Live data from Hacker News

Once we can see them, it’s too late

scottaaronson.com

61–70 of 114 posts

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#61
post #18

This kind of assumes that a “maxed out” civilization can expand at speed of light, but I don’t think it is given. It may very well be that meaningfully massive transport cannot exceed even a small fraction of c . After all, propulsion has to make energetic sense. 1. There is energy to get to speed 2. Mass of fuel to decelerate (and you have to accelerate that fuel in the beginning!) 3. Highly blue shifted CMB (that a…

In theory you can manipulate atoms and molecules at a distance with light. So you can use a laser beam to construct a 3D printer at a distance. Rinse and repeat, and this is asymptotically expanding at c.

The first few pages of Glory by Greg Egan describe something a bit like that.

https://bobson.ludost.net/hugoawardnominees/2008/GregEganGlo...

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#62
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3D printing. Deliver the printer, rest is just information.

Sure, but printers have mass/volume and require energy. I think in all Van Neumann probe scenarios (which this is) the fact that you bring a micro—replicator that makes other micro-replicators is a given.

Right, a bacterium is proof-of-concept for a literally microscopic printer. Maybe the seed to grow into a radio dish out of asteroid materials and sunlight would necessarily be bigger than that, but I'd be surprised if it really had to be bigger than, say... a seed.

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#64
Another interesting idea I've been playing with is that there's no guarantee that the lifeform that replaces us will be the same level of complexity. What does it feel like to be a molecule? A mitochondria? A cell? All of these are or were once self-contained "things", but now they exist as part of larger systems. Our image of the beings that replace us tends to look like us and be roughly the same size - robots or little green men. But what if the thing that replaces us encompasses us, so that individual humans become cells in a giant superorganism.

There's some evidence that this is already happening - with 6 billion humans on earth, the global economy is already showing specialization (similar to how cells develop into organs in a human) and complex emergent behavior, with parts of it dying off without killing the whole.

What if the reason are experience looks like it does, with life a full 1/4 of the age of the universe, because at later points in the universe's evolution, life at this scale becomes meaningless and the primary sentient beings are planetary civilization interacting at the speed of light through the galaxy? Or galactic civilizations interacting throughout the universe?

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#65
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are assuming present day lasers. An advanced civilization will individually control the photons. You also don't really need atom resolution anyway. You can build mechanical computers driven by rolling stones by abblating matter with powerful beams - lithography on continent size scale, etc.

Even if you individually control the photons, I'm not sure that's possible. Matter still behaves like a wave at quantum levels. I don't know enough to say with certainty. This is all highly speculative.

You don't need all your photons to get to the destination. Only some of them. And you can use error correcting methods to ensure they have a useful pattern when they arrive.

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#66
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Want something scary? The form of reasoning used is exactly that in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_argument for why humanity is unlikely to last long, and almost certainly will not have a future where we break out and colonize most of the Solar System, let alone the stars. If you believe both arguments, the most likely outcome is that there is one more step on the way to Robin's argument. And that outcome…

We are within 500 years of creating millions of self sustaining spaceports. We are within 500 years of AGI. We are within 500 years of understanding quantum gravity. We are within 500 years of fixing biological death. The order we get to those and how they interplay and change the world matters so much that it doesn't make sense to worry about making predictions.

You state these "we are within 500 years" as if they are certainties, but you show no evidence for any of them. The only one I consider even slightly likely is that we are within 500 years of understanding quantum gravity.

So... evidence? Argument? Just stating baldly that it is so is not very convincing.

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#67
post #18

This kind of assumes that a “maxed out” civilization can expand at speed of light, but I don’t think it is given. It may very well be that meaningfully massive transport cannot exceed even a small fraction of c . After all, propulsion has to make energetic sense. 1. There is energy to get to speed 2. Mass of fuel to decelerate (and you have to accelerate that fuel in the beginning!) 3. Highly blue shifted CMB (that a…

Sometimes I wonder if a prerequisite to becoming the kind of civilization that could span a large volume of space is becoming the kind of civilization that has solved the problems that might drive a civilization to need that kind of expansion.

Consider Earth. If we set T=0 at one year ago, and assume that there really is no way around the speed of light, then it follows that by year N, every human alive must be within a sphere of radius N light years.

The average human has a volume of about 0.06 m^3, according to a few sites I found on the net. If you divide the volume of a sphere of radius N light years by 0.06 m^3, you get an upper limit on the number of humans that can be alive in year N.

Given a fixed population growth rate, you can figure out at what year the population hits the upper limit. It is startling faster than you might guess.

At 1% annual growth, we hit it by year 12059, when we'd have a population of 1.04 x 10^62 needing to fit in a volume of 6.22 x 10^60 m^3.

At 0.1% annual growth, we hit it by year 127168, with a population of 1.27 x 10^65 needing to fit in 7.26 x 10^23 m^3.

At 0.01% annual growth, we hit it by 1341545, with 1.45 x 10^68 people needing to fit in 8.56 x 10^66 m^3.

It is clear then, barring faster than light travel (or expansion into other dimensions or parallel universes or something like that), that growth rates for an growing civilization must in the long run go down, and keep going down until growth is very very low if that civilization survives long term.

Keep in mind that my numbers above are the time to hit a ridiculously high limit (packing all space that could be reached at the speed of light starting last year with over 16 humans per m^3). If you use a limit not as ridiculous, such as the still ridiculous limit of all mass within that volume is used to make humans, you'd get a much shorter time to the limit.

I think this might be a candidate for the Great Filter. Lowering growth rates means getting some people not to reproduce, but millions of years of evolution have selected for reproduction. Maybe civilization hit a point where they must slow down growth more than their citizens are willing to do, and that leads to internal conflict that if it does not destroy them at least stops them from further advancing.

The result may be that there may be a lot of civilizations out there, but they get stuck at the first size limit that they hit where (1) they don't have the technology to get past that limit but (2) they have the technology to make war over that limit devastating.

Civilizations that avoid this have figured out how to thrive indefinitely without depending on growth. Such a civilization might not feel the need to expand into a large volume of space. They may be content to stay within their solar system.

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#68

Wa there really such a big need for such a clickbait title? Now I'll never know what it was about. Probably someone selling stuff.

You could either read the article or read the comments. (If there aren't any, wait until there are and read them.) But don't do what you did, which is make a completely uninformative comment. Even if the article is clickbait, and therefore a waste of everybody's time, don't add to the waste with comments like yours.

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#69
post #23

An interesting paper that I don't see brought up often enough is "Dissolving the Fermi Paradox" by Anders Sandberg, Eric Drexler and Toby Ord[0]. They show that it isn't a surprise that we are alone in the universe if we consider the uncertainty inherent to parameters of the Drake equation. Their analysis estimate that there is (at least) a 39% chance that we are alone in the observable universe. [0]: https://arxiv.o…

I really dislike these type of papers. Just like Drake equation, it is all guesswork with completely unknown boundaries for many of the parameters.

How will their paper work if we confirm life on Venus, especially if it independently evolved.

Re: Once we can see them, it’s too late

#70
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Want something scary? The form of reasoning used is exactly that in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_argument for why humanity is unlikely to last long, and almost certainly will not have a future where we break out and colonize most of the Solar System, let alone the stars. If you believe both arguments, the most likely outcome is that there is one more step on the way to Robin's argument. And that outcome…

We are within 500 years of creating millions of self sustaining spaceports. We are within 500 years of AGI. We are within 500 years of understanding quantum gravity. We are within 500 years of fixing biological death. The order we get to those and how they interplay and change the world matters so much that it doesn't make sense to worry about making predictions.

What about the climate crisis halting or slowing down technological progress?
Post reply on HN