5 ms·

That's pretty comforting. As the solar system we live in seems more unusual it seems more credible that planets with advanced life might be rare. In which cas

That's pretty comforting. As the solar system we live in seems more unusual it seems more credible that planets with advanced life might be rare. In which case the emptiness of the galaxy seems more explicable.

jerf 8y ago
Putting the Great Filter not merely behind us, but way behind us, would be a pretty cool scientific result.
- kijin 8y ago
  There may be more than one Great Filter. We could have passed one of them, but we might not survive the next one.
  - pc86 8y ago
    The entire point of a "Great Filter" is that there is one that wipes out the majority of species that make it that far. If there are multiple then they're just likely cataclysmic events.
    - Izkata 8y ago
      No, the Great Filter is more general than self-destruction. Some examples I've seen of possible Great Filters we've already passed include: * The formation of any life at all * The jump from single-celled life to multi-cellular organisms * The ability to create/use/pass on knowledge of tools
  - jerf 8y ago
    The point of the Great Filter argument is that something seems to be preventing widespread intelligent life. If the Filter is behind us, then while that is not proof that there are no impassible obstacles in front of is, we have no particular reason to believe that there are impassible obstacles in front of us. That is in stark contrast to what has been the scientific dogma for the past several decades, which is that there is nothing special about us whatsoever, which does give us reason to believe there are impassible obstacles in front of us. To be able to put the filter way behind us is still a real change.
    - dwaltrip 8y ago
      It depends on how fully the initial Great Filter explains the lack of observed exolife. It may not be a binary thing.
  - outworlder 8y ago
    There could be one factor, or several. What matters is if the species can or cannot survive at the end to spread out or at least to make their presence detectable. This aggregate of 'filters' is what's important.
- climber604 8y ago
  Although it's science fiction, the second book from the "Three Body Problem" series by Cixin Liu offers an intriguing idea he labels as the "Dark Forest". The gist is that the primary motivation for all civilizations is survival and other civilizations are a threat. This Quora answer gives more detail, but I highly recommend reading the books; there are many compelling science-based ideas within it. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Dark-Forest-Theory-of-the-cosmos-which-is-a-response-to-the-Fermi-Paradox?share=1 https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Dark-Forest-Theory-of-the-...
  - ssijak 8y ago
    Why would anyone want to spoil the books for themselves?
    - kerbalspacepro 8y ago
      I spoiled this book for myself, and it was still fun. There was a lot of dramatic tension as I waited for all the characters to realize the horrifying things that lay in wait.
  - SZJX 8y ago
    That's one way to go about it but it might be a bit simplistic and there's no reason why cooperation wouldn't work out for some civilizations as well. To completely hide one's signals is both hard to achieve and not necessarily beneficial. For example in ancient times there were blooming trades between empires which would not have been possible if every civilization just thought about hiding themselves. I was not a fan of "Three Body Problem" from its beginning.
Brockenstein 8y ago
Only if you assume solar systems with advanced life need to model our solar system, which I'm not sure is a foregone conclusion yet.
tabtab 8y ago
Re: the solar system we live in seems more unusual We and we alone have the one and only Trump ;-)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
KnightOfWords 8y ago
The article is interesting but I don't think we can draw too many conclusions yet due to Kepler's observational biases. For example, the similar size pattern seen may only apply to closely packed systems rather than more widely spaced ones, and we don't have a great deal of information on the latter type.

jerf 8y ago

Putting the Great Filter not merely behind us, but way behind us, would be a pretty cool scientific result.

kijin 8y ago
There may be more than one Great Filter. We could have passed one of them, but we might not survive the next one.
- pc86 8y ago
  The entire point of a "Great Filter" is that there is one that wipes out the majority of species that make it that far. If there are multiple then they're just likely cataclysmic events.
  - Izkata 8y ago
    No, the Great Filter is more general than self-destruction. Some examples I've seen of possible Great Filters we've already passed include: * The formation of any life at all * The jump from single-celled life to multi-cellular organisms * The ability to create/use/pass on knowledge of tools
- jerf 8y ago
  The point of the Great Filter argument is that something seems to be preventing widespread intelligent life. If the Filter is behind us, then while that is not proof that there are no impassible obstacles in front of is, we have no particular reason to believe that there are impassible obstacles in front of us. That is in stark contrast to what has been the scientific dogma for the past several decades, which is that there is nothing special about us whatsoever, which does give us reason to believe there are impassible obstacles in front of us. To be able to put the filter way behind us is still a real change.
  - dwaltrip 8y ago
    It depends on how fully the initial Great Filter explains the lack of observed exolife. It may not be a binary thing.
- outworlder 8y ago
  There could be one factor, or several. What matters is if the species can or cannot survive at the end to spread out or at least to make their presence detectable. This aggregate of 'filters' is what's important.
climber604 8y ago
Although it's science fiction, the second book from the "Three Body Problem" series by Cixin Liu offers an intriguing idea he labels as the "Dark Forest". The gist is that the primary motivation for all civilizations is survival and other civilizations are a threat. This Quora answer gives more detail, but I highly recommend reading the books; there are many compelling science-based ideas within it. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Dark-Forest-Theory-of-the-cosmos-which-is-a-response-to-the-Fermi-Paradox?share=1 https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Dark-Forest-Theory-of-the-...
- ssijak 8y ago
  Why would anyone want to spoil the books for themselves?
  - kerbalspacepro 8y ago
    I spoiled this book for myself, and it was still fun. There was a lot of dramatic tension as I waited for all the characters to realize the horrifying things that lay in wait.
- SZJX 8y ago
  That's one way to go about it but it might be a bit simplistic and there's no reason why cooperation wouldn't work out for some civilizations as well. To completely hide one's signals is both hard to achieve and not necessarily beneficial. For example in ancient times there were blooming trades between empires which would not have been possible if every civilization just thought about hiding themselves. I was not a fan of "Three Body Problem" from its beginning.

Brockenstein 8y ago

Only if you assume solar systems with advanced life need to model our solar system, which I'm not sure is a foregone conclusion yet.

tabtab 8y ago

Re: the solar system we live in seems more unusual We and we alone have the one and only Trump ;-)

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

KnightOfWords 8y ago

The article is interesting but I don't think we can draw too many conclusions yet due to Kepler's observational biases. For example, the similar size pattern seen may only apply to closely packed systems rather than more widely spaced ones, and we don't have a great deal of information on the latter type.