Thread: Proposal for a New Theory About Extraterrestrial Intelligence! Seriously!

Hello everybody

I want to introduce a new theory about extraterrestrial intelligence. I don't know if there already exists a theory like below.


The theory:

In the technolgical progress of every intelligence there is a point where it is experimented with physical behavior of atoms (like CERN experiment in Switzerland). I think in the early stages of technological development of intelligences they can unwillingly generate a black hole wich grows uncontrolled and kills the whole cilivization of the species.

The consequences:

• There are no intelligences which are much higher developed (in technological aspect) than humans.
• No contact with extraterrestrial intelligences on earth (before they build a speceship or something similar, an experiment which generates a black hole destroys the whole civilization)
• Some or all black holes in the universe are generated artificially (by extraterrestrial intelligences which don't exist anymore).

I want to name it "The Technological Development Trap Theory" or "The Babuc Theory".

Could you give some inputs? Discussions?

If the LHC created a black hole by colliding protons together, then the BH would have the mass of 2 protons. It would essentially evaporate instantly from Hawking Radiation. At any rate, such a small BH would not destroy a civilization.

Originally Posted by Dr. Risk

I think in the early stages of technological development of intelligences they can unwillingly generate a black hole wich grows uncontrolled and kills the whole cilivization of the species.

Exactly the same suggestion was made about nuclear weapons back when we all thought they would kill us all. I think I have heard a similar idea about global warming. And money. And consuming all available resources. And ...

Originally Posted by Arch2008

If the LHC created a black hole by colliding protons together, then the BH would have the mass of 2 protons. It would essentially evaporate instantly from Hawking Radiation. At any rate, such a small BH would not destroy a civilization.

Well, it would have the mass of the two protons plus their combined kinetic energy. But apart from that you are exactly right. It would also be travelling at a significant proportion of the speed of light and so wouldn't be around long enough to do any harm. It would also be a fraction of the size of a proton and so would not interact with matter. Apart from all that, such a collision can't produce a black hole.

So I don't think we (or the aliens) have anything much to worry about. (Apart from a massive meteor maybe...)

This should be in pseudo-science

I'm watching...

I don't want to reduce the theory to the CERN experiment (LHC) but some experiments in the future (much powerfull experiments which unwillingly create a hole in the room).

Originally Posted by Dr. Risk

I don't want to reduce the theory to the CERN experiment (LHC) but some experiments in the future (much powerfull experiments which unwillingly create a hole in the room).

It may be that we, other an alien species, might develop the ability to create a black hole, either deliberately or accidentally. I guess the problems with you argument are that it assumes that
- such a development is inevitable
- it will always be unexpected
- it will be destructive

As noted above, creating a small black hole, even by accident, would have no damaging effects. Creating a larger stable black hole would require such prodigious amounts of energy that I doubt it could be done by accident - any civilization with the technology to create and manipulate that much energy would have a far better understanding of the physics than we do.

A black hole with a mass of 10¹⁵kg would have a lifetime of less than a second and a diameter a fraction the size of a proton. The energy would all be released in a huge explosion that would destroy the lab (and surrounding city) but would not be the end of the world.

Maybe if you "accidentally" converted the moon to a black hole? This would be stable and have a diameter of about 0.1mm. If you did it in situ, it would just carry on orbiting the Earth and we wouldn't notice any difference.

Other than darker skies for astronomy during a full moon!

The proposal that Fermi’s Paradox is solved by every advanced ET destroying itself isn’t a new theory. If 19 terrorists had crashed 4 space liners traveling at a fraction of the speed of light into the Earth then all organisms that don’t live in molten lava would perish. It may be the case that the most intelligent members of any advanced civilization discover technology that the most foolish of their civilization use to cause their extinction.

It might also be the case that a truly intelligent civilisation would refrain from an obsession with gizmos like nuclear weapons, power stations and space flight.

Perhaps a deeply intelligent approach to life would result in a focus on understanding both the world and the organism's place in it. I see no good reason to believe that, if there are intelligent creatures beyond our own, they must necessarily follow the same path as us. A quick review of industrial history shows that we could, all by ourselves, have made other choices when developing the fire based technologies we now rely on so heavily.

Why would a similar group of creatures not decide that fire and explosions are a bit old-fashioned when their civilisation becomes technically advanced and develop other technologies and thereby leave burning stuff or blowing it up just for fun times like bonfires, BBQs and fireworks displays?

Originally Posted by Arch2008

It may be the case that the most intelligent members of any advanced civilization discover technology that the most foolish of their civilization use to cause their extinction.[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]

The other side of that coin is that civilizations that don't destroy themselves may be peaceful without these sort of destructive tendencies.

Or maybe incredibly authoritarian.

Or they may develop advanced technology that allows them to travel across the galaxy in a few days, but then decide it is better to just stay at home to enjoy food, drink and music.

We don't know the exact or 100% behavior of atoms or even black holes. That is why such experiments are done, the validation of the models. Either, I don't say that the theory is valid but I think there is a risk of 0.0001% or something else. I want to say that there is a very small probability but it exists.

You agree with me indirectly in using conditional sentences like "It would ..." or "I doubt ..." in your phrases.

Do you agree with me that there is a very small probability of the validation of the theory?

Originally Posted by Dr. Risk

We don't know the exact or 100% behavior of atoms or even black holes. That is why such experiments are done, the validation of the models.

As I say, any civilization with the technology to accidentally create a black hole would almost certainly have a much better understanding of these things than we do.

Do you agree with me that there is a very small probability of the validation of the theory?

Of course you could be right. There just doesn't seem any realistic reason to consider it. And certainly not specifically because of black holes.

Dr. Risk, this describes how a mini BH works, like one with less than the mass of a mountain range. Tiny BHs evaporate immediately due to Hawking Radiation and slightly larger BH’s would take billions of years to accrete any additional mass. So a civilization would not plausibly be able to accidently create a large enough BH that “grows uncontrolled and kills the whole civilization”.
http://news.discovery.com/space/the-lhc-black-hole-no-braner.html

Originally Posted by Arch2008

Dr. Risk, this describes how a mini BH works, like one with less than the mass of a mountain range. Tiny BHs evaporate immediately due to Hawking Radiation and slightly larger BH’s would take billions of years to accrete any additional mass. So a civilization would not plausibly be able to accidently create a large enough BH that “grows uncontrolled and kills the whole civilization”.
http://news.discovery.com/space/the-lhc-black-hole-no-braner.html

You are right. I agree all with the models and theories.
I want to mention that not today but perhaps in the future, our civilization or others could produce something like a BH which destroys the civilzation. Further, there can be omitted variables or changed parameters (e.g. lab environment) which lead that our unterstanding of physics could be (slightly) false (with small probability).

We don't even know the (exact) physical behavior of antimatter (perhaps other than matter).

We know just about as much about the behavior of antimatter as we do of matter. Other than charge, there's no difference.

"perhaps othrer than matter" I can't say, since I have no idea what that means.

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

We know just about as much about the behavior of antimatter as we do of matter. Other than charge, there's no difference.

"perhaps othrer than matter" I can't say, since I have no idea what that means.

There are differences or not.
but
e.g. in an electron-positron-annihilation the hole mass is converted to energy other than in nuclear fission or nuclear fusion.

The annihilation of antimatter produces 100 times more energy than nuclear fusion (hydrogen atoms).

Originally Posted by Dr. Risk

e.g. in an electron-positron-annihilation the hole mass is converted to energy other than in nuclear fission or nuclear fusion.

The annihilation of antimatter produces 100 times more energy than nuclear fusion (hydrogen atoms).

And both those processes are very well understood. Which is how come you are able to make such comments about them.

Yes, I absolutely agree.

But the interactions of models or changing the parameters or something like that which are not well unterstood, all these could lead to a fatal issue during the experiments. (maybe in the future)