Assuming multi-cellular life exists elsewhere in the universe, what do you think it looks like?

[J842P]

Just reading up on  hypothetical types of biochemistry over at wikipedia. I looked up Silicon based life forms, although I recalled that there were various reasons that Silicon is not as suited for life as Carbon, and of course that wiki popped up.

 Organosilicon

Where is the terminus of biochemistry?

Biochemistry is just the chemistry of living things. So, the terminus depends on your definition of living things.

 

[Kharakov]

What does "look objectively different" mean? Either they are objectively different, or they look different, which is by definition a subjective attribute. Since almost half of the creatures depicted are fish like us, I assume you mean the latter.

Oh god, you have never heard of someone say "trying to be objective"? Stop derailing and wasting time.

Since when were fish in conversations on the net?

 

[barbos]

CO2 is a gas
SiO2 is a sand
do you see a problem?

The primary problem isn't the temperature difference between the sublimation point of CO2 and SiO2, it's the number of different compounds that are formed by C and Si, and the complexity of said compounds.\

None of the interesting Si compounds will exist at SiO2 sublimation point.
So your silicon based life would have to exhale sand which does not dissolve in water.
And even if you are talking about very primitive life which does not involve reducing of silicon as source of energy you still have a problem with extracting energy from light and producing silicon compounds.
Carbon based organic compounds are abundant and rich in space for a reason - very easy to make and convert
Whereas none of the silicon based organic is present, just simple SiO2, nothing else.

 

[dystopian]

No, I don't think that the combination of furry + warmblooded is unique to Earth. I have no idea how common it is, and know of no way to derive a reasonable estimate of that. But even if it's common, there's no reason to assume that the species that ends up developing technology and that would thus be the one that contacts us would derive from that group.

Well, I agree with that; there's no reason an intelligent civilization couldn't be built by a species that would fit into an entirely different category than us; all that's really required is that they have some means of manipulating their environment, preferably to the kind of fine degree our digits allow as opposed to say a squid awkwardly grabbing stuff with a tentacle. If Dinosaurs hadn't died out, it would be conceivable that a raptor species had achieved something similar to what we have.

Oh, and I wouldn't consider a creature with fur+warm blood but diverging numbers of limbs and eyes as "mammal-like" in any meaningful sense - not even to a non-biologist.

It really depends. I don't think 4 limbs and 2 eyes is some sort of defining feature of mammals; a dog-like creature with six legs would still look similar to a dog. The same would be true if it had 3 eyes instead of 2. It'd look like an alien *dog*. (Do dogs with birth-defects, or photoshops along such lines, not look like dogs to you?) As for "meaningful", well, that's subjective here. The number of limbs and eyes is not included in any scientific definition of "mammal", which is just about having mammary glands and a few other traits; so I don't see why we should consider a creature that diverges in terms of limbs/eyes but has an x in all the other checkboxes to be something other than a mammal.

 

[Jokodo]

In the OP, you said that you've "always thought that the human imagination has painted 'aliens' in a weird picture". I was assuming that you talked about science fiction. Science fiction typically doesn't feature any and all extraterrestreal life, it features predominantly species with which we would establish communication. So we're pre-screening biomes for ones that have indeed thrown up something that has a vaguely human-like intelligence, zooming in on those species, and asking how similar the paths that end up with such beings have to be. You seem to be arguing that they would have to be very similar, maybe even that there's only one viable path - how else would you conclude that that aliens (which I, in context, understand to mean intelligent species from extraterrestreal biomes) would have to be pretty similar to us?

I didn't say *have* to, I said it's likely. Big difference.

OK, granted. My main point remains though - that in the OP you seem to be talking about paths to intelligent species and now you want to make it about life in general.

It can be true that life on a different planet would move in roughly similar directions overall without it being true that the species we'd be interacting most would be anything other than weird when compared to humans.

For example, there'll probably be "trees" - photosynthetic organisms that compete for putting their leaves closer to the sunlight. There's going to agile heterotrophic organisms that make the crowns of those "trees" their habitat. On some (possibly many) worlds, some of those might have an endoskeleton and be warm-blooded, so with some tolerance for superficials, you might want to classify them as equivalents of monkeys (or koalas, or squirrels, or...). But - and here we need to reduce our sample to worlds where intelligent life has evolved - there's no good reason to assume that the intelligent species - the "aliens" that are being portrayed in sci-fi - would hail from that clade.

 

[rousseau]

I didn't say *have* to, I said it's likely. Big difference.

OK, granted. My main point remains though - that in the OP you seem to be talking about paths to intelligent species and now you want to make it about life in general.

It can be true that life on a different planet would move in roughly similar directions overall without it being true that the species we'd be interacting most would be anything other than weird when compared to humans.

For example, there'll probably be "trees" - photosynthetic organisms that compete for putting their leaves closer to the sunlight. There's going to agile heterotrophic organisms that make the crowns of those "trees" their habitat. On some (possibly many) worlds, some of those might have an endoskeleton and be warm-blooded, so with some tolerance for superficials, you might want to classify them as equivalents of monkeys (or koalas, or squirrels, or...). But - and here we need to reduce our sample to worlds where intelligent life has evolved - there's no good reason to assume that the intelligent species - the "aliens" that are being portrayed in sci-fi - would hail from that clade.

The alien comment in the OP was mostly just a segue-way into the question of what you think alien life forms would look like. I'm no more interested in intelligent life than any other life, but I think if intelligent life existed it would look more similar to us than the image from the popular imagination of the media, I think that's mostly obvious, though.

It seems like the evolution of life forms has a lot to do with chance, and humans and every other species likely had a certain probability of arising. I don't know that I would say any particular species would be absolutely inevitable, but I think a knowledgeable biologist could likely make a list of niches that would inevitably be filled somehow given enough time and the right conditions.

 

[skepticalbip]

OK, granted. My main point remains though - that in the OP you seem to be talking about paths to intelligent species and now you want to make it about life in general.

It can be true that life on a different planet would move in roughly similar directions overall without it being true that the species we'd be interacting most would be anything other than weird when compared to humans.

For example, there'll probably be "trees" - photosynthetic organisms that compete for putting their leaves closer to the sunlight. There's going to agile heterotrophic organisms that make the crowns of those "trees" their habitat. On some (possibly many) worlds, some of those might have an endoskeleton and be warm-blooded, so with some tolerance for superficials, you might want to classify them as equivalents of monkeys (or koalas, or squirrels, or...). But - and here we need to reduce our sample to worlds where intelligent life has evolved - there's no good reason to assume that the intelligent species - the "aliens" that are being portrayed in sci-fi - would hail from that clade.

The alien comment in the OP was mostly just a segue-way into the question of what you think alien life forms would look like. I'm no more interested in intelligent life than any other life, but I think if intelligent life existed it would look more similar to us than the image from the popular imagination of the media, I think that's mostly obvious, though.

It seems like the evolution of life forms has a lot to do with chance, and humans and every other species likely had a certain probability of arising. I don't know that I would say any particular species would be absolutely inevitable, but I think a knowledgeable biologist could likely make a list of niches that would inevitably be filled somehow given enough time and the right conditions.

It’s odd that we seem to imagine quite the opposite of each other. When I see sci-fi portrayals of other intelligent life, I generally always see what looks like a general humanoid with lots of make-up – a torso, two arms, two legs and a head with eyes nose, and ears, all arranged in humanoid fashion, Even the alien in the movie Alien, though not humanoid had a torso, two arms, two legs, and a head with two eyes, a nose and a mouth.

Personally, I would imagine alien life would be quite different having had completely different origins and environment. Even on Earth critters with a common origin look very different, e.g. humans and land crabs or octopi.

 

[J842P]

The alien comment in the OP was mostly just a segue-way into the question of what you think alien life forms would look like. I'm no more interested in intelligent life than any other life, but I think if intelligent life existed it would look more similar to us than the image from the popular imagination of the media, I think that's mostly obvious, though.

It seems like the evolution of life forms has a lot to do with chance, and humans and every other species likely had a certain probability of arising. I don't know that I would say any particular species would be absolutely inevitable, but I think a knowledgeable biologist could likely make a list of niches that would inevitably be filled somehow given enough time and the right conditions.

It’s odd that we seem to imagine quite the opposite of each other. When I see sci-fi portrayals of other intelligent life, I generally always see what looks like a general humanoid with lots of make-up – a torso, two arms, two legs and a head with eyes nose, and ears, all arranged in humanoid fashion, Even the alien in the movie Alien, though not humanoid had a torso, two arms, two legs, and a head with two eyes, a nose and a mouth.

Personally, I would imagine alien life would be quite different having had completely different origins and environment. Even on Earth critters with a common origin look very different, e.g. humans and land crabs or octopi.

Right. I don't think what rousseau is saying is obvious at all. To me, most depictions of intelligent alien life in the media are extremely humanoid.

 

[rousseau]

I don't think that this:

Has any evolutionary basis, and despite being slightly similar to humans in a few ways, is anywhere close to as similar to earth-bound humans as what bi-pedal intelligent life on another planet is likely to be.

 

[skepticalbip]

I don't think that this:

Has any evolutionary basis, and despite being slightly similar to humans in a few ways, is anywhere close to as similar to earth-bound humans as what bi-pedal intelligent life on another planet is likely to be.

And I think that, if we ever encounter alien intelliegent life, that they would see that "little gray" and humans as so similar that they would consider them as not only from the same planet but the same species.

 

[ryan]

I don't think that this:

Has any evolutionary basis, and despite being slightly similar to humans in a few ways, is anywhere close to as similar to earth-bound humans as what bi-pedal intelligent life on another planet is likely to be.

I think that they would probably look even more different from us than this.

Given all of the variety here on one planet, how can you even imagine what else is probable?

Great topic by the way

 

[rousseau]

I don't think that this:

Has any evolutionary basis, and despite being slightly similar to humans in a few ways, is anywhere close to as similar to earth-bound humans as what bi-pedal intelligent life on another planet is likely to be.

I think that they would probably look even more different from us than this.

Given all of the variety here one planet, how can you even imagine what else is probable?

Great topic by the way

Well I guess the diversity of life would likely be just as wide-spread as it is here, and there would be some interesting creatures. I guess the idea, though, is that much of the life that comes into existence does so because of the physical conditions that surround it. In other words, we are a result of the environment. Given that, a similar environment would likely produce very similar results. We can also expect that most life that exists on another planet is going to be very aesthetically appealing.

 

[Jarhyn]

I'm thinking either something largely "furry", some manner of hybrid endo/exo skeletal insect, or if intelligent enough to find us before we find them, some amalgamation of various kinds of remotely controlled altered life forms, and a central brain in a jar.

 

[Kharakov]

The primary problem isn't the temperature difference between the sublimation point of CO2 and SiO2, it's the number of different compounds that are formed by C and Si, and the complexity of said compounds.\

None of the interesting Si compounds will exist at SiO2 sublimation point.
So your silicon based life would have to exhale sand which does not dissolve in water.
And even if you are talking about very primitive life which does not involve reducing of silicon as source of energy you still have a problem with extracting energy from light and producing silicon compounds.

It doesn't necessarily have to take the silicon respiration route to get energy- silicon based life forms could have solar cells, and maybe the more advanced ones would have capacitance and rechargeable batteries integrated to their systems so they can remain active at night.

 

[Kharakov]

I'm thinking either something largely "furry", some manner of hybrid endo/exo skeletal insect, or if intelligent enough to find us before we find them, some amalgamation of various kinds of remotely controlled altered life forms, and a central brain in a jar.

A lich, with a phylactery, controlling a furry?

 

[Jarhyn]

I'm thinking either something largely "furry", some manner of hybrid endo/exo skeletal insect, or if intelligent enough to find us before we find them, some amalgamation of various kinds of remotely controlled altered life forms, and a central brain in a jar.

A lich, with a phylactery, controlling a furry?

Pretty much. Or a lich controlling a phylactery controlling... Well, anything really. I expect a lot of small insect-like things that collect resources, maybe some spider-like things that build habitats and reclaim worker resources, some
Manner of autonomous bacteria that break down complex items, a variety of robots that do more complex or mechanical operations/construction and some manner of birthing chamber for terrestrial avatars that would be loosely networked clones of the host intelligence that check in intermittently with some manner of base station. Most of it would probably be space-bound. It's most likely going to be something most humans would consider an utter abomination. The future is not one that will belong to the 'hidebound'. As to planet bound life, it'm really hoping it's furries. Because evolution has a propensity towards elegant lines and streamlined proportions I doubt it's be disgusting grey did proportioned things.

 

[barbos]

None of the interesting Si compounds will exist at SiO2 sublimation point.
So your silicon based life would have to exhale sand which does not dissolve in water.
And even if you are talking about very primitive life which does not involve reducing of silicon as source of energy you still have a problem with extracting energy from light and producing silicon compounds.

It doesn't necessarily have to take the silicon respiration route to get energy- silicon based life forms could have solar cells, and maybe the more advanced ones would have capacitance and rechargeable batteries integrated to their systems so they can remain active at night.

Forget about evolutionary path to this, You will have hard time thinking of reproduction system of such a creature.

 

[Kharakov]

A lich, with a phylactery, controlling a furry?

Pretty much. Or a lich controlling a phylactery controlling... Well, anything really.

It's most likely going to be something most humans would consider an utter abomination.

I didn't read "most" at first, and was thinking about the diversity of human mental states, including the mental state of interest in something such as the Borg.

 

[Kharakov]

It doesn't necessarily have to take the silicon respiration route to get energy- silicon based life forms could have solar cells, and maybe the more advanced ones would have capacitance and rechargeable batteries integrated to their systems so they can remain active at night.

Forget about evolutionary path to this, You will have hard time thinking of reproduction system of such a creature.

Crystalline.

 

[barbos]

Forget about evolutionary path to this, You will have hard time thinking of reproduction system of such a creature.

Crystalline.

That supposed to mean something?