As SETI's
scientists plan for their first contact with other worlds, who better to
consult with than anthropologists, who specialize in encounters with exotic
cultures? And thus, over the past several years the SETI Institute has
repeatedly brought together anthropologists and scholars from other
disciplines, in an attempt to bridge the gap between humans and
extraterrestrials.
The task of
these savants, who met most recently in San Jose, California, is twofold: to
try to uncover any universals of culture, and then apply these insights to
constructing messages that might be intelligible to independently evolved
civilizations. "Although it is impossible to predict the nature of
extraterrestrial intelligence," admitted NASA's Chief Historian, Steven Dick,
"the one certainty is that, if it exists, it will have undergone cultural
evolution."
For SETI
researchers, the dizzying variety of societies that might evolve on other
worlds becomes manageable for one simple reason: if extraterrestrials can build
a radio transmitter or high powered laser beacon, we and they already have
something vital in common. Indeed, there may be dolphin-like forms of
intelligence in the oceans of other planets, but unless they can erect
transmitters to send signals across interstellar space, we may never know of
their existence. And to build the technology that makes such contact possible,
it has often been argued, extraterrestrials would certainly need to know some
of the same mathematics that we do. Extraterrestrials might not understand
English or Chinese or Swahili, but they'd certainly be familiar with algebra
and geometry.
Or would
they?
Several
participants of the San Jose meeting advised care in assuming that human ways
of understanding the universe will necessarily be mirrored on other planets.
"Reliance on mathematics as a major means of communication with
extraterrestrial intelligence may be misplaced," cautioned historian Shirley
Woolf. In contrast to the view that mathematics is a direct reflection of the
structure of the universe, which would necessarily be known by scientists on
other worlds, Woolf emphasized a view espoused by some prominent cognitive
scientists, that "mathematics is an artifact derived from the specific
structure of human embodiment."
What to
Count On
The
simplest example might be the link between the way humans count and the number
of digits we use for counting: it may not be a coincidence that humans have ten
fingers and that we're also are very comfortable using a base 10 number system,
where there are ten different digits that can be added, subtracted, and
otherwise manipulated. For extraterrestrials with arms or tentacles ending in a
different number of digits, other number systems may seem equally natural.
If only the
numbering system varied from civilization to civilization, mathematics might
still serve as a cosmic Rosetta Stone. After all, we humans are quite capable
of converting the numbers of everyday life into binary formats or an endless
array of variations, and base 10 number systems are by no means universal even
on Earth.
But what if
the differences run even deeper, and our mathematics reflects not just the
vicissitudes of the hands we use to grasp objects, but more fundamental
features about our way of relating to the world, such as the senses that allow
us to gather information about our environments?
As
creatures who rely heavily on our senses of vision and hearing, we are able to
locate objects precisely in three-dimensional space. Moreover, our senses let
us clearly demarcate objects in time: events happen in the present, the past,
or the future. Either something is already taking place (the present), it's
already over and done with (the past), or it has not yet happened (the future).
But what if
we relied on sensing the world primarily through our sense of smell, with
objects leaving traces of their presence in lingering scents even long after
they are gone? Might our sense of past, present, and future blur somewhat, with
one moment gently merging into another?
What if we
no longer sensed the presence of an object in stark categories of "here" or
"not here," but in terms of "probably here" or "probably gone"? Might our
mathematics reflect our everyday encounters with the world, so we no longer
bluntly stated "1 + 1 = 2," but felt a more intuitively reasonable mathematics
might be founded on the observation that "roughly 1 + roughly 1 = roughly 2"?
Might the notions of precision and fuzziness vary from civilization to
civilization, making it a bit harder to understand creatures who experience the
world differently than we do?
Understanding
Ourselves
"The Search
for Extraterrestrial Intelligence is, on one hand, a straightforward
experimental endeavor -- astronomers searching our galaxy for signals of
artificial origin," said anthropologist Kathryn Denning. "However, in creating
the possibility of contact with alien beings, SETI has also created a space for
abundant speculation about the nature of societies on other worlds."
And indeed,
the hope of SETI is that some day we will have incontestable evidence that
extraterrestrial civilizations exist. But in the meantime, let's remember the
impact that the search can have on our world, right now, whether or not we ever
detect a signal from another star. "A real encounter between human beings and
alien intelligence would have substantial global impact," Denning reminds us.
"However, even considering such possibilities in strictly hypothetical terms
may affect the way we see ourselves and our future on Earth."
advertisement
