On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 11:36:36 AM UTC-7, Lawrence Crowell wrote:
>
> On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 11:18:37 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 6:58 AM, Lawrence Crowell <
>> goldenfield...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ​> ​
>>> *If IGUS or ETI exist elsewhere, I would argue that probably there are 
>>> scaling limits to the powers such beings are able to control. The universe 
>>> has matter in it, but it has an average density of 10^{-29}g/cm^3,*
>>>
>>
>> ​
>> Yes, if you picked an average cubic meter of space in the universe it 
>> would only have about one hydrogen atom in it, but that's irrelevant 
>> because the space near stars is very very far from average.
>> ​ ​
>> Jupiter alone has enough matter to make a Dyson Sphere, especially if the 
>> sphere's radius was considerably less than the Earth's orbital radius, and 
>> ET would probably pick that design. The efficiency of solar cells increases 
>> in more intense sunlight,  some existing solar photovoltaic installations 
>> use a mirror or a Fresnel lens
>> ​ ​
>> to concentrate sunlight to up to 900 times normal earth intensity and aim 
>> it at a solar cell. One Dyson Sphere would produce 33 trillion times more 
>> energy than the entire human race uses now, and it would keep producing it 
>> for billions of years. And there is no reason ET couldn't make billions of 
>> Dyson Spheres in a very short amount of time, astronomically speaking. And 
>> yet we see nothing.
>>  
>>
>>> *​> ​and the overwhelming percentage of matter in dense configurations 
>>> is in stars that are hot and hard to access.*
>>>
>>
>> ​ET wouldn't even want to access the matter in stars because that's the 
>> source of the very power  they're ​trying to get at. 
>>  
>>  
>>
>>> ​> 
>>> *Even tearing up planets for materials is hard and energy intensive.*
>>>
>>
>> ​
>> Energy is not a problem, there is plenty of energy available near stars 
>> but you're right it's hard, at least its hard to do right now because we 
>> don't have Drexler style Nanotechnology, but we don't have it because some 
>> law of physics forbids it, we don't have it simply because of lack of 
>> engineering skill. But new skills can be acquired.  Brain surgery isn't 
>> hard if you know how and once we have Nanotechnology
>> ​ ​
>> building a Dyson Sphere will no longer be hard.
>>  
>>
>>> ​> 
>>> *I would argue there are simply scaling limits to the control or 
>>> abilities of intelligent beings.*
>>>
>>
>> ​You haven't argued it you've simply stated it.
>>
>> John K Clark​
>>  
>>
>
> I am simply proposing it. I have no particular proof. At some point though 
> any ETI/IGUS that attempts to do these things might be akin to a flea 
> climbing an elephant's butt with rape on its mind.  
>
> We are faced with a number of prospects. The first is there is some limit 
> to complexity that any intelligent being can manage. In this scenario there 
> would be intelligent life elsewhere, but they are unable to push into these 
> extreme hyper-tech areas. The second is that intelligent life is extremely 
> rare or maybe we are the only ones. This seems to go against some general 
> Copernican principle. The third is the biology itself is some sort of 
> spectacular fluke, maybe as a hard emergent process, that Earth is the only 
> biologically active planet in the entire universe.
>
> LC
>

*Another possibility is that ET's exist, but for whatever reasons have no 
motivation to build Dyson Spheres. In this scenario they could be plentiful 
or rare, but without interest in such a project or others which are 
comparable in scope. AG*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to