Re: Doomsday and Fermi

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Fri Apr 25 2003 - 15:40:37 MDT

  • Next message: Ramez Naam: "my objection to the Doomsday argument"

    On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, Keith M. Elis wrote:

    > On another
    > track, the Fermi paradox suggests that either life is very uncommon in the
    > universe, or we are relatively advanced as a technological civilization.
    >
    > In short, the two propositions 'life is common in the universe' and 'we are
    > a typical civilization' are not compatible. As Fermi asked, if life is
    > common, where is it? We must conclude that if life is common, most life is
    > not technologically advanced enough to be detectable. If this is true, we
    > are atypical.

    We are "atypical". There are 3 types of "intelligences" in the universe.

    a) Those too simple to produce detectable signs. We can't even detect
       Earth like planets now. Perhaps we will have this ability in 15 years.
       Even then we have to "go there" to detect such intelligences (whales
       and dolphins come to mind).
    b) Civilizations like us. The problem is that these civilizations have
       extremely short lifetimes. Dyson pointed out that if we grow at the
       current rate we exhaust the resources of the solar system in less than
       1000 years (except the sun). Add that to a ~2000 year old civilization
       and the "typical" lifetime of civilizations like ours is ~3000 years.
       Going back to the dawn of civilization in Egypt or Iraq and you might
       add perhaps 3000 more years. 6000 years is the blink of an eye in
       terms of the evolution and survival of advanced civilizations.
    c) Civilizations more advanced than us. If these exist one has to extract
       them from the galactic background radiation at temperatures below LN2
       and perhaps almost as low as the GBR itself. (This was pointed out
       by Minsky as the ideal thermodynamic situation that advanced civilizations
       would seek at the first U.S.-Russian SETI conference.)

    The bulk of the civilizations in the galaxy should be at stage (c) [in
    part because if Lineweaver is correct ~70% of the "Earths" in the galaxy
    should be *older* than the Earth -- at least until they get dismantled.]

    We are not going to "see" them (class c) without using different methods.
    To start with you don't point your detectors (radio or optical) at *stars*
    because advanced civilizations "hide" their stars. Second they aren't
    going to want to communicate with us because we are way to stupid (they
    can probably run a simulation for all of humanity if they wanted to).
    Third unless things like subspace communications and transwarp conduits
    are *real* interstellar communication is a pointless exercise.

    Advanced civilizations are more concerned with:
    (a) How do I lengthen the lifetime of my star (i.e. implement star-lifting)
    or
    (b) How do I determine a least cost method for gathering new material to
        myself so I can have greater amounts of computronium (CPU or memory
        capacity) and/or lengthen the lifetime of my star.
    or
    (c) How do I pick the least dangerous path through the galaxy (no
        supernovas, neutron star collisions, etc. in my vicinity) with the
        requirement that you have to navigate something with the mass of
        an entire solar system.

    Robert

    P.S. Keith, if you haven't read the papers on Matrioshka Brains and
    related references, esp. the paper cited by Anders, you may want to
    do so. That will give you a fair amount to think about.
    See: http://www.aeiveos.com/~bradbury/MatrioshkaBrains/index.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 25 2003 - 15:49:41 MDT