9 ms·
> If this is right – and we can debate exact parameter values forever, but it’s hard to argue with their point-estimate-vs-distribution-logic – then there’s no
by e67f70028a46fba 8y ago
> If this is right – and we can debate exact parameter values forever, but it’s hard to argue with their point-estimate-vs-distribution-logic – then there’s no Fermi Paradox. It’s done, solved, kaput.
this makes no sense at all: whether or not there is a fermi paradox absolutely depends on the parameters "we can argue about"
- OscarCunningham 8y agoPerhaps it be accurate to say the given our current knowledge about the parameters there's not currently a Fermi paradox, but if we gained more information about the parameters then a Fermi paradox could arise in the future.
- rad88 8y agoBut nothing at all is really known about "length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space". It's somewhere between a few decades or so and 10 billion years?
- OscarCunningham 8y agoSure, which is one of the reasons why we don't currently have a Fermi paradox.
- EthanHeilman 8y agoTo me the Fermi Paradox isn't really a paradox it is framework for thinking about the problem. This research fits into that framework and provides an interesting new argument that the great filter is more likely to be in our past rather than our future.
- bena 8y agoIIRC, we're already going dark. The amount of "noise" we broadcast into space is diminishing. If other civilizations roughly follow the progress of our own, that could mean that the window a civilization has to be detected is something like 100 - 200 years.
- jandrese 8y agoIt all comes down to trying to draw a line from a single point. We don't have enough information to even make an educated guess at this point. IMHO the Fermi paradox has one flawed assumption: that interstellar travel for the purposes of colonization would be possible and desirable. If this is not the case then there is no paradox, everybody is in their solar system happily doing whatever it is they do all day.
- bena 8y agoExactly. To transfer something between Earth and the nearest star would require about 8 years. Fuck having a pen pal. You'd also need the energy to propel something to the speed of light. Is it even worth it?
- neaden 8y agoI would think so, for an advanced enough civilization certainly you could expect to see something like Bracewell probes getting sent out to go say hi without spending too many resources.
- Retric 8y agoSending 1 probe might be low resources. Try sending 1 probe to every star ever 10,000 years. Because without that the odds of any probe being near us is rather limited. As to self replicating probes that's freaking dangerous. Get something wrong and the universe becomes a very hostile place. PS: In terms of cost consider the % of humanity's GDP spent on SETI projects. Now consider those at least have the possibility of some benefit in your lifetime. Extra Solar probes are unlikely to get much in the way of resource investment from most civilizations.
- bena 8y agoHe said "for the purposes of colonization". That means sending people out. We would be sending people on one-way trips, for better or worse. You'd likely never hear from them again. As to just sending out Bracewells to say "Hi", why? Once again, the return on a response is very long and not guaranteed. And without a response, what's the point?