Live data from Hacker News

The Fermi paradox revisited: Technosignatures and the contact era

arxiv.org

351–353 of 353 posts

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

#351
post #97
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That argument seems to violate the basic rules of exponentials. If an advanced species did settle on an stasis, then that will only last until some subset of the population decides to go beyond the stasis. Particularly for a space-faring civilization, the time scales and resources are so fast, that any multiplication factor beyond unity will eventually go bananas. Any individuals with the prerogative to multiply will…

> the basic rules of exponentials A space-faring civilization cannot expand faster than O(n^2) because physics.

Yes, this is true but only from the reference frame of the cosmic background radiation. It is still possible that you can get O(n^3) from the reference frame of the aliens themselves, because time dilation makes travel fairly fast. You get into some spacetime philosophy about what metrics are worth evaluating O against in the first place.

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

#352
post #351
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the basic rules of exponentials A space-faring civilization cannot expand faster than O(n^2) because physics.

Yes, this is true but only from the reference frame of the cosmic background radiation. It is still possible that you can get O(n^3) from the reference frame of the aliens themselves, because time dilation makes travel fairly fast. You get into some spacetime philosophy about what metrics are worth evaluating O against in the first place.

OK, but even O(n^3) is still polynomial, not exponential. That matters. There's a reason that P=?NP is a thing.

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

#353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a 120 hz Oled Android TV. Unless Youtube drops frames speeding up a 30 FPS video 4x should hit 120 FPS. I've never heard of someone filming a video for cats in 4x slow motion and asking people to play it at 4x to entertain a cat, so I'm assuming this experiment has been tried and doesn't work, but I'll give it a shot. (It occurs to me I would need to confirm the Android Youtube app supports 120 FPS otherwise I…

I’m not talking about FPS. At all. It doesn’t matter how many FPS there are. I’m talking about the refresh rate, ie, how many times per a second the hardware updates the screen which is in no way related to FPS, which is how many times per second your video card fills the display buffer.

I don't follow. All high end OLED TVs these days have a 120 hz refresh rate. This would appear to disprove the idea that TVs have too low a refresh rate for cats.
Post reply on HN