Alone in the Universe: A safe choice?

Open letter to SETI:

There are those at the SETI program who wish to send signals out into space — hoping a reply will make it easier for us to discover life in the universe. I’ve addressed this concept before, however, there are those who fear such an act would invite unwanted visitors from a civilization far more advanced than our own. So the question remains: should we be concerned about distant civilizations looking to Earth with ideas on our natural resources?

A fundamental consequence of an evolved intelligence is proportional to a species capable of advanced activities as interstellar travel. The reasoning is clear: if interstellar travel is a capability reserved only for species of such advancement, then their advancement is direct proof of their understanding sustainable activity. Their very existence as an advanced species is proof of their unconditional adaptation to sustainable activity, in response to any previous unsustainable activity. This relationship is a universal constant, as the entropic pressures of adaptation permits the continued existence of a species — contingent on sustainable function of said species.

To attain such a level in advancement for the sole purpose of raping resources from other populated worlds is both counterintuitive and contradictory to an intelligence of such a level — not just ignorant to the vast resources from uninhabited planets, but from the universal constant the entropic model of civilization places on all species. Specifically, the pursuit of sustainable activity will ultimately reveal the biological constant of Universal Rights to any species exhibiting sociality, much less of such advancement.

What would it say if an advanced species harboured an unsustainable society — somehow existing long enough to develop advanced interstellar travel? It would be a contradiction not unlike “Bruce Almighty” materializing a sports car rather than teleporting to a desired location. It would suggest the advancement was stumbled upon, found under a rock; intellectually unfit in knowing what best to do with it.

The actions of any advanced civilization are proportionate to their grasp of sustainable activity — not contingent on the definitions by a lesser civilization who’s society unwittingly value unsustainable activity currently threatening their existence.

How catastrophically misguided for us to suggest contact with intelligent life in the universe would reveal a civilization fraught with unsustainable activity — outright unconscionable in suggesting advanced intelligence could somehow achieve superior galactic status while exhibiting a stone-age understanding in sustainable resource management. Unsurprisingly, this is a disheartening indicator of our current grasp of sustainable activity — blind, as though our problems are just as unresolvable for a civilization millions of years more advanced than us.

To sight the mathematical probability of finding life in the universe, is equally proportionate to their advancement beyond our current level. Simply put, we are at the birth of telecommunications, much less space exploration in the context of an evolved species. We’ve just started — training wheels still attached. To find no evidence of life is to find no evidence. Once evidence is found, it (laughably) becomes a race between who is more advanced. To that, what might be the gap in advancement between them and us?

Respectively, if humans had a thousand years to evolve and advanced ahead of today, what might we expect? If we survive, would interstellar travel be common to us? Would we still use radio signals to communicate? A thousand years seems extraordinary given where we were just 100 years ago.

On the larger cosmic timescale, galactic life a thousand years further advanced than us is extremely unlikely. Ten thousand years would be imperceptibly more probable. It’s more likely we’d find civilizations are hundreds of thousands if not millions of years further advanced than us — for no evidence exists to suggest all life in the universe started at the very same time. We, being a species only just now detectable by other civilizations, cannot define realistic expectations while being a galactic pre-schooler.

Sustainability is irrefutably prerequisite for the existence of any advanced species — as proof of any species being advanced at all, much less existing many times longer than us. To find any galactic civilization capable of advanced activity such as interstellar travel, will categorically reveal the absolute definition of a sustainable civilization.

Fear not the discovery of an advanced galactic intelligence — fundamentally exemplifying a sustainable civilization. Fear the possibility of not finding advanced galactic intelligence — relegating us blind to our unsustainable activity and eventual extinction.

We are all made of “star stuff,” and as a species exhibiting sociality, we instinctively support the members of our family, our community, our people, and our species. If we reach the galactic level, we will instinctively support our galactic family. We are only held back by those who do not support one or more levels of sociality our species desperately depends upon in continuing our existence.

Advertisements

One thought on “Alone in the Universe: A safe choice?

  1. Pingback: Open Letter to Neil deGrasse Tyson: SETI as you like it? | Drexus

Comments are closed.