Jason Joel Thompson writes:
> By changing "planets" to "solar systems" and we [humans] to we (Earthlings
> and Martians), we find again that our observations are biased: we apparently
> aren't able to make predictions about life appearing in other solar systems
> (under the AP.) This will continue ad infinitum-- while tremendously
> rewarding to hard science, the observation of additional intelligences adds
> no further information under the AP.
This is highly unreasonable. Why do you see the gained information in
purely boolean terms? Don't you see that the bias decreases?
The second blip in the same stellar system still gives you valuable
information: because only spores of primitive organisms can be
crosstransferred by impact ejecta, hence creating a sporadic, low
payload coupling. The development of higher life and especially
intelligent life would be independent until they develop means of
communication and travelling. It also tells you something about the
extension of the life belt.
A blip from one of the neighbour stellar systems must indicate that
life nucleation event was independent. This way you know that
essentially any stellar system will do. The farther away the blip, the
higher the probability that it shares the same magical local
environment as us.
A blip from one of the neighbour galaxies tells you that essentially
any will do. There might be events energetic enough to sterilize
clusters of galaxies, but we don't see them. A second blip from that
remote a distance carries as much information payload as a second blip
ever could. It is a very, very good 24ct Au-plated Bvlgari blip.
Of course, the more blips you have, the more information. The step
from one blip (just you) to the second (preferably from afar) is very
large, the other ones decrease logarithmically. If you have 100 blips
already, one extra conveys almost no additional information.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:18 MDT