4 ms·
It is sad. But, on a flip side - somewhat tangentially, I've recently become interested in molecular biology. The strides we're making within the field is incr
by Hedepig 5y ago
It is sad.
But, on a flip side - somewhat tangentially, I've recently become interested in molecular biology. The strides we're making within the field is incredible.
Perhaps it isn't as sexy as astronomy, but it's far more within our grasp, and arguably has a far bigger impact on us, at least right now
- xvector 5y agoEventually, the human consciousness will move to a synthetic medium, and we will feel far less "trapped" as time will virtually cease to hold meaning.
- grandchild 5y agoI'm also intrigued thinking about a post-meat existence. But I think that while time will then not be measured in hours or days, we will be counting down the total energy available to us from Sol, and if it will suffice to bring us to a new star or other energy source. There will always be an uncertain countdown.
- xvector 5y agoThis begs the question - is there a maximum "star cluster" size, beyond which a post-meat society on starship(s) would be unable to obtain more energy? In essence, given some function that takes in: - a graph of stars/blackholes (energy sources), with: - the distances between each energy source - the expected remaining lifetime of the source - (optionally) the probable locations of new sources, and their expected time to maturity and: - a set of starships, with: - the maximum material lifetime of the starship (e.g. of solar panels) - the percentage of material renewal possible at each node - the energy consumption of the starship is there a finite longest path, that is meaningfully smaller than the universe? And what is the probability that we will encounter a life-bearing planet on this path, which we will have to mine to oblivion to enable the renewal of our starship(s) for the survival of our own species?