Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Politics and Religion
A wacky new theory on why we seem to be alone in the universe

A wacky new theory on why we seem to be alone in the universe

Last updated on: July 20, 2017 at 8:51 am by Jane the Actuary

A wacky new theory on why we seem to be alone in the universe 2017-07-20T08:51:50-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

From Slate: “A New Theory on Why We Haven’t Found Aliens Yet.”

Now, before I share this theory with you, I should tell you that it doesn’t trouble me in the least that “we haven’t found aliens yet,” despite the so-called Fermi’s Paradox that posits that we ought to have, in terms of probabilities, so that the lack of alien contact requires explaining.

I personally tend to believe that God created the world, using evolution as a tool to do so, though I’ve never been keen on the idea of positing specific junctures at which God intervened causing mutations or sending the right asteroid at the right time. But given this, I don’t see any theological reason why God would have created more than one world.

And at the same time, supposing the God gave the universe no more than that first nudge of the Big Bang, it still seems unlikely to me that we should be expecting aliens to be ringing our doorbells, or at least transmitting signals to us. The universe is simply too vast, and for all that every science fiction film or book posits a way to travel faster than the speed of light, or put people in stasis to travel without aging, or find “wormholes” or similar shortcuts, I find all of this improbable. I know that there are some people who believe that there are fundamentally no limits to what scientists will invent, if they are just given enough time, but that seems to be treating science as some sort of supernatural entity.

In the case that there are indeed other planets that have evolved life, I could imagine that somewhere in the denser part of the galaxy, where distances are travelable, the sort of routine exchanges that Star Trek envisions are indeed taking place. Perhaps there could even be solar systems in which planets as close together as Earth, Venus, and Mars, are all habitable, with the more-distant planet having more greenhouse warming rather than less.

But in our neck of the woods, it just doesn’t seem worth the effort to ponder the question, “why aren’t there aliens contacting us?” They are too far away. Besides, given how regularly our own planet has been bombarded with asteroids, there is no reason to imagine that the universe is not only teeming with life, but teeming with advanced civilizations that make us on Earth seem primitive in comparison.

And having said that, let me share with you Slate’s theory, or, rather, the theory they report on:

Three researchers think they think they may have another potential answer to Fermi’s question: Aliens do exist; they’re just all asleep.

According to a new research paper accepted for publication in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, extraterrestrials are sleeping while they wait. In the paper, authors from Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute and the Astronomical Observatory of Belgrade Anders Sandberg, Stuart Armstrong, and Milan Cirkovic argue that the universe is too hot right now for advanced, digital civilizations to make the most efficient use of their resources. The solution: Sleep and wait for the universe to cool down, a process known as aestivating (like hibernation but sleeping until it’s colder).

Understanding the new hypothesis first requires wrapping your head around the idea that the universe’s most sophisticated life may elect to leave biology behind and live digitally. Having essentially uploaded their minds onto powerful computers, the civilizations choosing to do this could enhance their intellectual capacities or inhabit some of the harshest environments in the universe with ease.

Slate further claims,

The idea that life might transition toward a post-biological form of existence is gaining ground among experts. “It’s not something that is necessarily unavoidable, but it is highly likely,” Cirkovic told me in an interview.

but cites a single paper, The Postbiological Universe, by Dr. Steven Dick, from 2006, which suggest that this “post-biological” view isn’t particularly prevalent after all, which means that the “evidence” for this notion of a “digital life” largely seems to come from science fiction, and the ways in which authors have envisioned superior life forms “living” inside computers, or as a noncorporeal mist living in space. (I suppose this citation could be intended as “here’s the report that started us on this line of thinking,” but that would be odd.)

Here is the key paragraph with this paper’s reasoning:

At the level of knowledge we see this principle in daily operation as individuals, groups and societies attempt to maximize their knowledge in order to gain advantage in the world around them. At the species level, intelligence is related to the size and structure of the brain. Failure to improve intelligence, resulting in inferior knowledge, may eventually cause cultural evolution to cease to exist in the presence of competing forces such as AI. In Darwinian terms, knowledge has survival value, or selective advantage, as does intelligence at the species level. The Intelligence Principle implies that, given the opportunity to increase intelligence (and thereby knowledge), whether through technology, genetic engineering or AI, any society would do so, or fail to do so at its own peril. Culture has many driving forces, but none can be so fundamental, or so strong, as intelligence itself. Artificial Intelligence is potentially a striking example of the Intelligence Principle, since an artificial intelligence greater than ours may make biological intelligence redundant. Given the time scales of the universe, this may have long ago resulted in a postbiological universe.

So we have two alternatives being posited here. Either the long-term development of the life forms on a given planet results in “digital life” because of AI, that is because some sort of androids or artificial intelligence will take over, or humans will themselves become some version of cyborg in which they use technology to enhance themselves and ultimately transform themselves into something non-biological.

So: a) if some sort of AI “took over” the world, what would it want? Science fiction tells us that it would want to destroy all human life, because we’re too sinful (e.g., Ultron), or that these life-forms would seek personal self-improvement (e.g., Data) and hold as their highest objective knowledge about the world. (I’m sure there are other variations, but, let’s face it, my science fiction reading and viewing is limited.)

Now, I’m a skeptic about the possibility of some sort of computer program becoming sentient, as opposed to being simply so good at what it’s programmed to do that it appears sentient, but, for the sake of argument, a key part of sentience would be free will and the ability to have desires. The Dick article presumes that the objective of such artificial free-willed beings would be to compete with biological beings, and come to dominate them, in the same way as we humans dominate and use cattle, say, for our own purposes, and keep wild animals away from our farms and ranches and homes and penned into nature preserves. But what sort of resources would these beings compete with humans for? Are we meant to imagine that they would want to occupy homes, and have backyards to play in, and man caves for their big-screen TVs, and go on beach vacations?

Or are we meant to envision beings of the future as Borg-like, seeking expansion, with some sort of credo that increasing the size and strength of the collective is what matters? Of course, if so, then (a) we don’t want them to find us! and (b) why would they voluntarily shut themselves down?

If, on the other hand, we’re talking about some sort of metamorphosis from human to cyborg to fully-artificial life form, well, that makes even less sense. Dick posits that those who are smarter will eventually dominate those who are not, and that, like General Grievous (yes, from the days when my kids watched animated Star Wars shows regularly), they will choose to forgo their humanity to gain power/intelligence.

But why would human beings choose to do so? The human body is frail, but it is also what gives us pleasure. After all, it is the temptation of Data by the Borg Queen through the offering of skin that can feel sensations, that sets up the big climax in First Contact. In what would an “artificial human” find pleasure? Even seemingly “non-physical” things like video games provide sensory pleasure, and produce the satisfaction of the accomplishment at completing the game, that wouldn’t exist if there were no challenge to it. I suppose in a post-apocalyptic scenario, people might choose artificiality if survival is at stake, but, again, this is hardly the rosy scenario of “advanced life forms who just want to seek out new knowledge.”

Which is all a very rambly way to say, “I’m not buying it.”

Image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ATOPIO_3.jpg; By Humanrobo (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Uncategorized

alien life

space

Previous Post

July 18, 2017

Er, Lady-friend robots, again

Next Post

July 21, 2017 From BBSes to Facebook: gains and losses

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who saw the Lord high and lifted up, with the train of his robe filling the temple?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Daniel Isaiah Ezekiel Jeremiah