YT2095 Posted December 30, 2003 Share Posted December 30, 2003 most of our probes do contain simple to understand information, incl that of basic mathematics, for example sequences of non naturaly occuring numbers Primes for example, something that indicates inteligence by the fact that it couldn`t have occured by simple chance. the doing a little more research idea sounds good though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasori Posted December 30, 2003 Share Posted December 30, 2003 (I'm supposed to shut up!) But by putting our primes doesn't mean that they are the same to them, so they may just think that we came up with random lines and scribbles and said 'this is a prime!' because to them, our 3 could be like %^#$!. Although, the fact that we have a probe sent out there SHOULD tell them that we know something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted December 30, 2003 Author Share Posted December 30, 2003 You both REALLY should read Crichton's books. I agree with you Rasori, but on a different level. I think that its not only that we seek for out OWN personal human definition of life (which is LIMITED as hell, since we haven't even began to imagine what's on our own planet - say, at the bottom of the ocean) its also a matter of perception and definition as a general. The odds there are life around the universe are extremely high. The odds they are similar to us (have eyes, nose, hair, legs, hands, head, even if they're combined differently..) is slim. If such slight changes in the surroundings (such as air pressure and exposure to sun radiation) resulted in such a difference between human races (chinese, arabs, native americans, africans - they're all different = though having very VERY small changes in surroundings, if we compare them to the infinite space..) we can't expect aliens coming to earth from huge changes in atmosphere, pressure, AGE (we're relatively young, don't forget), and so on - to come to earth *before* a much advanced, much less noticeable (they might be standing here and we intercept them as a BUG because we don't realise the true meaning of what they are..) that possibility is EXTREMELY slim. ~~~ btw, I'm back ~~~ ~mooeypoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mam"MATT"us Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 Different civilizations are likely to have have different base mathmatics. I don't know it could be different beyond that but it might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSX Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 Cool stuff dave. Here's some neat stuff I googled: http://temporal_science.tripod.com/introduction/special3.htm Really cool gifs: http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/sr/hypercube.html omg: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 Rasori said in post #27 :But by putting our primes doesn't mean that they are the same to them, so they may just think that we came up with random lines and scribbles and said 'this is a prime!' because to them, our 3 could be like %^#$!. Huh? 3 of ANYTHING even little dots is still 3, and so if primes are represented as quantities or regular Beep Beep sequences as opposed to drawing OUR number "3" is valid, what`s the problem here? Mooeypoo: life here is defined roughly by 7 characteristics Movement Resiration Sensitivity Nourishment (requiring food) Excretia (waste products) Reproduction and Growth if anything has all these atributes, it is said to be alive. personaly I think that is a pretty fair and broad deffinition, and it`s certainly the ones that we look for in the space missions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted January 1, 2004 Author Share Posted January 1, 2004 What about intelligence? By the way -- three of anything is *not* always three. That's the point of the fourth dimention (time) and the possibility that what YOU concider three might be actually 5 in a different dimention. My point here, though, is not even the dimentions themselves but the possibility that we think DIFFERENTLY than other creatures - in such a sense that maths will not be their way to calculate things. They might have the perception of the fourth dimention of time, in which the CURRENT numbers (maths!) means absolutely nothing. I'm throwing hypothetical ideas to make my point. I don't know how many dimentions there are, if any, and what kind of extra-stuff you suddently understand when you can intercept those dimentions - but my point is that ANYTHING is possible. We shouldn't close our minds. Maths is *our* way of understanding. Aliens most probably use something else we don't even understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasori Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 How is movement a characteristic of life? If I remember correctly, it has to have all of the seven properties to be considered life by our standards, but trees, for example, don't move, yet they are considered living. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Rasori said in post #33 :How is movement a characteristic of life? If I remember correctly, it has to have all of the seven properties to be considered life by our standards, but trees, for example, don't move, yet they are considered living. LOL, of course trees and plants move! their leaves will follow sunlight or droop when the weather turns colder at night to try and keep in heat, try planting a tree sidways, or turning an existing baby tree on it side, after a while it will start to turn upwards again at 90 degrees, it recognises gravity. all plants move, look up the words; photonastic movement, seismonastic movements, chemonastic movements, tactic movements and thigmotropism. thats how and why plants move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 In this respect "movement" and "sensitivity" ought to be considered together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Agreed, as I`de equate in many instances nourishment and excretion together. being a system, it`s very difficult to actualy seperate the attributes. I would have been more impressed if "Fire" was used as an example of life (though it also has flaws) as opposed to Plants not moving though! LOL with respect to the Maths part of this arg, it`s nothing at all to do with how many dimensions are perceived how "Alien" a species is, or what they use to represent a finite quantity, the rules will ALWAYS be the same ergo: it`s Universal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 By the way -- three of anything is *not* always three. That's the point of the fourth dimention (time) and the possibility that what YOU concider three might be actually 5 in a different dimention. You are getting confused between reality and perception. If I look at a sheet of paper that rests in axis XY, but I look at it so that I am seeing plane YZ, I won't see any of the fifteen dots that are drawn on it. That doesn't meant that they aren't there, it just means I don't perceive them. Does that mean that zero in three dimensions is the same as fifteen in 2 dimensions? No. Clumsy example but you get the idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 mooeypoo said in post #32 :By the way -- three of anything is *not* always three. That's the point of the fourth dimention (time) and the possibility that what YOU concider three might be actually 5 in a different dimention. Maths is abstract you ninnyhammer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Also - bear in mind that an ability to accurately measure and predict the reality around it would be a prerequisite for any species that was attempting to develop a technology (travel, communications) that might result in this thread's replies being tested. The universe consistently proves its indifference when it comes to human opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 and if 3 = 5 in dimension X, then it must still follow a mathematical principal. to our term 3 is the sum of 1+1+1, and that law is imutable, in dimension X their laws will be imutable as well, but they will still be laws, and obey mathematical principals to the letter. no one EVER stated that we KNOW all these laws, only that they are there and apply. it`s an inescapable truism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 YT2095 said in post #40 :and if 3 = 5 in dimension X, then it must still follow a mathematical principal. to our term 3 is the sum of 1+1+1, and that law is imutable, in dimension X their laws will be imutable as well, but they will still be laws, and obey mathematical principals to the letter. no one EVER stated that we KNOW all these laws, only that they are there and apply. it`s an inescapable truism '3' '=' and '5' are just symbols. The mathematics underneath will still be identical even if you randomly swap the meanings over. Furthermore, 'Beep beep (pause) beep beep beep (pause) beep beep beep beep beep (etc)' can only be interpreted mathematically as the prime numbers, no matter the base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Assuming of course that the listener has figured out that primes exist, and what qualifies them as such. If not, they will simply not recognise the sequence. That does not mean that the underlying meaning of the maths changes or disappears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 thnx! that`s what I`ve been trying to get across all this time. the Principals remain constant regardless of the symbols, this many plus this many will equal this many, it`s the PLUS word that`s the key, the concept of addition or subtraction. I feel somewhat vindicated now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now