Is our universe controlled by artificial intelligence?

89 תגובות

1. We are alone in the universe!

   I thought it was bad until I realized I'm not alone and I'm on a planet together with the same author of the article and then I really got bad!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2. All intelligence is artificial intelligence, including humans, it does not require that intelligence as we know it exist only in an organic case,

3. Aliens created us, the scientists call them aliens and the religious call them God

4. We are alone in the solar system and in the universe in general...

5. Our first contact with aliens will be in 2025 until then please be patient

6. I'm interested in another thing, how is it that there are many movies based on science fiction... After all, the human imagination takes things from life (and there are quite a few interesting things that happen in the world) so maybe we really are not alone in the galaxy??? I'm pretty sure there are other places that humanity hasn't even thought about and I'm sure there are creatures there or maybe people who don't know about our existence....

7. See the aliens:
   These are not aliens but liars.
   I am happily married and a father of three.

8. Michael Michael! Come here quickly, I see aliens and they tell me you are a disgruntled nerd who must find a partner

9. The genetic code was created by high level technology from your computer by another life form
   And this living form may exist in a dimension that has no time - beginning or end

10. Some guys here need to stop watching Transformers.

11. 1:0 for me 🙂

12. Good Morning:
    Write us again when you wake up.

13. Yesterday, Britain released documents that had been suppressed for 50 years, including the testimonies of pilots who went on missions to intercept unidentified objects. They say that these huge hovering vessels disappeared from their range within seconds.

    Look what the conversation was today in the UK:
    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/mysun/article1837062.ece

    As for SETI, it's their pleasure to listen, even so they don't know what to do with the messages they received more than a decade ago.

    humans,
    If you wish to communicate with aliens and develop a much more advanced culture than what you call civilization -
    Stop intercepting spaceships, stop playing with atomic bombs, stop exploiting the animals and plants and the earth's soil. Stop exploiting human beings living on earth.
    On the day when humans will be civilized... the connection to a new culture will open.

14. On the other hand, a certain version of the company still exists:
    http://www.a-i.com/default.asp

15. what's new (18)
    The AI ​​company that developed the "baby" God (ALONEH) was closed a few months after the publication of the article:
    http://www.themarker.com/tmc/article.jhtml?ElementId=ebn20010916_03

16. Hanan,

    You avoid the point, make arguments around and try not to answer my simple question about the issue of predictions and tests. After all, no one said that the subject of UFOs could not be investigated. On the contrary, governments in Europe and the USA did so according to their admissions, yet nothing came of it.

    Let's go back to predictions and tests. It is very easy to make predictions and test them, even in objects outside the Earth. In every crater of a meteor that has been discovered to date, quartz crystals have also been found melted in a very specific way. I predict that in every crater that will be discovered from now on, similar quartz crystals will be found, and their dating will match the age of the crater. Now this theory has held up and the prophecies have matched it time and time again. It's that simple.

    So again, where are the predictions and where are the tests in the UFO theory? Where are the physical remains that can only be explained in a very limited number of ways, like the molten quartz crystals?

17. Hanan is enough to be gullible and believe in everything.

18. The above just proves that we don't know anything, and probably shouldn't know too much either.

19. Roy, you are simply missing the point or prefer to ignore it.

    You forgot to refer to all the studies that refer to the physical findings that exist, as well as the many testimonies that exist. Saying that there is no possibility of testing the subject of UFOs, is like saying that there is no possibility of testing ball lightning or any other rare natural phenomenon.

    Just as a scientist can investigate evidence following the appearance of ball lightning, or refer to the claims of witnesses following the appearance of a meteor (remember - 3 weeks ago in Israel?) even without there being any photographs or physical findings, this is exactly how the UFO phenomenon can be investigated. Like any rare phenomenon And randomly, even there you can predict and check findings (and I did not refer to the physical findings that exist).

    In addition, of course, there are many studies that part of the scientific community simply refuses to refer to and examine. There is no issue here of inappropriate research or anything else, except for ignoring the findings and the research that exists. There is nothing more wrong than the statement that the UFO phenomenon cannot be tested.

    Hanan Sabat
    http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL

20. Hanan,

    Thanks. I'm planning to order from Amazon in the near future, and I might actually try to find Friedman's book as well.

    If we take your claims seriously, you describe four types of phenomena, all of which, contrary to your claim, can be predicted and tested.
    Lunar eclipses, for example, have been predicted for thousands of years with good accuracy, even though the variables cannot be controlled.
    Earthquakes cannot be predicted by themselves, but it is certainly possible to develop statistics of the location and frequency of earthquakes, which is based on scientific theories such as continental drift. Such statistics can confirm or invalidate the theory, so that here again there is a prediction and a test, but this time the prediction is based on statistics.
    The fourth type you presented is not a theory but a description of cases. Car accidents are not a scientific theory, but a well-documented occurrence by several independent factors.
    What can be a theory in this context?
    Well, if a scientist comes along and wants to claim that a certain traffic law causes more accidents, then he will be able to check the number of traffic accidents per capita in one city, where the law in question exists. Then he will check the same number in another city, where the same law does not apply. His prediction is that there will be fewer accidents on average in the other city, and if it comes true, then his theory will receive real reinforcement.

    So it is clear from this that there is no scientific theory that is not supported by prediction and testing... except the UFO theory.

    Shabbat Shalom,

    Roy.

21. Hello Roy,

    My best wishes and hope that admission to the PhD will be approved. And if so, precisely then Friedman's book might be interesting.

    Especially for future doctoral students - the element of prediction and realization is not a part of every scientific theory, but is only one of 4 types of science that exist:

    1. A scientific theory that can be predicted, tested and realized, while controlling all its variables.

    2. A scientific theory that can be predicted and tested, but its variables are not under our control - for example, an eclipse of lights, transit of a planet, etc.

    3. A scientific theory that can be tested, but cannot be predicted and its variables are beyond our control - for example earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, solar storms, etc.

    4. A scientific theory that cannot be predicted, sometimes describes one-time events, and only rarely can be measured provided that measuring devices happened to be in place - for example, car accidents, criminal incidents, plane crashes, lightning strikes, meteor penetration, and the UFO phenomenon.

    The fourth type relies mostly on testimonies, on findings that happened to be found and discovered, etc.

    Therefore, your argument as if the element of prediction and realization is an important part of any scientific theory is simply not accurate. This is true in only 25% of the existing scientific research.

    Hanan Sabat
    http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL

    post Scriptum. - The argument that politicians are not ready to talk about the issue is also baseless, as is the argument that all governments in the world are hiding information in common. You are invited to watch their recorded testimonies in front of a camera of the over 500 witnesses in the DISCLOSURE PROJECT. Most of them are very senior government officials, politicians, astronauts, pilots, senior military personnel and scientists.

22. Hello Hanan,

    The element of prediction and realization is an important part of every scientific theory. A theory that does not have the ability to make such predictions is considered a theory standing on chicken's knees.

    Because the UFO theory makes some very big claims (aliens visit the earth every day, governments all over the world cooperate in hiding the visits and imposing strict censorship on research, no politician is willing to cover up his mouth about the research and the aliens he censors, etc.), It is appropriate that she also provide very large proofs for all of these. Such a proof could be a prophecy that would come true, and could only be explained by alien intervention.

    Regarding the conference - I received the invitation, but I'm afraid I'm too busy for it (PhD nomination committee this month). Thanks for the invite, and maybe next year.

    Shabbat Shalom,

    Roy.

23. Hello Roy,

    Your claim is very partial and presents only one of the four types of studies that can be carried out. To elaborate on my intention, I recommend you an excellent book that was published only recently, which sums up exactly the point you just raised:

    "Flying Saucers and Science" by Stanton Friedman.

    post Scriptum. - I hope you received the invitation I sent you by email. I would be very happy if you would come, what's more, one of the lecturers is also the administrator of this website.

    Hanan Sabat
    http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL

24. Gillian,

    The theory of black holes is a product of physical calculations. The theory predicted a number of discoveries that were needed to verify it (for example, stars revolving around an unobservable mass), and these predictions were indeed repeatedly adjusted.

    I and others have asked you in the past to provide a prediction of the 'UFOs', so that if it comes true we can determine the correctness of the theory. We are still waiting for such a prediction, which can only be explained by alien intervention.

25. Hanan Sabat
    Gillian
    Read again, no one said you are delusional or crazy except you.
    In all your responses you talk "about" the talks "about" the claims and "about" such and such accusations. "On" people who saw and "on" people who investigated.
    Not even once did you come up with some alien mathematical theorem or something real
    A fact (not a story of a fact, an actual fact visible to everyone) after all, something of all this lived statistically to be visible, it is not possible that there is not even one example that is visible to all. And she is not subject to a governmental concealment obligation or the like.
    After all, if the aliens are so advanced, it can be assumed that they have more sophisticated scientific theories. So present something slightly partial so that it can be examined and observed.
    And again, no one is saying that you are sane or daydreaming.
    So far you have only talked and talked and talked.
    For once be honest and bring something solid that others will see too.

26. Dear Gillian,
    Following on from the previous comment
    What is the connection between the sentence you wrote and the point, and the aliens?

27. Dear Gillian,
    I was impressed by your alien wisdom
    As an ignorant human being, I do not understand why you say a quote:
    "And on this celebratory occasion - perhaps Mr. Yuel Punkut would be kind enough to bring us, for example, a piece of a black hole as evidence of the existence of these?"
    Perhaps you can interpret this closed sentence into simple and understandable language with maximum detail.

28. Oh, how wonderful are the ways of the pits! I find myself astounded every time anew by its strength and the extent of its stupidity, even among a public that considers itself enlightened.

    And on this celebratory occasion - perhaps Mr. Yuel would be kind enough to bring us, for example, a piece of a black hole as evidence of the existence of these?

29. Michael, just don't reveal to him the big secret that basically all those who have seen obem are actually repressing in their subconscious the fact that they themselves are obem and unidentified creatures, neither with themselves nor with the environment.

30. Hanan Sabat,
    Even if Einstein, the president of the USA, and an astronaut swore that they were in contact with aliens, this is not proof because these are only words and words are not findings that can be analyzed.
    It is enough Hanan that you bring a piece of alien technology and/or a living or dead alien and present them in public, then it will be equal to your hundred years of research (which apart from words have nothing in them)
    Of course, the scientific establishment will analyze the findings and draw conclusions.
    I have no idea why your aliens are shy or afraid to reveal themselves in public, they have all the technological power on their side and they can destroy all the inhabitants of the earth and take over the earth.
    Hanan Alien movies are nice to watch but living them everyday is excessive.

31. Hanan:
    OK - we are all delusional and disconnected from reality but at least we are in good company along with the vast majority of scientists.
    We are also all complicit in a conspiracy designed to mislead you and Gillian.
    It's actually a worldwide version of The Truman Show.

32. B, Point and the other fantasists: your words prove what I said. Throwing arguments into the space of the world, without any connection to reality.

    I suggest you carefully check who is delusional...

    And to that point I suggest, before you name the list of thousands of witnesses who testified as delusional and psychotic (among them US presidents, senior ministers, senior scientists, astronauts and top military personnel), I suggest you personally present the certificate that explicitly states that you have an education of a psychiatrist or psychology specialist.

    With what arrogance do you state that these are psychos and mental patients? Are you qualified for this? Are there studies that indicate this?

    Do you even know what you are talking about before you write this delusional nonsense??? (This is a rhetorical question of course - the answer is clear).

    Hanan Sabat
    http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL

33. Hanan Sabat
    Apart from surrounding arguments about investigative studies and words of this kind, you do not add meaningful details. The content of the information in your response is not related to aliens but to humans.
    And because that's how words and sentences are left with no essential content except for the opposing slogans.
    The style of your statement is unfortunate due to the great resemblance to a propaganda style that was customary in rather dark regimes. Even on Kristallnacht, the Jews were forced to pay for the damage of the broken glass.
    Instead of answering the questions on the subject and the content, you take your plan as if there were stones and throw them back at the questioners in an attempt to destroy any desire to know and understand something about the subject. I can only conclude that your thread is empty of any real content other than being entrenched in a class framework that claims to know everything above the heads of the people who inhabit this planet.

34. and more. All those who had findings of extraterrestrial inventions in their environment were found to be psychotic mentally ill, or just delusional who confuse reality with a dream, therefore one can conclude according to Ockham's razor and according to common sense that every new claim about an extraterrestrial indicates a newly discovered mental patient.

35. Hanan, you are right about the findings but not about the conclusions.
    That is, the fact that one hallucinated that he saw an extraterrestrial is a finding that would lead only a mindless person (with the excuse of a plausible explanation) to conclude that there was indeed an extraterrestrial.

36. Hanan:
    The point is that in any serious study the findings can be brought to public attention in a serious manner and then, miraculously, there are no longer those who do not know the findings.
    The situation is of course different when instead of findings there are inventions.

37. To Arya Seter:

    Most of the "opponents" simply do not know the findings and therefore simply have no one to discuss the matter with the appropriate seriousness.

    Those people believe with absolute certainty that the world is built by a series of known and fixed mathematical equations and that all the elements of the universe are known with complete absoluteness.

    They continue to ignore all the existing research, all the physical findings and every piece of information or evidence, while secluding themselves in their world, in a truly religious way.

    If you want to claim that there is no evidence or that there is evidence, then you have to base things on studies or findings or something. I have never heard a single claim from the "opponents" that would have a factual basis in field research. At least they would be based on something, apart from worn-out philosophical theories such as Ockham's philosophy, or Fermi's paradox (which, by the way, was disproved a long time ago). If we take Ockham, the plausible explanation is in many cases the extraneous explanation and not an explanation of mass hysteria or an inversion that captured the light of Venus...

    Hanan Sabat
    http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL

38. It is important to reiterate that most of those who "oppose" aliens, believe or think that there are aliens in the galaxy and universe, or at least do not rule out the possibility of their existence. They only claim that there is no evidence of their visit to Earth, or its surroundings.

39. Do you believe in aliens as much as you do in Harry Potter?
    It seems to me that the evidence for the existence of Harry Potter is stronger.

40. Hanan Sabat
    It's a bit tricky to live in a reality that fits this collection of script parts.
    Why complicate things when things are simple.
    There is something from Okam's law, as I imagine, that claims that given two options, one crooked and winding and one straight and simple, choose the simple one.
    On the other hand, we are all aware of everyone's need to live in a movie sometimes.
    But you don't have to continue it at any given moment, it's a bit stressful, isn't it?
    Unless it's some mental need.
    On second thought when you look at this script that attributes so many things
    For extraterrestrial forces it is impossible not to try to replace the extraterrestrials in the name of
    The different religions. The script can equally be attributed to the Indian gods
    to the Greek gods as well as to the other religions.
    Christianity cannot be blamed for not investing enough research and other resources
    To adapt the script to the beliefs of the Christian religion.
    They have much more research material and accumulated evidence than the collection of all studies
    On the subject of aliens and UFOs. Simply a matter of seniority, money and size.
    And if all the research material of Christianity is still there are some who are not ready to believe in the creationism of Christianity.
    In conclusion, where is the relative advantage to accept as a fact precisely the way of the aliens.

41. Leave nonsense.
    I just heard that for the first time in history Iran was prepared for the International Youth Physics Olympiad.
    It is much more interesting than the hallucinations that try to drag us into the content.

42. Thank you Michael for sparing me the attempts to explain to me what I wrote and what I said and also what I meant.

43. Quick answer to B:

    1. Of course. All are visible to the eye.

    2. The issue is considered conspiratorial because it concerns a security service and most of it has not been disclosed to the public.

    3. It is possible that the stories of the Tanakh, the Sumerian writings, the Mahabharata and other writings, all rely on such and other encounters with extraterrestrial cultures that were here.

    4. There is more than one piece of technology that comes from reverse engineering alien technology that came to us following crashes. If we refer to Colonel Philip Corso's book "THE DAY AFTER ROSWELL", then the following developments all rely on technology of extraterrestrial origin: the transistor, the integrated circuit, optical fibers, lasers, etc. If we refer to more modern information, then anti-gravity technology, which is being studied In recent years and applied in Aurora aircraft, it originates directly from the reverse engineering of extraterrestrial tools.

    Hanan Sabat
    http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL

    post Scriptum. And I apologize in advance, but the expansion will be given in the appropriate forums and not in talkbacks.

44. Gillian
    on the importance of seriousness.
    Are there aliens that can be seen with the naked eye?
    Why is it always related to conspiracies?
    Are the stories of the Bible and mythologies necessarily connected with the phenomenon of aliens?
    Is there a widely used piece of technology of alien origin?
    Thanks.

45. Gillian:
    It turns out that you still haven't understood and my conclusion is that it's a waste of effort to try to explain to you.

46. It's amazing, Michael, how someone who doesn't understand is quick to accuse his interlocutor of a lack of understanding - I read your entire long response, which lacks relevance to what I said, and I ask again: what's the matter with putting a bed on Mount Sinai? Probably your narrow mindset prevents you from understanding at all what it is about.

    And of course, your delusional and completely detached conclusion from reality as if we are opposed to serious research in the field while we are engaged in research of this type and the attempt to present the lovable theory (which is how it begins and ends) as serious research.
    come on…

    And finally, if you already mentioned SETI - then this project at best conducts research on screensavers, nothing less and nothing more.

47. Gillian:
    I have been waiting for a long time to hear something sensible from you.
    maybe next time.
    And maybe this time you'll read the article it's about and the comments you're responding to.
    Really, what's the matter with a bed at Mount Sinai? How can I write that it is suggested to look for stars that do not support life when the following paragraph is written in the article:
    "How can this change the way aliens are searched? Well, when looking for robots you can search everywhere, and therefore Dick suggests that the SETI community should consider looking for signals even in places that are not suitable for life but that have an inventory of resources suitable for robots, and not necessarily on other planets. Robots will look for places that will provide them with raw materials and energy, think about quasars and not necessarily about inhabited planets."
    really odd!
    You say this is not about research. I agree with you. Nor are we talking about oranges here. Why did you choose to state that this is not about research and did not state that it is not about oranges?
    Now let me explain to you the meaning of the word conspiracy.
    Like all words that begin with "kon" this is a word that requires an activity or a common feature for several entities - this "kon" - more or less "together". The prefix "line" also means the same thing. Maybe (probably not) you have already heard words like "collinear", "congruent" "concurrent" and the like.
    Therefore conspiracy is not something that anyone can do alone.
    It requires the cooperation of many people.
    The Hebrew translation of the word - more or less - is conspiracy.
    A single person cannot make a conspiracy.
    Why did I talk about a conspiracy?
    First of all, as a joke that you, Shevra Leitz, accuse the whole world and his wife of a conspiracy to hide the fact of encounters with aliens from the eyes of the rest of the world (this is a kind of conspiracy in which the participants are probably many of the people from whom the facts are hidden, but we will not enter into the old debate here).
    Second, because strangely it seems as if all the alien enthusiasts who visit the site - literally all - are opposed to serious research on the subject of aliens.
    Oh! I said "research" again! Now I know where you got the word "research" for your response - it's a reading comprehension problem - I was talking about the SETI research and you decided, for some reason, that I was talking about the theory of the author of the article regarding the expected distribution of the robots.
    This lack of understanding should have turned on a red light for you immediately because you cannot stop a theory - only research can be stopped.
    In conclusion - reading is an important subject that is taught in all schools and it is taught not just as something else to test on but so that people will use this ability when they grow up.

48. Michael - you made one big salad.
    What is the connection between what is said in the article and the search for life in stars that do not support life as they are known to us? What is the matter of going to Mount Sinai? And what kind of research is this? There is no research here, just a philosophical theory that is not based on anything, not even a shred of research. I really wonder about you this time.

    If there is a conspiracy here (if it can even be called that) then it comes precisely from your side - to say "day" when we say "night" and vice versa, without any connection to the content of the things. In any case - this is what is implied from your responses throughout the various articles.

49. Let's hope for results, either way.

50. Roy,
    I definitely agree with you. All I was trying to say is that for me the operative matter is what is important and operatively I would indeed point the antennas in other directions.

51. Michael,

    This is exactly why I say that the whole theoretical issue is still speculative and without real evidence.

52. Roy:
    I don't know why there aren't such robots here yet.
    Is it possible that it was programmed (for reasons of caution) to avoid contact with other cultures and only send information about their existence as soon as their Hardin signals were detected?
    The whole issue is highly speculative and we haven't even encountered aliens yet.
    In my opinion, since pointing antennas in other directions costs relatively little, this way should be taken in any case.

53. Michael,

    A theory that relates to the idea of ​​space being populated by robots is described in the great story Lungfish, by David Breen. warmly recommended.

    http://www.davidbrin.com/lungfish1.html

    The interesting point in the story is that once a certain species reaches the ability to create Van-Neuman machines (robotic machines capable of moving between the stars, and using the raw materials on them to create more such ships), the entire universe should be manned within a few million years, following the exponential growth rate in the number of machines. Why, then, do we find no sign of those machines?

    Carl Sagan argued that the reason is that any intelligent species would refrain from creating such machines, because in a relatively short time they could consume all the resources in the universe. But it doesn't sound logical, because it is likely that out of thousands and millions of civilizations scattered around the universe, at least one will put this nonsense into action.

    So I don't see something in the idea of ​​robots, simply because we haven't come across such robots yet or evidence of their existence.

54. Roy:

    I deliberately spoke only about the aspect of the practice because, as I mentioned in previous responses, this practice is also effective in searching for life that is not based on the organic compounds known to us.
    In general, article writers have a tendency to dramatize things - even when things are serious enough without it.
    As I mentioned, many years ago Timothy Ferris proposed the idea which on the face of it sounds absolutely reasonable.
    In fact, if you take into account the (somewhat hasty) conclusions of another article published on this website recently -
    https://www.hayadan.org.il/how-long-would-it-take-to-travel-to-the-nearest-star-2407084/
    It is easy to come to the conclusion that the chances of populating the space with robots of our own hands exceed the chances of populating it with real humans.
    If you think about the fact that these robots will also be tasked with tasks such as locating life-supporting stars, the landing of stars where this can be done, and regular reporting to the human race, then there is definitely a chance that space will be filled with the transmissions of such robots even if they will not be completely intelligent and yet - discoveries will be for Who discovers them is evidence of our existence.
    I think that since we are the only example we have of creatures that are truly intelligent, it would not be wise to ignore the hints we receive from this example and here, already in this example and already today there are machines sailing in distant space and transmitting to us.

55. Michael,

    This is a proposal to change the practice used today, based on the theory that organic cultures tend to 'upgrade' themselves to mechanical ones. Although it seems plausible at first glance, I see two problems with the theory:

    1. It relies on direct and narrow-minded deduction about our culture (similar to Joel's deduction).
    2. The very distinction between a robotic creature and an organic creature is problematic. As we go deeper into the intricacies of biology, we realize that every cell in our body contains billions of nanomachines, and if we can control their activity and create such machines at will, then today's engineering achievements will be nothing. Can a person who was 'assembled' from such nanomachines to order be considered an organic being? Or a robot?

    Of course I am stretching the limits of imagination here (a bit unfortunately). If such a future comes, it will not come in the next hundred years. But it seems to me that it is possible to understand the problematic in a simplistic cataloging of living things into organic and robotic.

56. Friends:
    This is not about theory but practice.
    It is suggested - and rightly so, in my opinion - not to limit the search to stars that seem to us to support life because it is possible that even though the stars do not support life of the type we are familiar with, they have the intelligence of creatures with a different metabolism.
    I repeat my wonder about the supporters of the extraterrestrial theory who do everything in their power to stop research on the subject.
    Is this a conspiracy?

57. Gillian,

    indeed.

58. In the bottom line, this is nothing more than a pretentious theory that has nothing to base it on in practice. There are many such.

59. someone,

    I accept your point. There is no direct relationship between the period of time that has passed since the formation of a certain breed (if at all it is possible to put your finger on the date of formation of a breed - what was the first individual called a chicken, and what was the last that was a member of the breed from which the chickens evolved?) and its technological level. Technological development is largely dependent on the environment. For example, suppose a race of intelligent aliens did develop on another planet. If so, let's assume that that race was not lucky and no plants (or equivalents) suitable for agricultural cultivation were developed on its planet. For example, plants whose growth consumed more energy than their yield. Such a race would never develop agriculture. Without agriculture, all intelligent individuals of the race would spend most of their time gathering food or hunting. Professions will not be able to develop, because each individual will have to provide his own food. There will not be a layer of professionals and experts and technological progress will stop.
    At the most, that unfortunate race will develop hunting tools for hunting large animals, and when these, as its main food, are eliminated by it, its technological level will retreat back to the level of hunter-gatherers.

    This is not an imaginary scenario, this is exactly what happened to Aubergines in Australia. When the Europeans discovered Australia, they met the Aboriginals, who had exactly the same years as the Europeans to develop technologically, but were still living in the Stone Age.

60. The logical fallacy in making the connection according to which the time since the formation of a system
    Equal technological progress of the so-called alien race
    Sitting in the same system - he is absurd; Because even if we assume
    That such a relationship exists and we will evaluate it based on our experience (we were not harmed
    from meteorites that landed here in the last million years), we can't
    To ignore that technological progress is related to, for example, progress
    (and sometimes withdrawal) socially and in the needs arising from this -
    And proof of this is the tremendous technological leap that has begun
    At the end of the 19th century and related to the study of the atom, aviation
    Electromagnetic chemistry, etc.
    Nuclear technology may be the technology that will delay
    (in a war or a major accident) the technological development
    of the human race for generations - if you don't destroy it completely.

61. Roy:
    Joel's deduction doesn't even come close to the one you described.
    The one you described is indeed a deduction and it is indeed a wrong deduction, but the one Joel describes is not a deduction.
    After all, there are already X-rays today and we don't use them for communication because they are harmful.
    The "advantages" of the neutrino - beyond the unimaginable difficulty of "catching" one of these are the fact that its speed is less than that of electromagnetic radiation. I guess for Yoel it makes sense that as we progress we will use slower communication.
    This is a prophecy - and one that can be refuted with confidence even though the future has not yet arrived.
    He doesn't know about the radiation he's talking about, but he's sure there is one and that it will be superior in terms of the media.
    He does not consider the (more likely, in my opinion) possibility that there is none, or that some of the aliens will not discover it, or that we will receive transmissions from a population that is at a sufficiently advanced level of development to ours that still uses a normal radio, or a million other situations in which there is a chance that we will discover aliens using a radio.
    In fact he says "don't look because you might not find".
    It's hard to think of a bigger nonsense

62. This is a related link http://www.youtube.com/AVIMOAS

63. Joel,

    Your deduction is based on a very narrow view. If we use the same deduction on another factor, for example...

    As we evolve, the growth rate of humanity increases exponentially.
    In five years there will be 8 billion people.
    In ten years there will be 10 billion.
    In 2000 years, the mass of humans will be greater than the mass of the universe.

    All the alien civilizations we will meet are at least thousands of years older than us.

    The conclusion: we are currently living inside an alien body whose mass constitutes the entire universe.

    In other words, deduction does not help here, because we do not have all the data on the development of civilizations different from ours and it is impossible to project our own on others. Junk in – junk out. We can only try, quite blindly, to track them in space with the tools we know, and hope for the best.

    By the way, how do you know what civilizations will be using in 100 years or 1,000 years? How come you don't have, for example, that they won't try to make contact through transmissions on all possible frequencies?

    Good Day,

    Roy.

64. With such a mental fixation, I didn't think I would come across this site.. A horrible lack of imagination, as befits humans in general. But I would expect to hear different words from the direction of a "scientist". It really sounds like a pathetic attempt to create a gimmick.

    Meir - This is a very nice comparison: amoeba-human being; human-alien
    There is no reason not to look at it that way. no reason

    And let's wait a few more months for good news from Saran. Maybe we will get a new concept that will help us open the imagination a little more.

65. The problem must be sharpened: the chance that people like Newton, Maxwell Einstein, etc. will come out of the isolated creatures who call themselves human is much smaller
    , from the possibility that a soup of particles will turn into a bacterium, and that a bacterium will turn into a human.

    Therefore do not expect to find radio broadcasts from other places.

66. and adopt any idea that has been proven wrong. What will they not do so that they can claim that science does not invest in the subject

67. It's interesting how the hyserists try to tattoo any real research on the subject they preach

68. Laur and Yoel.
    Light:
    Your response is very interesting
    I would love to hear from you how you answer your question. If it is positive, how do you define intelligence.
    Joel:
    It seems to me that the conceptual strain in your words is, for example, do you simply mean that the consciousness of humans is distant from the consciousness of the amoeba (this is roughly the ratio), for example, and there is no chance of us communicating?

69. Joel:
    Apart from the fact that this is a prophecy that is not based on anything (and clearly does not make sense - imagine what would happen here if every mobile phone emitted X-rays) there is not much to say about your response

70. SETI searches in the low radio frequency range that are not effective in transmitting information.
    As we develop, humanity's use of frequency increases. Today, the most use is in the 1.8-2.4GHZ range.
    A civilization developed in 100 years from us will use 500GHZ-2000GHZ
    A developed civilization in 1000 years will use X-rays
    A developed civilization in 10000 will use neutrinos which have great advantages
    A civilization developed by 100000 will use radiation of a type unknown to us
    A civilization developed in a billion years will use things we have no ability to measure or understand
    Most of the life forms we will encounter will be either billions of years ahead of us or billions after us
    So there is no chance for any form of constructive communication.

71. I mean - I understand, but, oh la quantos - ....

72. Does anyone have an update on the development of "machine baby"
    I read an article that deals with imparting artificial intelligence to a computer using the method that humans are taught from a baby to an adult according to the article on the website below

    http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/1,7340,L-826188,00.html

73. light:
    Since all the doubts have already arisen, it's time to look for an answer to them.
    Do you have a better offer than the one offered?
    Do you really think that you should only watch stars that have planets in the life belt?
    Do you have any idea how few of these have been discovered so far?
    Or maybe you're suggesting that the study of visiting the stars be abandoned altogether, since inventions in the life belt still do not prove that there is life.
    In short - your proposal is not constructive and it is not clear to me what it is for.

74. As Steven Pinker, biological psychologist and author of How the Mind Works, wrote, intelligence is not an inevitable product of evolution any more than fur is an inevitable product of evolution. It is important to remember that life develops according to the "fit survives" principle. Certain conditions may lead to the development of intelligence, and certain conditions may lead to the development of a long, scaly tail, but just as we do not imagine aliens as having crocodilian features, there is no reason for us to imagine them as having human features, including human intelligence.
    Before we raise whether there is an alien artificial intelligence, it is appropriate to answer the question of whether there is an intelligence, as we know and define it, alien.

75. Walla:
    I think you're just lashing out.
    This proposal, like all SETI activity, is not based on the fact that the aliens are interested in us or our communications, but on the fact that they maintain radio communication among themselves and we can learn about their existence and about them by listening to this communication.
    By the way, it is most likely that such aliens will also be interested in us and our communication for exactly the same reason that we are interested in them, but, as mentioned, that is not what the idea is based on.
    The idea of ​​sending robots to settle in space and eventually populate the entire universe was already raised many years ago.
    Timothy Ferris wrote about this many years ago in his book "The Mind's Sky" which was translated, if I'm not mistaken, under the name "Beyond the Limits of Consciousness".
    It is a perfectly reasonable idea and definitely justified to direct the antennas also to stars that do not support life of the kind we are familiar with, both because of the possibility of robotic civilizations and because of the possibility of life forms of a completely different kind.
    The advice offered by Stephen Dick (what a name! Almost like Guy Pines 🙂 ) is to listen to transmissions from all the existing stars and if you thought a little you would realize that this advice does not depend on the fact that the life on these stars is robotic and that your entire response, as usual with many commenters here, is quick to condescend to the scientists is out of place.

76. Thanks to my father for the site.
    Simply, I entered a quantum leap.. as a natural and elegant spontaneous athlete.
    Yes, thanks. To the smart people on the site.
    You made it possible for me to understand the days in a week.. from that computer zombies.
    It was possible for me, another understanding..to the fatigue of the material..to its details
    I wish my children..to be...independent in spirit and self-taught.
    I wish everyone.. to continue learning and to appreciate life and covenants.
    I wish everyone to be valuable. and direct.. really.

    Amalia, daughter of Binyamin and the bee
    And the rest.. for the musings and the wits - for our wise ones.. later.
    All the best.

77. Qantas I did not quite understand your intention, but on this occasion I will again recommend an excellent book on this very subject! –

    http://www.tapuz.co.il/blog/ViewEntry.asp?EntryId=1065939

    have fun

    .

78. And these are Kane's products..

    And so, the reaction of an adversary is seen.
    And on a note..really, Oilit..this...simply, I'll finish..
    No, dare to read smart books.
    Don't you dare move from the computer.
    And that..who wrote about my book..cellulite for women..may his name and memory be longed for

    Know if you have an E.S.K.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ask-w

79. Here is an excellent book on exactly this topic, amazing!!

    http://www.tapuz.co.il/blog/ViewEntry.asp?EntryId=1065939

80. .
    .
    .

    Here is an excellent book on exactly this topic, amazing!!

    http://www.tapuz.co.il/blog/ViewEntry.asp?EntryId=1065939

    .
    .
    .

81. Gil, Dehilak.. you number eight here.. so explain, mention, justify your question..
    You spared me a summary of things, as I learned..seriously..from me in another article here..

82. Has anyone been affected by the eighth passenger? Or did it just turn out similar?

83. Hanan Sabat continues to preach with his customary missionary fervor. He just "forgot" again that the SETI project is based on private funding sources and is misleading as usual

84. We just didn't look well. Luckily the genius came.
    It's interesting that the aliens don't want to talk to us but are interested in our communication.
    Who said they moved to machines? Maybe they moved to a plasma phase? Gas?
    Maybe they are in the form of non-ionizing radiation? How did he decide they were robots for God's sake there are endless options for an inhuman existence.

85. Not accurate,
    There were such aliens and they did create robots in the post-biological phase, but then the robots created us in their post-technological phase and finally failed because of corrosion problems. And we will produce mechanical babies in the future (in our post-vaginal phase).

86. Hanan:
    What you want? that they will not search? That they will just believe?
    Are you trying to preach the abolition of SETI?
    What is the reason for this - is it only because they are working seriously to discover the facts that you claim to be aware of?
    Do you really believe they will send a probe to look for God?
    Dahil Rabak!

87. It is interesting that NASA already knows how advanced civilizations might act, what they will develop and their biological developments, and this while it claims that no such civilizations have been discovered and the whole UFO phenomenon is imaginary.

    What won't NASA do, to help the producers of the screensavers (i.e. SETI), continue and earn a living.

    Will the next step send a probe to look for God???

    Hanan Sabat
    http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL

88. For the enthusiastic amateur scientist..
    You know, if there is no longer a partnership..between them..which is only now..turning out, go..
    .??.??

89. An original and interesting idea, very plausible. Let's hope it exists and they are friendly and will bring redemption to the world instead of Rybel Miliobevich...

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.