Re: Practical Cosmology Symposium--Five Papers Now Online

From: Mark Walker (mail@markalanwalker.com)
Date: Mon Jun 10 2002 - 13:25:27 MDT


----- Original Message -----
From: "Hal Finney" <hal@finney.org>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: Practical Cosmology Symposium--Five Papers Now Online

> I haven't had a chance to read all of the papers, but I've looked at the
> first few paragraphs of some and skimmed others. Many of them discuss
> the Fermi paradox but they mostly take a curiously nearsighted view.
>
> The Fermi paradox seems to be generally expressed in galactic terms.
> Why hasn't our galaxy been taken over by aliens? With all the stars in
> the galaxy, surely one or more besides our own should hold intelligent
> life, which can then sweep through the galaxy in a million years or less.
> Nick's paper looks at the local supercluster and implicitly assumes
> that it is unoccupied.
>
> But really, the Fermi paradox is worse than this, in that it goes beyond
> one galaxy. What about all the other galaxies we can see? Are they
> devoid of intelligent life as well?
>

I agree with you Hal. I made this same discovery as I was researching my
contribution for the symposium. (How's that go? "Small minds think alike?)
Milan and I are thinking about co-authoring a paper on the subject. Below is
part of something I sent to SL4 on April 30th:

Relatedly, while writing this I realized that a small but illuminating paper
might be

written on the idea of a "Fermi Equation". The idea of course is an equation

like the "Drake Equation" but with a difference. Here is a very rough stab

at it:

The Fermi Equation

N = N* fp ne fl fi fm fd

N: The number of civilizations that launch spaceships (or probes) that reach

Earth by

April 2002.

N*: Number of stars that our within traveling distance of the earth. (See

below)).

fp: represents the fraction of stars that have planets around them.

ne: represents the number of planets per star that are capable of sustaining

life.

fl is the fraction of planets in ne where life evolves

fi is the fraction of fl where intelligent life evolves

fm is the fraction of fi that have the technical means to launch spaceships

capable of reaching earth.

fd is fraction of fm that have the desire to launch spaceships to reach

earth.

Where are the colonizers, the explorers, and the solarformers? An answer to

this must invoke a bottleneck explanation. Somewhere in the evolution of

inorganic matter to a technologically advanced civilization there is at

least one bottleneck that is not immediately obvious, for if it were obvious

there would be no Fermi Paradox. (See Brin's "The Great Silence" and R.

Hanson's "The Great Filter"). Bottlenecks can be broken down into one of

the parameters of the Fermi Equation. The bottleneck then will be

attributable to an associated science. For convenience sake we will use

three divisions: The natural sciences (physics, chemistry, and cosmology,),

the biological sciences (botany, zoology, genetics, etc.) and the social

sciences (economics, psychology, sociology). Let us then look at each of the

variables:

N = 0 We have not been visited by aliens.

N* = Number of stars that our within traveling distance of the earth. (See

below)

fp Clearly a bottleneck could be attributable to a lack of planets available

for life to develop on. The discovery of a number of large planets has

assuaged fears that solar systems with planets might be a rarity.

Ne: It is obviously possible that a significant bottleneck may be discovered

here at some point, for example, many of the planets that have been

discovered thus far are large and in close orbits to their suns suggesting

that it might be difficult for earth-sized e planets to establish themselves

in the appropriate orbital radius. However, nothing so far says that we

should expect that fp is zero, indeed, quite the opposite.

fl: the process of getting life started is very difficult (blame it on

biology)

fi: the process of getting intelligence started is very difficult. (blame

it on psychology)

fm: the technical means to master space travel is much harder than it looks,

or there is a Galactic club that forbids travel to undeveloped planets like

earth. (Blame it on sociology).

fd: Perhaps many species have the means to travel to earth but none have the

desire. (Economics? Sociology? Psychology?)

Re: N* Originally [I was] thinking of just

following

Tipler in his paper on the Fermi paradox to get the numbers for N* but I

realized that Tipler made a huge

assumption in limiting N* the stars of this galaxy, about 200 billion.

Tipler calculates very

conservatively that it would take 300 million years to colonize the entire

galaxy. But what is to say that there cannot be intergalactic travel? If we

figure that older civilizations might have had say a five billion year head

start then N* must be "astronomical" (as it were) in size. To figure it out

we would

need an estimate of a reasonable maximum speed that a spaceship (or one of

Tipler's Von Neumann probes) could travel. Whatever N* turns out to be it

will be huge, which means that

at least one of the other variables in the Fermi equation must be pretty

small indeed. The problem of course is the "just one problem". It would take

only a single civilization to pass through the bottle neck and colonize the

universe (given enough time). I think that our universe is still a "buyers

market" should seem as perplexing as if one discovered life on a planet

(like ours) confined to a single continent.

Mark

Dr. Mark Walker
Research Associate (Philosophy), Trinity College, University of Toronto
Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Evolution and Technology,
(www.transhumanist.com)
Editor-in-Chief, Transhumanity, (www.transhumanism.com)
Home page: http://www.markalanwalker.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:43 MST