First, saying something like "if the aliens don't have sense/capability X, then they can't have developed science" is beyond absurd. To apply concepts like our senses to aliens is pointless. Who knows if they even perceive space and time in the same way that we do.
Now, assuming these aliens exist at the same rough physical scale as us and with the same concept of time and space, then we might have a shot at communication.
Sending someone famous or attractive is a waste. Their charm and fame applies only to humans. Their specialization at pleasing humans might actually be harmful because their every instinct will seem arbitrary at best.
I think that we should send someone willing to die in the name of communication. Someone with an even temperament and an incredible sense for mimicry. We'll want someone capable of observing posture, gestures, sounds, movements, any anything else within the realm of human perception and tailoring his or her behavior to mirror that of the aliens in an attempt to appear non-hostile.
This isn't a very difficult question. A big chunk of human history is one society meeting another, and then one usually conquering the other. You learn about the aliens, get an idea of what they would find friendly and non-threatening, and go from there.
[Tycho?] on
0
Options
Gabriel_Pitt(effective against Russian warships)Registered Userregular
edited November 2009
Except these wouldn't be political ambassadors, they'd be scientists whom in whatever time we've learned we're going to have unexpected company at dinner have been picked as being able to make the most of the meeting.
Unless they're capricious enough to do so on a lark, one race deciding the other needs a good conquesting is infinitesimally unlikely. As said before, anything the would-be victims have can easily be obtained elsewhere. Unless it's a galactic wanderers looking for a new home scenario, the only real draw of finding life existing elsewhere is checking it out because it's so vastly uncommon.
The above link should make for interesting [or whatever you really think here] reading for all.
The way I figure it: The process of interacting with aliens would have to be so slow and careful no one would be sending anyone to meet anyone else [if travel wasn't an issue obviously] for a long time.
Will Wright, a laptop with PowerPoint, and a projector.
On a more serious note, if an alien race does try and contact Earth, it's apparent that they are either a.) advanced enough technologically to achieve FTL travel, or B.) biologically made to live for extremely long periods of time. I think, if they want to contact us, they'll be the ones to imitate a human method for such contact. I guess we just go from there.
Regarding human nature however, I'm sure they'll be so much more conflict over what we should do with the aliens (and to a lesser degree, who we send) that this alien race will watch in horror as we blow each other up, conclude "What a bunch of dicks...", and then continue their search for intelligent life elsewhere.
That last line is even more applicable to everything you've brought up.
Faster than light travel discovered by the same man that disproves Occams Razor. News at 11.
This whole paragraph actually makes me think of what might be the biggest challenge. Who is to say that they will view the passage of time in the same way we do, and not one that is so significantly different as to make communication obtusely difficult?
Longevity or the ability to go into some kind of stasis would be a neccessity for sub-light travel as even the smallest trips take 50+ years. So yeah, a race that has a completely alien concept of the passage of time is going to be a problem.
"Greetings Earth People. We are deliberating amonst ourselves whether to grace you with our tech."
"How long does that take?"
"Oh not long.....a million or so revolutions of your planet around your sun"
"facepalm"
Marauder on
0
Options
Donkey KongPutting Nintendo out of business with AI nipsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
If aliens exist exclusively in the same space and time we do, they wouldn't have to have FTL travel, just near lightspeed. Relativity does the rest of the work keeping them alive on the way here.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
The above link should make for interesting [or whatever you really think here] reading for all.
The way I figure it: The process of interacting with aliens would have to be so slow and careful no one would be sending anyone to meet anyone else [if travel wasn't an issue obviously] for a long time.
I think I found a new aquisition target for my freinds at The Onion. Holy shit is that some "I want to believe" delusional schizophrenia.
Even a cursory look at evolution and Earth history will show you that intelligent life bearing even identifiable characteristics to terrestial analogs is laughable at best. Thus the term "Alien".
On the contrary, I think a look at evolution shows us the exact opposite. We have found plenty of examples of species smart enough to learn tool use (crows, octopuses that can unlock locks, etc) but only one type (primates) have really developed it on their own in nature and only modern humans ever went with it anywhere, and as we went with it we evolved to be better at making and using tools.
Alien life can't be just any random thing. It has to make sense from an evolutionary perspective, which means operating in viable design space. And that limits the possibilities astronomically. If you build something to do a certain task, even if you start from different initial conditions you will arrive at a similar destination. Because there is going to be one more optimal solution (kind of like the lowest energy state) and that's going to be favored over everything else.
Here's another example of what we can reasonably expect: They will nurture their young, because technology depends memetic inheritance aka the parents need to educate their young in the science and technology they have developed in order for it to be passed on.
HamHam, I have a problem to pose to you.
You keep saying that because these things - eyes, ears, hands - are useful, they would have to evolve.
However, evolution works more or less thusly: an existing creature has offspring->that offspring has some genetic mutation which causes a new or altered trait -> that creature survives to have offspring because it is better suited to the environment than other creatures of its species -> rinse and repeat -> evolution!
Right?
So suppose the "eye gene" just never spontaneously mutated into existence. The creatures wouldn't have eyes. Same for everything else.
If no other creatures developed them either, not having eyes wouldn't be a major setback. Same goes for any other trait you care to think of.
So, why do you insist that they WOULD have any given trait? As useful as they may be, eyes, ears, etc didn't necessarily HAVE to evolve into existence and sophistication. Maybe the creatures communicate with each other telepathically, who knows, then they would have no real need for ears. I could come up with any number of ridiculous hypotheticals, but the fact remains that no single trait would exist simply by virtue of it being useful.
Nostregar on
0
Options
Donkey KongPutting Nintendo out of business with AI nipsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
Eye-style photo sensors evolved independently many, many times in the history of evolution on earth, simply due to their usefulness here. So it's not a "just by chance" thing. That's not to say aliens would have them though.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
Eye-style photo sensors evolved independently many, many times in the history of evolution on earth, simply due to their usefulness here. So it's not a "just by chance" thing. That's not to say aliens would have them though.
It absolutely is a just by chance thing (the occurrence of the mutation). Even if it did occur in the population of the alien species while evolving, the carrier of the gene could have died in a freak accident before passing it on.
Nostregar on
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
Eye-style photo sensors evolved independently many, many times in the history of evolution on earth, simply due to their usefulness here. So it's not a "just by chance" thing. That's not to say aliens would have them though.
It absolutely is a just by chance thing (the occurrence of the mutation). Even if it did occur in the population of the alien species while evolving, the carrier of the gene could have died in a freak accident before passing it on.
I suppose you could argue that if light is present on their home world, and is as critical to advanced forms of life as it is here, then it is entirely possible eyes would develop.
Even a cursory look at evolution and Earth history will show you that intelligent life bearing even identifiable characteristics to terrestial analogs is laughable at best. Thus the term "Alien".
On the contrary, I think a look at evolution shows us the exact opposite. We have found plenty of examples of species smart enough to learn tool use (crows, octopuses that can unlock locks, etc) but only one type (primates) have really developed it on their own in nature and only modern humans ever went with it anywhere, and as we went with it we evolved to be better at making and using tools.
Alien life can't be just any random thing. It has to make sense from an evolutionary perspective, which means operating in viable design space. And that limits the possibilities astronomically. If you build something to do a certain task, even if you start from different initial conditions you will arrive at a similar destination. Because there is going to be one more optimal solution (kind of like the lowest energy state) and that's going to be favored over everything else.
Here's another example of what we can reasonably expect: They will nurture their young, because technology depends memetic inheritance aka the parents need to educate their young in the science and technology they have developed in order for it to be passed on.
HamHam, I have a problem to pose to you.
You keep saying that because these things - eyes, ears, hands - are useful, they would have to evolve.
However, evolution works more or less thusly: an existing creature has offspring->that offspring has some genetic mutation which causes a new or altered trait -> that creature survives to have offspring because it is better suited to the environment than other creatures of its species -> rinse and repeat -> evolution!
Right?
So suppose the "eye gene" just never spontaneously mutated into existence. The creatures wouldn't have eyes. Same for everything else.
If no other creatures developed them either, not having eyes wouldn't be a major setback. Same goes for any other trait you care to think of.
So, why do you insist that they WOULD have any given trait? As useful as they may be, eyes, ears, etc didn't necessarily HAVE to evolve into existence and sophistication. Maybe the creatures communicate with each other telepathically, who knows, then they would have no real need for ears. I could come up with any number of ridiculous hypotheticals, but the fact remains that no single trait would exist simply by virtue of it being useful.
Hell, just think if the enviroment that another species evolved in negated the need for flagellum for propulsion? Bam, there goes the trait that every single apendage is based on.
I mean the absurdity of the "grey" alien stereotype that has a 90% human appearnce is really hard to fathom.
Marauder on
0
Options
Donkey KongPutting Nintendo out of business with AI nipsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
If eyes were really favored, a freak accident wouldn't wipe them out. They'd come up again and again.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
Hell, just think if the enviroment that another species evolved in negated the need for flagellum for propulsion? Bam, there goes the trait that every single apendage is based on.
I mean the absurdity of the "grey" alien stereotype that has a 90% human appearnce is really hard to fathom.
Traits like that don't just exist because one ancestor happened to have a particular trait. If the life forms exist in an environment with,let's say light, the eye would be re-invented again and again because sensing light it is just that useful for survival of a species. It may never evolve to be quite the same as the eyes that we know but it's mostly up to what they are competing against and their environment.
In addition the Flagelum is not entirely like any other appendage known to animal life. It's free spinning axel and in a sense a molecular turbine. I'd imagine if it wasn't abandoned by creatures larger then bacteria it would have evolved in to wheels.
DanHibiki on
0
Options
Donkey KongPutting Nintendo out of business with AI nipsRegistered Userregular
Hell, just think if the enviroment that another species evolved in negated the need for flagellum for propulsion? Bam, there goes the trait that every single apendage is based on.
I mean the absurdity of the "grey" alien stereotype that has a 90% human appearnce is really hard to fathom.
Traits like that don't just exist because one ancestor happened to have a particular trait. If the life forms exist in an environment with,let's say light, the eye would be re-invented again and again because sensing light it is just that useful for survival of a species. It may never evolve to be quite the same as the eyes that we know but it's mostly up to what they are competing against and their environment.
This is a man who understands the real consequences of evolution.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
Hell, just think if the enviroment that another species evolved in negated the need for flagellum for propulsion? Bam, there goes the trait that every single apendage is based on.
I mean the absurdity of the "grey" alien stereotype that has a 90% human appearnce is really hard to fathom.
Traits like that don't just exist because one ancestor happened to have a particular trait. If the life forms exist in an environment with,let's say light, the eye would be re-invented again and again because sensing light it is just that useful for survival of a species. It may never evolve to be quite the same as the eyes that we know but it's mostly up to what they are competing against and their environment.
This is a man who understands the real consequences of evolution.
With that in mind, would it be safe to assume that, if a species were able to contact us in a way for us to understand, that they would have similar sense receptors to us?
What we'd probably run into as far as organisms go is something similar to any set of organisms successful in particular environments on earth (temperature/chemical composition). The big favorite has always seemed to be insects (Heinlein & Card), purely because they're so diverse here that the odds may be more in their favor elsewhere. I know the Discovery Channel's hypothetical "what's after us?" shows beat intelligent cephalopods (squids & octopi adapted to live on land) like a dead horse. If I'm not mistaken, the current bet on Earth for a potential successor species in the short term is actually baboons.
Anyways, how would we contact them? Probably an unmanned probe/probes first. Launch one in at relativistic speeds screaming it's head off in all the good communication frequencies we know of, with a slower one following it in to take an eccentric orbit around the system's star. The slower one would broadcast continuously with a repeating signal, and have onboard all the materials necessary to establish some basic understanding between us in math, physics, chemistry, biology, computer science, etc. The hope there would be that the race in the system would rush out and try to retrieve/visit the probe (depending on its size). Following that would be a modified bernal sphere or o'neill cylinder (space colony) with the actual first contact colony on board, to set up shop in an area of the solar system rich in resources but distant enough from the planet to not risk warfare (assuming the other race is less advanced technologically). If they're advanced we'd probably want to send a military-capable escort group. The colony would establish direct first contact from a safe distance, and depending on how things turned out open up trade and information exchange between humans & the new race (aka give them the interwebs & bernal sphere/o'neill cylinder related technologies in exchange for scientific access to their planet).
Hell, just think if the enviroment that another species evolved in negated the need for flagellum for propulsion? Bam, there goes the trait that every single apendage is based on.
I mean the absurdity of the "grey" alien stereotype that has a 90% human appearnce is really hard to fathom.
Traits like that don't just exist because one ancestor happened to have a particular trait. If the life forms exist in an environment with,let's say light, the eye would be re-invented again and again because sensing light it is just that useful for survival of a species. It may never evolve to be quite the same as the eyes that we know but it's mostly up to what they are competing against and their environment.
This is a man who understands the real consequences of evolution.
With that in mind, would it be safe to assume that, if a species were able to contact us in a way for us to understand, that they would have similar sense receptors to us?
Some kind of photo-sensitivity is almost a given, unless for whatever reason their planet lacked light or the light was harmful. It's unlikely they'd have eyes similar to ours or make use of the same spectrum. Touch is very likely also. If these aliens have organic bodies prone to damage, they'll need a sense of touch. If they're temperature sensitive, they'll need to be able to identify hot and cold.
Anything else, hearing, smell, taste, balance... they're a tossup. It'll depend of what type of life this is and what circumstances they evolved in.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
How the fuck has no-one seconded David Attenborough or Stephen Fry
You people sicken me
How about Nicky B?
Fiziks on
0
Options
BarcardiAll the WizardsUnder A Rock: AfganistanRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
1: Not a politician
or
2: Neil Armstrong
or
3: Not a scientist or religious fanatic (see the religious spite in thread)
or
4: Ok, how about Neil Armstrong clones
or
5: Obama's grown up daughter?
the only real important that is when/if contact happens, the public should not have ANY say.
haha, contradiction
honestly though, let the aliens choose who they want to talk to
Honestly, we should just send Jeeter straight up from Mississippi, with his corn liquor, bible and coon hound. This way we know what to expect later on when the aliens discover what we're really like.
One thing to consider is, with the difficulty of space travel (I'll bet against FTL drives until physics provides a realistic way to operate one), why would anyone travel so far in person? Having a probe show up is one thing, having a ship (or ships) show up out of the blue means they intend to stay for a while.
First, saying something like "if the aliens don't have sense/capability X, then they can't have developed science" is beyond absurd. To apply concepts like our senses to aliens is pointless. Who knows if they even perceive space and time in the same way that we do.
If they don't, we will never meet them. Thus, the only aliens we will meet are those obeying the same laws of space-time as us.
There's a selection process going on from both ends. The only aliens we will meet are aliens mostly like us because they are the only aliens we will be able to recognize as intelligent life.
Here's another example of what we can reasonably expect: They will nurture their young, because technology depends memetic inheritance aka the parents need to educate their young in the science and technology they have developed in order for it to be passed on.
You can't know this. Who is to say they have young or give birth?
Way too much earth bias in this thread.
Because reproduction is necessary for any evolution to take place? While some esoteric solutions like your example might be possible, they are far more complicated and hard solutions than simply giving birth to things. Which means that they are less likely to evolve because they will generally be selected against.
You keep saying that because these things - eyes, ears, hands - are useful, they would have to evolve.
However, evolution works more or less thusly: an existing creature has offspring->that offspring has some genetic mutation which causes a new or altered trait -> that creature survives to have offspring because it is better suited to the environment than other creatures of its species -> rinse and repeat -> evolution!
Right?
So suppose the "eye gene" just never spontaneously mutated into existence. The creatures wouldn't have eyes. Same for everything else.
If no other creatures developed them either, not having eyes wouldn't be a major setback. Same goes for any other trait you care to think of.
So, why do you insist that they WOULD have any given trait? As useful as they may be, eyes, ears, etc didn't necessarily HAVE to evolve into existence and sophistication. Maybe the creatures communicate with each other telepathically, who knows, then they would have no real need for ears. I could come up with any number of ridiculous hypotheticals, but the fact remains that no single trait would exist simply by virtue of it being useful.
Mutations are common (on an evolutionary scale). Most are not beneficial. A small fraction are, and catch on. Essentially, if there is a one on a billion chance per generation of a creature evolving a light-detecting sensory organ, and you get one generation every ten years lets say, then over ten, a hundred, a thousand billion years the odds of not evolving an eye become vanishingly small. And if it happens once, it will stick because eyes are just that useful.
Nature abhors a vacuum. It takes time, but any niches in the ecosystem will get filled sooner or later.
HamHamJ on
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
Mutations are common (on an evolutionary scale). Most are not beneficial. A small fraction are, and catch on. Essentially, if there is a one on a billion chance per generation of a creature evolving a light-detecting sensory organ, and you get one generation every ten years lets say, then over ten, a hundred, a thousand billion years the odds of not evolving an eye become vanishingly small. And if it happens once, it will stick because eyes are just that useful.
Nature abhors a vacuum. It takes time, but any niches in the ecosystem will get filled sooner or later.
This is only applicable if their environment is identical to ours. It's feasible that a world could have light conditions different from ours, making eyes of little to no value. Eyes like ours are pretty vulnerable points, actually. It's possible a different means of perceiving the environment would be more valuable/less costly on a different planet and be the more successful adaptation.
In addition the Flagelum is not entirely like any other appendage known to animal life. It's free spinning axel and in a sense a molecular turbine. I'd imagine if it wasn't abandoned by creatures larger then bacteria it would have evolved in to wheels.
It turns out that aliens already visited us. They made the movie Herbie back in the 70's to try to gauge our reaction to their kind. Sadly, the car people were unimpressed and moved on.
Mutations are common (on an evolutionary scale). Most are not beneficial. A small fraction are, and catch on. Essentially, if there is a one on a billion chance per generation of a creature evolving a light-detecting sensory organ, and you get one generation every ten years lets say, then over ten, a hundred, a thousand billion years the odds of not evolving an eye become vanishingly small. And if it happens once, it will stick because eyes are just that useful.
Nature abhors a vacuum. It takes time, but any niches in the ecosystem will get filled sooner or later.
This is only applicable if their environment is identical to ours. It's feasible that a world could have light conditions different from ours, making eyes of little to no value. Eyes like ours are pretty vulnerable points, actually. It's possible a different means of perceiving the environment would be more valuable/less costly on a different planet and be the more successful adaptation.
It's applicable to basically any living thing on a planet orbiting a star. The exact spectrum of light they see might be different, but they will still have some means of seeing the light given off by their sun.
HamHamJ on
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
I'm not sure what's worse. If we find life on another planet and it's more advanced than us, we're probably fucked. Higher tech doesn't mean they're going to compassionate and benevolent.
Or if we find life on another planet and it's significantly less advanced than us, you know damned well we'll eventually exploit the shit out of them.
Posts
Well, she can see space from Alaska, so she must know all the relevant infos.
And Jon Stewart.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
His age aside, not a bad choice at all.
Have you seen his wife? Who's to say this hasn't happened already?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Henry_and_Nancy_Kissinger.jpg
This isn't a very difficult question. A big chunk of human history is one society meeting another, and then one usually conquering the other. You learn about the aliens, get an idea of what they would find friendly and non-threatening, and go from there.
Unless they're capricious enough to do so on a lark, one race deciding the other needs a good conquesting is infinitesimally unlikely. As said before, anything the would-be victims have can easily be obtained elsewhere. Unless it's a galactic wanderers looking for a new home scenario, the only real draw of finding life existing elsewhere is checking it out because it's so vastly uncommon.
The above link should make for interesting [or whatever you really think here] reading for all.
The way I figure it: The process of interacting with aliens would have to be so slow and careful no one would be sending anyone to meet anyone else [if travel wasn't an issue obviously] for a long time.
On a more serious note, if an alien race does try and contact Earth, it's apparent that they are either a.) advanced enough technologically to achieve FTL travel, or B.) biologically made to live for extremely long periods of time. I think, if they want to contact us, they'll be the ones to imitate a human method for such contact. I guess we just go from there.
Regarding human nature however, I'm sure they'll be so much more conflict over what we should do with the aliens (and to a lesser degree, who we send) that this alien race will watch in horror as we blow each other up, conclude "What a bunch of dicks...", and then continue their search for intelligent life elsewhere.
Faster than light travel discovered by the same man that disproves Occams Razor. News at 11.
Longevity or the ability to go into some kind of stasis would be a neccessity for sub-light travel as even the smallest trips take 50+ years. So yeah, a race that has a completely alien concept of the passage of time is going to be a problem.
"Greetings Earth People. We are deliberating amonst ourselves whether to grace you with our tech."
"How long does that take?"
"Oh not long.....a million or so revolutions of your planet around your sun"
"facepalm"
I think I found a new aquisition target for my freinds at The Onion. Holy shit is that some "I want to believe" delusional schizophrenia.
HamHam, I have a problem to pose to you.
You keep saying that because these things - eyes, ears, hands - are useful, they would have to evolve.
However, evolution works more or less thusly: an existing creature has offspring->that offspring has some genetic mutation which causes a new or altered trait -> that creature survives to have offspring because it is better suited to the environment than other creatures of its species -> rinse and repeat -> evolution!
Right?
So suppose the "eye gene" just never spontaneously mutated into existence. The creatures wouldn't have eyes. Same for everything else.
If no other creatures developed them either, not having eyes wouldn't be a major setback. Same goes for any other trait you care to think of.
So, why do you insist that they WOULD have any given trait? As useful as they may be, eyes, ears, etc didn't necessarily HAVE to evolve into existence and sophistication. Maybe the creatures communicate with each other telepathically, who knows, then they would have no real need for ears. I could come up with any number of ridiculous hypotheticals, but the fact remains that no single trait would exist simply by virtue of it being useful.
It absolutely is a just by chance thing (the occurrence of the mutation). Even if it did occur in the population of the alien species while evolving, the carrier of the gene could have died in a freak accident before passing it on.
I suppose you could argue that if light is present on their home world, and is as critical to advanced forms of life as it is here, then it is entirely possible eyes would develop.
Especially when all hands, eyes, ears and antennae all came out of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prokaryote
Hell, just think if the enviroment that another species evolved in negated the need for flagellum for propulsion? Bam, there goes the trait that every single apendage is based on.
I mean the absurdity of the "grey" alien stereotype that has a 90% human appearnce is really hard to fathom.
Traits like that don't just exist because one ancestor happened to have a particular trait. If the life forms exist in an environment with,let's say light, the eye would be re-invented again and again because sensing light it is just that useful for survival of a species. It may never evolve to be quite the same as the eyes that we know but it's mostly up to what they are competing against and their environment.
In addition the Flagelum is not entirely like any other appendage known to animal life. It's free spinning axel and in a sense a molecular turbine. I'd imagine if it wasn't abandoned by creatures larger then bacteria it would have evolved in to wheels.
This is a man who understands the real consequences of evolution.
With that in mind, would it be safe to assume that, if a species were able to contact us in a way for us to understand, that they would have similar sense receptors to us?
THEY'RE ANGRY!
Yes! Thank you! I second the Will Shatner vote!
Anyways, how would we contact them? Probably an unmanned probe/probes first. Launch one in at relativistic speeds screaming it's head off in all the good communication frequencies we know of, with a slower one following it in to take an eccentric orbit around the system's star. The slower one would broadcast continuously with a repeating signal, and have onboard all the materials necessary to establish some basic understanding between us in math, physics, chemistry, biology, computer science, etc. The hope there would be that the race in the system would rush out and try to retrieve/visit the probe (depending on its size). Following that would be a modified bernal sphere or o'neill cylinder (space colony) with the actual first contact colony on board, to set up shop in an area of the solar system rich in resources but distant enough from the planet to not risk warfare (assuming the other race is less advanced technologically). If they're advanced we'd probably want to send a military-capable escort group. The colony would establish direct first contact from a safe distance, and depending on how things turned out open up trade and information exchange between humans & the new race (aka give them the interwebs & bernal sphere/o'neill cylinder related technologies in exchange for scientific access to their planet).
Some kind of photo-sensitivity is almost a given, unless for whatever reason their planet lacked light or the light was harmful. It's unlikely they'd have eyes similar to ours or make use of the same spectrum. Touch is very likely also. If these aliens have organic bodies prone to damage, they'll need a sense of touch. If they're temperature sensitive, they'll need to be able to identify hot and cold.
Anything else, hearing, smell, taste, balance... they're a tossup. It'll depend of what type of life this is and what circumstances they evolved in.
You people sicken me
How about Nicky B?
or
2: Neil Armstrong
or
3: Not a scientist or religious fanatic (see the religious spite in thread)
or
4: Ok, how about Neil Armstrong clones
or
5: Obama's grown up daughter?
the only real important that is when/if contact happens, the public should not have ANY say.
honestly though, let the aliens choose who they want to talk to
If they don't, we will never meet them. Thus, the only aliens we will meet are those obeying the same laws of space-time as us.
There's a selection process going on from both ends. The only aliens we will meet are aliens mostly like us because they are the only aliens we will be able to recognize as intelligent life.
Because reproduction is necessary for any evolution to take place? While some esoteric solutions like your example might be possible, they are far more complicated and hard solutions than simply giving birth to things. Which means that they are less likely to evolve because they will generally be selected against.
Mutations are common (on an evolutionary scale). Most are not beneficial. A small fraction are, and catch on. Essentially, if there is a one on a billion chance per generation of a creature evolving a light-detecting sensory organ, and you get one generation every ten years lets say, then over ten, a hundred, a thousand billion years the odds of not evolving an eye become vanishingly small. And if it happens once, it will stick because eyes are just that useful.
Nature abhors a vacuum. It takes time, but any niches in the ecosystem will get filled sooner or later.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
This is only applicable if their environment is identical to ours. It's feasible that a world could have light conditions different from ours, making eyes of little to no value. Eyes like ours are pretty vulnerable points, actually. It's possible a different means of perceiving the environment would be more valuable/less costly on a different planet and be the more successful adaptation.
I'd be up for sending B52.
It turns out that aliens already visited us. They made the movie Herbie back in the 70's to try to gauge our reaction to their kind. Sadly, the car people were unimpressed and moved on.
It's applicable to basically any living thing on a planet orbiting a star. The exact spectrum of light they see might be different, but they will still have some means of seeing the light given off by their sun.
Or if we find life on another planet and it's significantly less advanced than us, you know damned well we'll eventually exploit the shit out of them.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!