The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#11

Post by elorant » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:15 PM UTC

PeterWhittaker wrote: post #6

We suffer from hubris when we label it the "Fermi paradox ": It implies that somehow we are interesting, worth visiting. If we are, it may well be as a cautionary tale or for tourism. Consider the energy and material engineering necessary to achieve long-distance space transport of any sizable amount of people, equipment, and supplies. Regardless of whether the transport is subluminal or FTL, the energy requirements…

Your argument is kind of contradictory. It assumes that we are not worthy of visiting but an argument like that suggests that they’ve already found us and interstellar travel is feasible. They’ve also solved all the logistic problems you’re referring to. Whether they like to make contact or not is somewhat irrelevant to this context.

For the sake of argument let’s linger on that assumption for a while. How for example did they found us when our civilization achieved radio signals transmission in the last couple of centuries? That means that they’re close by, unless FTL travel is feasible in which case we can safely assume the whole galaxy should be teeming with life. But if they’re close by shouldn’t we be able to spot them? And if they’re far away that means they should already have colonized half the galaxy before they decide to launch an expedition to a planet thousands of light years away.

The worrying factor relating to the “Fermi Paradox” is that it suggests that maybe life is extremely rare. We could very well be the only living souls in this part of the Universe and that’s kind of heart breaking considering the sheer size of the whole thing.

By the way, your assumption is called the "Zoo Hypothesis" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoo_hypothesis

Oh, and while we're in this scenario I'd urge everyone to read the following SF short. http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#12

Post by Mahn » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:19 PM UTC

Another argument against the great filter, and one I'm surprised it's not considered more often, is the relativity of the space and time. We assume, long story short, that the colonization explosion is rare because we can't see it, but what if all that we can observe in terms of space and time is a incredibly "microscopic" slice compared to all that there is/has been/will be out there? The way I see it it looks like we've concluded water must be commonplace on earth, but then we act puzzled when we can't find a lake down the street and assume water must be rarer than we thought.

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#13

Post by Retra » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:20 PM UTC

Udo wrote: post #4

There is a disconnect between these two statements: " No alien civilizations have substantially colonized our solar system or systems nearby. Thus among the billion trillion stars in our past universe, none has reached the level of technology and growth that we may soon reach. " While the article is in a way all about exploring that disconnect, it's a bit strange to find it written down so explicitly in the conclusio…

The 'soonness' of our interplanetary colonization is really not safe to assume. The obstacles to self-sustaining life on other worlds are not insignificant -- in fact, they are the explanation for why there is no life there to begin with.

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#14

Post by je_bailey » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:24 PM UTC

Among other comments here, there is the question of why? Why does a civilization need to expand? Why should it? We can already see in our world where the birthrates start to decline in societies that have a certain level of technology and quality of live. When we reach a point where our whims are catered for and energy is cheap. Reproduction doesn't seem very cost effective.

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#15

Post by zachalexander » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:26 PM UTC

api wrote: post #10

We are provably not beyond the great filter. At least one great filter lies tangibly in front of us: ecological sustainability. Barring several fairly large changes to our energy and resource systems, our civilization is mathematically and physically guaranteed to collapse within the next 200 years at most. That's not a hypothetical filter. It's a real one that we can see, and we are not past it.

This is a great point – which I would paraphrase as, let's not worry about cosmic filters when we have a very tangible filter in front of us – but it doesn't follow that we're "provably not beyond the great filter".

The Great Filter is just the thing that explains most of why intelligent life is (or seems) so rare in the universe. It could be true, for example, that some cosmic event kills life before it becomes technological 99% of the time (= Great Filter), and also that, say, 60% of technological civilizations destroy themselves via destroying their environment.

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#16

Post by killnine » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:27 PM UTC

je_bailey wrote: post #14

Among other comments here, there is the question of why? Why does a civilization need to expand? Why should it? We can already see in our world where the birthrates start to decline in societies that have a certain level of technology and quality of live. When we reach a point where our whims are catered for and energy is cheap. Reproduction doesn't seem very cost effective.

At least for me, it's because all of our eggs are in one basket at the moment.

Loosing this rock or our star essentially equals the extinction of our species.

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#17

Post by Animats » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:28 PM UTC

api wrote: post #10

We are provably not beyond the great filter. At least one great filter lies tangibly in front of us: ecological sustainability. Barring several fairly large changes to our energy and resource systems, our civilization is mathematically and physically guaranteed to collapse within the next 200 years at most. That's not a hypothetical filter. It's a real one that we can see, and we are not past it.

Painfully true. Human civilizations go back about 3000 years. Industrial civilization only goes back about 200. Being able to make a significant dent in the planet's natural resources goes back less than 100 years.

Few nonrenewable resources have a remaining supply measured in hundreds of years.

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#18

Post by privong » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:28 PM UTC

api wrote: post #10

We are provably not beyond the great filter. At least one great filter lies tangibly in front of us: ecological sustainability. Barring several fairly large changes to our energy and resource systems, our civilization is mathematically and physically guaranteed to collapse within the next 200 years at most. That's not a hypothetical filter. It's a real one that we can see, and we are not past it.

> We are provably not beyond the great filter. At least one great filter lies tangibly in front of us: ecological sustainability.

> Barring several fairly large changes to our energy and resource systems, our civilization is mathematically and physically guaranteed to collapse within the next 200 years at most.

Would you mind elaborating on this or posting some links with more evidence for this? As stated, your claim seems reminiscent to previous claims that humanity would soon not be able to grow enough food for the projected population. So far, unexpected scientific advances have managed to increase food yields substantially, and we can now effectively produce more than enough food to feed people (though we clearly have issues ensuring that food gets to everyone who needs it). So I wonder what is different now, that makes this looming catastrophe "provable" and "mathematically and physically guaranteed".

I agree that humanity is facing significant challenges (e.g., climate change), but I think the claim of "guaranteed collapse" is not as well established.

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#19

Post by furyofantares » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:28 PM UTC

api wrote: post #10

We are provably not beyond the great filter. At least one great filter lies tangibly in front of us: ecological sustainability. Barring several fairly large changes to our energy and resource systems, our civilization is mathematically and physically guaranteed to collapse within the next 200 years at most. That's not a hypothetical filter. It's a real one that we can see, and we are not past it.

If that's provably a great filter, you must have proof that there is only a tiny percent chance that we will have fairly large changes to our energy and resource systems. Is that what you are claiming?

Re: The Great Filter – Are We Almost Past It? (1998)

#20

Post by Udo » Sun, Apr 05, 2015, 7:30 PM UTC

Retra wrote: post #13

Udo wrote: post #4

There is a disconnect between these two statements: " No alien civilizations have substantially colonized our solar system or systems nearby. Thus among the billion trillion stars in our past universe, none has reached the level of technology and growth that we may soon reach. " While the article is in a way all about exploring that disconnect, it's a bit strange to find it written down so explicitly in the conclusio…

The 'soonness' of our interplanetary colonization is really not safe to assume. The obstacles to self-sustaining life on other worlds are not insignificant -- in fact, they are the explanation for why there is no life there to begin with.

You are certainly correct - but did I imply otherwise in my comment..?