Could waterborne intelligences be spacefaring?

[iquestor]

While nitpicking in the Fermi's Paradox thread, I was thinking about the different types of intelligences that could be out in space, and what would preclude an intelligent civilization from being able to acheive spaceflight technology.

Man has always wondered about the stars and it has been an unarguable force in our culture since recorded time. We have always looked up and wondered about space, and our natural curiosity has pushed us to try to learn more and make sense of what we are seeing. But what if we had never seen the stars, or only had brief , blurry glimpses? How would that affect our level of technology? Our progress? Our evolution?

Consider the dolphin or octopus, both highly intelligent creatures. Dolphins would lack the ability to use tools, but could see the sky (enough to peak interest in space); octopus do (by some accounts) use tools and perform other sophisticated behavior (such as gardening) but can't really see the sky. (I could be wrong about this, they might get glimpses from shallow water, but dont know how well they's be able to see the stars and moon, etc.

Both of these species, being waterborne, would have a much more difficult time in making it to space because of the water environment.

1. They cant see the sky, or only get brief glimpses, so the effect of seeing space constantly and wondering about it would not be a big factor in their culture.

2. Scientific development would be limited - electricity would be near impossible to develop in a water environment.

3. Lack of need for complex tools - Man's intelligence was fostered by our continuing struggle for survival, and inventions such as fire, the wheel, the axe, the bow, etc. all played a part in our technological progress. But most of these things wouldn't be possible or useful underwater.

4. Environmental - its easier for a land animal such as man to explore the ocean than it would be for a waterborne creature to explore the land; the tools to do so would likely never develop in the water, and this would have to be a first step (IMHO) for a waterborne intelligence to acheive space.

What are your thoughts? Are water based intelligences planet bound?

[Hungry4info]

I've wondered about something similar before. What if intelligent life evolved on Titan or Venus, and like with your scenario, never having seen the stars, would they be pushed to explore?

In your example of the ocean, I would imagine that the species you describe would start by exploring land after a while, and then may be able to see the stars. Then astronomy might pop into existence.

[Argos]

The aquatic environment poses some hurdles to the transformation of materials, therefore hampering the rise of technology. But it is hard to say if the development of technology would be impossible.

A waterborne intelligence would probably be a race of philosophers at best.

[IsaacKuo]

I have developed ideas on how an aquatic species could develop high technology. Basically, the key is electricity rather than fire based tech.

One of the big problems we had in developing electrical technology was the lack of cheap wires. But aquatic creatures living in a salt water environment would be literally swimming in electrical conductor! There are many aquatic species that use electricity for sensing and even attacking. There are no land/air species which do.

In order to create a crude "wire", all that's needed is to surround sea water with an insulative tube. Many creatures make tubes; tubes can also be fashioned from animal guts.

I imagine intelligent aquatic species could accidentally discover electrolysis--buildup of copper or magnesium on the ends of naturally occuring batteries. A metal like copper could be an early "super-material"--easy to form into durable tools of any shape, and easy to form into wires far more efficient than sea-water tubes.

An aquatic species could develop electricity based technology and metallurgy without ever using fire. It would be a very different path toward high technology than our own, but possible.

[Amber Robot]

Carrying all that water up in your rocketship would require a lot more lifting force and fuel than us air-breathers use.

[Strange]

Reminds me of an SF story I read once about a waterborne species trying to explore nearby "worlds" (which turn out to be other puddles).

There were arguments between different groups about whether these other worlds existed, whether it was worth trying to reach them, etc. I seem to remember that they were very small so water tension was a huge obstacle for them.

Can't remember much more about it now...

[IsaacKuo]

Carrying all that water up in your rocketship would require a lot more lifting force and fuel than us air-breathers use.

The depth of the planet's gravity well will have a much greater impact on how hard/easy it is than this factor. Our Earth's gravity well is just on the edge of what's doable using chemical rockets. If we had to deal with Mars's gravity well, then we'd have cheap SSTOs already.

An aquatic species might be living in the ocean mantle of a smaller planetary body like Europa or Enceladus. If so, then the weak gravity well could make orbital rocket flight as cheap and easy as jetliner flight is for us.

[Amber Robot]

The depth of the planet's gravity well will have a much greater impact on how hard/easy it is than this factor. Our Earth's gravity well is just on the edge of what's doable using chemical rockets. If we had to deal with Mars's gravity well, then we'd have cheap SSTOs already.

I was thinking specifically of Earth. If you had to fill the Space Shuttle's crew area with water instead of air, how much weight would it add? Maybe not too much relative to the total weight of the rocket.

Would they launch their rockets from underwater? That would seem to affect things a lot too.

[iquestor]

I have developed ideas on how an aquatic species could develop high technology. Basically, the key is electricity rather than fire based tech.

One of the big problems we had in developing electrical technology was the lack of cheap wires. But aquatic creatures living in a salt water environment would be literally swimming in electrical conductor! There are many aquatic species that use electricity for sensing and even attacking. There are no land/air species which do..

I didnt think of this. Its a good point. We could further it by saying that these creatures could understand how they (or other creatures) could produce, store and discharge electricity, so that might be a quick stepping stone to the idea of capacitance , resistance and inductance.

In order to create a crude "wire", all that's needed is to surround sea water with an insulative tube. Many creatures make tubes; tubes can also be fashioned from animal guts.

I imagine intelligent aquatic species could accidentally discover electrolysis--buildup of copper or magnesium on the ends of naturally occuring batteries. A metal like copper could be an early "super-material"--easy to form into durable tools of any shape, and easy to form into wires far more efficient than sea-water tubes.

assume itelligent species had tool using appendages. How would they be able to get copper or other metals, and then shape them without a heat source, much less mining equipment? Thats a big challenge. Maybe large amounts of electricity? We can use electricity and magnesium to burn and weld underwater, so why not?

Wouldnt any such batteries have to be completely islated from the surrounding seawater so they could hold a charge? This is the biggest obstacle, However I guess if they studied electricity producing animals, then the the properties of electrical insulation would be readily observable, and they could use that to find a solution.

An aquatic species could develop electricity based technology and metallurgy without ever using fire. It would be a very different path toward high technology than our own, but possible.

very difficult. Its an interesting problem. we havent had to deal with it, so Im sure there are a lot of possibilities we havent considered.

[iquestor]

I was thinking specifically of Earth. If you had to fill the Space Shuttle's crew area with water instead of air, how much weight would it add? Maybe not too much relative to the total weight of the rocket.

Would they launch their rockets from underwater? That would seem to affect things a lot too.

water is 8 lbs per gallon. it would add considerable amount of weight in water. a prohibitive amount, in my opinion.

[Argos]

An aquatic species could develop electricity based technology and metallurgy without ever using fire. It would be a very different path toward high technology than our own, but possible.

Well, they could use the atmospheric environment of their planet to process materials.

[swampyankee]

Reminds me of an SF story I read once about a waterborne species trying to explore nearby "worlds" (which turn out to be other puddles).

There were arguments between different groups about whether these other worlds existed, whether it was worth trying to reach them, etc. I seem to remember that they were very small so water tension was a huge obstacle for them.

Can't remember much more about it now...

iirc, the name of the story Surface Tension, by James Blish. Blish is a great writer, and A Case of Conscience may well be one of the best SF stories ever published.

[Noclevername]

Water-dwelling intelligences would also have experience in exploring an alien environment before going into space-- they'd come above water and find either a dry atmosphere, or ice and vacuum. So they'd learn about life support, pressure containment, etc. before rocketry.

A Rocheworld could give them an even greater advantage than low g, the point in between planets would drop to zero-g, they wouldn't even need rockets at all if the planets are close enough-- just head to the midpoint, and turn left! Perhaps they wouldn't even need technology or intelligence-- some species might have been flung out so many times that they've adapted to those conditions, resulting in spacefaring lifeforms.

[swampyankee]

In answer to the question "could waterborne intelligences be spacefaring?" I'd answer a definitive "maybe."

Were these to develop on a world like Europa, where the "sky" is several kilometers of ice, I would answer "no." Why would they ever develop the idea that there is something beyond the sky?

For something like dolphins -- land-dwelling animals that returned to the sea -- I suspect the answer here, too, is "no," mostly because they're likely to be out-competed by land-based animals that develop intelligence and don't have the same environmental handicaps.

Since our very limited data set seems to show that continental boundaries are needed for productive oceans, I think that a completely oceanic world is not likely to evolve intelligence. The world would need to have significant land areas, but they must be insufficiently productive to permit evolution of animals sufficiently large to develop intelligence.

[coreybv]

In order to create a crude "wire", all that's needed is to surround sea water with an insulative tube. Many creatures make tubes; tubes can also be fashioned from animal guts.

This *might* give them a start, I suppose. They clearly need to move far beyond this to become space faring, though. A microprocessor (I consider computing technology a prerequisite to space travel) built from water-filled intestines would be a truly cumbersome contraption, if such a thing was even possible.

I imagine intelligent aquatic species could accidentally discover electrolysis--buildup of copper or magnesium on the ends of naturally occuring batteries. A metal like copper could be an early "super-material"--easy to form into durable tools of any shape, and easy to form into wires far more efficient than sea-water tubes.

To say that copper is suitable for building durable tools requires a definition of "durable" that is quite different from what I expect from my tools. If they had access to tin and stumbled upon how to create bronze, then we might be starting to get somewhere.

An aquatic species could develop electricity based technology and metallurgy without ever using fire. It would be a very different path toward high technology than our own, but possible.

Possible, sure, but still very difficult, I would think. If nothing else, the requirement for every part of a circuit to be well insulated from the water environment would severely slow down the tinkering and experimentation process. Bread boarding a new circuit design would be incredibly laborious and tedious compared to what we're able to get away with in our non-conductive atmosphere.

With motivation and effort, electrical technology would probably be possible for an underwater civilization, but I suspect that the extra precautions required even for simple experimentation would make the rate of progress orders of magnitude slower than what can be done on land.

[IsaacKuo]

Were these to develop on a world like Europa, where the "sky" is several kilometers of ice, I would answer "no." Why would they ever develop the idea that there is something beyond the sky?

Seismic sensor data. We know that Earth has an iron core because of seismic sensor data of earthquakes and volcano eruptions. Seismic sensor data of "icequakes" and volcanoes on a world like Europa would reveal that beyond the ice shell is...vacuum??!!?!?

Imagine if our seismic data had revealed Earth to be hollow. We'd want to find out what was inside, right?

So these aliens would discover that their ice ceiling was actually a thin shell. Drilling their way up wouldn't be too hard, since ice is less tough than rock, and it would be possible to drill upward using hot water jet "cutters" and oxygen as a lifting gas. Drilling down into the Earth is much more challenging, due to the heat and pressure. Drill bits suitable for drilling through rock wear down, and ultimately the drill components fail in the heat and pressure. Drilling upward through ice could use hot water jet cutters to avoid wear and tear on the components.

[Romanus]

My op: 99% of the time, they are planet-bound. Getting out of the water is key; that 1% allows for the fact that a true waterborne civilization would be creative in ways of doing things that we landlubbers can't envision, because there was never a need for them. Perhaps if they could fabricate some method of leaving the water, first temporarily, and then on a more permanent basis, yes--but as aforementioned, such techniques are unlikely wholly underwater.

[IsaacKuo]

This *might* give them a start, I suppose.

Right. I see it as a primitive start which can get them as far as electrolyzing some copper out of mineral rich salt water (perhaps near suitable "hot smokers" if necessary). Once they get some copper, it's a vastly superior material to make wiring out of.

To say that copper is suitable for building durable tools requires a definition of "durable" that is quite different from what I expect from my tools. If they had access to tin and stumbled upon how to create bronze, then we might be starting to get somewhere.

When humans first discovered metal, it was copper. It was magical stuff; shiny and durable compared to the alternatives. It doesn't shatter like ceramics. It doesn't rot like wood.

Sure, copper is soft compared to other metals, so it would deform upon abuse. But unlike something made of wood or ceramic, it could be worked back into shape. It could be repaired rather than discarded.

Aquatic aliens may see copper as a magical material also.

[coreybv]

Aquatic aliens may see copper as a magical material also.

Quite possibly.

I still see the need for perfect insulation of the entire circuit as a major barrier, though. It's not a big deal if you're tinkering with a couple of D-cells and a flashlight bulb. But what happens when you get to something like a data center? I was doing some testing a few weeks ago on the UPS and generator in a large data center. The particular panel I was working with was one of the "small" ones. 480 volts, with wiring a good inch and a half in diameter. I can't even imagine working with the voltages and amperages involved there in an underwater environment. You'd need to be VERY sure of the integrity of your insulation.

It's not hard to imagine a few mishaps early in the game causing an underwater society to abandon electricity as being simply too dangerous. Something as seemingly simple as electric lighting may well be a Manhattan Project scale undertaking for them.

[GOURDHEAD]

Evolution produces stranger critters than we can imagine.

[galacsi]

r

2. Scientific development would be limited - electricity would be near impossible to develop in a water environment.

What are your thoughts? Are water based intelligences planet bound?

I am not so sure about electricity because you have several aquatic creatures which use it for detection or for fight . One example the electric rays : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_ray

So these waterborne intelligences could develop biotechnology and reach some great achievement by very different means.

[Sharlos]

If they did they would have a very different sort of technology to us, mostly biological in nature, electricity is plausible but I doubt it would see the type of use we put it to (such as computing and lighting ect.) There are biological methods of lighting however.

Could an inteligent civilisation develop underwater? I'd say yes, but I very much doubt it would be capable of reaching space without colonising the land first as a stepping-stone.

Unless they live on a low-gravity planet/moon getting into space requires a variety of refined metals, propellant, methods of concentrating the propellant, ect.

If they are on a low gravity planet/moon with an accompanying small/non-existent atmosphere, things would be significantly less complicated but still a much larger challenge then what humanity faces on Earth and we are far from particularly successful when it comes to space flight.

[Argos]

An intelligent aquatic species would certainly be aware of the various environments of its planet. They would certainly figure out ways to take advantage of these environments [like the atmosphere] to develop technology.

[RedFive]

I have thought about these things and I believe waterborn civilization is just not possible.

Here on Earth, we are about 75% covered by water, not to mention that waterborn life had a headstart on land-based life by a couple hundred million years. And yet despite all those advantages, it was on land where civilization took place. Yes, I know that that does not necessarily mean waterborn civilization is impossible, but that's my theory.

I would say the corrosive properties of water (especially seawater) would make any sort of fashioning of complex tools to be impossible for all intents and porpoises.

[galacsi]

I would say the corrosive properties of water (especially seawater) would make any sort of fashioning of complex tools to be impossible for all intents and porpoises.

LOL

[IsaacKuo]

Here on Earth, we are about 75% covered by water, not to mention that waterborn life had a headstart on land-based life by a couple hundred million years. And yet despite all those advantages, it was on land where civilization took place. Yes, I know that that does not necessarily mean waterborn civilization is impossible, but that's my theory.

It just shows that probably landborn civilizations would develop sooner than waterborn civilizations. Maybe. The advantages you speak of are not really that amazing, considering that most of the oceans are barren and nutrient poor.

I would say the corrosive properties of water (especially seawater) would make any sort of fashioning of complex tools to be impossible for all intents and porpoises.

This is a more direct argument.

What would you consider a "complex tool", and why do the corrosive properties of water make fashioning it to be practically impossible? Taking into consideration the possibility of alternate materials, of course.

[RedFive]

It just shows that probably landborn civilizations would develop sooner than waterborn civilizations. Maybe. The advantages you speak of are not really that amazing, considering that most of the oceans are barren and nutrient poor.

I think your statement here helps support my point :-)

This is a more direct argument.

What would you consider a "complex tool", and why do the corrosive properties of water make fashioning it to be practically impossible? Taking into consideration the possibility of alternate materials, of course.

I would say a complex tool would be any tool that involved multiple parts expected to work, move and operate together. I don't really consider "alternate materials" to be a viable option. Civilization would require a bronze age or an iron age or some other metalwork. I could see other civilizations having different metals in different abundency, so maybe they would be less focused on iron (for example) but how could early civilization mine for materials underwater? To say nothing of how modern day materials could be fashioned, such as plastics or synthetics.

[iquestor]

I think your statement here helps support my point :-)
I would say a complex tool would be any tool that involved multiple parts expected to work, move and operate together. I don't really consider "alternate materials" to be a viable option. Civilization would require a bronze age or an iron age or some other metalwork. I could see other civilizations having different metals in different abundency, so maybe they would be less focused on iron (for example) but how could early civilization mine for materials underwater? To say nothing of how modern day materials could be fashioned, such as plastics or synthetics.

to me, thats the crux of the problem. I think there have been some good arguments made for some limited use of electricity, but higher manufacturing practices involving specific environmental conditions, high heating, computers, and other practices just might not be possible or practical underwater. Think about making vacuum tumes or relays in such an evironment, much less textiles, glass, transistors (or anything electronic)...

It would seem there might be a ceiling to what could be done in an environment like Earth's ocean.

However, I am sure that there are some other approaches we havent thought of because we didnt have to accomplish those things. SUch a civilization's tech would be very different from ours.

[IsaacKuo]

I think your statement here helps support my point :-)

How so? If the actual living space in the ocean that doesn't qualify as "barren desert" is only, say, about equal to the useful living space on land, then that would put them on equal footing.

I would say a complex tool would be any tool that involved multiple parts expected to work, move and operate together.

Like, say, a water wheel, which powers millstones?

I don't really consider "alternate materials" to be a viable option. Civilization would require a bronze age or an iron age or some other metalwork. I could see other civilizations having different metals in different abundency, so maybe they would be less focused on iron (for example) but how could early civilization mine for materials underwater?

I suggest the use of electrolysis to extract metals from metal-rich water (perhaps from underwater vents). Depending on the metalic content of the ocean water in question, magnesium may be the metal of choice rather than iron.

Heat based methods may be possible using volcanic lava, or floating platforms (if there's a suitable atmosphere above the water).

I would agree that metals would be very useful if available. But are they strictly required to make complex tools? In our own history, complex machines were made using primarily wood and stone.

[RedFive]

How so? If the actual living space in the ocean that doesn't qualify as "barren desert" is only, say, about equal to the useful living space on land, then that would put them on equal footing.

Your statement was that "most of the oceans are barren and nutrient poor." I think that statement helps support the notion of the unlikelihood of waterborn civilization.

Like, say, a water wheel, which powers millstones?

No, not like a water wheel. Obviously we have crafted all sorts of tools that are used underwater, from water wheels to simple scuba gear to the most complex submarine in the Navy. But those tools are crafted using properties and techniques that could not be replicated underwater. How would the precise metallurgy of a submarine be crafted in an underwater environment?

In other words, just because something is used underwater does not mean it could be crafted underwater.

I suggest the use of electrolysis to extract metals from metal-rich water (perhaps from underwater vents). Depending on the metalic content of the ocean water in question, magnesium may be the metal of choice rather than iron.

Heat based methods may be possible using volcanic lava, or floating platforms (if there's a suitable atmosphere above the water).

I would agree that metals would be very useful if available. But are they strictly required to make complex tools? In our own history, complex machines were made using primarily wood and stone.

OK, but wood is another great example of a material that simply couldn't be fashioned into complex tools an underwater environment.

Things don't stay where they are underwater. They tend to either sink or float. There are no foundations underwater. How could you smelt ore underwater? How could you heat something up?

IMHO, it's just not possible. While our own oceans have intelligent animals, the physical properties of water simply do not allow for the basic tenets of civilization to evolve, let alone the complicated parts we now enjoy.

EDIT: Please let me clarify something. Our modern technology could probably find various solutions to creating such things underwater. But I am asking you to think with the mentality of early humans. How is a group of tribesmen going to form their own cradles of civilization with all the drawbacks as mentioned above? Controlling fire, forming communities, etc, etc.