I think someone needs to invent a handsign, most urgently for use by drivers.
There are many signs we already have available:
The finger. Needs no comment.
Raising hand. Acknowledgment of someone who has yielded right of way.
Thumbs up. Approval.
Thumbs down. Disapproval.
Fluttering flat hand. Ambivalence.
Thumb and finger in a circle with others wide (finger spelling "f"): Perfect.
Waving "hi". Generic friendly gesture.
Peace sign. Nearly as generic friendly gesture.
What about a sign that says "I am sorry, I apologize"? I have sometimes wished I had such a sign when I inadvertently make a mistake while driving. In response to a horn blast, waving "hi" or the peace sign or thumbs up can indicate friendly intentions, but they can also be interpreted as dismissal of the situation, as in "Don't have a cow, man". Even if few drivers ever gave the "I'm sorry" signal, it still might have a noticeable effect. Occasional validation could quiet the sort of person who might go over the edge to road rage.
There are some possibilities, but none is a simple hand sign and all are hard to observe: A facial wince or mouthing the words "I'm sorry" could serve the purpose, as could scrunching one's head down to convey the "guilty" concept. Putting palm to forehead as in "doh!" might serve but is also lacking in visibility.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Aliens are bountiful but unreachable
It is common to wonder about whether there are intelligent civilizations elsewhere in the universe, and if so, why we haven't heard from them. Here is one link that discusses the issue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox
Here is how I see it:
It is overwhelmingly likely that intelligent life has arisen elsewhere in the universe millions of times. We believe we are on an average star in an average galaxy, with nothing from the realm of astronomy indicating we are special. Any time in the past we have considered ourselves to be special, we have been wrong (our culture fundamentally greater than other cultures, our species fundamentally different from other species, our planet the center of the universe). Among gazillions of possible stars and planets, it is conservative to estimate millions of instances of intelligent life.
The failure to detect such other civilizations casts no doubt on this conclusion. Of all the possibilities that have been put forth for why we have not detected aliens, one observation suffices: Relative to the density and longevity of technological civilizations, the laws of physics prevent economically feasible ways of moving among the stars.
If there were a truly easy way of moving among the stars as simple as some sort of instantaneous jump from one point to another, some one of the millions of other civilizations would have discovered it and taken advantage of it. They would be here already. If the effort required were substantial, then it would be less likely and depend heavily on how dense civilizations are.
Those who are sanguine about the possibilities of interstellar exploration and colonization remind us that our world is full of technological marvels that earlier generations could not have predicted. They are correct that we should not rule out interstellar-enabling technologies based on what we understand of science and technology today. But it would be a worse folly to claim that it is only our limited mindset that makes us doubt the discovery of every technology we find appealing. We cannot say that any future technology that excites our imagination is impossible, but we certainly cannot say that it is inevitable. The persuasive evidence that easy interstellar travel cannot be achieved is that none of the millions of other civilizations has achieved it.
Life on earth has a tendency to spread into all available niches, and people reasonably expect that the same process would apply to the colonization of space. If we assume humans discovered the requisite technology, exponential expansion requires the discovery of planets that not only can support human life but where it can thrive to the point of serving as a basis for a further round of exploration and colonization. Planets that would allow human life to thrive might be considerably less common than planets with other intelligent life forms, which might evolve in considerably different environments. Human-friendly planets might also be inhabited by civilizations that, whatever their initial friendliness, would not be so friendly to the idea of being colonized, and could use their huge advantages in local resources to prevent it.
Detecting an alien presence in the electromagnetic spectrum seems much more likely. It is a function of how dense intelligent life is in the universe, how long it lasts in a detectable form, and how sensitive our detection technologies are. Failure to detect other civilizations will not cast doubt on their existence. As our technologies increase and we find no aliens, our estimate of the density of life in the universe will simply go down.
It is overwhelmingly likely that intelligent life abounds elsewhere in the universe, and overwhelmingly unlikely that we will ever communicate with any of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox
Here is how I see it:
It is overwhelmingly likely that intelligent life has arisen elsewhere in the universe millions of times. We believe we are on an average star in an average galaxy, with nothing from the realm of astronomy indicating we are special. Any time in the past we have considered ourselves to be special, we have been wrong (our culture fundamentally greater than other cultures, our species fundamentally different from other species, our planet the center of the universe). Among gazillions of possible stars and planets, it is conservative to estimate millions of instances of intelligent life.
The failure to detect such other civilizations casts no doubt on this conclusion. Of all the possibilities that have been put forth for why we have not detected aliens, one observation suffices: Relative to the density and longevity of technological civilizations, the laws of physics prevent economically feasible ways of moving among the stars.
If there were a truly easy way of moving among the stars as simple as some sort of instantaneous jump from one point to another, some one of the millions of other civilizations would have discovered it and taken advantage of it. They would be here already. If the effort required were substantial, then it would be less likely and depend heavily on how dense civilizations are.
Those who are sanguine about the possibilities of interstellar exploration and colonization remind us that our world is full of technological marvels that earlier generations could not have predicted. They are correct that we should not rule out interstellar-enabling technologies based on what we understand of science and technology today. But it would be a worse folly to claim that it is only our limited mindset that makes us doubt the discovery of every technology we find appealing. We cannot say that any future technology that excites our imagination is impossible, but we certainly cannot say that it is inevitable. The persuasive evidence that easy interstellar travel cannot be achieved is that none of the millions of other civilizations has achieved it.
Life on earth has a tendency to spread into all available niches, and people reasonably expect that the same process would apply to the colonization of space. If we assume humans discovered the requisite technology, exponential expansion requires the discovery of planets that not only can support human life but where it can thrive to the point of serving as a basis for a further round of exploration and colonization. Planets that would allow human life to thrive might be considerably less common than planets with other intelligent life forms, which might evolve in considerably different environments. Human-friendly planets might also be inhabited by civilizations that, whatever their initial friendliness, would not be so friendly to the idea of being colonized, and could use their huge advantages in local resources to prevent it.
Detecting an alien presence in the electromagnetic spectrum seems much more likely. It is a function of how dense intelligent life is in the universe, how long it lasts in a detectable form, and how sensitive our detection technologies are. Failure to detect other civilizations will not cast doubt on their existence. As our technologies increase and we find no aliens, our estimate of the density of life in the universe will simply go down.
It is overwhelmingly likely that intelligent life abounds elsewhere in the universe, and overwhelmingly unlikely that we will ever communicate with any of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)