Do Alien Civilizations Inevitably ‘Go Green’?

by Paul Scott Anderson on February 8, 2012

Beautiful view of our Milky Way Galaxy. If other alien civilizations are out there, can we find them? Credit: ESO/S. Guisard

In the famous words of Arthur C. Clarke, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” This phrase is often quoted to express the idea that an alien civilization which may be thousands or millions of years older than us would have technology so far ahead of ours that to us it would appear to be “magic.”

Now, a variation of that thought has come from Canadian science fiction writer Karl Schroeder, who posits that ”any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from nature.” The reasoning is that if a civilization manages to exist that long, it would inevitably “go green” to such an extent that it would no longer leave any detectable waste products behind. Its artificial signatures would blend in with those of the natural universe, making it much more difficult to detect them by simply searching for artificial constructs versus natural ones.

The idea has been proposed as an explanation for why we haven’t found them yet, based on the premise that such advanced societies would have visited and colonized our entire galaxy by now (known as the Fermi Paradox). The question becomes more interesting in light of the fact that astronomers now estimate that there are billions of other planets in our galaxy alone. If a civilization reaches such a “balance with nature” as a natural progression, it may mean that traditional methods of searching for them, like SETI, will ultimately fail. Of course, it is possible, perhaps even likely, that civilizations much older than us would have advanced far beyond radio technology anyway. SETI itself is based on the assumption that some of them may still be using that technology. Another branch of SETI is searching for light pulses such as intentional beacons as opposed to radio signals.

But even other alternate searches, such as SETT (Search for Extraterrestrial Technology), may not pan out either, if this new scenario is correct. SETT looks for things like the spectral signature of nuclear fission waste being dumped into a star, or leaking tritium from alien fusion powerplants.

Another solution to the Fermi Paradox states that advanced civilizations will ultimately destroy themselves. Before they do though, they could have already sent out robotic probes to many places in the galaxy. If those probes were technologically savvy enough to self-replicate, they could have spread themselves widely across the cosmos. If there were any in our solar system, we could conceivably find them. Yet this idea could also come back around to the new hypothesis – if these probes were advanced enough to be truly “green” and not leave any environmental traces, they might be a lot harder to find, blending in with natural objects in the solar system.

It’s an intriguing new take on an old question. It can also be taken as a lesson – if we can learn to survive our own technological advances long enough, we can ultimately become more of a green civilization ourselves, co-existing comfortably with the natural universe around us.

Paul Scott Anderson is a freelance space writer with a life-long passion for space exploration and astronomy and has been a long-time member of The Planetary Society. He currently writes for Universe Today and Examiner.com. His own blog The Meridiani Journal is a chronicle of planetary exploration.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Beck/100000136728103 Daniel Beck

    What is interesting here is that one of the ideas often talked about in Panspermia, is the idea that advanced civilizations realize they cannot travel the stars, so instead they create bio-machines with DNA coded to carry out evolutionary changes in a guided way over time. That they colonize the universe with “star seeds” so to speak. Which is an interesting SCI FI book with a similar (though more technology based) idea.

    So this idea of Green Technology fits in nicely with that one theory. We could already be visited, or even be the products of these probes.

    What if for example humans are just some Alien Colonization tool? A way to make sure that the uniqueness of life in the universe doesn’t die out without a fighting chance?

    Anyway just food for thought.

    • https://plus.google.com/104242241965716988815 boo Jay

      Are you referring to a book in particular? I could use a good read as I’ve always thought it would make an epic story arc to find out that we were the seeds of a previous generation. Similar to the movie Mission To Mars, but on a much grander scale.

  • Jonathan Neufeld

    There’s no reason to suggest all other aliens are more advanced than us. Metal-rich population II stars are relatively brand new in the history of the universe and thus sophisticated life hasn’t had much time to develop. It’s more likely that we are the first intelligent species to emerge from the universe. The obvious challenge to that idea is to prove that metalicity is not actually correlated with sophistication of life or that the “Big Bang” model is false. However, a look at WebElements plotting all the elements in the periodic table that our bodies depend upon illustrates how improbable that is.

    • Anonymous

      ” It’s more likely that we are the first intelligent species to emerge from the universe.”
      The universe is anywhere from 14-46 billion light years in size… and at least 14 billion years old. Our home star Sol is 2nd or third generation in our local cluster, about 3-4 billion years old…
      You’re believing that we human hominids are the first intelligent beings in the universe…
      Whenever you’re ready…

  • Anonymous

    So little green men really means they are environmentally green?

    Sigh… yet another anthropocentric idea being applied to extra terrestrial life being taking seriously?? Come on please!

    Any advanced alien ‘civilizations’ are not going to be anything like ours at all. Why would you even think this to be the case? Too much Star Trek?

    They more than likely will think in ways we could not currently comprehend given they evolved in a completely alien environment, have a completely different biology, and a completely different history. They simply would not have similar values that we share.

    Believing that aliens are ‘environmentally friendly’ is inline with believing that they have two eyes, two arms, two legs, and answers to the name of ‘Spock’ or ‘Dejah Thoris’.

    It doesn’t bother me that a SciFi writer came up with this. SciFi is fun to to think and fantasize about. But please… no one could take this idea seriously (I hope).

    • Anonymous

      It’s not entirely unlikely that some alien life will have things in common with us. It’s all speculation at this point as you point out.

  • Anonymous

    Any form of intelligent life on a planet that develops technology will face the same problems we face now, to one degree or the other. Any technology requires the use of energy and the conversion of raw materials into other forms. This will lead to problems of resource exhaustion and the contamination of the planetary environment with byproducts and waste. The alternatives are either to do more of the same or to reconfigure your activities. This is particularly the case if other ETI engage in the sort of exponential trends our species is so very good at doing. If any ETI persist in doing much of the same they risk reaching some maximum entropy situation on their planet which could result in a mass die-off.

    I would certainly think that any ETI which survives for a relatively long time period after first developing technology they will do so by reigning in their appetites and configuring their technical infrastructure in ways more commensurate with their planetary environment. If in 500 years our species is doing well and not in a state of some post apocalyptic misery we will have done something similar. In some cases OF ETI they might after such a collapse manage to climb out of the disaster and build a future which is more commensurate with their planet.

    LC

    • Anonymous

      One of the most important resorces for intelligent civilizations is energy. We are currently polluting our atmosphere with the waste of burning fossil fuels. More advanced technologies will use renewable energy sources or nuclear fusion.

      But could some advanced civilization learned to make energy out of nothing by producing negative energy (like that between two thin plates, i.e. the casimir effect) ?

      With negative energy, you can make energy from nothing without violating the conservation of energy: create equal quantities of negative and positive energy.The net result is zero new energy.

      This is not new: the entire Universe is thought to have produced all the matter around us just after the Big Bang (during inflation). Currently, as the universe expands, more and more vacuum energy is created from nothing as space expands while the energy density remains almost constant.

      Has someone imagined to make a tiny perpetual motion machine (of the first kind)
      using the casimir effect as energy source as explained above?

      Could some ETI learned to use negative energy (like that of the casimir effect) to make arbitrarily high quantities of energy to power themselves without taking that energy from their environment (i.e. from their planets and stars), resulting in zero waste products?

      • Anonymous

        The Casimir effect is not a source of energy unless the universe has two regions with different energy level. One might think of the vacuum as a static body of water. The body of water has energy, but it can only be accessed if one can cause it to flow through a turbine and down to a lower level. The vacuum of the universe appears to be absolutely constant to the further regions we can observe. The GALEX results bear this out. The process of lowering the vacuum energy by separating two plates might be compared to lower the water level of a small region by pushing a floating body into the water. The buoyant force which opposes one’s force on the body is analogous to the Casimir force on the plates. If you let go of the floating body that buoyant force pushes it upwards and performs work. However, that work is equal to the energy you put into the system by pushing the body into the water. The same goes for the Casimir plates.

        If you could somehow grab vacuum energy and convert it to electrical current, by say dumping the vacuum to zero energy “elsewhere,” a one micron volume sphere would give enough energy to push an electron to 1 electron volt. You would need to do this to 10^{19} such volumes to get one volt, a region about 2 meters in radius. If you converted that much vacuum energy to power every second you would get one watt of power. Humanity generates about 10 trillion watts of power, which would require converting the vacuum energy in a volume which would enclose the orbit of Mars every second. So even if we could figure how to dump the vacuum into a complete zero energy state in some volume in a lab, it is clear this will never be a practical power source.

        LC

      • liberty_rocks

        If you burned all of the coal and all of the petroleum, then disassociated all the carbon dioxide from all the limestone in the entire planet’s crust, you still wouldn’t have gathered together all the CO2 that was in the atmosphere 1Gya.

        Good day.

        • Anonymous

          The Earth prior to 1.5 billion years ago had primarily a CO_2 atmosphere. Much of that carbon was sequestered by foraminifera and plankton in their shells and has gone into dolomite and limestone. If that carbon were released you can be sure a pretty good percentage of the primordial CO_2 in the atmosphere would be returned. The continent of Europe and much of North Africa is essentially limestone, the Egyptian pyramids are made of limestone. Imagine releasing all that CO_2!

          LC

      • Anonymous

        There is no such thing as free energy.
        Once your plates get stuck together by the Casimir effect you need to add new energy to separate them again.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/DQB7J4I53ZZXJZNNNXXODN6574 Yak yak yak

    What an intriguing speculation! I do wish, however, that you would refer only to civilizations which are “older than we (are),” and completely ignore those which are “older than us.”

  • Anonymous

    With advanced molecular nanotechnology, there’s the potential to do many things (including material recycling) with efficiencies approaching their theoretical limits. That tends to make you ‘green,’ even if that wasn’t your goal…or if you’re a being that never heard of chlorophyll.

  • http://www.dvefx.com Damian

    This is an intriguing thought experiment. Lets take it to another level. (for fun)

    If; ”any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from nature,” Then one can posit that; nature is a technology.

    Rather then saying that ‘probes could be hidden by nature’ its also possible that biological life is a probe, it is certainly self replicating. It takes millions of years but biological life unequivocally terraforms its biosphere, in the long term aim of producing a BioSphere capable of supporting ‘complexity’advanced enough to become sentient and leave its home planet.

    Perhaps; quite simply, this how planets procreate.
    Lets posit this another way; You are not You, if you go to another planet you are taking a Microbiome of life with you.

    “Total microbial cells found in association with humans may exceed the total number of cells making up the human body by a factor of ten-to-one.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_microbiome

    Lets take the idea even further, and posit that Stars, Planets and Solar Systems all the way to Galaxies are the most sophisticated types of technology possible in our universe.

    One possible sign of this could be that the Baryonic matter is organized everywhere to a remarkably similar design. If you can momentarily suspend the desire to know what it is and how it came to be, you could ask; What is it purpose?

    From my perspective Galaxies appear to be turning base interstellar hydrogen into complex matter, thats the best place to start the questions.

    Stars in turn produce planets that give rise to ever more complexity. Why? is it a waste product or engineered by design? Is life itself an accident of another sentient intelligence in the universe.? What function does small level complexity give to a galaxy anyway? Perhaps a form of data storage? A sub routine in the Galaxies thought process?

    How could we prove any of such concepts anyway?

    Perhaps the weak magnetic lines that permeate a galaxy transmit information like synapses in a brain. (think IBEX observations) but its highly improbable we would ever be able to detect such signals from the inside of our Galaxy. Perhaps the best hope we have is to see information exchange between distant galaxies. ? If they are constructed rather then a result of random chance then they should exchange information.

    My point is that If you accept nature as a developed technology and by extension that must include complex Baryonic matter from which its made, why continue to conceptualize an alien intelligence in anthropocentric terms and limit them to the extremely small time frame and scale we can conceptualize.

    Colony plants like the Quaking Aspen still living on earth are conjectured to be 80,000 years old years old or older.

    Perhaps it should be said that; If; ”any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from nature,” then its highly unlikely to find 4.5 billion years to be a long time. :)

Previous post:

Next post: