4 ms·

The thing we keep on neglecting to mention is that life on earth actually happened pretty quickly in the time scale of the universe. I can't remember but I thin

The thing we keep on neglecting to mention is that life on earth actually happened pretty quickly in the time scale of the universe. I can't remember but I think we're one of the earliest points for life in the "broad" time scale. I wouldn't be surprised if stastically we're some of the first intelligent life, or the first wave.

kjkjadksj 2y ago
Our generation time is probably too slow for us to be the first wave. I’d expect that title to belong to something that looks like a pile of snot on a table but under a microscope looks like a neural network.
- AIPedant 2y ago
  A key limitation is that the early universe had virtually no heavy elements whatsoever, and it is far too fantastical to suppose there might have been life in the form of hydrogen-positron crystals or whatever. It took billions of years of supernovas for protoplanetary disks to include metals, complex organic molecules, etc, and perhaps even longer to make planets with enough chemical entropy to support life.
  - kjkjadksj 2y ago
    Even still much of our evolution as complex organisms were far slower than our unicellular cousins. Bacteria have conquered every place on earth and humans have not. They probably took advantage of us to colonize the moon already. They have adapted a plethora of unique systems thanks the their ability to grow at log scale and rapidly adapt to any situation. The HN analogy would be a VC that could double the amount of potential startups it seeds every 20 minutes. Meanwhile over in the Homo genus only one subspecies has limped along to this day with severely diminished genetic diversity to boot in many large populations, with selective pressures probably not directly applied to maximizing intelligence in the species long term much less survival.
platz 2y ago
Actually, we're already past the peak of star formation in the universe. So the universe is well on its way winding down.. less and less stars are being created. We're seeing the universe more middle aged than especially young https://www.reddit.com/r/space/s/0oVjIo0XMi https://www.reddit.com/r/space/s/0oVjIo0XMi
- DrFalkyn 2y ago
  But how many of those stars would have been suitable for life ? A huge star that’s going to burn out quickly isn’t conducive to complex organisms Also in a huge star there’s less material to form planets in the first place
JoeAltmaier 2y ago
There's talk of 'forever chemicals' produced by everything we do. Is evidence of industry going to just disappear? Forever is a long time.
- philipkglass 2y ago
  This is why "forever chemicals" is a poor term for those pollutants. They take a long time to decay under natural conditions (kind of like nuclear waste) but they don't literally persist forever.

kjkjadksj 2y ago

Our generation time is probably too slow for us to be the first wave. I’d expect that title to belong to something that looks like a pile of snot on a table but under a microscope looks like a neural network.

AIPedant 2y ago
A key limitation is that the early universe had virtually no heavy elements whatsoever, and it is far too fantastical to suppose there might have been life in the form of hydrogen-positron crystals or whatever. It took billions of years of supernovas for protoplanetary disks to include metals, complex organic molecules, etc, and perhaps even longer to make planets with enough chemical entropy to support life.
- kjkjadksj 2y ago
  Even still much of our evolution as complex organisms were far slower than our unicellular cousins. Bacteria have conquered every place on earth and humans have not. They probably took advantage of us to colonize the moon already. They have adapted a plethora of unique systems thanks the their ability to grow at log scale and rapidly adapt to any situation. The HN analogy would be a VC that could double the amount of potential startups it seeds every 20 minutes. Meanwhile over in the Homo genus only one subspecies has limped along to this day with severely diminished genetic diversity to boot in many large populations, with selective pressures probably not directly applied to maximizing intelligence in the species long term much less survival.

platz 2y ago

Actually, we're already past the peak of star formation in the universe. So the universe is well on its way winding down.. less and less stars are being created. We're seeing the universe more middle aged than especially young https://www.reddit.com/r/space/s/0oVjIo0XMi https://www.reddit.com/r/space/s/0oVjIo0XMi

DrFalkyn 2y ago
But how many of those stars would have been suitable for life ? A huge star that’s going to burn out quickly isn’t conducive to complex organisms Also in a huge star there’s less material to form planets in the first place

JoeAltmaier 2y ago

There's talk of 'forever chemicals' produced by everything we do. Is evidence of industry going to just disappear? Forever is a long time.

philipkglass 2y ago
This is why "forever chemicals" is a poor term for those pollutants. They take a long time to decay under natural conditions (kind of like nuclear waste) but they don't literally persist forever.