Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #440681 > unrolled thread

Intelligent Life Could Be Rare

Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.sf.written

Contents

  Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 06:51 -0700
    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Stephen Allcroft <stephenallcroft@lycos.co.uk> - 2016-05-26 08:02 -0700
      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-26 16:27 +0000
    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 08:18 -0700
      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare nance@math.ohio-state.edu (Anthony Nance) - 2016-05-26 17:49 +0000
        Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Jack_Bohn" <jackbohn64@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 11:13 -0400
          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-05-27 09:01 -0700
          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare nance@math.ohio-state.edu (Anthony Nance) - 2016-05-27 17:17 +0000
          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-27 10:44 -0700
          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 13:01 -0700
            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-05-27 13:33 -0700
              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Don Kuenz <garbage@crcomp.net> - 2016-05-28 01:17 +0000
            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-05-27 16:49 -0400
              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2016-05-27 14:23 -0700
                Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 15:34 -0700
              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 15:33 -0700
                Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> - 2016-05-28 08:17 +0300
                  Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2016-05-28 00:09 -0600
              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 15:05 -0500
                Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 17:01 -0500
                  Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 19:16 -0700
                    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare David Johnston <David@block.net> - 2016-05-28 21:09 -0600
                      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-05-29 05:40 -0700
                    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> - 2016-05-29 17:01 +1200
                      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@csuohio.edu> - 2016-05-29 12:21 -0400
                  Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-05-29 10:30 -0400
                    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@csuohio.edu> - 2016-05-29 12:25 -0400
                    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare David Johnston <David@block.net> - 2016-05-29 10:56 -0600
                      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 12:31 -0500
                        Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> - 2016-05-29 23:21 +0300
                    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Michael F. Stemper" <michael.stemper@gmail.com> - 2016-05-30 12:12 -0500
                      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-05-31 08:05 -0400
                        Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare David Johnston <David@block.net> - 2016-05-31 08:14 -0600
                          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-05-31 10:30 -0400
                            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@csuohio.edu> - 2016-05-31 11:34 -0400
                            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-05-31 08:50 -0700
                              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-05-31 13:00 -0400
                                Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Robert Bannister <robban@clubtelco.com> - 2016-06-02 14:21 +0800
                                  Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-06-02 07:59 -0400
                              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare David Johnston <David@block.net> - 2016-05-31 12:01 -0600
                                Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-05-31 12:48 -0700
                                Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Robert Bannister <robban@clubtelco.com> - 2016-06-02 14:22 +0800
                          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 11:15 -0700
                            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare David Johnston <David@block.net> - 2016-05-31 13:13 -0600
            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-05-28 03:03 -0700
    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare patmpowers@gmail.com - 2016-05-27 04:28 -0700
    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-05-27 13:24 -0700
      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare David Johnston <David@block.net> - 2016-05-27 14:53 -0600
        Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-05-27 17:19 -0700
          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2016-05-27 17:37 -0700
            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-05-27 18:54 -0700
              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2016-05-27 21:38 -0700
              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 21:43 -0700
      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2016-05-27 15:00 -0700
        Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 15:29 -0700
          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare patmpowers@gmail.com - 2016-05-27 15:53 -0700
            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 18:30 -0700
          Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2016-05-28 00:14 -0600
            Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 00:17 -0700
              Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2016-05-28 10:30 -0700
                Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-05-28 15:48 -0700
      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 15:27 -0700
      Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 19:55 -0700
    Re: Intelligent Life Could Be Rare Adamastor Glace Mortimer <nospam@no.invalid> - 2016-05-28 13:24 +0000

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#440681 — Intelligent Life Could Be Rare

A recent news report concerning the inaugural METI conference held in Puerto Rico 
notes that it might be difficult to communicate with alien creatures that are not 
humanoid, giving as examples creatures like intelligent spiders, citing one of 
the papers given.

Another paper, by Dr. Anna Dornhaus, notes that there is reason to think that the 
unusually high intelligence of humans may be the product of sexual selection. 
This is not a new idea; Darwin himself advanced it in his sequel to "The Origin 
of Species": "The Descent of Man", subtitled ...and Selection in Relation to Sex.

Elaine Morgan's book, "The Descent of Woman" also advanced this possibility in 
more detail.

This was just one of the reasons Dr. Dornhaus gave for considering the 
possibility that the steps which led to the intelligence level of humans could be 
so involved, so rare, that all the habitable planets in the Universe might not be 
enough for the process to be repeated.

I agree that this is a possibility; we don't know enough, however, to know how 
many different routes to intelligence there are. While a Star Trek universe where 
nearly every solar system is taken is unlikely, whether there are hundreds of 
civilizations in each galaxy, or we are the only one in the whole Universe is 
still very much an unknown in my opinion.

John Savard

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#440682

On Thursday, 26 May 2016 14:51:08 UTC+1, Quadibloc  wrote:
> A recent news report concerning the inaugural METI conference held in Puerto Rico 
> notes that it might be difficult to communicate with alien creatures that are not 
> humanoid, giving as examples creatures like intelligent spiders, citing one of 
> the papers given.
> 
> Another paper, by Dr. Anna Dornhaus, notes that there is reason to think that the 
> unusually high intelligence of humans may be the product of sexual selection. 
> This is not a new idea; Darwin himself advanced it in his sequel to "The Origin 
> of Species": "The Descent of Man", subtitled ...and Selection in Relation to Sex.
> 
> Elaine Morgan's book, "The Descent of Woman" also advanced this possibility in 
> more detail.
> 
> This was just one of the reasons Dr. Dornhaus gave for considering the 
> possibility that the steps which led to the intelligence level of humans could be 
> so involved, so rare, that all the habitable planets in the Universe might not be 
> enough for the process to be repeated.
> 
> I agree that this is a possibility; we don't know enough, however, to know how 
> many different routes to intelligence there are. While a Star Trek universe where 
> nearly every solar system is taken is unlikely, whether there are hundreds of 
> civilizations in each galaxy, or we are the only one in the whole Universe is 
> still very much an unknown in my opinion.
> 
> John Savard

"Let's hope there's intelligent life somewhere out in space because there's bugger all down here on earth."

cf Monty Python's Flying Circus, the Universe Song

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440685

Stephen Allcroft <stephenallcroft@lycos.co.uk> writes:
>On Thursday, 26 May 2016 14:51:08 UTC+1, Quadibloc  wrote:
>> A recent news report concerning the inaugural METI conference held in Puerto Rico 
>> notes that it might be difficult to communicate with alien creatures that are not 
>> humanoid, giving as examples creatures like intelligent spiders, citing one of 
>> the papers given.
>> 
>> Another paper, by Dr. Anna Dornhaus, notes that there is reason to think that the 
>> unusually high intelligence of humans may be the product of sexual selection. 
>> This is not a new idea; Darwin himself advanced it in his sequel to "The Origin 
>> of Species": "The Descent of Man", subtitled ...and Selection in Relation to Sex.
>> 
>> Elaine Morgan's book, "The Descent of Woman" also advanced this possibility in 
>> more detail.
>> 
>> This was just one of the reasons Dr. Dornhaus gave for considering the 
>> possibility that the steps which led to the intelligence level of humans could be 
>> so involved, so rare, that all the habitable planets in the Universe might not be 
>> enough for the process to be repeated.
>> 
>> I agree that this is a possibility; we don't know enough, however, to know how 
>> many different routes to intelligence there are. While a Star Trek universe where 
>> nearly every solar system is taken is unlikely, whether there are hundreds of 
>> civilizations in each galaxy, or we are the only one in the whole Universe is 
>> still very much an unknown in my opinion.
>> 
>> John Savard
>
>"Let's hope there's intelligent life somewhere out in space because there's bugger all down here on earth."

And even less on Usenet since eternal september began....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440684

On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 9:51:08 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
[...]
> I agree that this is a possibility; we don't know enough, however, to know how 
> many different routes to intelligence there are. While a Star Trek universe where 
> nearly every solar system is taken is unlikely, whether there are hundreds of 
> civilizations in each galaxy, or we are the only one in the whole Universe is 
> still very much an unknown in my opinion.

How many independently evolved intelligent species are there in Star Trek?

I'm not a Trekkie, but I recall TNG showing that all the rubber-forehead races
(including humans) had a single origin. There weren't too many others (the 
'Q'?).

pt

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440690

Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 9:51:08 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> [...]
>> I agree that this is a possibility; we don't know enough, however, to know how 
>> many different routes to intelligence there are. While a Star Trek universe where 
>> nearly every solar system is taken is unlikely, whether there are hundreds of 
>> civilizations in each galaxy, or we are the only one in the whole Universe is 
>> still very much an unknown in my opinion.
> 
> How many independently evolved intelligent species are there in Star Trek?
> 
> I'm not a Trekkie, but I recall TNG showing that all the rubber-forehead races
> (including humans) had a single origin. There weren't too many others (the 
> 'Q'?).
> 

I agree there weren't many.  My ST memories get fuzzier by the day, 
especially for TNG and Voyager, but a few that come to mind are:
- the Horta
- species of shapeshifters (Odo)
- lizard/reptile species (Gorn?)
- vague memories of insectoid species 
- energy-based species (e.g. medusans in the TOS episode with Diana Muldaur)
- and maybe Wesley's nanites?

Tony

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440722

Among the things Anthony Nance wrote: 
> Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 9:51:08 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> > [...]
> >> While a Star Trek universe where 
> >> nearly every solar system is taken is unlikely, whether there are hundreds of 
> >> civilizations in each galaxy, or we are the only one in the whole Universe is 
> >> still very much an unknown in my opinion.
> > 
> > How many independently evolved intelligent species are there in Star Trek?
> > 
> > I'm not a Trekkie, but I recall TNG showing that all the rubber-forehead races
> > (including humans) had a single origin. There weren't too many others (the 
> > 'Q'?).
> > 
> I agree there weren't many.  My ST memories get fuzzier by the day, 
> especially for TNG and Voyager, but a few that come to mind are:
[...]
> - lizard/reptile species (Gorn?)

ISTR Voyager's producers intended to have weirder aliens on that show, which seemed strange to me: a dozen light years is --for all practical purposes-- as far from Earth as 10,000.  It does make more sense when considering that the Progenitors may not have had galactic reach.  There was one episode where the Voyagers encountered a bird-like reptilian race they couldn't communicate with; who were only coming to a planet to either lay eggs or collect their young. 

> - vague memories of insectoid species 
> - energy-based species (e.g. medusans in the TOS episode with Diana Muldaur)

Coincidently, Muldaur was in two TOS episodes with discorporate intelligence; there was also the episode where Sargon and his group kept their mental energies stored in spheres.  They thought they still needed physical instrumentalities, but by the end roamed free.  They were pretty explicit about how they were once like us, to the extent that we might have been their lost colony.

The Organians evolved from physical beings whose architecture fits the humanoid size and shape, whether they looked exactly like the form they took for our convenience or not.  (There was a TNG episode about  "John Doe" alien "evolving" into an energy being.)


On the main subject, it seems we are getting a handle on the unknowns of the Drake equation: the fractions of stars with planets, of planets with appropriate conditions for life, where life developed in those conditions.  The fraction of life-bearing planets where intelligence arose still has two interpretations: it's only happened once that we've seen, and it's happened in every case we've examined.

-- 
-Jack

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440725

On Friday, 27 May 2016 16:14:00 UTC+1, Jack Bohn  wrote:
> Among the things Anthony Nance wrote: 
> > Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 9:51:08 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >> While a Star Trek universe where 
> > >> nearly every solar system is taken is unlikely, whether there are hundreds of 
> > >> civilizations in each galaxy, or we are the only one in the whole Universe is 
> > >> still very much an unknown in my opinion.
> > > 
> > > How many independently evolved intelligent species are there in Star Trek?
> > > 
> > > I'm not a Trekkie, but I recall TNG showing that all the rubber-forehead races
> > > (including humans) had a single origin. There weren't too many others (the 
> > > 'Q'?).
> > > 
> > I agree there weren't many.  My ST memories get fuzzier by the day, 
> > especially for TNG and Voyager, but a few that come to mind are:
> [...]
> > - lizard/reptile species (Gorn?)
> 
> ISTR Voyager's producers intended to have weirder aliens on that show, which seemed strange to me: a dozen light years is --for all practical purposes-- as far from Earth as 10,000.  It does make more sense when considering that the Progenitors may not have had galactic reach.  There was one episode where the Voyagers encountered a bird-like reptilian race they couldn't communicate with; who were only coming to a planet to either lay eggs or collect their young. 
> 
> > - vague memories of insectoid species 
> > - energy-based species (e.g. medusans in the TOS episode with Diana Muldaur)
> 
> Coincidently, Muldaur was in two TOS episodes with discorporate
> intelligence; there was also the episode where Sargon and his
> group kept their mental energies stored in spheres.  They thought
> they still needed physical instrumentalities, but by the end
> roamed free.  They were pretty explicit about how they were once
> like us, to the extent that we might have been their lost colony.

ROT13:
Gurl pubfr "boyvivba" juvpu v haqrefgbbq nf fhvpvqr 
orpnhfr gurl sbhaq vg vzcbffvoyr gb yvir jvgu hf 
jvgubhg pnhfvat unez - yvxr puneyvr'k.  rira zef 
fnetba unq frg nobhg gbeghevat zppbl gb trg ure jnl.

> The Organians evolved from physical beings whose architecture
> fits the humanoid size and shape, whether they looked exactly
> like the form they took for our convenience or not.  (There was
> a TNG episode about  "John Doe" alien "evolving" into an energy
> being.)

Gur nepuvgrpgher nyfb znl unir orra qrfvtarq sbe ivfvgbef, 
nf va "pngfcnj".  gurl qvqa'g hfr vg nal zber rkprcg znlor 
nf n zhfrhz.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440728

Jack_Bohn <jackbohn64@gmail.com> wrote:
> Among the things Anthony Nance wrote: 
>> Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 9:51:08 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
>> > [...]
>> >> While a Star Trek universe where 
>> >> nearly every solar system is taken is unlikely, whether there are hundreds of 
>> >> civilizations in each galaxy, or we are the only one in the whole Universe is 
>> >> still very much an unknown in my opinion.
>> > 
>> > How many independently evolved intelligent species are there in Star Trek?
>> > 
>> > I'm not a Trekkie, but I recall TNG showing that all the rubber-forehead races
>> > (including humans) had a single origin. There weren't too many others (the 
>> > 'Q'?).
>> > 
>> I agree there weren't many.  My ST memories get fuzzier by the day, 
>> especially for TNG and Voyager, but a few that come to mind are:
> [...]
>> - lizard/reptile species (Gorn?)
> 
> ISTR Voyager's producers intended to have weirder aliens on that show, which seemed strange to me: a dozen light years is --for all practical purposes-- as far from Earth as 10,000.  It does make more sense when considering that the Progenitors may not have had galactic reach.  There was one episode where the Voyagers encountered a bird-like reptilian race they couldn't communicate with; who were only coming to a planet to either lay eggs or collect their young. 
> 
>> - vague memories of insectoid species 
>> - energy-based species (e.g. medusans in the TOS episode with Diana Muldaur)
> 
> Coincidently, Muldaur was in two TOS episodes with discorporate intelligence; there was also the episode where Sargon and his group kept their mental energies stored in spheres.  They thought they still needed physical instrumentalities, but by the end roamed free.  They were pretty explicit about how they were once like us, to the extent that we might have been their lost colony.
> 


Aha - I forgot she also was in the "Sargon" episode.  Thanks!
- Tony

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440731

On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 9:14:00 AM UTC-6, Jack Bohn wrote:
> (There was a TNG episode about  "John Doe" alien "evolving" into an energy being.)

I don't immediately recall which episode you're referring to - but I do know that 
there was another episode in which the first *human* reached that stage of 
evolution.

The character everyone loved to hate during the first season - Wesley Crusher.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440737

On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:14:00 AM UTC-7, Jack Bohn wrote:

(snip)

> On the main subject, it seems we are getting a handle on the unknowns of the
> Drake equation:

  There are some variables not accounted for, or probably more properly speaking folded into other variables. I'm thinking of the fraction of ETs that think sufficiently like us to even consider the possibility of life on other worlds, to consider leaving their world/sending space probes out/listening for our RF and other emissions.

  We make assumptions like that all the time in SF. ST is often thrown up as an example- why do all rubber-forehead alien races have starships that look like design studies from competitors of the future Boeing that got all of the Starfleet contracts? The most radically different design that I recall is the Vulcan ringship design. If that's so logical, why does *nobody else* use it- instead pretty much everyone goes with one main hull or a split hull and two nacelles?

  More to the point, why are there so few ST aliens who don't want contact with outsiders for whatever reason?

  Yeah, I know, most SF is just Earth-historical-drama set in space. Still, if the Conspiracy Theorists who claim SF is intended to prepare us to meet our Alien Overlords were right, you'd think there'd be more Starfish aliens in stories.


  Mark L. Fergerson

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440741

In article <0841588d-7477-4103-89b3-01f9741b4cc0@googlegroups.com>,
 "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:14:00 AM UTC-7, Jack Bohn wrote:
> 
> (snip)
> 
> > On the main subject, it seems we are getting a handle on the unknowns of 
> > the
> > Drake equation:
> 
>   There are some variables not accounted for, or probably more properly 
>   speaking folded into other variables. I'm thinking of the fraction of ETs 
>   that think sufficiently like us to even consider the possibility of life on 
>   other worlds, to consider leaving their world/sending space probes 
>   out/listening for our RF and other emissions.
> 
>   We make assumptions like that all the time in SF. ST is often thrown up as 
>   an example- why do all rubber-forehead alien races have starships that look 
>   like design studies from competitors of the future Boeing that got all of 
>   the Starfleet contracts? The most radically different design that I recall 
>   is the Vulcan ringship design. If that's so logical, why does *nobody else* 
>   use it- instead pretty much everyone goes with one main hull or a split 
>   hull and two nacelles?

As I recall reading somewhere (probably in one of the various "Trek Tech 
Explained for the Complete SF Illiterate" type volumes that have 
appeared through the years) that question gets handwaved with something 
along the lines of "Due to the way the warp field works, a saucer/dish 
and two nacelles is the most energy-efficient configuration" - Never 
mind that "The Great Bird of the Galaxy" (AKA Gene Roddenberry) just 
plain thought that configuration looked cool and insisted that the 
modelers build it that way for TOS - turn your attention back to the 
fancy handwavium show over here, dammit!

-- 
Brought to you by the letter Q and the number .357
Security provided by Horace S. & Dan W.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440763

Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> wrote:
> In article <0841588d-7477-4103-89b3-01f9741b4cc0@googlegroups.com>,
> "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:14:00 AM UTC-7, Jack Bohn wrote:
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>> > On the main subject, it seems we are getting a handle on the unknowns of
>> > the
>> > Drake equation:
>>
>>   There are some variables not accounted for, or probably more properly
>>   speaking folded into other variables. I'm thinking of the fraction of ETs
>>   that think sufficiently like us to even consider the possibility of life on
>>   other worlds, to consider leaving their world/sending space probes
>>   out/listening for our RF and other emissions.
>>
>>   We make assumptions like that all the time in SF. ST is often thrown up as
>>   an example- why do all rubber-forehead alien races have starships that look
>>   like design studies from competitors of the future Boeing that got all of
>>   the Starfleet contracts? The most radically different design that I recall
>>   is the Vulcan ringship design. If that's so logical, why does *nobody else*
>>   use it- instead pretty much everyone goes with one main hull or a split
>>   hull and two nacelles?
>
> As I recall reading somewhere (probably in one of the various "Trek Tech
> Explained for the Complete SF Illiterate" type volumes that have
> appeared through the years) that question gets handwaved with something
> along the lines of "Due to the way the warp field works, a saucer/dish
> and two nacelles is the most energy-efficient configuration" - Never
> mind that "The Great Bird of the Galaxy" (AKA Gene Roddenberry) just
> plain thought that configuration looked cool and insisted that the
> modelers build it that way for TOS - turn your attention back to the
> fancy handwavium show over here, dammit!

        That was Gene. Couldn't write for sour owl poop, but
    strutted around for the benefit of the gullible Trek Nation,
    explaining how every failure was someone else's fault, and
    every success was due to his fecund imagination, vast
    literary ability, and CEO-level organizational skills. Do I
    strike you as vicious in my presentation of these facts?
    Yeah, well, just so, gentle reader, just so. I put up with
    this crap for the better part of three decades, and now it's
    my turn. Do not expect from me a nobility that was not
    possessed by the late, great Bird of the Galaxy, who spent
    more the a few hours of those years dropping bird-sh*t on
    me and my version of "City." - Cordwainer Bird

--
Don Kuenz KB7RPU

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440742

On 5/27/16 4:01 PM, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
> On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:14:00 AM UTC-7, Jack Bohn wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>> On the main subject, it seems we are getting a handle on the unknowns of the
>> Drake equation:
>
>   There are some variables not accounted for, or probably more properly speaking folded into other variables. I'm thinking of the fraction of ETs that think sufficiently like us to even consider the possibility of life on other worlds, to consider leaving their world/sending space probes out/listening for our RF and other emissions.
>
>   We make assumptions like that all the time in SF. ST is often thrown up as an example- why do all rubber-forehead alien races have starships that look like design studies from competitors of the future Boeing that got all of the Starfleet contracts? The most radically different design that I recall is the Vulcan ringship design. If that's so logical, why does *nobody else* use it- instead pretty much everyone goes with one main hull or a split hull and two nacelles?
>
>   More to the point, why are there so few ST aliens who don't want contact with outsiders for whatever reason?
>
>   Yeah, I know, most SF is just Earth-historical-drama set in space. Still, if the Conspiracy Theorists who claim SF is intended to prepare us to meet our Alien Overlords were right, you'd think there'd be more Starfish aliens in stories.
>
>
>   Mark L. Fergerson
>

	Starfish Aliens are a pain in the ass to write, tend to be 
unsympathetic, and usually require a lot of explanation just to make the 
reader accept them and let the story move along. So they're just not 
going to be as common as "They may not LOOK like us but they think 
rather like us". Especially since "us" covers awfully broad ground; 
delving into other HUMAN cultures can still have one hitting the 
"they're ALIENS" feeling quite often.


	Insofar as Star Trek, they've retconned an explanation that the 
core-plus-nacelles design is one favored by the physics of the Warp 
Drive. Insofar as their aliens, it was stated in TOS more than once that 
there were connections between a lot of the humanoid alien species.



-- 
                      Sea Wasp
                        /^\
                        ;;;	
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com  Blog: 
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440744

On 5/27/2016 1:49 PM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> On 5/27/16 4:01 PM, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
>> On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:14:00 AM UTC-7, Jack Bohn wrote:
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>>> On the main subject, it seems we are getting a handle on the unknowns
>>> of the
>>> Drake equation:
>>
>>   There are some variables not accounted for, or probably more
>> properly speaking folded into other variables. I'm thinking of the
>> fraction of ETs that think sufficiently like us to even consider the
>> possibility of life on other worlds, to consider leaving their
>> world/sending space probes out/listening for our RF and other emissions.
>>
>>   We make assumptions like that all the time in SF. ST is often thrown
>> up as an example- why do all rubber-forehead alien races have
>> starships that look like design studies from competitors of the future
>> Boeing that got all of the Starfleet contracts? The most radically
>> different design that I recall is the Vulcan ringship design. If
>> that's so logical, why does *nobody else* use it- instead pretty much
>> everyone goes with one main hull or a split hull and two nacelles?
>>
>>   More to the point, why are there so few ST aliens who don't want
>> contact with outsiders for whatever reason?
>>
>>   Yeah, I know, most SF is just Earth-historical-drama set in space.
>> Still, if the Conspiracy Theorists who claim SF is intended to prepare
>> us to meet our Alien Overlords were right, you'd think there'd be more
>> Starfish aliens in stories.
>>
>>
>>   Mark L. Fergerson
>>
>
>     Starfish Aliens are a pain in the ass to write, tend to be
> unsympathetic, and usually require a lot of explanation just to make the
> reader accept them and let the story move along. So they're just not
> going to be as common as "They may not LOOK like us but they think
> rather like us". Especially since "us" covers awfully broad ground;
> delving into other HUMAN cultures can still have one hitting the
> "they're ALIENS" feeling quite often.
>
>
>     Insofar as Star Trek, they've retconned an explanation that the
> core-plus-nacelles design is one favored by the physics of the Warp
> Drive. Insofar as their aliens, it was stated in TOS more than once that
> there were connections between a lot of the humanoid alien species.
>
And of course the real world reason is that slapping some rubber on 
someone's forehead costs a lot less than creating and animating a human 
sized land living starfish.  :)


-- 
Privacy IS Security

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440750

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote in
news:niadl3$k0r$1@dont-email.me: 

> On 5/27/2016 1:49 PM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>> On 5/27/16 4:01 PM, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
>>> On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:14:00 AM UTC-7, Jack Bohn wrote:
>>>
>>> (snip)
>>>
>>>> On the main subject, it seems we are getting a handle on the
>>>> unknowns of the
>>>> Drake equation:
>>>
>>>   There are some variables not accounted for, or probably more
>>> properly speaking folded into other variables. I'm thinking of
>>> the fraction of ETs that think sufficiently like us to even
>>> consider the possibility of life on other worlds, to consider
>>> leaving their world/sending space probes out/listening for our
>>> RF and other emissions. 
>>>
>>>   We make assumptions like that all the time in SF. ST is
>>>   often thrown 
>>> up as an example- why do all rubber-forehead alien races have
>>> starships that look like design studies from competitors of
>>> the future Boeing that got all of the Starfleet contracts? The
>>> most radically different design that I recall is the Vulcan
>>> ringship design. If that's so logical, why does *nobody else*
>>> use it- instead pretty much everyone goes with one main hull
>>> or a split hull and two nacelles? 
>>>
>>>   More to the point, why are there so few ST aliens who don't
>>>   want 
>>> contact with outsiders for whatever reason?
>>>
>>>   Yeah, I know, most SF is just Earth-historical-drama set in
>>>   space. 
>>> Still, if the Conspiracy Theorists who claim SF is intended to
>>> prepare us to meet our Alien Overlords were right, you'd think
>>> there'd be more Starfish aliens in stories.
>>>
>>>
>>>   Mark L. Fergerson
>>>
>>
>>     Starfish Aliens are a pain in the ass to write, tend to be
>> unsympathetic, and usually require a lot of explanation just to
>> make the reader accept them and let the story move along. So
>> they're just not going to be as common as "They may not LOOK
>> like us but they think rather like us". Especially since "us"
>> covers awfully broad ground; delving into other HUMAN cultures
>> can still have one hitting the "they're ALIENS" feeling quite
>> often. 
>>
>>
>>     Insofar as Star Trek, they've retconned an explanation that
>>     the 
>> core-plus-nacelles design is one favored by the physics of the
>> Warp Drive. Insofar as their aliens, it was stated in TOS more
>> than once that there were connections between a lot of the
>> humanoid alien species. 
>>
> And of course the real world reason is that slapping some rubber
> on someone's forehead costs a lot less than creating and
> animating a human sized land living starfish.  :)
> 
Certainly was the case in the 60s, and the 80s, and more or less 
still so today. But not for much longer.

-- 
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
    -- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440749

"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in
news:niabl8$dv5$1@dont-email.me: 

> Especially since "us"
> covers awfully broad ground; delving into other HUMAN cultures
> can still have one hitting the "they're ALIENS" feeling quite
> often. 
> 
I was just reading the other day about all the many different ways 
that humans count on their fingers, which hand they start with, which 
finger they start with, apparently at least one culture doesn't just 
count each finger as one integer, they use some to denote multipliers 
or something.

-- 
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
    -- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440780

In article <XnsA6159E487B4D4taustingmail@69.16.179.43>, 
taustinca@gmail.com says...
> 
> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in
> news:niabl8$dv5$1@dont-email.me: 
> 
> > Especially since "us"
> > covers awfully broad ground; delving into other HUMAN cultures
> > can still have one hitting the "they're ALIENS" feeling quite
> > often. 
> > 
> I was just reading the other day about all the many different ways 
> that humans count on their fingers, which hand they start with, which 
> finger they start with, apparently at least one culture doesn't just 
> count each finger as one integer, they use some to denote multipliers 
> or something.

There's a system in some places where people count in base twelve by 
indicating the fingerbones with their thumb.

"Base ten bacause fingers" isn't as natural and obvious an idea as the 
current popularity suggests. I'm kind of facinated by the remnants of 
other numeral systems. Base 12 (and to some extent 60) is the most 
obivious in Western culture, but base 20 pokes up in places, too.

-- 
Juho Julkunen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440783

Juho Julkunen <giaotanj@hotmail.com> wrote:

>obivious in Western culture, but base 20 pokes up in places, too.

http://www.itchyfeetcomic.com/2015/09/tres-childish.html#.V0k195ErKM8

-- 
We are geeks.  Resistance is voltage over current.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440821

On 05/27/2016 03:49 PM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> On 5/27/16 4:01 PM, nuny@bid.nes wrote:


>>   We make assumptions like that all the time in SF. ST is often thrown
>> up as an example- why do all rubber-forehead alien races have
>> starships that look like design studies from competitors of the future
>> Boeing that got all of the Starfleet contracts? The most radically
>> different design that I recall is the Vulcan ringship design. If
>> that's so logical, why does *nobody else* use it- instead pretty much
>> everyone goes with one main hull or a split hull and two nacelles?

>> Still, if the Conspiracy Theorists who claim SF is intended to prepare
>> us to meet our Alien Overlords were right, you'd think there'd be more
>> Starfish aliens in stories.

>      Starfish Aliens are a pain in the ass to write, tend to be
> unsympathetic, and usually require a lot of explanation just to make the
> reader accept them and let the story move along. So they're just not
> going to be as common as "They may not LOOK like us but they think
> rather like us".

You need to read (or reread) some Poul Anderson, who gave us races
such as:
- The Shenna in _Satan's World_, some extremely aggressive (despite
   Niven's beliefs) and non-herd-oriented herbivores
- The Ruadrath and the Domrath of Talwin, who had a "time-sharing"
   arrangement in _A Circus of Hells_
- The Togru-Kon-Tanakh of "Hiding Place"
- The Didonians of _The Rebel Worlds_
- The Ythrians of "The Problem of Pain"

... to pick only a tiny selection of his alien races, and only taken
from his van Rijn/Falkayn/Flandry stories.

>   Especially since "us" covers awfully broad ground;
> delving into other HUMAN cultures can still have one hitting the
> "they're ALIENS" feeling quite often.

Anderson even did multiple ethnic groups within an alien species.
Most notable was the split within the Diomedeans in _The Man Who
Counts_, but I recently encountered another in _After Doomsday_.
In the first, the ethnic/cultural divide drove a lot of the action;
in the second, it was a throw-away, sketched with just a few
sentences.


-- 
Michael F. Stemper
87.3% of all statistics are made up by the person giving them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#440830

On 05/28/2016 03:05 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 05/27/2016 03:49 PM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:

>>      Starfish Aliens are a pain in the ass to write, tend to be
>> unsympathetic, and usually require a lot of explanation just to make the
>> reader accept them and let the story move along. So they're just not
>> going to be as common as "They may not LOOK like us but they think
>> rather like us".
>
> You need to read (or reread) some Poul Anderson, who gave us races
> such as:
> - The Shenna in _Satan's World_, some extremely aggressive (despite
>    Niven's beliefs) and non-herd-oriented herbivores
> - The Ruadrath and the Domrath of Talwin, who had a "time-sharing"
>    arrangement in _A Circus of Hells_
> - The Togru-Kon-Tanakh of "Hiding Place"
> - The Didonians of _The Rebel Worlds_
> - The Ythrians of "The Problem of Pain"

Or, closer to your tastes: the Palainians and the Cahuitans (the
latter from _The Vortex Blaster_). Neither of them were "rubber
mask aliens".

-- 
Michael F. Stemper
There's no "me" in "team". There's no "us" in "team", either.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | rec.arts.sf.written

csiph-web