3 ms·

I've been excited for JWST for years. I don't think people realize how close we are to strong (positive or negative) evidence for the existent of life on other

I've been excited for JWST for years. I don't think people realize how close we are to strong (positive or negative) evidence for the existent of life on other planets. It could be coming within the decade.

joe_the_user 7y ago
This may be slightly off-topic but I feel like these kinds of development make "dark forest" hypotheses a little problematic. One assumes that most alien societies began in a state where they'd give evidence of their existence long before they gained the ability to construct a dark Dyson sphere or whatever could conceal their existence.
- ionwake 7y ago
  Any ideas how it could still be a valid theory even if there is evidence of life elsewhere? We are in a conservation area seems most likely to me
cletus 7y ago
If you we find a lot of life signals in nearby star systems that's bad news for us if they're sentient but probably good news for us if they aren't. The difference here is that if, say, you find 5 sentient civilizations within 1000 light years then statistically it's highly likely there are a ton of them in the Milky Way. Since we see no evidence of a true spacefaring civilization (most notably, the evidence of a Dyson Swarm) then it's likely there is a Great Filter ahead of us and statistically speaking we're probably doomed. If we find lots of evidence of life but no sentient life then it's more likely we're passed the Great Filter. So this could be a real good news or bad news type scenario.
- tgflynn 7y ago
  I don't think sentient is the right word to use here. Cat's are probably sentient, but they won't be building Dyson Swarms any time soon. On the other hand a non-sentient artificial super-intelligence might well be able to build them.
  - doctoboggan 7y ago
    I think the word usually used here is "technological" species.
- wcoenen 7y ago
  Finding lots of simple life wouldn't be great news for our future either, because it rules out abiogenesis as one of the great filters. And each time we rule out a potential great filter behind us, the potential ones ahead of us become more likely.

joe_the_user 7y ago

This may be slightly off-topic but I feel like these kinds of development make "dark forest" hypotheses a little problematic. One assumes that most alien societies began in a state where they'd give evidence of their existence long before they gained the ability to construct a dark Dyson sphere or whatever could conceal their existence.

ionwake 7y ago
Any ideas how it could still be a valid theory even if there is evidence of life elsewhere? We are in a conservation area seems most likely to me

cletus 7y ago

If you we find a lot of life signals in nearby star systems that's bad news for us if they're sentient but probably good news for us if they aren't. The difference here is that if, say, you find 5 sentient civilizations within 1000 light years then statistically it's highly likely there are a ton of them in the Milky Way. Since we see no evidence of a true spacefaring civilization (most notably, the evidence of a Dyson Swarm) then it's likely there is a Great Filter ahead of us and statistically speaking we're probably doomed. If we find lots of evidence of life but no sentient life then it's more likely we're passed the Great Filter. So this could be a real good news or bad news type scenario.

tgflynn 7y ago
I don't think sentient is the right word to use here. Cat's are probably sentient, but they won't be building Dyson Swarms any time soon. On the other hand a non-sentient artificial super-intelligence might well be able to build them.
- doctoboggan 7y ago
  I think the word usually used here is "technological" species.
wcoenen 7y ago
Finding lots of simple life wouldn't be great news for our future either, because it rules out abiogenesis as one of the great filters. And each time we rule out a potential great filter behind us, the potential ones ahead of us become more likely.