Alien appearance and facial features

[Delvo]

"Avatar". Those aliens were humanoid, very humanoid, actually. They departed only slightly from humans, especially for a world where most animals had six limbs.

That movie implies to me that the nervous system and the rest of the body are two different organisms living in symbiosis, and the nervous system organism is the same species as those of other animals and also has symbiotic relationships with some plants. So the actual "intelligence" there would be pretty thoroughly different from humans.

 

[Correa Neto]

Round isn't the fundamental shape for our brains. TL to quote (TL:TQ - just created that one) but good stuff snipped.

In other words, the "head" may have a shape very different from ours. It may be elongated like in Giger's alien. Or maybe even the brain will not be enclosed in something like a head.

As for Avatar, the blue aliens, even if symbiotic with the rest of the ecosystem, were (or at least that was my reading) independent, separate species and individuals. Humanoid (IMHO nothing new in terms of concept), very human-like faces, otherwise empathy between public and characters would not be possible. Falling in love with a six-limbed alien would be hard for some people to understand and/or buy, too...

 

[Mudcat]

Well, I think the actual problem is functionality and not appearance. It doesn't matter if the form is outlandish - what matters is if the form is functional and evolutionarily wise, plausible (within the boundaries of our knowledge, of course).

Actually it really does mater if the form is outlandish. A jellyfish-like creature wouldn't be very successful because they can only survive in water, not to mention the problems they would have tool making without having access to perceptive organs like eyes or the lack of ways to manipulate said tools.

 

[Stray Cat]

Falling in love with a six-limbed alien would be hard for some people to understand and/or buy, too...

The three breasted woman on Total Recall on the other hand...

 

[Stray Cat]

Actually it really does mater if the form is outlandish. A jellyfish-like creature wouldn't be very successful because they can only survive in water,

We can only really survive in a specific and small range of mixed gases.
If we were exploring deep space like they do in the movies, we create conditions we can survive in by making what are basically bubbles that represent our environment/atmosphere, it would be possible to come across a planet supporting intelligent life that only lived in water because for instance, there was no dry land so evolution had developed to those conditions. If they had dexterity, they could make spacecraft and space suits that were filled with water in the same way we do with air.

not to mention the problems they would have tool making without having access to perceptive organs like eyes or the lack of ways to manipulate said tools.

Yup, a jellyfish with a power drill isn't going to happen anytime soon.

 

[RenaissanceBiker]

We can only really survive in a specific and small range of mixed gases.
If we were exploring deep space like they do in the movies, we create conditions we can survive in by making what are basically bubbles that represent our environment/atmosphere, it would be possible to come across a planet supporting intelligent life that only lived in water because for instance, there was no dry land so evolution had developed to those conditions. If they had dexterity, they could make spacecraft and space suits that were filled with water in the same way we do with air.


Yup, a jellyfish with a power drill isn't going to happen anytime soon.

Clarke touched on this subject a few times in his writing. Water dwelling creatures are at a distinct disadvantage in that it is highly unlikely they will progress to any kind of fire-building stage. If you don't have a basic grasp of that you will have a hard time forging metal tools.

 

[Hellbound]

Clarke touched on this subject a few times in his writing. Water dwelling creatures are at a distinct disadvantage in that it is highly unlikely they will progress to any kind of fire-building stage. If you don't have a basic grasp of that you will have a hard time forging metal tools.

Yep.

Not to mention both flight and space-faring is more difficult, as well. Water is a lot more mass than air, making both of these things substanially more difficult.

On the fire, though, I wonder if access to underwater volcanic vents or rifts might allow a work-around, of sorts? Natural fire, so to speak?

 

[Mudcat]

Clarke touched on this subject a few times in his writing. Water dwelling creatures are at a distinct disadvantage in that it is highly unlikely they will progress to any kind of fire-building stage. If you don't have a basic grasp of that you will have a hard time forging metal tools.

They'd likely have issues with stone tools, as well.

So space faring jellyfish, baring cosmozological life, is out of the question.

Just as well, if you'd stop and think about it. We'd have no common frame of reference and would likely have to overcome significant hurdles to be able have even basic communications with each other.

 

[arayder]

Just don’t let the aliens sneeze on ya’! You’ll end up with some sort of super duper space virus for which you have no immunological defense and you’ll end up dying in agony after having infected human first responders whose last coherent words will be, “What’s that purple stuff coming out of his nose?”

 

[Correa Neto]

Actually it really does mater if the form is outlandish. A jellyfish-like creature wouldn't be very successful because they can only survive in water, not to mention the problems they would have tool making without having access to perceptive organs like eyes or the lack of ways to manipulate said tools.

The shape may be outlandish but still functional. I'm sure evolution can produce some rather unexpected solutions. The different types of wings and gliding organs form terrestrial animals are an example. Sure, we also have convergent evolution as a factor.

Now, fully aquatic sentient species will most likely never go too much beyond the stone age in therms of tech. No fire means no smelting, no metal casting, no combustion engines, no firearms, no rockets. An hypothetical sentient jellyfish or squid-like species would be limited by this factor. Now, in a world with higher atmospheric pressure than Earth and free oxigen (or another gas which allows combustion), maybe a technologic species of sentient gas bags is possible. Not totally unlike jellyfishes or squids. I suppose in such a world vertebrates for whatever reason would not have evolved and/or become major players. Competition would be bad for these probably fragile critters. I wonder if species like the Zardalus, H.G. Well's Martians and Clake's Octospiders are possible. I have the tendency to say yes.

As for comunication, Math is universal. Empathy may never arise, our cultures may never fully reach mutual understanding, but I suppose technological and scientific exchange could be possible, at least to a certain extent.

 

[Lensman]

Good call. I don't want to think about the alien he wouldn't take on. Maybe a female Gorn.

Don't forget that the Horta was female & he saved it's life.

 

[Correa Neto]

Great.

Now I have an image I can't erase from my brain. Kirk, his shirt ripped apart, and the Horta doing it.

Thank you.

 

[Mudcat]

Now, in a world with higher atmospheric pressure than Earth and free oxigen (or another gas which allows combustion), maybe a technologic species of sentient gas bags is possible. Not totally unlike jellyfishes or squids. I suppose in such a world vertebrates for whatever reason would not have evolved and/or become major players. Competition would be bad for these probably fragile critters.

Yeah... That sounds like a perfectly reasonable and successful design.

They would be practically incapable of building tools even of Stone Age equivalent.

All these what ifs and why nots of 'exotic' life forms sound more and more blatantly ridiculous. The more you suggest them, the more certain I am that any spacefaring or otherwise advanced lifeforms will be decidedly familiar looking and not some unfathomable, strange looking creature that looks like it came from a drawing that received a big fat F in Art class and then got rejected from the Jim Hensen workshop.

 

[Correa Neto]

Honestly, it seems you are overestimating what we actually know about the possible evolutionary paths leading towards a sentient species capable of space flight. We have a single point in our database - we. We have no idea of possible and plausible alternate paths. Humans are the products of great apes evolving, adapting to certain sets of environments, along a given succession of enviromental changes and taking advantages of certain traits. Its not just this, there is a great deal of luck involved. A forest fire could have wiped out our ancestors, for example. Or maybe it actually helped them. We have no control on this. We don't even actually know exactly why we are upright bipeds. Keep the brain colder? Gain a better view of the surroundings? Sexual selection?

Now expand this to other worlds - worlds we actually have no idea of what will be their environments, ecosystems and evolutionary history. Assuming the outcome will be humanoid is, in my opinion, an unimaginative and biased position. It might as well be, but it might as well not be. And at last but not least, you are overlooking the technological aspects. Genetic engineering, AI, prosthetics, etc. The more I think about it, the less I expect to see human-like sentient aliens like those we commonly see at science fiction. An intelligent spaceship is more likely.

Yes, it looks quite like an argument on ignorance. But we actually know very little about this, and fictional humanoid aliens are the products not of projecting our limited knowledge, but of limited budget, limited technology and the need of empathy.