RE: Discovery of New Nearby Star

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sat Feb 15 2003 - 09:04:11 MST

  • Next message: Technotranscendence: "One solution to the Fermi Paradox"

    On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:

    > Robert J. Bradbury indulged his idee fixe :)

    Ah, but when Timothy Martin, VP of Tech Transfer Initiatives
    at the NanoBusiness Alliance knows about JBrains and MBrains
    (and I don't believe he is a ExI List subscriber), then one
    has to acknowledge that the memes are a spreading. [He made
    a point of mentioning them to me at the recent IBF nanotech
    investor conference.]

    > What, you reckon the nearest post-Spike Culture nipped over to the in situ
    > HPMS not long ago and set up their hide, from which convenient position they
    > spy upon us as we plunge toward the transition?

    I'd probably lean in this direction. If survey ships (or micro-sats)
    detect "controlled" fire then one might have early warning of signs
    of a technological civilization under development. If one has been
    around for a few hundred million years, then "exploring" for yet another
    form of "wild-life" has to have gotten pretty boring. The interesting
    events will be when "wild-life" becomes sentient and subsequently when
    they make the transition to relatively virtual entitites. Of course
    this is also the time at which they potentially become a threat to
    the "Galactic Club".

    > Or did they drive the star
    > over our way, starting a few hundred or thousands of years back?

    Perhaps, but it seems easier to simply select a star that is likely
    to be in the right place at the right time. Unless the transitions
    are really rare events, they probably have statistics on how long
    the transitions are likely to take, so they can time their observations
    to coincide with high information content periods.

    Now, Amara's comments extracting data from the paper seem to suggest
    it is a fairly metal rich dwarf star (though I don't believe they
    measured many metals of value from a nanotech perspective) so that
    would suggest that star lifting is not taking place. I think the
    current theories predict that dwarf stars are probably low in excess
    non-stellar material (planets, etc.). So picking a dwarf star as
    an observational base remains a questionable strategy (no material from
    which to construct large mirrors). But if its a partially enshrouded
    star then classifying it as a dwarf is probably a stretch. Astronomical
    theory is still locked into the paradigm that the universe is most likely
    "dead" and interpretations of the data reflect that bias.

    Robert



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Feb 15 2003 - 09:06:27 MST