Roy Lotz's Reviews > Contact

Contact by Carl Sagan
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
14046996
's review

really liked it
bookshelves: novels-novellas-short-stories

A couple of weeks ago, on June 25, the Pentagon did something rather unusual: It released a report on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP), a subject that has long been associated with alien spacecraft. This was the culmination of the public and political interest piqued by the 2017 release of videos, taken by the United States Navy, of strange flying objects. The content of these videos was not especially groundbreaking—indeed, like all the amateur UFO videos before them, they feature grainy blobs—but their source was. It is one thing when the neighborhood loony says they were abducted; it is another when the most powerful military on the planet admits they cannot identify something in their airspace.

Opinions will differ as to whether report is interesting or boring. Of the 144 reported sightings (quite a lot), 143 remain unexplained. The investigators conclude, tentatively, that these objects are real (i.e. not optical illusions or sensory errors, since they were picked up on many different sorts of sensors, not to mention seen by eyewitnesses), but do not rule out technological malfunction in accounting for the remarkable flight patterns recorded in some instances. Of course, no rational person could conclude that any of this constituted evidence of a visitation by aliens, or even their drones. Still, it is difficult to watch the 60 Minutes segment on the sightings, for example, without one’s curiosity getting piqued. Even Obama seems interested.

In this spirit, I picked up Carl Sagan’s Contact, a physicist’s imagined version of how first contact with an alien species would play out. The book functions on two levels: as a novel and as a thought experiment. Considering that Sagan was no novelist, it is easy to imagine Contact being quite deficient as a work of fiction. Surprisingly, however, the story pulls its own weight. Yes, there is too much exposition and not enough characterization; and yes, the style is more akin to a work of nonfiction than of fiction. But the imaginative plot pulls the reader into the story quite effectively, making the book a pleasurable read.

As a thought experiment, Contact is even more compelling. From the details of the message, to its decryption, to the assembly of the machine, to the social and political ramifications of the discovery alien life, Sagan has taken great pains to imagine how his scenario might realistically play out. Unlike so much science fiction, this book does not insult the reader’s intelligence by asking her to suspend disbelief or accept bizarre premises. And as the novel is set in the (then) near-future, it is also fun to compare Sagan’s predictions with how events actually turned out. We have not, for example, made as much progress with commercial space flight as he thought we would. And our space billionaires are not nearly so enlightened as Sagan anticipated.*

The main theme of the book is the conflict between religion and science: faith vs. reason. I cannot say that Sagan was especially insightful here, as he takes the fairly standard view that science is superior because it is based on evidence. What is more, if I am not mistaken, this issue has lost some of its teeth within the last few years. Nowadays, American conservatives are more concerned with preventing children from learning about racism than about evolution. And as the pandemic revealed, cultural resistance to science is just as likely, if not more so, to come from secular conspiracy theories, social resentment, or political affiliation as from traditional religions.

Above all, this is an immensely optimistic book. Sagan describes all of humanity coming together when faced with intelligent alien life, leading to the triumph of the better angels of our nature. I greatly admire Sagan for this hopefulness; it is one of his best qualities. Personally, though, I doubt that a message from outer space would prompt humanity to come together in the way he describes. A common threat—in the form of a virus—was not even enough to make Republicans and Democrats work together, much less Americans and Russians. At this point, I think even unambiguous contact from an alien race could be absorbed into our polarized politics.

As a last note (and warning, spoiler ahead), though interesting, I did not exactly follow Sagan’s idea of there being a message in π. If you were searching an unlimited string of random numbers—using arithmetic in multiple bases—then is it not inevitable to find a long string of, say, 0s and 1s? And even if a particular string is improbable, how could you rule out a statistical fluke? I suppose a message of sufficient complexity and length, with significant content (say, blueprints to make a Ford Model T), would be difficult to disbelieve. But being able to arrange a circle using 1s and 0s in base-11 arithmetic does not strike me as a clincher.

This is just a quibble. On the whole, I greatly enjoyed this book. Like Sagan’s series, Cosmos, Contact left me full of hope for the human future, and full of wonder for the universe. He was a treasure of a man.
______
*Sagan imagines billionaires living in luxurious space hotels, or chateaus. But as I learned from a recent story in the news, even now, astronauts in space do not clean their clothes. They wear them until the stink becomes unbearable, and then throw them away. So it is not exactly opulence above the clouds.
52 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Contact.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

October 29, 2014 – Shelved as: to-read
October 29, 2014 – Shelved
Started Reading
July 7, 2021 – Shelved as: novels-novellas-short-stories
July 7, 2021 – Finished Reading

Comments Showing 1-27 of 27 (27 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by David (new)

David A timely and enjoyable review. Who knew about the stinky clothes?! Thanks Roy.


message 2: by Roy (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Thanks for reading, David! And yes, it does take away some of the allure of being an astronaut.


message 3: by Hulttio (new)

Hulttio "Nowadays, American conservatives are more concerned with preventing children from learning about racism than about evolution." Spot on, haha. Great review! I should pick this up sometime soon.


message 4: by Roy (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Yes, though I’m not sure it’s an improvement!


Manny I did not exactly follow Sagan’s idea of there being a message in π. If you were searching an unlimited string of random numbers—using arithmetic in multiple bases—then is it not inevitable to find a long string of, say, 0s and 1s? And even if a particular string is improbable, how could you rule out a statistical fluke?

I have had so many discussions about this with physicist and mathematician friends! Some of them take your line. But it seems to me that the question is how early you find the purported message. Something is bound to turn up if you look long enough, but if it's only within the first few trillion digits then the odds against its having happened by chance are astronomical. So the reasonable conclusion is that the message is genuine. This kind of argument is common in all fields of modern science, so why can't you apply it here?

I recall the aliens saying they may have found another, more complex message, but it's far enough along that they aren't sure whether it's real or not.


Manny Also, on the subject of an alien threat unifying mankind, have you read Kurt Vonnegut's The Sirens of Titan? If not, a magnificent black-comedy take on this question...


message 7: by Roy (last edited Jul 08, 2021 03:08AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Manny wrote: "I have had so many discussions about this with physicist and mathematician friends! Some of them take your line. But it seems to me that the question is how early you find the purported message. "

Your point is well taken that, in principle, almost anything can be dismissed as a statistical fluke. But there does seem to be a clear difference between finding a pattern in a string of random digits and an experimental confirmation of a scientific theory, as the latter is repeatable and falsifies (or not) a definite prediction. The search for a message is far more open-ended, without (to my mind) clear enough criteria to differentiate flukes and genuine messages. And, to me, it seems that concepts of early or late are not specific enough with an infinite string of digits. Is a trillion a little or a lot compared to infinity?

As Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," and the claim that the maker(s) of the universe put their signature in a transcendental number is pretty extraordinary. I personally would not be convinced of this if, say, investigators found a string of hundreds of 4s three billion digits in. So, to my mind, the most important criteria would be the apparent meaningfulness of the message. (If memory serves, the aliens say they found complex messages but can't decode them, which does not seem very reassuring.)

All this being said, I am inclined to defer to your and Sagan's collective judgment, since this is certainly not my field!


message 8: by Roy (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Manny wrote: "Also, on the subject of an alien threat unifying mankind, have you read Kurt Vonnegut's The Sirens of Titan? If not, a magnificent black-comedy take on this question..."

Yes I have! A few years ago. But a wonderful book!


Manny Roy wrote: "But there does seem to be a clear difference between finding a pattern in a string of random digits and an experimental confirmation of a scientific theory, as the latter is repeatable and either falsifies (or not) a definite prediction. The search for a message is far more open-ended, without (to my mind) clear enough criteria to differentiate flukes and genuine messages. And, to me, it seems that concepts of early or late are not specific enough with an infinite string of digits. Is a trillion a little or a lot compared to infinity?"

To me, Ellie is indeed verifying a prediction! The aliens tell her that if she looks she will find a clear message, and she does. There is a picture of a circle written in ones and zeros.

I would make the probabilistic argument along the following lines: a message of this kind (a long consecutive string of ones and zeros of length the product of two primes) is bound to turn up eventually. But you can estimate how likely it is to turn up after a given number of digits have been examined. Here, the probability will be vanishingly low.

It's interesting that many scientists I've talked with won't accept the argument. To me, it's unscientific: they won't accept any evidence that apparently proves the universe has been created by a higher power. Iris Fry, the author of The Emergence of Life on Earth said this in so many words. Behaviour of this kind makes me feel that for some people atheism has become a new religion. It seems to be a reaction based on faith rather than evidence.


Manny (I thought Sagan was being very clever here. It would be possible for a higher power to provide incontrovertible proof of their existence. But in the real world, of course, no such proof has been discovered).


Manny Roy wrote: "Manny wrote: "Also, on the subject of an alien threat unifying mankind, have you read Kurt Vonnegut's The Sirens of Titan? If not, a magnificent black-comedy take on this question..."

Yes I have! A few years ago. But a wonderful book!"


I thought about it just the other day when I was helping Not's aunt record the Book of Ruth for LARA. I hadn't known until then where the name "Boaz" comes from.


message 12: by Roy (last edited Jul 08, 2021 03:45AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Manny wrote: "(I thought Sagan was being very clever here. It would be possible for a higher power to provide incontrovertible proof of their existence. But in the real world, of course, no such proof has been d..."

I agree it is a very clever idea. I just have a hard time accepting the circle of 1s and 0s as clear proof. In other words, even though the aliens told Ellie to look, the situation seems more akin to me pointing out to you that some nearby cloud looks exactly like the silhuoette of a unicorn. The probability of that happening is also vanishingly low, but I doubt that most people would take it as proof of a higher power.

Now, π is clearly different from a cloud, in being fundamental to the cosmos. But (and I recognize I'm a little out of my depth here) we don't have any objective basis of differentiating what a "naturally" occuring π would look like versus an "artificially" created π.

Maybe I'm too much a dyed-in-the-wool atheist, but from the premise "There is a creator being" no unambiguous conclusions follow. Since we only have one universe, we can't compare created and naturally occuring cosmoses. It's a dilemma.


Manny But it's the element of prediction that makes the difference. If I were to tell you that on September 12, at exactly 17:46, you would be able to look due West and see a cloud that had exactly the shape of a unicorn, and this indeed came to pass, you'd be convinced at the very least that I had remarkable powers. The prediction the aliens make is far more impressive than that.

It isn't mathematical proof. It could still have happened by chance. But it's as convincing as any other scientific proof, which is never more than probabilistic. This to me is what's so clever about Sagan's argument: in principle, you could have a scientific proof that a higher power existed, which would be as convincing as any other scientific proof. If the higher power existed and wanted us to know that, it would be possible. So either there is no higher power, or it doesn't want us to know it exists, or it's waiting for the right moment to tell us.

But this thought experiment shows that the argument "only faith can reveal it to us" is incorrect.


message 14: by Roy (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Manny wrote: "But it's the element of prediction that makes the difference. If I were to tell you that on September 12, at exactly 17:46, you would be able to look due West and see a cloud that had exactly the s..."

To me, your cloud example seems very different from the example in Contact. The aliens don't tell Ellie where the pattern appears, or even what base of arithmetic to use. Furthermore, they tell each of the five voyagers about a different transcendental number. They also don't say what Ellie will find. So the prediction is basically, "look at a transcendental number and you will find something."

Besides, even if they did specify where to look and what to look for, pi, unlike clouds, is static. So it's more like me saying "If you look at Mt. Rushmore you will see four faces." In other words, it's more like finding something than predicting the results of an experiment. Now, of course, if you look at Mt. Rushmore it would be hard to believe that it occured without human intervention. Likewise, I think the message in pi would have to be so complex that flukes don't even come to mind. That, to me, would be the defining criterion.

In any case, I think the wormhole transportation system is much more convincing!


Manny But the fact that you'll find a message whichever transcendental number you look at, and whichever base you use, is even more convincing! They say you'll find something that shouldn't be there. Only a miniscule proportion of the possible strings you could find will be this kind of clear message.

Wormhole transportation systems? Anyone can fake a wormhole transportation system. You don't need to be a higher power :)


message 16: by Roy (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Manny wrote: "But the fact that you'll find a message whichever transcendental number you look at, and whichever base you use, is even more convincing! They say you'll find something that shouldn't be there. Onl..."

Well, I suppose if there were a bunch of highly structured messages early-on in many important transcendental numbers, that would be pretty convincing. But I still prefer wormholes.

To change the subject, I was curious about your reaction to the Pentagon UFO report.


Manny It's really interesting that people have such different takes on this argument! That should tell us something, but I'm not sure what :)

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the UFO report. I'd always been extremely sceptical about UFOs, but it seems that there is something there. The only problem is, we have absolutely no idea what it is. So far I haven't heard anything about actual aliens, just flying objects that can't be any kind of current technology.


message 18: by Roy (last edited Jul 08, 2021 06:15AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Manny wrote: "It's really interesting that people have such different takes on this argument! That should tell us something, but I'm not sure what :)

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the UFO report. I'd ..."


Yes, indeed. If you haven't seen the 60 Minutes clip on the UFOs, it's pretty interesting. In particular, they cover one incident when an object was picked up on radar, coming down from high altitude, and then spotted by four pilots in two separate aircraft, and then picked up on radar again, and finally recorded on a targeting camera. So many lines of evidence converging make it difficult to dismiss. But like yourself, I find myself scratching my head at what it could possibly be.

Here's a link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBtMb...


Manny The theory which seems most plausible to me is that someone on Earth has very advanced technology we don't know about. You'd only have to suppose that the general AI problem actually was cracked a while ago, which doesn't seem that far-fetched.

If they're from elsewhere, you need to make more assumptions. But it doesn't feel like a strong argument at all.


message 20: by Roy (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Manny wrote: "The theory which seems most plausible to me is that someone on Earth has very advanced technology we don't know about. You'd only have to suppose that the general AI problem actually was cracked a ..."

That's an intriguing idea. However, the best counterargument I've heard to that line of thinking is that these sightings go back a long time. The one I mentioned is from 2004, and similar sightings have been reported much earlier. It would also be hard to explain how such technology has been kept completely secret for so long, if it were indeed in the hands of some government.

I'm not arguing in favor of aliens, you understand, but just emphasizing how very odd these sightings are.


message 21: by Roy (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Maybe they're time travelers who can't interact with us because it would interfere with the timeline!


Manny It is a little hard to believe that the general artificial intelligence problem was cracked more than twenty years ago. On the other hand, many people in the business think that the problem is actually quite simple, we just haven't found the right trick yet.

I'm just saying that I find it easier to believe than aliens. But only slightly. I guess my problem with aliens is that the behaviour doesn't seem to make sense. If they want to engage with us, why don't they do that? If they don't want to engage with us, why do they let us see the vehicles? But of course that's not a strong argument either.


Manny Roy wrote: "Maybe they're time travelers who can't interact with us because it would interfere with the timeline!"

If they're time travellers, seems to me that they're already been extremely careless.

I find that the least plausible explanation... we know GAI is almost certainly possible, we know there are almost certainly habitable planets some of which which might have produced life, we have almost no idea about how to do time travel.


message 24: by Roy (last edited Jul 08, 2021 06:56AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Manny wrote: "It is a little hard to believe that the general artificial intelligence problem was cracked more than twenty years ago. On the other hand, many people in the business think that the problem is actu..."

My favorite idea is that alien camera drones are busy making a David Attenborough-esque nature documentary about us, but one spanning decades.

I suppose when you're debating time-travelers, interstellar aliens, or the AI singularity, things have gotten pretty strange.


Manny If they're camera drones making a nature documentary, the technique seems so unnecessarily clunky! You'd think something small and unobtrusive would work much better.


message 26: by Roy (new) - rated it 4 stars

Roy Lotz Speaking of seeing improbable shapes in clouds:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-s...


Manny Impressive! But it has not made me into a Neptune-believer :)


back to top