Here's the Real Explanation of ET -- Not What You're Expecting

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   
1) Why is ET not physically here? Radio-wise, duh of course they won't be using radio. That's the interstellar equivalent of intercontintentally sending messages in bottles over the ocean. Even if they had no better technologies, it'd still be useless to them and they probably just wouldn't communicate at all with each other over large distances. Or very little.

But we know that even with current technology, we'd populate the entire galaxy in a few hundred million years tops just going from star to star using slow multi-generation spaceships. So, if they exist all then they have to be already here; we'd already be there. That means.. something is stopping them from making contact. Or they don't exist.

2) Why do the ones that people 'see' appear biological? We're going to have a technological singularity this century hopefully and computers will exceed human intelligence trillion-folds and more. Obviously, humanity will morph into or just be taken over by computer intelligences. When we go to other stars, it won't be as biological creatures. It will be as computers. An ET star-traveling civilization will no question have gone through this transformation already. ETs coming here will be computers. No one currently claiming to see ET is really seeing them; if they are, they're insane or being lied to.

Just using easy extrapolations off of technologies we already have proves current ET theories ridiculous and absurd. So, let's go a bit further.

My personal opinion is that we're living in a simulation. With the computing power we'll have by the end of the century, we'll have created a near infinite amount of simulations just as 'real' as our world. Those simulations will each have trillions, upon trillions.. of sentiences embedded in them thinking they live in the real world. A sentiences existance in such a simulation will have no way to distinguish its reality from real reality. So, if we're in one, we have no way of knowing -- just guessing whether we are or not.

The intelligent guess then is to measure the probability of being in one. We can do that. The number of simulations, let's call N. That number will approach infinity. There's only 1 real reality.. So, our odds of living in the real reality are the number of real realities divided by the number of simulations. That's 1/lim n-> infinity. That's 1/ infinity. That's about 0%.

We don't see aliens because our simulation doesn't include them.
edit on 10/28/12 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   
I have seen them, they are live and just as much a part of the physical world as we are.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
I have seen them, they are live and just as much a part of the physical world as we are.


You haven't. They wouldn't be biological. Biology can't match a trillionth of the sentience will be able to develop before we develop interstellar technologies. When we merge with computers, our biological intelligence will be to our future-selves less than a microbial bacteria is to us now. If we're interacting with biological aliens, they're retarded or something.
edit on 10/28/12 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)


+16 more 
posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by RedDragon
 


You may be stuck in the wrong paradigm, or thinking inside the current known set of physics to determine your hypothesis. Many people see this quite differently than you do. Your experience perhaps limits your ability to comprehend the subject.


+20 more 
posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedDragon

Originally posted by antar
I have seen them, they are live and just as much a part of the physical world as we are.


You haven't. They wouldn't be biological.


this is an assumption. you have no idea what someone else has experienced.

this is a highly arrogant and rude response.

bad show old bean.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by okamitengu

Originally posted by RedDragon

Originally posted by antar
I have seen them, they are live and just as much a part of the physical world as we are.


You haven't. They wouldn't be biological.


this is an assumption. you have no idea what someone else has experienced.

this is a highly arrogant and rude response.

bad show old bean.


I'm an open-minded guy.. Honestly believing they will be biological is very close-minded. It's just accepting what you think they will be and not thinking further (logically of course).



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
reply to post by RedDragon
 


You may be stuck in the wrong paradigm, or thinking inside the current known set of physics to determine your hypothesis. Many people see this quite differently than you do. Your experience perhaps limits your ability to comprehend the subject.


I have no experiences; so I'm completely neutral. The physics we know has this happening with better engineering. Any new developments in physics can only make it happen quicker or to a more ridiculous extent.

If you're honestly seeing ET (and not just think you are) and they appear biological, they're lying to you. Which makes complete sense, by the way. It'd probably freak you out less if they appear to be something you already can relate to. Probably why those nordics (lol) would make themselves appear to be human.

It'd probably freak most people out less to have them appear biological. It would honestly just make me more speculative (not negatively though) about their intentions since I would know they're lying. I'm also much more open to accepting sentience-in-a-machine than most people are. We had slavery, genocides, etc. over people that just looked like different races. It's actually very painful for me to think about how we're going to treat non-human sentiences when we create them, given they'll appear less human to people today than different human races did to people thousands of years ago.
edit on 10/28/12 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)


But yeah, that doesn't mean they're bad or out to hurt you. It's probably just a bit easier for them to reveal themselves that way to most people. It's more out off concern for you than anything else. That's assuming you're not talking to things in your head.. Not saying you are.
edit on 10/28/12 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Only someone who has actually sat down, shared a smoke, a glass of wine and maybe a chat over a plate of spaghetti with an alien can know for sure.

Peace



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by jude11
Only someone who has actually sat down, shared a smoke, a glass of wine and maybe a chat over a plate of spaghetti with an alien can know for sure.

Peace


I'm sure computers can be made to 'eat' spaghetti..



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   
Does it really matter anyways if we are in a simulation considering we perceive it as real and can't tell the difference?



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
I have seen them, they are live and just as much a part of the physical world as we are.


I agree with this. Yes I know you have. Your frequency is very high too.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedDragon
1) Why is not physically here? Radio-wise, duh of course they won't be using radio.


Everyone starts somewhere....remember "Sputnik"


But we know that even with current technology, we'd populate the entire galaxy in a few hundred million years tops just going from star to star using slow multi-generation spaceships.


You really think we'll last that long?


2) Why do the ones that people 'see' appear biological? We're going to have a technological singularity this century hopefully and computers will exceed human intelligence trillion-folds and more.


Computers are only as smart as the programmers and still cannot make the simplest of calculations as a self-entity like deciding to give an answer OR NOT depending on a possible outcome based on unprogrammable data. The human condition.


Obviously, humanity will morph into or just be taken over by computer intelligences.


Please explain why it's OBVIOUS. Details, I want details.


My personal opinion is that we're living in a simulation. With the computing power we'll have by the end of the century, we'll have created a near infinite amount of simulations just as 'real' as our world. Those simulations will each have trillions, upon trillions.. of sentiences embedded in them thinking they live in the real world. A sentiences existance in such a simulation will have no way to distinguish its reality from real reality. So, if we're in one, we have no way of knowing -- just guessing whether we are or not.


The fact we have 'doubt' kinda points to a reality we live in being the start point for all possibilities. Don't put us down so easily and make us into something less than magnificent.


The intelligent guess then is to measure the probability of being in one. We can do that. The number of simulations, let's call N. That number will approach infinity. There's only 1 real reality.. So, our odds of living in the real reality are the number of real realities divided by the number of simulations. That's 1/lim n-> infinity. That's 1/ infinity. That's about 0%.


We are UNIQUE maybe?


We don't see aliens because our simulation doesn't include them.


Oh, but it does.....you just can't shake their hands.

You seem to think you know what's what and write in a very 'matter-of-fact' way, but I read just one opinion out of about seven billion. Nice ideas, a little narrow in concept and all are arguable.

Thanks for the read, are you a Trekkie?



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by RedDragon
 



My personal opinion is that we're living in a simulation. With the computing power we'll have by the end of the century, we'll have created a near infinite amount of simulations just as 'real' as our world.


In my opinion, a 'simulation' is doubtful.

Day after day, weather erodes the surfaces of buildings, mountains and even the paint on window frames.

Particles are sheared off and blown elsewhere by winds.

*If* our existence was a simulation, would such microscopic details be part of the program? Would the implied intelligent designers include features that dictated one limestone block would erode at a different rate to another? Might they insert some coding whereby some autumn leaves fall later than others?



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Putyournamehere
Does it really matter anyways if we are in a simulation considering we perceive it as real and can't tell the difference?


Well ,yeah. Things in a simulation still exist in the real reality. A video game character exists as a groove on a piece of silicon. Maybe as a fluctuation in magnetic field.. whatever. If something inside a simulation is intelligent enough, it can influence things in the simulation to do things that cause interactions with the real reality. That sentience then gets a real body in the real reality and really exists.

Pretend that video game character becomes aware that it's a fluctuation in a magnetic field in the real reality. It then does things in its reality that cause its magnetic field to fluctuate a bit.. Those fluctuations create an electric current.. You see where this is going. Alternatively, it could learn to 'program' the user of the simulation.. Etc.

We live in a simulation but we can transcend it if we get intelligent enough to do so. One day, there might be one human or human-created intelligence, or some hybrid, that does this. But, me and you? We'll probably just have our little notches on silicon be magnetically removed and replaced with other notches
We'll be 'deleted' before we can get a real body.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by RedDragon
 



My personal opinion is that we're living in a simulation. With the computing power we'll have by the end of the century, we'll have created a near infinite amount of simulations just as 'real' as our world.


In my opinion, a 'simulation' is doubtful.

Day after day, weather erodes the surfaces of buildings, mountains and even the paint on window frames.

Particles are sheared off and blown elsewhere by winds.

*If* our existence was a simulation, would such microscopic details be part of the program? Would the implied intelligent designers include features that dictated one limestone block would erode at a different rate to another? Might they insert some coding whereby some autumn leaves fall later than others?



I agree..a little with what your saying, but already we design game engines that include physics programs designed to simulate erroding environments.
By the way, I dont believe in the simulation theory either



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Would the implied intelligent designers include features that dictated one limestone block would erode at a different rate to another? Might they insert some coding whereby some autumn leaves fall later than others?


Oh-oh!....you're talking about god aren't you?

Bet he didn't use DOS for this baby.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   


1) Why is not physically here? Radio-wise, duh of course they won't be using radio.


Everyone starts somewhere....remember "Sputnik"


Starting is a small timeframe..




But we know that even with current technology, we'd populate the entire galaxy in a few hundred million years tops just going from star to star using slow multi-generation spaceships.


You really think we'll last that long?


No but this point doesn't matter either. Whether Earth gets destroyed or not doesn't matter to people on the multi-generation ships or whatever we'd be using to move through the galaxy.




2) Why do the ones that people 'see' appear biological? We're going to have a technological singularity this century hopefully and computers will exceed human intelligence trillion-folds and more.


Computers are only as smart as the programmers and still cannot make the simplest of calculations as a self-entity like deciding to give an answer OR NOT depending on a possible outcome based on unprogrammable data. The human condition.


Humanity is already a contradiction to this. What you're talking about is a function of intelligence and time. Intelligence can reorganize time to make the outcome happen quicker. Evolution is really dumb but over enough time, it created us.

Give a million monkeys some typewriters and they'll eventually write Shakespeare.. They'll also eventually create more intelligent machines than themselves.




Obviously, humanity will morph into or just be taken over by computer intelligences.


Please explain why it's OBVIOUS. Details, I want details.


Because the sentiences we create will be so much more intelligent than us, we'll be irrelevant to them. We then either merge with them or just get brushed aside like we brush aside ants. That will be an individual decision to make.



My personal opinion is that we're living in a simulation. With the computing power we'll have by the end of the century, we'll have created a near infinite amount of simulations just as 'real' as our world. Those simulations will each have trillions, upon trillions.. of sentiences embedded in them thinking they live in the real world. A sentiences existance in such a simulation will have no way to distinguish its reality from real reality. So, if we're in one, we have no way of knowing -- just guessing whether we are or not.


The fact we have 'doubt' kinda points to a reality we live in being the start point for all possibilities. Don't put us down so easily and make us into something less than magnificent.

Doubt what? Feelings have no impact on truth but I'm also not sure what you mean.




The intelligent guess then is to measure the probability of being in one. We can do that. The number of simulations, let's call N. That number will approach infinity. There's only 1 real reality.. So, our odds of living in the real reality are the number of real realities divided by the number of simulations. That's 1/lim n-> infinity. That's 1/ infinity. That's about 0%.


We are UNIQUE maybe?


That's what the equation measures. Maybe we are unique! But the odds are 1/N->inf.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   


By the way, I dont believe in the simulation theory either


This kind of thinking irritates me to no end. Sorry to say that. But your beliefs don't matter. What matters is what you know and then deducing logically off of what you know.

Beliefs can arise from feelings and feelings don't dictate reality. Logic does.

There are a lot of things I want to believe in: god, the tooth fairy, etc. But I just can't.
edit on 10/28/12 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   



*If* our existence was a simulation, would such microscopic details be part of the program? Would the implied intelligent designers include features that dictated one limestone block would erode at a different rate to another? Might they insert some coding whereby some autumn leaves fall later than others?



You could design the simluation to do whatever you want to do. What are you trying to say?
edit on 10/28/12 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedDragon
If something inside a simulation is intelligent enough, it can influence things in the simulation to do things that cause interactions with the real reality. That sentience then gets a real body in the real reality and really exists.


So wrong! You seem to forget that a computer only does what it's told to do from a pre written set of instructions written by a human in the first instance. Any 'sentience' you refer to is an illusion and is just the results of all the instructions.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join