/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10869402]

Hello /sci/ brainlet here. Can we have a Fermi Paradox discussion since I just learned about it? This thing is really making me depressed.

[Anonymous No.10869407]

>>10869402
What's depressing about it?

[Anonymous No.10869422]

There is no paradox. Alien life is either rare or nonexistent.

[Anonymous No.10869429]

>>10869407
The fact that we are completely alone in the universe and that we will die out with no one to ever remember we existed.

[Anonymous No.10869438]

>>10869429
it is worse

the universe will only be habitable for an infinitesimally small fraction of its expected lifespan

[Anonymous No.10869468]

>>10869429
>>10869438
relax bros, this is the infiniteth time you wrote this

[Anonymous No.10869477]

>>10869402
>Can we have a Fermi Paradox discussion since I just learned about it?
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[Anonymous No.10869493]

>>10869438
The only real limit is the possibility of proton decay, computers could survive until then

[Anonymous No.10869501]

>>10869429
For good part of the past million years we have assumed we were alone in the universe and nobody was depressed about it. Now all of the sudden you are depressed thinking of the possibility that we might be alone in the universe.

Besides that there are more depressing facts about the universe like: it's going to an end. But this is not even really that depressing, because it's billions of years in the future.

[Anonymous No.10869512]

>>10869402
I really hope aliens don't exist. I don't want humanity to have competition.

[Anonymous No.10869622]

>>10869501
What is religion dumbass?

[Anonymous No.10869739]

>>10869422
The "paradox" is the universe is absurdly large compared to the ordinary human relevant scales we can wrap our minds around and for life to be that extremely rare would make us extremely special, which goes against the generalized Copernican Principle assumed by the standard cosmology model. You're not supposed to guess we're extremely special. You're supposed to guess we're mediocre since by definition mediocre cases are the most common and extremely special cases are the least common. When we start going down a line of thinking that involves us being very special (e.g. the Earth being the center of the universe) it's a huge red flag what we're thinking probably tells us way more about how we're the ones coming up with the heavily self-biased conclusions than it does tell us how reality is actually operating.

[Anonymous No.10869921]

>>10869739
You talk like you are smart but you are not. Fermi Paradox wrongly assumes that alien life have human values, motives and ideals. It assumes that intelligent alien life would want to spread out and colonize the galaxy.

[Anonymous No.10869939]

>>10869402
But once self-propagating systems have attained global scale, two crucial differences emerge. The first difference is in the number of individuals from among which the "fittest" are selected. Self-prop systems sufficiently big and powerful to be plausible contenders for global dominance will probably number in the dozens, or possibly in the hundreds; they certainly will not number in the millions. With so few individuals from among which to select the "fittest," it seems safe to say that the process of natural selection will be inefficient in promoting the fitness for survival of the dominant global self-prop systems. It should also be noted that among biological organisms, species that consist of a relatively small number of large individuals are more vulnerable to extinction than species that consist of a large number of small individuals. Though the analogy between biological organisms and self-propagating systems of human beings is far from perfect, still the prospect for viability of a world-system based on the dominance of a few global self-prop systems does not look encouraging.

[Anonymous No.10869942]

>>10869402
The second difference is that in the absence of rapid, worldwide transportation and communication, the breakdown or the destructive action of a small-scale self-prop system has only local repercussions. Outside the limited zone where such a self-prop system has been active there will be other self-prop systems among which the process of evolution through natural selection will continue. But where rapid, worldwide transportation and communication have led to the emergence of global self-prop systems, the breakdown or the destructive action of any one such system can shake the whole world-system. Consequently, in the process of trial and error that is evolution through natural selection, it is highly probable that after only a relatively small number of "trials" resulting in "errors," the world-system will break down or will be so severely disrupted that none of the world's larger or more complex self-prop systems will be able to survive. Thus, for such self-prop systems, the trial-and-error process comes to an end; evolution through natural selection cannot continue long enough to create global self-prop systems possessing the subtle and sophisticated mechanisms that prevent destructive internal competition within complex biological organisms.

[Anonymous No.10869945]

>>10869402
Meanwhile, fierce competition among global self-prop systems will have led to such drastic and rapid alterations in the Earth's climate, the composition of its atmosphere, the chemistry of its oceans, and so forth, that the effect on the biosphere will be devastating. In Part IV of the present chapter we will carry this line of inquiry further: We will argue that if the development of the technological world-system is allowed to proceed to its logical conclusion, then in all probability the Earth will be left a dead planet-a planet on which nothing will remain alive except, maybe, some of the simplest organisms-certain bacteria, algae, etc.-that are capable of surviving under extreme conditions.

[Anonymous No.10869949]

>>10869402
The theory we've outlined here provides a plausible explanation for the so-called Fermi Paradox. It is believed that there should be numerous planets on which technologically advanced civilizations have evolved, and which are not so remote from us that we could not by this time have detected their radio transmissions. The Fermi Paradox consists in the fact that our astronomers have never yet been able to detect any radio signals that seem to have originated from an intelligent extraterrestrial source.
According to Ray Kurzweil, one common explanation of the Fermi Paradox is "that a civilization may obliterate itself once it reaches radio capability." Kurzweil continues: "This explanation might be acceptable if we were talking about only a few such civilizations, but [if such civilizations have been numerous], it is not credible to believe that every one of them destroyed itself" Kurzweil would be right if the self-destruction of a civilization were merely a matter of chance. But there is nothing implausible about the foregoing explanation of the Fermi Paradox if there is a process common to all technologically advanced civilizations that consistently leads them to self-destruction. Here we've been arguing that there is such a process.

[Anonymous No.10870370]

its really fuckin stupid

[Anonymous No.10870404]

>>10870370
The modern contrarian trend of calling the Fermi Paradox stupid is really fucking stupid. Almost every time I see someone do this they end up bringing up a "criticism" that was already explicitly addressed in the original formulation of the idea.
Also, not saying you need to believe everything any really smart person comes up with just because they're really smart, but it IS Enrico Fermi we're talking about. And if you find yourself calling Enrico Fermi, the guy half the Standard Model of Elementary Particles is named after, stupid then you might want to slow down and ask yourself whether maybe he had some good points and your own assumptions about them might be the problem.
Honestly I don't get why people don't just stick to the arguments they're partial to instead of trying to go over the top and call a historical peak human genius retarded. By analogy I think it'd be totally reasonable for someone to say they don't enjoy Stanley Kubrick films, but to go on and say he was a shit filmmaker whose cinematic ideas were stupid just makes you sound like you're either really ignorant or else know better but want to use sensationalist language to get more people to respond to you.

[Anonymous No.10870412]

>>10869429
Bro thats nothing. Imaging the realization when I learned we could NEVER leave local group without FTL travel. Forever as we sit in the corner of the universe like bird in a cage, seeing the outside world but never to reach it. Unless some genius can prove Einstein wrong we are done.

[Anonymous No.10872128]

>>10869921
The Fermi Paradox doesn't require all aliens to share human motives to want to explore the galaxy. Even a small fraction of species having a drive to explore/colonize would be enough. If alien intelligent life is common, it would strike me as bizarre that humanity would be the only species coming up with the idea of von Neumann probes; something we will probably be able to build within a couple hundred of years at most.

[Anonymous No.10872215]

>>10870412
>Unless some genius can prove Einstein wrong we are done.
What is time dilation?

[Anonymous No.10872230]

>>10869402

[Anonymous No.10872254]

>>10869402
They are all hiding in fear of an even more advanced civilization. We should do the same and have quick military strikes against any leaks occuring.

[Anonymous No.10872351]

>>10869402
A•T•T•E•N•U•A•T•I•O•N
S•Q•U•A•R•E I•N•V•E•R•S•E L•A•W

[Anonymous No.10872401]

>>10872230
>tfw we're probably the equivalent of a retarded and sickly prematurely born infant who will die before its first month of living outside the womb
>tfw we were trillions of years too early for peak life in the universe and won't register any more on the intergalactic history ledgers as a random nameless stillborn baby from the stone age would on our own planet's history books
https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2016/08/25/491307739/are-we-the-earliest-intelligent-life-in-the-universe

[Anonymous No.10872411]

Someone talking about the Fermi Paradox is a great way to tell if you're speaking to someone who has no idea what they're talking about. Bonus points for the Drake "Equation".
We cannot accurately deduce how common life is in our universe until we know the exact conditions required for life to begin. Any further thinking about it is purely a philosophical endeavor at this point.

[Anonymous No.10872427]

>>10872411
Do you believe Enrico Fermi had no idea what he was talking about?

[Anonymous No.10872428]

>>10872254
The hiding theory can be debunked easily anon

[Anonymous No.10872433]

The premise that space niggers have yet to be discovered may be false. Of course, if space niggers had managed to navigate to the Earth, that would be indirect evidence of a conspiracy to suppress education, or at the very least evidence that the approved narrative in physics is false.

If there is no fermi paradox, then it is necessarily possible to build weapons that far exceed the destructive capabilities of nuclear warheads.

So there is a fermi paradox.

[Anonymous No.10872440]

>>10872427
Of course Fermi knew what he was talking about, a hell of a lot more than most of the morons who spout the Fermi Paradox.
But even Fermi would have to admit that the Fermi Paradox is not scientific, and is instead a philosophical quandary.

[Anonymous No.10873698]

>>10872411
>in our universe until we know the exact conditions required for life to begin
man it's possible life didn't even begin in our universe

abiogenesis is so fucking improbable, like throwing a bunch of bricks and mortar together and expecting it to form the Empire State Building.

[Anonymous No.10873706]

>>10869402
Paradox doesn’t exist. There is no reason to believe that, if aliens exist, we should be aware of them now.

[Anonymous No.10873710]

>>10870404
really set this nigga off lol

[Anonymous No.10873738]

>>10869402
The Fermi Paradox is solved by the realization that FTL is impossible.

[Anonymous No.10873744]

>>10869477
Absence of evidence IS evidence of absence. It is not proof positive of absence, tough.

[Anonymous No.10873747]

>>10873738
No, you dont need FTL to spread all over the galaxy group. There was already plenty of time to do this at sublight speeds.

[Anonymous No.10873761]

>>10873747
A civilization complex enough to spread across the galaxy would have no need to spread.

[Anonymous No.10873765]

>>10873761
And yet they would still do it, because they can.

[Anonymous No.10873797]

>>10873765
No, they wouldn’t. We *can* colonize Antarctica.

WE
DONT

[Anonymous No.10873816]

>>10869402
life in this universe spans different planets at different times. assuming everything would be close enough to travel from point A to point B so there can be a intelligent discussion between sentient life forms is stupid. the universe grows over time and carbon based life as we know it needs a specific range it can exist within so the proximity to one another would be to little to notice each other in the sea of radio and microwave noise and the diffusion of light to great for any imagery to show life else where in the galaxy

that said the ortt cloud had a station and it had a accident. this would be like a rest stop in the middle of no where. many many accidents after the first because it drifted to much. thats the joke of space travel. everything is fine until its not and maps are wrong all of the time. you think you got a good 500 miles between you and a obstacle and you dont. so much wasted on space exploration due to the fact you wont recover all the scrap. its a dead end for sentient life more often than not

[Anonymous No.10873828]

>>10872215
The local group isn't the limit, but the accelerated expansion of space means that we can see many galaxies which we could never reach or even send a signal to now. There are even more galaxies from which a round trip is impossible.

[Anonymous No.10873850]

>>10873797
It's a matter of time desu

[Anonymous No.10874374]

>>10869402
If the universe were the size of our planet, our solar system would be the size of a grain of sugar. It's not much to think that one grain could be missed, even if there were billions of other grains looking.

[Anonymous No.10874706]

>>10874374
so universe= planet
planets are in the solar system
our planet is Earth
Sugar is small
hmmmm


what am i missing to fully understand this? we are a grain of salt? or