From: bbrown@transcient.com
Date: Thu Dec 09 1999 - 09:07:35 MST
"Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury@www.aeiveos.com> wrote:
> If we assume 10^26 "operating" minds / 10^10
OK, why 10^26 and not some other number?
> Hmmmm... Perhaps thats yet another reason interstellar nanoprobe
> colonization doesn't occur -- a shotgun blast of high velocity
> nanoprobes through an MBrain makes quite a mess. It doesn't
> really damage them, but when they have to restore 10^12 "running"
> copies from the backup storage, it gets them *really* pissed.
Now there you go again. A relativistic nanoprobe caries enough energy to melt
a few cubic meters of shielding, but MBrains are supposed to have hundreds (or
maybe thousands) of kilometers of radiator systems between their computronium
and the outside universe. Even the high-performance systems I favor could
easily afford a kilometer or two of shielding. Since even the most energetic
secondary radiation isn't going to penetrate more than a few hundred meters of
solid matter, that means that impacting nanoprobes are no threat at all.
Besides, do you really think an SI is going to be that stupid of a target?
For a relatively trivial mass/energy investment it could surround itself with
a network of sensors and directed energy weapons capable of eliminating such
objects long before they impact its surface. Its going to want to do that
anyway to protect against more substantial threats (like large relativistic
objects), so why not invest a little extra effort to be thorough about it?
Billy Brown, MCSD
bbrown@transcient.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:06:01 MST