THE SEARCH FOR EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE

Posted by admin_akashic on Jun 27th, 2022 in Space

is not a question of having the right technology – more powerful radio telescopes and computers – but a question of not having appropriate concepts of technology and intelligence. Could we understand a concept of technology that is not geared to control of the environment and ourselves? The ability to think beyond an instrumental technology is beyond the reach of most SF authors who inevitably depict advanced ETIs with images of ever increasing control, akin to a ‘Galactic Corps of Engineers’ (Weston, 1988: 95). To consider a technology not geared to control is to lose sight of the notion of intelligence which is measured by its capacity for control. A billion-year-old civilization, says Weston, might not even value control, but ‘view nature in such a way that precludes engineering’ (ibid.). But even closer to home, an instrumental concept of intelligence fails to capture human intelligence, as the artificial intelligentsia have learned. A computer can generate a military strategy that could do the work of ten generals but not know how and when to write an apology.

There is a danger in too much speculation about ET life and ET intentions: in the absence of factual evidence, speculation may not only be widespread, it may take on a form of wish-fulfilment representing deeply felt psychological and even moral beliefs. This may partially explain speculations about benevolent supercivilizations who are keeping a paternalistic eye on us. But there are rules to govern speculation: it must be contained within the boundaries of scientific theory. This allows one to pursue an idea beyond the limits of so-called hard-headed, all facts-and-no-nonsense-thinking, and indeed conform with the philosophical imperative to follow the argument wherever it leads, but it is necessary to remain within the plausible extensions of currently defensible theory.

One answer to the question of the Great Silence is akin to the theologians’ answer to the question of silentium dei: it requires a transformation of our concepts of intelligence and our purpose in communicating. Maybe human intelligence is not the ultimate product of evolution.

Are they among the asteroids?

Many explanations of the silence assume that the extraterrestrials simply choose not to colonize. But B. Zuckerman (1985) suggests that a very advanced and long-established technological civilization of several million years might have little choice but stellar migration. Zuckerman’s argument adds a new dimension to Fermi’s Paradox in which doubt is cast upon the SETI community’s preference for radio searches over search for evidence of migration. According to Zuckerman, several million-year-old supercivilizations would be obliged to consider mass migration as their sun becomes a red giant. If this is the case we should expect the galaxy to be teeming with extraterrestrials, and evidence of their existence would be derived from their expeditionary ventures rather than radio signals.

169

Zuckerman’s argument, like Hart and Tipler’s, suggests that advanced ETs should have colonized the galaxy by now. The fact that they have not is taken as proof that we are unique. Michael D. Papagiannis expressed the now familiar dilemma as follows:

Either the entire Galaxy is teeming with intelligent life and hence our Solar System must have been colonized hundreds of millions of years ago, or else there are no other inhabitants in our Solar System and hence most probably neither anywhere else in the Galaxy.

(1978: 277)

Before accepting the ‘bleak’ conclusions that we must be alone, Papagiannis suggests a search in the asteroid belt, which could be an advantageous place for a galactic society living in space colonies. Papagiannis reaches the suggestion for a search in the asteroid belt from his considerations of six arguments employed in support of the case for our uniqueness: first, life expands to occupy all possible living space; second, interstellar travel is theoretically and technically possible, and colonies could be built as stepping stones thus making star trips possible for future generations who have lost all emotional ties with Earth. Third, even without major new discoveries, with steady technological progress, stellar missions could be undertaken within a few centuries (ibid.: 278). Fourth, once the interstellar threshold is crossed, it would only take a few million years for the whole galaxy to be colonized. Fifth, the attractive features of our solar system, with its hot stable star, would not be missed by colonizers. Sixth, the colonizers would be accustomed to space living and might not need to live on a habitable planet like Earth, but prefer to live in space colonies.

It can be deduced from the first five arguments that either they are already in our solar system or we are alone (ibid.). Their apparent absence suggests the latter. But the sixth argument provides Papagiannis with an alternative. As they are very likely to prefer to live in space colonies, they might have selected the asteroid belt as a location for their colony. They would have access to natural resources by mining the mineral rich asteroids. They would be close enough to the Sun in order to harness its energy. It may even be the case that many fragmental asteroids are the result of their mining projects, adds Papagiannis, who suggests a thorough search of the asteroid belt before accepting the conclusion that we are unique.

Of course identification of extraterrestrial activity would be difficult; from this distance natural asteroids and colonies would be indistinguishable. So Papagiannis suggests that we look for radio leakage, infrared observation for unusual temperatures, and space missions designed to seek reliable photographic evidence.

There is still the question regarding their apparent silence. Why do they remain silent when they are so near and contact would be relatively simple? Papagiannis suggests that they suffer from ‘confusion and indecision’. For

170