"Linear" as in the sense of once you get to FTL travel, you assume that you know pretty much a LOT of other stuff.... ah.. what the heck, you already acknowledged that assumption of yours. I guess "unified" may be a better term. But... anyway....Boltzmann said:I never said you were attacking it.
Technology does not increase in a linear progression. It's expansion is exponential (well, sort of). Look at the 20th century if you don't believe me. We develop tools that help us create new tools.
Depends, really, on their priorities. We don't have sufficient proof that if we had been able to put much more effort on space travel, at the cost of other sciences, we might be closer to FTL than we are to cloning. What if they had some form of belief which barred genetic research?Boltzmann said:But I really made a small assumption. I assumed that any race that developed FTL travel must be a curious race, so that they would do research on all fronts, biology included. And cloning is a small feat compared to FTL travel. See, we already can make clones but we're not even close to FTL travel. But all of this is unecessary, really.
If they're so interested in biology as to come to a far away planet and take samples from their cattle, then their technology is surely advanced enough to include cloning (see my point above about cloning being way easier than FTL travel).
As you said... Intergalatic pranksters. :lol:Boltzmann said:You can argue (as I did in another thread) that curiosity is not necessarly needed for technological development. But if a race does not possess this curiosity, they wouldn't be doing experiments with Earthly cattle, would they?
Boltzmann said:It's illogical from a game theoretical perspective, and also for engineering reasons. Game theory holds true for everyone in the universe. If a race hasn't discovered it, then they can't do FTL travel... really.
It would be if it followed a reasoning if resources were scarce and emotions / alien personal preferences were not in play. Besides, they might have a Bush there too. Simply because something is possible in an effecient manner doesn't mean it will be done that way. A lot of factors have to be considered as well.
None. But the point is, man would want to go there nonetheless. We don't know the mechanics of the implementation of FTL. We don't know their coping mechanism. Besides, it might not be too expensive for them.Boltzmann said:Have you seen manned expeditions to Pluto? Do you know why we never sent anyone there (even though many people would be willing to go)? Because it's too costly. And why would aliens waste their time going to another planet to mutilate cattle and make crop circles? Maybe they're intergalactic pranksters?
Yeah, but imagine what would happen if humans could not control these instincts. We might not have progressed much if at all. To be human is precisely to be above the carnal instincts.Boltzmann said:I can't see why not. It's very hard to get rid of your instincts. Are you jealous of your GF/wife? That's an instinct. Do you like to have sex? That's an instinct too. I don't see we getting rid of any of these instincts any time soon.
Emotional content and intelligence are orthogonal to each other. Study evolutionary psychology, neuroscience and cognitive psychology and you'll see it.
It *might* have a practical use for them, but it's way better than conquest. Would like to die in an alien onslaught?Boltzmann said:Anyway, this advanced species of yours wants to mutilate alien cattle and make crop circles. Is that really better than conquest?
Of course, all my arguments would come crashing down in the face of an efficient-as-AI intellect. :hdbash:
Anyway.... we're arguing over matters that we really know squat about. It's fun, but let's not get carried away. Unless, there's actually an alien around here already (sounds like Stephen Hawkings' refusal to make a bet on time travel :lol: )