RE: Fermi "Paradox"

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sun Aug 03 2003 - 11:13:30 MDT

  • Next message: Paul Grant: "RE: Ground-breaking work in understanding of time"

    Robert writes

    > The implication of this is that advanced civilizations --
    > if they want to produce the most advanced computational
    > architectures -- have to *leave* the galaxy to seek the lowest
    > temperature (inter-galactic) environment.

    Ah, yes, but as I've pointed out many many times, we
    use our intuitions of having to *move* rather than
    *copy* and then project this limitation onto our future
    selves and onto advanced technologies themselves!

    There is no need to *move*. The advanced entities
    and civilizations simply *copy* themselves to wherever
    they get the most run time per nickel. Moving would
    be damned hard anyway. I can just see (not!) our
    picking up and moving every single bit of life here
    on Earth to somewhere where it gets to run better
    and faster!

    > So one answer for the Fermi Paradox is the fact that we
    > (or any other "developing" civilization) simply live in
    > a "bad" neighborhood. Advanced civilizations would gather
    > up sufficient materials and exit from galaxies entirely.

    Not at all. That's almost analogous to saying that all
    humans who live in Siberia will just pick up and move
    to more temperate surroundings now that know what they
    are missing. (Really, though, I sincerely wonder what
    does keep everyone in the U.S. from moving to California.
    The reasons that people need all that ice and snow aren't
    clear to me, but the reasons do exist.)

    Advanced civilizations will simply *spread* outward,
    and if the papers you are studying make it really
    advantageous to run outside galaxies, then eventually
    despite the fewer resources, the matter dominated
    areas inside galaxies would very gradually fall
    behind. That is, all tentacles of civilization that
    reach beyond a galaxy will by definition lag 20,000
    years behind to begin with. It will take a *long time*
    to catch up and surpass their parents.

    > This makes sense from the additional perspective of
    > avoiding galactic hazard functions (esp. Gamma Ray
    > Bursters, wandering black holes, etc.).

    The urge to avoid the obvious runs deep indeed.

    Lee



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 03 2003 - 11:22:54 MDT