« Home | Pee: The Four Quadrants, Tagged by Mackey » | Soulless: Mackeydoodle: Rona :other » | Moving From FACT to What-If:Resolved » | Index to May 2006 'is' Blogs » | What is, in fact, a FACT? » | The Pattern of Four » | Final Exam - Soulless » | In Response Part 2 - Soulless » | Everything: EVERYTHING » | In Response Part 1 - DJB »

Alien Communications? WHAT-IF?

Someday, I might write a book. Science fiction, or just fiction, who knows?
Maybe just science! What if?
(This is the companion blog to the second half of this one)
(cautionary note, like its comapnion, it starts off in English, and gradually translates to 'is', just so you know what's coming {smile!}
There are some new fractals at the end, too.


Awhile back, I wrote this blog speculating about our space experiment to send signals out into space in the one chance in a trillion that one of the variations of signals we used (radio signal, engraving on side of spacecraft, etc.) would be correctly interpreted by another intellignet life form, and they'd get in touch. The E.T call home kind of thing.

In this blog, I'm going to apply the theory of 'is', and just do a first-level speculation.

What if we traded places?
What if I tried to see things your way.
What if you tried to see things my way.
What if we did it simultaneously?

What if I just turned around our lttle space satellite experiment?

(This is where the 'is' stuff STARTs again):

What if there 'is' intelligent life out there AND
they've apready figured a way to get in touch with us and leave us a communication message?
Because they're so much more intellignet than we are, they decided to leave their message in as many different ways and in as many different coding syntaxes as they could think of. They hoped by doing this to improve the odds of "getting a match", i.e. have an earthling figure out (crack) their code. (They've disguised it i.e. made it tricky to de-code, by adding CONTEXT or MEANING to the code SIMULTANEOUSLY with DEFINITIONS. The secret of 'is' is to separate the two from each other CLEARLY and UNAMBIGUOUSLY.
Sorta like the da Vinci code (universal appeal at the moment: focus on code:decode)
One of the coding structures they left was ENGLISH.
another was FRENCH.
another was CHRISTIAN.
and so on.

I see patterns in the SHAPES of the 26 symbols we use in the code ENGLISH, and have assigned common, traceable, consistent meaning (standing for CONTEXT) to each one.
They explain my theory (their theory?) totally, precisiely, and without error.
(PRETEND:IMAGINE:ROLE-PLAY: either I'm totally cracked, -or-)
I have cracked the code the aliens sent us.
At least, ONE of them.

So, just idle thought here:

a)would make a great plot for the next Isaac Asimove type book.
b)gives you the shivers, cause, I mean, WHAT-IF, eh? We think we can send them messages that they'll be able to interpret intellignetly, let's pretend for the moment that they simply beat us to it?
c)MYBE THINGS LIKE sTONEHEDGE, eASTER ISLAND, THE aZTEC CIVILATIONS, the pyramids and all those other crop-circle, flying-saucer type mysteries COULD be just a teensy tinier bit closer to the realm of POSSIBLE IF we were to make that assumption. What if?
d)OTHER (best case scenario: worst case scenario)



(depending on your POINT OF VIEW, theirs or ours)
(the first one assumes TRUE, with possible room for doubt)
(the second one assumes DOUBT, with possible room for truth)
(in either case, there is now SOME MEASURE of TRUTH between the two DIAMETRICALLY-OPPOSED POINTS of VIEW, we just need to settle on the exact measure, and we have a measured, guaranteed agreement, accurate to our mutual measurement of AGREEMENT:DISAGREEMENT)
Will you STIPULATE to that from the argument solely contained within this blog entry? (setting THRESHOLDS: boundaries, limits, connections)
The default answer is always "yes". I always assume defaults, unless challenged to PROVE them.
FACT:STIPULATED-TRUE. [hyphen or minus sign]
FACT:TRUE.[def'n and meaning]
Therefore it could be ABSOLUTELY true, though, at this point(ofview) HIGHLY-UNLIKELY:HIGHLY-FICTION.HIGHLY-WHAT-IF.
WHAT-IF entropy is exponentially HIGHLY.
Either I've got a tough case to prove (lots of entropy to fill; lots of distance between our agreement)
the POSSIBILTY of a SHRED of POSSIBLE FACT-TRUTH as the SINGLE PREMISE (FACT, TRUST, ASSUMED-AGREEMENT; STIPULATE) gives us a huge bowl of entropy to discover, explore, splash around in, add TRUTH to MINI-TRUTH exponentially. TRUTH gives birth to TRTH.


Which is more POSSIBLE, FACT or FICTION (if you pick FACT, you're making a jump over PROBABLE to make a link FACT-POSSIBLE; which puts you closer to my WHAT-IF, doesn't it?
(Is that a question or a staement? YES).

(now read it, one setence at a time, from bottom to top from the other point of view.)
Weird, eh?

P.S. It's been awhile. A few more fractals I've done recently (click to enlarge).

- Precious Treasure -

- Shoulder Pads-

- Searching for Identity-

- Other-

"Precious Treasure" is really pretty. Nice work!

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

  • I'm Evydense
  • From Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • And I'm tired of living in the shadow of narrow-mindedness and ignorance. So here's the fax, Jack! "The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and three hundred and sixty-two admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision." - Lynne Lavner*** I'm confused; curious; satisfied; realistically resigned to being a frustrated idealist; usually at peace with myself, but not always. Amazed at how little I know, and wondering how much I need to understand.
More of Me