4 ms·

That theory doesn't account for the fact that the laws of physics prevent anything from traveling faster than the speed of light. because our galaxy is 100000 l

That theory doesn't account for the fact that the laws of physics prevent anything from traveling faster than the speed of light. because our galaxy is 100000 lightyears long by itself, it would take 100000 years for an advanced civilization just to get to us let alone cross their own galaxies. It's highly possible other life doesn't exist but the reason we can't see them is because space is way larger than you think it is and takes a long time to travel across.

elboru 8y ago
It's easy to speculate when there are infinite "what-ifs". If AGI (artificial general intelligence) development is technically possible and if they're really able to recursively self-improve themselves to become semi-gods and if there are really N number of civilizations out there, then there should be N number of AGIs too, it would make sense that we should be able to see their traces of existence across the universe.
- Razengan 8y ago
  This makes a lot of cherry-picked assumptions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840
travisoneill1 8y ago
Which is a very short amount of time for a species to be in existence. Alligators have been around for 2000x that amount of time. If you take a max speed of 0.01c which is possible with technology that we will probably have in the next 100 years (fusion power) that means the galaxy could be colonized in 10 million years. If 200 million years ago humans had evolved instead of alligators (can’t see any reason this is not possible on some alternate earth) then we could have colonized the galaxy 20 times over by now.
- Razengan 8y ago
  "Unrestrained colonization just because we can" relies upon a lot of assumptions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840 For example, we could have begun building a base on the Moon by now if we wanted to, but we have decided not to.
  - travisoneill1 8y ago
    My point was in response to WilliamEdward above so really only dealing with showing that travel time is not a constraint. That said, your points are good, but knowing humans I think "Unrestrained colonization just because we can" is probable if not certain, for anywhere that a self sustaining society can exist. It certainly holds for Earth. The moon is not a great example because it isn't habitable. Same as Antarctica. We have sent a few expeditions and have a few bases but have not colonized it. If the moon was earthlike then I would bet that colonization would have started shortly after the Apollo program. Right now there are no habitable planets we can get to. If we ever develop interstellar travel, finding habitable planets we can reach is a near certainty. More likely we first develop technology that allows terraforming and a self sustaining colony on Mars. And at that time I would bet that it happens.
    - Razengan 8y ago
      > The moon is not a great example because it isn't habitable. It could actually serve well as a strategic and logistic launchpad for subsequent missions. But still, you highlighted a key point yourself: That it's not always going to be possible (or desirable) to continue expanding through the galaxy because we may run into a "dead end" with no stepping stones (i.e. habitable planets) within our range of travel.
  - WilliamEdward 8y ago
    Another related example: We don't have the abundance of resources to do so. Whether or not the universe is infinite, while it does mean there can be infinite resources, our direct radius of galaxies is finite and it gets harder to travel as the distance gets further so the infinite planets are not all the same distance from earth.
rad88 8y ago
The other way of looking at that is that it would only take a few hundred thousand years for a technologically advanced civilization to permeate the galaxy. But the galaxy is billions of years old and that has not happened. The other thing is that the paradox isn't just that they aren't physically here with us. It's that there's no evidence of intelligent life whatsoever. We're at the point where we can take direct optical images of exoplanets. At some point we have to conclude that if they are out there, we would have seen some indication of it.
- Razengan 8y ago
  > it would only take a few hundred thousand years for a technologically advanced civilization to permeate the galaxy. Why? How? How soon would they be able to start? Why haven't we begun doing so ourselves? Why haven't we even established a presence on our neighboring moons and planets, even though we are technically capable of already doing so? At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the "we should have met someone by now" argument relies upon a bunch of thin assumptions that have been brought up elsewhere in response to other instances of it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840

elboru 8y ago

It's easy to speculate when there are infinite "what-ifs". If AGI (artificial general intelligence) development is technically possible and if they're really able to recursively self-improve themselves to become semi-gods and if there are really N number of civilizations out there, then there should be N number of AGIs too, it would make sense that we should be able to see their traces of existence across the universe.

Razengan 8y ago
This makes a lot of cherry-picked assumptions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840

travisoneill1 8y ago

Which is a very short amount of time for a species to be in existence. Alligators have been around for 2000x that amount of time. If you take a max speed of 0.01c which is possible with technology that we will probably have in the next 100 years (fusion power) that means the galaxy could be colonized in 10 million years. If 200 million years ago humans had evolved instead of alligators (can’t see any reason this is not possible on some alternate earth) then we could have colonized the galaxy 20 times over by now.

Razengan 8y ago
"Unrestrained colonization just because we can" relies upon a lot of assumptions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840 For example, we could have begun building a base on the Moon by now if we wanted to, but we have decided not to.
- travisoneill1 8y ago
  My point was in response to WilliamEdward above so really only dealing with showing that travel time is not a constraint. That said, your points are good, but knowing humans I think "Unrestrained colonization just because we can" is probable if not certain, for anywhere that a self sustaining society can exist. It certainly holds for Earth. The moon is not a great example because it isn't habitable. Same as Antarctica. We have sent a few expeditions and have a few bases but have not colonized it. If the moon was earthlike then I would bet that colonization would have started shortly after the Apollo program. Right now there are no habitable planets we can get to. If we ever develop interstellar travel, finding habitable planets we can reach is a near certainty. More likely we first develop technology that allows terraforming and a self sustaining colony on Mars. And at that time I would bet that it happens.
  - Razengan 8y ago
    > The moon is not a great example because it isn't habitable. It could actually serve well as a strategic and logistic launchpad for subsequent missions. But still, you highlighted a key point yourself: That it's not always going to be possible (or desirable) to continue expanding through the galaxy because we may run into a "dead end" with no stepping stones (i.e. habitable planets) within our range of travel.
- WilliamEdward 8y ago
  Another related example: We don't have the abundance of resources to do so. Whether or not the universe is infinite, while it does mean there can be infinite resources, our direct radius of galaxies is finite and it gets harder to travel as the distance gets further so the infinite planets are not all the same distance from earth.

rad88 8y ago

The other way of looking at that is that it would only take a few hundred thousand years for a technologically advanced civilization to permeate the galaxy. But the galaxy is billions of years old and that has not happened. The other thing is that the paradox isn't just that they aren't physically here with us. It's that there's no evidence of intelligent life whatsoever. We're at the point where we can take direct optical images of exoplanets. At some point we have to conclude that if they are out there, we would have seen some indication of it.

Razengan 8y ago
> it would only take a few hundred thousand years for a technologically advanced civilization to permeate the galaxy. Why? How? How soon would they be able to start? Why haven't we begun doing so ourselves? Why haven't we even established a presence on our neighboring moons and planets, even though we are technically capable of already doing so? At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the "we should have met someone by now" argument relies upon a bunch of thin assumptions that have been brought up elsewhere in response to other instances of it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17829840