Dissolving the Fermi Paradox • Hacker News Board

Re: Dissolving the Fermi Paradox

#71

Post by sinuhe69 » Thu, May 20, 2021, 4:35 AM UTC

koheripbal wrote: post #52

sinuhe69 wrote: post #26

If we just stop for a moment and think how little we can “receive” from our surrounding (100 hundred light year max?) and how vast the universe, even our galaxy is and how incredible long the time span between the birth of the first stars and the birth of our petite civilization then we will realize we still can deduce nothing about the existence or non-existence of other civilizations.

This is only for omnidirectional radio signals. Directional beams can go arbitrarily further.

What kind of “directional” signal you can think of sending from a planet millions years ago that can hit earth exactly in the moment a SETI antenna directed at it and ready to receive? And how much energy should this civilization keep pumping in the signal to increase the probability that someone can receive them? And why it should make any sense to waste energy like this when the probability that you can receive a confirmation is equal zero even when other civilizations are out there?

About the required power and signal degradation over distance, see this: https://www.quora.com/How-far-do-radio-signals-travel-into-s...

Re: Dissolving the Fermi Paradox

#72

Post by zackees » Thu, May 20, 2021, 5:59 AM UTC

gmuslera wrote: post #50

The streetlight effect, we are searching in our close neighborhood, for signals that we would use in our current kind and stage of civilization, and because we didn't find anything we conclude that in the whole universe there is no life or intelligent life at all. Maybe SETI search should add several terms to the drake equation to understand odds of hitting gold. Is not enough to be intelligent life, to be found in t…

Could it be possible that the “no aliens exist” meme is just not true?

Because mainstream media is saying that the military is admitting to tracking aliens for years now.

Re: Dissolving the Fermi Paradox

#73

Post by esarbe » Thu, May 20, 2021, 9:01 AM UTC

wildermuthn wrote: post #17

The paper basically says that the Drake equation is just a guess, and if we’re going to guess, we might as well do so using probabilistic models. Their model puts the Great Filter behind us. This makes intuitive sense too — an early Great Filter simply has to stop life from occurring, while a late Great Filter has to deal with the complexity of preventing life from doing what it does best (surviving and spreading in…

> This makes intuitive sense too — an early Great Filter simply has to stop life from occurring,

I'm not so sure why this supposed to make intuitive sense. Life is a gradient, so any metabolic process that happens on a energy gradient can be considered 'alife'. I really don't see how an early Great Filter would work - are you going to stop energy gradients from happening? I've read -- will try to dig up the source -- that -- at least simple life -- is pretty much a given since -- even though it creates pockets of lower entropy -- allows for the most paths to thermodynamic equilibrium.

In my opinion a late filter makes more sense. That is; any species that evolves in the confinements of competition for resources and natural selection is -- due to the requirements that competition for resources creates -- necessarily unable to properly transition to a steady-state mode with no competition for resources and no (or limited) natural selection.

The reason for that is that the transition phase from competition for resources to the steady-state phase is simply too short. I'm convinced that this is what we are currently seeing with Humanity on a global scale; even though there's no need for competition for resources, we're still biologically and socially 'programmed' to compete with each other for resources, mates and habitats.

(Biologically, all humans are more closely related to each other than -- for example -- any two chimpanzee tribes. We are not very diverse, genetically.)

That inability to quickly change a species 'modus operandi' to a steady-state model together with the immense power multiplication of technology and cooperation that make it possible for civilization to literally dominate their ecosphere, I don't see how any species is ever going to survive that threshold.

The result of that inability to switch to a steady-state model and the powers achieved - tools and cooperation are the ultimate exploits! -- is simply extinction by habitat destruction.

I think that the current observations quite neatly match this.

Re: Dissolving the Fermi Paradox

#74

Post by gremlinsinc » Fri, May 21, 2021, 8:13 AM UTC

gfxgirl wrote: post #22

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not religious. If anything the opposite is true. Believing we're the only intelligent life in the universe is an epic violation of the Copernican Principle. There are so many other explanations for Fermi Silence - from the reality of extremely limited sampling to the creeping suspicion that we're too mediocre and underdeveloped to recognise truly intelligent life - that grand assumptions about our specialness se…

Some religions: From the Book of Moses 1:33, a Mormon scripture > And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.

Exmormon, they basically believe all other planets are nicer than this shithole....and Jesus had to come here because the Jews were the only ones who'd be evil enough to crucify the son of god for ALL earths that ever will be.