What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now • Hacker News Board

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#121

Post by Eliezer » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 5:53 PM UTC

To accelerate stars, you squeeze them until a jet of matter comes out in the opposing direction. For ideas on getting matter out of stars, see "star lifting".

Furthermore, most of the useful energy in stars is not their nuclear binding energy, it is their potential as gravitational fuel, for example when added into a black hole via the Penrose process. It makes sense to accelerate stars toward the central dwelling place of intelligent life, even if the stars have burned out by the time they get there.

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#122

Post by maxerickson » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 5:55 PM UTC

Eliezer wrote: post #121

To accelerate stars, you squeeze them until a jet of matter comes out in the opposing direction. For ideas on getting matter out of stars, see "star lifting". Furthermore, most of the useful energy in stars is not their nuclear binding energy, it is their potential as gravitational fuel, for example when added into a black hole via the Penrose process. It makes sense to accelerate stars toward the central dwelling pl…

How silly. Saying we don't know how to move a star is exactly the same as saying "you just squeeze it", right up until the point you actually go out there and actually fucking squeeze it.

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#123

Post by JumpCrisscross » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 5:55 PM UTC

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #50

akie wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

400 years is nothing. I mean, climate change is real and could be very damaging, but what aside from that and war - why do you think we’ll be living amongst ruins? That seems overly pessimistic to me.

30 years ago there was a very real prospect of a Worldwide nuclear war -- my mother was, in the UK, involved in creation of shelters to allow some kernel to survive the ensuing nuclear winter. Apocalyptic films were portending doom and in school we watched films about what to do if there was a nuclear blast. There have been massive wars/killings, massive famines, massive epidemics. We're in what may well be a local m…

> water poverty, food security, avoiding escalation of conflict

Two out of three of those problems are getting easier with technology (renewable energy for desalination and smart agriculture). If we leave this maxima, it will be because we permitted nuclear proliferation. Even that isn’t inescapable, however.

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#124

Post by Taniwha » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 6:02 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #122

Eliezer wrote: post #121

To accelerate stars, you squeeze them until a jet of matter comes out in the opposing direction. For ideas on getting matter out of stars, see "star lifting". Furthermore, most of the useful energy in stars is not their nuclear binding energy, it is their potential as gravitational fuel, for example when added into a black hole via the Penrose process. It makes sense to accelerate stars toward the central dwelling pl…

How silly. Saying we don't know how to move a star is exactly the same as saying "you just squeeze it", right up until the point you actually go out there and actually fucking squeeze it.

But, please, go squeeze some other star

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#125

Post by throwaway37585 » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 6:09 PM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #74

I started reading this and then thought "what a waste of time". This pertains in no way to my life or the life of anyone for the foreseeable future. I read it just after the one about taking pictures preventing people from experiencing things and remembering them. Putting these together reminded me that reading some of these things on HN is preventing me from living. And with that, I'm gonna close this laptop and go…

What you find boring, other people find interesting, and thus not a waste of time. I’m curious about why you bothered to post a rant about how these discussions are “preventing you from living”, followed by a public announcement of how you’re “gonna close this laptop and go do something”. It comes across as bizarre and a bit narcissistic.

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#126

Post by bkohlmann » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 6:19 PM UTC

InitialLastName wrote: post #105

charlchi wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are under the assumption that we aren't already trying to doing all these things?

When the brightest minds of our generation have dedicated themselves to optimizing advertising networks, you can be sure we aren't emphasizing these things.

Are we sure the brightest minds of our generation really are simply devoting themselves to optimizing advertising? To be sure, some are - but folks like the author of the original paper the article is based on are the counter example to the common refrain. I see brilliant folks laboring in all sort of fascinating endeavors. They’ve yet to achieve publicity because their work is either not complete or they prefer obscurity.

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#127

Post by thorum » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 6:19 PM UTC

Have we ruled out the possibility that a future civilization could slow or stop the expansion of the universe before all the stars disappear from view forever?

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#128

Post by ck2 » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 6:33 PM UTC

I wish I could still see people and nations with the optimism of youth.

But now I am going to point out that someone will probably weaponize fusion and that will be the end of that.

We're not making it off this planet as a civilization, and honestly that may be for the best.

(but I still think The Expanse may be the best show since Babylon 5)

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#129

Post by amelius » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 6:38 PM UTC

visarga wrote: post #110

Here's my take on the future: We'll upload ourselves and use much less energy. As uploaded agents we'll have all the advantages of software - forking multiple instances of ourselves, backup for assured immortality, plugins and upgrades, changing our appearance at will, slowing down or speeding up, becoming part of a collective - everything. It will be Life 2.0, very different from our life. We've already "uploaded" p…

Yeah, and we could set the clock speed really low and we wouldn't even notice the difference ;)

Re: What life could be like for civilizations 1 trillion years from now

#130

Post by oldcynic » Sat, Jun 30, 2018, 6:47 PM UTC

21 wrote: post #103

oldcynic wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll probably wonder why all the fragments they find seem to indicate we preferred damaging technologies over benign. Then like archaeologists everywhere will conclude it was of religious significance.

Are you saying that we shouldn't have had the industrial revolution, because burning coal and oil was very polluting?

Not at all. A little glibness aside, I do think we should have replaced many things with better or less polluting alternatives far, far earlier than we do. The market is the wrong tool for many of these choices as shown by some of the current global issues.

At such a vast time distance there's likely nothing whatsoever left of us - except in the geological record as a few rare fossilised artefacts and environmental clues. We have a hard enough time understanding life a couple of thousand years back and religion is all too often trotted out as easy explanation for "we don't know why".