What is your opinion on the Fermi paradox?

[Anonymous No.9753655]

Are we alone in the galaxy?

[Anonymous No.9753660]

>>9753655
aliums r gay

[Anonymous No.9753664]

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[Anonymous No.9753666]

>>9753655

[Anonymous No.9753670]

>>9753655
Relevant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter

[Anonymous No.9753673]

>>9753664
It actually is evidence of absence from a Bayesian perspective.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/mnS2WYLCGJP2kQkRn/absence-of-evidence-is-evidence-of-absence

[Anonymous No.9753679]

>>9753666

That list omitts a lot of possible and interesting solutions. Also some of these presented are poorly formulated and because of that a bit misleading.

[Anonymous No.9753684]

>>9753673
>lesswrong

[Anonymous No.9753697]

>>9753673
>But in probability theory, absence of evidence is always evidence of absence. If E is a binary event and P(H|E) > P(H), "seeing E increases the probability of H"; then P(H|~E) < P(H), "failure to observe E decreases the probability of H".
That scenario does not have an absence of evidence, since ~E is evidence.

[Anonymous No.9753698]

>>9753684

[Anonymous No.9754165]

>>9753655
Technology has limits and those are experienced by all forms of life throughout the galaxies.
> We will never be able to travel at significant speed
> With our limited resources, we will never be able to build generational space ships that could realistically take humanity elsewhere
> We will never discover any sci-fi fantasy technology like wormholes, faster than light travel or shrinking space between two points
> Our time is running out. The sun grows brighter everyday. Soon lige won't be possible anymore
> We will never venture out of the solar system
> We will much likely self destruct before
So, yes, there are great filters and they are ahead of us.

[Anonymous No.9754243]

The proof that intelligent life exists is right here. It's us.
I have no doubt there is lots more out there but maybe intelligence is extremely rare?
If you think about how long giant reptiles were the peak of design here on Earth, we are pretty new on the scene. We mammals only got a chance after some freak occurrence wiped everything out and gave us a window. Thanks to all those fossilized dead things that came before us we have abundant, cheap and easy energy that has allowed us to advance technologically.
Maybe we are the super advanced beings?
Maybe it will take a few thousand years for the radio bubble of another civilization to hit us?
The distances out there are unimaginably vast

[Anonymous No.9754258]

>>9754165
It’s always amusing to see the magical time traveling wizards that provide us with this information and totally aren’t depressed trolls trying to make other people sad.

[Anonymous No.9754260]

>>9754243
Our radio bubble has only travelled about sixty light years and it would take another sixty for something at the edge of that to reply, assuming it will actually want to reply, and assuming they have radio technology or haven’t transitioned to something else and ignore radio signals.

[Anonymous No.9754263]

>>9754258
What, are you reading too much asimov?
Technology is not limitless. It is foolish to think otherwise.

[Anonymous No.9754282]

>>9754263
No more trolling, honey. Go to bed or show us how your time machine works.

[Anonymous No.9754607]

>>9753670
>>9753655
I'd say intelligent life is rare, and I think getting to where we are means that we've passed most of the filters

[Anonymous No.9754613]

>>9753655
There's probably something out there, but we'll probably only find microorganisms.
As for intelligent life, there probably is some out there also, but we'll probably never hear from or meet it.

[Anonymous No.9754614]

>>9753655
Isac Arthur is that u?

[Anonymous No.9754621]

>>9754165
Every time I see one of these posts, I cringe internally:
>We will never be able to travel at significant speed
Wrong, we COULD and CAN travel at light-speed, surviving it is the issue.
>With our limited resources, we will never be able to build generational space ships that could realistically take humanity elsewhere
What is asteroid mining?
>We will never discover any sci-fi fantasy technology like wormholes, faster than light travel or shrinking space between two points
Probably not, but Alcubierre drive is possible, but again, surviving it is the real issue.
>Our time is running out. The sun grows brighter everyday. Soon lige won't be possible anymore
In billions of years, retard.
>We will never venture out of the solar system
Wrong, the nearest other system is only 4.224 light-years away, so at 50% of c we could reach it in 8 years, or so.
>We will much likely self destruct before
Maybe.
Over all though, your post is mostly bullshit.

[Anonymous No.9754628]

>>9754621
>at light-speed
*near light-speed

[Anonymous No.9754632]

>>9754621
Was about to write something similar but seems like someone already did it.
Also technically we already ventured out of the solar system due to Voyager 1 who exited our solar system a few months ago

[Anonymous No.9754633]

>>9754165
>>9754621
>>9754632
For clarity, you could reach 50% of c safely in about 20 days, you'll be hitting around 8.85 g, most people losing consciousness at 9-10.

[Anonymous No.9754780]

>>9754633
I don't suppose anybody has done experiments on humans at elevated G-forces on for anything like that duration. Easily accesible literature talks about minutes, not hours or days.

At 1g, 50% of c is what, about half a year?

[Anonymous No.9754783]

>>9754780
About that, yeah.
Again, the issue isn't really speed, it's about surviving traveling at that speed.

[Anonymous No.9754873]

>>9753655
“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”

>>9753664
I see no evidence that whale is in my kitchen. This is, in fact, fairly convincing evidence that there is an absence of whales there.

If a theory predicts certain evidence, which, when you look for it, is absent, then that is evidence against the theory.

Absence of evidence that Fermi's concept of aliums predicts is evidence that some part of his hypothesis incorrect. That may be evidence there are no aliums. It may just be evidence that some of the assumptions he made about them, or how we might detect them, are wrong.

[Anonymous No.9754876]

>>9753670
Re draw that.

At each yellow line, maybe make 10% of spaces not make it through. Turn the red line yellow.

Maybe there is no single great filter, but instead there are a series of hurdles that, cumulatively, tend to weed out species that get onto the track that might lead to detectable civilizations.

[Anonymous No.9754889]

It's important not to fall into the fallacy of assuming evolution is purposive -- that there is some intent on the part of evolution to make organism more intelligent. There is not.
Intelligence, at east to a pint, is AN advantage, but it is not the only one, and most species even here on Earth survive and thrive without much of it or even without ant at all. Insects, bacteria, grasses -- all are doing pretty well.

[Anonymous No.9754892]

>>9754889
>at least to a point
>without any at all

Sorry, small keypad, large fingers.

[Anonymous No.9754894]

>>9754633

I'm a brainlet and don't understand what you're talking about. What subject do I need to study to understand what you're talking about?

[Anonymous No.9755414]

>>9754873
>This is, in fact, fairly convincing evidence that there is an absence of whales there.
How so?

[Anonymous No.9755684]

>>9755414
Because if there WERE whales in my kitchen,there would be fairly obvious evidence of that. I could see, hear, and probably smell them. They are sufficiently big that there are no real places n my kitchen that a whale could hide. Since the hypothesis "There are whales in my kitchen" would predict a certain set of evidences that would be hard to miss, the absence of such evidence is convincing proof that the hypothesis is in error somehow.

But if you want to argue that my kitchen is full of whales, go to town.

[Anonymous No.9755701]

>>9754894
When moving non-relativistically (so [math]v<<c[/math]) the equation for accelerated movement is [eqn]v=\int^{t_c}_{0}a(t)\hspace{0.1cm}dt[/eqn]
assuming constant [math]a[/math] we get [eqn]v=a*t_c \Leftrightarrow a = \frac{v}{t_c}[/eqn]
If we want to reach .5c in 20 days that's [math]a=\frac{1.5*10^8\frac{m}{s}}{20*24*3600s}=86.7\frac{m}{s^2}\approx 8.85g[/math]

[Anonymous No.9755710]

>>9755684
>Since the hypothesis "There are whales in my kitchen" would predict a certain set of evidences that would be hard to miss, the absence of such evidence is convincing proof that the hypothesis is in error somehow.
But you're updating your probabilities based on evidence supporting "there is no whale in my kitchen". The prior probability has no reason to change without any evidence.

[Anonymous No.9755713]

>>9753664
the absence of evidence is evidence of absence

[Anonymous No.9755714]

>>9753670
>>>9753655 (OP)
>Relevant:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter
FTFY

[Anonymous No.9755715]

>>9755713
>the absence of evidence is evidence of absence
Wrong.

[Anonymous No.9755722]

>>9755715
How?

[Anonymous No.9755732]

>>9755722
>How?
Because it's not right.

[Anonymous No.9755736]

>>9754621
Even if the alcubierre drive is possible to make, which the requirement of negative energy suggests it is not, you still have the issue of not being able to turn the fucking thing off when traveling
you also have the issue of matter piling up on the front of the bubble, and if you do somehow manage to shut it down when you want it to, you'll shotgun everything in front of you with dust traveling less than a hair below the speed of light, glassing everything in your general direction for light years

[Anonymous No.9755748]

>>9754621
>50%c
not only would that take gigafucktons of energy to reach, and thus fuel, it would also make the interstellar medium a radiation hellscape, with grains of sand hitting like nuclear bombs
15-20%c is probably our absolute limit for the first ships passing through, though we could probably go higher once laser highway coridors are built and fully cleared of dust

[Anonymous No.9755759]

>>9753655
I Don't know op, but i know that if 4chan was the first communication method for aliens to contact humans they would probably leave inmediatelly and delete their navigation logs. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.9755782]

>>9754165

I routinely copypasta this formula for galactic expansion, because it's actually do-able on a reasonable timeline within the next million years...a blink of the eye in the future age of the universe, even presuming a "Big Rip" Dark Energy acceleration:

>build interstellar probe from the atomic level on up, via nanotechnology
>this ship is composed of atomically-reinforced radiation shielding and machine "cells", designed to both compute and "digest" matter to create copies of itself, like hot-rodded brain cells, but infinitely tougher, more flexible and smaller than living cells
>they can also create other types of machine "cells", and even organic cells
>interstellar probe is only a few grams in mass
>use enormous EM accelerator to launch several thousand of these (maybe more, maybe less) at nearby star (or stars)
>leaves solar system at an appreciable percentage of light speed
>sacrifices part of its mass to decelerate (again, in the grams, due to its tiny size)
>upon reaching nearby star, first mission is to build a transmitter from a captured asteroid or comet it "eats" and establish data link to "home"
>then build another EM accelerator and more duplicates of itself to launch at more stars (a la Von Neumann)
>it will never be necessary to send more than one successful probe...all it needs to "build" another civilization around the target star (whether its biological, or more likely, virtual...this would likely be a Matrioshka Brain) is information from the data link to "home"
>galaxy and universe eventually enveloped by this machine "organism", either at light speed, or something faster, it that's at all possible

Should be possible in ~100 years, definitely 1000.

One caveat, which I believe to be the "Great Filter":

>unless, of course, the AI uncovers the truth about base reality and learns how to create universes on its own, negating the need to expand indefinitely into our universe, in favor of building one of its own and seemingly disappearing

[Anonymous No.9755934]

If ETs arent real explain to me how pools of liquid mercury a superconductor are doing below pyramids in both Teotihuacan and China? Mercury occurs in nature only as a mineral

[Anonymous No.9755980]

>>9753664
if it isn't, then what would be?

[Anonymous No.9755982]

>>9753664
Spare me of your platitudes!

[Anonymous No.9755988]

>>9755980
>if it isn't, then what would be?
it's the absence of evidence

[Anonymous No.9755989]

>>9753679
What are some of the possible interesting solutions it omits?

[Anonymous No.9755991]

>>9755980
>if it isn't, then what would be?
Well first of all it would have to be evidence.