i think the domestication route to civilization is quite reasonable though, especially on an ocean planet since life in water seems generally more “flexible”.
There would need to be an evolutionary drive to develop that tech. And in a water world there’s little reason to. The main utilization of fire was to cook food. From there other developments occurred. That’s not a thing that hydrothermal vents would be good at or easily utilized. An aquatic species would literally be inside the oven they cook with, and for little reason. Sushi is a thing we eat now. You also can’t smelt metals underwater. So passing the threshold of utilizing basic tools is basically impossible.
Plants grow under/in water, why would it be impossible to plant them on purpose? Genuinely asking. And fish farms are a thing.
Also, pet peeve of mine: carps ARE sentient as they can perceive their surroundings using their senses. You probably want “sapient”, being able to reason and think about those surroundings in more than just immediate reflexes.
Sperm whales communicate with each other in a language as complex and information-dense as our own. It is reasonable to assume they are sentient. We are not discussing the hypothetical sentience of matrix math on silicon chips here. We’re talking about another biological entity, with a brain of the same fundamental nature as our own, with a brain much larger than our own, of common evolutionary heritage to our own. And by what other objective measure could we use to measure the sentience of another biological mind, than the complexity of its communication? You could look at behavior. But they’re complex social mammals just like we are.
If we are sentient, so are they. I’m sure they have thoughts and as complex of inner lives as we do.
I wonder what their culture is like. Do they tell stories of great hero whales of the ancient past to their children?
Or are they more learned? Are they down there debating the finer points of philosophy like Plato and Aristotle? They couldn’t do anything experimental. Perhaps they would become masters of classical philosophy.
Perhaps, more ominously, if we can learn to talk to them…what will they want to tell us? I wonder if they still have a cultural memory of the whaling days. Are there sperm whales alive today who hear tales from their elders about the time humans ruthlessly hunted their kind? Do they doubt they are real, wondering if they’re merely old superstitions? These seem so different from the humans you know. (Mostly.)
Or would their culture be so different, that none of these concepts would even remotely map to the things cultural touch stones I cite?
Ocean worlds would be less likely to be able to make and control fire, which is likely one of the main reasons we have any technology at all.
It’s reasonable to assume that a world that is completely covered by ocean has no technology or sapient life.
i think the domestication route to civilization is quite reasonable though, especially on an ocean planet since life in water seems generally more “flexible”.
But since most fire is ultimately used to heat water, couldn’t a form of technology develop based on hydrothermal vents?
There would need to be an evolutionary drive to develop that tech. And in a water world there’s little reason to. The main utilization of fire was to cook food. From there other developments occurred. That’s not a thing that hydrothermal vents would be good at or easily utilized. An aquatic species would literally be inside the oven they cook with, and for little reason. Sushi is a thing we eat now. You also can’t smelt metals underwater. So passing the threshold of utilizing basic tools is basically impossible.
Says the guy who never grew up on a water world. Bet you’re one of those foundation men! Space have you you ingrate!
Agriculture also seems unlikely unless youre a sentient carp or something
Plants grow under/in water, why would it be impossible to plant them on purpose? Genuinely asking. And fish farms are a thing.
Also, pet peeve of mine: carps ARE sentient as they can perceive their surroundings using their senses. You probably want “sapient”, being able to reason and think about those surroundings in more than just immediate reflexes.
Even more so, seaweed farms are a thing; 100% EXACTLY the thing the asked for.
I am aware the cleaning fiah and animal on the whole are most likely sentient, so yes, i did mean sapient
We already have sentient carp. Or at least, sentient denizens of the deep.
We already have that here.
Sperm whales communicate with each other in a language as complex and information-dense as our own. It is reasonable to assume they are sentient. We are not discussing the hypothetical sentience of matrix math on silicon chips here. We’re talking about another biological entity, with a brain of the same fundamental nature as our own, with a brain much larger than our own, of common evolutionary heritage to our own. And by what other objective measure could we use to measure the sentience of another biological mind, than the complexity of its communication? You could look at behavior. But they’re complex social mammals just like we are.
If we are sentient, so are they. I’m sure they have thoughts and as complex of inner lives as we do.
I wonder what their culture is like. Do they tell stories of great hero whales of the ancient past to their children?
Or are they more learned? Are they down there debating the finer points of philosophy like Plato and Aristotle? They couldn’t do anything experimental. Perhaps they would become masters of classical philosophy.
Perhaps, more ominously, if we can learn to talk to them…what will they want to tell us? I wonder if they still have a cultural memory of the whaling days. Are there sperm whales alive today who hear tales from their elders about the time humans ruthlessly hunted their kind? Do they doubt they are real, wondering if they’re merely old superstitions? These seem so different from the humans you know. (Mostly.)
Or would their culture be so different, that none of these concepts would even remotely map to the things cultural touch stones I cite?