4 ms·

The fallacy here is simple: All of the assumptions mapping from our experiences to "alien" experiences are built on that those experiences share fundemental p

The fallacy here is simple: All of the assumptions mapping from our experiences to "alien" experiences are built on that those experiences share fundemental premises. That the demographics of alien civilizations match our own. That we are a median point and not an extreme outlier. There are even solid arguments for considering us an outlier (Fermi paradox) Even if we take the sketchy assumptions that the sizes of alien civilizations are zipfy, we could equally reasonably assume most civilizations are smaller than us even if we are the smallest civilizations to ever exist.

simonh 6y ago
It’s not just assuming they match our own. The kinds of distributions we see in our civilisation (country land are distribution, population distribution, etc) are also seen in many, many other phenomena. Species ranges, species population sizes, planet and asteroid size distributions, island size distributions, mountain size distributions and many many other phenomena. All it’s assuming is that the number of a thing inversely correlates to the size of the thing. Small things tend to be numerous and big things tend to be scarce. We see this in all sorts of phenomena. Not all phenomena, but many, many. On that basis, the argument would be that since that inverse correlation seems to be extremely common, it”s also likely to be found in the distributions of Intelligent species. Not guaranteed, but very likely. I think it’s an interesting argument.
Nevermark 6y ago
The article is making the (almost explicit) assumption that the "power law" holds for civilization populations. That seems reasonable to me. But I think we can also find good arguments that we have more information than simply where each of us as individuals appeared. For instance, the resources of the universe can easily support quadrillions of us (or individual entities), so if even one civilization is able to extend itself to other solar systems reliably, there must be civilizations with quadrillions or more individuals somewhere. That would strongly imply that while most individuals are in large civilizations, we have counter evidence that we might still be not in one. Or the argument could be that the power law doesn't hold due to a strong threshold effect, or some other effect. For instance of some civilizations become galactic, but most individuals still appear in a great many more civilizations that die out before becoming immune to collective disasters. In which case, I really hope we are not typical!

simonh 6y ago

It’s not just assuming they match our own. The kinds of distributions we see in our civilisation (country land are distribution, population distribution, etc) are also seen in many, many other phenomena. Species ranges, species population sizes, planet and asteroid size distributions, island size distributions, mountain size distributions and many many other phenomena. All it’s assuming is that the number of a thing inversely correlates to the size of the thing. Small things tend to be numerous and big things tend to be scarce. We see this in all sorts of phenomena. Not all phenomena, but many, many. On that basis, the argument would be that since that inverse correlation seems to be extremely common, it”s also likely to be found in the distributions of Intelligent species. Not guaranteed, but very likely. I think it’s an interesting argument.

Nevermark 6y ago

The article is making the (almost explicit) assumption that the "power law" holds for civilization populations. That seems reasonable to me. But I think we can also find good arguments that we have more information than simply where each of us as individuals appeared. For instance, the resources of the universe can easily support quadrillions of us (or individual entities), so if even one civilization is able to extend itself to other solar systems reliably, there must be civilizations with quadrillions or more individuals somewhere. That would strongly imply that while most individuals are in large civilizations, we have counter evidence that we might still be not in one. Or the argument could be that the power law doesn't hold due to a strong threshold effect, or some other effect. For instance of some civilizations become galactic, but most individuals still appear in a great many more civilizations that die out before becoming immune to collective disasters. In which case, I really hope we are not typical!