From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@www.aeiveos.com)
Date: Wed Aug 18 1999 - 13:33:31 MDT
> Anders Sandberg <asa@nada.kth.se> wrote:
> Larry Klaes <lklaes@bbn.com> writes:
>
> > They have detected in the disk of a galaxy the molecule of hydrogen,
> > considered an important component of the dark matter if it is of the
> > normal, ordinary type. Moreover, the molecular hydrogen is found
> > precisely in the amount needed to fill the missing-mass gap.
>
> Robert, what do you think of this? Is this bad news for the M-Brains
> as dark matter hypothesis, or have they just found evidence that they
> are sloppy eaters?
>
Ah, Anders, why don't you put me on the spot!
I've got the papers sitting on my printer and am going to read them
over the next few days. The interstellar gas explanation for the
missing mass had been made to me by one of the gravitational
microlensing astronomers in Jan '98. I think he may have had
more knowledge regarding the H2 story than I did.
If the gas does turn out to be as abundant as they argue it would
clear up some of the missing mass problem. It would not explain
the gravitational microlensing observations or the other evidence
very well though. In addition I think they only looked at 2
galaxies. So it is a stretch to extrapolate from that small
a sample to the universe.
Robert Freitas has made an argument (to me) that M-brains do not
harvest interstellar gas clouds because the mass density is too
low to make it profitable. So sloppy eating would not be the
source of the gas. However, I don't think this problem
(refueling from non-stellar sources) has been given the
attention that it deserves. My guess would be that the gas
is probably just leftovers from galaxy formation.
Of course, while I would be disappointed if we live in an
uninhabited galaxy (meaning intelligent life really is
a difficult process for the universe), then the up-side
is that all of the material and energy is *ours* for the
taking. The pain is that *we* are going to have to
come up with the solutions to all those "magic physics"
problems ourselves!
The publication of this type of result is one of the reasons to
sell M-brains to the engineers before you try to sell it to the
scientists (esp. astronomers). The scientists will be able to bury
you in reasons and hypothesis why the evidence argues against the
existence of M-brains. The engineers will simply look at
the blueprints and say, "I can build that." (paraphrasing
a song from Chorus Line). The nice thing is that if
I'm right about the dismantlement time for Mercury,
then we can get the M-brain built before the paper from
a scientist that "proves" they don't exist can get back
from the reviewers.
My general feeling is that if there are no M-brains out
there then we have a situation where
(a) evolution to our level is *very* difficult
or
(b) the singularity is universally fatal to civilizations
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:48 MST