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.

 

[Umbran]

I’m pretty sure some in this thread were postulating super-high tech materials to get around the requirement of a replication process, which is what I was responding to. I mean, take a look at Maxperson’s post I quoted and correct me if I’m wrong.

Ah. Well, if you don't have a replication process, we aren't talking a million years. We are talking times that exceed the lifetime of the stars you'd like to visit...

 

[Shasarak]

We deal with it by making new parts with new tools; by installing new software; by creating and revising blueprints- IOW, by the expenditure of more energy and resources in imperfect replication.

A probe on a million year mission will not have that option. When its blueprints go bad, there won’t be someone there to reload them.

You dont have a probe on a million year mission. You have a probe on a how ever long it takes to get to the next system mission.

And if you have a self replicating self-repairing probe then it creates new tools, reloads software, runs debugging software.

No. But look at any mass produced good and you’ll see the effects of entropy. A certain % of iPhones are never released from the factory every year due to their failing QC tests. And STILL defective phones hit the market. The iPhone 5 had a period when they had to recall a fairly sizeable number of phones they sold somehow passed QC despite being visibly damaged.

And even with those defective units Apple still managed to sell over 70 million units. If we could do that with old Earth technology then why would an even more advanced species not be able to improve on that

Yes, by expending more resources and correcting the inevitable errors. We’re still subject to the laws of thermodynamics.

Why would a self replicating probe not be able to collect more resources? That seems like an odd flaw to build into a self replicating exploration probe.

Hellenistic astronomers considered the spherical nature of the earth as a given by 3rd century BC. So really, not as many as you seem to imply.

Actually my point is that your statement is a tautology; surprising discoveries make you feel surprised.

 

[Hussar]

You dont have a probe on a million year mission. You have a probe on a how ever long it takes to get to the next system mission.

And if you have a self replicating self-repairing probe then it creates new tools, reloads software, runs debugging software.



And even with those defective units Apple still managed to sell over 70 million units. If we could do that with old Earth technology then why would an even more advanced species not be able to improve on that



Why would a self replicating probe not be able to collect more resources? That seems like an odd flaw to build into a self replicating exploration probe.



Actually my point is that your statement is a tautology; surprising discoveries make you feel surprised.

You seem to be missing the point though. How does it create new tools? Where does it reload software from? Where does that debugging software reside? When we're talking about crossing interstellar distances, in that harsh of an environment, the odds of errors creeping in are very high. And any error will cascade over generations because there's no actual way to fix the error. You need a machine that can operate constantly for decades (at least) in the most hostile environment imaginable, while completing incredibly complex tasks (finding resources, refining those resources, building a factory of some sort that can then utilize those resources, all from scratch without any outside input). All without introducing any errors into the system, not a single flaw or imperfection, over hundreds or perhaps thousands of generations lasting millions of years.

Look, it makes for fantastic SF, but, it's just not very feasible.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

And if you have a self replicating self-repairing probe then it creates new tools, reloads software, runs debugging software.

All you’re doing is highlighting points of failure. To make new tools, all of the processes for making those tools must be perfect; the software must remain uncorrupted. And the fact of the matter is, because of entropy, they won’t.

Assuming the probe needs something as simple as a cog, that cog must be cast and polished to the necessary tolerances, for our purposes, on an autoCAD machine of some kind. But dies wear out; polishing surfaces abrade. Even at losing just a few molecules per use, over great spans of time, they become unusable. That’s why flowing water forms canyons (and super-pure water dissolves metals), why centuries of walking formed dips in the marble stairs to the Akropolis. Or why he merest pushing of human fingertips have obliterated the features of the feet of finely crafted statues in churches around the world.

At some point they’ll have to be replaced. Errors in the OS and debugging and autoCAD software will creep in...even in the downloadable backups.

Why would a self replicating probe not be able to collect more resources? That seems like an odd flaw to build into a self replicating exploration probe.

It would have to, by definition. But, absent perfect replication, it will eventually fail to perfectly self-replicate/repair. A crucial cog will fail; a software error will cause a malfunction. Then it will need- and probably be unable to get- an outside actor to repair it.

 

[Shasarak]

All you’re doing is highlighting points of failure. To make new tools, all of the processes for making those tools must be perfect; the software must remain uncorrupted. And the fact of the matter is, because of entropy, they won’t.

Its not increasing points of failure, it is overlapping security features. If your first response fails, you got your second response, then your third response. There is no single thing which can fail and take down the whole system.

If you want a comparison just look at the bodies immune system, multiple overlapping redundancies.

Assuming the probe needs something as simple as a cog, that cog must be cast and polished to the necessary tolerances, for our purposes, on an autoCAD machine of some kind. But dies wear out; polishing surfaces abrade. Even at losing just a few molecules per use, over great spans of time, they become unusable. That’s why flowing water forms canyons (and super-pure water dissolves metals), why centuries of walking formed dips in the marble stairs to the Akropolis. Or why he merest pushing of human fingertips have obliterated the features of the feet of finely crafted statues in churches around the world.

Which is why most manufacturing plants dont rely on a human to jam a microchip into your computer with their thumb.

At some point they’ll have to be replaced. Errors in the OS and debugging and autoCAD software will creep in...even in the downloadable backups.

And as errors creep in they get fixed or replaced.

It would have to, by definition. But, absent perfect replication, it will eventually fail to perfectly self-replicate/repair. A crucial cog will fail; a software error will cause a malfunction. Then it will need- and probably be unable to get- an outside actor to repair it.

It has never been my argument that you can make something that will last forever. Hundreds of years is probably all that you would need to explore the Milky Way completely.

 

[Hussar]

Its not increasing points of failure, it is overlapping security features. If your first response fails, you got your second response, then your third response. There is no single thing which can fail and take down the whole system.

If you want a comparison just look at the bodies immune system, multiple overlapping redundancies.

And, barring the intervention of modern medicine, the human body lasts a handful of decades. Even WITH the best care and healthiest lifestyle, your multiple overlapping redundancies last a century (maybe a smidgeon more) at best.

Which is why most manufacturing plants dont rely on a human to jam a microchip into your computer with their thumb.



And as errors creep in they get fixed or replaced.

How? There's no outside fixes. You're too far away for any reasonable chance of communication, so, all errors must be fixed by the thing that is malfunctioning. That presumes that the programming is good enough to actually recognize an error and that the programming that recognizes errors remains uncorrupted for centuries or millennia.

It has never been my argument that you can make something that will last forever. Hundreds of years is probably all that you would need to explore the Milky Way completely.

See, that's the problem. You flat out cannot explore the Milky Way in centuries. Not without faster than light travel anyway. We're not talking centuries, or even millennia. We're talking truly deep time - megayears. Again, unless our understanding of the universe is really, really flawed, and there's no current evidence that it is, that's just not possible. There are just too many things that can go wrong, and, given the timespans we're talking about, the chances of failure are pretty much guaranteed.

Heck, entire species don't last a million years sometimes. The universe is a very hostile place.

At best, we might make the nearest star or two with probes, but, that's about it. Actually establishing colonies? Not without some serious changes in our understanding of the universe.

Even something like colonizing Mars, in the long run, isn't feasible. It took billions of years to make Earth as habitable as it is. Domed cities? Great. But, over the long term - as in hundreds of thousands or millions of years - that won't work because eventually you won't be able to replace lost resources in your dome from Earth. Even if you do manage to turn Mars into a "living" planet with a functioning ecosystem, gravity will eventually get you. Mars can't support life indefinitely. The lack of gravity means that the atmosphere will eventually bleed off. Lose the Earth and Mars dies.

 

[Maxperson]

Ah. Well, if you don't have a replication process, we aren't talking a million years. We are talking times that exceed the lifetime of the stars you'd like to visit...

Not if the materials takes millions of years to deteriorate to the point where they fail. Such a super advanced civilization will have materials to match.

 

[Maxperson]

You seem to be missing the point though. How does it create new tools? Where does it reload software from? Where does that debugging software reside? When we're talking about crossing interstellar distances, in that harsh of an environment, the odds of errors creeping in are very high.

Why are you assuming that this highly advanced civilization is only as advanced as we are? The interstellar environment is harsh to us, because we don't have the advanced materials to handle it. It would be child's play to a civilization as advanced as we are talking about.

 

[Maxperson]

Even something like colonizing Mars, in the long run, isn't feasible. It took billions of years to make Earth as habitable as it is. Domed cities? Great. But, over the long term - as in hundreds of thousands or millions of years - that won't work because eventually you won't be able to replace lost resources in your dome from Earth. Even if you do manage to turn Mars into a "living" planet with a functioning ecosystem, gravity will eventually get you. Mars can't support life indefinitely. The lack of gravity means that the atmosphere will eventually bleed off. Lose the Earth and Mars dies.

Mars has metals, water, minerals, etc. The resources are already there to replace resources for the dome.

 

[Shasarak]

Why are you assuming that this highly advanced civilization is only as advanced as we are? The interstellar environment is harsh to us, because we don't have the advanced materials to handle it. It would be child's play to a civilization as advanced as we are talking about.

If a culture is able to develop Nano-tech then they would be able to create materials on the atomic level. So a nano-tech probe could land on an ice asteroid and essentially transform it into Unobtainium or Handwavium or what ever else was needed.

Good old Replicators, they will never let us down or turn on us.