261–270 of 278 posts
Europa is definitely the most exciting part of the solar system that sparks imagination. Literally 100s of miles of pitch black ocean with thermal vents, ripe for life. Getting kiddy thinking about the leviathan sized aliens roaming the deep ocean of Europa. Does anyone else feel this way?
Well technically they would just be Europeans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know what that means. The statement just wasn't useful and comes across as sassy and arrogant.
Do you think it's belittling to point out that someone may not have scientific knowledge? Ie, is the statement something beyond mere fact? What makes having scientific knowledge good, that you may infer that someone may think not having it is bad?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The distances involved, the speed of light and inverse square laws mean we wouldn't expect to have detected aliens yet if they are there That’s not true at all - simple assumptions would make it likely we would have encountered intelligent life if it evolved in the past in this galaxy.
We don't have the technology to detect signals similar to our own from the distance of even the nearest stars [1], and there is no reason to assume that more technologically advanced civilisations will generate vastly larger signals. Therefore the absence of detection to date tells us nothing, except to place an extremely generous upper bound on the power of signals they generate. [1] https://www.seti.org/press-relea…
That’s bad, I heard Carbon is pretty bad to any environment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Saying there might be fixes for this in the future is also disingenuous. It's like saying military burn pits are okay because there may be medical advancements in the future that can be used to treat afflicted soldiers.
Arguing against optimism is arguing against the history of science. We have cures to diseases that were declared unavoidable divine judgements, we have achieved feats of engineering that would be unimaginable a century ago. I am not arguing for the deapoilation of the planet. We should preserve our resources as best we can. But future growth requires the usage of what resources we do have, in to achieve outcomes and…
If you showed today's world to an optimist from a century ago they would see many wondrous things they would never have thought of, but they would also fail to see many of their predicted advancements. And I do think that what optimists predict is usually far more impressive than what actually comes to fruition. That's not to say the pessimists are right, but the optimists simply don't have the track record you seem to think they have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Every once in a while, I get reminded that people don’t necessarily have a scientific background. This isn't necessary for your point and detracts from an otherwise useful clarification.
I find it helpful to remember. When covid was starting to spread I worried a lot about potential exponential growth and was confused why a lot of others didn't seem so worried. While there may be many reasons, one that came to mind is that they may not have learned as much about exponential growth as I had in electrical and computer engineering and in working with startups. So it helped me to remember not everyone ha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except those are utter nonsense. The distances involved, the speed of light and inverse square laws mean we wouldn't expect to have detected aliens yet if they are there, so we can't deduce anything about their existence from the fact we haven't detected them. The "Fermi" "paradox" is like someone locked in a bathroom going "OMG I can't see anybody! Everybody on earth must have died!!".
> The distances involved, the speed of light and inverse square laws mean we wouldn't expect to have detected aliens yet if they are there That’s not true at all - simple assumptions would make it likely we would have encountered intelligent life if it evolved in the past in this galaxy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We don't have the technology to detect signals similar to our own from the distance of even the nearest stars [1], and there is no reason to assume that more technologically advanced civilisations will generate vastly larger signals. Therefore the absence of detection to date tells us nothing, except to place an extremely generous upper bound on the power of signals they generate. [1] https://www.seti.org/press-relea…
All you need is one single civilization to develop von Neumann probes and then they’re everywhere in the universe (or at least Galaxy). If life really is so ubiquitous as to be found in 3 different planets or moons in our solar system then we’re totally screwed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We don't have the technology to detect signals similar to our own from the distance of even the nearest stars [1], and there is no reason to assume that more technologically advanced civilisations will generate vastly larger signals. Therefore the absence of detection to date tells us nothing, except to place an extremely generous upper bound on the power of signals they generate. [1] https://www.seti.org/press-relea…
We wouldn’t need to detect signals - life arising only a few hundred million years earlier than us would easily have been able to send physical artifacts/vehicles/harvesting to every system in the entire galaxy if they had interstellar travel. If life were common enough that it has evolved multiple times in the same solar system (excluding panspermia) then this becomes almost a certainty that it should have occurred
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Every once in a while, I get reminded that people don’t necessarily have a scientific background. This isn't necessary for your point and detracts from an otherwise useful clarification.
I find it helpful to remember. When covid was starting to spread I worried a lot about potential exponential growth and was confused why a lot of others didn't seem so worried. While there may be many reasons, one that came to mind is that they may not have learned as much about exponential growth as I had in electrical and computer engineering and in working with startups. So it helped me to remember not everyone ha…
They took 7th grade math, but assert that y=mx is meaningless in real life and doesn't help them understand anything they have to deal with