Annoying First Contact

Okay, here’s the thought for the day: how would we react if visiting extraterrestrials simply said hello and then refused to tell us anything about themselves or the universe? I like to call this scenario annoying First Contact, because our human curiosity would drive us just about crazy with questions. It’s a different scenario then stumbling on an engineered signal. With the discovery of an engineered signal there would be no actual communication initially and thus the origin and nature of the signal would be a scientific puzzle that we could work on solving. It actually fits well into the current human process of knowledge building. Annoying First Contact does not fit well into our thought process. It would be the excitement and promise of a wealth of new information and then the dismay of having the door to that knowledge slammed in our faces.

Hopefully, in such a case they would tell us why they decided not to reveal anything. They may even say they are doing it in our own best interest. We could develop into a stronger civilization if we are forced to grasp and claw for every scientific achievement. Perhaps they tell us about their history and biology and then refuse to tell us about their science and technology? How would we react? It seems likely that we would feel inferior in comparison to an advanced extraterrestrial civilization. Being purposely kept from information that would be easy for them to share would be insulting and a further blow to the collective human ego.

If we ever do meet extraterrestrial visitors it seems likely that they would keep some information from us, whether it is fear of what we might do with that knowledge or as a form of protection. It could be information we would not know how to process. Astrophysicists posit that an extraterrestrial civilization could be many thousands if not millions of years in advance of us in development. How could we expect to understand the science and technology of such a civilization? Their conception of the cosmos could be beyond our comprehension. Maybe they would feed us bits of information over the years, slowly catching us up to their level of understanding?

No matter what, humans had better be prepared for some frustrating elements of First Contact. It seems unlikely it would occur in our dream scenario of beneficent aliens bestowing to us the secrets of the universe in one fell swoop. First Contact will likely be just like everything else in our world: complex, challenging and often annoying.

The Dangers Involved in Receiving Extraterrestrial Information

It’s easy to assume that receiving extraterrestrial knowledge, as a result of First Contact, is a good thing. While there may be benefits, there are also many serious concerns. Albert Harrison summarizes them in his paper “Networking with our Galactic Neighbors”, part of a Foundation For the Future report.

Overload: The danger that too much information will cause humans to miss the subtleties and overlook important ideas.

Culture Lag: The time that it takes human society to catch up to the new ideas revealed by extraterrestrials.

Lack of Understanding: There would be clear dangers in humans failing to fully understand the information and trying to reproduce technology. Mistakes could be disastrous.

Losing our Curiosity: If we are spoon fed the secrets of the universe (at least as known by this particular extraterrestrial civilization or group of civilizations) will we lose the initiative to explore and learn on our own?

All of these concerns raise the need for intermediation. A data dump of information would be incredibly tough for humans to decipher and could have many negative consequences. If the extraterrestrials are far in advance of us in terms of technological and social development, we may need to be schooled. The information would likely be complex and need explanation. Extraterrestrials would be the only ones capable of doing this. Whether they would want to educate us is another matter entirely.

How would we react to being students? Several authors in the Foundation For the Future report discuss the impact to the human psyche. It seems plausible that human society could suffer from a collective inferiority complex After First Contact. We could go from being the lone masters of the universe (at least in our own minds) to relative babies in terms of scientific knowledge and technological prowess.

The actual impact of First Contact could depend on how the entire process for diplomacy and knowledge transfer goes forward. In addition to safeguards through information gatekeeping, both on the part of extraterrestrials and humans, it would seem important to make the celebration of being human part of the larger context. We must learn to appreciate what we have and what we hold valuable as humans. Then we need to realistically understand our place in the larger scheme of things. One can only submit to being a student when they are confident in their talents and truly ready to listen and learn.

Gatekeeping After First Contact

I have long advocated for a conservative approach to diplomacy and relations with any extraterrestrial civilization we might meet in the future. Strangely, this isn’t an idea shared by many in the SETI research community. Albert Harrison is one of the few to suggest that gatekeeping could be important After First Contact. In his paper “Networking with our Galactic Neighbors”, part of a Foundation For the Future report, Harrison describes gatekeeping as regulating the information that might be released to us by an extraterrestrial civilization. The gatekeeping could be handled by the extraterrestrial civilization to control us, for our protection or their benefit, or it could be done by humans to protect or control other humans. If you read this blog regularly you know that I advocate gatekeeping to carefully control information dissemination After First Contact. Receiving extraterrestrial information in a massive flood could be dangerous both in the short and long-term. A well thought out process could protect our cultural institutions, better determine how information might be processed, and keep our sciences and research institutions from being washed away in the torrent of new knowledge.

Even if the extraterrestrials have their own set of gatekeeping protocols, it would seem necessary for humans to have a system as well. A coordinating body could work with academia, government and other groups to provide a framework for sorting through the information and considering the impact of such knowledge on human civilization. Clearly, such a body would be put in a powerful position. So, how do we prevent human gatekeeping from being used by governments or agencies for special interest? Complete transparency in process seems to be the only solution. How could you empower a body to sort through secret information and still keep the process transparent? It would be complicated, but seems possible. The key is to make all decision making in public. Every meeting could be streamed and the proceedings carefully documented on the web. You could allow for worldwide participation in the process by the regular consideration of outside opinions and viewpoints. It would also be important to make sure the body in charge of a certain field of study was not subject to political whims or corporate pressure.

The key is to spread the power out among nations and among people to achieve some degree of global participation. The international coalition of experts would have to report to a larger body, responsible for the organization of the overall effort. There would be the danger of bureaucratic inefficiency and lack of progress. It would be necessary to give some in the group the power to keep the process moving forward.

Needless to say, it would ultimately be the keepers of such information, the extraterrestrials involved in First Contact, to decide how the process should work. They would likely have their own view of how such information, if any at all, should be disseminated to humans. However, as in all things After First Contact, it would be critical that humans make the final determination as to what happens. Self-determination will become the central issue for humans After First Contact. We will have to fight for our culture and our future no matter how benign the intentions of our visitors. It is our society that will be at risk, not theirs.

Public Donations Save SETI (for now)

Excellent news this week in the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI). The Allen Radio Telescope Array is going back online after a fundraising drive by the SETI Institute. The work, conducted in conjunction with UC Berkeley, was funded by the National Science Foundation and the state of California. Those funds were cut, forcing SETI researchers to ask for help from the public. They’ve raised more than $200,000 in donations so far and that’s enough to get the project up and running again. However, they’re hoping they may be able to fund the entire yearly budget with private donations. If you want to do your part to push forward the frontiers of science please consider a donation.

Technology, Finance and the Failure of our Cultural Institutions

If an extraterrestrial was to view life on Earth in 2011, what would they consider the most serious threats to our human civilization? Nuclear weapons? Damage to the environment? Religious differences? All of these are perfectly logical answers. I have another threat to add to the list: our rapidly developing information technology. The problem is not in the technology itself, the issue is with the inability of our slow-reacting cultural institutions to control that technology. Our tech wizardry is growing at an exponential rate and creating situations that our governments and financial institutions simply cannot handle. The recent global economic crisis is a good example of where this could be headed. Technology has allowed for increasingly complicated financial transactions and trading interconnected on a global scale as never seen before. Our governments however, did not fully understand what was occurring when the speculation bubbles grew and banks were taking serious risks. It was not just a problem in the United States. Many countries have been, and still are, experiencing disturbing speculation. Just witness the ghost cities of China, where massive speculative building projects serve very small populations. That bubble is just waiting to burst. Apparently, even in a controlled economy bad things can happen.

Governments did not take action in the early 2000s to reduce risk through management and regulation. They allowed the financial entities to make increasingly poor decisions. Throw into the mix the age-old problem of human greed and you have a particularly volatile situation. Bad mortgages in Florida quickly lead to unemployment in China. This is well illustrated in the recent movie “The Inside Job” and I am over simplifying to make a point. The movie shows that complicated financial trading and lack of substantial regulation, when combined with greed and self-interest, caused a massive earthquake in the world financial system. The problem is made worse by the rapidly expanding use of technology in world markets. We are not keeping pace with our machines. We unleash them on the markets and quickly find that one programming error can cause the U.S. stock market to plummet. Computers are no longer a tool in the financial system- they have become the puppet master of sorts. Human trading is a poor money maker. The faster the computer and the better designed the program, the more money that can be made. You don’t bet on a company actually creating anything. These days you let the computer trade in split second actions that treat the market, and business stocks, like a series of rising and falling waves.

The individual governments on Earth are having huge problems in trying to control the increasingly complex financial systems. Derivatives nearly brought the world to its collective knees for one primary reason (well, aside again from greed) - very few cultural institutions had regulators that fully understood them.

So, how does an extraterrestrial view all of this, if they happen to be watching? Humans have built interconnected systems of finance that can spread trouble like wildfire across the globe in a matter of days, if not hours or minutes. Yet we have no real global ability to regulate that financial action. Sure, we have some quasi-global entities, such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The best these groups can hope to accomplish is better economic cooperation. Their main function seems to be helping third world nations by providing loans and advice

The G-20, or Group of 20, has made strides to set a new agenda in recent years and that is one positive outcome of the most recent global financial crisis. The group provides a regular forum for the 20 major world financial powers to discuss economic issues. It’s certainly a more international body than the exclusive and European-American dominated G-8. World leaders seem to recognize that the G-20 needs a more formal nature and hopefully one day actual rule-making ability. The real question is whether the movement towards more formality and power in the G-20 and other international groups is progressing quickly enough to serve the fragile world economy. 

The founding of the European Central Bank and the Euro currency also serve as a possible model for nations on Earth.The European Union was created to allow European countries to better compete as a bloc, rather than as individual nations, with the United States, China and other growing economies. Still, the supranational organization of the 27 member European Union is an important role model for future development and the first of its kind on Earth. It shows that nations can join together with aligned economic and political interests, working in concert, rather than working in competition. This can occur without the individual nations losing cultural significance and independence.

Our technology and interconnectedness makes us like a teenager given the keys to a Lamborghini sports car. We barely know how to drive and yet we have a technological machine that can go 180 miles an hour. The worst part is that the achievable speed of that technological machine will continue to skyrocket. Tomorrow we’ll be able to go 200 miles an hour and in a year 300 miles an hour. What are the chances that the still inexperienced teen will wreck the thing at those speeds?

Our cultural institutions are failing us. We labor under tribal arrangements, disguised these days as international politics, which go back centuries. We attempt to solve world problems with a haphazard and confusing set of alliances, counter-alliances, back-door deals and all out hostilities. It’s truly a wonder we’ve survived this long.

An informed extraterrestrial would have to give pause before saying hello. Could our fragile financial system handle such an event? Could international organizations step up to the plate and lead this fractious human civilization? Do we have the ability to be anything more than bickering tribes trying to sell each other goods and gain advantage in a confusing and raucous world market place? Take a few steps off the planet and you begin to see the challenges we face in the coming years. It’s a sobering view.

Implications of the Galactic Club

Let’s say that First Contact does occur some day. Just who do we meet? Is it a lonely civilization or a group of civilizations, part of a galactic amalgamation of some sort? SETI researchers have called this concept the Galactic Club, so named by Ronald Bracewell.

The informal nature of the name gives it wide latitude in organization. The Galactic Club could be just a couple of extraterrestrial civilizations communicating over the vast distances of space. It could also be a more organized and controlled group, similar to the United Federation of Planets concept in Star Trek.

In his paper, “Networking with our Galactic Neighbors” (part of the The Foundation For the Future report “When SETI Succeeds: The Impact of High-Information Contact.”) Albert Harrison explores both the possibilities and impacts of the Galactic Club concept. Harrison posits that the nature of the Galactic Club could depend on its level of development. Early efforts would likely be looser in connection. A more highly developed organization could come to act as a supranational system of galactic government.

This idea is a critical one for humans to consider. If we meet a lone civilization there is a clear path for diplomacy and relations. If First Contact occurs with a member of a Galactic Club things could be much, much more complicated. Alliances and rivalries could enter into the picture. We could easily find ourselves involved in a galactic political struggle.

On a more positive note a strong Galactic Club, as Harrison points out, could have strict rules for First Contact with a newly found civilization. This could help make the process easier and perhaps include safeguards in protecting our culture.

Harrison points out that humanity could actually be the founder of such a Galactic Club. But given the high odds that any extraterrestrial civilizations we make contact with will be further along in development than us, in thousands, if not millions of years, we need to consider the more complicated scenario of us entering into an established Galactic Club as a naïve member.

Humans speaking with one voice is essential in any First Contact scenario. In the case of a complicated, multi-civilization scenario it becomes critical for our survival. We may not last long, or have an outcome we like, if we act as a disjointed group of nations here on Earth. At the very least, it seems improbable that we would benefit from interstellar relationships if we remain divided and warring here on Earth.

Harrison says that a galactic club of any formal organization would likely have a well-developed framework for First Contact, carefully managing when such an event might occur and the subsequent communication and diplomacy. If it is a beneficent club that could be good for us. They could walk us through an established process. Harrison says dealing with a group could be less threatening to us, since a single civilization could act in a number of extreme ways in First Contact, while an organized bureaucracy would likely act in a more careful and established fashion.

There is always the possibility of a controlling, malevolent Galactic Club. One can imagine the Empire in the Star Wars series. However, Harrison points to political research to show that quarrelsome, violent civilizations would likely have a shorter life than civilizations that form defensive and strategic alliances. Perhaps a tougher thing for humanity to handle would be a Galactic Club that we didn’t understand at all, in terms of makeup or interaction. It might take years and decades to wade through the history to determine just how a Galactic Club came into being and what it holds for us, the newest members.

The Debate Over the Probability of Extraterrestrial Life

The Drake Equation is one of the hallmarks of the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) research movement. It seeks to describe in an equation the probability of technologically advanced civilizations existing outside of Earth. It is named for Frank Drake, a founder of the SETI movement, who came up with the equation during a historic meeting of astrophysicists in 1961. While it was a groundbreaking consideration of the issue, it has been controversial over the years, primarily due to the wide interpretation that can be given to the various parts of the equation. Drake says that the equation suggests there may be 10,000 communicative extraterrestrial civilizations in the Milky Way Galaxy alone.

David Spiegel with Princeton University and Edwin Turner with the University of Tokyo have made headlines this week with a paper in which they take a new look at the question, applying a different mathematical model. The specifics of the Bayesian statistical framework they use are too complicated for me to understand or explain. Please see the paper for details. The conclusion of the piece suggests that estimates for the possibility of extraterrestrial life in the universe may be far too high and from their mathematical model it’s just a probable that we are alone in the universe. Certainly a sobering analysis. However, you need to look closer at the paper to see what they are really suggesting. They state in several places that the search for extraterrestrial intelligence and extraterrestrial biology is the only way to solve the problem. We need to look for these signs to better determine the probability of extraterrestrial life. That seems a bit obvious- if we find extraterrestrial life then it’s more likely there is extraterrestrial life in the universe. The real question is the number of planets with life. With no evidence of life outside of Earth, our current state, the likelihood is low. With the discovery of astrobiology there is a much greater likelihood of widespread life and thus intelligence.

Most extraterrestrial life considerations rely on speculation. Even the best ideas, such as the Drake Equation, rely greatly on speculation. This doesn’t take away from SETI research. A systematic, scientific search of the universe for signs of extraterrestrial life is the only way to get beyond the speculation and work in the realm of fact. That’s what SETI does each day. The exciting NASA Kepler Mission has discovered many planets, some of which could be habitable. This is concrete scientific research at its best. Astrophysicists are pushing the frontier of our knowledge and at breakneck speed. It’s an exciting time to be human.

The rest of the discussion of extraterrestrial intelligence is simply conjecture. This blog is primarily speculation. Many of us will continue to speculate, consider possibilities and offer opinions. There’s plenty of room for that too. Science fiction authors and futurists have offered up ideas on the subject for decades. If there ever is a solid scientific discovery that speculation could be quite valuable to help us create a path to move forward. Spiegel and Turner just have one big message for us: don’t get your hopes up.

Collective Mediocrity or a Celebration of the Human?

Who do we become After First Contact? How do we perceive ourselves and other intelligent beings in the universe? Human diversity models may provide a framework for moving forward. The diversity initiative seeks to celebrate human cultures while allowing for differences. Diversity in action says: I celebrate my culture and yet I am interested in learning about your culture. Through dialog, we can respect, and hopefully enjoy, the cultures of others.

Does all that sound like consultant-inspired, touchy-feely, mumbo-jumbo? I’ll admit the rhetoric does get to be a bit much sometimes. But diversity is an important concept for humans, especially in a country as culturally rich as the United States. It helps us to grow stronger by exploring our differences. Those differences inspire creativity, new approaches in business and entrepreneurism.

Diversity has important implications for First Contact. It says that we can take pride in what it means to be human, while respecting, and hopefully enjoying, the culture of extraterrestrials. In all seriousness, what could be more important After First Contact? Understanding is the bridge to start a new relationship, assuming of course, that communication allows us to share such information.

The Foundation For the Future report “When SETI Succeeds: The Impact of High-Information Contact” spends a great deal of time examining the impact of First Contact on the collective human psyche, with special attention to the challenges presented if the extraterrestrial visitors are thousands of years further along in development than us. Albert Harrison has an article entitled “Social Comparison, Identity and Self-Esteem.” It may sound a bit esoteric, given the groundbreaking set of circumstances inherent in high-information First Contact. In reality, as Harrison points out, it may be one of the most important issues for human development After First Contact. Do we experience a feeling of collective mediocrity? In many human First Contact situations the less technologically advanced society is more likely to change, sometimes in drastic ways that undermine the cultural foundation of the lesser civilization. Harrison says that the type of ETI we encounter will decide our outcome. Are they overtly controlling or domineering? Do they provide us with much information and technology, essentially solving our problems for us and causing us to suffer from a type of learned helplessness?

The future After First Contact does not necessarily have to be this bleak. We can decide how we want to change. Comparing ourselves to ETI thousands, if not millions, of years more developed than us seems like a destructive waste of time. It’s not unlike humans comparing success: there will always be someone richer, more attractive and happier than you. Peace of mind means knowing who you are and not worrying about your status in relationship to others.

What could we do After First Contact? It would seem important to celebrate the distinctive elements of human culture. Reinforcing what we find valuable in being human could help protect our civilization. Controlling the rate of change, through careful filters in the dissemination of extraterrestrial knowledge, would also help. We would need to keep looking forward as a civilization to where we are going and where we want to be and not let extraterrestrials decide the path for us. We should determine the road forward based on our own needs and unique characteristics. An extraterrestrial civilization could certainly provide valuable insight into how we might progress, but ultimately it should be up to us to decide what we will become.

Harrison makes one other prediction in his article. He says the outcome for human civilization will be set in the first few decades After First Contact. If true, this would make it imperative for humans to respond quickly to the identity challenges After First Contact and set a self-guided course for humanity into the new era.

When SETI Succeeds: The Impact of High-Information Contact

I would like to correct a major omission in this blog. Over the years I have frequently bemoaned the lack of serious consideration of the implications for human society in First Contact. While I’ll still maintain that there is not nearly enough discussion, I have missed an important and comprehensive examination of the issue. In 1999 Allen Tough, working with the Foundation For the Future, put together a seminar in Hawaii that featured 16 scholars and their perspective of issues relating to the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) and most importantly the aftermath of First Contact. Tough later collected the results of that discussion and the series of papers created for the seminar, in a publication titled “When SETI Succeeds: The Impact of High-Information Contact.”

It is one of the most insightful and wide-reaching explorations of the subject that I have found. The group of participants will be familiar to those who read this blog: Albert Harrison, Jill Tarter, Steven Dick, Paul Davies, Douglas Vakoch, John Billingham and Ben Finney, among others. And through the papers other noted writers such as Michael Michaud and Donald Tarter added their thoughts.

The importance of this particular seminar is that while it does touch on issues of SETI research methods, it is primarily focused on issues of human reaction and response to First Contact, both in the short-term and the long-term. Why do we care? Several of the seminar participants note that while there are protocols in place for researchers to handle the scientific aspects of First Contact response, there are virtually no plans for a wider societal response. In particular, the focus on high-information First Contact is important because it has received very little attention in the field of SETI research. High-information First Contact is quite different from the simple discovery of some engineered extraterrestrial signal that we don’t understand. High-information means that we gain knowledge from First Contact. Extraterrestrial information would have wide-reaching implications for human society.

In the paper “The Role of Social Science in SETI” several authors suggest a simple scale showing, much in the same vein as hurricane warnings, the impact of First Contact.

Force One: Knowledge that we are not alone, primarily in discovery of some form of extraterrestrial communication.

Force Two: Humans gaining scientific or technical knowledge from communication with an extraterrestrial culture.

Force Three: Direct interaction with an extraterrestrial culture leading to a long-term dialog.

While the authors maintain that Force One is the most likely scenario, the real challenges for humanity lie in Force Two and Force Three First Contact. They create the most disruption to human society and would cause the greatest change. How that change occurs and to what degree is a matter of debate. Several of the authors predict that a Force Three scenario would be deeply troubling for humanity and perhaps have primarily negative outcomes.

The call for action in this paper is for greater involvement in the SETI discussion by researchers in the social sciences, and in the areas specifically related to gauging how humanity actually perceives extraterrestrial contact and how humanity might react to such news. Social scientists could conduct in-depth surveys to try and better determine how humans might respond to certain First Contact scenarios. Most surveys conducted thus far have been shallow, mainstream media oriented and extremely narrow in focus. While many people use the results of those surveys to show that humans would not be perturbed by First Contact, that view seems questionable given the lack of examination of high-information First Contact scenarios and the threat implications of communicating in an active and engaged way with extraterrestrials.

Over the next several weeks I will take a closer look at some of the individual topics presented in the seminar and resulting publication. It is material well worth an in-depth look.

Foundational Information versus Application Specific Information

I advocate for tightly controlled interaction with an extraterrestrial civilization After First Contact. Not that I think alien First Contact is likely to happen soon, but if it does I think there are many reasons to suggest a conservative approach to information sharing.

That said, I think it’s important to note the different types of information that might be involved. Foundational information is the type of knowledge that involves the fundamentals of who they are and what they know about the universe. It can include everything from their history and biology to the nature of the cosmos and even the basic features of particle physics from their perspective. I think foundational information could be shared in the very first weeks and months After First Contact. While the information revealed might be startling, and even revelatory, it would still require humans to do some work before anything concrete in terms of technology could be obtained from those revelations.

Application specific information however, would be an entirely different prospect. If aliens were to tell us how to build a more efficient and environmentally sound form of energy generation, that knowledge would have a profound and immediate impact on our private industry, economic systems and scientific structures. It would bypass the human process of discovery and create a short cut to a new technology. While that short cut would be exciting in some respects, it could create havoc in the world economy as nations and companies scramble to take advantage. One could hope that the United Nations would try to control such information, to perhaps create a global non-profit to develop the new technology, but that would fall so far outside of  our current realities of government and business that it would prove nearly impossible to control in the initial months and years After First Contact. In the long term, it could prove even more disastrous- undermining our frameworks of scientific discovery and technological development.

Foundational information could certainly lead to new technology and innovation, but it would require work on our part and work within the context of our current systems of science and business. Doing that work would keep our scientific efforts alive and force us to earn the reward.

What might foundational information reveal? I’ve been reading two books lately that examine the furthest reaches of what we know, and would like to know, about the universe. Lee Smolin suggests, in his 1997 book “The Life of the Cosmos,” that it could be nature of universes to reproduce via black holes, creating a multiverse.

The idea of multiple universes with differing physical constants points to a larger vision of the cosmos than previously imagined. It’s been a popular idea among astrophysicists and cosmologists for some time now. Paul Davies explores the many possibilities, including multiple universe theories, in his book “Cosmic Jackpot”.

These may sound like esoteric discussions, but at the fundamental level they struggle with the nature of our reality. It would seem likely that an extraterrestrial civilization would, at the very least, have a different view of reality than us and perhaps, especially if they are thousands of years more developed in intellectual thought, they might have revelations to offer us about the organization of the universe. This information could transform modern human cosmology and astrophysics and yet it would not have an immediate impact on the basic human societal functions. It would likely be a catalyst for new thinking in many scientific fields and cause changes in paradigms over many years and in a wide range of areas. However, the impact would be blunt and not specific. In contrast, information about specific technology would be sharp, focused and potentially disruptive.

This argument assumes much. Certainly extraterrestrials could say that they would rather not share any critical information with us at all. They might decide that we are not to be trusted with such knowledge. It seems likely though, that if we do make First Contact, the question of what information we ask for and what we receive will be of paramount importance. It’s essential to our future as intelligent beings in the universe that we make the right choices and take the hard road forward towards our future- an earned future.

First Contact Motivation

No matter what the form of First Contact, the motivation for communication on the part of the extraterrestrials would be the foundation of the new relationship with humans. I argue that if we simply discover an engineered signal that is not First Contact. Contact by definition involves communication. Discovering a signal intended as a form of communication would fall into the First Contact scenario. That too, though, would entail a primary motivation on the part of the sender.

The number of possible motivations for extraterrestrials contacting humans seems endless, or at least bound only by our imagination. We have no actual knowledge of anything involving extraterrestrial intelligence, so any talk of motivation is merely speculation. That speculation has been the subject of a robust body of work in science fiction for decades.

Some of the possibilities include:

-They’re responding to our radio signals or messages placed on our spacecraft

-They just wanted to say hello

-They’re scientifically curious

-They want to convert us to their form of religion

-They want to warn us about something

-They want to reveal something

-They want to conquer us

-They want to be our friends

-They didn’t mean to make contact at all, it was a mistake

The science fiction writers have been much more creative than this meager list shows. My point is simply that the motivation of extraterrestrials should be of top concern to us in the event of First Contact. And that brings up another issue: will they tell us their true motivation for First Contact? It’s easy to assume that aliens would be honest. But honesty is a human trait and dishonesty perhaps just as common. It will be important for us to not only ask why they have made contact, but we will have to try and determine the underlying motivations that they might not be willing to share. This may sound a bit paranoid, but we would be dealing with creatures that we don’t understand at all. Caution and critical thinking would seem essential in such a situation.

Of course, motivation is a two-way street. The relationship will also be formed by our motivations for First Contact. It may seem like a cut and dried case of curiosity on our end. But is that the only motivation? First Contact would probably bring to light a bunch of things we would hope to gain in a new relationship: knowledge, new technology, a solution to global warming, revelations about the true nature of the physical world and new energy sources.

Eight Things We Could Expect from Direct First Contact

Here are eight things we could expect from Direct First Contact with an extraterrestrial civilization. That is, First Contact that involves extraterrestrial visitors coming to earth.

1. If an extraterrestrial is curious enough to contact humans it would probably share some of our intellectual abilities and value orientations. This idea comes from psychologist John Baird in his book "The Inner Limits of Outer Space". 

2. If they reach us first they are likely to be scientifically and technologically superior to us. This again is from the Baird book, but a common idea shared by many. It is really common sense. We don’t have the ability to travel between stars. If they come here they do have that ability. Ergo they are more technologically advanced.

3. If they wish to make contact they would likely do research first. They would probably examine our environment, language, culture and psychological nature. Once again, this is a proposition derived from common sense. If they have the ability to travel between stars they have problem solving abilities. Research is a basic step in problem solving.

4. They would most likely have a motivation for First Contact and a plan for carrying it out. If you understand problem solving you probably won’t take serious action without a plan.

5. They would be bringing their party to our house. First Contact, at least in the initial stages, would be their objectives, their process and their rules.

6. If they have studied us thoroughly, they would realize that we would not react well to such an overtly controlling process.

7. They would probably consider ways to keep us peaceful, calm and open to communication.

8. In short: they would have a public relations plan.

What does all of this mean for us? We must be cautious at every step. We must work to determine their true motivation and what it means for us. We cannot assume their motivations will keep our best interests in mind. We must be as open as possible and not let paranoia and fear prevent us from acting effectively. We must be united in our approach and response. We must state clearly that First Contact on our planet must be carried out according to our rules. We must quickly establish guidelines and protocols for protecting our civilization and yet keeping an open dialogue to develop a fruitful relationship. We must hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

The Psychology of First Contact

Contact with extraterrestrials is more than just a scientific or social challenge. There will be psychological challenges for humans. Much would depend on the type of contact. The most profound impact would be in a Direct First Contact event, where humans interact directly with extraterrestrials. There’s not much written on the psychology of First Contact. One of the better books is "The Inner Limits of Outer Space" by John Baird. 

The psychologist posits that social communication with aliens will be modeled, at least from our perspective, on our own social interaction. No surprise there, modeling our behavior on what we have come to expect in human relationships is our only option- we simply don’t have any other frame of reference. For humans, and for the aliens, the relationship will be based on how each party views the other and perceives relative intelligence, social rank and knowledge.

Much of Baird’s book explores SETI based communication with extraterrestrials. He was part of a NASA study group on the issue in the 1970’s. However, his work does have application to Direct First Contact as well.

It has been expected that in a Direct First Contact scenario the visiting aliens would be more technologically advanced, which makes sense considering that we do not have the technology to visit them and by the very nature of the scenario they do have the technology to visit us. This would immediately place the relationship in a type of imbalance.

Baird suggests that while many scientists have used technology to set up possible comparison scales to extraterrestrials, a much better scale would be to determine how they think and how similar that thinking is to the human mentality. It is a bold suggestion and one that makes sense. Sure, technology will be a huge part of the discussion, but that very discussion rests on a foundation of communication and interaction. If the aliens think very differently from us the relationship will be harder to form. If they think more like us it will be easier. Science is only one way to compare civilizations. We would have a much stronger bond if they had some appreciation of the role of art and music in our society. If they have similar pursuits there will be a connection, perhaps one even stronger than science, due to the more personal nature of art and music and the deep connection of those activities to our culture.

There is a tendency for humans to view everything with an anthropocentric bias. Many prominent researchers have been arguing that our narrow definition of what could form biological life could interfere with our search for extraterrestrial intelligence. Baird was one of the first to broach the subject in the 1980s. It applies to Direct First Contact as well, as our focus on an anthropocentric view of communication could be extremely limiting in how we interact with alien intelligence.

Baird suggests that one way of helping us understand an extraterrestrial intelligence is by examining how humans perceive intelligence. Researchers say that humans have many different types of intelligence and no one measure is enough to judge the sum. Baird uses an interesting comparison in this argument, taking a look at how adults view the intelligence of a child. The very notion of growing up and gaining in knowledge is a given, but does it really make one more intelligent? You can argue that humans become more set in their ways as adults, less playful and less excited by new ideas. We can see those child-like attributes in some of the most successful older adults: a constant need for play with ideas.

Probably the biggest take-away from Baird’s book is the idea that First Contact would be an extremely complicated relationship from many perspectives. We would have to be prepared to take several steps back from our usual way of thinking and take in perspectives we have not imagined. The danger is that some humans will not want to spend the time or energy to consider such things. That could lead to knee-jerk reactions based on anthropocentric fears and judgments. If it’s simply a problem for the man or woman on the street that’s one thing, but what is the likelihood that our political leaders would be able to rise above this base level thinking?

Conspiracy Theory After First Contact

Conspiracy has been popular in American culture for years and the rise of the Internet has brought it to a fever pitch in certain circles. Nothing breeds mistrust like bad information. Bill Keller of the New York Times has an interesting piece in the New York Times Magazine about conspiracy, tracing the American obsession from President Kennedy’s assassination to the President Obama birth certificate frenzy. Keller points out that much of it seems to stem from a mistrust of authority, whether that authority is a government commission or the New York Times. The Internet provides fertile ground for self-made authorities who buck conventional logic and often reality.

Now I’m about to take the question a bit further than Mr. Keller would have intended. Can you imagine all of the nut bag crazy conspiracy theories that would circulate After First Contact with an extraterrestrial civilization? Keller points to a book by Mike Fenster called “Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture.” Fenster says that conspiracy is often a response to unusual events. I can’t imagine an event stranger than First Contact. In addition to that potent catalyst, humans will undoubtedly have to deal with the incredible load of conspiracy baggage that already exists concerning extraterrestrials: abduction, government collusion, secret societies and alien infiltration. If folks are already loony about extraterrestrials, and there is absolutely no credible evidence that extraterrestrials exist, what the heck happens if we have actual evidence that they do exist?

I would imagine that after a brief period of shock and awe, which will shut down most of the crazy conversation, the conspiracy bandwagon will grow new stories and crazier plots. The thing that will make it tough to refute the theories: the reality is already bizarre enough. If aliens actually do exist, is it that much of a leap to think they kidnapped and brain-mapped your cousin Clarence? And who’s to say they’re not abducting people and dissecting cows? The aliens? Like we’re going to believe them. How about a government commission? Oh, wait, let’s not go there. Perhaps the New York Times could investigate?

First Contact would fuel wilder and more robust conspiracy theories. The only possible hope is transparency. And it would have to be a brutal, bare-all type of transparency that keeps every decision and each action clearly in the public eye. That won’t be easy. It’s one of the reasons I suggest that an explosive and dramatic Direct First Contact event would be the best way for an extraterrestrial civilization to say hello in person. It bypasses government secrecy and goes straight to the people via the live media. This is an important distinction, not the behind the scenes, we don’t know what you’re leaving out or putting in media, but the live media. Events and actions need to occur in full public view and live television offers that ability in a way that no other medium can. Even with that approach there will be years and years of debunking and myth busting necessary and unfortunately the alien visitors would have to be front and center for that questioning. Sure, it’s rather annoying to say hello to a new planet and then be brought before some organization that will ask you if you have been anal probing the very beings you have just met. Annoying and necessary.

And I have one prediction that I know will stand up in any First Contact situation. No matter how transparent and no matter how many questions are answered there will always be new conspiracy theories and paranoia will fester for many, many years. It’s just the way some of us humans think and unfortunately my alien friends if you embark on a relationship with us humans you get all of us.

Extraterrestrials, Hawks and Doves

If extraterrestrial intelligence is ever discovered in the universe, we may very well think back on these days as a time of relative ease of mind. The very notion that extraterrestrial civilizations exist could bring about a sudden fear. What we don’t know at all doesn’t seem to bother us, what we know only slightly could scare us half to death. The primary driver is of course that lack of knowledge. How many civilizations are out there? Can they travel? Do they plan to visit? Are they friendly? Even the slightest proof that extraterrestrial intelligence exists would inspire all of these questions and many more.

Scientists are quick to point out that given our current understanding of the physical world interstellar travel is quite impractical- both expensive and time consuming. Thus any relationship with extraterrestrials would likely be via communication. The vast distance between stars would provide a ready-made insulation of sorts, ensuring our safety. Given that our understanding of the physical world has changed rapidly over the last couple of hundred years though, it also seems likely that our science will progress and we will learn new things about the laws that govern actions in the universe.

First Contact would bring the issue of safety to the forefront of discussion and it seems likely that humans will fall into the same divisions that we currently do. The hawks and the doves will have a grand debate.

Planetary defense has been considered primarily for a much more likely threat: asteroids and other objects coming near the Earth. The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics has held yearly conferences about the issue of near Earth objects (NEO), including one conference just a few weeks ago in Romania.

NASA and several other agencies participate in these conferences and they are perhaps the best gauge of current thinking in regards to planetary defense. Still, deflecting a near Earth object would be much different than trying to defend against intelligent beings. The NEO, probably being an errant asteroid, can’t plan countermeasures or use stealth technology. 

Planetary defense against alien invaders has been discussed in the world of science fiction and raised as a realistic concern by only a handful of authors. Travis Taylor, Bob Boan, Charles Anding and Conley Powell have written one of the few ETI oriented planetary defense books, called “An Introduction to Planetary Defense: A Study of Modern Warfare Applied to Extra-Terrestrial Invasion.” These engineers have been involved in aerospace research for many years and they raise several thoughtful ideas in the book about the issue of defense against extraterrestrials. The problem is that Hollywood has also weighed-in, and those special effects driven spectaculars do little to examine the real issues. This month the National Geographic Channel takes a closer look with a show called “When Aliens Attack.”

Most of the show is based on the usual television silliness, framed around an animated portrayal of an alien attack. We ponder how humans could use balloons to drop onto alien ships to stage an attack. We get animated examples of how F-18s would fare against alien fighter ships. We make assumption, after assumption; go through scenario after scenario and reveal, well…basically nothing. It isn’t that much different from what you’ve already seen in the many movies on the subject.

There is a glimmer of hope for substance in the TV show, as the issue of the U.N. protocol for extraterrestrial contact is raised. Researcher and author Michael Michaud pops up with thoughtful, albeit brief, commentary and then he’s gone and it’s back to the dramatics. Michaud is also allowed to discuss the problem of communication with aliens; however it’s also a short break from the silliness. The show does talk about the need for a global army in the case of an attack and some other interesting issues, but they are merely raised and then gone as the cheesy animated attack continues.

Okay, fine. I understand it’s just a television show. The producers are attempting to amuse middle aged men drinking a beer after mowing the lawn. But couldn’t they have spent just a few more moments hearing from this rather esteemed line-up of interview subjects? I’m sure Mr. Michaud, Seth Shostak and Travis Taylor had much more interesting things to say. Those comments are probably lost on the proverbial cutting room floor.

All of these issues would come to the forefront in the wake of First Contact. The hawks will demand a robust defense with an emphasis on new technology. The doves will say that it’s pointless to prepare and we would be better off sending positive messages to signal that we are not aggressive. Both groups will have valid points. Preparation could be tremendously important or it could be of no use at all. Aggressive actions could send the wrong message, or they could let an adversary know we won’t go down without a fight.

The problem with all of it? The unknown. Even if we intercept a signal and even if we start a conversation (likely to be decades long conversation as the messages travel back and forth) we would have many more questions than answers. We need a debate here on Earth because the answers are not clear cut. With so many variables and so many unknowns every view should be taken seriously, at least at first. Then the United Nations will need to lead the way and put together a plan of action. That will be perhaps the biggest hurdle of all. The hawks versus doves debate will bring out international squabbles and Earth-bound security concerns. Each nation will be looking not only to space for a possible confrontation, but also to their neighbors here on Earth. Will China be interested in sharing its latest military technology with the United States and vice-versa?

Without strong United Nations leadership, and a recognized body to take up the issue, it would be a debate beyond anything that we have experienced on Earth thus far. There is at least one thing we can do now- prepare ourselves for how we might handle the diplomatic and international issues of First Contact. It’s something that could reside entirely on paper and doesn’t require a big expenditure of money. Imagine how much further along we would be if we did some planning before panic strikes.

Jill Tarter of the SETI Institute, Michael Michaud and others tried to get the United Nations to take action. Michaud details the actions in his excellent book “Contact with Alien Civilizations”. They presented an International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) position paper to the U.N. Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) in 1996 in regards to First Contact protocol. They followed up with a briefing on the documents in 2000. Both of these were accepted by the UN and then ignored.

The issue of First Contact has so many implications that it deserves a serious treatment. The details of a defined First Contact diplomatic and response protocol might not be of much interest to a guy watching TV and drinking a beer on a Saturday afternoon. However, such a robust protocol could be a good starting point if we ever do make First Contact.