UFO Conjecture(s)

Saturday, December 03, 2016

UFOs as Artificial Intelligence Probes....one more time!

A review, by Steven Shapin, in The London Review of Books [12-1-16, Page 15 ff.] of Jessica Riskin’s book, The Restless Clock: A History of the Centuries-Long  Argument Over What Makes Living Things Tick [Chicago], while a bit too academic for readers/visitors here I’m guessing, does provoke a recurrence of my view (speculation/conjecture) that some UFO sightings may be of von Neumann-like probes (artificial machines with sentience or intellect, created and evolved from an advanced extraterrestrial civilization from our galaxy or beyond).

Most of you know my stance: AI machines, scouring the galaxy or universe in an exploratory mode stumbled upon Earth with its diverse life-forms.

One (or more) of these AI machines communicated back to its home base, using (and here comes a new speculation) entangled quantum particles that the AI intelligence(s) have made into a communication language that allows instantaneous messaging.

This would account for the onslaught of UFOs, reported over the eons, and especially in our modern era.

The “evidence” for AI UFOs, for me, stems from a few notable flying saucer/UFO events: the 1948 Gorman dogfight, the 1967 Michalak, Falcon Lake “attack,” the 1973 Coyne helicopter incident, the 1976 Tehran encounter, and the 1979 Robert Taylor “assault.”
There are others, but these UFO “bouts” consisted of AI machines interacting with machines that the probes thought were AI machines like “them.”

The Taylor incident is, obviously, not a machine confronting a machine but the description of the “object” that terrorized Robert Taylor has all the earmarks of a probe, one that mistook a human for a sentient being, so unusual compared to other contacts with actual machinery, that the probe “insisted” on getting to the crux of its discovery.

This is where the book under review comes into play.

The author provides early accounts of automata and the discussions that ensued from such “creations.”

She [Ms. Riskin] offers, at one point, that the Church’s use of automata, in the form of statues replicating Christ’s agony on the cross, ascending Virgin Marys (using screw devices), and other “theatrical” contrivances in the late medieval and early modern eras, produced the philosophical and theological debates about the difference between matter and spirit (by Descartes and others), agency and consciousness, which have led to discussion of human-machines and AI, today.

That we, many of us, see machines approaching sentience, one can, as I do, see a processed gaggle of AI machines being used by a race of beings in an advanced machine civilization, or that advanced civilization being composed of AI machines only, having displaced their creators ages ago, and now searching the universe for like-beings.

Such AI machines, as I’ve noted before, to some controversy by a few, would be attracted to machines, especially flying machines like aircraft, as in the RB-47 encounter or nuclear installations where machines seem to have a computational intelligence, primitive when compared to the extraterrestrial AI visitors but interesting as a possible sentient life-form on our diverse, animated planet.

At any rate, the book is replete, it seems, with rumination about machine life, animated mechanisms that mimic human life, and the arguments of creation by design (via God) and atheism, and all the concomitant exigencies that accrue to such weighty matters.

UFO buffs would do well to take in such discourse, to fulfill their goal of being intelligent rather than loopy, with obeisance to Roswell and other forlorn UFO tales.

RR

33 Comments:

  • Hi,
    I just had a weird thought (once again). Maybe some of those early UFO sightings like foo fighters or Scandinavian "ghost rockets" in the 40s (or even earlier, there were in the late 30s reports of unknown aeroplanes, "ghost fliers" in Finland and Sweden, officially they were just figments of imagination) were actually extraterrestrial AI machines trying to make a contact with other possibly intelligent, flying machines? Later they figured out that they should contact those weird mammals that fly those machines...
    OK, I´m not completely serious, but anyway. And yes, UFOs as AI would explain a lot of things, like why ET contacts always seem to babble same things over and over...Sure we all know it would be nice to live in peace with each other and not to start a nuclear war...

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Oh and thanks for mentioning an interesting book, I had to put The Restless Clock to my wish list immediately, hope there´ll come a softcover (and cheaper) edition too : )

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • The "ET contacts" you reference, Jerry, are hallucinatory.

    ET probes would provide gibberish, to us or our primitive AI machines, of a mathematical kind, no matter how much physicists insist that math is the language of the universe.

    Truly intelligent AI machines would eschew contact with warm-blooded inferiors like man (or animals) just as we ignore intelligent contact with animal life ourselves.

    (Talking to one's dog doesn't factor either. That's gibberish on our part, from the dog's standpoint.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Yes,
    I´m sure that UFO "contacts" or "experiences" are hallucinatory (at least partially). What interests me is what triggers that hallucinatory experience, what is the "objective" part of the UFO encounter? Didn´t John Keel write that the UFO experiences usually start with a bright light and that it could be a hypnotizing thing and after seeing that you´re on an UFO trip that´s not physically happening?

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Keel?

    Keel was a little nuts himself, wasn't he?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • I´m sure he was. And probably little neglectful with the facts, I think. I still love his books : ) It was the Mothman Prophecies that actually got me interested in UFOs as an adult. Seriously.

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • And hey,

    people can be a bit nuts but that doesn´t mean they can´t have noteworthy ideas or even true observations, right?

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • I've always contended that people report what they see accurately, Jerry.

    But their observation can be compromised by visual defects, what they've eaten or drunk, atmospherics, and other things.

    So, one can't accept observational reports as an objective reality.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Rich

    Yes, I agree, people probably report what they see, accurately, it´s just that I´m a bit sceptical that is what they see is really reality. (And yeah, what is "reality"?) I mean it´s so easy to fool one´s senses.

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Even if its easy,to fool one's senses..that in its self..is still "reality"

    [In all reality]..real existence..all that exists or "happens"..something that exists or "happens"..type of existence..totality of real things...........

    By Blogger Daniel Yang-Clark, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Daniel:

    There are various kinds of "reality" ; super reality, meta reality, subjective reality. objective reality, et cetera.

    But the real reality, espoused by Plato, is what we humans should be seeking.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • An amazing summary of "AI.Probes"..but Rich, some might suggest that they would not venture into the back-woods of this planet Earth, we suggest they must have! to be able to explain, some of the UFO reports..............

    By Blogger Daniel Yang-Clark, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Yes Rich, [in all reality] !?...........

    By Blogger Daniel Yang-Clark, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Daniel and Rich

    yes, basically what we feel and how we assimilate our experiences becomes our "reality" but it doesn´t mean it would be "real" in any greater sense. For example, if you believe in God (and I don´t mean to offend anyone here, just an example) then when you look around you see God´s works everywhere, right? But an atheist sees just the same things and explains them with science or coincidence. You can´t disprove God, after all.
    Maybe reality should always be written as "reality", it´s that subjective.
    One of my favourite quotes (I´m very fond of quotes as you have probably found out) from my favourite episode of my favourite tv show, the X-Files:
    JOSE CHUNG: Truth is as subjective as reality. That will help explain why when people talk about their "UFO experiences," they always start off with "well, now, I know how crazy this is going to sound... but."
    SCULLY: So you're here to get my version of the truth?
    JOSE CHUNG: Exactly.

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • Reality and the observation (awareness) of reality are complex issues, fellows.

    Discourse can't be cavalier or superficial.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, December 04, 2016  

  • ``Although the notion of a tachyonic imaginary mass might seem troubling because there is no classical interpretation of an imaginary mass, the mass is not quantized. Rather, the scalar field is; even for tachyonic quantum fields, the field operators at spacelike separated points still commute (or anticommute), thus preserving causality. Therefore, information still does not propagate faster than light,[1] and solutions grow exponentially, but not superluminally (there is no violation of causality).`` -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon_condensation

    ``In the 1967 paper that coined the term,[4] Gerald Feinberg proposed that tachyonic particles could be quanta of a quantum field with imaginary mass. However, it was soon realized that excitations of such imaginary mass fields do not in fact propagate faster than light,[5] and instead represent an instability known as tachyon condensation.[1] Nevertheless, in modern physics the term "tachyon" often[1][6] refers to imaginary mass fields rather than to faster-than-light particles.
    ...
    Despite theoretical arguments against the existence of faster-than-light particles, experiments have been conducted to search for them. No compelling evidence for their existence has been found.`` -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyon

    Consider me un-compelled.

    By Blogger Parakletos, at Monday, December 05, 2016  

  • As usual, Parakletos, you miss the gist of my piece above.

    (Gathering a few snippets about quanta doesn't address the issue I'm raising and, in fact, takes us to a corner of quantum mechanics that doesn't apply.)

    You seem to have a fixation on the faster than light debate, which is intriguing but not pertinent here, at the moment.

    Try not to get sidetracked by your "obsessions."

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, December 05, 2016  

  • Tachyons seemed a theoretical possibility until we found out about Tachyon Condensation.

    As to your misplaced and/or misguided 'hope' for entanglement to save you:

    ``However, it is now well-understood that quantum entanglement does not allow any influence or information to propagate superluminally. Technically, the microscopic causality postulate of axiomatic quantum field theory implies the impossibility of superluminal communication using any phenomena whose behavior can be described by orthodox quantum field theory.[3] A special case of this is the no-communication theorem, which prevents communication using the quantum entanglement of a composite system shared between two spacelike-separated observers.``

    By Blogger Parakletos, at Monday, December 05, 2016  

  • Again, Parakletos, a misplaced, obtuse response to the posting message..

    You miss, as usual, the import of the item I'm stressing.

    (My quantum entanglement aside was a speculative side suggesting that an advanced form of AI had mastered quantum entanglement, allowing communication of an "instantaneous kind." Not the gist of my von Neumann probe thesis.)

    You need to get on the same page here.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, December 05, 2016  

  • I think we need a reality-check? on quantum entanglement:)..I can just hear you saying;
    not again:)...................

    By Blogger Daniel Yang-Clark, at Monday, December 05, 2016  

  • For fear of exciting my long-time friend, Parakletos, I'll write that an advanced alien life-form, a thousand years ahead of us or a million, maybe a billion years would know about quantum particles that seemingly exist through out the Universe.

    And I would imagine that this advanced group of sentient beings, if scientifically endowed (which is only a possibility), would have mastered quantum reality to serve it somehow.

    Quantum entangled particles would be a superb methodology for transmission of information, if those particles, like binary 0s and 1s , were tamed by a genius species -- those AI probes, that I keep introducing here.

    Everything in the Universe is tameable, controllable, by a developed, advanced, civilized species.

    Even we pathetic Earthlings will be able to control the wayward aspects of the Universe, if we don't kill ourselves off before we reach the Omega Point. (See Human Destiny by Lecomte du Nouy.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, December 05, 2016  

  • Late Latin indomitabilis "untameable"

    ``Everything in the Universe is tameable, controllable, by a developed, advanced, civilized species.``

    Of course, you know you run into problems with that theory of yours when you start on an infinite regress and apply a bit of self-reference. What if the most 'developed' 'advanced' and 'civilized' species doesn't want to be tamed?

    By Blogger Parakletos, at Monday, December 05, 2016  

  • If they are AI machines, I'd expect them to want to be "logical" and thus "tameable."

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, December 05, 2016  

  • And indeed they might, if all they ever met were the best examples we could imagine from our civilized species. Given how violent a species humanity is, I could well understand why an AI machine would keep its distance.

    By Blogger Parakletos, at Tuesday, December 06, 2016  

  • Daniel,

    "a reality-check on quantum entanglement" sounds pretty hilarious (I mean really, I´m not trying to offend you or pick a quarrel, I just mean that, you know, quantum entanglement probably seriously is a thing that needs a reality check...). I´m a bit tired, so I guess things start to seem a bit too funny for me. But hey, sorry if I was a bit grumpy last weekend, I just noticed I was having a flu and my leg hurts and whatever : ) Luckily it´s a independence day holiday today here in Finland so no need to get outside....
    Parakletos has made some good points, unfortunately they don´t seem to have much to do with this blog post as far as I understand.

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Tuesday, December 06, 2016  

  • Hi,

    hope I´m not going completely off on an tangent, but "Everything in the Universe is tameable, controllable, by a developed, advanced, civilized species." That´s what really bugs me, I mean, really, why not? Maybe what we see and experience as reality or universe (or the laws of nature) is only just programming by a super-civilization. We wouldn´t even know. Perhaps we live in a simulation like some scientists suggest.
    Anyway, if we were under the surveillance of an alien civilization far more developed than us, how should we ever know (unless they wanted us to?).
    Damn, I feel the fever rising. But let´s keep up the discussion : )Parakletos too, right?

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Tuesday, December 06, 2016  

  • Hope you get well soon, all good,Jerry! and I think you may be right about; We wouldn't even know (unless a super-civilization wanted us to)...

    I wonder some times, if a: "super-civilization" as you say, could, or might be, "god-like" in a way, with influencing powers, that could seem: "miraculous or magical" depending on which way you prefer to think about it.Things happen in life,that also,can't be explained,
    like the paranormal!? Some call it, "a miracle!" an act of God. Hence, therefore one believes in God, and the church teachings, keep the ball rolling...

    Are they right,and we are wrong? After-all, there is allot of bad in the world, and the church helps to keep a handle on things,failing that, the law is waiting to pick the stragglers up..So what do we have here?..[Mind control]? Over seven billion plus,of us.

    Its a great system,to keep us on the straight & narrow path in life, with a few wobbles along the way.This could be a very significant reason, why no one in the political arena, is prepared to officially declare.."Disclosure"..on the ET/UFO presence, engaging the human race,if at all,they believe this themselves. In other words,lifting the "truth-embargo" So speaking our mind is good, in Reverence:)...................

    By Blogger Daniel Yang-Clark, at Tuesday, December 06, 2016  

  • Daniel,

    thanks, and seriously I think I need some time to recover (my foot is swollen and hurts and I see weird dreams although I don´t think it´s anything serious : )).
    Hmm, basically we would have to accept what the super-cilivization tells us, right? I don´t think they would contact us if they wouldn`t have some kind of a common ground, whatever that would be.

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Wednesday, December 07, 2016  

  • Hello all,

    Not sure about the "tameable" notion. An AI machine/probe would be surely understandable only by its makers. To us it would just be a probe beyond our knowledge -and our perspectives.

    So what would taming take? Capture and destruction for analysis that might never come?

    How do you tame a non-sentient probe? If 'they" have reached us with a technology so far beyond our capability, as with the suggested quantum entanglement for communication -and perhaps -if not most likely, a further advanced technology- all borne of a different historical path of development it may be seen as but a failed mission for those sending it and a captured brick for us.

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Thursday, December 08, 2016  

  • The probe, Bryan, is sentient in the ways suggested by the AI advocates I've noted previously here.

    What is tameable are the physical laws and, thus, the behavior of the Universe, or segments of it.

    UFOs are beyond our ken, so we can assume I think, that they are a phenomenon (or phenomena) with "intelligence" that is advanced in ways that indicate an evolution which has occurred over thousands, perhaps, billions of years., hardly a "brick."

    The manipulation of quantum attributes, entanglement, befuddles and irks my friend Parakletos, who thinks, wrongly, that my conjecture proposes faster than light "communication." I suggested "instantaneous" communication within the parameters of quantum entanglement theory (Bell's).

    Mass or matter may not be able to travel faster than light, but quantum particles may be able to, as Einstein complained with his "spooky action at a distance" barb.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, December 08, 2016  

  • If I may interject here;..I agree with Rich, that mass or matter may not be able to travel faster than the speed of light,too dangerous,& far too slow!but if a ship,"being the mass" was to be converted into something like: quantum particles, while the internal design was retained, in some quantum order, would it not then, be possible to travel at the speed of light or greater, like, instantaneously!!Communication the same! A time dilation might be an intricate part of this equation.And sometimes a craft is seen to be in two places at the same time,as has been reported!? Also reported, was craft, "shape-shifting" that's spooky! Something we don't normally see,unless it was an allusion we were looking at. Like two aircraft,coming in for landing, one behind the other, as one ..BRIGHT LIGHT.. "landing lights"..Light emerges from the other, now giving two bright lights,and depending what's on your mind, you might think what you will!?

    PS.

    Rich,..Hardly a brick?:)..it might as well be, for us. An umteen ton space brick, and we don't know what to do with it..LOLs ..You hold our attention though, and its great readings for us...............

    By Blogger Daniel Yang-Clark, at Thursday, December 08, 2016  

  • Daniel

    Alcubierre drive? Wormholes?
    Actually I´m not so sure if we know the laws of physics that good, I´d love to see what things are looking like after a hundred years or so.

    JC

    By Blogger Jerry Cornelius, at Friday, December 09, 2016  

  • RR,

    I've given some more thought to your AI notion and still believe it would be the AI of its makers and foreign (by definition) to us and our path of development likely leaving the communication gap. This would continue to include both AIs after their individual singularity(s).

    In the human experience it would be like sending a brilliant solo emissary who was still unable to communicate with a new found race -as in the Contact movie a "primer" would be required.

    On the other hand, if math and'science' languages come together at an advanced point, if you will a singularity of singularities, it could result in a universal language among the AIs.

    -Now that could exceed the point of danger that we are already being warned of.

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Friday, December 09, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home