Posted on Feb 8, 2016
Fermi Paradox and the great filter: are we Ahead, Behind, Between or none of these?
4.74K
37
15
4
4
0
The Drake Equation estimates how many intelligent life species should be out there, Fermi Paradox asks why we haven't seen any, "The Great Filter" is the hypothesized solution: something keeps life from developing to the point where we would observe it. So: Are we past our filter? Or heading toward it? Or are there multiple filters?
http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html
xkcd.com/1377/
http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html
xkcd.com/1377/
Space
Threat
Physics
MC: Mass Communication Specialist
Science
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 5
5
5
0
Capt Richard I P. The Drake Equation is fallacious, because it's entirely contrived -- he simply picked what he thought was the best variables, and went with it. He wasn't being disingenuous, or trying to sell snake oil -- he did the best he could, with the given information he had at the time. Still...it's just that: contrived. Made up. It's one smart guy's best guess, but has no known basis in factual reality, because he had to essentially make up some of the variables. For example, the statistical probability that intelligent life will evolve given a certain set of circumstances. (In reality, insofar as we have empirical proof, intelligent life evolves 100% of the time on watery worlds within their stars' 'Goldilocks' zone. Problem is, we only have a sample of one.)
As for why we haven't observed life out there? There are several accepted theories, but I concur mostly with the simplest: the distances are too great. Any electromagnetic signals emitted by anyone(thing), travel at the speed of light. So a civilization that's 100k light years away that followed a similar path to technology (that would emit such signals), would likely have 'exploded' into hi-tech over a relatively short period of their looong development cycle...just like we did. Therefore, their signals are not yet anywhere near us.
Secondly, the energy required to cross those distances are, literally, astronomical. Until some civilization beats e=MC2, whatever form that takes (warp drives, Alcubierre bubbles, wormholes, whatever)...don't expect visitors any time soon. And that brings me to my last point:
Finally, there is NO REASON for an advanced civilization to come and visit us. Everything on earth, literally everything, every single atom, can be replicated with materials found in our own asteroid belt, likely millions and millions of times over. This is going to be true of ANY mature solar system. Aliens are never going to come here to take our water or resources simply because they're waayyy too abundant out there. If they ever did come, however, we'd best hope that they're benevolent -- to get here would require an energy source like nothing we've ever seen...and energy source is synonymous with weapon.
Having said all that? I'm just an armchair scientist, but I'm pretty good at math. Trillions of stars out there. Many will have no planets. Many will have 50 (or more). SOME of those planets are going to replicate conditions similar to earth. There will be billions of these. Not all of them will produce intelligent life, but if even an infinitesimal percentage of them do...well. It's a statistical IMPOSSIBILITY that there's not life out there.
As for why we haven't observed life out there? There are several accepted theories, but I concur mostly with the simplest: the distances are too great. Any electromagnetic signals emitted by anyone(thing), travel at the speed of light. So a civilization that's 100k light years away that followed a similar path to technology (that would emit such signals), would likely have 'exploded' into hi-tech over a relatively short period of their looong development cycle...just like we did. Therefore, their signals are not yet anywhere near us.
Secondly, the energy required to cross those distances are, literally, astronomical. Until some civilization beats e=MC2, whatever form that takes (warp drives, Alcubierre bubbles, wormholes, whatever)...don't expect visitors any time soon. And that brings me to my last point:
Finally, there is NO REASON for an advanced civilization to come and visit us. Everything on earth, literally everything, every single atom, can be replicated with materials found in our own asteroid belt, likely millions and millions of times over. This is going to be true of ANY mature solar system. Aliens are never going to come here to take our water or resources simply because they're waayyy too abundant out there. If they ever did come, however, we'd best hope that they're benevolent -- to get here would require an energy source like nothing we've ever seen...and energy source is synonymous with weapon.
Having said all that? I'm just an armchair scientist, but I'm pretty good at math. Trillions of stars out there. Many will have no planets. Many will have 50 (or more). SOME of those planets are going to replicate conditions similar to earth. There will be billions of these. Not all of them will produce intelligent life, but if even an infinitesimal percentage of them do...well. It's a statistical IMPOSSIBILITY that there's not life out there.
(5)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
SN Greg Wright Thanks for your detailed response! So agreed: the equation is made up, but it's still generally used since there isn't a much better way to estimate. The values used to plug in to get results can vary wildly, but non-zero values tend to produce the Fermi Paradox. And its common corollary: the Great Filter. What are your thoughts on that?
I can accept not being worthy of a visit. But any advanced civ should have gone through ha period of wild Electromagnetic emissions like we did. The link to the Wait but why does some interesting thought experiments on relative aging of planets and civilizations after universe inflation. Did you get a chance to take a look at that blog post? I think it's great.
I would prefer not to be visited/discovered. Much smarter men than I hold that preference too (Stephen Hawking) and I find it wise to follow their lead. I hugely oppose the idea of METI (Messages to Extra Terrestrial Intelligence). I agree they're not likely to want any of our resources (that I see as a holdover of our own perceptions of scarcity at our stage of development) but they might not take kindly to competition regardless of its competency ("an ant has no quarrel with a boot?").
I can accept not being worthy of a visit. But any advanced civ should have gone through ha period of wild Electromagnetic emissions like we did. The link to the Wait but why does some interesting thought experiments on relative aging of planets and civilizations after universe inflation. Did you get a chance to take a look at that blog post? I think it's great.
I would prefer not to be visited/discovered. Much smarter men than I hold that preference too (Stephen Hawking) and I find it wise to follow their lead. I hugely oppose the idea of METI (Messages to Extra Terrestrial Intelligence). I agree they're not likely to want any of our resources (that I see as a holdover of our own perceptions of scarcity at our stage of development) but they might not take kindly to competition regardless of its competency ("an ant has no quarrel with a boot?").
(1)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
Capt Richard I P. - Well, I believe that the Fermi Paradox is an interesting theory, but it's fundamentally flawed, being based in part on the Drake Equation. However, working within the confines (and the possibility that it's accurate -- I make no claim to surety, here) of it, I'd have to be firmly in the 'filter is behind us' camp -- we're rare. Which means 'they're' rare. And highly probably toooooo far away for us to notice each other yet...or even ever. You would, after all, have to be looking in precisely the right place at precisely the right time to observe any signals.
(1)
(0)
Or maybe it's because the universe is so incomprehensibly large, and we have observed such a tiny fraction of it, that the odds of us finding life so far (or it finding us) is just not high. It would be like landing on Mars, looking at a single speck of dust (or a fraction of one) and saying "there's no life on this planet!"
On a scientific level, space between stars and galaxies is just so large that assuming we are bounded by the speed of light, it may not be practical for deep inter-galactic travel. By the time you get there, the Universe would dead given the time dilation you experience at those speeds.
On a scientific level, space between stars and galaxies is just so large that assuming we are bounded by the speed of light, it may not be practical for deep inter-galactic travel. By the time you get there, the Universe would dead given the time dilation you experience at those speeds.
(4)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
There's an XKCD for that too: https://xkcd.com/638/
That's definitely one of the arguments (and a good one, especially if you add in other dimensions like in this comic). But the Drake Equation is well composed, and conservative numbers imply a likely radio-wave reception.... a lot of them.... and there have been exactly none.
That's definitely one of the arguments (and a good one, especially if you add in other dimensions like in this comic). But the Drake Equation is well composed, and conservative numbers imply a likely radio-wave reception.... a lot of them.... and there have been exactly none.
Warning: this comic occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors).
(1)
(0)
LTC Yinon Weiss
Capt Richard I P. - Despite all the progress we have made, I tend to believe that our understanding of the cosmos is so incomprehensibly small, that it would be difficult for us to even measure how far we have to go to understand even the true basics.
(3)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
LTC Yinon Weiss Good point. One thing that has repetitively proved true is any time we thought we were special, or had a really good grip on how things are, we were wrong.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
We only just recently discovered that there ARE other planets outside our solar system; we have not yet approached the point of being able to discover whether there is life on any of them.
When Orville and Wilbur first flew nobody envisioned the stealth bomber.
Have patience.
When Orville and Wilbur first flew nobody envisioned the stealth bomber.
Have patience.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
I first became aware of the Fermi Paradox through Ultimate Fantastic Four (Marvel Comics) strangely enough. It used the Fermi Paradox to justify Galactus the world eater.
The issue I've always seen is one of "big sky little planet."
Unless there is a specific need to travel to a set point in space (planet), why go there? Why fight a gravity well to get a resource that is likely much more abundant in space itself? That's compounded by distance and "communications." We've really only been able to communicate outside our own atmosphere for a couple hundred years. The closest planet is 10 light years away (20 year round trip with lightspeed travel).
Then look at where we are in relation to everything else. We're essentially on a backwater world, in the outer arm of a galaxy, outside the "core." It removes us so far from where other life would be "likely."
So.. were I to guess, we've got time (lots). We just haven't been sending out signals long enough for anyone else to hear. Likewise, we'll we'll probably hear someone else well before we encounter them. Universe is a big big place.
The issue I've always seen is one of "big sky little planet."
Unless there is a specific need to travel to a set point in space (planet), why go there? Why fight a gravity well to get a resource that is likely much more abundant in space itself? That's compounded by distance and "communications." We've really only been able to communicate outside our own atmosphere for a couple hundred years. The closest planet is 10 light years away (20 year round trip with lightspeed travel).
Then look at where we are in relation to everything else. We're essentially on a backwater world, in the outer arm of a galaxy, outside the "core." It removes us so far from where other life would be "likely."
So.. were I to guess, we've got time (lots). We just haven't been sending out signals long enough for anyone else to hear. Likewise, we'll we'll probably hear someone else well before we encounter them. Universe is a big big place.
(2)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS Did you take a look at the blog post? What do you thing about the thought experiment on relative aging after universe inflation?
Personally I'm not scared of Galactus, I'm scared of Reapers. Not so much the artistic embodiment from the game,but the concept. Lie dormant for millenia, harvest iterated knowledge and experience, return to dormancy- or better yet exploration elsewhere and periodic returns to harvest new knowledge and experience.
Personally I'm not scared of Galactus, I'm scared of Reapers. Not so much the artistic embodiment from the game,but the concept. Lie dormant for millenia, harvest iterated knowledge and experience, return to dormancy- or better yet exploration elsewhere and periodic returns to harvest new knowledge and experience.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Capt Richard I P. - I fall under Group 2, possibility 2 (and 3), but joke about #5, but #4 is a scary possibility as well.
"If" c really is the hard limit of our universe, I'm not worried about it. If there is a way to bypass it, then we're "food" and there's probably not a lot we can do (yet).
"If" c really is the hard limit of our universe, I'm not worried about it. If there is a way to bypass it, then we're "food" and there's probably not a lot we can do (yet).
(0)
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
Limits are made to be overcome, right? But as to the broadcasting... I agree with Carl Sagan.
“the newest children in a strange and uncertain cosmos should listen quietly for a long time, patiently learning about the universe and comparing notes, before shouting into an unknown jungle that we do not understand.”
“the newest children in a strange and uncertain cosmos should listen quietly for a long time, patiently learning about the universe and comparing notes, before shouting into an unknown jungle that we do not understand.”
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Capt Richard I P. - Unfortunately... I think our initial broadcasts were akin to a baby's screams. It would be nice to believe that our first radio transmissions were the greatest things we could shout to the cosmos... unfortunately, it was many decades before we were actively looking to the stars.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google