The Great Toposophic Filter

[Anonymous No.2969255]

What do you think of the concept of a Universe-wide Toposophic filter?

From the Asspie article:

>One great mystery has puzzled thinkers for millenia, a mystery which first became apparent even before the first space flight. If intelligent life existed anywhere else in our Galaxy, why had it not colonized the earth long ago? This question was first posed by the classical age physicist Enrico Fermi, but was refined a few years later by Frank Tipler, who realized that if any intelligent species developed self-replicating probes, then it could explore and ultimately colonize the galaxy in a few tens of millions of years. But this had not happened.

http://www.orionsarm.com/eg-article/47faddfe17122

The idea is, if there was intelligent life, it would be everywhere because it had billions of years to evolve and spread across the universe. Perhaps there is something that is "filtering" out intelligent life as it evolves. Some cosmic force or like the self-destructive behavior seen in super intelligent human individuals where intelligent life destroys itself as it becomes more advanced.

What do you think?

[Anonymous No.2969268]

I think that we live in one galaxy out of many.

I think that traveling, even within the galaxy, takes a long fucking time.

We;ve only been recording shit for a few thousand years, who's to say aliens haven't come here before?

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.2969267]

I think that at some point, life produces administerial people analogous to Bible-thumping conservatives in the ages where they have deadly mass-scale weapons.

[Anonymous No.2969281]

Well, look at us for example. It took approximately 13.7 billion years for us to get to the point that we're at today, although you might've been able to shave off a few million years if the dinosaurs weren't all dumb brutes. But barring that, space is fucking big, and travelling within the confines of the known laws of physics takes either a long-ass time, or a lot of energy and a slightly less long-ass time.

[Anonymous No.2969312]

>>2969267
I thought about that too. People think that some potentially very dangerous technology isn't dangerous.

Like every asshole posting their personal info and opinions online with their full name and face. They tell me "I have nothing to hide and I'm not doing anything illegal!" Well, that maybe true, but what if some paranoid dictator comes into power, doesn't like what you think and who you are and ships you to some fucking camp to die?

Same thing with nuclear weapons. I have always feared in the back on my head some Jesus freak becoming President and then trying to deliver everyone to God via nuclear apocalypse. I mean, we can now make a techo-mockup of everything in the Book of Revelation, but SHOULD we?

>no

>>2969268
> who's to say aliens haven't come here before?

No evidence. Don't fucking "but the prime directive, that's why" me either.

[Fr 87 No.2969315]

Well first of all... Why WOULD an intelligent species develop such a probe? It would be tremendously wasteful of potentially exploitable resources. It's the same reason we take exploration one step at a time... There really is no reason rush. Perhaps these other species see no desire to expend resources to needlessly proliferate throughout the endlessness of space and instead expand their territorial holdings only when necessity presents itself.

Or... As we do love to imagine extraterrestrial civilisations as being so far advanced of ourself... What if the opposite is in fact true? That we are the exception to the rule. One of the few times if not the only time that life has ever grown to this level of consciousness?
What if, instead of our planet being the ultimate stop of an alien exploratory mission, it is we who make the demands of "take me to your leader?"

It truly seems possible that such a complex organism as ourselves should, indeed, be a rare occurrence.
It is only through the destruction of previously dominent species in mass-extinction events that mammals and intelligence was ever even given a shot at success. Think of how, had the dinosaurs continued to rule the planet, intelligence may never have been given to chance to surpass might.

[Anonymous No.2969343]

>>2969312

Hurp durp. Because if aliens came here 100 million years ago we'd know.

We're nothing. Recorded history is nonexistent.

[Anonymous No.2969345]

>>2969281
It took US 13 billion years, but the fact is the solar system is 4-5 Billion years old. Other systems had up to 3 times as much to evolve. Where are they?

[Anonymous No.2969351]

>>2969315
>There really is no reason rush.

Sure, just take a 6 Billion year nap. Fuck space exploration. Take a break.

[Fr 87 No.2969355]

>>2969315

And to continue these musings...

We think ourselves so mighty... We think we are the unconquerable rulers of this pathetic little rock but time and time again through frequent and yet minor natural hiccups we call "natural disastrous" we are shown the folly of our ways.
The awesome might of nature has never been brought down upon this fortunate planet in any truly serious way... And yet.... It has been brought down in ways damaging enough to eliminate entire ecosystems -- the Chicxulub crater is a testimony to this.

I hope you realize how pathetically easy it would be for the forces of nature to simply snuff out the life on this silly rock.
An errant gama ray burst from a poorly placed wolf-rayt could certainly do the trick in no time.

Perhaps we are lucky? Perhaps on those worlds that happen to harbor it... Life has always been eliminated.
The cosmic timeframe is a huge one... Perhaps it is only a matter of time before we are eliminated.

[Anonymous No.2969358]

>>2969345
Elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.2969363]

>>2969358
and they haven't discovered the electromagnetic spectrum and don't use it for inter-solar system communication?

[Fr 87 No.2969364]

>>2969351

I'm not suggesting that space exploration would ever halt... I'm simply saying that its progression would likely be a slow one...
There is no reason to consume resources that could be vital to survival in a mad dash to send self replicating probes to all corners of the universe. Such could result in a "grey-goo" event on a cosmological scale.

[Anonymous No.2969388]

>>2969364
You can write a program to curb the amount of probes. Self-replication is easy to maintain if you can make it work. It self maintains.

Would we even notice or give a fuck if our entire asteroid belt became a uniform mass of orbiting self replicating probes? Sounds safer even.

>no more meteor apocalypse.

[Anonymous No.2969387]

>>2969363
Perhaps they do, perhaps they don't. It would be remarkable if an alien species just happened to have colonized systems near us and just happened to be giving off detectable emissions during the exact time period when we are equipped to detect them.

[Anonymous No.2969396]

>>2969364
Or we do that to increase the amount of cognition in the universe on higher and higher scales.

[Fr 87 No.2969433]

>>2969388

But WHY would any species utterly sacrifice its long term survival in an uncertain attempt to understand the universe? Obviously these probes couldn't cover immense distances without immense numbers and communication with them would grow so futile due to distance that the actual knowledge of their creators would have been better served through other means....

It's just a stupid idea.

Whose to say, anyway, that one of these probes did NOT zip through our solar system 10,000,000 years ago? There would have been no information for it to receive....
This is why radio arrays are our best bet at finding intelligent life... We can point them in any direction...

[Anonymous No.2969434]

>>2969255
err, there may be a slight problem with the estimation.

As we speak, today, theres no way for us to even observe directly another star.

The answer is dull, simple and sad: there is no physics to gap the mindfuckingly large distances in the universe.

[Anonymous No.2969444]

>>2969315
>Think of how, had the dinosaurs continued to rule the planet, intelligence may never have been given to chance to surpass might.

>implying megafauna didn't exist.

[Fr 87 No.2969446]

>>2969434


Time.
Imagine an entirely nomadic species that roams the cosmos, in all directions, with massive self-contained torus stations... Stopping only occasionally to plunder a planet or asteroid dry of resources. This is a realistic possibility.

[Fr 87 No.2969451]

>>2969444

What?

[Anonymous No.2969467]

There are trillions and trillions of planets out there. And they're ridiculously far apart. They don't have to go to Earth. They can choose from the massive, massive collection of planets in the universe. It's certainly possible that they have no found us yet with so many galaxies and planets. I mean, the only planet we know of so far that as it is RIGHT NOW other than Earth that has any chance at all of supporting life like us is Gliese 581 g, which is still 20.5 lightyears away. And then you have to realize that they may not be as advanced as us even if there is intelligent life there. We may be the most advanced species in our tiny area of the universe, and all the really advanced ones just are too far away to reach us yet.

Not all other intelligent life has to be more advanced than us.

[Anonymous No.2969471]

>>2969433
>implying humans didn't make the Voyager probe.

[Anonymous No.2969492]

>>2969446
imagine I wave a magic wand

>everythings possible when I ignore current physics

[Anonymous No.2969497]

>>2969467
Intelligent life doesn't have to come to Earth, but there should be SOME evidence they are out and about.

[Fr 87 No.2969501]

>>2969471


>Implying Voyager is any way shape or form analogous to this hypothetical method of space exploration...

[Fr 87 No.2969509]

>>2969492


Why are roaming torus stations in violation of "current physics?"

[Anonymous No.2969514]

>>2969497
You know how cops use 1 way mirrors to view interrogations?

We have no clue what our signals even look like after traveling through space.

So why would we assume that an intelligible signal, even one we ourselves have made, would be discoverable?

[Anonymous No.2969515]

>>2969467
>Not all other intelligent life has to be more advanced than us.

why not? We aren't more intelligent than cavemen, but with a little time added to the equation we are far more advanced. Out of the many possible civilizations, some MUST have more advanced technology.

[Anonymous No.2969519]

>>2969501
Of course it is. Jesus fucking christ, Voyager is amazing. Think about what it means. We made a probe and it's outside of our solar system now.

In terms of human history, it's one of the most amazing things we've ever done.

[Fr 87 No.2969524]

>>2969515


Define "caveman"... Either way however... It's irrelevant.
Who's to say that life has ever evolved to human like intelligence?
It seems probable but we've yet to even discover extraterrestrial single celled organisms... We really have no insight at all into the different paths that the evolution of life might take.

[Anonymous No.2969526]

>>2969519
yfw you find out Voyager got smashed to pieces by an asteroid while approaching Uranus and never left the solar system.

[Anonymous No.2969527]

>>2969514
Interesting idea, but is there any verifiable science to his post?

>seriously? not being an asshole.

[Fr 87 No.2969534]

>>2969519

Voyager is not in any way a tool designed to hunt down extraterrestrial life (That was a last minute addition by Sagan)... Let alone self replicate. (A task we couldn't even accomplish today if we wanted.
It only left the solar system because it was most convenient for it to do so.....


Voyager was NOT at all an attempt to explore interstellar space.

[Anonymous No.2969536]

>>2969524
>Define "caveman"

neolithic humans, you fucking aspie smartass tard.

[Anonymous No.2969547]

Life may be frequent but civilization building and space-faring life may be really fucking unlikely. It took 3 billion years for life on earth to result in us, that's a significant chunk of the age of the universe.

[Anonymous No.2969548]

>>2969527
The point is our vantage point is exceedingly small. Theres no known physics that will allow humans as we know them to explore space in a efficient manner.

Even if all the technology about space exploration is solved, we'd need a new way to manipulate the fabric of time and space to even propose doing useful human exploration of a nearby star.

Then, given that the universe has billions of stars and we know nothing about identifying intelligent signals, it appears pretty much a given that any other alien life out there would need to wave a magic wand to find us.

I'm not saying we can't discover new tech, new physics, etc.

I'm stating our current knowledge answer's OP's inquiry in a straight forward manner: until the age of the universe is several orders of magnitude greater than the vast expanse of it, theres a very low probability of any intelligent life finding us.

[Fr 87 No.2969549]

>>2969536
Chill the fuck out man...
I wasn't trying to be hostile in any way... Just get an insight into whether you meant homo-sapiens, erectus or even neanderthals...

[Anonymous No.2969554]

I chalk it up to the immense size of the universe. Even with light-speed travel, It would take an average of 8 years to travel from star to star within our galaxy (Average distance of the closest dozen stars to our own). Then take into consideration the time it would take to properly scan each solar system to find possible life inhabiting planets.
You also have to assume that space travel and colonization is the priority of extra terrestrial societies. It certainly isn't the case on Earth. It could be that alien species don't need to colonize, or stick relatively close to home. Or perhaps their space programs get the funding shaft the same as ours. Or maybe there IS no way to efficiently travel the universe, or it hasn't been discovered yet, by anyone, before they became extinct/blasted back the stone age/etc. Also, what do you constitute as intelligent life? Would we classify something as smart as a dolphin or pig on another planet as intelligent, or are we specifically meaning a sentient race capable of obtaining a culture and the widespread use of tools and some form of scientific basis? Then there's the possibility that their planet has a thick atmosphere, making the stars impossible to see, and thus the desire to reach them negligent. or a million other variables.

And we don't even know if we have been found or not. For all we know, we could be under discreet observation now. Be it for scientific, diplomatic, or war purposes. We've proven that we're capable of making stealth planes neigh impossible to detect. Add a few thousand years and galactic travel under our belt, and I think we can make something even more difficult to detect.

tldr, there are endless reasons why we haven't been found yet, and we don't even really know if we have been found or not. Space is huge, and I'm sure aliens have their own form of politics/funding to deal with.

[Anonymous No.2969558]

>>2969536
Don't worry bro, I swear there are about 8 neckbearded asspies who lurk on this board just jump into random threads and nitpick and split hairs over nothing to make themselves feel superior.

Example.
>>2969369

[Fr 87 No.2969559]

>>2969548

Self contained nomadic torus stations....

You could have them travelling at .9c with nuclear propulsion and given their self-sustaining nature, they would be able to bridge star systems in generational increments (assuming humans do not have indefinite life-spans by this point...)

[Anonymous No.2969560]

>>2969526
Sure it did.
We never landed on the moon, either.

[Fr 87 No.2969565]

>>2969558

Butthurt much?

[Anonymous No.2969567]

Any decently scientifically cuirious civilization would leave a primitive civilization alone. We would not land on a planet full of stone-age octopods and start handing out toaster ovens. We'd remotely observe.

If they're out there, we're most likely an object of interest and study - unless intelligent life is so amazingly common that you can wipe it out and forget about it. I have a hard time believing that any civilization could get pan-galactic without a decent level of scientific interest though.

[Anonymous No.2969570]

>>2969559
Eh. I got magic unicorns. Please demonstrate your technology.

Thanks.

[Anonymous No.2969576]

>>2969559
Seriously, just wave a magic wand or ask jesus to save you.

>someone forgot what part is science and the other part fiction

[Anonymous No.2969578]

>>2969565
No, I've proven the trolls wrong. Feels good man.

[Fr 87 No.2969575]

>>2969570

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_torus

[Anonymous No.2969591]

>>2969575
Eh?

>sufficiently advanced technology
>indistinguishable from magic

[Fr 87 No.2969592]

>>2969576


Explain why this wouldn't work...

Or am I just being trolled?

[Anonymous No.2969595]

>>2969578
Stupidity is like entropy, just as claude shannon

[Anonymous No.2969610]

>>2969592
Thats not my job, you sound like a creationist.

If you might've forgot, the point made was that with current understanding, the universe is to large to wander around in.

Last I checked, theres billions of stars, billions of EM sources and billions light years.

If you multiply all that, your probabilities are exceedingly low.

However, if you wave a magic wand, you can raise your probability too anything but 1, obviously.

[Fr 87 No.2969649]

>>2969610


Either I'm being trolled or you have no idea at all what I'm proposing.
I'm not proposing that we go wandering about "looking" for life... I'm proposing that we literally LIVE in these biospheric and leech off a star system until its resources are consumed and then set sail for another star system with exoplanets and repeat....
The basic elements needed to maintain such a ship and to fuel it are... Well... Rather ubiquitous in the universe and could be found in any planet-possessing star system. (Not to mention that we ALREADY have the technology to determine potential compositions of exoplanets in other star systems.)

[Anonymous No.2969684]

>>2969649
Yes, and I'm proposing we wave a magic wand.

Either way, the answer to OP's question is still simple.

There is no current level of understanding that would make it highly probable that aliens would make it to earth.

You're masturbating to some imaginary universe and trying to shoehorn it into OP's reality.

[Anonymous No.2969683]

>>2969592
it's the difference between an idea and an action.

fantasy and reality.

until it is done, it's just a delusion.

[Fr 87 No.2969697]

>>2969684


I agree. Aliens have almost certainly never visted and likely will never visit Earth unless long distance radio communication is somehow achieved....

I wasn't even talking about OP idea... not even in relation the possibility of finding life... Merely a solution to the conundrum of interstellar travel.

[Anonymous No.2969701]

if other intelligent is controlled by the same laws of physics that we are, space travel would take a long time.
i don't know about a mystical cosmic force destroying lifeforms, but greed, violence and other flaws that are inherent human nature may be the inevitable by-products of sentience.

[Anonymous No.2969712]

The anti spirals bro.

[Anonymous No.2969727]

>>2969697
erm. The argument against aliens visiting us is strictly based on what we, as humans, currently know and can achieve.

Any propositioning beyond that is waving a magic wand. If at some point humans are capable of interstellar space, than the reasoning changes and OP's question becomes relevent again.

If you wish to interject about humans managing interstellar space travel, theres no current tech that will allow it without waving a magic wand.

[Anonymous No.2969730]

>>2969697
You're assuming communication back to the home planet is a priority of space faring cultures. It's also likely that a space faring vessel would operate independently, or on behalf of their native planet, without needing a connection back home. Like the Enterprise, to come up with a simple example.

[Anonymous No.2969734]

>>2969684
>There is no current level of understanding that would make it highly probable that aliens would make it to earth.


that's not what Op is saying. There should be SOME evidence of intelligent life. Not saying they should come here or even notice us but it should be like ants (humans) looking up at people (aliens) walking on a busy city sidewalk.

They don't notice us, but how could we miss them? But alas, there are none to be found.

[Fr 87 No.2969741]

>>2969727


Just because we haven't done it doesn't mean that it's not "possible."
In fact... We know that this IS MOST DEFINITELY possible.

Orion is NOT a fucking magic wand.
Self contained biospheres are NOT fucking magic wands.
Artificial gravity through centripetal force is NOT a fucking magic wand.

I have never seen anyone on /sci/ capable of making me rage more than you.

Seriously. 10/10.

Go fuck yourself you useless piece of shit.

[Fr 87 No.2969750]

>>2969730


No I'm not.

Read my posts.

I'm proposing the exact OPPOSITE of that in fact.

[Anonymous No.2969749]

>>2969730
or magic.

>ITT: People who like magic and imagination

[Anonymous No.2969770]

Why would a civilization want to expand through the universe? The human brain is motivated by various impulses, generally these impulses need control over the material universe to be satiated so we strive to gain power.

However a super-intelligent being may simply not have any impulses whatsoever, or be unwilling to sacrifice resources to research, develop and produce self-replicating proves to send to other solar systems. It might be content to just sit there for billions of years waiting for the end of the universe.

[Anonymous No.2969786]

>>2969734
Horrible analogy.
The distance between star systems is far greater, comparatively, than that between ants and humans.
Space is huge.
And we don't even know what we're looking for. They could have contacted us before, and we didn't know the phone was ringing. Or was looking in the wrong place. Or maybe we just didn't see the communication for what it is. We're also looking at everything in the universe on a time-delay. We wouldn't know if there's now intelligent life in a star system a few thousand light years away. As our own culture has proven, that's enough time to go from camp fires to exploring space (at least somewhat).

Yes, with how old and huge space is, evidence of extra terrestrial life should be evident from Earth. But we have to look in the right place, at the right time. And there are A LOT of places to look, and the right time could have been billions of years ago.

[Anonymous No.2969789]

>>2969741
We're not tlking about possible.

We're talking about current knowledge. We are not waving a wand at an impossibly long list of contigencies. I'm not going to debate about the speed or progress of technological advances.

The current now is it's taken 30 years for 2 unmanned probes just to exit the solar system.

Interstellar travel requires such a large and sophisticated set of technology that theres no way of determining the feasibility of it.

Hence, it's improbable.

Rephrase your reality and start talking about the existence of god, and you'll see that from a logical view, your argument and a theists are similar to this extent.

No one is trying to say technological progress won't eventually overcome obstacles, but the further you project science/technology into the future, the more you're just fantasizing with no evidence.

[Anonymous No.2969799]

>>2969770
I believe it's more likely the human race and other similar entities will try to digitize their consciousness once they realize they're essentially locked in their solar system.

A virtual world is quite easy handle comparatively speaking.

[Anonymous No.2969815]

>>2969799
In this case it may still be in the best interest of the beings to create an AI who's purpose it is to take control over all the matter and energy in the universe to intercept any belligerent civilizations that have decided to take control over all the matter and energy in the universe.

[Anonymous No.2969819]

>>2969649
Eh, any civilization doing this would probably be K3 and therefore wouldn't need a vast armada, just a shitload of probes. We could have a K3 colonization fleet merrily chewing away at the transneptunian dwarf planets, and we'd only really notice them once they hit the gas giants and started siphoning them off for Deutronium.

K3s would see a K0 like ourselves as little more than a curiosity. Unless they had a preservation order coming from the mBrain, they'd probably just grind a couple of million of us up for genetic information, download the internet for data, maybe port a few of our best and brightest for a bit of innovative variance, and then reduce our planet to component compounds.

And there's not a fucking thing we could do to stop them.

[Anonymous No.2969836]

>>2969815
meh, you don't need an AI to construct a virtual world that people can explore. It'd be helpful, but not necessary, as (wave wand) any person plugged in could be the 'architect' (bad matrix, bad)

[Anonymous No.2969839]

>>2969819
finally, someone who talks sci-fi to the optimists.

[Anonymous No.2969842]

>>2969255

YOU EXIST BECAUSE WE ALLOW IT, AND YOU WILL END, BECAUSE WE DEMAND IT

[Anonymous No.2969865]

i think the most likely answer is that the galactic standard for broad communication is not based on tradition radio communication.

and that discovering this new kind of communication method is the "cosmic IQ test", so no civs broadcast on radio because it's a waste of time

[Anonymous No.2969869]

>>2969839

sci-spec more than sci-fi. Anything more advanced than 2 on the Kardushev scale is useless for sci-fi as it is impossible for the audience to relate to except as a God equivilant.

[Anonymous No.2969872]

>>2969819
I never understood why any alien race would destroy the Earth. Really, what do we have here that's unique that could be achieved by destroying us? The only thing on our planet that is unique is the lifeforms on it, and the organic compounds they create. And even that is questionable. Earth has no resources that we can't see in abundance everywhere else in the universe.

People are so fixated on the idea that resources are scarce, we must grab and take whatever we can, and we think alien races will do so as well. But just look at the immense amounts of resources out in space. It is incredibly unlikely that any resource we have here can't be found more easily much closer to their home planet. Unless they're looking for a habitable planet. We're not sure just how many of those there really are.

[Anonymous No.2969888]

>>2969836
But you would need the AI to protect the computer that simulates the matrix from the cruel outside world.

[Anonymous No.2969898]

>>2969789
Of course we're talking about possibilities.
Can we space-travel yet? No. Do we think it's possible? Yes.
Having a discussion about space travel, and only taking into consideration current technology, will be a rather short discussion. We can't do it, and it would take forever.
The ONLY option is to talk about what may be possible. It's not waving a magic wand, it's attempting to hypothesize what future technologies may cause space travel to be possible in the future.

You're basically saying we shouldn't discuss the possibilities because there isn't enough data to prove it would work.
You are very boring.

Also, probability has nothing to do with being able to determine the probability. Just because there are too many variables to correctly come up with a probability of it happening doesn't mean it's improbable, it means we don't know how to calculate the probability of it.

[Anonymous No.2969909]

>>2969872
>claims to know the goals of a type 2 civilization

[Anonymous No.2969946]

>>2969909
Never claimed anything of the sort.
I'm asking what would make our planet so valuable so as to merit our destruction to obtain it, when a quick glance in the universe shows that the only thing our planet has to offer is it's location, and the life forms on it. The resources are nothing new or unique, and for all we know, the organic compounds might be run of the mill as well.

I'm not saying that an alien race wont wipe us out for some reason or another. But saying they would do so for resources just doesn't make sense. Even destroying us to obtain our organic compounds makes little sense. Once we're destroyed there would be no more resources, and if they could just synthesis it after we're all destroyed, there would be no need to destroy us for it in the first place. I find it far, far more likely that were an alien race to destroy us, it would be more for some form of politics or religion, or a need for our life-sustaining planet.

[Anonymous No.2969968]

>>2969872

Because it's a nice distance from the sun, which would be their primary objective. I'm not saying they'd chew earth first, only that it would probably be on the cards at some point. It's the fact that earth is not unique that makes it a target.

Speculation states that a stage 2-3 civilization on the Kardashev scale would be surprisingly simple in its objectives in the wider universe. Probably about 3 things would catch their interest outside of their internal data networks. Shiny, Go, and Grow.

Shiny refers to any interesting anomalies. Advanced civilizations or evidence thereof, unique planetary or stellar bodies, and heretofore undiscovered elements.

Go refers to sources of power. Mostly 'young', stable stars and gas giants.

Grow refers to sources of raw materials. Even a fully digitized society needs bits for its structures, miniaturized as they may be.

Anything else is probably too 'slow' to catch their interest. A person attempting to communicate with a stage 2 intelligence would be like you trying to read war and peace at the rate of a word a week.

Assuming they find us before we 'ascend' to that stage of our civilization, I just hope we're that interesting.

[Anonymous No.2969980]

>>2969946
Of course they would destroy us to make a Shkadov sail. So as to move, sol (and any other stars closer to each other). This would increase communications speed and would allow for higher and higher levels of cogitation. If it ain't fusing of computing it's just bending space.

[Anonymous No.2969986]

>>2969980

lulz. Well done good sir, very droll.