OT: Japanese company trying moon landing today (appx 11amish E)
- Thread starter GoodOl'Rutgers
- Start date
Cool. We gotta speed up humanity's effort to spread ourselves out into the rest of the universe.
Hm. Unless we think doing so might draw the wrong sort of attention from more advanced galactic neighbors who, having come into their attention, view us as a food source.
I try to think ahead about this stuff.
Hm. Unless we think doing so might draw the wrong sort of attention from more advanced galactic neighbors who, having come into their attention, view us as a food source.
I try to think ahead about this stuff.
Just read up on why no broadcast right this minute.. projected landing time is 11:40AM eastern..
and I think.. just maybe.,. we haven't seen signs of intelligent life out there is either because we are alone.. or the most advanced.. or we cannot recognize intelligent life in all its forms.. or all intelligent life blows itself up or the universe eliminates it because it is all a simulation.
and I think.. just maybe.,. we haven't seen signs of intelligent life out there is either because we are alone.. or the most advanced.. or we cannot recognize intelligent life in all its forms.. or all intelligent life blows itself up or the universe eliminates it because it is all a simulation.
its a live presentation now.. looks like there will be a 40-minute period with no communication to the lander sometime before it lands and it should actually land around 12:40 eastern
There is a fantastic white-paper-like blog article out there on the internet somewhere that talks about extraterrestrial life very logically and intelligently. It's maybe more of a thought experiment than anything else. I read it over a decade ago I think, was blown away by it, but stupidly failed to note the URL.
And I've been forever unable to relocate it since, which is massively frustrating in moments like this where that link would be very on-point. The authors of that article concluded something not too dissimilar to what you just said.
Although it wasn't exactly a conclusion so much as a presentation of several potentially valid reasons why we haven't, so far as we know, met any intelligent life from elsewhere in the universe. They don't talk about simulation at all IIRC. But they do talk about distances, timing, and probabilities.
The super low probability of two species evolving separately (surviving all extinction events long enough to become advanced enough to detect life so very far away), combined with the vast distances between life-supporting worlds, and the requirement that the evolutionary timing must overlap some, all while being within close enough proximity to detect each-other... well, the already super low probabilities get awfully close to zero.
It's not that intelligent life hasn't existed, or won't eventually exist, elsewhere in the universe. That premise seems mathematically unlikely given just how unimaginably large the universe is.
It's just that all the perfect conditions necessary for intelligent life to find other intelligent life, given the vastness and duration of the universe, means the various evolved civilizations have negligible odds of detecting one-another.
At least that's how I remember the article. Wish I could find it (although it might prove how awful my memory really is).
Now they're saying they may have crashed on landing, because they had communication w/the lander until it landed, when comms were cut off. That would be too bad.
a little surprised we haven't trained Hubble (or an earth-based telescope) on the landing site to get images... maybe we have. Guess it is pretty small.. come to think of it, have never seen telescope photos of the old landing sites. It looks like we'd need a lunar orbit platform type telescope to get good photos... its just too far from earth orbit.
as for life out there.. yeah.. the vast distances and volume of space means it is likely out there somewhere... and "they" may even suspect they have found "us".. but in cosmic terms... what is the life of the earth? our solar system and star? our galaxy even.. and human life including the pre-intelligent days? a blip. Its nothing.
And that's why I find it so strange that it seems many of the same people who refuse to believe in "god" believe wholeheartedly in intelligent life out there.
as for life out there.. yeah.. the vast distances and volume of space means it is likely out there somewhere... and "they" may even suspect they have found "us".. but in cosmic terms... what is the life of the earth? our solar system and star? our galaxy even.. and human life including the pre-intelligent days? a blip. Its nothing.
And that's why I find it so strange that it seems many of the same people who refuse to believe in "god" believe wholeheartedly in intelligent life out there.
Last edited:
I never say "there is no God". And never say "there is a God".
Either way, in the absence of proof, it's a belief. And I've never felt compelled to form such beliefs.
I sometimes wonder, though, how humans could ever distinguish between a god and a hyper-advanced being from elsewhere in the universe (or from wherever) passing itself off as a god. If there is a God and that God involves itself in the creation of humans, then God clearly created me to be a skeptic.
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."
-- Thomas Jefferson
A
anon_ivydyf0amkzay
Guest
Are you possibly referring to this...? https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html
I figure it's about 50/50 if AI gets us before some killer virus does us in. But for sure, we're all gonna die. LOL
Yes, I believe that's it. Thanks. I've recorded that in a half dozen places. Hopefully I don't lose it again.
Tokyo company: ‘High probability’ spacecraft crashed on moon
MODS: Please move this to the AE board.. the ANCIENT ENIGMA board.
AI will create the killer virus... or kill all those who work on or discuss killer viruses.
Every time population comes up with AI it leads to same conclusion and why the first attempt (aside from forming own language) the project was shut down or rather delayed
I know I already replied to confirm that's the article to which I was referring. But I reread it again last night and was yet again struck by what a great article it is.
So, thanks again.
I recommend everybody take a moment to read it. I think that article is, among other things, a decent example of good casual writing that promotes ongoing thought about multiple possible conclusions without strongly advocating for any particular conclusion. Which seems a bit like a lost art these days.
Nowadays, it seems that much of what is casually written is hell-bent on promoting some predetermined preferred conclusion and spends most of its words advocating strongly for adoption of that conclusion. Which strikes me counter-productive to growth, either societal or personal.
Some conclusions are obviously necessary for pragmatic purposes (we must conclude what to eat for dinner or we'll starve to death). But that doesn't mean we have to accept any conclusion as permanent or perfect. That's the path to close-mindedness and stagnation (and to bitter ideological rigidity and polarization in many cases).
I think it's probably wise to refuse to form any conclusion about anything unless there's no reasonable way to avoid doing so. Can always form a conclusion later, if and when it becomes necessary. I'd prefer to just keep learning more in the meantime.
You're very welcome. Glad I could help. I agree it's an excellent read and recommend it as well.
