Alien lifeforms and proto-Modrons - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Alien lifeforms and proto-Modrons

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
friendofreligion
May 11, 2005 23:40:21 Discovery Channel has a cool-looking program called "Alien Planet" this Saturday night, about the xenobiology of (duh) an alien planet. Real scientists, including Stephen Hawking, will appear as themselves. I've looked at some of the sample aliens, and they look *kewl* -- and very Earth-life-like, in some cases, even though their anatomical features are used for different purposes than their Earthly counterparts.

The website is http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/alienplanet/splash.html.

Elsewhere in the news, self-replicating robots have now been built. "As those Modrons go marching along!"
#2
bran_dawri
May 12, 2005 18:40:20 Looks like we're approaching the upper end of Clarke's Theorem, at least some of it.

...

What? You don't know Clarke's Theorem? Shame on you. Well, for educational purposes (actually, I'm just showing off my nerdity), here it is:

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from what we'd term 'magic'.

'Course, the question is, and remains: by the time your technology reaches those levels, so will (presumably) your understanding, and thus, you would no longer term it 'magic' - or would you?
#3
gray_richardson
May 13, 2005 0:46:27 It's actually Clarke's Third Law.

Clarke's Three Laws are as follows:

1) When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

2) The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

3) Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Clarke stopped at 3 laws, since he figured that 3 laws were good enough for both of the Isaacs (Newton and Asimov). ;)
#4
bran_dawri
May 13, 2005 3:35:57 I know, but his Third is the most wellknown, and I didn't want to confuse people too much ;)
#5
sildatorak
May 13, 2005 21:19:00 Don't forget the addendum to Clarke's third law

"Therefore, any technology that is not indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
#6
raymond_luxury_yacht
May 19, 2005 20:59:02
It's actually Clarke's Third Law.

Clarke's Three Laws are as follows:

1) When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

2) The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

3) Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Clarke stopped at 3 laws, since he figured that 3 laws were good enough for both of the Isaacs (Newton and Asimov). ;)

He also came up with another Law somewhere along the line, stating that a sufficiently powerful entity is indistinguishable from a god.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 friendofreligion May 11, 2005 23:40:21	Discovery Channel has a cool-looking program called "Alien Planet" this Saturday night, about the xenobiology of (duh) an alien planet. Real scientists, including Stephen Hawking, will appear as themselves. I've looked at some of the sample aliens, and they look kewl -- and very Earth-life-like, in some cases, even though their anatomical features are used for different purposes than their Earthly counterparts. The website is http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/alienplanet/splash.html. Elsewhere in the news, self-replicating robots have now been built. "As those Modrons go marching along!"
#2 bran_dawri May 12, 2005 18:40:20	Looks like we're approaching the upper end of Clarke's Theorem, at least some of it. ... What? You don't know Clarke's Theorem? Shame on you. Well, for educational purposes (actually, I'm just showing off my nerdity), here it is: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from what we'd term 'magic'. 'Course, the question is, and remains: by the time your technology reaches those levels, so will (presumably) your understanding, and thus, you would no longer term it 'magic' - or would you?
#3 gray_richardson May 13, 2005 0:46:27	It's actually Clarke's Third Law. Clarke's Three Laws are as follows: 1) When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong. 2) The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible. 3) Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Clarke stopped at 3 laws, since he figured that 3 laws were good enough for both of the Isaacs (Newton and Asimov). ;)
#4 bran_dawri May 13, 2005 3:35:57	I know, but his Third is the most wellknown, and I didn't want to confuse people too much ;)
#5 sildatorak May 13, 2005 21:19:00	Don't forget the addendum to Clarke's third law "Therefore, any technology that is not indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
#6 raymond_luxury_yacht May 19, 2005 20:59:02	It's actually Clarke's Third Law. Clarke's Three Laws are as follows: 1) When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong. 2) The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible. 3) Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Clarke stopped at 3 laws, since he figured that 3 laws were good enough for both of the Isaacs (Newton and Asimov). ;) He also came up with another Law somewhere along the line, stating that a sufficiently powerful entity is indistinguishable from a god.