Now, what I am going to say, NASA finds so offensive, the first time I suggested it, some years ago, got me permanently banned from the Forum, never having even made 1 post. Mods choice.
Today, the remove any mention of it as fast as they can and pretend no such post ever existed.
It seems to me, that if one is serious to have First Contact, which is the exchange of Linguistic Data, then they would realize a biological fact.
A mind reads as perception from the body, the mind virtualizes that information, processes it, and writes it back to the body as behavior. Simple biological fact. This biological fact is the foundation of First Contact Protocol.
So, a long time ago, I was ask to learn something, and when I was ready, to share why there appears to be no contact with mankind, even though, it is they who are following First Contact Protocol for any species considered sapient.
I have put the results of my work on the Internet Archive, the bulk of which shows geometry mankind was unable to develop, I did.
The concise message to man is summed up in my most recent posts there, as I was asked to inform all mankind.
So, this will probably be my last post, I have not been here since 2015, been too busy preparing to do what I was asked. What they can do, and have done, just might surprise you.

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

They've landed!

See:

Eerie glow in sky confuses Australian town...
wrote:

... [an unnatural] pink glow lit up the evening sky above an Australian town on Wednesday, local woman Tammy Szumowski wondered if the apocalypse had arrived...

Fantastic!

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

As Plato noted, there are two types of identity, one is used for the simple minded, the other for those capable of intelligence.
I.e. arithmetic and geometric, also known as literal and metaphorical. i.e. based on the noun or the verb. The verb has another name, behavior, the relative difference of a thing.
Thus, every grammar, which is still not taught today, is aimed at the study and application of behavior. You can actually test a person's level of comprehension, their actual I.Q, by their ability to read.
Thus, First Contact Protocol, the exchange of linguistic data, is not the literal examples of grammar and mathematics, it is how they are applied and understood.
Today, as written, there is not on this planet today, one correct grammar book teaching the only four categories of grammar, afforded by binary recursion, your own computer is trying to teach you grammar, but instead, like everything else, man is perverting it.
The outcome of evolution, is for the recursion of sapient life, that form of life which is the gardener of life in the galaxy. Men call it guided evolution, but guided to what? A functional and literate mind which can manage the entire biosphere of a planet.
Man is provably under management, however, the psychology by which it is done, is beyond man's ability to recognize at present.
phil8659, Internet Archive, sort by date.
I was asked to help teach what literacy is, and quite frankly, you cannot disprove my words, because they are already proven, but not applied by man's own admissions.
But, if you think you can stop evolution, well, you need therapy.

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

Well, yes and no....
The exchange of linguistic data is actually not the first contact action. Rather the first contact action is to study and observe in as low a profile manner as possible. Such that when attempts at linguistic interactions take place they do so in a manner that does not influence or affect in any way the culture under observation.

Next we come to your (almost) accurate statement about there not being a "binary recursion" that defines the four(?) categories of grammar. Much current grammar theory focuses on three categories of grammar (prescriptive, descriptive, transformational-generative) . But then proceed to demonstrate that each of these has at least two major sub-sets. So, what are your four categories? I would assume that "inquiring" would be a possible, as would "decision".
Now on to why no robust binary theory exists. The immediate answer is that most people haven't thought about it and don't care. But in reality it is that most human languages do not follow a rigid rule-set, rather have a set of flexible guidelines that are regularly bent and or broken "at the whim" of the user. This is extremely well demonstrated by English - which version of English (England vs Scotland vs Wales vs .....) they all have their own sets of guidance which they call rules, then proceed to bend/break them. The same applies to French, German, Japanese, all of which are taught in a more rigorous manner against a set of rules, but they all break those rules.

And you struggle with explaining what you mean by literacy? Well, try a simple definition such as "The ability to transfer meaning between written and verbal forms of a language" in a manner that is understood by the intended recipient/audience".

As to your final line - In philosophy there is no truth, only theories and propositions, neither of which is provable nor dis-probeable, as they just just philosophical positions.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Well, yes and no....
The exchange of linguistic data is actually not the first contact action. Rather the first contact action is to study and observe in as low a profile manner as possible. Such that when attempts at linguistic interactions take place they do so in a manner that does not influence or affect in any way the culture under observation.

Next we come to your (almost) accurate statement about there not being a "binary recursion" that defines the four(?) categories of grammar. Much current grammar theory focuses on three categories of grammar (prescriptive, descriptive, transformational-generative) . But then proceed to demonstrate that each of these has at least two major sub-sets. So, what are your four categories? I would assume that "inquiring" would be a possible, as would "decision".
Now on to why no robust binary theory exists. The immediate answer is that most people haven't thought about it and don't care. But in reality it is that most human languages do not follow a rigid rule-set, rather have a set of flexible guidelines that are regularly bent and or broken "at the whim" of the user. This is extremely well demonstrated by English - which version of English (England vs Scotland vs Wales vs .....) they all have their own sets of guidance which they call rules, then proceed to bend/break them. The same applies to French, German, Japanese, all of which are taught in a more rigorous manner against a set of rules, but they all break those rules.

And you struggle with explaining what you mean by literacy? Well, try a simple definition such as "The ability to transfer meaning between written and verbal forms of a language" in a manner that is understood by the intended recipient/audience".

As to your final line - In philosophy there is no truth, only theories and propositions, neither of which is provable nor dis-probeable, as they just just philosophical positions.

Yes, I struggle very hard. So maybe you can argue against the factual and provable work I have done?
See if you can glibly pass it off. I have actually edited, by hand a compendium of translations of Plato's work, some 19,000 pages put into a format Plato suggested, and I constructed a reader program that cues off the formatting which to switch character voices for listening until one actually understands what is being said.
So, you actually believe that proofing is by theory in grammar? Really?

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

... I have actually edited, by hand a compendium of translations of Plato's work, some 19,000 pages put into a format Plato suggested, and I constructed a reader program that cues off the formatting which to switch character voices for listening until one actually understands what is being said.

That method sounds like a game of a chant of sentences that are all part of the same subject area but otherwise unconnected.

Note that sort of thing is done by the LaMDA chatbot.

See recently in the news:

Claims of AI sentience branded 'pure clickbait'
wrote:

Stanford academics peeved over LaMDA chatbot brouhaha...

So, you actually believe that proofing is by theory in grammar? Really?

Care to describe/explain what you mean by that?


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... I have actually edited, by hand a compendium of translations of Plato's work, some 19,000 pages put into a format Plato suggested, and I constructed a reader program that cues off the formatting which to switch character voices for listening until one actually understands what is being said.
So, you actually believe that proofing is by theory in grammar? Really?

That method sounds like a game of a chant of sentences that are all part of the same subject area but otherwise unconnected.

Note that sort of thing is done by the LaMDA chatbot.

See recently in the news:

Claims of AI sentience branded 'pure clickbait'
wrote:

Stanford academics peeved over LaMDA chatbot brouhaha...

Keep searchin',
Martin

Thank you for the admission that you are ignorant of comparative linguistics.

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

Thank you for the admission that you are ignorant of comparative linguistics.

Please enlighten me or give a pointer to Wikipedia or some academic summary?

Always interested in learning!


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Thank you for the admission that you are ignorant of comparative linguistics.

Please enlighten me or give a pointer to Wikipedia or some academic summary?

Always interested in learning!


Keep searchin',
Martin

Well, there are plenty of people who can help you not only use the principles of provable grammar for proofing instead of a product of it like theories, so I imagine there are plenty of people who can help you master the art of using a web browser.
Oh, is you really want to learn, study factual grammar. Common Grammar, Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry.

Perhaps you are simply uniformed. Plato is known by Linguists, and Grammarians alike as being the founder of Formal Grammar,. And, if you cannot follow the links I provided, your own computer proves the work of Plato, there are two, and only two, parts of speech, and all grammar is afforded by the management of the relative difference, i.e. the verb. And all systems of grammar function by being metaphorical, i.e. applicable for all information processing, just like your computer. Now, if you want someone to show you how to find the keys on a keyboard, well, try a typing class.

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

I'm very familiar with Plato.

And throwing insults goes against what Plato teaches and what he demonstrates...

Can you formulate your ideas into some understandable grammar that is brief enough to explain on this thread?


Keep searchin'!
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

I'm very familiar with Plato.

And throwing insults goes against what Plato teaches and what he demonstrates...

Can you formulate your ideas into some understandable grammar that is brief enough to explain on this thread?


Keep searchin'!
Martin

Not to you, you prove your level of comprehension with every word you write.

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

Not to you...

Ergo, your First Contact Protocol fails.

QED.


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Not to you...

Ergo, your First Contact Protocol fails.

QED.


Keep searchin',
Martin

That is why, First Contact Protocol is an IQ test, to see if a species is even capable of literacy.
So tell me, which Platonic Dialog, was an exercise in the Principles of Predication?
And, what did Aristotle say if you could not master it?
Hint, search Aristotle for the word vegetable?

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

So tell me, which Platonic Dialog, was an exercise in the Principles of Predication?

This has little to do with what you are talking about, and is a test of someone's knowledge of Plato and his writings, which of course any alien visiting this planet would have ZERO knowledge and understanding.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

So tell me, which Platonic Dialog, was an exercise in the Principles of Predication?

This has little to do with what you are talking about, and is a test of someone's knowledge of Plato and his writings, which of course any alien visiting this planet would have ZERO knowledge and understanding.

LMAO, so you are the standard for First Contact Protocol, not Linguistic Data used to test intelligence? Got it. Thanks for the advice.
I was under the impression that the superior species uses First Contact Protocol in order to measure the wit of a species, and not among those species which kill each other and destroy their own environment because stumbling around in the dark, with your eyes closed, is the standard set by man, the brightest of the bunch claims it is.

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

... Linguistic Data used to test intelligence?...

Do you rate ELIZA, or the more recent LaMDA as "Intelligent"?


Keep searchin'!
Martin


ELIZA: an early natural language processing computer program

LaMDA: Language Model for Dialogue Applications

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Actually it is you who made the connection.
In quite a number of posts you have used phrases that indicate that one would have to use "intelligence" to understand a strange language. Further it is you who brought up "IQ" as being suitable metric to select those appropriate for the first contact.

For what it is worth you should go back through the history of the various empire building activities over the last few millennia. The empire builders set about destroying the peoples of the lands they conquered and oppressed. And these empire builders considered themselves superior in all ways to those they oppressed, who is to say that the aliens are no better?

Another thought - what if the first contact is a human spots one of the aliens and rushes up with a friendly "HI - take me to your leader".....

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

... Linguistic Data used to test intelligence?...

Do you rate ELIZA, or the more recent LaMDA as "Intelligent"?


Keep searchin'!
Martin


ELIZA: an early natural language processing computer program

LaMDA: Language Model for Dialogue Applications

Really? the Intelligence is in the data! Maybe you should have someone teach you what an anthropomorphism is.

So, let us see if you can follow a simple line of reasoning. A thing, is a binary expression, a noun and a verb, now a verb has another name, behavior, i.e. a thing is a standard of behavior.
As binary recursion can only produce a binary result, tell the world, how it is that the recursion of a standard of behavior can possibly result in non standard behavior? like yourself?

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015

... the Intelligence is in the data! [Non-discussion insult ignored]

Is a Dictionary intelligent?

[Patronizing insult ignored] A thing, is a binary expression, a noun and a verb, now a verb has another name, behavior, i.e. a thing is a standard of behavior.
As binary recursion can only produce a binary result, tell the world, how it is that the recursion of a standard of behavior can possibly result in non standard behavior? like yourself?

Humans, as are all mammals, a very rich mix of reflexes, chemically modulated responses, further responses from pattern recognition, and yet further responses from experience and anticipation. That rich mix can be bundled into the description called "fuzzy logic"...

You can devise various binary associations/representations to approximate various aspects of that rich mix.

Human language is just one part of how we express ourselves and share what we call ideas and thoughts and emotion.


For some insight into any binary representations of language, take a look at examples using the computer programming language Prolog?


Keep searchin',
Martin


Prolog: is a logic programming language associated with artificial intelligence and computational linguistics...

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Since all that a mind can do, is read, process, and write information back as behavior,
The notions expressed by objectors here, that aliens are illiterate and do not know how to reveal the intelligence of a species by using a species own words to test the intelligence of a species, is very charming, and very naive.

---

https://archive.org/details/AUniversalLanguage

https://archive.org/details/TheDifferenceBetweenManAndBeast

https://archive.org/details/DelianQuest2015