Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

universetoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 327 posts

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#61

Post by pharmakom »

jerf wrote: post #54
Archelaos wrote: post #22

What makes the dark forest hypothesis not so conving to me is that it has the presupposition that it is indeed possible to hide. An advanced civilization close to us that is surveying the sky for signs of life would have very likely identified earth as a very promissing candidate due to the presence of methane and oxygen in its atmosphere at the same time. So our star system would have long been under surveillance, b…

I agree with your logic but would add one more thing to it: There is no compelling reason to wait until a planet conclusively proves it has intelligence on it to nuke it into oblivion with a kinetic kill projectile. You don't really know how long it will take for an intelligent species that could compete with you to arise. Humans have moved pretty quickly on cosmological scales, there's no particular reason to believ…

You don’t destroy the system because you want to inhabit it yourself. This assumes that life is looking for similar habitats and that it’s not simpler to create an artificial planet anyway.

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#62

Post by NiceWayToDoIT »

yreg wrote: post #40
NiceWayToDoIT wrote: post #17

In the near future it is more likely we will wipe out ourselves either due to Nuclear War, Global Warming, rogue AI or similar, than some hostile alien civilization will get us. It seems that we are those hostile aliens for ourselves.

Do you think that most/all civilisations end this way before becoming spacefarers?

I don't think, or rather I hope there are civilization that as a part of their evolution had cooperation, sharing, exploration and innovation embedded as main and prevalent strategies of survival and thriving. I would like to think that there is as in magic fairy tails of old, civilization where good prevails. Where leaders (or what ever mechanism of decision they have) and those in power - are not easily corrupted as here.

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#63

Post by kadoban »

snowwrestler wrote: post #48

To me the most likely back of the napkin answer to the Fermi paradox is that aliens are elsewhere in time. The Milky Way galaxy is about 100,000 light years across but about 13.5 billion years old. So it’s like 135,000x deeper in the time direction than the distance direction. We’re in the light cones of all the stars we can see, and as far as we know, we can’t get out of them. If a civilization ended even 100 years…

If true, that ends up meaning that alien civilizations are short-lived, right? That doesn't bode well for us.

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#64

Post by marcosdumay »

yreg wrote: post #39
Mordisquitos wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see that as a counterpoint, but more of a post hoc theory. How could the eradicators detect and destroy their victims before we detected any signal at all from the victims? And why haven't the eradicators come for us yet? Of course, this could always be explained by the distances involved and the limitations of light speed, but that would make the Dark Forest hypothesis redundant as an explanation as to why w…

>How could the eradicators detect and destroy their victims before we detected any signal at all from the victims? Even if they destroy them within say a thousand years, then at any given time there would be only few civilizations at the right age to be broadcasting. And not very loud at that. We listen only to a miniscule portion of the Galaxy. IMO, Fermi's question shouldn't be "Why can't we hear the few civs that…

The Fermi question is a lot closer to "how come Earth wasn't colonized before we even appear?" than "how come we can't see anybody?".

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#65

Post by minitoar »

jeremyjh wrote: post #55
jerf wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your logic but would add one more thing to it: There is no compelling reason to wait until a planet conclusively proves it has intelligence on it to nuke it into oblivion with a kinetic kill projectile. You don't really know how long it will take for an intelligent species that could compete with you to arise. Humans have moved pretty quickly on cosmological scales, there's no particular reason to believ…

How far away from earth is it still possible to detect oxygen and/or methane levels in the atmosphere?

You just need enough light to do spectroscopy. I’m not really aware of a limit other than being in our light cone.

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#66

Post by hashkb »

kadoban wrote: post #63
snowwrestler wrote: post #48

To me the most likely back of the napkin answer to the Fermi paradox is that aliens are elsewhere in time. The Milky Way galaxy is about 100,000 light years across but about 13.5 billion years old. So it’s like 135,000x deeper in the time direction than the distance direction. We’re in the light cones of all the stars we can see, and as far as we know, we can’t get out of them. If a civilization ended even 100 years…

If true, that ends up meaning that alien civilizations are short-lived, right? That doesn't bode well for us.

We're on a steady path to extinction, no doubt.

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#67

Post by chadwittman »

yreg wrote: post #40
NiceWayToDoIT wrote: post #17

In the near future it is more likely we will wipe out ourselves either due to Nuclear War, Global Warming, rogue AI or similar, than some hostile alien civilization will get us. It seems that we are those hostile aliens for ourselves.

Do you think that most/all civilisations end this way before becoming spacefarers?

It's a common proposed solution to the Great Filter idea.

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#68

Post by throw1234651234 »

hashkb wrote: post #66
kadoban wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If true, that ends up meaning that alien civilizations are short-lived, right? That doesn't bode well for us.

We're on a steady path to extinction, no doubt.

Generalization. Would be interesting discussion with details. Pop is growing. What's your concern - global warming, fertility rates, pollution, nuclear arsenal, running out of resources? Doesn't seem like we are doing that badly and that pop can't drop if get below renewable resource level or adjust to new ways of making energy/food, etc.

Does seem likely that on an extremely long time scale, we need to get multi-planetary, which is "realistic" if we give a reasonable time frame of, say, 10,000 years.

As far as the sun dying, that's beyond even parent point's timeline. This is very things start to get questionable if we never get to even .1 of c (e.g. Project Orion "realistic" estimates). Alpha Centauri is relative close at 4.something ly, but other "potentially habitable/useful" star systems are way out there.

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#69

Post by chadwittman »

kadoban wrote: post #63
snowwrestler wrote: post #48

To me the most likely back of the napkin answer to the Fermi paradox is that aliens are elsewhere in time. The Milky Way galaxy is about 100,000 light years across but about 13.5 billion years old. So it’s like 135,000x deeper in the time direction than the distance direction. We’re in the light cones of all the stars we can see, and as far as we know, we can’t get out of them. If a civilization ended even 100 years…

If true, that ends up meaning that alien civilizations are short-lived, right? That doesn't bode well for us.

Read more about the Great Filter, it's probable it's ahead of us.

Re: Beyond “Fermi’s Paradox” XVI: What Is the “Dark Forest” Hypothesis?

#70

Post by chadwittman »

yarg wrote: post #31
InsomniacL wrote: post #23

I have a theory that intelligence isn't particularly rare however the rate of development may be. It has long been alluded to in Sci-Fi that humanity's rate of development is fast (Humans vs Vulcans, Halo universe, etc). I imagine that one of the great barriers is that a civilisation with a lower rate of development may stuck in an industrial type era unable to progress before doing irreparable damage to their enviro…

I think that the biggest issue's gonna be a time gap. Life shows up and spends a long time doing not much, then exponential growth kicks in, life gets smart and suicides out in 100000 years or so. The rate of intelligent and communicating planets is going to be low enough; the chance of two such planets within a distance that allowed for bidirectional communication existing simultaneously is dwindling - and even then…

Love that quote: "If ever we meet aliens they'll be cavemen or gods."
Post reply on HN