cryptologist/ language expert question

[Tuor]

Using visible light as in fiber optic is no better, have you tried going outside in a thunderstorm and looking?
Additionally you have to outshine the star.

Unless, you built some sort of Gama Ray generator, which is exactly the kind of light able to outshine a star. Gama ray is the brigetest form of light in the entire universe.

Quantum entanglement cannot be used to communicate information, so it is not an information channel.
There are many who peddle half-truths about quantum things - but the simple fact is that it is physically impossible to send any information that way (with information defined in the usual way).

Knowledge is always advancing, before Einstein was ashamed by its E=mc2 everyone thought Newton had already unmasked the truth, and before Newton...

What is truth today, it might not be tomorrow.

The point of my post was not about what we know, but about what we yet to know.

And we back to the problem, we can't contact them, because we just don't understand their vehicle of comunication.

[Shadowferal]

I'm reminded of Helen Keller's story. And when she realized that patterns Ann Sullivan was tracing out with her fingers in Keller's hands were words and that she was trying to "talk" to her it was if the world finally opened up for her.

[Forogil]

You're making assumptions.
And really bad ones.

Most if not all life on Earth is carbon-based.

First and foremost radio signals work the same regardless of being carbon-based or not, but carbon is the most common atom (by far) that allows interesting chemistry. So, I am using good assumptions - not bad ones.

And then there's the assumption that such a species would even use the EM spectrum at all.

In a universe with lots of EM spectrum radiation? Yes, it is a reasonable assumption that organisms on other planets would be aware of the EM spectrum. They might also be able to communicate with neutrinos, gravity waves - or something unknown.
But the assumption is then that they try to communicate in multiple ways (same as SETI tries to listen on multiple frequencies) - and based on current understanding neutrinos or gravity waves are less efficient when sending information.

[Shadowferal]

First and foremost radio signals work the same regardless of being carbon-based or not, but carbon is the most common atom (by far) that allows interesting chemistry.

That you know of...and I'm willing to bet that ain't much, considering what we know of this little universe of ours is a mere few percent. And that's an optimistic projection.

In a universe with lots of EM spectrum radiation?

And what else?
A question that you can't answer.
Your basis for anything is in this shitty box thinking. This is why we have paradigm shifts...to break free of this box.

But you can be damn sure that there's far more than the EM spectrum floating around.

[Forogil]

Unless, you built some sort of Gama Ray generator, which is exactly the kind of light able to outshine a star. Gama ray is the brigetest form of light in the entire universe.

Gamma rays are also part of the EM-spectrum, and it in no way makes it better to use Gamma Rays for communication.

If a civilization can control a Gamma Ray Burst (which is far beyond our current technology) they might also be able to create lasers/masers or radio wave generators that outshine stars - and all the other variants would be easier to see - since we wouldn't confuse it with a GRB.

Knowledge is always advancing, before Einstein was ashamed by its E=mc2 everyone thought Newton had already unmasked the truth, and before Newton...

Newtonian mechanics is still roughly correct, and a new theory will have general relativity as the limit under some assumptions.

And we back to the problem, we can't contact them, because we just don't understand their vehicle of comunication.

Not based by any evidence. The simple explanation is that they are not close enough, and thus we haven't found them yet - if they exist.

- - - Updated - - -

That you know of...and I'm willing to bet that ain't much, considering what we know of this little universe of ours is a mere few percent. And that's an optimistic projection.

Nope, there are no unknown atoms that allow complicated chemistry and is more abundant that carbon. There might be silicon-based life-forms or something else odd - but silicon is far rarer than carbon.

You might think of dark matter - that is likely to exist, but we know that almost none of that is bunched together as dark stars/dark planets. (And dark energy is assumed to be constant throughout.)

And what else?
A question that you can't answer.

Gravity, neutrinos, and possibly something else. But gravity and neutrinos are not better ways of communicating.

[Tuor]

I'm reminded of Helen Keller's story. And when she realized that patterns Ann Sullivan was tracing out with her fingers in Keller's hands were words and that she was trying to "talk" to her it was if the world finally opened up for her.

Bingo, that is actually a great example, i remember that movie, which i believe was set on a real story about a young lady that couldn't see or ear... Great story which actually maded me cry.

[Forogil]

Very basic communication, we haven't exactly discussed Socrates with Harambe's son yet, nor explained the Physics of Liquids to a Dolphin.

Because the lack of interest on the other side. They haven't even explained their own language (assuming they have one) in terms of this communication - or tried to extend it further.

Compare this to Helen Keller:

I'm reminded of Helen Keller's story. And when she realized that patterns Ann Sullivan was tracing out with her fingers in Keller's hands were words and that she was trying to "talk" to her it was if the world finally opened up for her.

Tracing patterns in a hand isn't natural communication for humans - but we can use it.

[Kuntantee]

My question is that if we did receive a message from an alien civilization how exactly would we know that we've decoded and translated it properly?

The point of cryptology is hiding information. If aliens wanted to communicate with us, I doubt they would send a cryptic message, as depending on the cryptology algorithm, it would be either very hard or impossible to decode. So the cryptology is not the discipline you are looking here.

The received message would be a signal of some sort. That means a sequence of information bits (digits) created in a particular form which gives the context to the sequence. There isn't a formal method to give context to a particular information sequence as far as I know. However, if there are repeating patterns in the sequence, as it would in a sentence belonging to a particular language, these repeating patterns can be extracted with pattern recognition/data mining methods. After extracting these patterns, perhaps giving it a context would be easier. That's the point where communication principles can be made use of, not earlier.

To answer your question, unless the sequence is a unique one (e.g., prime numbers, first 10 million digits of PI etc.), there isn't a way to make sure the message is understood correctly. Please note that giving it a context is also a very hard task.

[Theodarzna]

Because the lack of interest on the other side. They haven't even explained their own language (assuming they have one) in terms of this communication - or tried to extend it further.

Compare this to Helen Keller:

Tracing patterns in a hand isn't natural communication for humans - but we can use it.

But it is communication between humans or other Earth species. We are unclear if we are actually communicating any more than we are when we tell a dog to sit or stay.

- - - Updated - - -

And I think that's what's most critical. Even after some relatively concerted attempts to develop communication, there is still a LOT of question as to whether we ARE communicating across that species barrier, or if we've simply built our own version of a Chinese Box. Yes, we can get dolphins to do what we ask under test conditions, but we can train a dog to react to a command, too; that's not "communication". Particularly not when communication necessarily requires two-way messaging.

Hell, even if you want to make the case that dolphins and chimps can communicate with us in human terms, I'm gonna swing back to pointing out that they have learned to communicate on our terms, but we apparently still can't figure out how to communicate on theirs. We can get chimps to use a form of sign language, but we can't "speak chimpanzee". And we're supposed to be the smart, adaptable ones? This is a big reason why I'm doubtful how clear that communication actually is.

At best i think we would be able to figure out we had been spoken to but that actual message may forever be unknown to us if such a contact event happened.

[Noradin]

Try designing a signal translatable to a dolphin and you will begin to understand the utter difficulty of the situation.

Did I claim it was easy?

- - - Updated - - -

Outside of pure mathematics, the possibility that we could approach an understanding on even basic concepts is almost nil.

I wouldn't expect it to work in mathematics at all, honestly. Maybe it might work for physics and chemistry, but mathematics is just a language when it comes down to it. There is a whole field of science that explores the different types of mathematics that are possible and how much of how mathematics work is really just a reflection of our capabilities as humans.

Yes, our mathematics and their mathematics (we are assumg they send signals so we can assume they have some tool to make theoretical predictions) should get comparable results for comparable tasks (if those exists in the first place), but in the end mathematics are meaningless if not used to describe something.

Therefore learning to communicate with them would require a readily apparent topic that can be described by both sides. Without feedback and without any previous knowledge about the other side identifying such a topic is probably only possible by chance. Predicting is far beyond us at this time, but maybe the other side is much more advanced (still highly unlikely).

- - - Updated - - -

I still think that whole thing assumes too much about how another intelligent species would evolve. Would it even have the same sensory capabilities as us? (sight, etc) I think the general argument that's made is light is such a prominent force in the universe, so some sort of sight is likely to evolve.

Do you really think that gold plate is supposed to be deciphered by aliens?
No, it is all about the publicity and emotional reaction of us humans.

- - - Updated - - -

At best i think we would be able to figure out we had been spoken to but that actual message may forever be unknown to us if such a contact event happened.

That would be the most likely outcome and event that one would require a lot more understanding of the universe than we have currently.

[Tuor]

Quantum entanglement cannot be used to communicate information, so it is not an information channel.
There are many who peddle half-truths about quantum things - but the simple fact is that it is physically impossible to send any information that way (with information defined in the usual way).

Ok, challenge accepted, i just waked up this morning and had this weird idea...

So, i was speaking of the 2 interconected particles, the ones you denied to be able to become a comunication form, and this morning this just poped out on my mind. What if we maneged to grab a pair of these interconected particles, we puted them inside some sort of a magnetic chamber (similar to the particle accelarator tubes) and we forced that particle to spin in a mathematical order, for example, at 2 diferent speeds, replicating the binary code. We know that both particles are conected, we know that this happens instantly, we know that one particle normally replicates the actions of the other, and vice-versa. So if we grabbed one of these particles and puted it inside a rocket, lets say, to Mars, theoreticly speaking, we would be able to cut down the 30m delay in comunications betwin Earth and Mars. And all the technology required is already here.

Please correct me if i'm saying something wrong.

[Shalcker]

Ok, challenge accepted, i just waked up this morning and had this weird idea...

So, i was speaking of the 2 interconected particles, the ones you denied to be able to become a comunication form, and this morning this just poped out on my mind. What if we maneged to grab a pair of these interconected particles, we puted them inside some sort of a magnetic chamber (similar to the particle accelarator tubes) and we forced that particle to spin in a mathematical order, for example, at 2 diferent speeds, replicating the binary code. We know that both particles are conected, we know that this happens instantly, we know that one particle normally replicates the actions of the other, and vice-versa. So if we grabbed one of these particles and puted it inside a rocket, lets say, to Mars, theoreticly speaking, we would be able to cut down the 30m delay in comunications betwin Earth and Mars. And all the technology required is already here.

Please correct me if i'm saying something wrong.

You have one wrong assumption here. It doesn't "happens instantly". Interaction still happens at the speed of light. They are just interconnected - you do something with one, another will get same thing, but not "instantly".

[Tuor]

You have one wrong assumption here. It doesn't "happens instantly". Interaction still happens at the speed of light. They are just interconnected - you do something with one, another will get same thing, but not "instantly".

That is the point of the hole thing. Conected particles just don't respected the speed of light, they just react instantly. I already gave the example of Andomeda galaxy and the Milky Way in a previous post, read it.

[Shalcker]

That is the point of the hole thing. Conected particles just don't respected the speed of light, they just react instantly. I already gave the example of Andomeda galaxy and the Milky Way in a previous post, read it.

Hmm, i went to re-check and it's slightly different.

Basically with two entangled particles you get two "sealed envelopes" that have identical content. You can open both at the same time (measure their state) and get identical results. Curiosity here is that normally you would not expect such behaviour from quantum particles.

But you cannot use this to transfer information. Which still has to travel at speed of light or less.

[Forogil]

Hmm, i went to re-check and it's slightly different.

Basically with two entangled particles you get two "sealed envelopes" that have identical content. You can open both at the same time (measure their state) and get identical results. Curiosity here is that normally you would not expect such behaviour from quantum particles.

Good explanation, a simple to implement non-quantum variant would be to make e.g. two drawings - one of a penny, one empty and put each in one of two identical "sealed envelopes" - and shuffle them perfectly and then send them to different places.

Complementary states - not identical, and as soon as you open one you will know the contents of the other one, faster than the speed of light, exactly as the quantum variant:

But you cannot use this to transfer information. Which still has to travel at speed of light or less.

The quantum part just mean that you can 100% guarantee that no-one peeked inside, and that there are multiple possible measurements.

- - - Updated - - -

Before assuming that an alien civilization will try to communicate using some exotic technology - the obvious question is how far away could we detect current earth-technology with current efforts, and the answer seems to be less than a light-year - unless we actually deliberately send a signal in the right direction.

[Shadowferal]

I think any assumption of technology is not only an oversimplification based upon the limitations of human perception...but a bad joke.