What are things aliens would find truly alien about humans?

Homicidal tendencies. It's quite rare to see members of one species kill each other as passionately as people do.

Consider how old the universe is. Consider how much time it took Earth life before it produced us. Any alien is going to be separated from us by millions of years. You could colonize the entire galaxy even without ever discoverimg FTL and turn every star into a Dyson Sphere with these timelines. FTL only means they would do it faster.

This is "only humans fight war" tier wrong

>It's quite rare to see members of one species kill each other as passionately as people do.
Bull shit. Nature is violet.

There’s probably some nearby, but rather than explore the galaxy they took a look up at the stars and said “Nah, fuck that.” Then they mined up their star system, built a Dyson sphere around their star, and set up their solar-powered NEET-lairs so they can jack off in VR for the rest of time.

All of them, down to the last, made that choice? Unlikely.

>Hair is a biological structure that evolved nowhere else

>”Humans produce their own heat, what the fuck?”

>They digest things by dissolving food...in ACID they store in an organ called a “stomach”

HFY Alert!
Pretty sure that the first one is wrong too

Why would any intelligent alien species want to construct a useless meme like a Dyson sphere? Let alone turn the whole galaxy into them? Building one takes so much energy that if you can already harness that much, you don't need the fucking sphere anymore.

That's hard to define without knowing anything of the corresponding point of view.

They might have no hearing senses, their DNA equivalent might be radically different, their species might think remarkable that we aren't the most violent species in the planet*, that we sleep.

*17% of lemurs die due to another lemur, in humans this is 1,33% nowadays.
news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/09/human-violence-evolution-animals-nature-science/

On the one hand this does reek of HFY, on the other there is evidence to suggest that silicon based life is more likely to arise then carbon based life.

I don't think you know what a Dyson sphere is

Wait, seriously? I've only heard the opposite, and that ammonia based life is the other decent candidate. Source?

>Source?
Sorry satan, was something that came up in passing years ago in a biology class I took as a minor, could be wrong, was just a hypothesis at the time that was brought up in conversation by my teacher that didn't relate to the work.

What if they created other sources of energy that we could not yet comprehend or move in a 4th or 5th spacial dimension?

Just curious

Well, our current model of the universe doesn't include 4th/5th spatial dimensions that work that way, sooo...

Damn near everything.

That would answer things, though it requires assuming physics we have no reason to assume exist. It also still means nothing within our galaxy is that advanced because we'd know by virtue of them physically being here, and they'd have no reason to hide.

Yes, I do. They are fucking useless. In order to build one, you need access to an energy source that makes stars themselves look like quaint little Christmas lights.

Your argument boils down to "if aliens were real, they would have built this retarded scifi concept because of course they would". It's like saying we know there's no intellignet life in the universe because there isn't evidence of a statue the length of a million miles in the shape of an alien dick anywhere.

most probably boobs

There's an alternative solution: This is a digital zoo. The aliens arrived to our planet millions of years ago. Seeing digital life as more efficient and less wasteful that biological life, they uploaded every brain they could find into digital format and unceremoniously proceeded to dismantle the whole solar system to build a matrioshka brain and make room for trillions of earth-like simulations. From the outside universe perspective, not even a second has passed since they turned on the simulation.

Attached: matryoshkabrain.jpg (480x360, 13K)

Too much speculation involved to give a helpful answer.

Yeah you have at best a skewed image of what they are, we already, today, have the technology to build one, just not the infrastructure. I don't know where you got the idea that you need some vast amounts of energy to make them, because you're so laughably off the mark you aren't on the map anymore.

Yeah, those don't even really make sense to human biologists.

>they'd have no reason to hide.

Prime directive.

>there isn't evidence of a statue the length of a million miles in the shape of an alien dick anywhere.
Come to think of it, ...

>Bust every single rare earth element in a galaxy and then some on a single giant solar panel
>Logical

Prime directive is actually pretty morally abhorrent when you actually put it under any level of scrutiny, no advanced civilisation would adopt it.

That's not what a dyson sphere is

You are thinking of the popular notion of a Dyson Sphere, which is just a shell. Nothing stops you from building trillions of space habitats in a swarm that would serve the same purpose. It is not even high tech, it's just a matter of scale.

Attached: matrioshkaconceptfull.jpg (898x1270, 213K)

No, faggot, you're full of shit. We do NOT have the ability to build that shit. You have no concept of how retarded the scale is when you talk about covering a fucking STAR in solar panels.

Even if Earth was somehow united in perfect harmony we wouldn't be able to build one.

.... Explain?

Since a lot of people here have no idea what a Dyson Sphere is, youtube.com/watch?v=HlmKejRSVd8

Conflicting instincts between our species and theirs. A race might have a defensive posture that they assume when threatened (like armadillos) whereas humans have adrenaline which forces a flight or fight response. They slow down and hunker up while we get faster and more aggressive.

You're right, we don't have the infrastructure to build one. Not sure what we're in disagreement over since I said exactly that. I just pointed out we have the technology to do so.

>It's based on the assumption any race that was advanced enough to build Dyson Spheres/Swarms would do so since it's the logical thing to do

Which is a completely retarded assumption.

Not to mention that there is like a million year gap at the very least between our technology level and ability to build a Dyson sphere. Plenty of shit fits in that gap.

>And we men, the creatures who inhabit this earth, must be to them at least as alien and lowly as are the monkeys and lemurs to us.
Well, there's a lot we can speculate about, but most likely literally everything.

Attached: jwposterfull.jpg (900x660, 106K)

We can actually make a partial dyson swarm by disassembling just mercury. This is enough to being the industrial production of proton-sized artificial black holes and antimatter for energy storage.

For a complete one, we would need to disassemble venus, mars and a good number of asteroids and moons....except, if we mine the Sun itself. Most of the mass of the solar system is trapped in the sun. We can harvest raw materials from the Sun itself and never touch a planet.

>Which is a completely retarded assumption

Not really, unless they're so alien as to not have a form of intellect that'll drive them to reach space travel to begin with, there's no rational line of thought that doesn't lead them to building them.

> a million year gap at the very least between our technology level and ability to build a Dyson sphere

We already have the technology to built one now, in fact we have for about 40 years now, the problem is we don't have the infrastructure, but unless some cataclysm occurs we'll have turned our system into one before the year 3000, possibly even centuries before that.

Things that are probably odd about earth vertebrates:
The jaw. No other form of life on earth has that kind of mouth and it evolved from a really specific gill structure, so it seems unlikely to show up often.
Respiratory intake. Sucking air through your feeding hole is a risky strategy, unlikely to be selected for.

Things about Earth which are odd:
Huge moon. Could possibly have made us understand things like gravity, orbits and so on earlier in the development of technology than most species. We might also be odd in having adaptations for moderate light, while most aliens will have evolved for direct sunlight or just starlight with not much in-between. Being able to go without sleep to any significant degree could be kind of unusual.
Gravity seems to be about the upper limit for conventional rockets to work. Might make us early adopters for space stuff if most others have to wait until they get atomic rockets working or a 'high g' race if they evolved where it isn't too hard to make orbit.

Things that are odd about humans as a species even among earth vertebrates:
Upright posture.
Serious endurance.
Accurate long-range vision with three different colour receptors while not being capable of flight. Also, fuck-all night vision (kind of goes hand-in-hand with the long-range, since reflectors inside the eye boost the signal but also the noise).

You only have a mental block result of your image derived from scifi. A Dyson Swarm is not high tech. It just a lot of space stations and satellites build over time.

....How is this any different then what said? Are you just going to pretend arguments against it don't exist? I know you're probably an under ager just learning about it and thinking you stumbled on something world changing but it's not sensible to build a complete Dyson sphere.

Just link the wikipedia article instead of some retarded video. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

It says right at the start: a dyson sphere is a thought experiment of a megastructure that encompasses a star and captures its energy output (almost) fully. That's the basic version. Since everybody knows a solid sphere that covers a star is retarded even as a fantasy, they have proposed a "dyson swarm" of orbiting panel modules (that don't completely envelop the star, and thus wouldn't completely conceal it either) as an alternative.

But if you want the retarded "stars wouldn't be visible at all" argument to work, you can't use a swarm. You need the actual sphere. An actual solid object that covers the entire fucking star. And that is NOT something you can just assume civilizations would start to build as the next logical step after our stage.

>Most of the mass of the solar system is trapped in the sun. We can harvest raw materials from the Sun itself and never touch a planet.
So how are you going to convert hydrogen mass of the sun to literally everything else again?

>Since everybody knows a solid sphere that covers a star is retarded even as a fantasy, they have proposed a "dyson swarm" of orbiting panel modules (that don't completely envelop the star, and thus wouldn't completely conceal it either) as an alternative.

no, that was what a dyson sphere always was, normies just misinterpreted it as being a solid sphere and that became so prevalent that the term dyson swarm was created to be what everyone who knows what they're talking about was calling a dyson sphere to begin with.

>But if you want the retarded "stars wouldn't be visible at all" argument to work, you can't use a swarm

you've evidently never seen a swarm of anything in your life

>there's no rational line of thought that doesn't lead them to building them.
Except they'd have to tear down several galaxies just to build one, fusion reactors are basically mini sun's anyways,and far less logistics and resources are needed for fission/fusion reactors,not to mention they're more scalable.

Stellar lifting

>We already have the technology to built one now,

No we don't you imbecile. We can build a solar panel. That is not the same thing as ability to build what is effectively infinite amount of them, AND place them in synchronous orbit an absurd distance away from us in space AND maintain them all the way out there somehow. You don't understand how stupid you're being. It's like you invented the waterwheel and went "we basically have tidal power now, everything else is just infrastructure".

>That's the basic version. Since everybody knows a solid sphere that covers a star is retarded even as a fantasy, they have proposed a "dyson swarm" of orbiting panel modules (that don't completely envelop the star, and thus wouldn't completely conceal it either) as an alternative.
THANK YOU

Oh yeah, then what's below Orion's belt?

Get a load of this guy

Depends on the species really. I'm sure they would be interested in our cultural traditions at the very least, holidays etc

>Except they'd have to tear down several galaxies just to build one

What? I mean seriously, what? You wouldn't even be done using all the material of the rock planets in our system before you'd be done making one.

>I don't know what the difference between technology and infrastructure is, therefore YOU are the idiot

If you can build something without a single new piece of technology being invented, only more of what already exists being built, it's not technology you're lacking. People like you are probably amazed and baffled by a Model T.

So star trek transfiguration that you left out conveniently? Nice larp pack it up boys.

>no, that was what a dyson sphere always was

No. A dyson sphere is LITERALLY a solid sphere. You are the one who is wrong you fucking fuck.

>That is not the same thing as ability to build what is effectively infinite amount of them, AND place them in synchronous orbit an absurd distance away from us in space AND maintain them all the way out there somehow.
No joke man

>I don't know what fusion is

alright then

>Dyson was wrong about his own creation

sure thing buddy

There is no existing technology that permits mining the sun for materials, or disassembling whole planets for materials, or building the panel modules in deep space, or placing the panel modules in orbit around the sun. You are a FUCKING RETARD.

>You wouldn't even be done using all the material of the rock planets in our system before you'd be done making one.
I don't think you realize how big the average star is compared to asteroids,plus Venus,plus Mercury.

You can by using particle accelerators around the Sun. But you don't need to. The Sun is a population I star, metal-rich (elements heavier than hydrogen) compared to first generations stars. 99.8% of the mass in the solar system is in the Sun. We can take advantage of the convective nature of the outer layers to harvest heavier materials.

Attached: maxresdefault (51).jpg (1192x900, 75K)

You didn't even argue against fusion?? Are you just baiting here?

>Stuff we have the technology for isn't possible because I say so

Guess what, you're wrong.

I don't think you understand what a dyson sphere is or how much mass it actually has compared to its perceived volume

Dysonfag btfo

Why are people who think Star Wars is realistic science fiction posting in here?

Attached: 1515289511185.jpg (960x720, 332K)

That humans seem to celebrate things they don't actually want people to do, such as when humans sit around a screen and watch people pretend to commit violent crimes.

That suicide by quick means (like a weapon) is banned but slow suicide by ingesting poison into their body over time (like smoking) is not.

That humans murder their babies in the womb and society calls it freedom.

Attached: 1520992073509.jpg (1024x752, 119K)

>metal-rich (elements heavier than hydrogen) compared to first generations stars. 99.8% of the mass in the solar system is in the Sun.
Those metals are only a few elements of all the ones we need, assuming we could build and send equipment out to the sun regularly, and that still wouldn't account for us needing to build other molecules from elements the sun doesn't have or how viable solar farming even is proportional to our needs. It's physically possible,but engineering wise it probably isn't. At least in the centuries to come.

>the only logical progression of a civilisation is to move towards being a K2 then K3 civilisation
This is faulty logic. It's the logical progression for beings that think exactly as we do on that timescale, but not for any civilization. Even the idea that space travel is the logical next step for an intelligent species instead of something humans think is neat is a science fiction assumption. Nothing necessitates that you "boldly go", especially on an interstellar scale. What stops aliens from getting to a level of technology that allows them to keep their home planet safe from external harm and just choosing to live the rest of their existence inside the Matrix?

>Plays AI on Stellaris
Disgusting.

Wouldnt most ayys that were very advanced find it easier to just go full Matrix? It's arguably easier and cheaper:
>build the pods
>drones tend the pods
>people born into a literal paradise, with some AI running the show(s)
>poor people living like the ultra rich, cuz electrons are cheap
>as people age and die they are removed, and population slowly allowed to decline to sustainable resource consumption levels for pod/drone manufacturing

There'd be little point to a space faring civ if you can just program up an infinite world, customizable to individual taste.

>The Sun is a population I star, metal-rich (elements heavier than hydrogen) compared to first generations stars.

In fact, no first-generation star (Population III) has ever been found. We think they are all extinct. They were probably supermassive and lasted just a few millions years before becoming supernovas.

Attached: Morgan-Keenan_spectral_classification-e1463083687574-768x340.png (768x340, 71K)

>Obviously if a civilisation could do _____ they would
No other topic of debate makes assumptions as large or flimsy as the debates about extra terrestrial societies. Its like the simulatipn theory, which is literally 'If we assume the world is a simulation, its a simulation!'

Fucking waste of time debating these things with such closed minds as to make any assumptions

>What stops aliens from getting to a level of technology that allows them to keep their home planet safe from external harm and just choosing to live the rest of their existence inside the Matrix?

The fact that their sun will eventually burn out, which will be a problem if they don't send out AI ships to collect galaxies worth of resources to artificially extend their civilisation's lifespan after that point.

Even if they want to live as NEETs, there is no situation where collecting as much mass and energy as possible makes sense.

Noses. Noses are weird. Most other animals on our planet have the nose built into the jawline. Humans have this weird protuberance. It's us, tapirs, a few types of shrew, and elephants. We're weird creatures, aliens would cop onto that.

Oh no user, he's correctly pointing out that saying this progression is obvipusly the next step is making an argument based on nothing, literally just saying 'This would happen, thus it would' as though that gives any concrete evidence for this happening.

It's not closed minded assumption given no one has yet conceived of a type of society that would not do it, only ones that would leave it to AI to do it for them instead of doing it themselves.

The only logical assumptions that actually make any sense are 1) there's physics beyond our understanding of the universe that make building them make no sense, or 2) there are no civilisations within our line of sight. There is no third option.

Unless we assume they're all idiots comparable to those who think a dyson sphere takes more mass then a galaxy to build

Outstanding Post.

Attached: 1509646251394.gif (200x254, 1.37M)

>eventually burn out

So if our sun is a decent example, the robots may have PLENTY of time to take a genetic sample elsewhere and start over with a new Matrix. 1 million years is longer than human civilization, let alone hundreds of millions or billions depending.

In astronomy anything that it is not hydrogen or helium is considered a metal because how stupidly common these two are. Incidentally, oxygen is the third most common atom in the universe. Mos of the atoms on Earth are Oxygen or Iron in various molecules.

See, this user knows whats up. That the only things we can assume are that if it exists, its not currently observable by us

The timescale we're talking about doesn't allow for "starting somewhere else", there isn't a "somewhere else" to go. We aren't talking about billions of years here, we're talking about quadrillions of years.

Good post here too

Yes. And?

>Unless we assume they're all idiots comparable to those who think a dyson sphere takes more mass then a galaxy to build
Prove it's possible. The on us is on you. Stars are fucking massive and apparently you think we can and should just fly up there and solar lift/panel it up. Explain how it's materially possible.

>their sun will eventually burn out
Assuming they don't either find a way to use their advanced technology to keep that from happening, or even just make their own sun unnecessary. If you're living in a pod while you frolic through virtual reality fields all day, what do you need a sun for? All you need is a sustainable power source to replace it and a way to keep your own body (or even just your own consciousness) going.

There's no reason to think that the human ideals of "expand, keep making more of us, get more things, get us to new places" either would necessarily be the case in other intelligent species- or even that it would keep being the case for us as we develop.

They would probably find mammalian things weird. Like boobs, and having children grow inside females.

>"In astronomy anything that it is not hydrogen or helium is considered a metal"
>Noble gases are metals

Of all the posts to have such digits used on, it was wasted on that. Here's how: we already have the technology to do it, we have for decades, we just lack the scale of industry to do it, and there is nothing that insentivises us not doing it and no line of thought that makes not doing so make sense in the long term. You people have failed to come up with a line of thought that would make not doing so make sense, but then you're probably the type of person who opposes nuclear energy anyway.

>If you're living in a pod while you frolic through virtual reality fields all day, what do you need a sun for? All you need is a sustainable power source to replace it and a way to keep your own body (or even just your own consciousness) going.

yes, and doing what you propose means lasting billions of years, while collecting resources means lasting millions of times that long. Even if you keep your numbers down, you'd still want AI to collect resources for you for when the sun burns out.

I mean if we are talking "heat death of the universe" timespans then there probably isnt much of an option so far as I've heard, barring some amazing energy source that can produce enough power to last us through the long, cold night to follow. Or it turns out parallel universes arent a meme and we Combine our way somewhere else, but i wouldnt place bets on that.

Drinking other animals milk is kinda weird

Yeah, that's just it, if we're going to die anyway, why only last billions of years when we could last millions of times that long?