The Fermi Paradox -- Where is everybody?

Captain Suave

Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris.
4,861
8,214
If you want to start traveling much greater than 0.9c or so, that's where mass (and thus energy) start to increase in a way that makes traveling at these velocities seem nigh impossible because at some point dust particles carry the energy of bombs.

Even stray hydrogen atoms can cause problems, and there are a whole lot of them. A "modest" 0.5c means the interstellar medium is coming towards you at 150 million m/s. Whatever shielding you've got evaporates over enough time (though perhaps not fatally so for "short" trips).

 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Kharzette

Watcher of Overs
5,027
3,672
You might need a mile or so of ice stacked on the front and maybe making it pointed like a needle at the front will help? They did that for the light huggers in one of the Alistair Reynolds books.

But yea that 22 year figure I got includes slowing down. 35 years to get to M87 to check out the ginormous center etc.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Scoresby

Trakanon Raider
784
1,445
The arguments that a sustained 1g acceleration gets you to near relativistic speeds is valid. What is being ignored is the amount of fuel to do that is astronomically large. Lets assume you can make this craft impossibly small (1000 kg) traveling at 0.5C has almost 14 million Terajoules of kinetic energy or 66 times the Tsar Bomba (keep in mind that weighed 27,200 kg by itself, admittedly the nuclear fuel weighs less...but you also will not see a 100% conversion of the energy into thrust). Chemical energy sources (rockets) are this exponentially worse as the fuel itself has significant weight (you need fuel just to accelerate fuel, your craft is 99.999999999...% fuel). Move up to 0.9C and the original energy requirement is now 8x more (0.99C is 39x more). There are not light sail solutions that will generate the sustained 1g acceleration required, this will also decay as you move away from the source. After all that is said, multiple it by 2 as you have to slow down.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

pharmakos

soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
<Bronze Donator>
16,306
-2,235
Even when you factor in a good 2000 years of butthurt colonists, tribalism, warfare, dark ages, renaissance, and re-industrialization before the daughter colonies were able to send seedships out of their own, that's STILL barely a blip on the cosmic timetable and it would still put the total expansion at around 25 million years. I'm sure 50 million year figure accounts for the occasional galactic war and waves of genocide.


Worf.

Khorum, the fact that you're still here explaining over and over again the same answers to the same repeated objections, props. You have far more dedication and patience than myself
 
  • 1Worf
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users

maskedmelon

Orator of Superfluous Nothings
1,893
2,952
In Mayan Astrology, according to his birthdate, Albert Einstein's sign was "Yellow Cosmic Sun," the 260th of their 260 unique signs, THE "big deal" sign in their zodiac, meant to represent ultimate enlightenment and eternal wisdom and etc etc. Always kind of blew my mind.

Fuck yes, I'm a Yellow Overtone Star ⭐️

I empower in order to beautify
Commanding art
I seal the store of elegance
With the overtone tone of radiance
I am guided by the power of intelligence
I am a galactic activation portal enter me.

What an extraordinarily edifying metaphysic assessment. Any fellow glactic gateways out there care to engage with another avatar of beauty, intelligence and creativity?
 
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 user

pharmakos

soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
<Bronze Donator>
16,306
-2,235
Fuck yes, I'm a Yellow Overtone Star ⭐



What an extraordinarily edifying metaphysic assessment. Any fellow glactic gateways out there care to engage with another avatar of beauty, intelligence and creativity?

Yeah I'm a Yellow Planetary Human, which is also a portal day. Let's start a new thread if we wanna get into it all tho Haha. :)
 
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 user

Sentagur

Low and to the left
<Silver Donator>
3,825
7,937
Well i am either a Red Magnetic Dragon or a Dwarf Paladin, in either case this is not the worst derail i have seen but its out there!
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 users

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
7,983
9,711
Yep. It just sucks that, because of our own mortality, those of us that actually care the most about this stuff won't be able to see it come to fruition.
You're always born at the wrong time. The Age of exploration would have been wonderful to live in (assuming you weren't a peasant because farming efficiency was sucking donkey dicks at the time and too many people had to be), but it's passed. And the Age of space is coming, but it will really kick off when we're old geezers and lift-off would break our bones.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
I think of all the generations we're one of the luckiest.

We're right in the middle of a technological revolution, but we don't have to deal with the horrible ramifications of it yet.

Just being alive to have witnessed the internet blossom, and having been a first order participant in it, if you stop to consider it, is astounding. Radio and Television were both fairly mild compared to it, they were variations of a theme. The internet has the same sorts of social influence as guttenberg did.

That would be enough by itself, but the advancements that it's spurred in medicine, computing, and agriculture are at least equal. The medical revolution may wind up being even more important.

The age of exploration would have sucked donkey balls. Even if you were the captain, you were riding across an ocean on a leaky wooden boat with a conscripted crew of murderous degenerates who probably had scurvy and for sure had syphillis of various stages. Just to go look at a patch of dirt where the brown native might or might not try to kill you. Much more interesting to read about! Fortunes were made and I'm sure it was exciting. There is some excitement in my life that is -too- exciting!

For so much of human existence your life has been your parents life with minor alterations. It's weird that the world my grandfather grew up in was so radically different than mine. And it really was, it's not just cosmetic differences. It happens during periods of history, but it is not normal.
 
Last edited:
  • 4Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 4 users

yerm

Golden Baronet of the Realm
6,082
15,662
You're always born at the wrong time. The Age of exploration would have been wonderful to live in (assuming you weren't a peasant because farming efficiency was sucking donkey dicks at the time and too many people had to be), but it's passed. And the Age of space is coming, but it will really kick off when we're old geezers and lift-off would break our bones.

People say this all the time, but it fails to realize every time feels the same way. A relatively miniscule number of people are pushing the boundaries, most are watching at best. Few people actually went on the voyages to discover new lands. Only a few hunted for fabled cities, or ventured into the unknown to proselytize, or mapped to the west coast, etc. In recent times, we developed undersea tech and have mapped ocean depths and sea lanes, sent some folks into space, etc. But very few do it.

The real analogy to the bursting into space colonizing would be something like the quakers coming to the americas, or like the late 1800s and the push west. Well after the age of exploration and discovery, the masses finally joined the movements. If you want to be among the likes of the discoverers, circumnavigaters, cartographers... that is now. The soviets "discovered America" and the USA "circumnavigated the globe" already in the space race. We already have the charter companies phase started, eg spacex. We can push the bounds of science and make space firsts, ourselves, in the time we are born in... just don't wear a sexist shirt or let google draw you afterwards.

In hundreds of years when settlers head into space, they will look back at us wishing they had been at the start or toward their future for when people leave the solar system. Maybe far into the future folks will pine over missing our phase of early discovery and look forward to new galaxies.

Or maybe liberalism will great filter us instead. Did you know that since Earth is on the very inner edge of the habitable ring, most habitable worlds would be relatively further from their stars? Also, the prediction is life is more probable with weaker stars? This means space colonisation is another form of milk drinking by light skinned shitlords who want to disenfranchise black people and we should redirect money from nasa towards reparations.
 
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 user

Scoresby

Trakanon Raider
784
1,445
When you say life is more probable with weaker stars I assume you mean red dwarfs and mean this due to their long life (trillions of years vs 10-12 billion of the sun) and being vastly more common than other stars (>70% of all stars). The downside is the habitable zone is super close to them. This means you have a year (revolution) every 7-earth days. The planet is tidally locked to the star so one side is always sunny and the other is in permanent darkness. They are also prone to flares and variable output (like 40% +/-). So yeah, there is a habitable zone where liquid water exists and there and they are common and ultra long-lived, BUT it's a wildly different environment than anything we're accustomed to with some extreme conditions that would annihilate humans if we lived on one.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
7,983
9,711
People say this all the time, but it fails to realize every time feels the same way.
Which is why I said "you're always born at the wrong time".

Except probably in the prehistoric times, where cultural and technological changes required dozens/hundreds of generations to occur. Then, you would be born at the wrong time, but never realize it.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

khorum

Murder Apologist
24,338
81,363
In hundreds of years when settlers head into space, they will look back at us wishing they had been at the start or toward their future for when people leave the solar system. Maybe far into the future folks will pine over missing our phase of early discovery and look forward to new galaxies.

Or maybe liberalism will great filter us instead. Did you know that since Earth is on the very inner edge of the habitable ring, most habitable worlds would be relatively further from their stars? Also, the prediction is life is more probable with weaker stars? This means space colonisation is another form of milk drinking by light skinned shitlords who want to disenfranchise black people and we should redirect money from nasa towards reparations.

LOL the only "settlers" we'll be sending anywhere in interstellar space will be digitized human uploads living in a heavily shielded computing substrate roughly the size and weight of a coke can.

__MAYBE__ they'll bring a few million frozen embryos with them, if their energy budget is flush and they can afford to accelerate a massive "sweeper mass" heavy asteroid a full AU ahead of their ship to absorb interstellar impacts. But that would be almost as wasteful as sending full sized humans. The best way to mitigate the impact risks of travelling through a dust cloud at .25c is to launch MILLIONS of tiny attritible seedships with super light payloads. They just need the minimum capacity to build the drones and landing craft from materials and resources left over from the sweeper mass.

But if a civilization can achieve post-physicality, then there's no reason to "downgrade" to less efficient physical states that need to directly metabolize resources, shit it out, have babies, raise them and die after spending 99% of its existence on maintenance. Once a species builds a more efficient version of itself, it can more easily maximise local energy and progress up the Kardashev scale---eventually building solar collectors to power their computing substrates, then converting the rocky planets in their solar system for bigger and faster computing substrates.

Eventually they would crowd their sun with so much energy capture infrastructure that it would be for all intents and purposes a dyson swarm. Dyson swarms start ad hoc at first so are essentially suboptimal, so eventually they would knit the swarm's components into a solid shell, a Dyson Sphere.

And once you have a dyson sphere, you can just selectively open billions of little apertures on ONE hemisphere of it to create a Shkadov Thruster:



Once they can build a Shkadov Engine, they don't need colony ships---it can sustain acceleration indefinitely and they can "steer" by opening and shutting apertures on the opposite hemispheres. The sun's magnetosphere would protect them from anything too small to intersect and redirect from impacting the shell.
 
Last edited:
  • 4Like
  • 1Picard
Reactions: 4 users

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
7,983
9,711
And it would be very, very obvious.

(which means no one's doing it. Yet)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Cybsled

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
16,610
13,118
If they were doing it. Which leads to a couple conclusions:

1) No one out there is capable of doing it
2) We're assuming these are "inevitable" apex developments, but the reality is they aren't

Honestly it could be a little of 1 and 2, but trying to assume stuff like Dyson Spheres and Shkadov Engines are some inevitable end game for a technological civilization is kind of arrogant, because it makes a presumption that we "know" everything.

It would be like a caveman trying to theorize what future state technology in the 21st century would look like. We create what we presume to be plausible scenarios with the information we have at hand.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Picard
Reactions: 2 users

Kuro

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
8,420
21,454
If we abandon our physical bodies how will we use advanced technology to give ourselves giant penises. This goes against the core dream of mankind
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

AngryGerbil

Poet Warrior
<Donor>
17,781
25,896
The missing link between the soup and life is in my opinion the greatest mystery that we haven't solved. I mean, I can picture having very complex structures created during early earth, and you may even reproduce that in a lab, but at what point do these molecules start having hunger, or defense against other molecules, etc ? If we completely manufacture from the bottom a procaryote, will it suddenly lives ? or just be an inert mass of molecules ? That puzzles me a lot

Agreed.

Watch this if you have a few dollars to spend:


He starts out by examining the idea that 'Life' is actually not truly defined. Sort of like 'Pornography', it exists in that "I know it when I see it' realm and is not exact. Are viruses 'Life' or are they simply complex reproducing molecules? They do not metabolize and they do not possess germ cells but they DO reproduce themselves. So are they Life or aren't they?

He talks about how we might puzzle this out. We approach the question from both the Top Down and the Bottom Up at the same time.

We can try to puzzle out how we can deconstruct the molecules and elements and atoms of Life in order to understand how it came to be, but we must also puzzle it out from a the view of what environments and pressures might have changed molecules so as to behave like Life.

He talks about the Miller-Urey experiment and how it formed our modern idea of the Primordial Soup, but also that there are some 'species' of Clays that can reproduce themselves. And also how the bottom of the Ocean, rather than a warm pond on the surface, might have been the true origin of Life due to the core warmth and pressures found there and the age of the fossils found in those environments.

He doesn't have any real solid answers for us, but he does thoroughly explain the path of exploration that we've traveled so far and how me might further ourselves down this path in the future.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users

AngryGerbil

Poet Warrior
<Donor>
17,781
25,896
But none of it matters because Jesus loves us "More than the Angels".

Whatever the fuck that means.
 
  • 1Dislike
  • 1EyeRoll
  • 1Picard
Reactions: 2 users

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
7,983
9,711
And also how the bottom of the Ocean, rather than a warm pond on the surface, might have been the true origin of Life due to the core warmth and pressures found there and the age of the fossils found in those environments.
It's still in debate, as the last "pre-biotic" chemical pathways rely on alternating wet/dry environments. You can create RNA bases from scratch using only simple compounds available in an early earth environment, but currently only if you have drying spells during the reactions.

About everyone thinks the depth of the oceans are probably where most of the original evolution occured, but the kickstarter for those might have sunk from the surface.
 

TheBeagle

JunkiesNetwork Donor
8,534
29,408
But none of it matters because Jesus loves us "More than the Angels".

Whatever the fuck that means.
We've been having a great discussion for 5 pages and then you toss out a "god damn Christians suck, amirite guys!?" non-sequitur completely out of nowhere.

Why is that? Are you so insecure in your non-belief that you have to shoe horn it into every conversation? Not much different than TDS suffering liberals at this point. Oh that's right, most of those idiots are atheist as well. Hmmmm, weird.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Truth!
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 3 users