"...produces sophonts as casually as it produces snowflakes."
-Poul Anderson, "Outpost of Empire" IN Anderson, Captain Flandry: Defender Of The Terran Empire (Riverdale, NY, February, 2010), pp. 1-72 AT p. 7 -
- and many of these intelligent organisms meet and interact because some of them develop faster-than-light interstellar travel whereas, in the same author's Genesis, intelligence emanates only from Earth and post-organic intelligences traverse interstellar distances only at sub-light speeds.
Which is the more probable scenario? Check out Leonard Susskind. In one video, he argues that oxygen and methane in an exo-planetary atmosphere would be evidence that organisms are present and producing these gasses but they have not been detected so far. Also, of the many species on Earth, only one has evolved intelligence so how likely is it to evolve elsewhere? If intelligence is highly improbable on any planet, then increasing the number of planets does not increase the probability by much. SETI detects no messages or signs of intelligent activity. So which scenario is more likely?
3 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I reject Susskind's argument because he is extrapolating only from what little we know about life/possible life on other worlds and claiming the conclusion that he drew means no other life exists. Anderson, being an SF completist, was willing to examine such ideas in GENESIS, but I don't believe that what he preferred or believed. STARFARERS, where, even with STL technology mankind settled other worlds and discovered other intelligent races, represents what he believed.
And we certainly can get off this rock into the Solar System thanks to the achievements of Elon Musk/SpaceX and similar entrepreneurs! That alone opens up many possibilities.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Susskind doesn't deny life. But there are many improbabilities to be passed before there can be:
multicellular organisms
consciousness
intelligence
civilization
technology
advanced technology
a lasting civilization with advanced technology
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I also got the strong impression that Susskind does not want life, intelligent or not, to exist on other worlds. To argue so strongly for the alleged "improbability" of life on other worlds with so little evidence for that idea makes me think that is his preference.
Until we get hard evidence for Susskind's beliefs I'm going to favor Anderson's views, as expressed in IS THERE LIFE ON OTHER WORLDS? or in essays like "Our Many Roads to the Stars," in NEW AMERICA.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment