11 ms·
This seems like a variant of a hypothesis I've heard before: "The universe is old enough, and the rate of expansion of a spacefaring civilization is fast enough
by larsiusprime 6y ago
This seems like a variant of a hypothesis I've heard before: "The universe is old enough, and the rate of expansion of a spacefaring civilization is fast enough (relative to the age of the universe, even at sub-light speeds) that either the aliens should already be here since long ago, or we're the first (or among the first)." ?
- bena 6y agoFermi's paradox. It assumes that technology will get to the point where it becomes trivial to explore space. That's not an easy assumption to grant.
- larsiusprime 6y agoSure, but my question was just if the article was making the same basic argument as the given hypothesis (along with the same basic assumptions).
- Pxtl 6y agoTrivial and possible are the same. If colonization is possible it will eventually be mastered and then you get geometric growth. Covid has given us all a quick refresher course on the nature of geometric growth. On the timescale of the universe, geometric growth in colonization is functionally hyper rapid. So either colonization (and thus, geometric growth) is impossible or there's nobody else out there.
- tsimionescu 6y agoWell, if establishing colonies and moving from one star system to the next is possible, but takes a few hundred million years each time, then it wouldn't be surprising in any way if even the 'first' civilization to arise has barely colonized a handful of star systems. Perhaps in a few hundred billion years the universe will indeed be full of colonies.
- amelius 6y agoHow do you determine who was "first" when simultaneity doesn't exist on a cosmic scale?
- PeterisP 6y agoWell, at any given point of reference (e.g. a star or galaxy) there's a clear ordering of events, who is first there. And the relative velocities between different stars and galaxies aren't that large; if we're speaking also about cosmic time scales (e.g. not days or years, but millions of years) then there's no need to involve relativistic reasoning about who's first.
- jstanley 6y agoWhat makes you think we'll be among the first? No human being has ever set foot on a different planet. No man-made object has ever reached a star system outside our own, let alone landed on a planet. We may still be quite a long way away from accomplishing those things at scale.
- larsiusprime 6y agoI'm just asking if the article is making a similar argument to the stated hypothesis.