From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Mon Jul 28 2003 - 18:24:45 MDT
Robin wrote:
> Some people think that the explanation of the Fermi paradox
> is that there are predators out there that swoop down an destroy
> any civilization that visibly starts to colonize. For that,
> I have a parable:
>
> Imagine a field full of slow plump rabbits, munching on grass.
> Imagine a fox sitting in a tall clump of grass eating the
> rabbits that happen to wander into that clump. This fox is
> thinks that he shouldn't leave his clump, because there are
> meta-foxes out there, who only eat foxes. He thinks the
> reason that there are so many uneaten rabbits out there is that
> any time a fox comes out to eat a rabbit, a meta-fox sees it
> and runs in and eats the fox. And his reason for not seeing
> any meta-foxes out there eating foxes is that this is a very
> rare event, due to the fact that meta-foxes are very efficient
> and foxes are rare.
>
> My key problem with this scenario is: why don't the meta-foxes
> eat the rabbits? Why focus on a few hard to catch foxes?
>
### Let me add a few belated comments:
There are internal limits on the size of metafoxes (they don't eat rabbits
because they would get too big and burst - the old doomsday weapon problem),
and the number of foxes a metafox can eat per day is also limited. New foxes
arise at a constant rate, and are in due course eaten, or become meta-foxes.
Meta-foxes attack each other relentlessly. This assures a dynamic
equilibrium between fox and meta-fox, as well as a reason to attack foxes
(to prevent their transformation into meta-foxes), and explains why
metafoxes are uncommon. It is unclear why meta-foxes each other - maybe they
are nutritious, due to technical reasons have a substantial first-attacker
advantage and no way of binding themselves not to attack.
The cautious fox, appraised of the situation, might indeed try to stay
inconspicuous, until it develops the first-strike capability needed to eat
other foxes and meta-foxes, and hope to stay around in this merciless
struggle for the fun of the kill (since this motive might have the best
long-term survival advantage).
With a few assumptions any scenario can be made plausible.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 28 2003 - 15:31:04 MDT