. Going to other planets. like Venus and Mars, to study their weather patterns, for instance, teaches us about our own weather. It is not so much the similarities that teach us, but the differences. And the more another system is like our own, the more any differences will help us learn how our system works. Weather is a complex system. I think this applies to complex theological systems as well. If there are many similarities with alien religions, with all having long and spotty records, there will still be differences, and those differences can be very telling, very instructive. Sometimes it is the smallest of variances that can give great results.

I think that the probability is high that meeting aliens will teach us something about ourselves, including religion.

Reference:

Bowermaster, Phil. "Alien Religion." The Speculist. 2 December 2005. 6 February 2008. <http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/000530.html>

Alien Technology - 3. Theology Part III: effects

"The Hive" © DigitalBlasphemy.com

So what would be the effect of theology on technology? That brings us to the first question from the previous post: "However, saying that theology may be prevalent among advanced beings does not answer 1) how that theology would differ, and 2) if theology is something that stays." The answer to the effect question is so difficult - it depends upon the theology itself: is the theology technology friendly, or not?

If the theology has no problem with science, then there are not limits imposed by theology. There will still be limits imposed by culture or physiology - such things will help affect the direction technological experimentation and exploration takes. But it won't have theological pressure.

If the theology has a problem with science, then there will be limits imposed. On our own Earth there are religious groups that demand that science bend to particular people's interpretations of scriptures. Such demands dictate what is studied, and what isn't. It dictates how data is interpreted. It dictates how it is used. It has a strong influence on the technology.

Others demand that life should be lead as simply as possible, so as to free believers to concentrate more on spiritual development. For them, technological development is not encouraged at all or maybe in only certain niches - medical or maybe for some the technology that helps the religion to spread to others (communication technology, for instance). So, unless they feel OK about developing communication technology, and develop a wish to spread their message to the cosmos, sentient beings whose theology demands a simple life, we may not be able to detect from afar their existence, and to communicate with them.

And, of course, if their world has differing theologies, competing theologies, the effects on technology would be "all over the map." If they devolve into war over these differences, then the effect would be a delay on certain technologies (and an possible encouragement to develop others - types suited for conflict).

Finally, to end this preliminary speculative discussion, some of concerns about contacting aliens center largely around their type of society and theology. Are they interested only in conquering others? Would they treat us as backward barbarians or primitives who have a primitive (and wrong - to them - religion) who must be forcibly saved?

Alien Technology - 3. Theology Part II: continuance?

"The Hive" © DigitalBlasphemy.com

As mentioned in part I, as the mind evolves to take in concepts of mathematical laws, quantum physics (the last two necessary for the ability to become a technological society), and faraway stars and galaxies, as well as a deeper awareness of death, does a need for philosophy naturally arise? And from philosophy, theology?

However, saying that theology may be prevalent among advanced beings does not answer 1) how that theology would differ, and 2) if theology is something that stays.

Let's address 2) first. That is a tough question - some would like to think we can evolve past theology, others would say it is impossible, and others would further state that it would evolve itself (whatever that means). At least for our present minds, it is hard to see how a sentient life would not think about death, and what is after death. Maybe some would be convinced that there is nothing after it, but unless they belong to a hive mind, incapable of complete individual thought, chances are that from time to time some abstract thinking individual would question that. In a sense, atheism is as much a theology as Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Agnosticism, or any number of other theologies.

Anyway, if an alien race has no theology, then there would be no theological influence on their technology. That does not mean they wouldn't have a ethical system (bad, good) of some sort that would influence the development, regulation and use of technology. Would even an amoral race have to figure out some sort of ethical system to have a functioning society, even if it is a system based purely on physical survival?

At first, the answer seems to be "yes," but with further thought, I wonder if that is certain. A species that knows it is amoral, knows that each of its members will be selfish, untrustworthy, may be able to still exist - each member would know not to trust the other at all and would have to develop ways of creating temporary alliances that benefit each member enough to engage in the alliance, with full knowledge that the alliance will end as soon as the benefit diminishes, or a better alliance can be formed with another. We have plenty of such examples in our own history, and in our own dealings with each other (watch Survivor and Biggest Loser on TV to see examples).

What is the benefit of morality? The benefit is one that helps the species as a whole survive -where members sacrifice self for the survival of others, for the survival of mates, children, society. Some say, though, if the one making the sacrifice believes in an afterlife, where their efforts will be rewarded, then their act is at the fundamental level still a selfish act. It is just one that looks to the afterlife as more important than the present life.

Of course, if people put too little importance to the present life, then the future of the species becomes endangered - sacrificing self for the afterlife in a way that harms the present world doesn't make much sense for the longevity of the species. And such a sentient race may not last long.

Which is why some feel that theology may not be helpful in the long run. At least one that doesn't care much for present life. And why maybe some sentient life would evolve "past" theology.

But, I can't help but return to the beginning - if abstract thought is the eventual result of evolving intelligence, not having a theology seems contradictory - theology/philosophy specifically deals with abstract thinking. Even a species who may be philosophical without a need to attach a God to it, would, at times, philosophize about a possible God, even if, for them, such thinking is fantastic philosophy.

Maybe such a race would evolve on a planet that experienced more than its "fair share" of catastrophes - say a planet in a system without a Jupiter sized planet to sweep away many of the dangerous meteors (some estimate that without Jupiter, with additional help from Saturn, that the Earth would've been hit 1,000 times more often by meteors), or a planet without a large moon or fast axial spin to keep it from having a large wobbling tilt (and thus prevent the planet from having extreme weather conditions in short cycles) - such a planet could not only give rise to a very resilient species of sentient beings, but also one that was very skeptical of any caring to the universe. At first, maybe they would be even more fierce in theological belief - more desperate to appease the divine. But as catastrophe after catastrophe hitting and wiping out large numbers randomly, without care to prayer or action or belief - maybe a race of agnostics or atheists would rise instead.

Of course, would God allow a sentient race not know that God exist? Ah, we'll save that for another post!

For now, let's return to the issue of theology and technology. How does theology affect technology, in Part III.

Alien Technology - 1. Biology/Physiology - Part III

"Enclosure" © DigitalBlasphemy.com

I was speaking with a mathematics instructor and retired Methodist minister today about logic. He brought up an interesting speculation: for many of hundreds, even thousands, of years ancient Greek logic has held sway. It is an either/or binary type of logic. But with modern advances in the study of DNA (logic with four variables) and computer science and quantum physics (fuzzy logic), binary logic is found to be too restrictive. It does not describe reality - most things are not black and white, off or on. Most things are diverse with a continuum, or range, of values. He wondered what our world would be like now if instead of binary type of logic, the ancient Greeks instead embraced more complicated logic. How would that affect technology?

Why did the Greeks use binary logic to begin with? Most things on the surface seem to be in binaries: hot and cold, night and day, left and right, dry and wet. We have two arms, two legs, two eyes, two ears, and two nostrils in our nose. We have male and female genders. However, that overlooks the other options: warm, twilight, middle. Maybe this binary thinking came from a moral sense - things are either bad or good - no in between. For some, the in between is worst (the Bible picks up on this - that it is better to be hot or cold than to be lukewarm, morally¹). It is also a simpler way to deal with things and such logic worked well enough for them. It even worked well enough for computers at first. Our scientific and technological advances are what helped pushed for the increased use of fuzzy logic. I think some of today's problems, as my mathematical minister friend was alluding to, is caused by this clash of classic binary thinking and modern "multi" thinking.

So, for alien sentient beings, some may develop non-binary thinking early on. Let us take, for example, theoretical alien beings on a planet in a trinary star system; there are solar system configurations that would allow for more than just Day - Night: two stars orbiting close to each other with a third orbiting further out, like a planet, with the planets orbiting in between. Now give the planet a large moon and with such an arrangement, there could be:

1. • A Main Day (with the main star seen either by itself, with the partner star directly behind or in directly in front of it, or with its partner star beside it),
     
   
   
   • with a Minor Day as its night (the third orbiting star only seen, the other stars "behind" the planet - normally the day side for planets around a solitary star),
     
   
   
   • with the Minor Day sometimes bolstered by the moon reflecting the main stars light, increasing the brightness of the night (though with possible occasional momentary eclipses);
     


2. • or a Main Day (with the main star seen either by itself, with the partner star directly behind or in directly in front of it, or with its partner star beside it),
     
   
   
   • with a Minor Day as its night (the third orbiting star only seen, the other stars "behind" the planet - normally the day side for planets around a solitary star),
     
   
   
   • with the moon sometimes on the Main Day side giving, depending upon the size of the moon and its orbital tilt, either momentary partial or full eclipses, or just hanging dimly in the Main Day sky and thus not adding any light to the Minor Day side;
     


3. • or a True Main Day when all three stars are grouped visually together in the sky,
   
   
   • with either a True Night where no star nor moon is seen in the sky opposite of the Special Main Day side,
     
   
   
   • or a Partial Night where none of the three stars are seen, but the moon is visible, reflecting back with its brightest intensity (since it is reflecting all three stars).
     

This would give the primitive sentient beings an "in your face" non-binary example. Maybe for such beings, the number three would hold such a long and deep importance across all their theologies and cultures throughout their history that thinking in binary would seem unnatural. Maybe this is the type of system the Ramans came from (see Arthur C. Clarke's brilliant Rendezvous with Rama series)!

So, could some sentient species develop fuzzy logic quicker than we did? And how would that affect their early technologies?

We won't necessarily find the answers to these kinds of questions in this blog, but I hope we can have fun speculating on them. And in a rather large universe (and with parallel universes possible), maybe, just maybe, some or more of what we speculate could somewhere be true.

If nothing else, it may help us to see our own world in a new way, to appreciate it on some deeper level (as well as help an occasional fiction writer!).

Notes:

1. Revelations 3:16: "So because you are not one thing or the other, I will have no more to do with you" (Bible in Basic English) or "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth" (KJV).

Alien Technology - 2. Sociology/Culture

"Enclosure" (c) DigitalBlasphemy.com

Of the five areas of speculation on alien technology - what it will be influenced by - sociology/culture is, in addition to theology, one of the most speculative! How can we even begin?

One way to begin is to study the social patterns of animals, and how they behave in groups (or if solitary creatures, how they behave). Yes, these are Earth animals, affected by an Earth environment, but it does give us some tools to work with - there is a logic, if you will, involved in why certain social systems instincts develop in animals, a logic of survival. Without this logic of survival, would there be much of a chance for the development of sentient beings?

Another way is to study the influence of physiology and environment upon our (human) societies and cultures, for physiology and environment do influence societies. A society that adapted to a desert environment, for instance, will have different societal pressures than a society that has adapted to a tropical island environment (such things will affect primitive theologies as well, of course). A culture fighting over scarce resources will have different technological needs and desires than a culture that is more isolated and in a lush environment. Thus, cultures, while rather varied, all are patterns, and they have their own logic, usually a logic of survival based on the parameters of their physiology and the physical environment they find themselves in.

By the way, if some of discussions in this blog sound like discussions relating to a mathematics equation, that is because on level it is. As Galileo Galilei said, "mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe." This is one reason why I hypothesize that there is a universal biology, that underlying all the great and incredible diversity in life are some basic universal biological laws which are the "natural" result of universal physical laws (see the blog post "Repeating Patterns - Universal Biologies" for some preliminary thoughts related to this).

There is, though, one variable that is quite difficult to nail down. While animals mostly have social structures that are instinctual, humans have social structures that are a result of a combination of instinct and abstract thought. And it is when we deal with abstract thought that the greatest difficulties in speculating alien technologies arises: abstract thinking can confuse, can create different interpretations from the same data, and influence sentient beings in similar physiological and environmental conditions to evolve very different social and cultural systems.

And let us not forget the abstract desire for power, or the sometimes related desire for self-preservation. Animals protect themselves instinctively, but do not have a global awareness that advanced sentient beings have. This desire for power connected with global awareness affects societal systems, and the direction technology takes (too often a negative direction).

However, studying the great diversity on Earth has drawbacks - it is just one "experimental" laboratory. We don't know the full extent of diversity that can arise with life originating and evolving on very different environments. Universal biology will allow for more diversity than our little blue marble: " There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy" (Hamlet Act 1, scene 5, 159–167).

For instance, maybe life, when it first forms, has different paths it can take, that once a path is taken it is fairly locked in - all life following having a propensity toward a set of behaviors, all of which self-reinforce the path. Thus, just because animals on Earth tend to, on average or in general, behave in a certain way under conditions x,y, and z, it does not follow that we can apply that knowledge to alien species - even if the alien planet is remarkably like the Earth.

Another question to ask is how much of an influence on the creation of social structures, systems is luck, chance, or randomness? How much is a social system the product of the people in it (alien or human) and how much of it is a product of a charismatic leader figure bending the social system to fit his or her own opinion or philosophical view of the life? Are the appearances of charismatic leaders predictable in some way, due to biological and environmental laws? Or are their appearances flukes, luck, chance (*)? If the latter, then here we have another example where you can have two virtually identical planets, with virtually identical life, and still have very different societies. And you don't even need charismatic leaders - as we see with twins, virtual duplicates living in the same environment will still be different.

This leads me to yet another way we could begin to speculate - we can take what we do know, and subtract x, or y, or z and contemplate on what would be the difference in human society, on human technological development for the removal of that one item. It would give us more data to play with - it may not be much, but it is something.

So, when speculating upon alien realities, I posit that most advanced sentient societies would want to survive (various smaller sub-groups may not, of course). Those that do not, while it would be also interesting to speculate on them, they would be of small concern as they would not last long (unless they were zealots about it and wanted to take all other life with them wherever it could be found). And thus, one of the forces will be a logic of survival (though that can sometimes be subverted or overruled by abstract thinking). I posit that there are universal biological laws which, while allowing for a great diversity - greater than we can yet imagine, will have an influence on the development of social systems.

Despite the length of this blog entry, we've only just begun contemplating this particular Alien Realities topic. Coming Soon: "Alien technology - 3. Theology."


* Of course, charismatic leaders would only work on a species that can be emotionally manipulated. However, for such species of advanced sentient life, there can be other ways an individual can have a large impact or influence on the development of its society.

Alien Technology - 1. Biology/Physiology - Part II

"Enclosure" © DigitalBlasphemy.com

An article I recently read about "stereo noses" of certain insects got me to thinking about how some technological advances/abilities may be rather common because of a common need for communication in space and the universal nature of space: while different beings may communicate on their planet in a number of very different ways - by light, sound, touch, or smell for instance - because of the near vacuum of space, communication is somewhat limited. One cannot communicate by touch, sound, or smell through the vacuum of space; however, one can communicate by light, or rather by the electromagnetic spectrum (radio waves, x-rays, light, and so forth). So no matter how a species communicates amongst its members on their home planet, they are rather restricted to how they can communicate in space.

Thus, many feel we may fairly confidently look to the electromagnetic spectrum as the most likely means for communicating with most alien species, it may not be the best way to search for indications of intelligent life on other worlds. Most assume that intelligent life will, at some point eventually, if they survive long enough, develop technology that will include some forms of electromagnetic communication / transmission of information which would either "leak" out into space and/or would purposefully used for space communications. These signals would eventually be detectable by sensitive radio telescopes (by those who believe that such intelligent life would use mostly the radio band) or by optical telescopes (for those believe some advance civilizations would use lasers to communicate, at least for communication in outer space).

However, not all species may use the electromagnetic spectrum to communicate with each other on their home planet, and thus not leak out any evidence of their presence or of their advanced civilization into space and, eventually, if we are fortunate enough, be detected here on Earth by our telescopes.

Take, for an extreme example to make my point, a water world where the intelligent species has developed wholly as an underwater organism. Smell, light, and radio waves are not the most effective or efficient means of communication in water, due to the properties of water. But sound is a different matter - sound is a very effective means, which is why whales and dolphins, among others, are able to communicate over long distances (sometimes thousands of miles) via sound alone. Using electricity would be difficult, and so development in that area could be very slow.

As mentioned in a previous post, such a species may also be slow to leave the planet - a creature that needs to be immersed in water has a much heavier load to launch into space than a creature that needs to be immersed in air. Water is dense and very heavy, launching from under water and breaking free from the planet's gravity (especially if the gravity is even heavier than Earth's), carrying enough water to fully immerse one or more creatures, not to mention the mechanisms to not only oxygenate the water and remove waste air (and other wastes) which would be more complicated than those to care for a terrestrial creature, all would add up to a much much more difficult endeavor than it is to launch from the surface, in air, with air breathing terrestrial passengers.

However, it could be argued that such a species would tend, then, to rely wholly on robotic space probes (after they tackle the problem of creating such probes with electricity in a underwater environment from scratch - though one could suppose a heavy reliance on pneumatics, which while adding weight to the craft, would add far less than a water immersed passenger). In which case, they would need a means for communicating with the probes, and thus reveal themselves to other planets.

Although, let us pick, for a another extreme example, an intelligent species that deaf or nearly deaf with rudimentary vision and which communicates mainly by smell and touch. Such a species would not feel the need to develop TV or radio, though they may develop something akin to the teletype where they can, by touch, feel what is being transmitted. Such a device could easily be updated where the information is transmitted through the air via radio waves, which get converted by a braille type mechanism or even a pulsating mechanism which while producing sound as a by-product, it is the variations in the vibrations that can be felt by sensitive appendages which is how the message is deciphered. Thus, such a species would use a means of communicating over distances that would leak out into outer space and which could be eventually detected by radio telescopes on, or orbiting around the Earth.

Finally, someone once mentioned, in a discussion about the Drake Equation, that some species may be paranoid about broadcasting, even inadvertently, their presence to the universe and may restrict/shield and otherwise block signals from leaving their planet - there may be more advanced civilizations out there that we can not detect by our SETI or OSETI telescopes.

Such beings may be paranoid because their physiology causes them to be especially xenophobic, or because of their theology makes them so, or because their ruler is. Or it may be because of a negative experience they had with another alien species. Or it just may be they logically thought about it and saw how violent their own people can be toward each other over differences and how more technologically advanced civilizations tend to easily conquer less advanced civilizations and figure they should play it safe (there are those here on Earth that present this very argument against our having SETI programs which purposefully try to make contact with other worlds).

We've had many examples on Earth of cultures closing their borders to avoid contact from other countries because of the paranoia of the leaders - mostly to limit the influence of "subversive" ideas from other cultures that may cause the people to reject the leader, or the paranoia of a people in reaction to a negative experience with outsiders. And so it could also happen with at least some other alien worlds.

References:

"Optical SETI - OSETI." Life in the Universe. 8 August 2001. 13 January 2008. <http://www.lifeinuniverse.org/noflash/OpticalSETI-07-01-03.html>

Rockefeller University. "Two 'Noses' Are Necessary For Flies To Navigate Well." ScienceDaily. 29 December 2007. 13 January 2008. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071226230117.htm>

Alien Technology - Preliminary Thoughts

"The Core" (c) DigitalBlasphemy.com

In speculating upon alien realities, one inevitable topic is what would alien technology be like?

OK, so how can we speculate, predict? One aspect is easy - the laws of physics, including the nature of space-time, are universal (or, at the very least regional). We can make some predictions based on predictions we can make for our own technology (for instance, the development of materials that can hide objects from light and sound).

But after that, much of alien technology will be influenced by the alien's 1) biology/physiology, 2) sociology/culture, 3) theology, 4) physical environment (planetary as well as the space environment), and 5) any outside influence (from another alien culture).

And as we will see later, all of the above are somewhat interconnected - each influencing the other to some degree.

Christmas on Omicron Persei 8

During this time of year, my thoughts turn philosophically, sentimentally deeper toward several things: family, the past, spirituality and, of course, life on other planets.

For family, this time of year means additional sentimental thoughts partly because, for the Northern hemisphere, the weather is growing colder, and the nights darker and longer, and so our hearts instinctively look to shorten the distances between loved ones to increase warmth, security, and hope.

For the past, at this time of year, with the New Year approaching, it is a time that we begin to realize that another year has gone, and we begin to look back and take stock of what has happened - sometimes with happiness, sometimes with new knowledge realized, sometimes with anger, sometimes with regret, and sometimes with sadness. If used right, it is a time of extra growth.

For spirituality, this season has strong, and many times somewhat similar, religious meanings for many of the world's theologies. This is in large part because, again for the Northern hemisphere, the Winter solstice brings not only the longest night of the year, but the knowledge that the days will now begin to lengthen again - the Sun returns, and with it renewed warmth and energy filled life. It is the promise of Spring. It is the promise of rebirth, renewal, and resurrection that we rejoice in and are thankful for. It is the promise of death conquered. And connected with looking back to the year that was, and looking close to loved ones, it is a time of year to be thankful yet again for the blessings that loved ones, that love, brings (though for those struggling with a bad year, with abandonment, it can be a very dark time of year indeed).

Of course, too often all of this is ruined by crass commercialism, by the pressures and stresses of false and shallow meanings that have been attached to the season. But that is a topic for other blogs.

For life on other planets, I wonder how they would treat a solstice on their planet? To be high level sentient does one have to be a pattern seeker, to look for the meaning and/or reasons for the patterns? If so, then such sentient beings would see the pattern of solstice and equinox as even our distant ancestors did (from even before Stonehenge) and work to apply a meaning or reason to the pattern (for to find meaning or reason is to find purpose and to be able to make predictions, and maybe even gain some control over - or at least the illusion/delusion of some control).

This, of course, depends on many factors which would affect the severity, or the placidness, of annual weather patterns. Is the planet in a very circular orbit, or a somewhat elliptical one? Is the planet close to its star, and thus with a very short year? Is the planet actually a large habitable moon circling a gas giant? Is there a virtually non-existent tilt to its axis or it is a large tilt? And what of these combined?

If, for instance, the planet is in a very circular orbit, at a close orbit (a red dwarf, for instance, would have a habitable zone much closer to it than a normal G-type star like our own Sun), and with virtually no tilt to its axis, such a planet may have very little differences between its seasons - and seasons that come and go quickly (smaller orbit means, usually, a shorter year). If a longest night is very quickly followed by a longest day (weeks later, i.e.), would there be as much imperative to celebrate the return of the sun's dominance in the sky?

For a planet-moon circling a gas giant, the sun could disappear for days at a time before returning to a "regular" schedule.

Or if the planet-moon is phase locked with its parent gas giant planet, then for the time it is behind the planet there would be, for the far side of the planet-moon there would be constant darkness until the planet-moon came out from behind the gas giant; but then the sun would rise and stay in the sky as it slowly arcs to the opposite horizon as the planet-moon orbits in front of the gas giant. On such a world, a short winter may cover the entire globe while in the shadow of the gas giant, and summer cover the entire globe while in front of the gas giant with extremely short springs and fall at the point the planet-moon is over the terminator line of the gas giant (the line where day and night on the gas giant meet, where one begins and the other ends). Maybe the world's sentient race would view their world as more of a unity than we view our own as on Earth the Northern and Southern hemispheres experience direct opposite seasons at the same time, while on this hypothetical world, both hemispheres experience the same season at the same time.

Anyway, back to the long day and long night, a primitive sentient mind may see that as a mighty heroic epic struggle between day and night. Though if a non-aggressive sentient species, say a slow moving herbivore species on a cool planet, maybe the day and night would represent a sort of "wheel of fortune" - first good luck (sun, warmth, plants taking full advantage) and then bad luck (days long darkness, worsening cold, plants folding up waiting for the sun)?

Additionally, there would be no solstice like we have - there would be no gradual shortening of the night - just one long night, and then one long day, each individual night as long as the night before, separated by an equally long day. Essentially, they would be in eternal equinox. Spring would be morning, summer would be the day, fall would be the evening, and winter would be the night - if you wanted to give them seasons. It may be more accurate to say such a world would have no real seasons at all, only the kind of "seasons" any day-night cycle would have.

If, instead, the planet-moon did have a noticeable tilt to its axis, and a non-circular orbit around its parent gas giant planet, which itself had a non-circular orbit around the central sun, or if the parent planet had a noticeable tilt to its axis with the planet-moon orbiting directly over the parent planet's equator, then the planet-moon, while still retaining non-changing lengths to its day and nights, would gain true seasons. The sun would arc over the sky differently through out the parent planet's year - while the planet-moon's year is the time it takes to orbit around the gas giant, the gas giant has its own year as it orbits its sun.

On such a world, a season would not be different parts of the planet-moon's year, but would be seen year to year. A number of years would be Spring, while another number of years would be Summer, and so forth, repeating itself. What a different kind of zodiac such a world would have! In some ways, it would be similar to a Chinese zodiac calendar (the year of the horse, the year of the dog, etc), except each zodiac would cover a span of years. Their zodiac could contain a zodiac within a zodiac within a zodiac.

Solstice on such a world may not represent so much the return of day, since it is possible that the day and nights would not change in length from year to year, but could represent the point where Winter is half over and thus the return of Spring begins. And maybe, just maybe, the celebration would be a whole year (for the planet-moon).

Of course, this is supposing that all higher level sentient beings feel, in an emotive sense, for in some ways spirituality, and especially sentimentality, depends upon emotion more (at least at times) than reason. Is emotion necessary to higher level of sentience? It seems on Earth, at least, the higher the level of sentience, the more emotion the creature seems to have.

But this is a topic for a future blog.

Comments? Feel free to comment on any post in this blog. Please feel free to disagree with me (just do so respectfully please - even if you think I sin in any or all of my opinions, please recall, if you are Christian, Jesus' attitude toward the adulteress: while he was against what she did, he did not condemn her, and turned away those who would stone her).

Happy Holidays to you and yours (and even to Lrrr, Ruler of Omicron Persei 8, and his wife Nd-Nd. And what the heck, to Robot Santa too!*).

* If Lrrr, Nd-Nd, and Robot Santa mean nothing to you, you need to run, not walk, to the TV and catch an episode of Futurama.