From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@www.aeiveos.com)
Date: Wed Jul 28 1999 - 11:35:31 MDT
> Alintelbot@aol.com wrote:
> I have no idea either, but I would suspect it's because of the whole "race"
> mentality that's been associated with space here on Earth (i.e. Apollo). I
> don't think the posts that cling so voraciously to nanotech (to the point of
> redefining what an interstellar voyage is for no sensible reason whatsoever)
> have much to do with aliens; instead, they're projections of what might
> happen to _us_.
In arguing against AI or Nanotech, you have to argue against convergent
evolution. There are numerous examples on Earth for convergent evolution
(eyes and wings for example), since the advantages they provide demonstrate
strong selective pressures. I would argue strongly that since the
"limits of physical laws" provide the ultimate constraint, the path
for long-lived civilizations is to evolve to these limits. Since
nanotech particularly and AI (within nanotech computational structures)
seem to be at such limits, I would argue that most, if not all
technological civilzations reach these limits. Is it feasible for
technological civilizations to attempt things (such as interstellar
colonization) before these limits? Yes, certainly. However, the
period of time at these "immature" development stages, relative to
the length of time at the "mature" development stages is brief,
so we can expect a majority of activities to occur at the limits of
convergent evolutionary paths.
When considering "what *might* happen to us", it is useful
to ask "what *are* the limits", and are the barriers to reaching
those limits short relative to galactic or planetary time scales?"
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:36 MST