To diaposra or not to diaspora was RE: The DA again was RE: Slashdot - The Computational Requirements for the Matrix

From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Wed Jun 04 2003 - 10:15:52 MDT

  • Next message: Dehede011@aol.com: "Re: Political labels (was: neocons (WAS IRAQ: Weapons of Mass Delusion))"

    Robert wrote:

    > On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Rafal Smigrodzki commenting on Hal's & Harvey's
    > comments wrote:

    >> ### Assumption: at this time in the evolution of the universe the
    >> measure of civs which die early (before diaspora) is not
    >> significantly lower than the measure of civs which live to diaspora
    >> and beyond. If the above were not true, our early birth rank would
    >> not be worrisome at all.
    >
    > Here, in a rare case where I have to call Rafal's perspective
    > into question, I have to ask "Why should there have to be
    > a diaspora?". Should not an advanced civilization with the
    > technological capabilities seek to extend current knowledge
    > bases rather than produce new untrained knowledge bases?

    ### I wasn't in this case making a case for a diaspora, but mentioned it
    because it is of relevance in the DA - civilizations which do spread over
    galaxies will tend to have orders of magnitude more members than sedentary
    ones, with attendant effects on anthropic calculations.

    This said, I kind of like the idea of colonizing the local supercluster and
    beyond. Phaethon is my hero. I couldn't really tell why but it's a strong
    gut feeling. Colonization might get messy, as I know you worry, but it will
    not be boring.

    Rafal



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 04 2003 - 07:25:49 MDT