Fermi Paradox and the Great Filter

[Anonymous No.9522727]

Perhaps the Great Filter, and the explanation for why we see no evidence of life outside of our Solar System is due to the drive of space exploration itself. Not even discussing FTL starships like Alcubierre Drive's or wormholes for the moment. Sticking only to things that we can actually build right now, such as nuclear pulse propulsion. Or, essentially farting thermonuclear bombs in the range of megatons out the ass of a spacecraft and riding the blast wave to accelerate. These types of spacecraft could potentially accelerate to 80-90% the speed of light. And it wouldn't even take that long to do it. Only a few months.

With that said. What is stopping someone from piloting one of these spacecraft implementing PNP at 0.9c right into planet Earth? Is this the true filter that, if passed, unlocks the Universe to a species while decimating those who do not pass?
>What is /sci/'s thoughts on this?

[Anonymous No.9522737]

I think a fair solution to the paradox is planets that can create the situation for intelligent life are rare, and the step between sentient, and intelligent is very difficult. There has never been a technologically advanced civilization on earth before us, and we wen't through several iterations of proto-humans who in some cases were smarted, who weren't able to bypass the minimalistic lives they lived, to developing society. Having a big brain is a huge inconvenience from an evolutionary standpoint, big brains cost a lot energy wise, and us developing them only happened due to an unusual chain of events that most likely doesn't happen often. PLUS, being intelligent doesn't grant you the ability to develop society, dolphins are intelligent, but lack the physiological ability to develop useful tool, and being ocean dwelling doesn't help. Plus complex cellular life, and macro cellular life are unusual, it took an odd accidental combination of two bacteria joining in a symbiotic relationship to allow life to become more complex.
If anything, intelligent life might be a very very very rare occurrence, something so uncommon some galaxies may not have an intelligent species, plus theres the risks we still face of self annihilation

[Anonymous No.9522740]

It's due to antinatalism.
t. alien expert

[Anonymous No.9522756]

Species which don't spend considerable effort trying to murder each other can't go to space.

[Anonymous No.9522795]

>>9522756
But in order to even be able to conceptualize exploring space. One must first be the dominant species on there planet. This usually involves being top predator. Also like what>>9522737 said. Large brains take a lot to power them. Eating grass isn't gonna get you there. Eating other animals, and especially cooking the meat before you eat it. Now that's a different story. But in order to get the meat, you have to kill the animal that is the meat.
>press F to evolve X millions of year's later and you got yourself an apex predator with a war like society
>Or in other terms, you have Homo Sapiens

[Anonymous No.9522802]

According to current trends, it's likely that the Great Filter is climate change. To develop advanced tech, fossil fuels are necessary to first industrialize and develop. But by the time the species realizes the damage it's done to it's biosphere it causes a runaway greenhouse effect which destroys its civilization. And all the easily extracted metals are gone at that point so they're stuck in a permanent stone age.

[Anonymous No.9522808]

>>9522802
>all the easily extracted metals are gone at that point so they're stuck in a permanent stone age

what did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.9522809]

>>9522727
Most alien civilizations probably realize how futile it is to explore space, and just go inward. A advanced enough civilization can run simulations that are likely indistinguishable from reality. So why bother. That's why we don't see anyone.

[Anonymous No.9522838]

>>9522802
Planets stable enough to have intelligent life evolve on are definitely stable enough to have an avenue for survival in the case of climate change.

[Anonymous No.9522865]

>>9522727
>What is stopping someone from piloting one of these spacecraft implementing PNP at 0.9c right into planet Earth?
If you want to kill, you don't need interstellar travel.

[Anonymous No.9522874]

>>9522865
brainlet

[Anonymous No.9522877]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Just because we haven't discovered ayys, or traces of them, does not mean they don't exist or are very rare. In terms of astronomical time humanity has been around for the blink of an eye and only exploring for extraterrestrial life for a fraction of a fraction of our existence. We've barely scratched the surface in terms of space exploration and searching for extraterrestrial life.

We didn't even know for sure if planets existed around other stars until around 25 years ago when we had the first confirmed exoplanet discovery. Now we have discovered thousands of them and have determined planets are pretty common. We didn't get serious about listening for ayy radio transmissions until the 70s - again, almost nothing in terms of cosmic timescales. Despite that short timeframe, there has been one radio signal that we can't explain (look up the Wow signal). Doesn't mean it was sent by ayys but we can't dismiss it with any other explanation and it's the most promising hard evidence of an artificial radio signal. I'm really looking forward to the JWST. It should give us more clues on where to look for life. It will be able to analyze atmospheres of some exoplanets, which will give us prime SETI candidates.

tldr give it a few hundred more years of searching for life before definitively making any claims about how common it occurs

[Anonymous No.9522910]

>>9522802
Yeah right because intelligent life could only ever use burning hydrocarbons as its source of energy.
>>9522727
Nuclear pulse propulsion cannot do .9c

And we still haven't eliminated the simplest "great filter" - that intelligent, technological life is simply quite rare to begin with. You simply cannot presume the probability of anything while your sample size is 1.

[Anonymous No.9522912]

If even one civilization in the observable universe could build Dyson spheres and travel between stars, it would be very obvious. As we would see a galaxy with a section obscured in the visible spectrum, but glowing brightly in the infrared band.

[Anonymous No.9522942]

>>9522912
well maybe Dyson spheres are actually just unnecessary?

[Anonymous No.9522950]

>>9522912
You think a Dyson sphere will have solar panels with shitty efficiency?

[Anonymous No.9522951]

>>9522912
>>9522942
Dyson sphere candidates are known by dozens
https://home.fnal.gov/~carrigan/infrared_astronomy/Fermilab_search.htm

Using the Low Resolution Spectrometer yielded 17 ambiguous candidates of which four were slightly amusing but still ambiguous and questionable. The largest one sun bolometric distance in the 17 source sample was 118 pc. The 11000 source Calgary sample extended down to 1-2 Jy which would have given a maximum bolometric distance of 300 pc for LRS sources. This region includes something like a million stars.

https://home.fnal.gov/~carrigan/infrared_astronomy/Other_searches.htm

Slysh and Timofeev at al. have the IRAS database for a different approach. Slysh investigated the flux at the maximum of a Dyson Sphere spectrum. He estimated that all Dyson Spheres with temperatures from 50 to 400 �K within 1 kpc of the sun should have been detected. The Timoreev search looked at a population of IRAS sources in the 110-120 and 280-290�K temperature range as established by Kardashev and others and did Planck blackbody fits to the four IRAS bands. Sylsh identified one possible Dyson Sphere candidate, G357.3-1.3. The Timofeev at al. search identified 10 or so candidates but ruled out most of them, often on the basis of associations.

More recently several other searches have been conducted for partial Dyson Spheres. Globus, Backman, and Witteborn have searched by looking for a temperature/luminosity anomaly due to the fact that the luminosity of a star surrounded by a partial Dyson sphere would be lowered compared to a naked star of the same temperature. Conroy and Werthimer have searched by constraining the Jugaku infrared excess technique to older stars using a list of 1000 nearby older stars compiled by Wright and Marcy. Using older stars eliminates thick dust clouds around young stars. hey have found 33 candidates in the 12 μm IRAS band with 3 σ excesses from the mean.

[Anonymous No.9522953]

>>9522942
Why? It's literally harvesting free energy that would be created from fusion reaction regardless of your will.

[Anonymous No.9522955]

>>9522951
>>9522912
>>9522942
>dyson sph-
Let me stop you right there, and ask you to leave, and please, never some back.

[Anonymous No.9522958]

>>9522951
If you see any Dyson spheres, you should see entire galaxies consumed by them. It takes a relatively tiny amount of time (a few million years) compared to the time it takes for life to arise and reach spacefaring technology.

[Anonymous No.9522961]

>>9522955
what's your fucking problem?

[Anonymous No.9522962]

>>9522955
shut the fuck up and keep suckin my cock you faggot

[Anonymous No.9522967]

>>9522958
>If you see any Dyson spheres, you should see entire galaxies consumed by them.
>if you see a city you should see whole continent covered by it

There is literally no reason for extensive colonization of entire universe.
Even our civilization doesn't colonize every piece of livable land there is.

[Anonymous No.9522970]

what if The Filter™ is becoming multi-cellular life?

[Anonymous No.9522976]

>>9522967
>Even our civilization
Yes. But our civilization =/= all of intelligent lifeforms. 1 that never stops colonizing is enough for it to be visible.

[Anonymous No.9522982]

>>9522976
>1 that never stops colonizing is enough for it to be visible.
Well we know that there isn't a civilization that colonizes everything so we can safely scratch that from our list.

[Anonymous No.9523001]

>>9522967
>There is literally no reason for extensive colonization of entire universe.
Yes there is. Gathering up resources to last as long as possible. And then there is the simple fact that in a civilization of trillions even a small proportion that wants to expand can do so.

And even if you can come up with a reason to not expand, if even just a few civilizations do it anyway you would see them everywhere.

[Anonymous No.9523004]

>>9522982
>we know that there isn't a civilization that colonizes everything
No we don't. We know humans haven't (so far), but you can't extrapolate this.

[Anonymous No.9523007]

>>9523001
>Yes there is. Gathering up resources to last as long as possible.
You don't get how big space is. Our Solar System can support trillions of humans for billions of years alone.
> And then there is the simple fact that in a civilization of trillions even a small proportion that wants to expand can do so.
Why would there ever be a civilization of trillions?
>And even if you can come up with a reason to not expand, if even just a few civilizations do it anyway you would see them everywhere.
Well, we can safely say there are no civilizations that want to endlessly expand since we don't see them.

[Anonymous No.9523010]

>>9523004
>No we don't. We know humans haven't (so far), but you can't extrapolate this.
Didn't you just say that we would see one if it existed? Since we don't see it, it is safe to say that there is no civilization in our observable universe that endlessly expands

[Anonymous No.9523017]

>>9523007
>You don't get how big space is. Our Solar System can support trillions of humans for billions of years alone.
And a billion solar systems can do even better. You're drawing arbitrary lines in the sand here.
>Why would there ever be a civilization of trillions?
Because that's what even a K1 civilization can support.
>Well, we can safely say there are no civilizations that want to endlessly expand since we don't see them.
But you can't assert that there are civilizations to begin with until you see them.

[Anonymous No.9523018]

>>9523010
No you fucking brainlet. Your claim is
>1. There are civilizations out there
>2. But they don't expand
You need to prove the first part, otherwise the more believable explanation is that there are no civilizations in our neck of the woods.

[Anonymous No.9523065]

>>9523018
Of course there are people out there. Heaps of people.

[Anonymous No.9523066]

I'm sure we've seen everything that could be seen with our garden telescopes.

[Anonymous No.9523103]

>>9522727
>nuclear pulse propulsion
>These types of spacecraft could potentially accelerate to 80-90% the speed of light. And it wouldn't even take that long to do it. Only a few months.

You have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

I've only ever heard an optimistic estimate of 10% c. for this type of spacecraft.

>>9522737

Or you brainlets are taking space opera seriously and thinking that an interstellar civilization is going to look like "Star Trek".

A species switching to a virtual existence using Matrioschka Brains is a more likely outcome, meaning that they would be very difficult to detect, because every last joule of stellar output would be absorbed by the construct (if they didn't just disassemble their star and switch to a more efficient utilization of energy production).

I was the guy who started the rumor that the Boötes void might be a colossal galactic empire, based on this notion...

(no, I wasn't serious)

[Anonymous No.9523154]

>>9522727
>Fermi Paradox
not science or math

[Anonymous No.9523156]

the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

[Anonymous No.9523182]

I really think it comes down to resources. I mean assuming a species develops to the point where they have the ability to go into space on the same level we can. They would also be individuals. So you don't see any insane amount of resources going into space. Also technological limitations. Which also covers the whole AI/Dyson stuff.

[Anonymous No.9523189]

>>9523065
citation needed

[Anonymous No.9523191]

>>9523066
If our galaxy was a bunch of dyson spheres we'd know it. Or rather wouldn't because we wouldn't exist

[Anonymous No.9523208]

>>9523017
>And a billion solar systems can do even better.
Why would you need billion solar systems? Is whole Earth covered with atomic powerplants

>Because that's what even a K1 civilization can support.
And human civilization can support in theory a trillion people. Yet it doesn't. Or on smaller scale France can have 200 million people yet it doesn't.

>But you can't assert that there are civilizations to begin with until you see them.
It is not me that makes a claim that civilization would constantly expand and colonize every system in the universe. There are Dyson sphere candidates and if there are indeed correct we can assume they don't belong to ever expanding civilization.

[Anonymous No.9523212]

>>9523018
>>1. There are civilizations out there
>2. But they don't expand
>You need to prove the first part, otherwise the more believable explanation is that there are no civilizations in our neck of the woods.

>if civilization expands it will colonize every rock in the Universe, no other options are possible!
Nope brainlet, just like humans haven't colonized whole Earth, alien civilizations don't have to colonize whole galaxies if they exist.
One type of civilization we can of course confirm to be non-existant is the one that colonizes everything. After all we would see it. Civilizations with limited or no expansion are possible.It is perfecty possible to imagine civilizations engaging in only limited colonization of their stellar neighberhood and just exploring the rest.

[Anonymous No.9523213]

>>9523191
>If our galaxy was a bunch of dyson spheres we'd know it. Or rather wouldn't because we wouldn't exist
As quoted above there are Dyson Sphere candidates. Read the link, they are known to exist but we can't confirm if they are artificial or really unique cool stars. There are other objects in the galaxy that possibly could be artificial but we have no way of confirming it, like Przybylski Star

[Anonymous No.9523214]

>>9523103
>I was the guy who started the rumor that the Boötes void might be a colossal galactic empire, based on this notion...
There is a galaxy that consists almost only of red dwarfs and we have also detected a star that has geometric patterns on its surface.
Plenty of weird stuff that could be artificial but would require confirmation.

[Anonymous No.9523216]

>>9523018
>You need to prove the first part, otherwise the more believable explanation is that there are no civilizations in our neck of the woods.
>Civilizations don't exist because there is no retard civilization spamming every object in the galaxy with colonies

[Anonymous No.9523218]

>>9523017
>Because that's what even a K1 civilization can support.
I can support 5 children yet I have none.
I prefer luxury and comfort in my life rather than reproduction.
Self-awareness and technology stand in the way of biological needs.

[Anonymous No.9523219]

>80-90% the speed of light
NO.
Why does no one use the Lorentz transformations. Why does no one understand something as simple as fucking special relativity. You fucking brainlets. NO! okay? NOOOOO!

[Anonymous No.9523223]

>>9522727

Sorry to burst your bubbles but aliens do not exist. God created only humans in the universe.

[Anonymous No.9523401]

>>9523218
But there are plenty of other people who reproduce anyway. You are not a universal yardstick.

[Anonymous No.9523414]

>>9523401
>But there are plenty of other people who reproduce anyway. You are not a universal yardstick.
Reproduction rate for developed countries has been falling universally

[Anonymous No.9523429]

>>9522737
>rare
Water is the most common compound in the universe so no, life would be common at least single celled life, multicellular would be rare.

[Anonymous No.9523433]

>>9522802
>it causes a runaway greenhouse effect which destroys its civilization
Just move to the poles.

[Anonymous No.9523439]

>>9522802
>But by the time the species realizes the damage it's done to it's biosphere it causes a runaway greenhouse effect which destroys its civilization.
Buahah, climate change is GOOD for our civilization.
It will reduce deaths from cold, flu.
It will increase agricultural yields.
It will allow us to raise more cattle.
It will allow us to build longer because winter means shorter construction time.
It will allow for better transport infrastructure(snow blocks roads and railways).
It will help to create new cities as coastal ones are abandoned and build new well planned modern high-tech cities.

Global Warming is a GODSEND.

[Anonymous No.9523448]

>>9523439
all fun and games before you have to evacuate 2 billion people from the coasts and another 2 billion from temperate areas that turned into fucking desert

[Anonymous No.9523465]

>>9523448
>turn into desert
Um no sweetie a hotter rock means more evaporation means a higher rate of rainfall meaning more moist latitude in general like the paleocene period of history when this rock was hotter dumbass.

[Anonymous No.9523467]

>>9523448
>>9523448
>all fun and games before you have to evacuate 2 billion people from the coasts
It will happen over a century and is perfectly doable.

>2 billion from temperate areas that turned into fucking desert
Not going to happen

[Anonymous No.9523484]

>>9522809
The problem with that is if you're not constantly expanding then you're only increasing the likelihood of a singular event wiping you out with every tick of the clock.
The further and faster you spread, the longer the odds get that any one thing could get everyone. It's like if you had a planet where a paradise for intelligent tool using life formed in the shadow of a volcano. They have everything they need, and no problems, and never go anywhere else. Eventually the volcano would wipe them all out though.
Even if you've managed to download the conscious mind into an enormous AI construct it doesn't make you invincible, shit can still happen.

[Anonymous No.9523587]

>>9523484
>you're only increasing the likelihood of a singular event wiping you out with every tick of the clock.
In movies, yes.
We're talking about reality though.
Even a large scale nuclear war would just mean a decrease in population, nothing more.

[Anonymous No.9523605]

>>9523439
It still increase deaths from malaria and other tropical diseases, which are more dangerous than the flu by far.
It will destroy the majority of the world's farmland through flooding and desertification.
It will flood and destroy coastal cities where the majority of humanity lives, raising demand for construction and so making it much more expensive.
It will lead to massively increased risk of fires.
It will lower the amount of oxygen seawater can hold, causing ecosystem collapse in the oceans.

Global warming is not a good thing you idiot. Why do you think everyone, including people who study it for a living, is so worried about it?

[Anonymous No.9523612]

>>9523587
I'm talking about neutron stars running into each other in an adjacent part of the galaxy. The black hole at the center of your galaxy becoming periodically active.
There are plenty of things on the candidates for great filter that are far bigger than piddly bullshit like muh nukes, muh climate change that you've just got to throw your hands up at the prospect of preventing them from happening.
If you stay in one place long enough, the more extremely unlikely things happening begin to have a non zero probability. That's not sci fi, that's how the dice roll.

[Anonymous No.9523613]

>>9523465
>a loss of montane glaciers and snow coverage won't lead to desertification
>increased evaporation only impacts they oceans, not the land

[Anonymous No.9523640]

>>9523429
>water is all you need for life

[Anonymous No.9523644]

Look at how all the great civilizations, except for the chinese, have destroyed themselves via dysgenetics & mongrelization with low IQ hordes

Look at how the west is now doing the same.

Look at how liberal retards, while babbling about "where are all the aliens", are cheering on the genocide of the race that invented everything on this planet? There is no paradox, intelligence is not a survival trait, and if any generation goes bad then thats the end of the climb of civilization on a planet.

[Anonymous No.9523666]

>>9523605
>malaria increase is because you drive cars not because us noble greenfags banned pesticides!

[Anonymous No.9523668]

>>9523605
>Why do you think everyone, including people who study it for a living, is so worried about it?
Because they want to see their trillion dollar fake green industries, and associated kickbacks.

As usual this is just the marxists trying to destroy our countries, our economies, our ways of life.
They want to raise taxes on us & increase our costs of living, while the third world ignores it.

>>9523448
A mass flood of migrants would finally force the cucks to defend their borders, or perish, it wouldn't be a bad thing. The world has been too comfortable in the west for too many people.

[Anonymous No.9523732]

>>9523644
>Look at how all the great civilizations, except for the chinese, have destroyed themselves via dysgenetics & mongrelization with low IQ horde
The chinks suffer dysgenics alright, it's just that their barbarian hordes are high IQ

[Anonymous No.9523758]

>>9523666
>DDT has no harmful side effects
>mosquitoes do not thrive in warmer conditions

>>9523668
>lmao don't you know that science is fake? I'm smarter and holier than everyone else in the world :))))))))
Get over yourself.

[Anonymous No.9524071]

>>9523732
Yea but mountains and jungles seperated them from the low IQ populations of India/South East Asia/etc

Even still, I believe the Southern Chinese population is lower IQ than the North

[Anonymous No.9524118]

>>9522727
It really takes nerves to talk about alien life when we didn't even directly look at any rocky planet outside of our solar system yet. We know three rocky planet that lie in the habitable zone of their star. And this the earth, mars and venus. From three planets one houses very complex life, one probably houses or housed at some point very primitive life forms, and one probably never did. So statistically speaking, from three planets in the habitable zone, two house life, and from those two one houses very complex life.

Of course we have a too small number of observations to make any meaningful assumptions. This will change soon when we have telescops that can look at planets directly and check their atmosphere for bio-signatures. If we find several true twins of earth, e.g. similar size, similar star they orbit, and similar age, and their atmosphere has no indicator for life whatsoever, then yeah, we can start reasonably assuming that there are no other civilizations. Until then, it's foolish to make any assumptions. Luckily, by 2050 we will probably know the answer to this since we are going to have the first telescopes capable of looking directly and relatively small rocky planets in just a few years.

>>9522737
If we assume that the rules of evolution are the same everywhere, then it is extremely likely that there will be a species with an extreme intelligence sooner or later. Evolution tends to develop extremes: A species can develop extremely big teeth, extremely good ears, or extremely good eyes etc. in its struggle to survive. It is only a matter of time until a species develops an extreme intelligence in the same way.

I think the universe has a lot of intelligent species. But they cant communicate with each other, because the chance that they are even remotely at the same technological level are ridicolously low.

[Anonymous No.9524143]

> mfw when I realised great filter and white genocide are the same

[Anonymous No.9524151]

>>9524143
These people cheer the death of civilization, or at least will attack those who would prevent it as racists, and yet they wonder how alien civilizations might die off before spreading amongst the stars

[Anonymous No.9524152]

>>9524118
>
Of course we have a too small number of observations to make any meaningful assumptions. This will change soon when we have telescops that can look at planets directly and check their atmosphere for bio-signatures. If we find several true twins of earth, e.g. similar size, similar star they orbit, and similar age, and their atmosphere has no indicator for life whatsoever, then yeah, we can start reasonably assuming that there are no other civilizations. Until then, it's foolish to make any assumptions. Luckily, by 2050 we will probably know the answer to this since we are going to have the first telescopes capable of looking directly and relatively small rocky planets in just a few years.

Yup, finally an intelligent answer.

However I wouldn't dismissi possibility of life being in clouds of Venus or Jupiter. However for the general purpose of this topic this is irrelevant(as are possible primitive lifeforms under Europa or Enceladus).

The new telescopes will be really civilization changing for us.
They also will make humans aware that any alien civilization that existed in observable universe probably knows about Earth's biosphere.
But due to distance of development of millions of years meaningful contact is probably impossible.
Exciting times ahead. Until we get these telescopes we can only speculate on what we can find. The same telescopes could allow discovery of alien megastructure artifacts if they exist.

[Anonymous No.9524153]

>>9524151

Once the chinks take over the world the kikes and coloreds will wish whites still ran things.

[Anonymous No.9524158]

>>9524153
The chinks a couple hundred years ago destroyed all their naval ships and never left China again

You can't rely on them for exploration

[Anonymous No.9524169]

>>9524158
They have learned from that mistake.
They won't innovate much but will perfect our technology to the maximum possible levels.
And even with 70s technology you can colonize the stars.
I for one, welcome our Chinese overlords and next year I am going to China to work for them.
Pax Sinica is so much preferrable to the word.

[Anonymous No.9524197]

>>9522727
here's the thing you fucking retard, radio signals are weak as fuck and attenuate to noise. You couldn't detect a mirror Earth that was 10ly away.

[Anonymous No.9524395]

>>9522727
Most intelligent species we are going to find in the universe are either going to be way behind us (e.g. they are still apes or pre-historic development level) or way ahead of us (e.g. trans-/post-humanism). In both cases, communication is probably neither possible nor specifically desirable. It would be quite the coincidence to find another intelligent species that is +/- within 10.000 years of our development level.

[Anonymous No.9524440]

>>9524197
>You couldn't detect a mirror Earth that was 10ly away.
You can with hypertelescopes

[Anonymous No.9524480]

>>9523103
>cruising space is impossible
>but making an artificial environment that feeds their brains through eternity with no need for physical maintenance, Dyson swarms and star deconstruction are definitely a go

[Anonymous No.9524500]

>>9523214
>Plenty of weird stuff that could be artificial but would require confirmation.

It might surprise you that the book on this situation was written back in the 1990s.

Read it...nothing surprises me anymore.

[Anonymous No.9524547]

>>9522727
>With that said. What is stopping someone from piloting one of these spacecraft implementing PNP at 0.9c right into planet Earth?
There's no technology that can make a vessel reach 0.9c. Maybe they could get pretty fast if they found a perfectly reflexive surface and harvested the star making a big fucking laser, reflecting of a solar sail for a long long time. The thrust would be proportional to the area of the sail and the amount of light the laser could provide, so this really is only possible if there is a 100% reflective surface, as the amount of energy necessary to accelerate such a vessel using light alone would burn through anything else if there was any tiny imperfection. The thrust would also diminish as you got it closer to c because of the doppler effect. The reason for the light sail is obvious: it's the only way to accelerate anything without using propellant, and if you use propellant your mass diminishes as you travel and the energy gained by accelerating won't do much damage when you hit if you end up with only 10% of your initial mass. Go ahead and calculate the energy of something with the mass of an aircraft carrier hitting at 50%c, it won't be that much more than a nuke.

[Anonymous No.9524551]

>>9523214
>we have also detected a star that has geometric patterns on its surface.
Dude what?

[Anonymous No.9524561]

>>9524480
>making an artificial environment that feeds their brains through eternity with no need for physical maintenance

Virtual existence is practically free.

>Dyson swarms

Near certainty.

>star deconstruction

A little tricky...you (meaning a superior AI) have to engineer a form of computronium that can progressively get closer and closer to a given star, harvest its matter, and then dart away before it's burned to a crisp.

All the same, physically do-able.

[Anonymous No.9524607]

>>9524561
But it's much easier to envision star travel, slow as it may be, than any of that shit. Particularly autonomous VR (machines break, and who knows when a comet is gonna hit your pc) and the star deconstruction. The Dyson swarms might not be that hard depending on the coverage you want, but eventually the panels are going to break and would need to be replaced.

And considering that in all the life a species might have they would only need to successfully send 2 ships that reach good destinations every 1000 years or so to be able to launch another 2 and thus have an exponential growth through the stars, adding to that that the milky way is more than 13biY old, but even supposing that it has only made habitable planets in the last 9biY, and from experience we know that 4biY is sufficient time for intelligence to develop, that leaves 5biY for any intelligence to grow exponentially in the galaxy, eventually having send multiple ships to every star, even if unmanned to only know if they are suitable.

Which makes me believe that the great filter is the development of intelligence.

[Anonymous No.9524632]

>>9523103
>t. isaac aurthur

Some civilizations might turn into virtual beings and try to wait out the hot period of the universe to conserve their energy until the end of time but most won't I'd wager

[Anonymous No.9524639]

>>9523208
I agree with you but in regards to France they don't have 200 million people because Napoleon killed off an entire generation of young men and then the same happened in WWI (and WWII.)

[Anonymous No.9524646]

>>9524607
>But it's much easier to envision star travel, slow as it may be, than any of that shit.

Star travel is a one way trip. It only needs to succeed ONCE. After that, all information is sent at light speed, the usual way.

>The Dyson swarms might not be that hard depending on the coverage you want, but eventually the panels are going to break and would need to be replaced.

These things are ALIVE, in all the usual ways we associate with that word. They heal and replace themselves.

>And considering that in all the life a species might have they would only need to successfully send 2 ships that reach good destinations every 1000 years or so to be able to launch another 2 and thus have an exponential growth through the stars

I have no idea why you would think that. Thousands of tiny ships could easily be sent to a target star (or stars) on a continual basis, until mission success and a communication is sent back to the base system that arrival was successful.

Upon arrival, each ship would contact the base system to establish a communication stream, then build more starships to send to more star systems.

[Anonymous No.9524651]

>>9522727
>it is a popsci bullshit thread again

[Anonymous No.9524659]

>>9524607
perhaps a dyson swarm that is a self-replacing matrioschka brain is the most likely outcome based on our understanding. They could have probes that went out and collected matter that was brought back and fed into batteries (and eventually into their star although a blackhole is more efficient I think in the long run.)

This is only feasible if a civilization wants to essentially be isolated and slow down time in order to survive for trillions of years instead of millions. I think most will probably want to control the physical realm due to primordial instincts (at least at first) and thus would leave behind traces of their existence.

[Anonymous No.9524762]

>>9524646
>Thousands of tiny ships could easily be sent to a target star (or stars) on a continual basis, until mission success and a communication is sent back to the base system that arrival was successful.
>Upon arrival, each ship would contact the base system to establish a communication stream, then build more starships to send to more star systems.
Oh yeah, now the Fermi Paradox makes so much more sense! I guess that's settled then, we don't hear anything and don't see the trillions of ships perpetually multiplying through the universe for billions of years because they would be invisible on the matrioschka brain... or something? I should've guessed you were a retard by the reddit spacing of your first post. Well, too late for that now.

[Anonymous No.9525209]

>>9523644
>>9524151

[Moses No.9525273]

>>9523439
>Global Warming is a GODSEND.
Don't forget your Friend in the Sky has sent flood, rivers of blood, frogs,
lice, boils, hail, locusts, darkness, and the death of innocents.

[Anonymous No.9525346]

>>9522955
its a way to refer to a dyson swarm...

oh, you actually think we were talking about an actyual sphere. HAHAHAHAHA you ahvent even started college

[Anonymous No.9525352]

>>9522967
>Even our civilization doesn't colonize every piece of livable land there is.
actually yes we do, we tend to keep growing and occupy every space possible.

[Anonymous No.9525706]

>>9522727

Life on Earth exists for over a billion years yet a species capable of building civilization only appeared 200k years ago.

There is 0 guarantee that life leads to civilization. Galaxy may be full of life and some intelligent species but no civilizations other than humans.

But people acting like we know for 100% that aliens don't exist are retards. We wouldn't be able to detect a civilization on our level if it was 50 light years away.

[Anonymous No.9525711]

>>9522727
because there is a possibility that FTL travel is impossible and your brainlet brain cannot comprehend how gigantic space distances are

[Anonymous No.9525717]

>>9525706
>people acting like we know for 100% that aliens don't exist are retards
absence of evidence is evidence for absence
believing there is life on different planets is the same as believing in god, no evidence for both

[Anonymous No.9525721]

>>9525352
>actually yes we do, we tend to keep growing and occupy every space possible.
Nope. See national reservation parks. Also the numerous abandoned islands

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermadec_Islands

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/the-incredible-ruins-of-12-abandoned-islands

[Anonymous No.9525729]

>>9525706
>We wouldn't be able to detect a civilization on our level if it was 50 light years away.
New telescopes will be able to do that.
But I agree it is unlikely any civilization is that close or would be on our level.

[Anonymous No.9525732]

>>9525717
>believing there is life on different planets is the same as believing in god, no evidence for both
Except life exists on our planet and is result of natural events. We have no known example of god, we have an example of life.
We have therefore assume that as life is a result of natural processes, these procesess can happen elsewhere as well.

[Anonymous No.9525734]

>>9522727
honestly I think it has something to do with time dilation

if the next habitable planet is several light years away. then it would make sense that if they are on a similar technological progression that we probably wouldn't see space ships blasting off from another planet for 50 more years.
If we can even see such "fine" detail from that far away.

[Anonymous No.9525744]

>>9522802
Quintissential brainlet

[Anonymous No.9525747]

>>9525717

Not when you know you simply can't get the evidence yet.

[Anonymous No.9525752]

>>9525729

Webb will be able to detect life not civilization.

[Anonymous No.9525756]

>>9522877
>Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Do you even know what the foundations of the Fermi paradox is??

[Anonymous No.9525765]

>>9522953
There are many other possibilities, like the world going in a Matrix where little real energy is required while the communal virtual reality can give the impression of harnessing a simulated astronomically large power source.

Or the world could end up as a pastoral/agrarian idyllic world where people are satisfied by philosophising about life, the universe and everything without being consumerists. You can have a rather enjoyable life without a large energy foot print. Thankfully, since from my time as a post doc I had to learn to live within my rather spare means.

[Anonymous No.9525775]

>>9522967
>There is literally no reason for extensive colonization of entire universe.
That is not a requirement for the Fermi paradox. To the contrary the issue is as much spreading probes all over the galaxy (ref. Star Wars probe droids but with self replication). We see neither any alien civilsation nor even *signs* of them.
>Even our civilization doesn't colonize every piece of livable land there is.
Really? Examples, please?

[Anonymous No.9525792]

>>9522912
>we can check every individual star
>we can see stars from other galaxies

[Anonymous No.9525808]

>>9525775
>We see neither any alien civilsation nor even *signs* of them.

We are able to detect small planets for just few decades and only based on super complex math and people think we should be able to detect alien civilizations?

Why the hell would they even broadcast their existence everywhere?

[Anonymous No.9525814]

I mean, really what you've got there is the possible filter that a civilization is going around killing anything that gets too advanced.

That doesn't really answer the fermi paradox because a civilization that could do that should still be able to be detected.

[Anonymous No.9525815]

>>9522958
I love how people assume that every civilization would work and think like humans do.

[Anonymous No.9525821]

>>9525814

Or few civilizations each with their own influence zone stuck in something like cold war. Assuming that alien race with 400 trillion citizens and dozens of solar systems colonized would even still think in the same way. 99.99% of their population may live in virtual reality or something.

[Anonymous No.9525825]

>>9525821

But none of that matters. I'm not assuming how the aliens would think, all I'm saying is we should have evidence of them, which we don't. That's the meat of the fermi paradox, why we haven't found any evidence of aliens.

[Anonymous No.9525838]

>>9524561
Control by the master of the simulation is not free. We are meant to live in the real world. I wouldn't upload my consciousness into a fake world for all the money in the world.

The only God I will submit to is the God of creation. Thank you, and good day to you sir.

[Anonymous No.9525840]

>>9522877
>Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
But it is. The absence of a check mark next to your name on the attendance list is evidence that you were absent from class.

>Just because we haven't discovered ayys, or traces of them, does not mean they don't exist or are very rare.
It doesn't mean that, but it is evidence for it.

[Anonymous No.9525889]

>>9525825
>all I'm saying is we should have evidence of them

Literally why? You realize we can't see other stars or planets right? We don't know what's there. It's very likely there is another large planet in our solar system and we can't even see that yet.

Kepler showed us there are billions of planets out there. Webb should give us some atmosphere data. We are literally babies when it comes to exploring space.

[Anonymous No.9525896]

>>9525747
you can say the same about religious concepts moron
>hurr durr we are too dumb to comprehend god

[Anonymous No.9525898]

>>9525840
We can't get the evidence yet. SETI would only work if somebody aimed a powerful beacon far ahead of our own tech directly at us. We know shit. At this point only civilization we could detect is some super empire billion years older than we are.

[Anonymous No.9525901]

>>9525896

Religion claims God created us and answers to prayers. This is completely different in literally every way.

[Anonymous No.9525906]

>>9525901
it doesn't matter, theres as much evidence for aliens as there is for god

[Anonymous No.9525908]

>>9525889

>Literally why?

Well why not? If a civilization had the ability to monitor a substantial amount planets in the galaxy, and go there and hyper speed ram anything that gets too advanced, you would have thought they'd leave behind not a small amount of evidence for their existence

And yeah, its possible we don't know something, but we don't know what we don't know. Science only focuses on things we do know.

[Anonymous No.9525972]

>>9525908

Unless they can build something the size of a nebula we won't notice. There are already hundreds of weird things discovered in space and dozens of Dyson Sphere candidates yet we simply don't have enough data to say anything for sure. Maybe after 20-30 more years if Webb and it's successor work.

[Anonymous No.9525984]

>>9525972

There's other ways. Radiowaves, infrared radiating from a spot where visible light isn't, quantities of artificial materials where they shouldn't be (this has actually already happened, though its probably not aliens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Przybylski's_Star).).

There's lots of ways to find aliens. Just the fact that Andromeda doesn't have any dyson swarms is suspect enough.

[Anonymous No.9526002]

>>9525906
There is 0 evidence for god while there are tons of evidences about weird stuff we can't understand going on in space. So no, it's not the same.

[Anonymous No.9526009]

>>9525984
We can't even see properly into Kuiper Belt and you think we can see megastructures in another galaxy?

[Anonymous No.9526025]

>>9522737
During stone age strong brainlets killed weak autistics

Autistics were forced to become Virgin Catholic Priests in middle Ages

Society only started to value autism because Newton & Einstein

But even now Autistics are quite outcasts.

If normies and chads continue to dumb down society we never will get into space.

[Anonymous No.9526027]

>>9522737
During stone age strong brainlets killed weak autistics

Autistics were forced to become Virgin Catholic Priests in middle Ages

Society only started to value autism more because Newton & Einstein

But even now Autistics are quite outcasts.

If normies and chads continue to dumb down our society we will never go to another planet

[Anonymous No.9526068]

>>9526027
>During stone age strong brainlets killed weak autistics
Wrong, autists in stone age were shamans and priests

[Anonymous No.9526078]

>>9525775
>Really? Examples, please?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auckland_Island

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermadec_Islands

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_and_South_Brother_Islands,_New_York_City

[Anonymous No.9526079]

>>9525825
>That's the meat of the fermi paradox, why we haven't found any evidence of aliens.
We aren't looking long or hard enough, although we have candidates for Dyson Spheres.
Withing next 20 years we will have telescopes capable of detecting clearly sign of life.

[Anonymous No.9526084]

>>9525752
>Webb will be able to detect life not civilization.
It analyze atmosphere to detect signs of artificial activity.

[Anonymous No.9526086]

Im just throwing it out there that dark matter could be giant alien infrastructures.

[Anonymous No.9526103]

Why the hell are people assuming that every advanced space civ should have dyson spheres? Is it a new meme or something?

Like seriously, what kind of population would you need to justify dyson spheres? Why are people assuming that super advanced races would keep breeding like rabbits while advanced cultures on Earth already barely procreate?

[Anonymous No.9526114]

>>9526103
>Like seriously, what kind of population would you need to justify dyson spheres?
You can use Dyson Spheres for other things.
>Why are people assuming that super advanced races would keep breeding like rabbits while advanced cultures on Earth already barely procreate?
Yup, this is one big reason why Fermi Paradox is flawed.

[Anonymous No.9526116]

>>9526103
>have yuge ass fusion source for free
>dont utilize it because reasons
Though I somewhat agree letting all that material get wasted in such inefficient reaction is not optimal. Better to dissemble the star and make proper use of it.

[Anonymous No.9526148]

>>9523214
>and we have also detected a star that has geometric patterns on its surface.
Go on, please tell us more.

[Anonymous No.9526151]

>>9526103
A civilization that can make dyson sphere wouldnt even fuck they would just mass produce their own species.

[Anonymous No.9526202]

>>9526151

Why? For what reason?

[Anonymous No.9526207]

>>9526027 >>9526068
In stone age autistics built this

[Anonymous No.9526218]

>>9522737
>If we find several true twins of earth, e.g. similar size, similar star they orbit, and similar age, and their atmosphere has no indicator for life whatsoever, then yeah, we can start reasonably assuming that there are no other civilizations. Until then, it's foolish to make any assumptions.
there are more factors to it.
>quiet and comfy spot in the galaxy
>at least one jupiter like planet to absorb cosmic trash like asteroids to prevent recurring extinction events
>a moon like ours

[Anonymous No.9526388]

>>9526218
>more factors.

For example if the planet has many moons, or a large moon, the tides would create gigantic tsunami waves which would kill life on land periodically.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hf_XkgE1d0

[Anonymous No.9526390]

>>9526202
Because fucking is inferior to mass producing your species, you never have to worry about genetic defects if you just build the organism from scratch.

[Anonymous No.9526404]

>>9526103
>advanced cultures barely procreate.

>>9526151
>they would mass reproduce

African civilization is already mass reproducing ... ... ... by fucking.

African black women have 9 kids on average!!! NINE KIDS!!!

[Anonymous No.9526410]

>>9526218
>......a moon like ours
>.....a large impact to clear older species but not planetary destructive
>....convenient evolution that allows primates to evolve intelligence
>...sufficient luck to prevent catastrophic event while said intelligence develops technology
>..Jesus Christ
>.renaissance
>..nazis
>...4chan

Looking for a doppelganger now?

[Anonymous No.9526418]

>>9526404

[Anonymous No.9526442]

i'm a fan of the elder race theory, maybe we are the first race to get to this level.
Somebody has to be the first right?
Maybe we got lucky and we are a few trillion years ahead of the next spacefairing race.
Maybe life is really that rare that we are the only ones, and its our task to seed the universe.

[Anonymous No.9526443]

>>9526390

Why produce trillions of your own race when you are advanced enough to make Dyson spheres? Why not legions of robots?

[Anonymous No.9526448]

>>9526442

Doubt we are the first but one of the earlier ones is possible. Our galaxy is becoming more stable and better for life as time goes on. It's possible it was simply too hard for life to appear few billions of years ago.

[Anonymous No.9526457]

>>9526388
>if the planet has many moons, or a large moon

Earth has a large moon. Life has managed to persist on land despite this.

[Anonymous No.9526465]

>>9526218
>right universe
>not too many stars
>old enough stars
>needs to be in less active part of galaxy
>star needs to be just right, not too hot, not to cold
>Not to old, not to young
>Need big planet like Jupiter
>Jupiter planet needs to be in right area
>needs to be in right orbit around star
>not too elliptical either
>needs moon to help stabilize climate
>needs to be in right area
>planet needs stable rotation
>planet needs active volcanism, but not too active, and not not active
>needs magnetic field
>planet needs to cool
>need right chemicals to make amino acids
>abiogensis needs to happen
>life needs to remain stable enough to spread
>life needs to develop in complexity to evolve eukaryotic cells
>these need to form macromolecular structures
>life needs to evolve to move onto land
>need right atmosphere
>need to evolve till species if stable and can grow larger brain
>not too many predators, good ability to adapt
>life needs to develop intelligence
>life needs to develop societies
>life needs to make tech
>life needs to make computers
>life needs to leave planet at own will
>All needs to happen before star gets too hot, and eventually dies
>life needs to carefully not destroy self with technology
there are probably a lot more filters to the development of life, but we can't really make assumptions without knowing the composition of other planets

[Anonymous No.9526526]

>>9525717
>absence of evidence is evidence for absence
Wrong.

[Anonymous No.9526600]

>>9526457
If Earth had a *Larger moon, many times larger, the tidal waves would be massive

[Anonymous No.9526897]

>>9522727
The great filter is intelligence.
>we
In the not too distant future, there'll be much less than 7 billion people on Earth. If aliens ever meet, it's after this artificial selection process has occurred on their home planet.

[Anonymous No.9526937]

>>9522737
Probably right, there are too many evolutionary deadends. Humans got lucky the dinosaurs were wiped out.

[Anonymous No.9526971]

>>9526897
What if most Aliens are Brailets and Humans are the most advanced "master race" destined to conquer the Universe.

Just like Star Wars.

[Anonymous No.9526985]

>>9526971
Improbable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_timeline_of_the_universe

[Anonymous No.9526987]

>>9526937
Now wipe out Africa

[Anonymous No.9527349]

>>9525898
>We can't get the evidence yet.
We could have discovered them or traces of them, we just haven't.

[Anonymous No.9527500]

>>9522808

The easy copper, tin, and iron deposits are all mined out. Cave men aren't going to learn how to smelt metals again. Unless they mine through our garbage and relics, which isn't that implausible.

[Anonymous No.9528262]

>>9526971
>Humans
My point went over your head. On Earth, the most intelligent human(s) will artificially select for intelligence, eradicating most of the population, peacefully or otherwise, leaving a mean IQ of say 200. If population levels of "intelligent" organisms are controlled, there's no need to invade the home planets of other intelligent species. Since this artificial selection happens on every alien world, we (our betters) can assume that aliens aren't a threat.

[Anonymous No.9528263]

>>9527500
>The easy copper, tin, and iron deposits are all mined out
yeah, they are actually out of the ground now, just waiting to be picked up and used

[Anonymous No.9528508]

>>9528262
>a mean IQ of say 200
based retardbro

[Anonymous No.9528512]

>>9524071
SEA are higher IQ than Chinks.

[Anonymous No.9528514]

>>9524143
>gene pool is 99.99% identical
>whites are different

[Anonymous No.9528530]

>>9528514
>Humans share 98% of genes with chimp
>Humans are different

[Anonymous No.9528551]

>>9528514
>Genetic similarity mean genetic parity

[Anonymous No.9528571]

>>9528514

>one gene is the difference between a deformed human and a normal human
>hurr 99.99...= 100

[Anonymous No.9528608]

>>9527349

We couldn't discover ourselves if we were 20 light years ways.

[Anonymous No.9529196]

>>9528514
Silence, Tyrone. You own white people everything.

[Anonymous No.9529717]

>>9526086
That would be funny as fuck

[Anonymous No.9530942]

>>9526390

They actually do that to a limited degree in the series Altered Carbon.

You still have fleshy human bodies and human minds, but the person's mind is on chip of sort. And if wealthy enough, the body is merely a vessel (artificially grown adult human bodies are expensive)

Essentially the human body only becomes a medium of growthfor the mind that can be replaced with a new one if needed.

Adult bodies

[Anonymous No.9530948]

>>9526390

They actually do that to a limited degree in the series Altered Carbon.

You still have fleshy human bodies and human minds, but the person's mind is on chip of sort. And if wealthy enough, the body is merely a vessel (artificially grown adult human bodies are expensive)

Essentially the human body only becomes a medium of growth for the mind that can be replaced with a new one if needed.

Something similar could be applied in the future.

In the meantime, the middle class - high middle class people of more civilized nations could buy themselves increased lifespan or immortality so the issue of aging population and low population growth is averted.

[Anonymous No.9531190]

>>9523640
These are getting out of control...
O.o

[Anonymous No.9532324]

>>9522727
Probably a brainlet question, but what is a blast wave in space? Pushing the nuclear mass away from the rocket will produce equal/opposite thrust, then the nuclear mass goes boom, mass is converted into EM radiation...how does that propel the rocket, rather than just heating it up?

[Anonymous No.9532345]

>>9522802
>But by the time the species realizes the damage it's done to it's biosphere it causes a runaway greenhouse effect which destroys its civilization
IF this were to happen here, how does that make it likely anywhere else? We could easily start enforcing strict population control to vastly reduce emissions and consumption of resources, so anything that's, hypothetically, 'runaway' is because we're still allowing it to run away, which means it isn't runaway at all. Are you suggesting it's somehow inherent in any intelligent species that population must be allowed to reach unsustainable levels?

[Anonymous No.9532349]

>>9532345
"runaway" global warming refers the fact that past a certain point the globe will just warm on it's own uncontrollably until it's like Venus due to positive feedbacks

[Anonymous No.9532362]

>>9532345
Coal and petroleum are very easy to exploit, and provide a massive advantage to whatever subset of a species discovers how to exploit them first. That's why on Earth it was a rainy little island which was irrelevant for the majority of its history which subjugated half the world, because they figured out how to exploit coal first. But the dangers don't become apparent until the technologies are already in use on a scale massive enough that they're inextricably intertwined in the fabric of society.

> hypothetically, 'runaway' is because we're still allowing it to run away, which means it isn't runaway at all.
Mainly my point is that it's runaway because it's so ingrained in our political and economic systems that despite knowing the immanent danger we're in, and what action to take, we're unable to do anything significant because of political and economic momentum.

Secondarily there exist some positive feedback loops which will continue to operate even if we stopped emitting greenhouse gases cold turkey, today. Things like the loss of reflective ice, permafrost melting and emitting methane, etc.

>Are you suggesting it's somehow inherent in any intelligent species that population must be allowed to reach unsustainable levels?
Not really, no.