Detecting Intelligence

[otseng]

There are two fields that actively pursues detecting intelligence that exist outside of the earth. One is the SETI program that seeks to detect intelligent life on other planets. Another is the field of Intelligent Design that seeks to detect intelligent life outside of this universe. Both are looking for clues of the existence of intelligent life by using natural means of detection.

SETI:

SETI, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, is an exploratory science that seeks evidence of life in the universe by looking for some signature of its technology. Our current understanding of life’s origin on Earth suggests that given a suitable environment and sufficient time, life will develop on other planets. Whether evolution will give rise to intelligent, technological civilizations is open to speculation. However, such a civilization could be detected across interstellar distances, and may actually offer our best opportunity for discovering extraterrestrial life in the near future.

ID:

Its fundamental claim is that intelligent causes are necessary to explain the complex, information-rich structures of biology, and that these causes are empirically detectable.

So, what would constitute as something (message, pattern) that required an intelligence cause?

How can we distinguish between an intelligent cause and a non-intelligent cause?

Would either of these be any different for SETI and for ID?

[Jose]

But the distinction is clear. ID searches for patterns that can't be explained by current scientific theories, not specifially for intelligence.

There's more to ID than this, which is what makes it seem so compelling. They throw in math.

Somehow, it has become socially acceptable to be mathematically illiterate. You know, "I can't do math" is a fine reason to ask someone else to figure the tip for a restaurant bill. Therefore, presenting complex math to shore up ID comes across as Really Smart.

The problem is that the math rests upon invalid assumptions. But that's OK, because the ID audience doesn't know the assumptions either.

[juliod]

ID searches for patterns that can't be explained by current scientific theories, not specifially for intelligence.

That's not really true. ID proponents don't do any searching for anything. There are no ID scientists. They don't, and don't try to, come up with anything by themselves.

Science is where you will find people looking for patterns that can't be explained. Science is all about explaining the unknown. You have to find something unexplainable before you can explain it.

The thing about prime numbers, BTW, is that they cannot be arrived at by the combination of regular repeating signals. Imagine two pulsars orbiting each other, and doing so in line with the earth. We would see both pulsars some of the time, one at other times, and the other at still other times. This might show a quite complex signal of varying pulse rates. But what it can't be is a series of primes. Primes aren't divisible by any number other than one.

DanZ

[Curious]

The thing about prime numbers, BTW, is that they cannot be arrived at by the combination of regular repeating signals.
DanZ

While I agree with the majority of what you say I disagree with the above. Using a binary signal it is possible to use one frequency or tone for 0s and another for 1s. The signal for each number could be the same duration, the first being mainly frequency or tone standing for 0s ending with a single 1 frequency/tone. This could be terminated with a frequency/tone blackout or marker frequency/tone. The final number would be a mixture of 0s and 1s.

Looking at it from a manner similar to your pulsar explanation (which BTW has lead to this very conclusion previously) what about a sun or pulsar with a number of satellites. If all had the same orbital frequency (ok, it's unlikely) but were orbiting so that each one passed the same line at regular intervals, the satellites ,if they had different magnetic fields, could deflect differing amounts of the pulsars/suns/planets signal. I know this is unlikely in the extreme but if by fluke these magnetic fields(or masses) were in the ratio 1:2:3:5:7:11:13 then this would seem like an "intelligent" signal.

[juliod]

I disagree with the above.

What I meant was that they can't be constructed of naturally-occuring repeating signals. Like spinning pulsars, or orbiting stars and planets.

We see repeated signal in space (like pulsars). We also see things that increase and decrease in amplitude. And of course random noise is ubiquitous. I think no one has come up with an idea how a natural phenomenon could make a prime-number signal.

edited to add:

If all had the same orbital frequency (ok, it's unlikely)

I don't think that is possible. Orbital frequency is related to radius, so planets in different orbits would have different frequencies. I think it might be possible with the right combination of masses and distances, but that would require so much fine tuning that it might be sufficient evidence to accept ID by itself.

DanZ

DanZ

[Curious]

I think no one has come up with an idea how a natural phenomenon could make a prime-number signal.
DanZ

I realized that so I edited my post (at the same time as you wrote reply I believe)

[Curious]

If all had the same orbital frequency (ok, it's unlikely)

I don't think that is possible. Orbital frequency is related to radius, so planets in different orbits would have different frequencies. I think it might be possible with the right combination of masses and distances, but that would require so much fine tuning that it might be sufficient evidence to accept ID by itself.

DanZ

DanZ

Who said they were in different orbits?

[juliod]

Who said they were in different orbits?

You can't have more than one planet in the same, or close, orbits. The gravitational attraction would disturb them or cause a collision.

DanZ

[Ian Parker]

[quote="otseng"]Let's look at this problem the other way around. That is, if we were to try to convince a space alien that we were an intelligent lifeform through some remote communication method, how could we demonstrate that?

Very simple. Write out Pi in binary decimals

11.001 etc

[Ian Parker]

I think in concentrating on detecting an intelligent pattern we are slightly missing the point. If a civilization has advanced beyong a certain point its effect on a star will be unmistakable.

There are Type 1 - Energy intercepted by a planet.

[Curious]

Let's look at this problem the other way around. That is, if we were to try to convince a space alien that we were an intelligent lifeform through some remote communication method, how could we demonstrate that?

Very simple. Write out Pi in binary decimals

11.001 etc

This would take forever as Pi is an infinite number of decimal places.