What if we aren't the first technologically advanced society?

[kerbiloid]

3 hours ago, RainDreamer said:

Also perhaps there was a civilization that completely dependent on bio tech, their artifacts would look almost natural to us. Or maybe we *are* the artifacts. 

As their job was lasting for 4 bln years, sure, they had enough patient top managers.

[lajoswinkler]

4 hours ago, todofwar said:

I always thought that happened before the earth was capable of sustaining life, but if not I imagine that kind of impact would wipe any evidence out. 

Not relates to the quote above but this would get merged anyway. People keep asserting we leave behind enough evidence, but would it reach a critical mass? Again, any species that evolves would treat everything they find as natural formations. Anything useful they find will get mined and reused. Plastics would be burned as a useful fuel. So, at a certain point our left overs will stop being a complete record. And as @wumpus said, our civilization will be compressed geologically speaking such that you won't be able to tell the modern era apart from the neolithic era. So, if a civ grows under the assumption that they were first, they will decide all these odd fossilized bits of tech must be natural. They may not even find much depending on how long after us they come. Will there be a critical mass of evidence to overturn their belief they are first? I think if we found plastic sediment in the jurassic layers we would begin trying to figure out how it formed naturally, and probably wouldn't say it's the result of a distant species. And I don't think we've depleted enough resources yet for that to be noticeable until such a civ maps the earth completely and sees a pattern, something we have not done yet. 

Tldr: it's not just about the evidence, it's a question of how much evidence is necessary to force a civilization to change its mind about being first, considering their world view would presume every odd feature they see is natural including plastic and isotope patterns.

The Earth was not capable of sustaining life back then. It was very, very young.

Also, radioisotopes would survive. Any modern civilization would be left with detectable amounts of various synthetic ones.

[Green Baron]

9 hours ago, wumpus said:

[tl:dr ]

4.  We can't even be sure of what caused the KT event, how in the world do you think dams, mines, and buildings are going to survive.  If a crater of that size erodes to the point of disappearance, you aren't going to find any roads.

 

I see. I lost you. So step by step. The crater didn't disappear. It was partly eroded, partly covered by sediments, that's why we found it (and many others, vredefort dating 2 billion years back). And that is the point: things that get under the surface last "a long time, brother". Structures i mentioned will be partly eroded and partly covered. They won't "survive" ready to use (i thought that was clear), but we'd see the traces, weathered, altered and distorted, compressed, but in all the sections we produce, borholes we bore and structures we build somewhere there would appear traces of what was comparable to what we do in the environment.

I hope that makes it clearer, and pls, don't rely totally on wikipedia and the internet. That causes you to be badly partly informed and draw the wrong conclusions.

brains: i didn't say birds have no brains, that's rather impudent, probably a result of "tl:dr", i said there are no big brains (implicitly like ours). Some saurians just have ganglion-nodes, enough for walking, eating and procreation.

Hope you read this ...

Edited July 8, 2016 by Green Baron

[TheCardinal]

Like @Todofwar, i've often contemplated the question if there could have been a prior technological advanced society on earth. The biggest problem one is facing when considering that question is that we're inclined to relate everything to our own ways (of living, thinking, discoveries etc.). A prior civilisation could have done things differently, have other believes and values. And the more time has elapsed, the less likely it is to find some proof of their existence. But if there was such a proof, would we even be able to recognise it as proof? Take for instance all the information that is stored in books and on magnetic tapes, cd/dvd's, harddiscs and in silicon chips. Given time, all those "proofs" of our knowledge/existence will disappear. I doubt that in a thousand years time any of those still exist. Time is the biggest enemy in finding evidence of a prior civilisation (and leaving proof behind).

Suppose we, humans, would know our existence would end in five, ten or a hundred years and wanted to leave some proof/memorial of our existence behind How could we leave such a proof of our existence behind which could be recognised as such in a million years?

 

Edited July 8, 2016 by TheCardinal

[Green Baron]

6 hours ago, micr0wave said:

i wonder .. isn't there a theory that the moon was the result of a collision of a mars sized planet with the 'proto-earth'.

What if that proto-earth had a civilization ? Could there be traces be found ?

I'm not sure whether this is just trolling ... the impactor is called Thea.

4 hours ago, RocketSquid said:

If there was a civilization, they were either very, very, very old or didn't use fossil fuels, plastics, or large amounts of metals. Occam's razor says no.

That'll be bacteria, ediacaran-fauna, fish or insects then ...

[Green Baron]

34 minutes ago, TheCardinal said:

Like @Todofwar, i've often contemplated the question if there could have been a prior technological advanced society on earth. The biggest problem one is facing when considering that question is that we're inclined to relate everything to our own ways (of living, thinking, discoveries etc.). A prior civilisation could have done things differently, have other believes and values. And the more time has elapsed, the less likely it is to find some proof of their existence. But if there was such a proof, would we even be able to recognise it as proof? Take for instance all the information that is stored in books and on magnetic tapes, cd/dvd's, harddiscs and in silicon chips. Given time, all those "proofs" of our knowledge/existence will disappear. I doubt that in a thousand years time any of those still exist. Time is the biggest enemy in finding evidence of a prior civilisation (and leaving proof behind).

Suppose we, humans, would know our existence would end in five, ten or a hundred years and wanted to leave some proof/memorial of our existence behind How could we leave such a proof of our existence behind which could be recognised as such in a million years?

 

There were a whole lot of civilizations before us. At least since the end of neolithic. Most of them have been investigated, are regionally and timely limited, they rose and fell. There are a few that still need some work but noone really has the time and money to do so.

 

Edited July 8, 2016 by Green Baron

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, Green Baron said:

I'm not sure whether this is just trolling ... the impactor is called Thea

Only in the modern version of the impact theory. Earlier this hypothetical body was referenced as a noname Proto-Moon, a counterpart for Proto-Earth.

[todofwar]

3 hours ago, Green Baron said:

I'm not sure whether this is just trolling ... the impactor is called Thea.

That'll be bacteria, ediacaran-fauna, fish or insects then ...

Pretty sure you're the one trolling this thread. No need to get accusatory or belittle people. This is the forum on the website of a video game that is targeted at all ages, so you will get all levels of knowledge on a range of subjects. And honestly, I'm pretty sure you're wrong about a few things, but I'm not going to add insults to my attempts to counter your points. This is supposed to be an interesting discussion about the realm of possibility, if you don't like it stop posting and this thread will fall off the front page in a day or two when the rest of us feel like moving on.

[magnemoe]

5 hours ago, Green Baron said:

There were a whole lot of civilizations before us. At least since the end of neolithic. Most of them have been investigated, are regionally and timely limited, they rose and fell. There are a few that still need some work but noone really has the time and money to do so.

 

Not technological advanced, who I would understand be similar to our higher, how far back to stretch it is questionable, most would agree on 1950 would be included, stretch it back to 1850 i liberal. And yes most of the historical are known, might be a few we don't know about if we are a bit liberal with civilizations or that is an independent one, lots of them had offspring or inspired others.  
 

[wumpus]

21 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

Not technological advanced, who I would understand be similar to our higher, how far back to stretch it is questionable, most would agree on 1950 would be included, stretch it back to 1850 i liberal. And yes most of the historical are known, might be a few we don't know about if we are a bit liberal with civilizations or that is an independent one, lots of them had offspring or inspired others.  
 

By 1850 you could presumably get a steam engine into a reasonably remote location and build a significant mine.  You would have to use black powder as your explosive, but steel tools would be common.  There really isn't a way that you would miss a human society at mid-victorian levels.

For the hypothetical dinosaur society, it gets even worse.  There is no justification to putting at the exact end of the dinosaurs (they wouldn't be able to take the rest of the planet's ecology with them), so you can expect the huge changes in planetary ecology to be reflected in the fossil record.  Any such instance would have to be confined to a landmass that is now underwater.  You would also expect the mining issue to show up as well (unless it was all underwater).

 

You can hide a fairly high tech civilization in a rainforest and watch the vegetation quickly tear up the ruins.  But once the people start re-arranging the geography, it becomes pretty obvious.

[Gojira1000]

You couldn't "lose" a spacegoing-level industrial civilization's geologic footprint - most notably in connection with mining.

A non-technological civilization? I'd entertain the idea, though biology/evolution as understood would require a very, very different sort of early life-form than any we have record of, so that's a big reach.

Edited July 8, 2016 by Gojira1000
I spel gud

[todofwar]

Just to address a few points and partly summarize (taking it from the reverse angle, if a new species evolves in 150 million years will they know about us assuming we all die tomorrow):

1 Mines: 

We've dug up enough key resources in specific places and that will leave a noticeable pattern, and the mines themselves will be clearly non-natural formations. 

Counter: I don't think we've dug up enough resources to really make it that obvious. Any oddities in terms of boreholes or shafts will be very distorted, and this hypothetical species will have studied these believing they are natural formations. I don't think Earth scientists have explanations for every feature, hence people keep finding "evidence" of lost cities that later turn out to be naturally formed. So, while their Earth science field is young, they might just assume all these sporadic features are simply natural formations and do their best to explain them in that context. They might even think our strip mines are the result of a series of meteor impacts and term it a "later bombardment" period. 

2 Fossils:

We have left a distinct impact on the fossil record, we will clearly show up as a dominant species and have caused such a change in ecology that will also be obvious.

Counter: Average out over 100K years, and our impact is nothing. So, in 150 MY it will get very hard to distinguish antiquity from modern times, there may be enough of a trend in some species and clearly there will be a mass extinction event on the books, but they will start trying to form a theory to explain it without the need for an advanced civilization. 

3 Isotopes:

We have changed the isotopic patterns through our messing about with nuclear energy.

Counter: They will see an anomaly for sure, starting at a specific time. But they may explain it other ways, claim it's the result of a meteor made of plutonium crashing into the Earth. This would even hinder their understanding of supernovae because they would think plutonium and other synthetic elements with long enough half lives are actually naturally occurring. So all their calculations would have to account for that.

4 Plastics:

Similar to above, they would assume any plastics they find (not all would get preserved, tons of it is getting dumped into the ocean after all) are naturally occurring compounds. This would again hinder their Earth science a bit, they would start trying to figure out how it got naturally produced. But maybe, just maybe, this would start to lend to a new theory that they were not first. But is it enough? Or will it be a fringe theory like that guy who believes cell membranes don't exist?

5 Satelites:

Once they go into outer space they will find our space junk.

Counter: It won't last forever, but if a single piece survives long enough, with the weight of the previous evidence, maybe, just maybe they would start to think another civ came and went. 

[kerbiloid]

38 minutes ago, todofwar said:

I don't think we've dug up enough resources to really make it that obvious.

We've dug enough to make the rest not to pay off.

[magnemoe]

14 hours ago, todofwar said:

Just to address a few points and partly summarize (taking it from the reverse angle, if a new species evolves in 150 million years will they know about us assuming we all die tomorrow):

1 Mines: 

We've dug up enough key resources in specific places and that will leave a noticeable pattern, and the mines themselves will be clearly non-natural formations. 

Counter: I don't think we've dug up enough resources to really make it that obvious. Any oddities in terms of boreholes or shafts will be very distorted, and this hypothetical species will have studied these believing they are natural formations. I don't think Earth scientists have explanations for every feature, hence people keep finding "evidence" of lost cities that later turn out to be naturally formed. So, while their Earth science field is young, they might just assume all these sporadic features are simply natural formations and do their best to explain them in that context. They might even think our strip mines are the result of a series of meteor impacts and term it a "later bombardment" period. 

2 Fossils:

We have left a distinct impact on the fossil record, we will clearly show up as a dominant species and have caused such a change in ecology that will also be obvious.

Counter: Average out over 100K years, and our impact is nothing. So, in 150 MY it will get very hard to distinguish antiquity from modern times, there may be enough of a trend in some species and clearly there will be a mass extinction event on the books, but they will start trying to form a theory to explain it without the need for an advanced civilization. 

3 Isotopes:

We have changed the isotopic patterns through our messing about with nuclear energy.

Counter: They will see an anomaly for sure, starting at a specific time. But they may explain it other ways, claim it's the result of a meteor made of plutonium crashing into the Earth. This would even hinder their understanding of supernovae because they would think plutonium and other synthetic elements with long enough half lives are actually naturally occurring. So all their calculations would have to account for that.

4 Plastics:

Similar to above, they would assume any plastics they find (not all would get preserved, tons of it is getting dumped into the ocean after all) are naturally occurring compounds. This would again hinder their Earth science a bit, they would start trying to figure out how it got naturally produced. But maybe, just maybe, this would start to lend to a new theory that they were not first. But is it enough? Or will it be a fringe theory like that guy who believes cell membranes don't exist?

5 Satelites:

Once they go into outer space they will find our space junk.

Counter: It won't last forever, but if a single piece survives long enough, with the weight of the previous evidence, maybe, just maybe they would start to think another civ came and went. 

Mines, we have mined over most of the world, the old shafts would be filled up and this might become stone but it would be another type of stone without any ore. I say this should be very obvious. 

Fossils, not only bones become fossils but also other stuff including soft materials in rare cases however harder to break down stuff become fossils easier. 
Metals and even plastic would have an good chance of becoming fossils, now take stuff who don't break down at all over historical time like glass, copper or aluminium 

Isotopes should also be easy to detect, we found the natural nuclear reactor who was very low power and 1.5 billion years old. 

[Scotius]

Archeologists have no problems with recognising burrows created by animals hundreds of millions of years ago. Heck, half of the archeology boils down to uncovering ancient holes - from fire pits to prehistoric flint mines to graves to trash pits.

[cantab]

On 05/07/2016 at 2:58 AM, todofwar said:

This. Let's rephrase, we all die from a super virus. How long until evidence of our civilization is completely wiped? 

This, at least, is a question that many people have attempted to answer. Although often the impact over geological timescales is glossed over.

If a previous civilization had developed spaceflight beyond LEO, those spacecraft would still be in orbit somewhere, or landed on the surface of a planet. But would we find them? They'd be small things in the vastness of space, quite possibly dimmer than our telescope surveys detect. If we did spot one, how would we tell it from an asteroid or even a piece of our own space junk?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guh7i7tHeZk

One of the points ASAPScience raises is that an intelligent civilization is likely to affect the distribution of other species. That doesn't really require a great deal of technological advancement, it can be done in the age of sail. Therefore a 'signature' of a past global terrestrial civilization in the fossil record would be the rapid spread of multiple terrestrial species around the world that previously had been restricted to a certain area. The advantage I feel of looking for such a thing is we don't need to speculate about how long artificial substances might last; instead we're looking at the distribution of natural fossils. However the fossil record might lack the temporal resolution to detect this.