/sci/ - Science & Math

Paradox can just mean finding something out that is surprising/ against expectations. It isn't a paradox in the false/true statement sense.

>>11548211
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

>>11548211
As I have said many times, the Alpha Centauri system could have every planet in its system be an ecumenopolis and an entire system-spanning fleet of heavy warships and we would never know any of that because human technology is little better than flung shit from apes. Pic related is the clearest image we have of our nearest celestial neighbor. That's it.

>>11548337
It's not a fucking paradox because it's stupid as fuck.

>>11548361
This. Good luck convincing the modern witch doctors calling themselves "scientists" of that, though.

>>11548383
we would be picking up massive amounts of evidence of radio waves if that were the case.

>>11548425
Sure, because stupid Earth monkeys spam radio pollution everywhere, everyone would. Especially a civilization more advanced than humans that know that light is a highly ineffective form of communication on star system level scales.

But you precious primates just stay convinced nothing is faster than light. That is just adorable!

The Fermi """""Paradox""""" is a blind man declaring the moon can't be real because he can't feel it like he does the sun.

>>11548435
You desire false physics because you don't like what actual physics implies.

>>11548211
If space is infinite then anything with a remote probability of being real, is real.

>>11548211
I wouldn't worry about it too much at this point.
There is so much of the Keppler and TESS datasets that haven't even been glanced at except for an algorithm that does a quick scrub of the data for what scientists are expecting to find. Could be every other system has death stars and dyson spheres around them but since no one has gone looking through the data for them it just remains burried in the pile.
The next generation of exoplanet telescopes will try and suss out what the atmospheres of these potentially habitable worlds looks like through spectroscopy at which point any biological byproducts should stand out like a sore thumb.
The next design generation after that will be able to directly image exoplanets.
If the human race survives another hundred years without major set backs and still haven't found any clear cut examples of ayy lmao life in the galaxy THEN you can start to worry.

>>11548599
>The dumb lies we made up literally based on judaism are the TRUTH! How dare you spout heresy?! What? Dark mat- NOW WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT MATTER!??! Of course you're a lunatic if you doubt the existence of something that's unfalsifiable! Do you not believe in math??!

>>11548383
you're retarded. A civilization of that scale would be venting heat like crazy and we'd easily be able to pick it up. Measuring our understanding of the cosmos by optical astronomy is like measuring achievements in neural science by how many problems lobotomies cure.

>>11548642
Absolutely seething dumbfuck retard

>>11548653
>A civilization of that scale would be venting heat like crazy
Why?

>we'd easily be able to pick it up
Humans can barely see the STARS in that system. Are you implying they'd be producing as much waste heat as stars?

>>11548654
Great rebuttal. Post some non-mathematical actual proof of dark matter or dark energy AND shut the fuck up.

>>11548435
We have things like wi-fi but we still use cables or data packeted in vhf for communication. Each method has some advantages, and i believe radio waves will still be useful, at every stage of civilization.

>>11548670
>i believe
That's nice, sweetheart.

>space is huge
>space is goddamn billions of years old
>intelligent life is super rare
There might have been another intelligent race at the other end of the galaxy that had been around for half a million years, but then they went extinct and a few hundred years later humans invented fire.

Do we even have a decent understanding of how rare the emergence of life is? There’s a litany of factors that played into Carbon based life on earth and I’m not sure if we have any idea how likely it is such could play out elsewhere in the universe.

Maybe it's human hubris to think that intelligent life is the ultimate goal.

Intelligence like ours could be a fluke. I fail to see why evolution would need to produce life as intelligent as our species. We could have survived to this day with half of our brains.

>>11548783
The universe made us to understand ourselves, and by extension, the universe itself.

>>11548783
Humans don't possess intelligence.

>>11548661
You post actual evidence of anything sending information faster than light you dumbfuck

>>11549095
No. Because that's not required. You, small little pea-brained monkey that you are, are not the grand arbiter of what is possible in the universe.

>>11548846
Did the universe tell you that?

>>11548211
There may be many civs out there but the fact we can see the stars means that none of them are much more advanced than we are.

What even is intelligence?

Single Celled Organisms dominate the planet. And can travel vast distances. On a scale humans can barely even comprehend.

>>11549134
This is such a reddit post idea. Dyson Spheres are a fucking retarded concept. Literally nobody has any reason to build one outside of a place where stars are rare to begin with, which means we wouldn't notice if there WERE one. It costs significantly fewer resources to just colonize another star system.

>>11549151
>Literally nobody has any reason to build one
Nature's fusion reactor plus all the living space you could ever want.

>>11549123
Yes it is required you fucking ape. You made the claim that you can send information faster than light, post evidence of this claim, or shut your bitch mouth.

>>11548383
>because human technology is little better than flung shit from apes
holy fucking win. good job anon

>>11550102
Nigger do you think the universe is small?

>>11550110
No. It isn't. The claim is that you don't know fuck about the universe because you are an infinitesimal speck in it. That doesn't require evidence. The universe does not bow to human ignorance. Eat shit.

Why do we assume any intelligent species would develop the same recognizable society as us? Why assume they are social instead of some singular organism, why even assume they would be animal like as opposed to some advanced archaea or fungal stuff? Humans in our hundreds of thousands of years of existence have only developed radio emitting technology for a fraction of that time.

>>11550139
i'm gonna ram this here dick cock RIGHT up into your little pussy cunt

>>11548211

Why would a sufficiently advanced civilization expand outward? I know Elon and Bezos are building ships, but space colonization is just a smoke screen for somethings that I don't feel like sharing. Point is we aint going to live in space, senpai. We'll be synthetic soon, and when that happens we colonize inward... smaller for infinity.

>>11548211
I agree. I always have. Some call me a rug. Others a carpet. I always say yes.

the probability of a planet being long term habitable is already extremely low, astronomy fags are liars that don't take a planet's geology, nearby cosmic events, a planet's climate, etc into account so the numbers are actually much lower than what they say.
since there is only one intelligent species on earth then that also means that the probability of intelligent life is extremely low (1 divided by the number of all species that have lived and are living). add all of this together and you will see why it's very possible that we are the only intelligent beings in the universe

>>11549095
Do you really think Einstein had it right and we reached the end of the road on our studies of the cosmos and light? I mean use your fucking brain man. Lots of you fags give human intelligent way to much credit.

>>11548425
Even if they were using analog radio for some absurd reason, we would have no way of picking it up from that far away.
>>11550327
You mean that colonize atoms nonsense?
>>11550512
There used to be many, we are the only one that made it. Our brains are actually somewhere between neanderthals and erectus, even people with erectus sized brains have normal, or even high intelligence enough to get the nobel prize in literature and it's expected denisovans had even bigger brains than neanderthals.

The missing piece is how long advanced civilizations last. There are probably lots of habitable worlds, but as soon as a species gets to the point where it can communicate they probably nuke themselves in a century

>>11550638
Yes. This is the reason why it's most likely a requirement for the species to breed themeself peaceful and it's quite unlikely that aliens would be a threat.

>>11550650
How can a peaceful species emergy? Unless all other species on that planet are intrinsically cooperative, which kind of goes against Darwin.

>>11550654
>emergy
>emerge via evolution

>>11550654
They start a war, kill almost everyone, their civilization collapses and the few survivors who ran away from the war start anew, until their technology gets good enough that they can kill everyone despite their peacefullnes. Repeat until nobody wants to have anything to do with war anymore.

>>11548361
Yes it is. It's a simple corollary of Bayes'.

>>11550534
Yes, Einstein got it right. The reason we don't see these giant space empires and shit is because the actual upper bound for intelligence and technological sophistication possible, given by the laws of physics and computation, are SIGNIFICANTLY lower than what singularity faggots and other scifi incels desire it to be.
The universe is teeming with intelligent life. But the upper bound for technology and intelligence and the ability to solve problems is very low, and humanity will hit the wall within the next 20 years.

>>11550119
The correct claim is that you are wrong, we do in fact understand a lot about how the universe actually and objectively operates, the speed of light IS the upper bound, this will not be broken or "discovered to be false" in the future (because it is the objective truth), and the reason we don't see aliens is because no intelligence is great enough within the laws of physics and computation to sustain this shit.
A literal super intelligence with the computational power of a galaxy still would not even come close to being able to organize a semester of a university, let alone be able to figure out protein folding or mind uploading or any of this other shit.

>>11548383
>s I have said many times, the Alpha Centauri system could have every planet in its system be an ecumenopolis and an entire system-spanning fleet of heavy warships and we would never know any of that because human technology is little better than flung shit from apes. Pic related is the clearest image we have of our nearest celestial neighbor. That's it.

There certainly would be ways of "seeing" them, wouldn't they? Other than just plain observing them through a telescope.

>>11551170
Why would it be? Do we have any reason to believe this is true?

>>11548614
Habitable space is not infinite

>>11551204
What if the universe is like Super Mario 64 and if you just travel a few quadrillion lightyears in one direction you can find another area where a Big Bang has happened, and it keeps going on like that forever?

>>11551212
That would be lit

Remains to be proven though

>>11551196
All the laws of physics and computation show its impossible. That's why all the people arguing against that shut ITT are saying that the physics is actually not true rather than accepting the physics and it's implications.
An artificial super intelligence with literally every single atom in the universe being used as a transistor still WOULD NOT EVEN COME CLOSE to being able to being able to organize a semester's schedule or figure out protein folding or how to decrypt an encrypte message or any of these other problems that singularity in cell just go "b-but it will figure it out!".
The reality is intelligence grows logarithmically, NOT exponentially, and the upper bound is very low. Humans are unironically only several times below it.

>>11551230
>All the laws of physics and computation show its impossible.
Where?

>>11551230
Wouldn't an intelligence 'only' several time smarter than human still be pretty fucking smart and useful for figuring shit out?

>>11551236
Computational complexity renders almost every problem that is required to solve things like mind uploading and protein folding and such becomes intractable.
>>11551241
No, because the nature of the complexity of the problems grows so fast that no intelligence that can exist in the physical universe is smart enough to solve them.

>>11551248
>Computational complexity renders almost every problem that is required to solve things like mind uploading and protein folding and such becomes intractable.

Can you prove this?

>>11551252
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6965037

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.gwern.net/docs/biology/1993-fraenkel.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjb-PLBlN7oAhXxknIEHVUvAeAQFjACegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw2RwOADH1Yun0OqcIBu2u0t

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/639724v1.full

https://academic.oup.com/peds/article/15/10/779/1521759

https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.scottaaronson.com/papers/npcomplete.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwid6-Hlld7oAhXakHIEHXcFBdoQFjALegQICRAB&usg=AOvVaw3_mTg7v7wAB7CQ32TjcI-Y

>>11551170
>humanity will hit the wall within the next 20 years.

I almost fell for your silly bait.

>>11551347
It's not bait, you're just (understandably) coping with the reality of the situation.
The upper limit for what intelligence is capable of doing is not very high.

>>11548614
1- the universe isn't infinite
2- that's not what infinite means

>>11551301
Interesting stuff anon, thanks I'll read over it. Still, I'm not entirely sold on the idea that we won't be making any further technological innovations after 2040, but feel free to quote my post and say 'I told you so' if 4Chan still exists at that point.

>>11551351
yeah pretty sure we've been through his before, and oh damn look, computers this time

>>11551366
Except we haven't been through this before, mathematical proofs do not become rendered wrong due to time. It is PROVEN that these problems are non polynomial and that the growth rate is so great that the entire universe isn't even enough to solve them.
This is not a matter of time. You are arguing fallaciously - "I'm the past they thought things were impossible but then it turned out it wasn't impossible so that will be the case this time as well!"
That is not how it works.

>>11551351
you know 100,000 years ago there was some hairy ape man screaming at the rest of the group "we have fire and cave! we've reached the upper bound of what we can do! all our needs are met! you won't find anything useful out there! don't leave me!"

>>11551372
What if the way in which our computers solved problems became exponentially more efficient?

>>11551378
That's not an actual argument, as our understanding of how reality actually works increases, our understanding of the actual limits of technology also increases.
It is a mathematical reason for the limits of intelligence being lower than required, mathematics does not change, it has been the same since the biggining of the big bang and since the first humans used it to figure out how to farm crops.
>>11551394
That is already assumed and it still isn't enough.

The reason we don't see space empires is because it's not possible. It's not because "aliens don't exist" or "every single alien species kills itself before it can get there" (this one is so fucking stupid that you have to genuinely be an idiot to believe it).
It's because the limits of intelligence and technology are not high enough to facilitate it. Every species is stuck on its planet (or its star cluster) FOREVER.

>>11551351
I understand that our potential for advancement is not infinite, but I doubt we'll reach that upper limit in 20 years.

>>11551417
>>11551415
What about AI and quantum computing? Information systems that will be able to compute what would take us humans thousands of years?

>>11551415
I mean, technically speaking, we already have the technology for space travel and producing it on an industrial scale, it's more or less a lack of money/political willpower at this time. It's not unthinkable that it could be happening elsewhere.

>>11551372
dude look at this thing. fuck physics and it's limits of what is possible. Everytime one of these takes off it is us giving the finger to God and nature

You overestimate what the word "no" means to a human

And I totally get that there is a finite amount of things to discover, but 1- we're nowhere near it, and 2- we'll literally just start making shit up.
As the great Dalai Llama once said "learn the rules so you can learn how to bend them"

>>11551230
>WOULD NOT EVEN COME CLOSE to being able to being able to organize a semester's schedule
But... people and computers can already do this?

>>11551415
God what a self righteous prissy little faggot you are. Fuck limits. Speed of light? Yeah as soon as we figured out that's the limit, we immediately starting thinking ok then, how do we bend space?

>>11551417
What I mean is, I fully believe that we will create artificial general intelligence within the next twenty years, and then within a few years humans and AI will discover everything that possible within the limits of physics and computation, and then there's nothing left because all the problems left are not computable in reasonable time frames. It will take hundreds of billions of years to make very small steps because these problems' space are so large that it's effectively impossible.

>>11551487
So, essentially, you think we will create the "Smartest Possible Computer", and ask it "The Big Questions", and it's going to do as much work as it can overnight, and the next morning go "lol idk that's about as much as I can figure out. But look, I just made superconductors 23% cheaper, that's cool right?"

>>11548211
>Space is fucking huge

It is even older than it is huge. It takes only a few million years to spread all over the galaxy even at deeply sublight speeds.

>>11551510
It's actually relatively young. The universe has several hundred billion years of relative stability in which life can develop and flourish ahead of it.

>>11551510
I thought because the edges are expending faster than light (relative to our position) it's huger than it is old

>>11551514
sure, if all you need is red dwarfs, otherwise no

https://www.wired.com/2012/11/universe-making-stars/

>Most of the stars that will ever exist have already been born, according to the most comprehensive survey of the age of the night sky.

>>11548211
1- yeah space is fuckin yuge, making it real hard to find anything
2- intelligent/sentient life isn't likely to develop
3- if it did, it would be in another rare and random anomoly
4- given our extra remote location in a semi-void, why would they reach out to us
5- if everyone thinks an advanced population is gonna be a bunch of peace loving hippies who obey all the rules, what makes you think they ever risked hurting one of their own by flinging them out into the cosmos? that kind of civilization doesn't breed brave souls.
6- if they're truly advanced and they did ever risk a way off, why would they share anything? What do we have to offer? Why would they irresponsibly spend resources babysitting someone who they have no responsibility for?
7- if they're familiar with war, they assume everyone else is, meaning they're not gonna shine a fucking beacon saying "hey here I am!" unless they're already here and outnumbering us

At best we're alone and the dominant species and the universe is our oyester.
At worst we're the fuckin amatuers on the outer rim nigger rigging space ships and making all the noise, unsuspecting of what lurks in the dark

>Earth came early to the party in the evolving universe. According to a new theoretical study, when our solar system was born 4.6 billion years ago only eight percent of the potentially habitable planets that will ever form in the universe existed. And, the party won't be over when the sun burns out in another 6 billion years. The bulk of those planets - 92 percent - have yet to be born.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/most-earth-like-worlds-have-yet-to-be-born-according-to-theoretical-study
>fermi pseuds at it again

>>11551587
can agree
We've equivalently been born 3 seconds into the universe's existence and already asking where our brother and sisters are

AYYS ARE INTERDIMENSIONAL!

>>11551587
>>11551595
Our life started in a young universe on a young earth, this indicates that it's easy to get started.

>>11551524
I mean, things might get tricky on tidally locked worlds, but I'd reckon it's possible. They would have their own challenges, but intelligent, technological life could exist there.

>>11548211
There's no Fermi paradox.
Countless civilizations came to life before us and destroyed themselves quickly after achieving a certain technological level.
Be it from the power of atom, some retarded morality, a deadly virus, or anything else.
The window of opportunity for one civilization to hear another is just so small that most of them die thinking that they were alone.

>>11548361
It literally is. If I have a 1x1x1 box and I search inside it for aliens and find nothing, that is absence of evidence and evidence of absence for aliens in that box.

>>11552091
So you have the ability to search the entire universe for intelligent life?

>>11548211
We already detected Dyson Spheres and signs of astronwngineering, we just refuse to accept it

>>11552082
>Countless civilizations came to life before us and destroyed themselves quickly after achieving a certain technological level.
Got any proof? Or are you speaking about the civilizations we know about, ie the Egyptians, Sumerians, and so forth?

>>11552279
If I had any proof, then my theory would be wrong.

What I sometimes wonder what the Earth would look like from another galaxy or star system. We are constantly sending gazillions of radio signals into space at any given time, doesn't it just look like electro-smog/static/background radiation from a couple lightyears? Not to mention radio signal weakens with the inverse square of distance. Would anything from Earth even be detectable at Alpha Centauri?

>>11551415
Mathfaggs are the worse. Your self contained bullshit is on par with voodoo magic.

>>11552609
You're a coping retard

>>11551378
This is the contribution of a 100IQ midwit. A Facebook meme response.

>>11551431
That thing is a speck of fly shit compared to the pie-in-the-sky engineering you wish was possible.