Do you believe we are alone in the universe?

The universe is far, far, far too big and ancient a place to reasonably rule out life elsewhere. Even if the galaxy is currently lacking intelligent life other than our own (and I'm not convinced it is - our expectations of what intelligent life should be doing with itself is, obviously, prejudiced toward our own ideals), I don't think it was nor will be. I'm also much more optimistic about FTL.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure. But, by the same token, if we're positing things like perfect replication, then we no longer need to start harvesting anything. We have the technology to make the planet a perfect paradise for everyone.

Not unless we stop replicating humans. We're running out of space and no amount of perfect replication is going to fix that problem all by itself. We're going to need Mars and other planets to live on. We're going to need to harvest planets and asteroids to furnish the needs of our expanding race.

So, again, why are we suddenly deciding, "Hey, yeah, we've got everything we could possibly need or want at our fingertips, let's dump all try to send probes to other solar systems for fun"?

We aren't, but we're not talking about us. We're talking about aliens and what THEY might do. You can't ascribe human motivations to them, as those motivations will almost certainly be at best flawed, and at worst useless.

 

[Hussar]

Or maybe just to see if you can do it. Or maybe to see if it's really as cold as you thought it was. Or maybe... Who knows what would motivate an alien species? Not you. Not me.



You're overlooking Mork's Law of Telelportinamics and Alf's Skizzblix. Those get around our issues.

Seriously man, there's a ton that we don't know and there could be work-arounds those issues that we haven't discovered yet.

True. And I might win the lottery tomorrow. But, we're talking about what is, not what we wish things to be. And, as far as we know, right now, there's no "get out of physics free" cards in the offing. The speed of light (in a vacuum) is absolute. The third law of thermodynamics applies. Even Shasharak's example of bacteria isn't really valid because those bacteria now are not the same as the bacteria then - they have evolved. There is NO perfect replication. It just cannot happen. Not over the long term anyway.

Not unless we stop replicating humans. We're running out of space and no amount of perfect replication is going to fix that problem all by itself. We're going to need Mars and other planets to live on. We're going to need to harvest planets and asteroids to furnish the needs of our expanding race.



We aren't, but we're not talking about us. We're talking about aliens and what THEY might do. You can't ascribe human motivations to them, as those motivations will almost certainly be at best flawed, and at worst useless.

Again, this is a myth. We cannot possibly fix our population problems by colonization. You cannot possibly move enough people off planet faster than reproduction will replace them. It isn't possible. The energy required to get those people to an off world colony is so great that you simply can't do it.

Look, if colonization was possible to relieve population pressures, we would have done it on Earth. Yet, funnily enough, despite having these huge land masses in North and South America, and a couple of centuries of exporting our people out of countries, country populations have never declined. It's not like England ran out of people. It just doesn't work. You can't do it fast enough.

Put it this way. The world population today is growing at about 83 million people per year. Give or take. How much energy would it take to move even 10% of that off world and keep them alive on Mars? And, remember, you haven't even scratched the surface of population growth at this point. 10% reduction? Whoopee. You could ship nearly 10 MILLION people a year to Mars and it would make basically no difference in world population growth.

It's just not possible.

Which means that populations will have to reduce on their own. If we cannot control that, we are not going to resolve it with a thousand year plan to terraform Mars.

Look, I want to be wrong. I really do. I'm a GIANT SF nerd. I love SF. Far more than I like fantasy. But, if we're going to talk about actual reality, we can't start positing impossibilities.

 

[Maxperson]

True. And I might win the lottery tomorrow. But, we're talking about what is, not what we wish things to be. And, as far as we know, right now, there's no "get out of physics free" cards in the offing. The speed of light (in a vacuum) is absolute. The third law of thermodynamics applies. Even Shasharak's example of bacteria isn't really valid because those bacteria now are not the same as the bacteria then - they have evolved. There is NO perfect replication. It just cannot happen. Not over the long term anyway.

See, if you just added an "At our level of understanding" your claims there wouldn't be a problem. However, since you are declaring an absolute without the foggiest idea of whether or not it really is an absolute, there is an issue going on.

At our level of understanding, perfect replication cannot happen. That's far different from it actually being unable to happen. Until we know everything or pretty close to it, we won't be able to be 100% certain like you are claiming.

Again, this is a myth. We cannot possibly fix our population problems by colonization. You cannot possibly move enough people off planet faster than reproduction will replace them. It isn't possible. The energy required to get those people to an off world colony is so great that you simply can't do it.

We don't have to. Moving some off to populate other places increases our survival chances and allows us to keep expanding, even if we cease to expand on the home world. Regardless, we will have to move one day. It's inevitable. If for no other reason than the Earth will one day be engulfed by the Sun, and long before that happens we will fry to a crisp. The lack of resources will drive us outward long before then, though.

 

[Shasarak]

True. And I might win the lottery tomorrow. But, we're talking about what is, not what we wish things to be. And, as far as we know, right now, there's no "get out of physics free" cards in the offing. The speed of light (in a vacuum) is absolute. The third law of thermodynamics applies. Even Shasharak's example of bacteria isn't really valid because those bacteria now are not the same as the bacteria then - they have evolved. There is NO perfect replication. It just cannot happen. Not over the long term anyway.

There is no perfect replication. There is just an organism that has existed for over a billion years. Billion.

So, yeah Newton.

Look, if colonization was possible to relieve population pressures, we would have done it on Earth. Yet, funnily enough, despite having these huge land masses in North and South America, and a couple of centuries of exporting our people out of countries, country populations have never declined. It's not like England ran out of people. It just doesn't work. You can't do it fast enough.

I thought you lived in Japan?

 

[Hussar]

See, if you just added an "At our level of understanding" your claims there wouldn't be a problem. However, since you are declaring an absolute without the foggiest idea of whether or not it really is an absolute, there is an issue going on.

At our level of understanding, perfect replication cannot happen. That's far different from it actually being unable to happen. Until we know everything or pretty close to it, we won't be able to be 100% certain like you are claiming.

And, again, I might win the lottery tomorrow. But, that's also pretty unlikely. Unless we are completely and utterly wrong about our understanding of the universe, I'm going stand by what I said.

We don't have to. Moving some off to populate other places increases our survival chances and allows us to keep expanding, even if we cease to expand on the home world. Regardless, we will have to move one day. It's inevitable. If for no other reason than the Earth will one day be engulfed by the Sun, and long before that happens we will fry to a crisp. The lack of resources will drive us outward long before then, though.

Again, nope. Those moved offworld will be dependent on resources from Earth for generations. If Earth's population continues to expand and we bugger the Earth, then a Mars colony or any other colony for that matter, will die within a generation at the most. Heck, the Andromeda galaxy will rip apart our galaxy before the sun goes into expansion. Which will very likely kill all life bigger than a single cell long before we have to worry about it.

It simply isn't feasible. Unfortunately. We've got about 300(ish) milliion years and that's about it. That's about as long as any species gets before it goes extinct.

There is no perfect replication. There is just an organism that has existed for over a billion years. Billion.

So, yeah Newton.

Sigh. Cyanobacteria that exists today is NOT the same as the cyanobacteria that existed a billion years ago. Good grief, read a book.

I thought you lived in Japan?

Oh, I get it now. Took me a second to see what you were talking about. Sorry, I thought we were talking about colonization. You, instead, want to play silly buggers semantic games in order to win. Yes, it's true. Japan's population is decreasing. That's very true. Heck, most of Europe is in the same boat. Take away immigration and so is North America. Yet, funnily enough, as we were talking about colonization, populations do actually decrease naturally in some circumstances. You are technically correct, and that's the absolutest bestest kind of correct.

Here's your cookie.

Now, go and actually do a bit of research about biology and thermodynamics and come back and let's have an adult conversation.

 

[Shasarak]

Sigh. Cyanobacteria that exists today is NOT the same as the cyanobacteria that existed a billion years ago. Good grief, read a book.

I can understand if you dont like it but facts are facts.

Oh, I get it now. Took me a second to see what you were talking about. Sorry, I thought we were talking about colonization. You, instead, want to play silly buggers semantic games in order to win. Yes, it's true. Japan's population is decreasing. That's very true. Heck, most of Europe is in the same boat. Take away immigration and so is North America. Yet, funnily enough, as we were talking about colonization, populations do actually decrease naturally in some circumstances. You are technically correct, and that's the absolutest bestest kind of correct.

Here's your cookie.

I dont want to get in the way of your rant about population control by way of colonisation. I have never seen anyone make that argument.

I just thought you said that a countries population always goes up which was odd coming from someone living in a country with a decreasing population. I just assume it must be because they are sending 10% of their population into space.

Now, go and actually do a bit of research about biology and thermodynamics and come back and let's have an adult conversation.

Ha, nice.

 

[Maxperson]

And, again, I might win the lottery tomorrow. But, that's also pretty unlikely. Unless we are completely and utterly wrong about our understanding of the universe, I'm going stand by what I said.

We are very wrong about our understanding of the universe. It shows every year, multiple times as things change for us, then change some more, and then we mix it up and it changes again. We understand(or think we do) a little bit, but there's a lot more that we don't know about than we do.

Again, nope. Those moved offworld will be dependent on resources from Earth for generations. If Earth's population continues to expand and we bugger the Earth, then a Mars colony or any other colony for that matter, will die within a generation at the most.

Because you say so?

Heck, the Andromeda galaxy will rip apart our galaxy before the sun goes into expansion. Which will very likely kill all life bigger than a single cell long before we have to worry about it.

"In fact, our solar system is going to outlive our galaxy. At that point, the sun will not yet be a red giant star – but it will have grown bright enough to roast Earth’s surface. Any life forms still there, though, will be treated to some pretty spectacular cosmic choreography."

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...4/03/24/scientists-predict-our-galaxys-death/

We will be gone before the collision happens. Gone from Earth anyway.

 

[Hussar]

We are very wrong about our understanding of the universe. It shows every year, multiple times as things change for us, then change some more, and then we mix it up and it changes again. We understand(or think we do) a little bit, but there's a lot more that we don't know about than we do.

Really? E no longer equals MC squared? Force no longer equals mass times acceleration? Entropy is reversed? Objects in motion don't stay in motion?

There's a reason that a TOE is actually a reasonably attainable goal within our lifetime.

Because you say so?

Sigh. No. Because I've actually spent a bit of time getting a tiny bit of education in this sort of thing and know just enough to know that it won't work. Good grief. You would need to recreate a billion years of evolution in a hostile environment with little to no atmosphere in a couple of generations. Good luck with that. All the way down to the biota in the soil in order to grow anything. Never minding the centuries it will take to thicken the atmosphere of Mars to anything approaching breathable, you're looking at several more centuries and thousands of tons of soil just to feed the people that are traveling there.

Cut off that supply before you have a positive feedback loop, which will take several centuries to create, and the entire thing dies in a generation.

"In fact, our solar system is going to outlive our galaxy. At that point, the sun will not yet be a red giant star – but it will have grown bright enough to roast Earth’s surface. Any life forms still there, though, will be treated to some pretty spectacular cosmic choreography."

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...4/03/24/scientists-predict-our-galaxys-death/

We will be gone before the collision happens. Gone from Earth anyway.

That I agree with. We will be gone.

 

[Umbran]

Without the Moon, most of the lifeforms as we know them are impossible.

And, with a sample size of one, how could you possibly know that?

Yes, the Moon has a stabilizing effect on the tilt of Earth's axis. But, without it, current models show the variation in tilt would only be about 10 degrees. We are currently at 23.5 degrees, so, call it a variation from 18.5 to 28.5, and that variation taking place over tens of thousands of years. This is not catastrophic, and there's no reason to think it would prevent the development of life. The patterns of life on such a planet might be different, but we expect that anyway.

 

[Morrus]

We don't understand a great deal about how the universe works. It's hubris to think we know for certain whether or not it's possible to have perfect replication.

The “our knowledge of the universe is incomplete, therefore you may not assert anything” is pretty much a conversation ender. If we can’t assert anything, what’s the point of even talking?

I feel like it must be a logical fallacy, too, but I’m not familiar enough with all the common fallacies to say for sure.

Closely followed by “scientists sometimes revise their hypotheses, so scientists can’t assert anything”. Which you also used.

They’re both largely nothing-statements.