OK, are you thinking of "nothing"?

Rich:

No, not hardly. Trick question... Trick Question.

Note the form of the question (trick). You know that the entity is
intelligent and capable of self-replication. From this, assume the
following:

a) The form you perceive (by whatever means) is organized in a way that
you see it as a definable entity. It may be a collective or a single
entity, but it is definable.
b) You see activity, material, evidence or results that show
self-replication. From replication one deducts self-awareness or
purpose. (Careful here, though. Don't mistake something like a crystal
growth process as self-replication.)
c) You also see activity, evidence or results that strongly suggest
intelligence. So, this entity will pass the Turing test. That making
the test mutually understandable may be difficult is beside the
point... right now.

Bottom line here. DON'T try too hard.

Having gone as far as the above three things (as they are assumed by
the form of the question): How would one communicate? Apart from magic?


You would start with numbers. 1.414..... starting in binary, and then
in any base as might fit. Any entity with mathematics would know this
number. Or, 3.1415.... and so forth. Numbers no good? Make patterns
that do not exist in nature. The pythagorean triangle with the squares
shown.

You are leaping in: Does this entity have eyes that (it) can see? Go to
c) above. Impinge onto that evidence. If you perceive it as
intelligent, that requires that you see what part of it shows such.
Affect that part with an obvious sign of intelligence (to you) and it
*might* be mutually discernable. Otherwise, try another impingement...
say there are a bunch of pins stuck in the ground in a line spaced at
some distance apart. Reverse or invert the pattern.

Obvious commonalities between any intelligent entities in the Known
Universe:

The periodic table. Oxygen on the Planet Widget in the Galaxy
Gezortenphlat is oxygen here.
Arithmatic. Two items here will remain two items there.
Spatial relationships. A Mobius Strip will be 100% the product of
intelligence wherever it might be found. As will be a Klein Bottle, or
a Tesseract.
Gas Laws.
And so forth.

Point being that if intelligence can be recognized, then communication
will be possible. The problem is in its recognition. Superficially,
ants and bees may be mistaken for intelligent. It is perhaps the case
that we will see either too much or too little when we view possible
intelligence outside ourselves. There was a time within the Catholic
Church when belief in possible 'other' intelligence was called the
"pathetic fallacy" and denied altogether within the natural world.

But, the properties of numbers exist independently of us. We describe
them and from that think we own them and that knowledge. But the
relationships of the sides of a right triangle as descibed by
Pythagorus existed before he described them, and will obtain any time
they are tested. The relationship between the circumference of a circle
and its diameter existed long before pi was described, and is also
immutable. One of the first obvious external indications of
'intelligence' is the use and understanding of these relationships.

What I meant by "being down the path" is that you have all the evidence
you need to initiate communications on any of several obvious plains
(another trick, when I 'suggested' in the original question only one
concept... I tried to give it away when I suggested 'several paths'.).
YOU KNOW THE ENTITY IS INTELLIGENT. So, work with that knowledge and
make changes in how you gained that knowledge. That is the means to
communicate.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA