Hospital of Transplanted Hearts

I came upon this bit of literary engineering by D. M. Thomas in Best SF: 1969 (ed. Harry Harrison and Brian W. Aldiss). I love the project idea, but I don’t endorse all the content.

  A B   C D E F G H I J K L M N
      Body of:
      Priest Soldier Whore Gardener Sadist Virgin Psychologist Stakhanovite Scientist Composer Masochist Surgeon</td>
Heart of: Priest     Bending sadly over his enemy he gave him his cup of grace. Absolved by her, he lit a small candle. He told folwers they would rise again if they were holy Religiously he choked evil spirits out of her. She stopped at the laying on of hands. He strove to marry the schizophrenic, whose tongue could not find his name. From his crane-pulpit he made a new heaven, new earth. In a smear of communion-wine: DNA of God. He believed in the triad, three-in-one, one-in-three. Lunchtime eucharist. Her sad, broiler flesh stigmatised. In the waiting flesh he made a vertical and transverse cut.
Soldier   He baptised the little ones with fire.   After the fray she withdrew completely exploding bridges. Unimaginatively he heard the insecticides silent rain. Her nails left stripes on arms, epaulettes on shoulders. She made them retreat from the capital’s gates through snow. Bravely he climbed down into sewers where the Resistance lurked. Sagging dugs fed her tenth son to a patriot’s death. On Mt. Palomar: Such multitudes! And more in reverse. Choric Ode Warsaw Ghetto for unaccompanied keening of mothers. She guided the gun barrel between her lips. The enemy on x-ray. We will attack at first light.
Whore   He loved all men equally. He did not question their instructions.   Where he planted used condoms, a gard of limbo. Shagging her, he pulled away from the intimacy of a kiss. She hung hesitant at the entrance of unlit alleys. If he were not paid for his skill their souls would feel enslaved. He holidayed in santinarium. Regained health. Inadequate theories passed each other on the stairs. All day at the piano, the spume of notes breaking and idling back. He dreamt he was a jewes in the Auschwitz brothel. Cunningly his hands moved as though we were operating.
Gardener   The butterfly evading his touch he mistook for Jesus. Where the shell struck, poppies bloomed from the astounded body. Two roses in the hot-house; one overblown one cankered.   While police raged he cultivated his garden quietly at night. She regretted pollinization by the wind. How could he restore the lost paradise beneath Suicide City? He drilled desert after desert, Planting a future forever receding. By morning, the culture had flowered unrecognizably. Instrumentation of a hot summer’s day, concerto for busy ephemera. The cooked and ate the insecticide-ridden plants. The steering column was grafted into the beautiful girl’s breast.
Sadist   He pictured a femal Messiah’s bloodied, heaving breasts. Afterwards, no one found it was only the moon rising over Finland. She left their mutilated bodies in backstreet hotels. The face of the rose purpled, crumpled.   Take me! she said, as the bus left, in church, on the big dipper.</i> He restored naturals to sanity. His skill faltered by an inch in the third story of the skyscraper. Test tube in hand, he stood over the city’s reservoir. He ended all movements with imperfect cadences. She had herself whipped by a reluctant weeping masochist. Religious he refused to cut away.
Virgin   He swooned at the snakeflesh of the communicant’s tongue. He did not know if he had died in that attack. She wept at her inviolate purity. Spring congress: nature’s pandering shocked him. She told her daughter You are ugly the world must not see you.   His fingers holding the pencil trembled. His cheeks blushed. He shuddered as the road drill clove soft earth. He shivered at the neutrino cleaving light years of lead. Convent bells over the fields stirred his heart to new modes. He kept himself untouched. Seventy years he fought to save the small tissues.
Psychologist   He considered Christ’s over-compensatory Oedipus complex. Bayoneted, he watched his killer’s face. She asked them why they did this. Autumn divorce: psychosis of Kore lengthened. He studied the child’s face. Lying on her lonely couch, she made notes on her case.   He felt for the huge machine’s pent-up sexual energy. He observed the expression on the dog’s transplanted head. At the first performance he watched the faces of the audience. On her couch of nails, she took notes on herself. Skimming the memory cells his lancet found the trauma.
Stakhanovite   In his confessional, a camp bed. He wanted to be the firing squad for the world. She frigged the hunover gray morning into cupfinal night. He dreamt himself sole survivor and named Adam. He emigrated to South Africa. She took the veil. He emigrated to the States.   If only nature had covered up its tracks more cunningly. His 999th Symphony was his last. Sketches of the 1000ths remain. He longed to believe in the consolation of Hell. He said We must take out the lot.
Scientist   So many worlds! So many galaxies! So many saviors! The silent village forgave him, for not using germ warfare. As her sighs quickened, she graphed their heartbeats. Birds hooded, flowers shut: everwhere entropy accepted. He experimented with the velocity of falling bodies. She feared the Pill, she feared it. Uncertainty: observing quanta changed by his observing. Give me an ideology and I will move the whole earth.   Tone-poem Jodrell Bank. The cracklings of infinite space. Singlehanded she sailed for the atom-test island. He toiled to turn inert mass into energy again.
Composer   Through all troubling modulations always the home-key. He wrote a victory march for the refugees to sing. Afire with impatience, she felt its percussive rhythm. Violets muted trumpets, then spring’s full sweet jazz. He looked at the inert score he played with too much brio. Night-music. The wind’s singers clicking sadly her bones. Slowly he collected all the strange lost tunes of the mad. He could listen to the song of a tractor forever. He played moon-light sonata of the cool star’s spectrum.   Dies Irae, Her favorite lovesong. He gasped at the cancer’s unexpected counterpoint.
Masochist   As the rope tightened, he offered to die instead. He turned the napalm inwards. She made love for love. He fecundated the Venus flytrap. He lashed a masochist who cried with joy. All night her moist, lustrous eyes begged him not ot rape her. He drove the devils out and into his own Gaderene mind. He toiled to complete the robot which would destroy him. Love bites of laboratory rats. He destroyed his magnum opus. Only God was worthy of it.   He turned the scalpel inward.
Surgeon   The one he had lost, not the ninety-nine he had saved. Heart transplant. He sent them to slave factories in the fatherland. She felt the hump on his back with skilled healing fingers. Plantation of transplantation. All members of one body. He said To whip you externally is not enough. Loving her, he allowed her to tenderly emasculate him. For freedom the patient must find her heart grasped by hands. Onto church-rubble he transplanted the factory. Man came: slowly, heart grafted into the universe. Thirty years he cut, sighed, stitched up the white silence. Lovebites in his old diseased heart.  

Connected oceans

Dividing an elephant in half does not make two small elephants. It makes one mess.

The same is true of our oceans. Modern management of the natural environment is all about dividing up elephants, assigning the halves to different owners, and blinding ourselves to the activities beyond our halves. But just as with elephants, pieces of an ocean depend on each other: fish and currents do not respect national boundaries.

That is the starting point of a new paper Nandini Ramesh, Kimberly Oremus, and I recently published in Science, entitled “The small world of global marine fisheries: The cross-boundary consequences of larval dispersal“. We wanted to understand how national fisheries depended upon each other.

To study this, we used the same model used to study how debris from the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 crash ended up halfway around the world:

Instead of looking at airplane debris, we looked at fish spawn. Most marine species spend a stage of their lives as plankton, either in the form of floating eggs or microscopic larvae. They can travel huge distances as they float with the currents, sometimes over the course of several months. We can use those journeys to identify the original spawning grounds of the adult fish that are eventually caught.

These connections are important, because they mean that your national fisheries depend upon neighboring countries. Spawning regions are highly sensitive, and if your national neighbors fail to protect them, the fish in your country can disappear. A country like the UK depends upon plenty of other countries for its many species.

Finally, this is not just an issue for the fishing sector. We also looked at food security and jobs. People around the world depend on the careful environmental management of their neighbors, and it is time we recognized this elephant as a whole.

An unstoppable force

Shortly after I joined LSE, Stéphane Hallegatte from the World Bank gave a presentation on their new report, “Unbreakable”. The report is about how to measure risk in the face of the potential to fall into poverty, and includes one of my favorite graphs of the last year:

Unbreakable figure
From “Unbreakable”: Estimated people driven into poverty annually by natural disasters.

I think it’s an amazing bit of modeling to be able to relate natural events to the excruciatingly chaotic process we call “falling into poverty”. But it’s the scale of the two sides of the graph that blows me away. On the left, earthquakes, storm surge, tsunamis, and windstorms all together account for about 1 million people falling into poverty every year. On the right, floods account for 10x as many, and droughts account for an additional 8x as many.

The reason is that floods and droughts are naturally huge events– covering large areas and affecting millions of people– every time they occur. The second is that they occur all the time.

This gets at the importance of water. Most of the researchers I know don’t spend much time thinking about water. They know it’s important, but in a way that’s so commonplace as to be invisible. We just said that 18 million people fall into poverty each year from floods and droughts; in 2015 there were 736 million people in poverty total. That means that if we magically got everyone out of poverty today, in 41 years, there would have already been 736 million new instances of poverty from floods and drought alone. Water is about enough to explain the stubbornness of extreme poverty all on its own.

A gallery in real life

“Elstir’s studio seemed like the laboratory out of which would come a kind of new creation of the world: from the chaos made of all things we see, he had abstracted, by painting them on various rectangles of canvas now standing about on all sides, glimpses of things, like a wave in the sea crashing its angry lilac shaded foam down on the sand, or a young man in white twill leaning on a ship’s rail. The young man’s jacket and the splash of the wave had taken on a new dignity, in virtue of the fact that they continued to exist, though now deprived of what they were believed to consist in, the wave being now unable to wet anyone, and the jacket unable to be worn.”

In the Shadow of Young Girls in Flower, Proust

I like to think I make art, sometimes, but all of my work exists only in this virtual Neverland. My works can be seen, but only through a glorified microfiche scanner, and if you choose to look to the right tiny speck. I wish I had a studio like Elstir’s where people could wander, with real hands tilting back real physical picture frames.

There’s a magic in printing things out, like a spell that reincarnates from the spirit-like 1s and 0s. Flame and I have over a dozen hand-picked photo albums from our various trips, ready should anyone care to open some memories. I want similar momentos for my projects. I thought for a while of building a converter that could represent the structures of code and data as intricate art. But no converter would see the beauty that I see in my own work.

So, I’m thinking of just printing and binding my papers (completed, whether published or not). I’m not above making them into mugs instead, or making blown-up figures etched in canvas. But the first step is to leave them leaning one on the other, and see if anyone takes a peak.

Paper Fish

I have fish! Two lovely creatures, my current obsession. I have not had an aquarium since I was 14 (when, at my height, I had tanks’ worth), but my new tank is at the center of our London flat.

Flame knows that I love animals, but her allergy to cats has killed any pet plans until recently. She finally consented to one fish per paper I publish. Since I’ve only published two papers since coming to London, I get two fish. Let me introduce them:

Paige is a Pearl Gourami. You can see her center stage, above. She’s a bit of an attention hog, but she’s beautiful and knows it. I got her for a paper on a model I helped build, named Mimi-PAGE, so it’s no surprise that she’s a model.

Robbie is a Red-tailed Black Shark (not an actual shark sadly). He’s quite shy, and you can just see his tail behind Paige. He inches along the gravel, propelled by his flaming tail, and I got him for a paper on transportation in Nairobi.

As I get more fish, I fully expected to be in a constant publication race against their perishing, but I didn’t do my research. Given the opportunity, Paige is going to grow 5 inches long and 5 years old, and Robbie is going to get 6 inches long after 9 years. And by the time Robbie comes of age, his instinct for territory is likely to be the terror of any other paper I try to publish.

23andme, Part I

Flame got me a 23andme genetic testing kit (report? procedure?) for Christmas! I’m excited to get some cliffnotes to my user manual, but I was surprised at how daunted I would feel. Preparing my saliva sample felt fatalistic, like each spit was nailing closed the possible; though, I suppose it was just a knock on the door to the actual.

I’m afraid of what I’m going to see. I got the genetic health option, and one of the items on the list is Parkinson’s, with which I watched my grandfather slowly die. That alone tells me that I have a chance that I’m predisposed– do I want to know that it’s definitely waiting in my future? I want to want to know.

On a happier note, I get to find out my paternal haplogroup. From an uncle’s genetic test, I know that my mother’s side comes from the lost land of Doggerland. And I think that my Y-chromosome comes from the east coast of England, but the story is so murky against 300 years of being American that I’m really curious what I’ll find.

Part II when I learn more!

Improving IAMs: From problems to priorities

I wrote this up over the holidays, to feed into some discussions about the failings of integrated assessment models (IAMs). IAMs have long been the point at which climate science (in a simplistic form), economics (in a fanciful form), and policy (beyond what they deserve) meet. I’m a big believer in the potential of models to bring those three together, and the hard work of improving them will be a big part of my career (see also my EAERE newsletter piece). The point of this document is to highlight some progress that’s being made, and the next steps that are needed. Thanks to D. Anthoff and F. Moore for many of the citations.

Integrated assessment models fail to accurately represent the full risks of climate change. This document outlines the challenges (section 1), recent research and progress (section 2), and priorities to develop the next generation of IAMs.

1. Problems with the IAMs and existing challenges

The problems with IAMs have been extensively discussed elsewhere (Stern 2013, Pindyck 2017). The purpose here is to highlight those challenges that are responsive to changes in near-term research priorities. I think there are three categories: scientific deficiencies, tipping points and feedbacks, and disciplinary mismatches. The calibrations of the IAMs are often decades out of date (Rising 2018) and represent empirical methods which are no longer credible (e.g. Huber et al. 2017). The IAMs also miss the potential and consequences of catastrophic feedback in both the climate and social systems, and the corresponding long-tails of risk. Difficulties in communication between natural scientists, economists, and modelers have stalled the scientific process (see previous document, Juan-Carlos et al. WP).

2. Recent work to improve IAMs

Progress is being made on each of these three fronts. A new set of scientific standards represents the environmental economic consensus (Hsiang et al. 2017). The gap between empirical economics and IAMs has been bridged by, e.g., the works of the Climate Impact Lab, through empirically-estimated damage functions, with work on impacts on mortality, energy demand, agricultural production, labour productivity, and inter-group conflict (CIL 2018). Empirical estimates of the costs and potential of adaptation have also been developed (Carleton et al. 2018). Updated results have been integrated into IAMs for economic growth (Moore & Diaz 2015), agricultural productivity (Moore et al. 2017), and mortality (Vasquez WP), resulting in large SCC changes.

The natural science work on tipping points suggest some stylized results: multiple tipping points are already at risk of being triggered, and tipping points are interdependent, but known feedbacks are weak and may take centuries to unfold (O’Neill et al. 2017, Steffen et al. 2018, Kopp et al. 2016). Within IAMs, treatment of tipping points has been at the DICE-theory interface (Lemoine and Traeger 2016, Cai et al. 2016), and feedbacks through higher climate sensitivities (Ceronsky et al. 2005, Nordhaus 2018). Separately, there are feedbacks and tipping points in the economic systems, but only some of these have been studied: capital formation feedbacks (Houser et al. 2015), growth rate effects (Burke et al. 2015), and conflict feedbacks (Rising WP).

Interdisciplinary groups remain rare. The US National Academy of Sciences has produced suggestions on needed improvements, as part of the Social Cost of Carbon estimation process (NAS 2016). Resources For the Future is engaged in a multi-pronged project to implement these changes. This work is partly built upon the recent open-sourcing of RICE, PAGE, and FUND under a common modeling framework (Moore et al. 2018). The Climate Impact Lab is pioneering better connections between climate science and empirical economics. The ISIMIP process has improved standards for models, mainly in process models at the social-environment interface.

Since the development of the original IAMs, a wide variety of sector-specific impact, adaptation, and mitigation models have been developed (see ISIMIP), alternative IAMs (WITCH, REMIND, MERGE, GCAM, GIAM, ICAM), as well as integrated earth system models (MIT IGSM, IMAGE). The latter often include no mitigation, but mitigation is an area that I am not highlighting in this document, because of the longer research agenda needed. The IAM Consortium and Snowmass conferences are important points of contact across these models.

3. Priorities for new developments

Of the three challenges, I think that significant progress in improving the science within IAMs is occurring and the path forward is clear. The need to incorporate tipping points into IAMs is being undermined by (1) a lack of clear science, (2) difficulties in bridging the climate-economic-model cultures, and (3) methods of understanding long-term long-tail risks. Of these, (1) is being actively worked on the climate side, but clarity is not expected soon; economic tipping points need much more work. A process for (2) will require the repeated, collaboration-focused covening of researchers engaged in all aspects of the problem (see Bob Ward’s proposal). Concerning (3), the focus on cost-benefit analysis may poorly represent the relevant ethical choices, even under an accurate representation of tipping points, due to their long time horizon (under Ramsey discounting), and low probabilities. Alternatives are available (e.g., Watkiss & Downing 2008), but common norms are needed.


Burke, M., Hsiang, S. M., & Miguel, E. (2015). Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature, 527(7577), 235.
Cai, Y., Lenton, T. M., & Lontzek, T. S. (2016). Risk of multiple interacting tipping points should encourage rapid CO 2 emission reduction. Nature Climate Change, 6(5), 520.
Ceronsky, M., Anthoff, D., Hepburn, C., & Tol, R. S. (2005). Checking the price tag on catastrophe: the social cost of carbon under non-linear climate response. Climatic Change.
CIL (2018). Climate Impact Lab website: Our approach. Accessible at
Houser, T., Hsiang, S., Kopp, R., & Larsen, K. (2015). Economic risks of climate change: an American prospectus. Columbia University Press.
Huber, V., Ibarreta, D., & Frieler, K. (2017). Cold-and heat-related mortality: a cautionary note on current damage functions with net benefits from climate change. Climatic change, 142(3-4), 407-418.
Kopp, R. E., Shwom, R. L., Wagner, G., & Yuan, J. (2016). Tipping elements and climate–economic shocks: Pathways toward integrated assessment. Earth’s Future, 4(8), 346-372.
Lemoine, D., & Traeger, C. P. (2016). Economics of tipping the climate dominoes. Nature Climate Change, 6(5), 514.
Moore, F. C., & Diaz, D. B. (2015). Temperature impacts on economic growth warrant stringent mitigation policy. Nature Climate Change, 5(2), 127.
Moore, F. C., Baldos, U., Hertel, T., & Diaz, D. (2017). New science of climate change impacts on agriculture implies higher social cost of carbon. Nature Communications, 8(1), 1607.
NAS (2016). Assessing Approaches to Updating the Social Cost of Carbon. Accessible at
Nordhaus, W. D. (2018). Global Melting? The Economics of Disintegration of the Greenland Ice Sheet (No. w24640). National Bureau of Economic Research.
O’Neill, B. C., Oppenheimer, M., Warren, R., Hallegatte, S., Kopp, R. E., Pörtner, H. O., … & Mach, K. J. (2017). IPCC reasons for concern regarding climate change risks. Nature Climate Change, 7(1), 28.
Pindyck, R. S. (2017). The use and misuse of models for climate policy. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 11(1), 100-114.
Rising, J. (2018). The Future Of The Cost Of Climate Change. EAERE Newsletter. Accessible at
Steffen, W., Rockström, J., Richardson, K., Lenton, T. M., Folke, C., Liverman, D., … & Donges, J. F. (2018). Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(33), 8252-8259.
Stern, N. (2013). The structure of economic modeling of the potential impacts of climate change: grafting gross underestimation of risk onto already narrow science models. Journal of Economic Literature, 51(3), 838-59.
Vasquez, V. (WP). Uncertainty in Climate Impact Modelling: An Empirical Exploration of the Mortality Damage Function and Value of Statistical Life in FUND. Masters Dissertation.
Watkiss, P., & Downing, T. (2008). The social cost of carbon: Valuation estimates and their use in UK policy. Integrated Assessment, 8(1).

The power of informal transit

The Journal of Transport Geography just published a study that I worked on with Kayleigh Campbell, Jacqueline Klopp, and Jacinta Mwikali Mbilo. The question address is “How important is informal transit in the developing world?” (Jump to the paper.)

What’s informal transit?

A lot of people get around Nairobi in works of art on wheels called “matatus”:

The matatu system is extensive, essential, efficient, and completely unplanned. In Nairobi’s hurry to accommodate the transport needs of a population that grows by 150,000 people a year, it has ignored this piece of infrastructure. Sometimes it has even undermined it.

The goal of this paper is to measure how important matatus are, in the context of the whole range of transportation options and income groups.

What does this paper bring to the table?

This is one of very few analyses on informal transportation networks anywhere, building upon the incredible work of the Digital Matatus Project, co-led by our co-author, Dr. Klopp.

It’s also fairly unique in looking at transport accessibility in the developing world at all (most work on accessibility is done in rich countries). Not surprisingly, transport needs in developing countries are different.

What do we find?

Some of the results are unsurprising: matatus boost measures of access by 5-15 times, compared to walking, with accessibility highest in the central business district. Of somewhat more interest:

  • Matatu access drops more quickly then driving or walking accessibility as you move away from Nairobi’s center. That’s an indication of the structure of the matatu network, helping people in Nairobi center the most.
  • Controlling for distance from the center, richer communities have low accessibility. Many people from those communities have cars, but it matters because their workers do not. In fact this communities tend to be quite isolated.
  • Tenement housing has quite strong accessibility, because matatu networks tend to organize around it.

What tools do we have for research in this area?

We developed quite an extensive body of tools for studying (1) accessibility in general, and (2) transit networks in particular. If you find yourself in the possession of a cool new transit network database, in “GTFS” format, we have code that can analyze it. Prompt me, and I can work with you to open-source it.

Enjoy the new paper! Accessibility across transport modes and residential developments in Nairobi

Made some “Rampaunt Perre” from the Pleyn Delit medieval cookbook: “Peoren ysoden (pears boiled) in water, [with] þree lyouns raumpauns [three heraldically rearing lions].” (But as beavers, naturally #mitgaard4life) #currentmiddleages #subtlety #moleculargastronomyathome

Consciousness and complexity

Whence comes consciousness?

I am reading Homo Deus, and Harari claims, “When thousands of cars slowly edge their way through London, we call that a traffic jam, but it doesn’t create some great Londonian consciousness that hover high above Piccadilly and says to itself, ‘Blimey, I fell jammed!'” How would we know if it didn’t? And with so many people having interconnected feelings across London, each like a neuron firing in a brain, isn’t it reasonable to assume that if a brain can have consciousness, London can too? Surely our feeling of being in London when it’s jammed some small ingredient of a larger jammed feeling.

For a long time, I’ve taken a kind of animist dualism stance on consciousness, which I took to be the only sensible alternative to physically wishing away the problem. It goes that if we have consciousness, and if humans aren’t specially endowed, then all physical elements must be imbued with a spark of consciousness. This conscious spark resides in every atom, and the difference between a brain and a rock is that in a brain there is a level of interaction that allows the conscious elements to sum together, rather than coexist separately.

Let’s distinguish here between a “strong animist” assumption and a “weak animist” assumption. The strong animist assumption holds that a rocks consciousness is qualitatively the same, but quantitatively different. The rock “experiences” on a geological timescale, and only then dimly. The weak assumption is that the precursor of consciousness is latent in all minerals, but only emerges in complex brains and the like. To discard strong animism, we need a kind of physics of consciousness, but what basis do we have for something so non-physical?

I was emphasizing micro-consciousness as the key ingredient to making a full consciousness, but something else seems similarly indispensable: complexity. (For the systems folk out there, complexity is just fractal systemness.) Even a pure physicalist would agree that consciousness is a kind of emergent property.

In The View from Nowhere, Nagel shows that objectivity– the basis for all empirical understanding– must start from subjectivity. Subjectivity is the only thing we ever experience, but we can infer an objective viewpoint by jumping through some extra mental hoops. The direct animist view here is that conscious sparks accrue a shroud of physical substance, rather than the other way around. Alas, that ascribes perhaps too great an agency to the mineral in rocks.

Similar to the suppression of the subjective, our analytical approach to the world tends to ascribe reality to simple things. However, the only things we actually have direct experience of are complex things: complicated, contextual, dynamic, and self-referential. What if complexity is the fundamental building block of the conscious-supporting world? For every emergent process, one could imagine a reciprocal “demergent” process, where you start from the complex thing and its simple components attain their reality from a complex foundation.

An elemental building block of complexity seems self-contradictory. But perhaps, like the story of the monopole or the geometric shape, it is simplicity that is the theoretical construct. I don’t know, but it seems plausible. A piece of evidence in favor of this view is the bizarre propensity for complexity in the universe. Put together a bunch of atoms, and complex interactions are much more likely than simple ones. This could be explained, if complexity is in some way present in the atoms, seeking opportunities to manifest.

If true, the complex things may share more in common than would be suggested by their different media. Today people often suggest that alien intelligence would offer no common ground for cooperation or meeting of minds. In particular, with no shared evolutionary history, we should not expect any recognizable ethics or philosophy. I suspect otherwise. Again, if we are not to suppose that humanity is special, then maybe ethics (in some forms) are likely a feature of all complex systems. But that’s an argument for another day. For now, let us say that like Hofstadter’s anthill in Gödel, Escher, Bach, we might have a strong basis in consciousness for a fascinating discussion with the city of London, if we only knew how to talk with it.

Sustainability, Engineering, and Philosophy