What will extraterrestrial intelligence look like?

[Moontanman]

When science fiction was new most aliens were hideous monsters come to kidnap our daughters for mating experiments or creatures just like us that came to kidnap our daughters for mating experiments...

 

But there are schools of thought that suggest that intelligent aliens might really be humanoid although that really doesn't pin down their looks we can say humanoid but humanoid covers a lot of ground and chances are there resemblance to use would be not much better than one head on top of it's body, two arms and two legs and torso. Not likely to be able to walk unnoticed at the beach for sure.

 

This idea of alien intelligence being more or less human shaped in based on the idea that animals that specialize in similar things evolve into similar shapes.

 

Shark or fish shape has evolved in many creatures from dolphins to sharks to ichthyosaur, to big game fish, to some marine crocodiles the streamlined works well due it's environment shaping their form.

 

Would intelligence's from another planet be humanoid for the same reason, is it possible that environmental pressure and natural selection would drive intelligent tool using being into the humanoid shape....

 

Then it could be that the humanoid shapes is totally random and aliens could be shaped like sea urchins...

 

What do you think? Alien intelligence's that look more or less human, or should we expect alien intelligence's to be any shapes that worked for them and intelligence can come in any shaped creature ...

[tar]

Moontanman,

 

They would probably need some way to manipulate their environment.

They would probably need some way to record their environment.

They would probably need some way to sense their environment.

They would probably need some way to pass their working pattern onto a new generation.

 

So as you suggest, the environment in which they develop will most likely play a key role in what works and what does not.

 

Given the range of environments that there are, that are unlike the lands or the waters of Earth, I would not expect humanoid development to be a universal rule of any sort. Even in an identical environment, which underwent a similar history as the Earth, an evolving organism could easily find various ways to manipulate their enviroment, as is shown in the variety of life forms on Earth. For the recording, something similar to a brain might be required, but even a cushion has a memory, and will regain its shape after the force that deformed it is removed, so there may be a wide range of working patterns there too. The sense development would be responsive to their particular environment, and like us they may develop multiple senses to notice different types of changes in their environment, so in this the only limiting factor in the number and type of sensors would be the amount and type of changes that their environment could throw at them, which is a considerable amount of concievable stuff.

And considering the variety of ways different life forms on this Earth have found works for passing on the pattern, I would say our way to do that is probably not a requirement either.

 

So all in all I vote for "not humanoid".

 

Regards, TAR2

Bigger question is "would we recognize it" as intelligent life.

Edited December 21, 2012 by tar

[ajb]

Based on evolution here on Earth, I would say that any alien civilization would consist of species that have evolved from predators. Basically, the level of communication and cooperation needed to develop tools and allow the spread of ideas is rooted in the skills needed to hunt as a pack. Furthermore, from our own evolution eating meat allowed our own brains to grow. I expect aliens to have a large brain.

 

They would also need something comparable to our hands and digits. Clawed animals would not have the dexterity to manufacture tools.

 

Other than that, I have no idea.

 

 

[tar]

They would probably need a way to rehearse manipulations of their environment and assess the outcomes, before making the move.

 

They could probably use a way to communicate their innovations and intentions to others of their kind.

 

But these things too, might be achievable in formats dissimilar to human form.

 

 

And like abj said, they would probably need a supporting cast of prey upon which to sustain their organism.

 

(sorry that wasn't an English sentence)

Edited December 21, 2012 by tar

[John Cuthber]

I speculate that they will speculate.

[Moontanman]

A recent thread on aliens and UFOs is what make me bring this up. In that thread the aliens look like ... us... in fact blond haired blue eyed... us... In many if not all close encounters of the third kind the aliens are always humanoid, some are distortions, some are so much like us they could walk the streets of any city and draw no attention (other than their other worldly good looks) .

 

This one thing is what pretty much derailed my own enthusiasm for UFOs as alien space craft. I felt like there was no reasonable way even one alien race would look like us much less all of them. But there are other schools of thought.

 

http://www.space.com/6978-aliens.html

 

 

 

But is there reason to think that actual aliens, from a star system a thousand light-years away, would be similar in appearance to the evolved apes that we now call Homo sapiens? Some scientists, such as Cambridge University paleontologist Simon Conway Morris, think there is.? After all, there?s a phenomenon in nature known as convergent evolution. It?s the tendency of evolutionary processes to find similar solutions to any given environmental challenge. For instance, if you?re a predator whose existence depends on catching lunch day after day, you probably have two eyes with overlapping fields of view. Stereo vision is a real plus for pouncing on prey.?

 

 

 

As a consequence, it?s possible that a hominid shape is the best body plan for sentient beings on any world, and no doubt Tinseltown would be pleased to learn that its rubber-suit aliens are good approximations to the real thing. But I?ll bet you dollars to Devil Dogs that any extraterrestrials we detect won?t be muscular guys with deep voices and corrugated foreheads, or even big-eyed, hairless grays. And that?s not because such creatures couldn?t exist. Rather, it?s because of the timescale for non-biological evolution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would agree with [shermer] in betting against aliens being bipedal primates, and I think the point is worth making, but I think he greatly overestimates the odds against. [university of Cambridge paleontologist] Simon Conway Morris, whose authority is not to be dismissed, thinks it positively likely that aliens would be, in effect, bipedal primates. [Harvard University biologist] Ed Wilson gave at least some time to the speculation that, if it had not been for the end-Cretaceous catastrophe, dinosaurs might have produced something like the attached [referring to paleontologist Dale A. Russell’s illustrated evolutionary projection of how a bipedal dinosaur might have evolved into a reptilian humanoid].

 

 

 

We can, in a thought experiment, give some parameters that would have to present on an intelligent being that lived in an earth like environment. I'm not sure non earth like environments can even support complex life but would an earth like environment with complex life necessarily produce a humanoid shape due to the pressures of developing a large brain, manipulative organs (hands) Eyes optimally placed, four limbs, upright posture to free the hands. Would the pressures of developing tool using intelligence result in a more or less humanoid shape?

[Semjase]

I've done extensive research on human Alien contact over my life time

I've made one assumption that eye witness testimonies generally are

truthful and common denominators start to emerge. Almost all

seem to walk upright on two legs, almost all have developed mental

telepathy to communicate, and the black eyed aliens in the above

image of Roswell fame have the power of telekineses and can

dematerialize and rematerialize at another location at will, they

also have an extra finger over us and urinate through their skin

according to reports.

[John Cuthber]

I've done extensive research on human Alien contact over my life time

I've made one assumption that eye witness testimonies generally are

truthful and common denominators start to emerge. Almost all

seem to walk upright on two legs, almost all have developed mental

telepathy to communicate, and the black eyed aliens in the above

image of Roswell fame have the power of telekineses and can

dematerialize and rematerialize at another location at will, they

also have an extra finger over us and urinate through their skin

according to reports.

LOL

especially "I've made one assumption that eye witness testimonies generally are truthful"

[Moontanman]

This site goes with that last pic....

 

http://io9.com/5784971/how-to-create-a-scientifically-plausible-alien-life-form

Doesn't that alien in the last picture in post #6 remind you of how the Martians from Stranger in a Strange Land were described?

[JohnStu]

Hmm, there might be some super intelligent aliens being non-mammals. Super developed worms could be very intelligent. The tentacles would serve similar functions as hands where as claws or paws lack the flexibility.

[ajb]

Hmm, there might be some super intelligent aliens being non-mammals.

 

This is interesting choice of words.This is a technicality, but what very carefully is the definition of a mammal? In particular, will it exclude, by definition aliens, even if they have fur and produce milk?

[Moontanman]

To be a mammal they would have to have evolved on earth, they might be pseudo mammals or mammal like but to actually be mammals they would have to have evolved on earth.

[ajb]

To be a mammal they would have to have evolved on earth, they might be pseudo mammals or mammal like but to actually be mammals they would have to have evolved on earth.

 

That would be my understanding, or we could change the definitions accordingly is something like a mammal was discovered.

[Moontanman]

I think it's important to note that humanoid does not mean mammal, just the general shape of a human...

[too-open-minded]

Look at how environment can effect animals. There is some animal which is not feline but looks almost just like a cat because it has adapted to its environment with no other felines around to take its place.

 

I doubt they would look exactly like us, at the same time they couldn't be much different.

 

Intelligence, I would assume that there emotions are somewhat like ours. Although to be able to make it off their planet and be spacefering, I would think anger would be subsided compared to ours.

 

Now thats an alien species in itself.

An alien species that has mastered the ability to sustain life in space, should be very different from us.

I would assume the stereotypical large dark eyes to draw in as much light as possible. You know they would try to conserve as much energy as possible on there space-ship. There skin and lungs would have to be somewhat different, I mean you could make the comparison of fish to us. I doubt after years(lots of years, thousands) of evolutionary advancement that the atmospherical conditions in a ship would be the same as in the biosphere on their home planet. At some point I would think they would try to maximize the conservation of their resources which would greatly effect the way they look.

 

Back to intelligence, Personally I think intelligence is based off (or builds from and has a lot to do with) emotions. I would think that an alien space faring species would be alot more subtle compared to us in aspects of our two most primitive emotions, fear and anger.

 

I wonder if they might possibly have developed new emotions stemming from empathy, curiosity, and love into something that wants to find answers of the universe and spread life.

 

Or could they possibly go the other direction and in fear of the demise of their own species, at all costs do anything to sustain their own life.

 

I'm willing to bet, from the numbers of solar systems and galaxies alone that both exist in the universe.

[too-open-minded]

So this is probably the coolest thread i've seen on SF, and this is all you guys have to say?

[Moontanman]

So this is probably the coolest thread i've seen on SF, and this is all you guys have to say?

 

 

So far i think this has been a productive thread, i expect there will be more on this, the idea that intelligence might mold the shape of the bearer of that intelligence the same way water molds an animal that swims in it is interesting. possibly it requires time to digest the implications...

[Przemyslaw.Gruchala]

LOL

especially "I've made one assumption that eye witness testimonies generally are truthful"

 

Testimony without connected lie detector is useless.

 

And even lie detector won't detect if somebody really believes in what he/she saw. But at least get rid of fraudsters.

 

 

Intelligence is result of lack of food.

 

 

 

In environment where is easy to find food, intelligence is not needed, so it won't be created in DNA mutations (organisms that have no/small intelligence will survive too, and they will be downgrading whole population gens).

 

Quick rapid changes in environment is causing extinction of organisms that can't develop new ways to find food.

Edited December 29, 2012 by Przemyslaw.Gruchala

[michel123456]

 

Testimony without connected lie detector is useless.

 

And even lie detector won't detect if somebody really believes in what he/she saw. But at least get rid of fraudsters.

 

 

Intelligence is result of lack of food.

 

 

 

In environment where is easy to find food, intelligence is not needed, so it won't be created in DNA mutations (organisms that have no/small intelligence will survive too, and they will be downgrading whole population gens).

 

Quick rapid changes in environment is causing extinction of organisms that can't develop new ways to find food.

 

I never thought of intelligence that way. Where did you get that from ?

 

-----------------------

one must also consider the difference between intelligent and technologically developped. Most probably Neanderthals were as intelligents as we are (maybe more) but upon all evidences developped no advanced technology. Dolphins are very intelligent animals but have developped no technology. They are many examples.

Edited December 29, 2012 by michel123456

[ajb]

Dolphins are very intelligent animals but have developped no technology.

So the evolutionary drive to be able to swim well and catch fish prevented the development of appendages with a large degree of dexterity. This in turn stunted any potential for complicated tools to be developed, assuming dolphins have the abstract thinking required.

 

The suggestion is that aliens with a large degree of technology will look similar to us in many ways, principally they will have "hands". I would then assume eyes, though they maybe adapted to different light conditions, maybe they see wavelengths we cannot see as their sun is a different colour. Again, relatively large brains or similar nervous system.

 

I would also then propose that the advanced aliens would be land living rather than water living, as suggested by our dolphin. (Though who knows!)

 

Even then, any alien that is likely to visit us would most likely breath gas: oxygen or maybe chlorine or fluorine, something that allows redox reactions. Any alien that required large volumes of liquid (which would be oxygenated or similar) with a density close to water would have great troubles in lifting that off his planet. Any "UFOs" would presumably be full of gas breathing aliens.

[Przemyslaw.Gruchala]

 

I never thought of intelligence that way. Where did you get that from ?

 

Imagine vegetable eating animal- its food is everywhere. So it doesn't need intelligence to find and eat it.

 

Imagine meat eating animal that has prays everywhere, such as anteater. It also doesn't need too high intelligence. Ants don't run away.

[ajb]

 

Imagine vegetable eating animal- its food is everywhere. So it doesn't need intelligence to find and eat it.

 

Imagine meat eating animal that has prays everywhere, such as anteater. It also doesn't need too high intelligence. Ants don't run away.

I think you are generally correct here. The development of intelligence seems tided to the skills needed to hunt, and especially collectively as a pack.

[michel123456]

i had thought that intelligence was a random feature. IMHO we are intelligent by chance or by error.

Edited December 29, 2012 by michel123456

[ajb]

i had thought that intelligence was a random feature. IMHO we are intelligent by chance or by error.

Random mutations would have been the process creating new traits, but it is natural selection that allows the propagation of these traits or not. In particular for our development it was advantageous for our ancestors to have large brains and well developed intelligence in order to hunt large animals. This also played a big part in our use of language.

 

The basic idea is that our more intelligent ancestors were better at surviving and had a better than average chance of successful procreation. This creates a feedback loop as the useful trait of intelligence is passed on generation to generation. The overall effect is that our ancestors became more and more intelligent.

 

I am sure a well versed biologist can put it better than this.

Edited December 29, 2012 by ajb

[michel123456]

And I remember somewhere having read a theory that said that first humans were merely scavengers. Which explains why we like some kind of decadent food made from fermentation, like cheese, beer, bread, french & italians salamis, patés and other faisanderies.

Random mutations would have been the process creating new traits, but it is natural selection that allows the propagation of these traits or not. In particular for our development it was advantageous for our ancestors to have large brains and well developed intelligence in order to hunt large animals. This also played a big part in our use of language.

The basic idea is that our more intelligent ancestors were better at surviving and had a better than average chance of successful procreation. This creates a feedback loop as the useful trait of intelligence is passed on generation to generation. The overall effect is that our ancestors became more and more intelligent.

I am sure a well versed biologist can put it better than this.

 

This will derail the thread completely, but I have another point of vue. A naked human with small teeths, weak nails no fur, could not survive 24h anywhere on the planet witouth intelligence..