Re: CDR: Re: Liars Paradox Fermi paradox
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Sarad AV wrote: There has been much speculation around Fermi's famous question: Where are they? Why haven't we seen any traces of intelligent extraterrestrial life?. One way in which this question has been answered (Brin 1983) is that we have not seen any traces of intelligent extraterrestrial life because there is no extraterrestrial life because intelligent extraterrestrial life tend to self-destruct soon after it reaches the stage where it can engage in cosmic colonization and communication. This is the same conclusion as that of the Doomsday argument (i.e.: we are likely to perish soon), but arrived at trough a wholly different line of argument. So does the fermi paradox mean that there are no extra terrestrials.Can't we throw away this paradox like every other paradox? There is no paradox, only a unanswered question. When one is faced with a paradox it is usually more helpfull not to ask what is 'wrong with it' but rather 'what mistake in assumption have I made'. In this case the assumption is that we've covered all the potentials and that we understand what a alien civilization would do (even though we have not even come close to reaching that technology). This 'paradox' is only an example of our curiosity -and- our hubris. There is at least one other alternative, of course my own favorite... As technology increases the rate of increase increases (the famous spike or whatever you want to call it). The way the curve is usually drawn is a straight exponential. However I believe this is wrong. I believe that the rules of the cosmos are simple and limited, and that the total number of things that can be done with such a set is limited as a result. Additionaly there are many 'impossibility theorems' that set other limits. So the technology growth curve should actually be a tanh() sort of shape. The question is: Once a civilization reachs the upper asymptote of the curve (in other words they learn pretty much all they can learn) what do they do with it? In particular, do the totality of laws and effects allow the creation of other cosmoses? Are the physical rules of those cosmoses fixed, decidable, or random? What are the results of each of those choices? When the cosmos is generated does it 'enclose' the generator or is it a 'seperable effect in time-space' (in other words I'm here and the cosmos 'bubble' is over 'there' at least for a while). My view summed up into something like Clarke's Law: Any civilization suitably advanced creates it's own custom cosmoses and moves in. -- We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
Re: CDR: Re: Liars Paradox Fermi paradox
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Mike Rosing wrote: On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Sarad AV wrote: So does the fermi paradox mean that there are no extra terrestrials.Can't we throw away this paradox like every other paradox? It's easier to assume we don't know what we're looking for. That's not a paradox at all. If you measure the same thing under different conditions, or worse, measre different things under what appear to be the same conditions, you have a paradox. Sorry, that's not a paradox. It does directly address -your assumption the conditions are the same-. What it -actually- implies is that there is one or more unknown parameters you are -not- controlling. Hence, the conditions are -not- the same. A paradox is when you have two or more sets of assertions built from the same axioms. Each can be shown to be 'true'. Each leads to a -different- result or conclusion when, the results -should- be the same. -- We are all interested in the future for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. Criswell, Plan 9 from Outer Space [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ssz.com www.open-forge.org
