The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era • Hacker News Board

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#131

Post by superposeur » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:23 PM UTC

sirmike_ wrote: post #115

superposeur wrote: post #102

In my opinion, the excitement occasioned by the discovery of so many exoplanets has clouded our collective judgement on the Fermi Paradox, leading the overwhelmingly most probable resolution to be underemphasized. Namely: there is no life out there. Not due to baroque mechanisms such as techno-self-destruction but just due to its sheer unlikeliness. As large as the number of stars in the observable universe is (let’s…

I do not think so. We know nothing. We really cannot answer if there is life out there or not at our stage. Not until we figure out the loads of problems hampering our very ability to *start to answer the question in earnest. Not to say our efforts thus far do not count as they do. My point is we do not even know with certainty if life rose on Venus or Mars within the known scope of time we think has passed as an exa…

True that we know little and actually this is my point. I fear that "of course there is life out there in the universe" (as much as I too would like to share in this sentiment) may be an anthropomorphic projection and wishful thinking.

One thing we are able to estimate is the number of stars in the observable universe -- that collection of stars in causal contact with us. It is far from infinite. In fact, not that much larger than the number of atoms in a macroscopic chunk of matter. The number of possible games of chess is incomparably vaster.

This is not to say that we should not look for traces of life. That is a completely separate question.

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#132

Post by superposeur » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:26 PM UTC

namirez wrote: post #121

superposeur wrote: post #102

In my opinion, the excitement occasioned by the discovery of so many exoplanets has clouded our collective judgement on the Fermi Paradox, leading the overwhelmingly most probable resolution to be underemphasized. Namely: there is no life out there. Not due to baroque mechanisms such as techno-self-destruction but just due to its sheer unlikeliness. As large as the number of stars in the observable universe is (let’s…

Then you need to explain how life on Earth started a short period after it cooled down. Yes, it took a long time for complex life forms to emerge but life itself started right off the bat.

"Short period" and "right off the bat" are terms without meaning. What sets the scale of "short"?

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#133

Post by cryptonector » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:26 PM UTC

superposeur wrote: post #102

In my opinion, the excitement occasioned by the discovery of so many exoplanets has clouded our collective judgement on the Fermi Paradox, leading the overwhelmingly most probable resolution to be underemphasized. Namely: there is no life out there. Not due to baroque mechanisms such as techno-self-destruction but just due to its sheer unlikeliness. As large as the number of stars in the observable universe is (let’s…

Or they're not communicating using EM. And maybe they can't get off planet. And maybe the mean distance between pairs of civilizations is so large that interstellar travel is just not practical at all for any of them and us as well.

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#134

Post by OkayPhysicist » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:26 PM UTC

puchatek wrote: post #26

lapcat wrote: post #19

There's no paradox. Technological civilizations destroy themselves relatively quickly. That's becoming painfully obvious.

Not every intelligent life form out there will have the same homicidal baggage in their genes as the homo sapiens

I'd suspect the vast majority would. Apex predators are pretty much the only niche that gains any incremental, real utility from investing energy in increased intelligence. What benefit would an individual slightly smarter manatee acquire?

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#135

Post by superposeur » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:27 PM UTC

troyvit wrote: post #129

superposeur wrote: post #102

In my opinion, the excitement occasioned by the discovery of so many exoplanets has clouded our collective judgement on the Fermi Paradox, leading the overwhelmingly most probable resolution to be underemphasized. Namely: there is no life out there. Not due to baroque mechanisms such as techno-self-destruction but just due to its sheer unlikeliness. As large as the number of stars in the observable universe is (let’s…

How would your perception change if life was discovered on the moons around Saturn and Jupiter? Does that increase the likelihood of life outside our system?

Yes, I would then think it's probable to be many places (and would be very happy about this as I would not like to be alone in the cosmos).

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#136

Post by yamtaddle » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:28 PM UTC

spookthesunset wrote: post #111

superposeur wrote: post #102

In my opinion, the excitement occasioned by the discovery of so many exoplanets has clouded our collective judgement on the Fermi Paradox, leading the overwhelmingly most probable resolution to be underemphasized. Namely: there is no life out there. Not due to baroque mechanisms such as techno-self-destruction but just due to its sheer unlikeliness. As large as the number of stars in the observable universe is (let’s…

I think the probability of there being other life is much closer to 100%. There just has to be. Our universe offers way to much of the correct “stuff” that can create life that it just has to exist elsewhere. Why haven’t we seen it? Well that is one of life’s great mysteries. But the idea we are all alone in this giant thing called the universe… it just doesn’t feel right. The more we learn about things the more we r…

I think life's probably fairly common. Like, bacteria-type stuff, maybe something like moss.

I think complex life, and life that lasts as long as that on Earth has, is probably extremely rare.

There's a lot more that's special about Earth that lets it support large fauna over long spans of time, than just orbital position and basic composition and such. Our weird moon plays a role, tectonic activity is vital, not just for our radiation shield but for the carbon-silicate cycle, Jupiter may even play a pretty big role, and so on. A whole bunch of systems are required to keep conditions on the planet from running away in one direction or another, and it's still come close to getting stuck in some hostile-to-life state, multiple times.

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#137

Post by cryptonector » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:29 PM UTC

denton-scratch wrote: post #130

topaz0 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the intervals are relatively prime, it wouldn't take much to work out what the intended time unit was.

OK, that makes a bit of sense. But I don't know what it means for two real quantities to be relatively prime. Primality is about factoring, right? And you can only factor integers. So to observe primality, you'd have to partition interval measurements into an integral number time-units. Can two reals be relatively prime no matter how you partition them into integers?

The ratios of several smallish prime integral time steps would bear out.

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#138

Post by superposeur » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:29 PM UTC

cryptonector wrote: post #133

superposeur wrote: post #102

In my opinion, the excitement occasioned by the discovery of so many exoplanets has clouded our collective judgement on the Fermi Paradox, leading the overwhelmingly most probable resolution to be underemphasized. Namely: there is no life out there. Not due to baroque mechanisms such as techno-self-destruction but just due to its sheer unlikeliness. As large as the number of stars in the observable universe is (let’s…

Or they're not communicating using EM. And maybe they can't get off planet. And maybe the mean distance between pairs of civilizations is so large that interstellar travel is just not practical at all for any of them and us as well.

Yes, these are alternative explanations. The explanation that is surprisingly undermentioned is the one I put forward: there is no life.

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#139

Post by ngvrnd » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:30 PM UTC

hackernudes wrote: post #112

damontal wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or we are in a simulation

That doesn't really solve the problem because the simulation is (apparently) big enough to allow life to evolve. Why couldn't life evolve multiple times in a simulation? Isn't the argument about simulation more about pondering the question "what is the fundamental nature of reality?", not "why is there life?". If you say that some beings are interfering with our simulation (either designing life, or preventing other…

"Why couldn't life evolve multiple times in a simulation?"

Because the Grad Students don't want it to, and act to prevent it? :-)

Re: The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

#140

Post by serpix » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 7:30 PM UTC

kiba wrote: post #88

_tom_ wrote: post #80

The Fermi paradox assumes that "intelligent" is one threshold, and we are beyond it. We couldn't communicate with the most advanced primates from a million years ago. A civilization a million years past ours would be unlikely to want to talk to us. The average star in our galaxy is a billion years older than our sun. You can only communicate with civilizations near your level, which are inherently much rarer. We aren…

We couldn't communicate with the most advanced primates from a million years ago. A civilization a million years past ours would be unlikely to want to talk to us. The average star in our galaxy is a billion years older than our sun. Based on what? Just because a civilization is extremely sophisticated doesn't mean we have nothing to offer. We still study primates and ants. Hell, we even desire that we could communic…

We as a species are very hostile towards all forms of life on earth. Some of us are scientists and open to communication and peaceful existence. Some of us are locusts, everything is devoured for personal gain. Our track record for meeting other species and other human cultures is such that were the roles reversed, meeting a human traveller from another star system would better be met with armed resistance.