/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6920862]

Fermi paradox, discuss:
http://www.quora.com/What-are-some-theories-on-why-we-arent-visited-by-aliens-yet

IMHO we better evolve fast, supremacist aliens are coming

[Anonymous No.6920889]

>>6920862
>from previous thread<

I think we vastly overestimate the probability of the evolution if human level *intelligent* life. We only have Earth's life for data, but we also have about 4 billion years of that data. I think intelligent life is extremely rare for the following reasons:

- Unintelligent life is usually more successful than intelligent life. In terms of biomass, plants, single celled organisms, and arthropods are a huge portion of Earth's life. They are extremely stupid creatures, but they dominate the biosphere.

- Intelligent life has a short, mostly unsuccessful history on Earth. Cetaceans, primates, and cephalopods are not that successful in terms of the number of species that have survived for very long. Cephalopods are the most successful intelligent life form in Earth's history in terms of the longevity of the genus, but they have not produce any language or technology beyond extremely simple tools. Cetaceans do not have hand like limbs, so they could never make sophisticated tools and they evolved from unsophisticated quadrapedal mammals that would never develop technology on land. Of these three groups, two of them are extremely recent in Earth's history. Homo sapiens is the only species of these three groups to have developed true language and sophisticated technology, so even if life is intelligent it seems unlikely that it develops language and tools.

- Many of the planets that support life will be completely covered in water, making it almost impossible for intelligent life to develop sophisticated technology.

To summarize, being small, unintelligent, and simple is the most successful evolutionary strategy in the history of life on Earth, and it is completely incompatible with being intelligent. Intelligence is only favoured by natural selection under very strange circumstances, and even then intelligence often does not progress to the point at which language and sophisticated tools develop.

[Anonymous No.6920892]

>>6920862

If they're coming they already know about us and it's too late: the only rational instellar policy is to keep as quiet as possible and when we develop the tech to launch RKVs send them at any planet which could have developed life and any planets near them that could be terraformed. Also send out seed ships and remote weapons of last resort scattered about.

[Anonymous No.6920905]

http://accelerating.org/articles/transcensionhypothesis.html

[Anonymous No.6920911]

>>6920905
Are we able to manipulate atomic nuclei?

[Anonymous No.6920920]

>>6920911
Not in a meaningful way.

[Anonymous No.6920931]

>>6920862
My theory is that either life is so ridiculously common to the point that we are not interesting and have done nothing worthy of note to merit a visit and that our resources are not worth anything because there is more in easier to reach places or We are the first species to reach sentience, space flight and will become the progenitors of future galactic empires who will slaughter billions for our leftover garbage.

[Anonymous No.6921007]

>>6920931
Could you imagine if we were the first in the entire universe? That would suck so much dick.

[Anonymous No.6921017]

>>6921007
Nah man holy shit imagine, they'll find our tools and our debris on other worlds and shit and they'll admire the hell out of us, the first intelligence, and they just walked out from the woods up to other worlds.
We'll be the ancients.

[Anonymous No.6921021]

>>6920889
Quality post. It does seem that exempting special circumstances/lucky conditions, simple beats complex

[Anonymous No.6921035]

>The Zoo Hypothesis: Aliens are observing us before making contact.

This doesn't make sense to me. If they have the tech to observe us from lightyears away surely they can obliterate us in an instant. Why hide?

[Anonymous No.6921047]

>>6920931
>>6921007
>>6921017
Humans are a superstitious myth!

[Anonymous No.6921075]

>>6921035
Our culture isn't developed enough yet to handle the responsibilities that come with extremely advanced technology. Giving crazy, militant 21st century humans warp drives and phasers would not end well for anybody involved.

Did you even watch Star Trek?

[Anonymous No.6921079]

I have yet to see these "probability estimates".

>inb4 drake equation

[Anonymous No.6921091]

>>6921017
That makes me feel better.

[Anonymous No.6921129]

maybe aliens have evolved past flesh and bone.

or took another route of evolution completely.

that would mess things up considerably.

[Anonymous No.6921132]

>>6920889
>In terms of biomass, plants, single celled organisms, and arthropods are a huge portion of Earth's life.
You have to take into account the resources needed for such organisms to survive. Humans have actually an outstanding capacity to thrive in number when compared to how much energy a human needs to survive. I do not have factual proof, but I will risk myself to say that humans are the most dominant animal specie in the sense that they are the specie that uses the greatest part of the available energy of Earth. I did say animal species because plants obviously beat us thanks to photosynthesis, but things might change once we will control nuclear energy correctly.

>Cetaceans, primates, and cephalopods are not that successful in terms of the number of species
>in terms of the number of species
Why do you assume that the number of individuals is a relevant way to measure the dominance of a specie ? I'd rather think in term of mass, or as I suggested, in terms of consumed power.

>To summarize, being small, unintelligent, and simple is the most successful evolutionary strategy in the history of life on Earth
Even assuming this is true, the following quote:
>on Earth
leaves the possibility that being intelligent is the most successful evolutionary strategy for life in Space.

[Anonymous No.6921161]

>>6921075
Who says they'd have to give us shit? They can withhold their tech and if we got a problem with it, they end us

[Anonymous No.6921164]

>>6921132
>in terms of the number of species
>Why do you assume that the number of individuals

Nice reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.6921169]

>>6921017
>We'll be the ancients.
That sounds amazing

[Anonymous No.6921174]

Sort of related question: Would alien life on other planets follow a similar system to evolution?

[Anonymous No.6921224]

>>6921161
Still, if you can see a working version of something like an FTL drive, that would significantly increase your chances of being able to construct one yourself.

[Anonymous No.6921292]

>>6921224
Or FTL just doesn't work

[Anonymous No.6921330]

>>6921174
Theoretically, yes. everything we know about evolution thus far would imply that it works in a standard sort of way. Presuming that said alien life has managed to reach a point of genetic diversity (roughly around the time eukaryotes come to be), reproduction should follow natural selection such that the best suited to survive in their environment do so and pass on their genes, resulting in evolution resembling how we know it.

[Anonymous No.6921358]

>>6921174
technically yes, but that dosn't mean they will look anything like life on earth. No rubber forehead aliens.

[Anonymous No.6921376]

Life is probably incredibly rare for a lot of reasons. Also lightspeed barrier is probably completely fixed.

[Anonymous No.6921392]

>>6921035
Letting your subject know you're there alters their behavior. It's the same reason field biologists like to observe animals without said animals knowing they're there.

[Anonymous No.6921399]

>>6920862
Life arose on Earth almost immediately as soon as the planet was capable of supporting it, and throughout the history of life there has been a general trend of more and more complexity as well as more advanced brains. Cephalization takes hold as soon as organisms become multicellular after all.

These two facts should hint to us that life in general should be somewhat common, and the life on said planets should trend towards more and more complex brains. This makes the fact that everyone is staying silent even more disturbing.

[Anonymous No.6921403]

>>6921358
>what is convergent evolution

[Anonymous No.6921405]

>>6921403
An amazing way to reduce costume and makeup budgets.

[Anonymous No.6921407]

>>6921403
How may non primate species look like humans?

[Anonymous No.6921412]

>>6921405
Sharks and dolphins look alike for a reason

>>6921407
No one else in our niche or as advanced as us

[Anonymous No.6921416]

>>6921017
>We'll be the ancients.

>Xeeborb, look at this! A new book of scripture!
>It says "/b/"
>What does it mean?

Also this would be awesome if we were the forerunners

[Anonymous No.6921419]

>>6921399
we aren't even sure they're staying silent. SETI's radio equipment is only good enough to detect signals as strong as our own from ~10 lightyears away. That's nothing as far as space is concerned. There could be multiple huge empires throughout the galaxy, and we'd never hear them.

[Anonymous No.6921429]

Humanity has only been putting out electromagnetic signals for, what, a bit over a century? That means the furthest out any extraterrestrial could direct us would be a little over a hundred light years, and most of that would probably be minimal until we really got into broadcasting. It's not that hard to believe that extraterrestrials just haven't figured out we exist yet.

[Anonymous No.6921430]

>>6921403
Convergent evolution generally applies when there is an objectively optimal way to perform a task such as interpreting light through ocular organs or trying to grasp things, although there are often similar yet distinct ways to do the same job. Like, say, communicating, which can work through both auditory and visual cues between individuals; many species use both, as well.

I know the communication idea is more of a learned concept than an evolutionary one, but I hope it illustrates my point somewhat.

[Anonymous No.6921435]

>>6921412
sir, I think you misunderstand what "convergent evolution" is. Aquatic animals have similar shapes because locomotion through a liquid necessitates it. The only thing needed for technological civilization is a grasping manipulator and the right evolutionary pressures, the human shape is surplus to requirements. Evolution is full of things that are unnecessary but present anyway.

[Anonymous No.6921437]

>>6921416
Fucking fantastic is what it would be. I wonder how much of what we say nowadays would even survive until such a time though? Even with everything stored digitally, there's a limit to how much we can save and how much would be accessible. Just thinking "out loud."

[Anonymous No.6921438]

>>6921435
>Evolution is full of things that are unnecessary but present anyway.
Name five

[Anonymous No.6921439]

>>6921438
everything but genetic material, cell membranes, and metabolism.

[Anonymous No.6921458]

>>6921164
Hahah

[Anonymous No.6921466]

>>6921376
Other ways of theoretically getting around light speed barrier. Photons can't think. Let's try to think of out-of-the-box solutions that don't simply entail "going faster". Undoubtedly, if there is an answer, it won't present itself as a natural phenomenon; but when has that ever mattered to us?

[Anonymous No.6921468]

>>6921438
I'll throw down a few: tailbone, appendix, fetal yolk sac...

[Anonymous No.6921470]

>>6921466
Slow down your thinking processes so that waiting a century to get from point A to point B is just a few minutes to your perspective.

[Anonymous No.6921474]

>>6921439
I don't think you understand how evolution works.

[Anonymous No.6921480]

>>6921474
Do you? Lmao

[Anonymous No.6921489]

>>6921470
I was thinking more along the lines of artificial wormholes, but okay... Physics beats biology anyday.

Just because you slow down your perception of time, doesn't mean your physiology will change. You still would need an insane amount of energy and an unparalleled ability to regenerate cells to pull of that stunt.

[Anonymous No.6921490]

>>6921489
By that point "you" would be stored on a computer anyway. Able to withstand greater forces, easier to shield, easier to transport, no need for life support systems. Makes it easier to change your perception of time, too.

[Anonymous No.6921518]

>>6921490
>you would be stored on a computer
Oh yeah? How in the hell are they going to store me in a computer? muh organics

[Anonymous No.6921521]

>>6921518
You're stored on an organic computer right now, just change the substrate to something easier to manage and maintain. And if you're bent on having a continuous state of consciousness moving from one state to another, then just slowly replace everything like your body already does on its own.

[Anonymous No.6921522]

>>6921518
Your DNA is composed of data, as are your memories. Granted, they are in a form we can't extract efficiently as of yet, but the codons and electrical impulses that make up "you" could be copied into a computer. It would be a hella lot of data, though.

[Anonymous No.6921526]

>>6921522
"You" is stored in the physical arrangement of the neurons.

[Anonymous No.6921528]

>>6921522
So it would just be a copy of me... Sorry if I don't feel like creating an everlasting clone of myself and dying anyway because you can't be two conscious individuals at a time. I don't give a shit about the life of my clone (who won't even be human) if I don't get to live its life

[Anonymous No.6921530]

>>6921528
"You" right now are just a copy of "you" from a few years ago. Your body is constantly replacing itself with new cells and phasing out old ones.

[Anonymous No.6921532]

>>6921528
so you wouldn't care about any offspring you may have?

[Anonymous No.6921546]

>>6921530
Yeah and eventually the enzymes which control those functions will die out. That's why you don't see many immortals running around. Until there's a way to regenerate cells, it's all just speculation.

>>6921532
What are you even talking about? No I don't care about whether or not my offspring spend their entire lives on a spaceship. I'm going to be dead anyway.

[Anonymous No.6921553]

>>6921546
The whole point is that your "consciousness" on a computer will be as much you as any past iteration of you. You don't share a single cell with the you of ten years ago, and the you ten years from now will also be made up of completely new cells.

[Anonymous No.6921566]

>>6921553
No it won't, because as my cells replenish, the physical arrangement of my neurons stay the same. It's not like you become a completely different person every 7 years. That's just amount of time your cells are continuously dying and regenerating. Just because someone downloads your brain onto a computer, doesn't mean YOU ARE on that computer. Just the action/reaction data recovered from your brain. It's not like you're even able to pull up a memory from a digitized brain and watch it from the subjects point of view like a movie. That's simply not how artificial life works.

[Anonymous No.6921569]

It's simple, complex earth like life is fucking rare.

I don't doubt many worlds in nearby systems may have traces of bacteria or microbial life.

But the set of circumstances necessary that need to converge to make a paradise like earth doesn't happen often.

[Anonymous No.6921570]

>>6921566
>the physical arrangement of my neurons stay the same
The arrangement changes as you have new experiences and form new memories while older memories fade and distort.

Regardless, slowly replace said neurons with an artificial equivalent, in such a way that you stay conscious from start to finish. There, now the old you in your old substrate no longer exist and is replaced by the new you in the new substrate.

There's nothing special about the specific formation of your neurons or the substrate that that information is stored on.

[Anonymous No.6921572]

Distance,distance,distance.
Everything is far away.
We're in the cosmic boondocks.
Bum tuck cosmic Egypt.

[Anonymous No.6921587]

>>6921570
Why haven't you done it yet, anon? You've theoretically just invented immortality. Mankind's goal since the dawn of life. Call me when you design your first "artificial neuron". I'll present you with the medal of /sci/

[Anonymous No.6921589]

>>6921587
Because we're talking about the far future you idiot, when any interstellar travel will even be feasible in the first place. Pay attention to the post chain. We may as well be as far away from this as ancient Romans were form nuclear fusion.

[Anonymous No.6921593]

>>6921589
Likely closer than that, since we can actually fathom the possibility. But yes, we are quite far off from that reality as of now.

[Anonymous No.6921617]

>>6921589
Oh well then I guess we can do a shitload of things in the "far future", eh? I may as well just jump inside a spacesuit, set an initial velocity to another planet, and coast on anon's patented neural rejuvenators to keep me alive and healthy during the trip. Prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.6921633]

>>6921617
The entire point of the discussion was about what may be possible in the far future. If technology is at the hyper advanced level that interstellar travel is even remotely possible, then computing power will be similarly advanced and we will be beyond our current primitive understanding of the brain. The entire point of transferring "you" to a computer was making it easier to travel.

[Anonymous No.6921676]

>>6921633
Well hey, in theory you could even just make a copy of yourself, isolated from your current body, and send it on its way. Sure, you won't be immortal, but you can pass on your personality to wherever your uploaded intelligence ends up, and you can continue to live your life as normal. Assuming said "future technology" doesn't cause death of the template upon the upload...

[Anonymous No.6921683]

>>6921676
You would be immortal because the copy made would be just as much you as the organic version is. If you don't like the idea of having two of yourself running around, look up destructive uploading.

[Anonymous No.6921691]

>>6921683
Hence
>death of the template
Although "you" wouldn't be immortal, "you #2" would be. Technically you, also technically not you. At this point, it's just semantics, but we're on the same page I think.

[Anonymous No.6921696]

>>6921691
>also technically not you
If it's an exact replica then any distinction between it and "you" would be arbitrary.

[Anonymous No.6921699]

>>6921691
>>6921696
Ah, now we've hit the subject of Theseus' paradox, a personal favorite of mine.

[Anonymous No.6921715]

>>6921699
Ah yes. Popularly debated about Star Trek transporters. Personally I think deconstruction, transmission, and reconstruction would result in death of the consciousness, though a functionally identical copy would live on with one's memories and personality. From the original's perspective though, it's dead.

[Anonymous No.6921735]

>>6921715
>>6921715
I have great paranoia about this becoming the norm. Same with the creation of teleporters that deconstruct you and reconstruct an identical copy elsewhere. From a purely physical standpoint it's harmless, but they're all just different ways to die. What good is a replica if you are forever lost? People who endorse these ideas are claiming to be far more altruistic than they really are.

[Anonymous No.6921746]

>>6921735
Agreed. It's a functionally sound idea, but it would be akin to suicide for anyone who regards it as death and copying. And I'm personally not a fan of that.

[Anonymous No.6921836]

>>6921292
We're talking about coming into physical contact with aliens, so it would kind of have to in this scenario. Or I guess they could just live a really fucking long time

[Anonymous No.6921841]

>>6921696
The fact that there are two of them means there is a distinction. If they were the same then they would be one

[Anonymous No.6921905]

Picture very relevant.

Imagine all the spaghettis we would spill upon first entering the galactic welcoming party.

[Anonymous No.6921908]

>>6921905
I dislike the bugs life and ants. Its unrealistic because most ants are blind and also female.

[Anonymous No.6921910]

>>6921908
I actually was just referencing the first time he entered the "city" filled with other bugs.

[Anonymous No.6921916]

>>6921905
Enough spaghetti to create a dwarf planetoid, I'm sure.

[Anonymous No.6921937]

>>6921916
>yfw pluto is spaghetti

[Anonymous No.6923370]

>>6921937
Low-res pic is low-res, I know. Couldn't find a better one :P

[Anonymous No.6923406]

>>6920862
Easy explanation is that there are many intelligent species in the galaxy... we just happen to be in the territory of a VERY aggressive territorial species... they are uninterested in contacting us and refuse any other species to contact us. Sort of like how you have an ant mound on your land... you have NO interest in the ant mound but refuse to allow any other people on your land... therefore ant mound is never disturbed

[Anonymous No.6923423]

>>6920862
Fermi Paradox is not really a paradox.
Most likely advanced civilizations don't colonize extensively due to limited population growth and we the distances between technological levels, time and space distance make contact unlikely.

>>6920892
>If they're coming they already know about us and it's too late
Any interstellar capable civilization will know about us, because with even slightly better telescopes than we have(and which we are already developing) they will detect human civilization just as easily as biosphere.

[Anonymous No.6923427]

>>6921429
>manity has only been putting out electromagnetic signals for, what, a bit over a century? That means the furthest out any extraterrestrial could direct us would be a little over a hundred light years, and most of that would probably be minimal until we really got into broadcasting. It's not that hard to believe that extraterrestrials just haven't figured out we exist yet.

Aliens would be able to detect biosphere since billions of years and human civilization since around 2 centuries at least(city lights), maybe more.

[Anonymous No.6923435]

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

Our "historical records" of previous alien encounters all indicate we've tried to eradicate them. Even when we don't want to fight them the plot demands an antagonist and we have to stop them from eradicating the aliens. EVERY FUCKING TIME!

If you visited a world as obsessed with killing aliens as this one, would you want to make yourself known to them?

[Anonymous No.6923440]

>>6923435
>Implying that film is reality

Indeed though, the ass-backwards hicks would probably try to fuck something up or shoot somebody while interested people establish contact or something. Damnit, dumb people. This is why we can't have nice things.

[Anonymous No.6923445]

Which aliumfilm do you like the best? I like Contact.

[Anonymous No.6923446]

>>6923440
>while interested people establish contact or something

They'd try to dissect it. Realistically governments could conspire some false flag attack. A common enemy from outer space is exactly what the world needs for world peace. Or at least that's what some idiot will propose to the brass tacks that run things..... and are too dumb to think for themselves or realize just how bad an idea it is. I think I just came up with a plot for a new alien movie. Somebody call Hollywood.

[Anonymous No.6923449]

>>6923446
>A common enemy from outer space is exactly what the world needs for world peace.

Haha, for a while. Then, they'll go right back to fighting each other.

[Anonymous No.6923459]

>>6923446
Buenos Aires was an inside job!

[Anonymous No.6923461]

>>6923446
Well, I can see your point. Obviously it could go either way, but since it hasn't happened [yet] there is no 100% guaranteed way to know how ET contact would turn out. I'd like to think the whole "dissecting" thing would become a kind of exchange, each species just passes along a fresh corpse of an organ donor to the other so they can learn. Maybe that's a bit too altruistic about the whole knowledge thing. The problem with that would be, then they could likely derive our weaknesses from our anatomy. Things that are toxic to us and whatnot. Of course we could also send them an anatomically incorrect dummy so that...

Shit, I'm rambling about something that's not even relevant. Fuck it. Kill the aliens, shit's too complicated.

[Anonymous No.6923777]

How could Fermi not realize that the alien civilizations are so far ahead in terms of technology that they simply do not care?

They are probably watching us, waiting for us to implode, like they have seen so many others do.

[Anonymous No.6923791]

>>6920920
>>6920911

BV: positronium
BVI: high energy particle colliders
B omega: maybe alcubierre, we'll see.

[Anonymous No.6923832]

>>6921841
Go to one of your documents and make a copy into another folder. Now what's the difference between the two? Describe how one is the "real" document while the other is somehow a "fake"

[Anonymous No.6923834]

>>6923832
Don't bother arguing with the closet dualists. They've been here and argued for a soul in some shape or form since day 1. Nowdays they're mostly throwing around "muh copies" instead

[Anonymous No.6923853]

>>6923832
>>6923834
it's not about souls. If I make a perfect copy of one paper, and then tear the original up, it makes no difference from my outside perspective but the fact of the matter is that one of those papers got torn up. And I don't want to be that paper. You guys must be playing devil's advocate. I refuse to believe that something so simple eludes you.

[Anonymous No.6923855]

>>6923853
Your body is already being constantly torn up and replaced as old cells die and get replaced with new ones.

[Anonymous No.6923858]

>>6923855
Seriously shut the fuck up already. You obviously don't understand what's being said. There is a difference between copy and original.

[Anonymous No.6923868]

They're staying away until we finally do some cleaning and get rid of all the nigs and kikes

[Anonymous No.6923871]

>>6923858
That difference being? Seriously, look up the Ship of Theseus.

[Anonymous No.6923874]

>>6923855
Yeah but my consciousness isn't destroyed. The electrical signals in my mind have fired continuously throughout this process. The problem with teleportation is that the original is destroyed. That person's consciousness is destroyed as the new person's is created. It doesn't matter that the copy is identical. It doesn't matter that you're the same from everybody else's perspective. What matters is from YOUR perspective, you fucking die when the machine turns on.

[Anonymous No.6923878]

>>6923874
I'm not talking about teleportation. I'm still talking about some hypothetical future anon transferring his mind to a computer to travel to Alpha Centauri. If you're bent up over having continuous consciousness, then slow down the transferal process and only change out bits and pieces of your brain at a time, until it's been entirely replaced with something more durable. There, problem solved.

[Anonymous No.6923882]

Simple answer to why nothing's come here to visit us: any intelligent life out there is probably hundreds of thousands of light years away from us, if not farther. When these entities observe our solar system, they see a cloudy water-dominated planet and some gas giants.

They're observing our distant past and there's no obvious sign of highly intelligent life here. If water isn't an important resource to them, then we're completely irrelevant to their existence and there's no reason to send a ship trillions of miles away just for nothing. We've only had artificial light visible from space on this planet for a bit over a century. We're only now becoming noticeable.

Some people like to think that there are noble aliens who avoid our existence or some shit. It's more likely that they just don't have warp drives and don't have 100% up to date maps of the galaxy.

[Anonymous No.6923899]

>>6923858
I don't have to look up some philosophical bullshit to understand that when I die, it's lights out. A copy is a copy is a copy is a copy. To the objective world, it would be the same thing. To my subjective conscious, I'd be dead. That's literally all I care about

[Anonymous No.6923906]

>>6920862
>Implying that we can control the rate at which our species evolves

[Anonymous No.6924011]

>>6923899
>yfw that happens every time you go to sleep

[Anonymous No.6924017]

>>6923882
Well if you consider the fact that water is a necessity for life, then our planet looks pretty rare and valuable regardless of whether life here is intelligent. I wouldn't doubt that, if they noticed this planet, they would be at least mildly curious about whether or not life was able to begin here.

I won't even go into my personal beliefs that we have already been contacted, which delves into aspects of politics the average /sci/entist isn't ready to deal with.

[Anonymous No.6924023]

>>6924011
>implying sleep and death are at all related

[Anonymous No.6924025]

>>6923882
It could just be that all or most civilizations end up destroying themselves.

[Anonymous No.6924038]

Because alien life is rare and spread out and they can't travel faster than the speed of light.

[Anonymous No.6924042]

>>6921007
What if, against the statistical lottery, we are the only sapient life forms and that is the way it will stay that way until the heat death of the universe?

[Anonymous No.6924046]

>>6923878
What could you even speculate might make a good substitute for brain matter? I'm genuinely curious.
I won't even go into the fact that whatever you replaced it with would still be limited to the same energy requirement and psychological degradation factors that make interstellar travel such a burden.

[Anonymous No.6924048]

>>6924042
Dude don't say shit like that. What a buzzkill

Captcha: bleak edkybe

[Anonymous No.6924049]

>>6924042
That means we can't search any bitchin alien ruins and learn from their mistakes

[Anonymous No.6924094]

>>6924046
It's not my field and I wouldn't even know where to begin. The entire point is that this is the far distant future and things like that will have already been discovered. Right now we're still in the stone age when it comes to neuroscience.

In principle, though, the fact we exist already shows you can make inert matter self aware and conscious by arranging it in just the right configuration.

>I won't even go into the fact that whatever you replaced it with would still be limited to the same energy requirement

The whole point is that having an organic brain and the body to go along with it makes any sort of interstellar travel all the more difficult and dangerous. It implies you need a life support system, that your ship can't accelerate or decelerate too fast, you need water and nutrients and air and on and on and on.

>psychological degradation factors that make interstellar travel such a burden.
The original comment in the post chain talked about slowing down perception of time so that long trips seemed short

[Anonymous No.6924114]

>>6924094
So, in essence, what you're saying is the entire focus and long-term goal of humanity is to eventually create artificial life and shed our organic selves. We'd essentially become Reapers. I guess science and ethics seldom, if ever, go hand in hand. We'd probably lose all respect for organic life.

[Anonymous No.6924125]

>>6924114
Humanity has always been about creating better and better tools and improving ourselves in different ways. There will always be groups who have religious, philosophical, political, or even just aesthetic reasons to stay in their fleshy meaty bodies. Our naturally evolved forms are just not meant for deep space travel, though.

[Anonymous No.6924202]

>>6924114
To be fair, it'll probably be more like ghost in the shell and we'll all just be highly advanced androids.

[Anonymous No.6924279]

>>6921169
Does it though?

I can't imagine our legacy being particularly good, but maybe I'm just pessimistic.

I have a feeling we'd end up as some kind of fable told to alien kids to teach them the importance of co-operation and taking care of your host planet, unlike the Ancient Shitlords, who destroyed countless worlds through war and exploitation as they spread across the galaxy, like spacecancer.

pic unrelated.

[Anonymous No.6924298]

>>6923832
Isn't the data stored in specific parts of the computer? So the difference between them would be where they are stored, and thus you could determine and keep track of each separately. Just like in this hypothetical situation of copying people, you could differentiate based on their unique locations and experiences after the copy was made. Even as it was just made, you could say the difference is that the copy was just made and the original was not.

[Anonymous No.6924304]

>>6924298
>on the computer

By that, I mean hard drive.

[Anonymous No.6924443]

>>6924298
>>6924304
And the only difference between them will be location. In the same way the two of "you" would both equally be you, just in two different places. They would start to diverge as time went on and different experiences were had between them, but that's no different from you changing from your past iterations as you go through new experiences.

[Anonymous No.6924453]

>>6924443
It is different... You can remember your past iterations as memories. You would have no neural connection between you and your copy.

[Anonymous No.6924464]

>>6921399
>Nuclear strategy in space

That's a real abstract kind of fucking terrifying

[Anonymous No.6924473]

>>6924453
The copy would share all of your memories, and in the new substrate may not even lose old memories like your brain will.

Any new memories formed between you two will eventually lead to two different people, but the point would be moot if the "original" you is either destroyed in the process or you're slowly converted from one form to the other, so that there only ever is one of you around at any given time.

[Anonymous No.6924587]

>>6924017
We're only beginning to map out the galaxy. It's entirely possible that aquatic planets are numerous and ours is too warm or too cold for other water-based life, and thus completely worthless to them.

[Anonymous No.6925360]

Our reality is a terrarium. We're an experiment by something with the tech to program realities using quantum coding. We see no other intelligent life because whatever the purpose of the experiment is requires there to be no external interference.

Or sufficiently advanced technology fundamentally alters how that civilization interacts with the physical universe, to the point our frames of reference are temporally out of sync.

Chances are we are not special and are merely doing what any intelligent being does: filling gaps in our knowledge with variables until evidence allows a logical conclusion to be drawn.

[Anonymous No.6925380]

>>6924473
The nature of the tech would lead us to cyborgs before we hit the point that we can just copy brains in to things.

If we ever reach that point, we'll understand that transferring your mind basically requires the receptacle to offer a near identical situation, or your going to have a very pissed off copy of a person wondering why they are suddenly the program running the toaster or something.

If we can manipulate minds at that point though, we'll have basically mastered telepathy, cloning, and mind integrations that the current concept of self won't even really exist any more.

[Anonymous No.6925566]

The difficulty of interstellar space travel is vastly understated.

Which is why.

[Anonymous No.6926760]

>aliens finally found us
>created wormhole
>went to earth
>suddenly into red giant
>they die
>ayy lmao
>jokes on them
>theyve seen earth millions light years away, millions light younger than it is now

[Anonymous No.6927045]

Pic related

[Anonymous No.6927088]

>>6924042

We will develop the technology to colonize space. If FTL proves to be possible, we could colonize other planets fairly quickly. If FTL isn't possible, we'd have to send generation ships if we want to break out of our solar system. Either way, humanity is going to figure out how to colonize the last frontier. If there are no other intelligent species, then we have a whole lot of room to do whatever the fuck we want. I image it would turn out a lot like the Firefly universe. If aliens do exist, I hope they are friendly.

[Anonymous No.6927391]

>>6925566
This. Also faster than light speed is impossible. Not to mention the enormous cost associated with actually developing and sending a space-worthy vehicle into space. To me the Fermi paradox isn't a paradox, because I don't believe space-faring civilizations can exist.

[Anonymous No.6927430]

>>6924279
>our legacy
plastiglomerates
there will be alien civilizations that will fight over rights to mine this shit

[Anonymous No.6927448]

>>6920931
I think
>Life is common
>Humans are uninteresting
>Earth isn't that valuable
is the best answer.

We keep seeing that almost every metal rich star has planets and even red dwarfs (the most common star) have habitable zones.

[Anonymous No.6927464]

>>6921521
>organic computer

VERY debatable

[Anonymous No.6927471]

>>6921435
>the human shape is surplus to requirements.
The human body is amazingly efficient.

>high throughput digestive tract that only processes high energy foods (no cellulose scavenging)
>only two legs for locomotion
>only two grasping limbs

What on humans (besides stuff like earlobes) is superfluous? Two graspers allows for advanced handling techniques, but three graspers dosn't add any significant benefit over two.

Not to mention that humans are endurance machines and we can jog other land animals to death.

[Anonymous No.6927497]

>>6927471
>Not to mention that humans are endurance machines and we can jog other land animals to death.

"jogging" is a human defined term that means running faster than walking but not fast enough to expend a lot of energy. It is trash in the biological work and a great way to get eaten by a faster animal.

A snail might call a sliding ability that fits its criteria of jogging (faster than walking but not fast enough to quickly expend all its energy) and say, "Look at me! I can jog for 24 hours straight! I am a straight MACHINE!"

[Violent Simians Guy No.6927504]

>>6920862

Fairly good reasoning, but you're still dodging a particularly central issue: The rapidity of the development of metallic technology. Humans are still pretty much the violent simians who hunted and gathered on the veldt. Our competitive urges are primary motivators, but as hardly needs to be said, being heavily competitive with such deadly and powerful industrial bases at hour back, is a surefire recipe for a Final War. And then the entire civilizational base gets knocked back to pre-petroleum capabilities, and then the race finds itself unable to muster the wherewithal to command spaceflight even to the pissant interplanetary level. We don't even need to indulge in NBC war (nuclear, biological, chemical), although WE WILL... no, just a heavy emphasis on conventional war across major population zones is enough to knock the civ base on its ass. And then we'll face a depleted world, where the low-hanging fruit of resources have already been picked. Lacking a strong industrial backing from cheap resources, particularly energy, expanding again will simply be impossible.

Humanity is all too likely to collapse back to a perpetual 1700s lifestyle worldwide, pastoral and stunningly retro in all cultural mores. 2-3 billion Humans will end up surviving the Last War, and will bicker and drink and screw for several thousand years before environmental changes make a tiny tweak in our genome for the next stage.

[Anonymous No.6927515]

>>6920862
We don't know the answer.

[Anonymous No.6927529]

>>6927497
Humans are apex predators, we can sprint out of danger, plus with basic tools we can kill most animals and with modern weapons any animal with little danger. We're not some prey, we are well adapted to stalking.

Your point is invalid because your assumptions are wrong.

[Violent Simians Guy No.6927531]

>>6924094
>The whole point is that having an organic brain and the body to go along with it makes any sort of interstellar travel all the more difficult and dangerous. It implies you need a life support system, that your ship can't accelerate or decelerate too fast, you need water and nutrients and air and on and on and on.

Can I honestly ask what the hell is wrong with you people? You seem so educated, but you can't see a micron outside of the cultural viewpoint box you're in.

If having a greatly slimmed down support system is your phyla, then by definition, your needs will be far more easily fulfilled. Therefore there's no need to leave the solar system; you can flourish even more easily by STAYING HERE.

And that's the root 'problem' for why Humans will ultimately avoid space. It's too easy to meet Human needs here, on Earth, once you allow a few billion of the useless eaters to die off from war, starvation and overall neglect.

[Anonymous No.6927588]

>>6927531
I wasn't discussing the why or even the how of interstellar travel, simply stating a truth. IF there ever is a human or posthuman intelligence leaving the solar system, it will never be in an organic human body.

>>6927464
There is no real debate around the existence of a soul or some notion of dualism. We are self-aware inert matter.

[Anonymous No.6927595]

>>6920931
>tfw leftists will force us to accept purple spaceniggers

[Anonymous No.6927603]

>>6927595
OOGA BOOGA WHAR DA HUMAN WIMMIN AT

[Anonymous No.6927668]

>>6927588
>never in an organic body
Never say never. We may yet see manned slow ships or even something much faster.

>self-aware inert matter
Be careful what qualifiers you use, humans are not inert by any standard definition, unless you were saying humans are sluggish because we don't move a significant fraction of the speed of light.

[Anonymous No.6927927]

>>6927471
>The human body is amazingly efficient.
but the body plan is not required to exist in our environment, just look at the veriety of shames in animals with grasping manipulators

[Anonymous No.6927947]

>>6927045
this has me wondering. What was the reaction when scientists and astrologists found out we were so insignificantly small compared to the universe?

[Anonymous No.6927954]

>>6927947
Galileo was almost executed and went under house arrest his entire life, Bruno was burned at the stake, and Copernicus was so afraid of punishment he only published his works after his death.

Also

>astrologers

[Anonymous No.6928133]

Here's an idea: what if it's quicker to find a way out of the universe than it is to find a way across it? What if none of the various alien civilizations have bothered to go out looking for other life in their universe because they're too busy experimenting with the local space in other universes? Maybe they're even having the huge cultural problems we assume we'd have with them, but with other universe iterations of themselves.

[Anonymous No.6928139]

>>6928133
*haven't bothered

[Anonymous No.6928339]

>>6920862
There are a few scenarios

>We're the only life in the universe
very unlikely. It's almost statistically impossible for Earth to be the only one considering the size of the universe
>There is life out there, but it is not "intelligent"
Very likely.
>There is "intelligent" life out there (maybe even capable of space), but has no Faster-Than-Light technology.
This is the most probable scenario.
>There is intelligent life out there and it has FTL technology. But it hasn't found us yet.
Very unlikely, since we don't know if FTL is possible in practice.
>There is life out there with FTL and it knows where we are. But they don't give a shit about us, there is nothing to find on Earth they can't find elsewhere.
Even less likely than the above scenario.

[Anonymous No.6928355]

>>6921017
>we'll be the ancients
i love that sentence
fuck rationality i want this to happen

[Anonymous No.6928360]

>>6928339
2nd one is possible but unlikely. if there's life, there surely is intelligent life too.

[Anonymous No.6928372]

>>6920892
Wouldn't sending out RKV's be a kind of death sentence for humanity since if one was sent towards an alien civilization at least as advanced as us they would have protocol to execute in exactly such an event?

[Anonymous No.6928384]

>>6928372
The scenario also ignores that launching relativistic objects as described would act like a beacon screaming "we are here and want to kill you" to anyone else nearby. It isn't like you can move at relativistic speeds through space and not make a shit ton of "noise."

The simplest solution to the Fermi paradox is that we are not millions of years behind other intelligent life coupled with intelligent life most probably being uncommon.

[Anonymous No.6928506]

>>6928360
Yes, but it's the second most likely scenario compared to 3rd.

[Anonymous No.6928527]

>>6927504

you sound like a fun guy