tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post2066477725040452589..comments2023-10-30T04:16:25.917-04:00Comments on Sentient Developments: The Fermi Paradox: Back with a vengeanceGeorgehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13003484633933455827noreply@blogger.comBlogger117125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-69436421933528222742012-11-09T00:40:59.728-05:002012-11-09T00:40:59.728-05:00Fascinating article and thread.
There are a few co...Fascinating article and thread.<br />There are a few comments that raise this argument, sorry if I'm repeating:<br />Life evolved through natural selection, we should have all read "The Selfish Gene" by Dawkins. Life, by definition, has narrow "self-interest" and evolution has no foresight. This fact explains why we can't seem to solve our immediate, pressing environmental and resource problems. Everyone is working for their own short-term interests and that of their clan, kin or nation. Our technology has had a massive 200 year "sugar high" from fossil energy and the party is nearly over. Now competition for resources will get ugly. <br />What if this was an evolutionary constant? Like a bacteria population colonizing the entire surface of an agar plate and then suffering collapse, each individual bacteria acts in it's own self interest and consumes as much as it can. Until there is nothing left but toxic waste.<br />Technology only hastens this process, allowing us to exploit the limited resources at an exponential rate. What if this is true of all life, anywhere? Life has to be programmed to seek its own short term interests and beat the competition, if it is not it is extinguished by the competition.<br />Life may be common, we may find it close by. But once it gets too good at exploiting its environment the algorithm at the centre of it's programming leads to it's demise?<br />I know that sounds fatalistic and I want to believe there is a way through this barrier. What I do know is that the best chance we have of solving a problem is to fully understand it. So I'd prefer to confront it for what it is.<br />Comments and refutations very welcome..!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15254792040671890530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-45351800939745003932012-11-07T21:00:23.237-05:002012-11-07T21:00:23.237-05:00Analyzing the possible evolutionary patterns of sp...Analyzing the possible evolutionary patterns of species completely unknown to us is trivial and assuming too much. Life in other parts of the universe would most likely not evolve similarly to us. Their method of species of evolution would most likely be completely alien and probably would not be reliant on a system of chromosomes and genes as life on earth is. Life on another world could easily have evolved under completely alien circumstances where concepts such as Darwin's theory of evolution would not be applicable. These other intelligent lifeforms could have some system of reproduction and evolution completely alien and unimaginable to us. As such we, limited to our terrestrial perspective on evolution, can not begin to even guess as to how another species might have evolved.davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14367604924029902027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-49442795850535934762012-11-07T18:42:22.807-05:002012-11-07T18:42:22.807-05:00Lets look at the reason we have yet to meet ET. We...Lets look at the reason we have yet to meet ET. We function in a less than whole universe defined by our maths. Lets call that Universe 'A', so over there in 'NOT A' separated from us by a 'string' is an alternate mathematical rule set that we are separated from. Now at Superposition A and NOT A are the same thing and if we were at Superposition we might perceive the 'alien' or perhaps we wouldn't because at superposition we would be both A and NOT A because we would be both us and them.<br />So right there we have a problem.<br /><br />There could well be Life - but in the end we are incapable of perceiving it in either state because they are in their own pocket reality and we could only be at superposition so the 'Alien' nature of our relationship vanishes instantly. At superposition they are us and we are them.<br /><br />If Life is a Superpositional Organism then the Theory of Evolution falls down. Basically Charles Darwin becomes a prat who made others look stupid because they believed him - scorned religion - and ran off and married his sexy cousin; and My Superpositional theory of Life can be scrawled inside the front cover of any textbook along with a smiley face and the words 'denied the Nobel prize by stupid people who are busy having sex with themselves - because that's what it looks like from Superposition'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-83988165648376641352012-03-23T21:41:52.875-04:002012-03-23T21:41:52.875-04:00I believe the reason we have not made contact is s...I believe the reason we have not made contact is simple...First we must learn to get along with each other on this planet! And when we do then we will be ready to meet our neighbors. Peace Out!michealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16687588016943797398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-61948700174513086312012-01-22T12:18:00.805-05:002012-01-22T12:18:00.805-05:00I agree with the comments above that a question is...I agree with the comments above that a question is raised by what we see humans doing with "intelligence".<br /><br />Humans have been using their powers to increase their powers to the point of collapsing their environments. That's been happening at large and small scales very repeatedly without our "intelligence" being able to grasp the question posed by it.<br /><br />The inverse is also common, though, making the question much more interesting to investigate. That line of thinking comes from new directions being taken in the study of self-organization, considering change in physical systems as a construction process. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization#Developing_views<br /><br />As regards Fermi's Paradox, change as construction also seems consistent with Elsasser's view that "persistent heterogeneity" in nature is inconsistent with the universe being a stochastic process, and far more improbable than universe could produce. He thought it would mean life and every other persistent form we find needed to be the product of something else.pfhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03496111608438462771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-26851370995186714802010-07-28T14:50:40.099-04:002010-07-28T14:50:40.099-04:00Interesting... the whole idea of energy and other ...Interesting... the whole idea of energy and other galaxies is fascinating to me... thanks.God Of Googlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15939307021427559556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-84414372379190665732010-05-04T23:02:04.737-04:002010-05-04T23:02:04.737-04:00are humans continuing to evolve? with all the tech...are humans continuing to evolve? with all the technology we have more and more diseases, disasters, etc are survivable, slowing down natural selection, maybe due to such advances humans have ceased further evolution, more people that would likely not survive life in primitive times are alive and instead of evolving to a further level our species stagnates and doesn't get any further than early man. there are few differences between modern humans and humans from lets say 2000 b.c. we are taller in stature and our brain has increased in size. our intelligence may actually be all that is changingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-76547132831459251942010-03-28T02:41:11.301-04:002010-03-28T02:41:11.301-04:00I tend to think the breakdown in Drake's equat...I tend to think the breakdown in Drake's equation is that there is no distinction between complex life and intelligent life. I believe that life, and even complex life, is common throughout the galaxy and universe. However, for life to evolve to the point of self-awareness, scietific endevor, etc may be .001% or less for all we know. Why was it evolutionarily neccasary for humans to be scientifcally curious? I don't have a good answer for that. If anything, my guess is that it would have slowed them down in the hunter-gather sense. If we chalk up the human race to an evolutionary "blip" that is outside of the norm for the rest of the galaxy, combined with all the other reasons stated (distance, time, etc) I don't think there is much of a paradox.kins80https://www.blogger.com/profile/12716410907367146738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-40866489014586649222010-02-17T11:37:41.623-05:002010-02-17T11:37:41.623-05:00hello friend excellent post about The Fermi Parado...hello friend excellent post about The Fermi Paradox: Back with a vengeance, That's enough time, given exponential exploration, even for generation ships to do the job, let alone other stuff. So, intelligent life has been possible for 4.5GY. That's enough time for the Galaxy to have been colonized 4,500 times over. Where and I would like to know if you have any post about <a href="http://www.safemeds.com/" rel="nofollow">buy generic cialis</a><br />The kind of low-level detritus we would expect to see from survey missions is really hard to find - and the someone who finds it has to be in the right frame of mind to interpret and preserve it correctly anyway, and not just toss it aside.Patrick Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04127870613063696369noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-56415664972987083532009-11-12T09:43:47.354-05:002009-11-12T09:43:47.354-05:00i have heard of extra dimensional as well as extra...i have heard of extra dimensional as well as extra dimensional intelligences visiting many people before. also read that comment about multiple radars tracking a ufo. what about the abduction stories, i mean there must be some truth to it. i doubt it is the result of a disinfo campaign. greys, nordics, mantis, reptilians, etc. are types of aliens that have been reported. <br /><br />what is going on is a multi level cover up. part of the cover up is coming from human governmental activity and the rest of the cover up is from the extra dimensional entities. perhaps we are not recieving any radio transmissions and not seeing any activity in space because its all being censored by some type of quantum technology. the Fermi Paradox is very short sighted and to hold dear to it is foolish. this is one of those scenarios where you have to go with your gut. you do not always need direct proof. indirect proof can be enough.<br /><br />so that is what is wrong with our thinking. we have to balance out the purely scientific mind and approach to life with more right brain flow. if we do not then we will never understand what is really going on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-87268732919756830072009-07-29T02:43:10.321-04:002009-07-29T02:43:10.321-04:00Here's are the ways I look at it, but these ar...Here's are the ways I look at it, but these are already known variations of the Fermi Paradox.<br /><br />1. Life is pervasive, but evolutionary fitness does not ensure the development of intelligence. For example, most living things on this planet are either microbes or insects. Or even going into higher species such as vertebrates, look at the good run the dinosaurs had. But what did they make of it?<br /><br />So we're not alone in the universe, nor the galaxy. But we're not going to communicating anytime soon to critters not much smarter than the average house-cat.<br /><br />2. Intelligence actually does develop, but conditions for technology to develop are much much rarer. In other words, we're the only kid in the neighborhood to have toys. On this planet, there are a few other animals besides the dominant hominid and the apes that would qualify as being higher-up on the earth-critter IQ chart. Look at the whales/dolphins/porpoises or even parrots for instance. However, they lack the physiology to manipulate their environment in any significant manner. Or take a look back at our own history. How long ago was the bronze age or the iron one? In terms of life on the planet, that's actually a pretty short while back. Also, where would we be if there wasn't much in the way of friable mineral resources? We'd probably still be rubbing two sticks together to make fire and talking about the upcoming hunt rather than reading this internet post exploring mundane ideas.<br /><br />3. There are actually many other beings zipping around with all the sci-fi like technology and beyond, but we're intentionally kept out of the loop. This one's known as the Zoo-Hypothesis. And we're the monkeys in the zoo. In a way, this scenario would give some credibility to the UFO, alien sightings, and abduction phonemena. If they're here, they're only only doing observations and otherwise staying out of the way. Until we can get out of "the cage" in any meaningful manner, we're not really a problem nor worth communicating with. Of course a few animals in the zoo (including us) will experience the occasional veterinary services related to park management. The abductions are merely part of the health and fitness surveys, and the implants are equal to tag-and-release programs. (Not necessarily pleasant on the recieving end, but well intentioned otherwise.) Afterall, if our solar system is a "zoo", somebody has got to do the part of the park ranger or wildlife researcher.<br /><br />I'd say 1 and 2 are likely enough because of the general chemistry that exists out there. Life should pop up somewhere else. It would be fun to know how many smart things are running around out there, but it's not like we can go to them anytime soon.<br /><br />Number 3 seems unlikely, but is fun to consider. Yet if it's true, we won't be hearing anything until we figure out how to poke around and get outside our own solar system. When the caretakers are spotted or communicated with before then, it's not by protocol and something that they try to avoid. Pretty much they're not wanting to rattle the cage and having all the monkeys go ape****, if you know what I mean.<br /><br />I'd rule out the hostile or other theories, simply because we're in existance and there isn't much to say anything has visited or communicated with us in a significant way.pauljs75https://www.blogger.com/profile/02678725603212793333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-21473716969881247192009-07-23T19:48:11.228-04:002009-07-23T19:48:11.228-04:00In response to Zimbel & Mr. Anonymous,
When ...In response to Zimbel & Mr. Anonymous, <br /><br />When discussing Fermi's paradox I'm often reminded of the quote, "Water, Water Everywhere But Not a Drop To Drink" or more appropriately in this case "... Not a Drop To Prove it."<br /><br />The concept of UFO is broad, incorporating misidentifications, psychological components, possibly new atmospheric phenomena, and who knows what else. The argument that <a href="http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread475763/pg1#pid6564344" rel="nofollow">all UFOs represent misidentifications is a fallacy dispelled by USAF Blue Book Special Report 14</a>. <br /><br />It's fair to say that in some instances UFOs may in fact be non-human technological devices. Probably the best empirical evidence of this to date comes in the form of the <a href="http://wiki.razing.net/index.php/(1957/07/17)_RB-47_radar/visual_multiple-witnesses#Transcribed_from_The_UFO_Encyclopedia:_The_Phenomenon_from_the_Beginning.2C_Volume_2:_L-Z" rel="nofollow">1957 RB-47 case</a> analyzed by Brad Sparks. It's by no means a short read, but it does demonstrate something of a fairly extraordinary nature. I find it difficult to imagine a natural explanation for a radar-emitting ball of light that has the ability to pace a RB-47 and follow it across several states especially during course corrections. <br /><br />This case stands out because it's tightly corroborated by verification from several passive radar sets, active radar detection on the ground, and mid-air /w visual observations. It's hard to imagine such a thing being an atmospheric or astronomical phenomenon. <br /><br />It's amusing to think we're very likely <a href="http://wiki.razing.net/index.php/How_do_we_know_UFO_sightings_represent_anything_extraordinary#Brief_Proof_of_UFOs" rel="nofollow">ignoring evidence</a> that might explain Fermi's paradox ("Where are they?" the answer being "Here") simply due to dogma and our inability to accept anecdotal / transient evidence.Xtraemehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14646252875351785334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-49249591392929344382009-03-16T12:33:00.000-04:002009-03-16T12:33:00.000-04:00The Drake equation has many factors missing that w...The Drake equation has many factors missing that would reduce the numbers dramatically that communication might be established between aliens.<BR/>For one, is the problem of the relative angular planes of rotation of systems/planets. This means the chance of observing communication from the surface of a planet is dramatically low.<BR/>Also the probablity of the existence of compatible communication technology existing simulatneously in a given time frame.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-84438799937966198482008-11-18T11:20:00.000-05:002008-11-18T11:20:00.000-05:00"Maybe "intelligent" life is never sustainable?It'..."Maybe "intelligent" life is never sustainable?<BR/><BR/>It's an old mistake to think of "intelligence" as a good thing in evolutionary terms. In fact it's just another thing.<BR/><BR/>It makes for very effective generalised exploiters of resources in the short term. However, such skills may well alwys result in unsustainable over-consumption, or in mistaking our perceived interests with actual evolutionary survival.<BR/><BR/>I think there's a good chance that "intelligence" is normally an evolutionary dead end. Such abilities may evolve frequently, but species may only be technologically sophisticated for a century or two before using up resources, or becoming too dependent on technology to adapt to new and unforseen evolutionary pressures.<BR/><BR/>Even if such flowerings of intelligence have been widespread in space, in order for us to meet up, we need to overlap in time as well. If we each get only a few decades of technological sophistication, it's not surprising we seem to be alone. Just now we probably are, at least in this bit of the Universe.".....<BR/><BR/>Could well be the truth :O( !Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-64078314993208998202008-09-27T18:19:00.000-04:002008-09-27T18:19:00.000-04:00What if we are being watched, but the observers do...What if we are being watched, but the observers don't want us to know yet? They could be watching, waiting to see if making contact with us is desirable. Would you want to interact with us if you were an alien? We still fight among ourselves over skin color, gender, and cultural differences; how would we treat visitors from another planet?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-49345658287483829712008-09-05T07:17:00.000-04:002008-09-05T07:17:00.000-04:00the secret is they are hiding in the fifth dimensi...the secret is they are hiding in the fifth dimension.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Ooops! sorry..Falkorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04681445993783973085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-72216992871877745862008-08-19T19:20:00.000-04:002008-08-19T19:20:00.000-04:00Please, do not see this as a naive comment.What if...Please, do not see this as a naive comment.<BR/><BR/>What if the advanced civilizations would find a better return on investment on creating virtual realities in which to download and live? As you can see in our world, it doesn't happen at all that decisions are taken thousands years in advance, and the temporal horizon for decisions is sometimes barely the length of an administration. I.e. we all tend to decide for *now*, because that's what makes "economic" sense (in the broader sense).<BR/><BR/>So, would you spend your life traveling between stars constrained by speed or light, or would you prefer to spend your life inside a virtual world designed to satisfy your needs?<BR/><BR/>Maybe the civilization expansion is not toward outside, buy toward inside.....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-62525189719736809252008-08-14T06:39:00.000-04:002008-08-14T06:39:00.000-04:00Hi!I have created a forum where we can discuss the...Hi!<BR/>I have created a forum where we can discuss the Fermi paradox and related topics. I hope to see you at:<BR/>http://fermiparadox.forumup.com/Martin Andersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10889102674534999108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-1793555042166581862008-08-14T03:10:00.000-04:002008-08-14T03:10:00.000-04:00juhazone you wrote:"So... supposing that most civi...juhazone you wrote:<BR/><BR/>"So... supposing that most civilizations reach technological singularity before discovering interstellar travel, what would these superintelligent creatures want? What would be their motives? Would they bother to explore the universe and would they even bother to exist?"<BR/><BR/>I think this is an important point. If we assume there have been many civilizations in our galaxy to reach at least our level of technology, some universal killer must have stopped them from colonizing the galaxy.<BR/><BR/>It's reasonable to assume that artificial intelligence is necessary for interstellar travel. So that could be it.<BR/><BR/>What I find very frightening with the Great Silence is this: If we humans had the technology today to travel and colonize the galaxy, would we do it ? I'm very sure we would. It's human nature to explore the unknown, take risks. <BR/><BR/>But no Aliens have done it, so they must be very different from humans. Furthermore, our chances of surviving as humans and colonizing the galaxy are slim, since no creatures with the same urge to explore have done it in the history of the galaxy.<BR/><BR/>Will the human way of living and thinking be killed off by AI ?<BR/><BR/><BR/>I have been looking for people with the same interests as me, so we could exchange ideas etc. The subjects would be The Fermi paradox and the technological singularity. Maybe we could create a forum for discussions ?<BR/>Please contact me at andersen.martin@gmail.com<BR/><BR/>Martin AndersenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-57689218632072427462008-07-16T20:19:00.000-04:002008-07-16T20:19:00.000-04:00don't you know that the fuel for these "random" re...don't you know that the fuel for these "random" reactions are in most if not all newly formed solar systems try seti.comAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-43503026597945586572008-07-03T12:45:00.000-04:002008-07-03T12:45:00.000-04:00The resolution of Fermi's Paradox is easy. Rando...The resolution of Fermi's Paradox is easy. Random evolution of sentient life is so rare that most galaxies never have any sentient life, and very few galaxies ever have 2. Humans are the only sentient life in the Milky Way and that will probably be true for billions of years.<BR/><BR/>Mosts atheists would say that lack of evidence is more than enough proof that God doesn't exist. Using the same criteria there are no other intelligent species in our galaxy.<BR/><BR/>http://www.spacetimestories.com/commentary/fermis-paradox/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-89587377610833229182008-06-15T18:58:00.000-04:002008-06-15T18:58:00.000-04:00Seems like Fermi Estimations can only be as releva...Seems like <A HREF="http://www.zenternal.com/weblog/?p=7" REL="nofollow">Fermi Estimations</A> can only be as relevant and accurate as the assumptions they are based on. One could surmise the underlying assumptions we have about intelligent life and/or the universe are not complete enough to form the basis for performing this sort of analysis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-54483200809282654082008-04-17T16:45:00.000-04:002008-04-17T16:45:00.000-04:00I have yet to see any "learned" reference to the f...I have yet to see any "learned" reference to the fact that planets and systems rotate at different speeds in varying planes and angles, sometimetimes with complex motion. This, and obscuring bodies/intersellar crap all conspire to make point to point communication extremely tricky even if two distant civilisations knew where to aim. Add another factor (Alignment) of < 0.0001 to Drakes equation<BR/><BR/>Andy RAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-74292024649562922162008-04-12T20:05:00.000-04:002008-04-12T20:05:00.000-04:00I've solved it. Any alien species that cannot trav...I've solved it. Any alien species that cannot travel through space isn't intelligent enough to do so. Any alien species that can is intelligent enough to not make contact with humans.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6753820.post-84950960628587988002008-04-08T15:28:00.000-04:002008-04-08T15:28:00.000-04:00Great topic and some really interesting posts here...Great topic and some really interesting posts here. I would like to add one, which is based on assumptions.<BR/><BR/>The Fermi paradox is based on many assumptons. One of them is that Evolution will breed intelligence, and intelligence is a higher order of life. And we offcourse are intelligent.<BR/><BR/>We are mortals. We have memories incapable of remembering a simple ten digit number without considerable effort. We think of ourselves as within our minds beeing like gods. According to Freud we are sex crazed paranoid schizofrenic and above all very influancable cyclebased nutcases. Sleep and death are all that keep us sane. (Sane as in our definition of it) Real intelligence surely would not bother to stay alive?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com