If we allow ourselves to entertain the possibility of replicating space probes we are also obligated to consider the logical consequences of this idea. In broad outline,we are forced to recognize that replication, with the possibility of error in replication, and competition for survival in a harsh environment are some of the key ideas of evolution. Machines designed to mimic organisms in this way will of necessity evolve like organisms and eventually fill every available ecological niche, and most importantly, they will evolve the tendancy to survive. Those that fail to do so will simply not survive.That is to say, after many generations,they will eventually come to serve their own purposes rather than those of their designers.
Therefore, unless we happen to be visited by a first generation probe from a civilization right next door, which is very unlikely, we will not encounter anything that we would currently recognize as a machine. Any probe we are likely to encounter will be the result of machine evolution. Its form will be determined by the history of its "species" and their environment, not by our own feeble imaginations.
I wish to suggest that if we are to detect such machines we must learn to think of them as a form of life with the infinite range of possiblities implied by the word "life". Perhaps then we can step out of the current mindset and realize that it makes no sense to think of tin cans with motors and sensors drfting among dead rocks. Instead we should imagine living things adapted to an environment we are only beginning to explore. We should try to imagine them trying to survive as living things always do, including but not limited to, feeding, reproducing, migrating, dying, communicating, laying out territories, and hunting. In short, exhibiting all of the behaviors we normally associate with life.
lamarc,specialists,landers,motherships,communications,recon,defense,manufacturer,contact