3 ms·
This is an interesting theory I have considered as well, however there is a reason to disbelieve it. It assumes at its core the diffusion of some form of highly
by gfodor 7y ago
This is an interesting theory I have considered as well, however there is a reason to disbelieve it. It assumes at its core the diffusion of some form of highly destructive technology, and that the technology will be unleashed in an irreversible way before it can be recognized and “put back in the box”, or it can’t be “put back in the box”.
These assumptions individually seem strong but together they get quite weak. For example, diffusion of civilization over several planets before this technology is diffused provides a potential firewall. (For example, once the technology is recognized, an orderly exodus is made which forcibly leaves behind any trace of it.) Alternatively, the diffusion itself may not occur as well, similar to the current life-ending technologies we have now that can only be created by state actors.
It is a legitimate prospect — but hinges upon several aspects hung together to get to a point where it’s an inductive invariant explaining fermi.
- NortySpock 7y agoMaybe a biological weapon being unleashed from some genocidal nutcase's basement hobby laboratory?
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y agoDo note that it is orders of magnitude simpler to reach the technological level necessary to create the means of causing the collapse of civilization than to create the means to colonize other worlds. There are places on our own planet far more hospitable than any other world in our system that we haven't yet colonized, yet we are potentially a few political incidents away from nuclear annihilation.