Post by Laurance on May 11, 2013 16:48:13 GMT 1
Do aggressive alien civilizations face conventional military questions when deciding to wage interstellar war, or, are the circumstances of inter-planetary conflict unique to strategic decision making?
“MAD with Aliens? Interstellar Deterrence and its Implications” by Janne Korhonen of Finland’s Aalto University, published in the current edition of Acta Astronautica – the journal of the International Academy of Astronautics – explores motivating and demotivating factors for an alien assault against the Earth (or any place) and concludes that the conditions of interstellar warfare make such an adventure “too hazardous for an attacker.”
In his paper, Korhonen identifies key concerns that could preclude a potentially aggressive civilization from choosing to launch a genocidal attack on humanity. Some of these may be specific to interstellar war fighting, while others echo questions faced by conventional military planners. An example of the former is the unique conditions of inter-planetary intelligence gathering. “If the light speed limit holds,” Korhonen posits, “all intelligence gathered before an attack is launched will be very much out-of-date by the time the attacking force arrives to the target system.”
Another issue is the inherent inefficiency of attacks with less than one-hundred-percent lethality.
"… an average growth rate of 1% – mediocre by historical standards – could repopulate the Earth to seven billion people from only five thousand survivors in little more than 700 years. If the motive for initial attack had been to ensure long-term survival of the Attacking Civilization by wiping out the competition in the stellar neighbourhood, a gain of a mere 700 years would constitute a massive failure. Even “knocking a civilization back to Stone Age” might theoretically mean only some tens of thousands of years before the said civilization could pose dangers to the attacker. On galactic time scales, even such a respite is temporary at best.”
A further factor an attacking civilization must consider, according to Korhonen, is the issue of witness civilizations – third parties equally (or more) advanced as either the attacking or victim civilization. An unprovoked attack by one civilization against another may prompt a response in-kind by a previously uninvolved third party seeking to kneecap the competition presented to it by the unmasked aggression of the attacker.
Korhonen acknowledges his evaluation may not account for all possible dispositions or motivations of an attacking civilization. It assumes, Korhonen notes, that intelligent aliens are rational actors, an assumption that may not be the case. He plans to follow his short paper with a more detailed modelling system, using computer simulation, to further analyse the dynamics of interstellar conflict.
“MAD with Aliens? Interstellar Deterrence and its Implications” by Janne Korhonen of Finland’s Aalto University, published in the current edition of Acta Astronautica – the journal of the International Academy of Astronautics – explores motivating and demotivating factors for an alien assault against the Earth (or any place) and concludes that the conditions of interstellar warfare make such an adventure “too hazardous for an attacker.”
In his paper, Korhonen identifies key concerns that could preclude a potentially aggressive civilization from choosing to launch a genocidal attack on humanity. Some of these may be specific to interstellar war fighting, while others echo questions faced by conventional military planners. An example of the former is the unique conditions of inter-planetary intelligence gathering. “If the light speed limit holds,” Korhonen posits, “all intelligence gathered before an attack is launched will be very much out-of-date by the time the attacking force arrives to the target system.”
Another issue is the inherent inefficiency of attacks with less than one-hundred-percent lethality.
"… an average growth rate of 1% – mediocre by historical standards – could repopulate the Earth to seven billion people from only five thousand survivors in little more than 700 years. If the motive for initial attack had been to ensure long-term survival of the Attacking Civilization by wiping out the competition in the stellar neighbourhood, a gain of a mere 700 years would constitute a massive failure. Even “knocking a civilization back to Stone Age” might theoretically mean only some tens of thousands of years before the said civilization could pose dangers to the attacker. On galactic time scales, even such a respite is temporary at best.”
A further factor an attacking civilization must consider, according to Korhonen, is the issue of witness civilizations – third parties equally (or more) advanced as either the attacking or victim civilization. An unprovoked attack by one civilization against another may prompt a response in-kind by a previously uninvolved third party seeking to kneecap the competition presented to it by the unmasked aggression of the attacker.
Korhonen acknowledges his evaluation may not account for all possible dispositions or motivations of an attacking civilization. It assumes, Korhonen notes, that intelligent aliens are rational actors, an assumption that may not be the case. He plans to follow his short paper with a more detailed modelling system, using computer simulation, to further analyse the dynamics of interstellar conflict.
It is interesting that he came to this conclusion. Considering the paper costs $31.50, I don't think I will be able to view it any time soon, which is a shame. I do disagree though with it. Without reading his paper I can only speculate though. One point:- an invasion may be for resources, this would mean even a growth of 1%, humanity wouldn't be a big threat. Two:- With the fact we are using drones for more and more dangerous roles, an alien force could park in orbit and just direct drones to do the dirty work. Three:- The speed of light might remain constant, that doesn't mean we couldn't find ways round it, like exploiting Einstein-Rosen bridges, Inter dimensional Vortexes etc. Also Special relativity is a man-made rule, many times rules have been broken when science advances. In the Victoria times a rule was made to show that anything travelling more than 20mph would cause all the air to be sucked out from said object, when trains started getting faster people were getting scared of dying from asphyxiation, however it was soon proved wrong. Four:- Witness civilisations doesn't mean anything. When Poland was invaded by Germany and USSR, how many nations did anything? None (Yes some declared war on Germany, not USSR mind you, but they didn't do anything else). Some may not be able to do anything other than watch (due to them not breaking FTL, not geared up for war etc), some may not care (Historical examples can be shown if asked), some may even support, some may use it to gather intelligence on the enemy (Germany did this when USSR invaded Finland in 1939).
At least the article didn't work on the principal that because they are so advanced they are completely peaceful. I hate that excuse, it holds no water in reality.