I think we can all agree that no alien civilization has made contact with us yet, but does this really mean we are alone in the galaxy?
Couldnt the explanation be just that our galaxy is so darn huge?
Established Member
I think we can all agree that no alien civilization has made contact with us yet, but does this really mean we are alone in the galaxy?
Couldnt the explanation be just that our galaxy is so darn huge?
Established Member
Originally Posted by Platinum Rhymer
With the rate of discoveries... I'd have to say that a shortage of planets isn't the reason.
Perhaps there aren't many habitable ones, but that is still on the short list, as our ability to spot them is still under development.
Robbo
Moderator
I can't recall who said it, but it went something like...
The fact that no other civilization has contacted us is proof that they are superiour.
I'm serious (sorta). Read the papers, watch the tv, listen to the radio. With all that's happening in Iraq, Darfur, London, and so on, would you want to talk to us?
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov
Moderation will be in purple.
Rules for Posting to This Board
Member
:-?
Well...I was wondering...if aliens could see us, do you think they'd want to help us out, or just leave us to our thing? I'm picturing them watching us like we watch animals eating each other on nature documentaries - its horrible to watch, and you'd want to help, but do you think they'd be bound by some code to just let us get on with it and not interfere?
Established Member
yup, the prime directive. inescapable facts of life from star trek.
taks
Established Member
That would be Calvin from Calvin & Hobbes, or, indirectly, Bill Watterson, who drew the comic. And the exact quote, If I'm remembering correctly, is
"One of the surest signs that there is intelligent life out there is the fact that it hasn't contacted us yet."
Established Member
If there were 50 highly advanced alien civilizations, they still could be separated by 4,000,000,000 stars on average...if there were 100, they could be separated by 2,000,000,000 stars
Established Member
In other threads we have looked at this. If only ONE civilization, travelling at 0.005 times the speed of light, explored the galaxy before they became extinct would be able to do so in 20,000,000 years. If the colonization crew was five times slower, they would have colonized the galaxy over and over again. Our time, is not unique. Us humans could throw rocks at other stars within a few generations. We could colonize the galaxy in a blink of a galactic eye.
My contention is that all intelligences commit suicide before this can happen.
Edited to spell galazy
Where are they? They are dead.
Established Member
Due to the Milky Way's violent past, dont you think no alien civilization (if they exist) have done that...atleast not yet.
I dont know I am just guessing.
Another question is has the Milky Way galaxy allowed enough time for life to evolve and populate the galaxy?
Established Member
Fermi's paradox can lead us to the conclusion that there are no star-travelling civilisations in the galaxy. But it's based on the assumption that an advanced civilsation is going to want to visit every single star in the galaxy. This may not be true. If there are millions of civilisations at our level of development, we may simply be too boring to come and look at.
An analogy: we haven't surveyed every single ant-hill in Olympic National Park. It would be feasible for us to do so, but we have other priorities, and what we would learn wouldn't be worth the effort.
I'm not saying this is what's going on in the galaxy, but it's possible.
Established Member
I agree with this, plus: many of us, even with a science background have a very hard time comprehending how far away everything in the galaxy really is. Also many people assume that advanced alien technology means they will magically be able to know who we are and where we are, and want to meet us. None of this takes into consideration what aliens might actually be like.
Established Member
1) They aren't there.
2) They aren't sufficiently advanced.
3) They simply haven't found us yet.
I tend to go with either option #2 or #3 just because I'm optimistic where life is concerned.
Established Member
I'd go with options #2 and #3 too.
"Fermi's paradox can lead us to the conclusion that there are no star-travelling civilisations in the galaxy." - Does it really?...I think its a combination of distance and time, has the Milky Way been habitable long enough for life to arise, evolve into a super advanced civilization and populate the galaxy?....thats if they want to populate the WHOLE galaxy, they could simply take what they need, and you dont need the whole galaxy just to survive.
Member
That's an important point. To take it even further, sufficiently advanced civilizations might end up much more difficult to detect than we ourselves are... possibly migrating from biological brains to compact computational substrates accomodating vast virtual spaces and requiring no physical elbow room whatsoever.
Order of Kilopi
Such a civilization will still need raw material with which to build more computers as they expand, so they move from star system to star system converting planets and asteroids to computer hardware leaving their stars to power them. This happened to our solar system too, but they noticed that we were somewhat intelligent so they left a computer simulation of us running in their computer after our system was converted. Some day we'll be sufficiently advanced to be told about it. Until then, we won't be meeting anyone because we're not real.
Member
Or... they could grow diamond film circuits, solar cells, nanotubes, and exotic hard materials such as ultrahard fullerenes and carbon nitrides, all using methane as a readily available carbon source. In other words, pretty much everything they could need for many billions of years might be readily available in thier own star system. They might decide to move on eventually as thier sun runs down, but I can easily picture a slow halting migration rather than a rapid colonization of the galaxy.
They might still be curious enough about the outside universe to send out an occasional probe, though.
I have to admit, that hypothesis might be more easily tested than mine. Everyone start looking for glitches in the matrix
Established Member
Actually, there has been some speculation along the lines that we exist in a simulation, and that the simulation has limits that could be exceeded.Everyone start looking for glitches in the matrix
One limit is the complexity of the simulation vs. the device it is running on. For example, if we are being simulated on a quantum computer, and we develop quantum computers of our own, then the simulating computer has to simulate something comparable in capacity to itself. Crash time.
The SF author Steven Baxter suggested another limit. We are in a simulation, and every time we increase our ability to probe the universe, the simulation has to include more detail. For cavemen, only the stars are simulated as lights in the sky. No need to add planets in other star systems or cosmic background radiation. We can see much more and in much more detail.
So in his story, a huge laser device in orbit generates a beam powerful enough to create a visible reflection from a planet in the Alpha Centauri system. Suddenly the simulation has much more to handle, and it's too much. Humanity watches the universe crash.
The bottom line is, if there is a simulation, we are probably nearing its limits. What happens then?
This applies to other Fermi Paradox solutions as well. We are in theory within a century or so of serious star travel of some sort. If something happens to stop this for all races, we may be about due.
Order of Kilopi
Hopefully they make backup copies of us fairly often. Then if there's a crash they can restore us after upgrading their hardware. Or they can restore us from a backup that was made before we developed the offending technology and intervene to make sure it doesn't happen. Maybe that's what happened to cold fusion.
Established Member
that's where vuja de comes from... a system reboot and you have to repeat the last few seconds before the previous backup. it is a well documented phenomena.
taks
Order of Kilopi
I think that a quantum computer could work within a quantum computer ad in finitum due to the fact that you would be using the physical properties of the quantum world.
I think that if there are aliens watching us then a prime directive would be taken very seriously. They would have taken a fair representative of all the species including humans and would just sit back and watch the world develop. What they could learn from watching the planet develop on its own might be priceless to them. And if this world destroys itself then they will still have people that they will have indoctrinated into their civilization so nothing(to them) will have been lost.
Established Member
The problem with Fermi's Paradox, IMO, is that it relies on four critical assumptions:
1.) Civilizations will expand and colonize other systems if it's possible.
2.) They will continue it until the Galaxy is completely filled.
3.) They will survive long enough until the Galaxy is completely filled.
4.) No matter when or where it happened--a million years ago or a billion--the evidence of their appearance should be here.
The first three are the major weaknesses. We have no idea if other civilizations will have an expansive impulse; even if they do, we have no idea if they'd be willing to undergo the tremendous effort to colonize other worlds. Finally, we're talking about maintaining a unity of purpose over millions of years, with a continuous and *methodical* development and expansion program. Think of how much our civilization has changed in even a thousand years, and think how much different it will be in another thousand (if we're still around); now compound that by spreading that civilization among a thousand different planetary systems, each with a different set of environmental and social problems, and all effectively isolated from each other. I simply cannot see that kind of continuity happening with any civilization.
Order of Kilopi
I disagree. Actually, I would turn your thesis around -- I would say all rebuttals of Fermi's Paradox rely on negation of these four assumptions.
The difference is that in order for Fermi's Paradox to be valid it is not necessary for "civilizationS" to be expansionist. All it takes is ONE civilization with expantionist desires and capabilities, and we have the paradox. All possible explanations of FP -- they lose interest in star travel, they move to microelectronic hardware, they kill themselves off, they obey Prime Directive, etc., -- rely on EVERY civilization that ever arose to do so. Which (assuming many did arise) I find far less probable than that one would choose to expand and succeed at it.
Who said anything about continuity or unity of purpose? Polynesians started out of Indonesia and colonized the entire Pacific ocean without ever remembering more than last five or six islands. A group (often fleeing a tribal dispute or even simply blown by a hurricane) would settle an island, and a couple generations later some of their grandchildren would settle another -- without a clue where their grandparents originally came from. The galaxy can be colonized in the same manner, with each planet keeping in contact -- or even aware of, -- only its immediate originators and colonies. I can easily see enough genetic (let alone political!) change that when two branches which separated a million years before meet, they'd think each other totally alien. And sure, many of these branches would, for various reasons, abandon expansion. Unless they ALL did so (very unlikely), they'd get overrun by those who do not.We have no idea if other civilizations will have an expansive impulse; even if they do, we have no idea if they'd be willing to undergo the tremendous effort to colonize other worlds. Finally, we're talking about maintaining a unity of purpose over millions of years, with a continuous and *methodical* development and expansion program. Think of how much our civilization has changed in even a thousand years, and think how much different it will be in another thousand (if we're still around); now compound that by spreading that civilization among a thousand different planetary systems, each with a different set of environmental and social problems, and all effectively isolated from each other. I simply cannot see that kind of continuity happening with any civilization.
Member
This is a good point. On the other hand, wouldn't we really only need a single "prime directive" following civilization in order to explain Fermi's Paradox? If a civilization that colonized the galaxy (or at least our corner of it) were to put our system under some sort of quarantine, then that would be it, right? No visitors, no calls...The difference is that in order for Fermi's Paradox to be valid it is not necessary for "civilizationS" to be expansionist. All it takes is ONE civilization with expantionist desires and capabilities, and we have the paradox. All possible explanations of FP -- they lose interest in star travel, they move to microelectronic hardware, they kill themselves off, they obey Prime Directive, etc., -- rely on EVERY civilization that ever arose to do so.
Established Member
Would the civilization that colonized the galaxy also just happen to be a "prime directive" civilization? That would be a stroke of luck.
An article I read suggested that there has been enough time since the galaxy was formed for a group of galactic civilizations to reach a consensus on leaving developing civilizations alone. This is without assuming FTL travel. That's something to hope for.
There's also a dark side: what if there is one xenophobic civilization? It might build self-reproducing probes that spread through the galaxy and wipe out any vulnerable young civilizations they detect.
Order of Kilopi
If the first transgalactic civilization where xenophobic that would explain why we haven't made contact with anyone. Each new civilization is wiped out when detected and xenophobes don't broadcast their locations. We should stop broadcasting now and send out interstellar arks so someone will survive if we've already been detected.
Established Member
I was thinking about this too and came to the opposite conclusion that in order for alien civilizations to abide by a "Prime Directive" we must assume FTL. My argument is this: If a spacefaring civilization is able to travel FTL then they may decide to avoid an inhabited planet because they probably have more freedom of movement. If a spacefaring civilization can't travel FTL then they may not have the luxury of bypassing a habitable planet due to fuel or supply issues. A Subluminal traveling ship might be able to bypass a planet but that might subject many more generations to wandering if it is a generation ship. But if they have already decelerated before they realize that the planet is inhabited (which is probable if the natives are pre-radio) then they may not have the option of bypassing.
Established Member
Platinum, you're thinking linearly. The stars in the galaxy are not strung out like a string of pearls. You need to think volumetrically, or at least 2 dimenstionally. If there are 50 advanced alien civilizations evenly distributed in the galactic disc then the straight line separation would be about 10,000 LY. If the distance between stars along that line was only 1 LY then the maximum number of intervening stars would be 10,000. Assuming a larger and more realistic separation between stars (10LY) would give a more realistic number of 1000 stars between any adjacent pair of 50 advanced alien civilizations. In any case, you are probably off by 6 orders of magnitude.
Established Member
Actually dont we need to think 3D? and shouldnt that make it even bigger....here is a post by A Thousand Pardons that basically sums up what I am trying to say.
"The Milky Way galaxy is about 100,000 lightyears across. That means that looking at it full-on, it would span an area of pi*50000^2 square lightyears. If those 1000 civilizations were evenly spread throughout that area, each would be in an area of pi*2500000 ly^2, which is a square whose side is of length 3000 lightyears. That's how far apart each civilization would be, ballpark, on average. Some would be closer, some farther, but we live in a not-too-dense neighborhood--plus, there's a third dimension involved as well. I don't think we've even been concentrating on trying to listen to stars that far away, have we?"
Established Member
That's why I said you should think volumetrically. However, at the densities suggested by 50/galaxy we can statistically ignore the z-axis of the galactic disc since it is only about 2000 LY thick and the separation of 50 civilizations would be at least 5 times that. I explained as much on the 11th page of this thread in this post.
Established Member
My best guess would be that if we have been discovered by another civilization then they would either wait until the right moment to make contact or they already have and are living among us (I know, Sci-Fi). I suppose there are other possibilities such as we just haven't been found yet or perhaps those civilizations haven't reached the levels needed to populate the entire galaxy (which I find extremely hard to believe). Perhaps it's far more difficult to travel around the galaxy than we seem to think. Another thing to consider is the amount of time it takes for a civilization to become advanced. Earth has been here, what, 4.5 billion years? How long has our species dominated again? And we're not anywhere near being considered advanced...
These things take time, and I for one do not buy into Fermi's Paradox--as convincing as it may sound. There may not be thousands upon thousands of civilizations out there (or maybe there are--who knows?), but I think it would be near impossible for us to be the only intelligence in this galaxy. That would be downright sad, if not pathetic.
Posting Permissions
