Alien origin thought experiment.

[studiot]

11 hours ago, beecee said:

How do you mean? One literally is time travelling when flying. There was also an account detailing near what I said with relation to future and past time travel by Kip Thorne, but I cannot find it now.

 

 

I mean that the in particular the time sub manifold of the spacetime manifold is the wrong shape.

(Shape is defined by the relationship between the points of a manifold)

There is only a direct relationship between 'adjacent' points in the time sub manifold.

(That is a definition or another way of saying there is only one time dimension).

 

Conmsider another one dimensional manifold  -  a single tack railway.

How would an express train pass a slow train on such a track ?

It may be possible for microscopic quantum objects to do this but not for macroscopic material ones.

Immaterial waves also have this capability.

[Genady]

In the classical "twin paradox" the twins get between same two points via different spacetime trajectories, and the traveler twin's way is shorter.

[dimreepr]

12 minutes ago, Genady said:

In the classical "twin paradox" the twins get between same two points via different spacetime trajectories, and the traveler twin's way is shorter.

So it's not a paradox, a real paradox is an explanation of why 'it' can't be real, if I kill my father before I'm real...

The real paradox of time is, we're doomed/liberated and liberated/doomed, by it...

[Genady]

I am not sure what you describe - killing your father before you were born - can't be real. On your worldline, you were born, went back in time, killed your father, then went forward in time (or not.) On your father's contemporary's worldline, somebody appeared from nowhere and killed your father. Is there a contradiction?

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, Genady said:

Is there a contradiction?

Only in reality...

 In a paradox, reality is contradicted...

[studiot]

1 hour ago, Genady said:

In the classical "twin paradox" the twins get between same two points via different spacetime trajectories, and the traveler twin's way is shorter.

This is exactly one sort of situation I had in mind when I said that the commonly understood time travel scenario is impossible.

The twins demonstrate another form of time travel.

The killing your father sort is impossible so no paradox arises.

 

Edited December 31, 2021 by studiot

[zapatos]

58 minutes ago, studiot said:

The killing your father sort is impossible so no paradox arises.

 

Why? If we make the giant leap that time travel is possible, what keeps me from pulling the trigger?

[TheVat]

Nothing, but then there would need to be a splitting off of a new timeline, one in which you never existed.  The original timeline would have to still exist, else how would you be there shooting Dad in the first place?  And any pastward time travel that even just displaced a few molecules would create a new timeline, in this way.  Time travel of this type only seems possible if Everett's Many Worlds interpretation is correct.  

[studiot]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Why? If we make the giant leap that time travel is possible, what keeps me from pulling the trigger?

Nothing stops you from pulling the trigger.

I already explained that neither you , nor your trigger can 'travel in time' the way described.

4 hours ago, studiot said:

It may be possible for microscopic quantum objects to do this but not for macroscopic material ones.

 

However if folks want to discuss why 'time travel' is impossible we should really do this in another thread.

Edited December 31, 2021 by studiot

[zapatos]

1 minute ago, studiot said:

Nothing stops you from pulling the trigger.

I already explained that neither you , nor your trigger can 'travel in time' the way described.

Perhaps I misunderstood. You are saying killing your father is impossible because time travel as it was described it is impossible? Not simply because killing your father would create some weird paradox?

 

[studiot]

Edit

4 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Nothing, but then there would need to be a splitting off of a new timeline, one in which you never existed.  The original timeline would have to still exist, else how would you be there shooting Dad in the first place?  And any pastward time travel that even just displaced a few molecules would create a new timeline, in this way.  Time travel of this type only seems possible if Everett's Many Worlds interpretation is correct.  

 

Yes, look carefully at my train manifold and you will see the beginnings of the model.

1 minute ago, zapatos said:

Perhaps I misunderstood. You are saying killing your father is impossible because time travel as it was described it is impossible? Not simply because killing your father would create some weird paradox?

In essence, yes.

See my earlier posts.

[Genady]

[Disclaimer: I don't think time travel is physically possible.]

Is splitting of a timeline necessary? I see a scenario without it, I think. A guy travels from year 2022 to year 1922, kills his ancestor, travels from 1922 to 2022, and finds a world, where he never existed. His history line is self-consistent: born, travel, kill, travel. The world's history line is self-consistent: somebody appeared from nowhere in 1922, killed a person, then somebody appeared from nowhere in 2022. No split, just a "loop".

[studiot]

20 minutes ago, Genady said:

[Disclaimer: I don't think time travel is physically possible.]

Is splitting of a timeline necessary? I see a scenario without it, I think. A guy travels from year 2022 to year 1922, kills his ancestor, travels from 1922 to 2022, and finds a world, where he never existed. His history line is self-consistent: born, travel, kill, travel. The world's history line is self-consistent: somebody appeared from nowhere in 1922, killed a person, then somebody appeared from nowhere in 2022. No split, just a "loop".

This is the sort of 'time travel' that is not physically possible, in the spacetime manifold that we observe around us.

Edited December 31, 2021 by studiot

[beecee]

20 hours ago, Genady said:

It is here: Black Holes & Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy (Commonwealth Fund Book Program) Reprint, Thorne, Kip, Hawking, Stephen W. - Amazon.com

Ahh yes, I have that book, ( actually out on loan at this time) 

What I was referring to was the following...https://plus.maths.org/content/time-travel-allowed

extract:

In brief: The laws of physics allow members of an exceedingly advanced civilisation to travel forward in time as fast as they might wish. Backward time travel is another matter; we do not know whether it is allowed by the laws of physics, and the answer is likely controlled by a set of physical laws that we do not yet understand at all well: the laws of quantum gravity. In order for humans to travel forward in time very rapidly, or backward (if allowed at all), we would need technology far far beyond anything we are capable of today.

Travelling forward in time rapidly

Albert Einstein's relativistic laws of physics tell us that time is "personal". If you and I move differently or are at different locations in a gravitational field, then the rate of flow of time that you experience (the rate that governs the ticking of any very good clock you carry with you and that governs the aging of your body) is different from the rate of time flow that I experience. (Einstein used the phrase "time is relative"; I prefer "time is personal".)

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

This is the sort of time travel that I automatically think of when the subject arises.

[studiot]

24 minutes ago, beecee said:

Ahh yes, I have that book, ( actually out on loan at this time) 

What I was referring to was the following...https://plus.maths.org/content/time-travel-allowed

extract:

In brief: The laws of physics allow members of an exceedingly advanced civilisation to travel forward in time as fast as they might wish. Backward time travel is another matter; we do not know whether it is allowed by the laws of physics, and the answer is likely controlled by a set of physical laws that we do not yet understand at all well: the laws of quantum gravity. In order for humans to travel forward in time very rapidly, or backward (if allowed at all), we would need technology far far beyond anything we are capable of today.

Travelling forward in time rapidly

Albert Einstein's relativistic laws of physics tell us that time is "personal". If you and I move differently or are at different locations in a gravitational field, then the rate of flow of time that you experience (the rate that governs the ticking of any very good clock you carry with you and that governs the aging of your body) is different from the rate of time flow that I experience. (Einstein used the phrase "time is relative"; I prefer "time is personal".)

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

This is the sort of time travel that I automatically think of when the subject arises.

How is this time travel ?

How is travelling forwards in time in any way consistent with the OP which specified travelling backwards ?

Are you going to address my comments in response to your previous post?

Happy New Year.

[beecee]

15 hours ago, Ken Fabian said:

I don't think there is a "human resemblance evolutionary process" and there are no known advanced intelligent aliens that have that form. It seems like rank anthropomorphising to presume it is superior or even necessary - if that is what that prejudice is.

Whilst hands with opposable thumbs at the ends of upper arms of visually capable bipeds appear a very good way to make and use tools (to humans) I don't see it is a requirement; birds build complex nests with beaks and even manipulate tools and Octopuses ('pi?) can do it with suction cup fitted tentacles.

But I suspect that physical capabilities are amongst the least essential - mental and communicative abilities can work around a lot of physical limitations, including by making teamwork possible. One beak to hold the work piece, another to steady the anvil and two more to work the hammer? Isn't much of human success a result of tools and techniques that work around the physical limitations of individuals?

Might that ability to work around physical limitations be a crucial marker of an "intelligent" tool using species? Where is the lower threshold for physical abilities? When starting off a lower base the achievements look greater, not less.

I'm not saying it or us are superior,only that  "human resemblance evolutionary process" seems more likely to be able to undertake space travel, building sky scrapers, bridges, space stations, LHC type machinery etc etc. I marvel at the intelligence of octupus,...I marvel at the social hierarchy and emotions of Elephants...the ability of Orcas to solving problems in obtaining lunch/dinner. But I also understand that if some  life does inhabit the Ocean's of Europa, or Enceledus, or Titan, it is somewhat confined by its evolutionary path, as Orcas appear confined, and Elephants appear curtailed by there physical form. 

Perhaps this is why through out the 19th, 20th and now 21st century, travelling Aliens (as we imagine)  are mostly humanoid form. I'll accept certain other lizard like forms also. Human success has come about due to our physical makeup, our original brainwave  in climbing down out of the trees and walking upright, the continued developing of that brain, coupled with that amazing opposing thumb, taming fire etc. Communication/language and understanding each other was also a requirement for human advancement. 

Do Aliens exist, is another important question. We can either go with favouring the Fermi paradox or the Drake equation. While accepting we still have no concrete evidence for the existence of any life off this Earth, I put my money on the Drake equation. I beleive Fermi has overlooked the time and distance barriers to inter-planetary contact.

15 minutes ago, studiot said:

How is this time travel ?

How is travelling forwards in time in any way consistent with the OP which specified travelling backwards ?

I have already expressed my views on forward and backward time travel. I might well ask you, why isn't it time travel? Not as normally envisaged, but still time travel none the less. As Thorne says, Time is personal/relative.

22 minutes ago, studiot said:

Are you going to address my comments in response to your previous post?

Happy New Year.

Give me time...please? I have just awaken after New Year! Happy New Year to you also, and stay safe!

8 hours ago, studiot said:

I mean that the in particular the time sub manifold of the spacetime manifold is the wrong shape.

(Shape is defined by the relationship between the points of a manifold)

There is only a direct relationship between 'adjacent' points in the time sub manifold.

(That is a definition or another way of saying there is only one time dimension).

 

Conmsider another one dimensional manifold  -  a single tack railway.

How would an express train pass a slow train on such a track ?

It may be possible for microscopic quantum objects to do this but not for macroscopic material ones.

Immaterial waves also have this capability.

OK, only one time dimension, accepted...but it is also a personal/relative concept, that is interchangeable with space. Not sure how else to address your post (remember, I'm noly a poor old retired maintenace fitter/machinist/welder) You also say the spacetime framework,(manifold) is the wrong shape. That shape though is distorted by mass/energy.

(Perhaps as someone suggested, we should start a thread on time travel?) 

[Ken Fabian]

We only have one example of intelligence capable of the kinds of technology we have - we don't know enough to even suggest a tech using intelligence having that form is more or less capable or likely. Or appreciate the kinds of technologies we don't have and may not recognise.

We do have examples of other physical forms finding, making and using tools as well as cooperating on tasks individuals are incapable of. Even, I suggest, examples of animals that engage in reasoning and problem solving. I suspect strong human prejudices on what form intelligent aliens might take - and perhaps an unhealthy measure of self deception about our innate superiority.

I see no basis to conclude that plants are unlikely evolve intelligence or evolve movement - there are venus fly traps and other exceptions and just using time lapse gives a whole different perspective on plants and movement.

Going by the human example I see no basis to conclude that, having crossed interstellar space, aliens are unlikely to be hostile. We can't even be assured that if humans achieved such a feat, that we would not covet the target world and it's resource or that humans would never do xenocide.

I think if we are honest we will concede that humans are quite capable of such things - and of finding justifications before, during and after. Or, where justifications seem inadequate - scapegoats. We may even be predisposed to doing such things.

I am not sure we would recognise some kinds of intelligent aliens and I think we would be capable of wiping them out just by mistake by simply failing to recognise them as intelligent.

And should any intelligent aliens take violent exception to human presence in their territory - on the basis that doing so is justified as self defense. If a child is caught and killed by an intelligent carnivorous plant on it's own world would humans refrain from retribution? We ARE the consummate nest raiders but we won't tolerate anything that raids our nests; any onworld human presence that has committed itself to survival by colonisation will be capable of wiping out alien species to assure that survival.

 

Edited December 31, 2021 by Ken Fabian

[beecee]

5 hours ago, Ken Fabian said:

I see no basis to conclude that plants are unlikely evolve intelligence or evolve movement -

I do see plenty though to conclude plants, intelligent or otherwise, will not achieve inter-planetary space travel.

Much of the rest of your post is opinion based. 

Will Aliens be hostile? perhaps, perhaps not. Perhaps we have a certain level  reached with intelligence, that will see the futility of hostility, over peaceful co-existence. Perhaps an advanced Alien species, having achieved inter-stellar travel, will be at that threshold. I prefer to remain optimistic in that regard. http://humoropedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/optimism-quote.jpg

[dimreepr]

On 12/30/2021 at 12:58 PM, beecee said:

Perhaps the "human resemblance" evolutionary process, is simply the most favoured to reach advanced intelligence and associated abilities. What I mean is that while an Octupus is obviously "intelligent" it is still confined somewhat by its evolutionary path.

It's simply our evolution, that has got us here, at our level, at this time.

It's a process not an attribute, and that process is just as capable of producing a space faring octopus/rabbit/tomato as it has us, logically speaking...

Remember, we are not formed in the image of God.

Edited January 1, 2022 by dimreepr

[beecee]

8 hours ago, dimreepr said:

It's simply our evolution, that has got us here, at our level, at this time.

That's what I said. 🙄

8 hours ago, dimreepr said:

It's a process not an attribute, and that process is just as capable of producing a space faring octopus/rabbit/tomato as it has us, logically speaking...

Don't be silly now. Or perhaps you meant illogically speaking?

8 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Remember, we are not formed in the image of God.

While this is largely a thought experiment on where members think Aliens would come from (and which it appears you still lack the intestinal fortitude to answer), we should leave your myths out of it.

Let's put the nonsense  that octopuses and/or plants could ever undertake space travel to bed. The following extracts from an excellent article says it far better then I could.........

https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-could-octopuses-evolve-until-they-take-over-the-world-and-travel-to-space-156493

extracts:

Michael, aged 14, asks:

"If the faster part of human evolution is over, and squids and octopuses continue to evolve, could there be an apocalypse where the cephalopods take over the world?"

ANSWER: EXTRACTS:

"They use tools to solve problems (like us) and they can open child-proof containers (not always like us). And just last week, research found a cuttlefish (another cephalopod, cousins of octopuses) passed an intelligence test designed for toddlers that showed they have advanced self control.

Like us, octopus have large brains compared to their body size:  It is, however, hard to compare brain size between marine animals and land animals, because the laws of physics differ in water and air. Animals are weightless in water but on land body shape and size is limited by gravity.

An octopus brain is made up of about 500 million brain cells. Humans, on the other hand, have 86 billion brain cells.

Unlike us though, octopuses don’t live for very long. The giant Pacific octopus might live up to five years, but most live for just a year and some as little as six months.

Compared to other species, octopuses actually evolve really, really slowly. Modern humans, by comparison, have only existed for 200,000 years and in that time, have taken over the planet (and badly damaged it in the process).

But lets face it. Despite all their tricks, octopuses are still working from a snail blueprint, and there’s only so much you can do with that toolbox. They are also highly constrained by their very short life-span.

In short, octopuses are very intelligent animals and one of the smartest creatures in the ocean. But their short life span and vulnerabilities on land are serious handicaps when it comes to taking over the world. (Or to undertake space travel)

ps: Last highlighted bracketed sentence by me.

Here's a "controversial" study by a group of scientists that propose that octopuses, really are Alien!

https://qz.com/1281064/a-controversial-study-has-a-new-spin-on-the-otherworldliness-of-the-octopus/

A controversial study has a new spin on the otherworldliness of the octopus:

Octopuses are strange, smart creatures that certainly seem alien—what with the tentacles, camouflage, and shape-shifting skills. Still, the idea that they actually came from outer space would seem to fall strictly into the realm of sci-fi; an update of HP Lovecraft’s Cthulhu, say.

But in these interesting times, real life reads like fiction. Recently, a group of 33 scientists worldwide—including molecular immunologist Edward Steele and astrobiologist Chandra Wickramasinghe—published a paper suggesting, in all seriousness, that octopuses may indeed be aliens.

more at link........................

 

the paper:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610718300798?via%3Dihub

Cause of Cambrian Explosion - Terrestrial or Cosmic?

Abstract:

We review the salient evidence consistent with or predicted by the Hoyle-Wickramasinghe (H-W) thesis of Cometary (Cosmic) Biology. Much of this physical and biological evidence is multifactorial. One particular focus are the recent studies which date the emergence of the complex retroviruses of vertebrate lines at or just before the Cambrian Explosion of ∼500 Ma. Such viruses are known to be plausibly associated with major evolutionary genomic processes. We believe this coincidence is not fortuitous but is consistent with a key prediction of H-W theory whereby major extinction-diversification evolutionary boundaries coincide with virus-bearing cometary-bolide bombardment events. A second focus is the remarkable evolution of intelligent complexity (Cephalopods) culminating in the emergence of the Octopus. A third focus concerns the micro-organism fossil evidence contained within meteorites as well as the detection in the upper atmosphere of apparent incoming life-bearing particles from space. In our view the totality of the multifactorial data and critical analyses assembled by Fred Hoyle, Chandra Wickramasinghe and their many colleagues since the 1960s leads to a very plausible conclusion – life may have been seeded here on Earth by life-bearing comets as soon as conditions on Earth allowed it to flourish (about or just before 4.1 Billion years ago); and living organisms such as space-resistant and space-hardy bacteria, viruses, more complex eukaryotic cells, fertilised ova and seeds have been continuously delivered ever since to Earth so being one important driver of further terrestrial evolution which has resulted in considerable genetic diversity and which has led to the emergence of mankind.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\

Hmmm, Panspermia...not as controversial (imo) as they are making out.

Edited January 1, 2022 by beecee

[Ken Fabian]

I still think overcoming vulnerabilities and limitations is what intelligence does best - I think the intelligence and problem solving capability matters much more than any baseline of physical abilities, although without some ability to hold and manipulate things tools would be more difficult. But I hesitate to say impossible. Co-opting other creatures? We make structures like hedges out of living things, we use other animals to utilize resources we can't use directly and make them into usable things.

I don't see the short life span of octopi - or their marine nature - as nearly as much of an impediment as being mostly solitary and lacking language is.

With language the lessons learned by an individual can be passed on to others - to youngsters of the next generation. No individual human can hold all knowledge - and our own example shows it is not necessary.  Individual intelligences that are not social? Even that seems possible to me - but may require the long lifespan and mutability/adaptability of form might help.

Octopi probably wouldn't find land as intimidating as some other marine creatures - some do go from rock pool to rock pool across dry land when seeking food.

A species that cannot hold a spear or throw anything may still be able to make traps. I suspect I would be in serious trouble if I had to hunt live prey by throwing things at them but I think I would be capable of making traps.

We are not adapted to live in space - yet we go there. We use fire - and are not adapted to handle it or survive it.

[beecee]

2 hours ago, Ken Fabian said:

I don't see the short life span of octopi - or their marine nature - as nearly as much of an impediment as being mostly solitary and lacking language is.

All I would think play a part.

2 hours ago, Ken Fabian said:

We are not adapted to live in space - yet we go there. We use fire - and are not adapted to handle it or survive it.

But the fact that Earth has a "use by date" makes it desirable, if not inevitable that we will keep on trying. Our intelligence enables us to conquer that which we are not immediatly adapted to, and our competitive, adventurous spirit also play a big part. eg: climbing Mnt Everest. Our intelligence has enabled us to become the dominent species on Earth, (along I suppose with some cosmological luck with the extinction of the Dinosaurs) but at the same time when taken in context with the universe around us we are insignificant, as is Earth....see Carl Sagan's, "Play Blue Dot"

I certainly hope that my optimism, (as previously detailed) 

21 hours ago, beecee said:

Will Aliens be hostile? perhaps, perhaps not. Perhaps we have a certain level  reached with intelligence, that will see the futility of hostility, over peaceful co-existence. Perhaps an advanced Alien species, having achieved inter-stellar travel, will be at that threshold. I prefer to remain optimistic in that regard. 

comes to fruition, both with our own species as we mature and gain more knowledge, and of course with any potential adanced Alien species.

 

Edited January 2, 2022 by beecee

[dimreepr]

17 hours ago, beecee said:

Don't be silly now. Or perhaps you meant illogically speaking?

You know we have evolved from single cell organism's to a space faring civilisation, given the peculiar evolutionary pressure's of our planet/time, therefore a different set of pressures and a different amount of time could produce a different type of space faring civilisation; a branch of which could easily have contained an octopus/rabbit/tamato, rather than a monkey.

Explain how I'm being silly or illogical? Rationally please... 

I should explain, I have a book on your reply...

10:1 his next post will be an insult. 12:1 it'll be gainsay. 15:1 it'll be a strawman. 20:1 bar.

Don't let me down.

 

[beecee]

5 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Don't let me down.

As usual, you have let yourself down.

[beecee]

While recognising that octopuses  would never evolve to be space travellers as they are seriously curtailed by their evolutionary processes, as are other examples of life on Earth, (https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-could-octopuses-evolve-until-they-take-over-the-world-and-travel-to-space-156493) (in essence this silly claim is invalidated by the fact that they would have to evolve as to be not recognisable as cephalopods.) there are two other choices that have been mentioned re Aliens and their origins, that we can now move on to....other dimension/s, and a simulation/s. What I envisage with regards to other dimensions, is another universe, and the possibility that the BB was not a one off scenario. The thing is that if these parallel universes did exist, would they be condusive to life, (as we know it) as per the universe we inhabit? All it requires is for the nuclear forces to be slightly different and even stars would be beyond forming, or if gravity were slightly different. There are also other aspects that make our universe condusive to life. And if on the off chance they were condusive to life, how could they, in a separate spacetime/universe, appear in our space/time/universe? Of course if our universe was not finely tuned for life, we probably would not be here discussing it. The old "Anthropic" principle!

That leaves the "simulation choice. Uggg! Don't like it at all, but then again, it seems some reputable physicists say it is possible. I know sfa about it anyway so someone else can give reasons as to why it maybe a valid choice. I also did not like the movie "Matrix" although Keanu Reeves is a great actor.

So I'll still at this time stick to inter-stellar travellers as the most likley origins of any Aliens that may have visited Earth, at this or any other time.

 

 

ps: Hey Moontanman, we need you back and your input!!