The SETI Paradox
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CERN Document Server Bull. Spec. Astrophys. Obs., 60, 2006 The SETI Paradox Alexander Zaitsev Institute of Radio Engineering and Electronics, Vedensky Square 1, Fryazino, 141120 Russia Abstract: Two opposing tendencies paradoxically coexist in terrestrial consciousness – the insistent quest for intelligent signals from other civilizations and the persistent aversion to any attempts to transmit such signals from Earth toward probable fellow intelligent beings. If typi- cal for our entire Universe, such manifestations of intelligence would make the search for other civilizations totally meaningless. Key words: SETI – interstellar messages – Great Silence 1. Introduction formulate various hypotheses, like, for ex- Searching the Internet for the word ample, Arthur C. Clarke, who said: “…it is combination “SETI Paradox” yields two almost evident that biological intelligence separate and interrelated groups of results – is a low form of intelligence. We are at the SETI and Fermi Paradox. Here, we focus early stage of the evolution of intelligence, on the “SETI Paradox” – on this incompre- but at the late stage of the evolution of life. hensible hope of finding extraterrestrial True intelligence is unlikely to be living.” intelligence while keeping almost abso- The planetary consciousness of the lutely silent. However, nothing but natural Earth may well be unique and so may be objects can be found in a Universe where the planetary consciousness of each extra- there are only “searchers” and no “send- terrestrial civilization. And all planetary ers”. consciousnesses in their global, mature Of the three components of the classi- manifestations – both internal and external cal triad “Universe, Life, Mind” that – may well be dismally monotonous, and Shklovskii (1962) introduced into scientific this very fact may explain the Great Si- and public use, we can now say nothing lence – because a passive/receive-only atti- definite about mind and its possible variety tude toward the Cosmos is perhaps every- or, on the contrary, sameness. We can only body’s, and not just our, feature – every- body tries to receive and nobody is willing Indeed, why should we transmit a to give… message to Others? It is more or less clear We suggest introducing – in addition why we should search for the messages of to such common terms as ETI = Extrater- Others. But why transmit? What for? In- restrial Intelligence and SETI = Search for deed, Shvartsman pointed out that this will ETI – a new term, METI = Messaging to give us no new knowledge. We must try to ETI, which we use to designate the funda- understand “…for the sake of what these mentally new type of human activities – transmissions are to be made…” – either transmission of messages to hypothetical by us or by ETIs… fellow intelligent beings. Some may argue that SETI is also a new type of activity. Of 2. Universality of consciousness? course, it is a new one, but not fundamen- How universal is consciousness? So tally new – mankind has always been look- far we have been lacking relevant experi- ing into the sky in the hope of finding mental data. Only a single measurement – something there. And as for transmitting to terrestrial realization of consciousness – is probable ETI and doing this purposefully – available. The aim of SETI is to try to find this type of activity is now only at its first out whether consciousness is universal or stages (Zaitsev, Chafer, Braastad, 2005) not. A full description of the Universe as and it is by no means clear whether it has discussed by Linde (2003) – any future at all… “Is it possible that consciousness, like Shvartsman writes in his already clas- space-time, has its own intrinsic degrees of sic paper, “Search for Extraterrestrial Civi- freedom and that neglecting these will lead lization – A Problem of Astrophysics or of to a description of the universe that is fun- the Entire Culture?” (1986): damentally incomplete?” – ”…we do not know for the sake of is so far impossible to achieve – we do what transmissions are to be made…” not know how to fit consciousness into the and description of the Universe – as something “…science is an activity aimed at ac- unique, or as a universal phenomenon. quiring new knowledge about the world. And it is not inconceivable that no one However, the interstellar messages are by in the entire Universe knows this – the no means meant to obtain new knowledge Universe is silent and even if there are by those who transmit them (message and other lone centers of consciousness some- reply are typically several thousand years where else (Grinspoon 2003), THEIR apart).” physicists should face the same problem – how to fit consciousness into the descrip- ter understand the true nature of being (as- tion of the Universe – as a singular or a suming, of course, that the Universe is in- universal phenomenon. In this sense, the habited), and, in the process, change the task of METI is to try to answer the ques- very nature of being, i.e., into a state where tion whether consciousness is universal – the existence of extraterrestrial life is con- and this answer is to be meant for OTH- firmed. ERS… Similarly, the Participatory Anthropic 3. The Drake equation with the Principle (PAP) formulated by John METI coefficient Wheeler in 1983 – “Observers are neces- The classic Drake equation is the sary to bring the Universe into being” – is product of seven parameters that estimate incomplete in the sense that the Universe the number of potentially detectable extra- that we now observe is a Silent Universe, a terrestrial civilizations in our Galaxy: Universe of observers, whereas true par- ticipation in the scene of the Universe can- N = R* × fp × ne × fl × fi × fc × L, not be limited to mere contemplation. One can speak about true “participa- where N = the number of potentially de- tion” when this “participation” becomes tectable civilizations in the Milky Way OBSERVABLE by a distant observer. Galaxy; R* = the rate of formation of stars Wheeler’s Participatory Anthropic Princi- in the Galaxy; fp = the fraction of those ple should therefore be supplemented by stars with planetary systems; ne = the num- the following statement: ber of planets per solar system that are “Senders are necessary to bring con- suitable for life; fl = the fraction of those sciousness into the Universe”. planets where life actually appears; fi = the So, the participation of senders would fraction of life sites where intelligence de- transform the observer’s consciousness of velops; fc = the fraction of communicative the Universe into a consciousness that rec- planets (those on which electromagnetic ognizes a Universe that is inhabited by at communications technology develops); L = least two, separate intelligences (e.g., two the “lifetime” over which such civilizations civilizations). In turn, this transformation transmit detectable signals into space. of the observer’s consciousness would it- This equation takes into account many self represent a contribution to existence. factors, but not all. Namely, it leaves out In other words, from an ontological per- the fraction of emitting “intelligent plan- spective, senders would help observers bet- ets,” i.e., planets that are, like our Earth, in the communicative phase of their exis- stellar message should be approved by the tence, and at the same time “bring” con- United Nations General Assembly. Some sciousness into the Universe by purpose- researches operate with concepts of fully transmitting intelligent signals to the “peaceful civilization” and “aggressive outside world. Estimation of this fraction is civilization” and suggest that we should by no means just a question of idle curios- reply only to signals coming from a peace- ity given the attitude of our planetary con- ful civilization – an attitude that would ul- sciousness toward such “bringing.” timately result in the total refusal to emit Here we are speaking about METI- any signal at all. The reason: a message phobia. It appeared immediately after the from a peaceful extraterrestrial civilization first interstellar radio message had been to which we are allowed to answer is im- sent from Arecibo on November 16, 1974. possible to distinguish from a message Nobel Laureate Martin Ryle then published from an aggressive, but self-coding civili- a protest where he warned: “…any crea- zation, to which we should not reply. And tures out there may be malevolent or hun- given that we will be hardly able to de- gry…” and called for an international ban velop an undoubted criterion to judge the to be imposed on any attempts to establish altruism of the extraterrestrial civilization Contact and transmit messages from the that would satisfy all those who fear the Earth to hypothetical ETIs. possible negative consequences of com- The International Academy of Astro- municating, it would also be impossible to nautics (IAA) then adopted a Declaration not only initiate, but even reply to interstel- (1989) calling for the restriction of such lar messages. Our civilization would be activities. Thus, paragraph 8 of this Decla- doomed to eternal silence. ration states: “No response to a signal or Unlike the English-language press, other evidence of extraterrestrial intelli- which has been discussing METI-phobia gence should be sent until appropriate in- continuously, articles on this subject ap- ternational consultations have taken place. pear rarely in the Russian media. One of The procedures for such consultations will the most recent international campaigns be the subject of a separate agreement, dec- involves a series of articles posted on the laration or arrangement.” site of the SETI League and the adoption Six years later, the SETI Permanent of the so-called “San Marino Scale” at the Study Group of the IAA presented a Draft conference “We and SETI” held in San Declaration (1995), which envisages that a Marino in 2005.