/jp/ - Otaku Culture

[Anonymous No.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_giant#The_Sun_as_a_red_giant

Evidently we've got about 5 billion years before the sun swallows the Earth.

Just a reminder to take it easy while you still can.

[Anonymous No.]

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835447

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835448

[Anonymous No.]

I need your help /jp/! At what point am I taking it TOO easy?

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835454
When you start sucking too much cock.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835446 5 billion years
Thanks for the timely warning Anonymous. I'll now quit my job and enjoy what time I have left.

[Anonymous No.]

If humanity doesn't get to a singularity by then (or at the very least substrate independence), they deserve to die. Nobody could be that stupid, right?

[Anonymous No.]

>Over another billion years, most of the atmosphere will get lost in space as well,[17] ultimately leaving Earth as a desiccated, dead planet with a surface of molten rock.

I wonder how many planets with this physical description we've seen in the distant reaches of space..

How sobering it is to think it possible that, at every moment, we may be surrounded by the light of countless billion planet-sized graveyards, housing naught but the incinerated bones of entire civilizations

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835473
You do realize that any generally intelligent civilization (given sufficient resources) should be able to dig themselves out of that problem only given a few thousand years of subjective time, right?

I can't think of any greater shame than failing something like this. The real problem is what to do with the natural life which isn't capable of overcoming this problem.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835486

Shut up, you're ruining my morose romanticism

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835498
Sorry, it's just that whenever I hear stuff like this I think of bad SF movies and of that silly children's story about a man who couldn't get out of the way despite being warned a thousand times that he will die if he doesn't do so, except this isn't a thousand times, but billions of times and moving very slowly.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835486
And you are optimistic. What is the chance that they never discovered FTL travel because it's a physical impossibility and their own star system withered and died ? What is the chance that a catastrophe like a gamma ray burst happened in a vicinity ? Or their own superweapons decimating them ? That is a very real threat.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835602
I'm not betting on FTL being possible (I doubt it is possible in our universe). I'm just betting on the usual technological advances that such a society would have to go through. You don't need FTL to get yourself out of this situation.

Your situation would require quite bad luck. They'd have to be fine the huge amount of time required to evolve up to general intelligence, but then get really bad luck and end up destroying themselves.

> Or their own superweapons decimating them?
Possible, but I like to apply the anthropic principle here. There's probably plenty of branches in the multiverse where we killed ourselves with our own atomic weapons. We'll just somehow find ourselves not doing it for a reason or another (usually due to good politics), and the cases where we did it, we'd be dead, thus those are irrelevant.

The gamma-ray burst is a nastier problem, but it would require really bad luck and bad timing.

[Anonymous No.]

The real reason that you don't see any advanced civilizations is because if they were intelligent enough to know how to travel/survive in space and shit, they would come to the conclusion there is no point and thus kill themselves off. You're welcome /jp/ I have solved the universe.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835668
Not so fast there depressed individual. If someone has a non-empty motivational system, no matter how stupid or random (human one is "random" enough), they already have plenty of reasons to enjoy living (even a reason such as improving their models or reducing cognitive dissonance - what /jp/ calls "autism" (not really)).

I do have my own set of answers to the Fermi paradox, but that would make this thread even more off-topic than it already is.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835681
Like what? Simulations? I too toy with those ideas, but it simply isn't so. Negative utilitarianism is the morality of any advanced species, and that calls for the prevention of the propagation of existence. I was going to write a book about it but I stopped. Also, I'm on anti-depressants but I can't deny that depressive realism fueled those ideas, but that actually further supports my hypothesis as I was less misguided than you or I right now.

[Anonymous No.]

This thread is babbys first Heliophysics and Fermi paradox.

>>8835695
>I was going to write a book about it but I stopped
lmao

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835716
What's so funny big boy? I'd post my ideas here but you'd steal them because they're so sugoi. Stay jealous nerd!

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835695
> Like what? Simulations?
To Fermi Paradox? First, actually evolving general intelligence is probably not that easy and requires a lot of luck. Second, those that evolve to GI, develop technological civilizations and eventually hit a singularity or singularity-like event (usually when they first become substrate independent). The outcome of that can be:
1) Local simulations, "hikki" brain-in-a-vat civilizations, too lazy to go out into the universe
2) If computationalism is true, then they can also rather easily change their perspective to a different "universe" and leave this one behind.
3) If they instead choose to turn this universe into computronium instead of performing step 2 (be it for religious reasons or whateer), we'd be selected out by the Anthropic Principle - first civilization wins, so you can only be the first technological civilization or the highly improbable case where more than one develops to technological civilization AT THE SAME TIME (improbable).
4) Variations of 3, but more stupid (seem to be popular in /sci/, I'm not going to bother listing them here, it's basically "take-over-the-galaxy or universe" self-replicating type of scenarios).

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835731
> continued
> I too toy with those ideas, but it simply isn't so. Negative utilitarianism is the morality of any advanced species, and that calls for the prevention of the propagation of existence. I was going to write a book about it but I stopped. Also, I'm on anti-depressants but I can't deny that depressive realism fueled those ideas, but that actually further supports my hypothesis as I was less misguided than you or I right now.

Now there's also possibility 0: technologically civlizations end up reducing their measure in the multiverse when they first come about, be it through physical experimentation ("did that LHC experiment mysteriously fail, when if it would have succeeded it would have collapsed the vacuum", probably not very likely though), or just more deliberate civilization-sized quantum suicide experiments. In our case, I suspect we had a few of these with the atomic race in the last century.

There's basically plenty of failure modes, but if a mode just reduces your measure in the multiverse, that doesn't mean you notice all your fuck-ups, but your neighbors will be lonely in all those other worlds.


> Negative utilitarianism is the morality of any advanced species, and that calls for the prevention of the propagation of existence.
Only applies for limited resource universes. True in our case, but option 2 that I listed might be doable (see "Permutation City" for an idea on how, if you didn't know already). Also, if MWI, also check out: www.paul-almond.com/ManyWorldsAssistedMindUploading.htm

[Anonymous No.]

I'll be long dead before this shit happens

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835732
Well you seem to favor the science perspective but I favor the philosophical perspective, the freudian death drive.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835736

That's the /jp/ spirit!

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835735
If I'm right, death isn't really possible (it's just measure reduction), so the best one could do is become lotus eaters if they didn't want to continue using up resources.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835740
Death not possible? Explain. The death drive only calls for returning to the inorganic "natural" state.

[Anonymous No.]

There will be no record of the things I hate.

This pleases me.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835747
All those shitposts will be lost in time, like planets in the supernova.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835746
Local death is possible, in a 3rd person way relative to others sharing the current state. However, in almost any multiverse theory, first person death is never possible, you will keep surviving improbable events more and more.

Let me elaborate: consider some scenario which you would only survive with a 1/3^^^3 probability. In almost all worlds, you would appear to be dead, but to yourself, you would always have a continuation where you keep surviving, even though it's highly improbably. From a person's inner perspective, death is merely a way of changing their measure in this situation. From a 3rd person perspective, it's just death (in 3^^^3-1 of 3^^^3 cases).

Of course, death events are not binary, so weird crippling situations become more likely, and even worse: bad cases of amnesia, dementia, etc as time progresses.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835759
Also, this reasoning can apply to civilizations too, if you've got a big enough threat against them.

One will only experience that which is consistent with them existing in that state.

[Anonymous No.]

humanity will destroy itself long before any of this shit becomes relevant

enjoy your day

[Anonymous No.]

Venice is sinking about 5 millimeters a year better visit it now!!!!

[Anonymous No.]

You are now aware that plants will cease to be able to photosynthesize in less then 800 million years, and with their passing will go all the oxygen in a few hundred thousand years.

Since we've been going now for about 500 million years, we're roughly half-way through biology's history.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835806
That's not true. Jesus Christ will return before then all who believe in Him will ascend into heaven.

[Anonymous No.]

>implying we don't have only three years left before everyone does the Tang dance

[Anonymous No.]

I remember when I cared about this sort of thing, when I was 150-years-old.

At the grand old age of 23, I ceased to give a fuck long ago. I'm going back to reading Haruko Maniax.

[Anonymous No.]

My own death is irrelevant but it makes me sad to think that one day Japanese Civilization will be no more.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835844

[Anonymous No.]

>>8835897
3D PRETTY DELICIOUS?

[Anonymous No.]

>>8836018

No its 3D Pig disgusting newfriend.