From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul> Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 17:17:15 +0100 Archived: Sun, 20 May 2012 17:39:02 -0400 Subject: Re: Problems With von Neumann Replicators >From: Kentaro Mori <kentaro.mori.nul> >Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:56:21 -0300 >To: post.nul >Subject: Re: Problems With von Neumann Replicators >>From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul> >>Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:29:57 +0100 >>Subject: Problems With von Neumann Replicators >>So, if we're not the first intelligence to evolve, why haven't >>we already been wiped out by murderous advanced machines from >>space? That's a question I woke up with - but then re-thought >>some of Reynolds' more complex human-machine scenarios. >That's Fermi's Paradox. It was formulated almost as soon as >advances in cosmology established the Universe is billions of >years old, and that there are billions and billions of galaxies >as large or even larger than ours. >http://tinyurl.com/2hg2qn Hi Kentaro, Right, but Fermi was a child of his time (as we all are) and simply thought that any ETs - who are statistically likely to've evolved millions or billions of years ahead of us - would still be organic beings and recognizable as such. Many folk, notably the profs Stewart and Cohen. have pointed out that truly advanced beings are probably not still organic (because they don't have to be) and, due to their technology also don't even have to be visible unless they want to be. So the `paradox' probably doesn't exist. <snip> >We don't have any material resources which cannot be found >elsewhere in higher quantities and greater convenience for any >civilization capable of crossing light-years of distance to get >here. And even if we are a resource for our intelligence or >biological uniqueness, the fact we cannot see any obvious signs >of intelligente life in the Universe elsewhere -- besides the 'controversial' UFO evidence -- must mean they are either deliberately hiding or that they don't exist. Nope, think ypu've jumped the gun there. While I fully agree that minerals and even fuels seem to be readily (and more easily) available in molecular clouds, thereby obviating all those Sci-Fi themes of planetary invasion and conquest, the machine-based outriders of ET expansion (or research) might well be using bio-engineered `animals' as tools in their projects. I'm not alone in remarking that there's some evidence of such `animals' being abandoned here on Earth, either after sustaining damage or merely having outlived their `job'. And as to `signs of intelligent life in the Universe' - we just don't know what to look for, or how to analyse what we already see. At the moment we simply assume that all astronomical events are `natural' - that assumption could be wildy wrong. >It's interesting that such kind of questions remain open and yet >are not that widely recognized -- for instance, cosmology gives >us yet another puzzle, the faint young Sun paradox: >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faint_young_Sun_paradox <snip> Ha! That seems to say we either don't know the full story about stellar evolution (which is being indicated even now) - or maybe that the Gaia principle was able to grab hold of Earth's feedback mechanisms even earlier than we thought. Cheers Ray D Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp