4 ms·

> That's a big if. Is it? Since humans can send probes, and reproduce ourselves, technology and civilization, it proves that a slower self-replicating bio-mech

by ericb 2y ago

> That's a big if. Is it? Since humans can send probes, and reproduce ourselves, technology and civilization, it proves that a slower self-replicating bio-mechanical system has this capability and now we're left debating if a faster more compact system is possible, which doesn't seem like a leap?

krapp 2y ago
It is a leap. Human beings are dependent on a specific, very delicate ecosystem and technological civilization to be able to replicate with the stability and scale that we do. We also can't replicate ourselves using arbitrary matter, we require the presence of a diverse breeding population. You can't just take human beings, push them out into space and expect them - somehow - to multiply exponentially and without error using any arbitrary matter they encounter over millions of generations, but that's the baseline expectation of Von Neumann probes. Add to that all of the assumptions required to use Von Neumann probes as an explanation for modern UFO folklore. One might assume that a simplistic organism could survive and thrive more easily in interstellar space (something like a virus or tardigrade, for example.) Complex organisms tend to be more delicate and more prone to replication errors over time, as well as more sensitive to things like the radiation of interstellar space. But that isn't what people are reporting - they're reporting large, complex, technological, apparently even piloted vehicles. And that's not even getting into the interdimensional stuff, links between UFOs and the supernatural, or abductions. Obviously Von Neumann probes haven't consumed the galaxy. Therefore, either no technological civilization has ever existed in the universe other than ourselves, in which case UFOs/UAPs cannot be Von Neumann probes because they obviously haven't consumed the galaxy, and don't behave in the ways that such probes would be expected to, or else technological civilizations can and likely do exist, and Von Neumann probes aren't as simple or inevitable as people seem to think. And it still doesn't explain UFOs/UAPs as reported.
- ericb 2y ago
  > haven't consumed the galaxy That's absurd. If you can make a self-replicating probe, you can code a heuristic that prevents a grey goo scenario. Cells reproduce, but they haven't consumed the galaxy. > doesn't explain UFOs/UAPs as reported. So, the existence of spurious reports magically invalidates actual probes?
  - krapp 2y ago
    It isn't absurd, it's the entire basis of the argument whenever it's brought up. If only one civilization has ever developed Von Neumann probes, then they should have consumed the galaxy by now. That they haven't is presented as a paradox, or evidence against the existence of life beyond Earth altogether. Some degree of grey goo scenario (enough for evidence of it to be obvious and observable) is always implied. >So, the existence of spurious reports magically invalidates actual probes? Given that the entire premise of bringing them up was to validate the probable reality of those reports, yes. If one is going to argue that the UFO/UAP phenomena which are the subject of TFA are likely true because self-replicating probes should exist, a valid counterargument is pointing out that the craft described by said phenomena do not resemble self-replicating probes either in their construction or behavior. For instance by having pilots, or by appearing to travel across dimensions or faster than light, which would render obsolete the entire rationale behind self-replicating probes to begin with.
    - ericb 2y ago
      Why is grey goo implied? Send one probe per solar system. If two probes meet each other, have them pick a random number to decide who flies off to find another solar system or into the sun. If there were probes here, are you sure you'd see it? Why do silly reports being mixed in change the liklihood? If they don't, couldn't a single report that was real be in the mix? Ok, maybe a few? So, saying "*some* don't resemble self-replicating probes" doesn't really invalidate anything? > a valid counterargument is pointing out that the craft do not resemble self-replicating probes either in their construction or behavior It seems like this is difficult to know what it would present as?
      - krapp 2y ago
        > Send one probe per solar system. If two probes meet each other, have them pick a random number to decide who flies off to find another solar system or into the sun. I don't think there would be enough probes for it to be unusual that none have landed here, given the size of interstellar space. I may be wrong, but if I am, we're back to the Fermi Paradox and it's essentially the same problem. If they should be here, they should be everywhere. >So, saying "some don't resemble self-replicating probes" doesn't really invalidate anything? I'm saying none of them do. >It seems like this is difficult to know what it would present as? To reiterate, being a probe, it wouldn't likely have pilots or crews, and the current UAP narrative mentions "NHI" (non-human intelligences) and "NHB" (non-human biologics), and the broader UFO narrative of course has plenty of aliens. One could, I suppose, suggest that the probes for whatever reason also replicate crews within themselves, but that seems to be stretching the premise beyond absurdity to me. At some point one has to assume there are limits to the capabilities of this model, otherwise it's essentially magic. Also to reiterate, the model of self-replicating probes assumes slower than light travel. If you have faster than light travel (assuming that's possible) you don't need self-replicating probes. Both the current UAP narrative and the broader UFO narrative involve craft traveling faster than light, across dimensions, through wormholes, etc. And as far as I'm aware there isn't any report of a UAP or UFO replicating itself as one would expect. So it isn't necessary to know what, specifically, self-replicating probes would present as when none of the details reported support the presence of self-replicating probes over any other possibility.
- ben_w 2y ago
  > We also can't replicate ourselves using arbitrary matter, we require the presence of a diverse breeding population. The former is true, but mainly limited by phosphorus as all the other elements are relatively easy to get hold of in random rocks or gas giants. The latter is no longer true as we have adequate diversity of collectable sperm and egg samples and also (albeit crude) DNA modification tech if we really needed it.

by ericb 2y ago

krapp 2y ago

It is a leap. Human beings are dependent on a specific, very delicate ecosystem and technological civilization to be able to replicate with the stability and scale that we do. We also can't replicate ourselves using arbitrary matter, we require the presence of a diverse breeding population. You can't just take human beings, push them out into space and expect them - somehow - to multiply exponentially and without error using any arbitrary matter they encounter over millions of generations, but that's the baseline expectation of Von Neumann probes. Add to that all of the assumptions required to use Von Neumann probes as an explanation for modern UFO folklore. One might assume that a simplistic organism could survive and thrive more easily in interstellar space (something like a virus or tardigrade, for example.) Complex organisms tend to be more delicate and more prone to replication errors over time, as well as more sensitive to things like the radiation of interstellar space. But that isn't what people are reporting - they're reporting large, complex, technological, apparently even piloted vehicles. And that's not even getting into the interdimensional stuff, links between UFOs and the supernatural, or abductions. Obviously Von Neumann probes haven't consumed the galaxy. Therefore, either no technological civilization has ever existed in the universe other than ourselves, in which case UFOs/UAPs cannot be Von Neumann probes because they obviously haven't consumed the galaxy, and don't behave in the ways that such probes would be expected to, or else technological civilizations can and likely do exist, and Von Neumann probes aren't as simple or inevitable as people seem to think. And it still doesn't explain UFOs/UAPs as reported.

ericb 2y ago
> haven't consumed the galaxy That's absurd. If you can make a self-replicating probe, you can code a heuristic that prevents a grey goo scenario. Cells reproduce, but they haven't consumed the galaxy. > doesn't explain UFOs/UAPs as reported. So, the existence of spurious reports magically invalidates actual probes?
- krapp 2y ago
  It isn't absurd, it's the entire basis of the argument whenever it's brought up. If only one civilization has ever developed Von Neumann probes, then they should have consumed the galaxy by now. That they haven't is presented as a paradox, or evidence against the existence of life beyond Earth altogether. Some degree of grey goo scenario (enough for evidence of it to be obvious and observable) is always implied. >So, the existence of spurious reports magically invalidates actual probes? Given that the entire premise of bringing them up was to validate the probable reality of those reports, yes. If one is going to argue that the UFO/UAP phenomena which are the subject of TFA are likely true because self-replicating probes should exist, a valid counterargument is pointing out that the craft described by said phenomena do not resemble self-replicating probes either in their construction or behavior. For instance by having pilots, or by appearing to travel across dimensions or faster than light, which would render obsolete the entire rationale behind self-replicating probes to begin with.
  - ericb 2y ago
    Why is grey goo implied? Send one probe per solar system. If two probes meet each other, have them pick a random number to decide who flies off to find another solar system or into the sun. If there were probes here, are you sure you'd see it? Why do silly reports being mixed in change the liklihood? If they don't, couldn't a single report that was real be in the mix? Ok, maybe a few? So, saying "*some* don't resemble self-replicating probes" doesn't really invalidate anything? > a valid counterargument is pointing out that the craft do not resemble self-replicating probes either in their construction or behavior It seems like this is difficult to know what it would present as?
    - krapp 2y ago
      > Send one probe per solar system. If two probes meet each other, have them pick a random number to decide who flies off to find another solar system or into the sun. I don't think there would be enough probes for it to be unusual that none have landed here, given the size of interstellar space. I may be wrong, but if I am, we're back to the Fermi Paradox and it's essentially the same problem. If they should be here, they should be everywhere. >So, saying "some don't resemble self-replicating probes" doesn't really invalidate anything? I'm saying none of them do. >It seems like this is difficult to know what it would present as? To reiterate, being a probe, it wouldn't likely have pilots or crews, and the current UAP narrative mentions "NHI" (non-human intelligences) and "NHB" (non-human biologics), and the broader UFO narrative of course has plenty of aliens. One could, I suppose, suggest that the probes for whatever reason also replicate crews within themselves, but that seems to be stretching the premise beyond absurdity to me. At some point one has to assume there are limits to the capabilities of this model, otherwise it's essentially magic. Also to reiterate, the model of self-replicating probes assumes slower than light travel. If you have faster than light travel (assuming that's possible) you don't need self-replicating probes. Both the current UAP narrative and the broader UFO narrative involve craft traveling faster than light, across dimensions, through wormholes, etc. And as far as I'm aware there isn't any report of a UAP or UFO replicating itself as one would expect. So it isn't necessary to know what, specifically, self-replicating probes would present as when none of the details reported support the presence of self-replicating probes over any other possibility.
ben_w 2y ago
> We also can't replicate ourselves using arbitrary matter, we require the presence of a diverse breeding population. The former is true, but mainly limited by phosphorus as all the other elements are relatively easy to get hold of in random rocks or gas giants. The latter is no longer true as we have adequate diversity of collectable sperm and egg samples and also (albeit crude) DNA modification tech if we really needed it.