Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Sun Nov 01, 2015 2:21 pm

Via: http://www.tor.com/2014/10/30/repost-th ... e-fiction/

Science fiction is a literature of possibilities. The universe we live in is also one of countless possibilities. For humanity, some universes are better than others, and Three Body shows the worst of all possible universes, a universe in which existence is as dark and harsh as one can imagine.

Not long ago, Canadian writer Robert Sawyer came to China, and when he discussed Three Body, he attributed my choice of the worst of all possible universes to the historical experience of China and the Chinese people. As a Canadian, he argued that he had an optimistic view of the future relationship between humans and extraterrestrials.

I don’t agree with this analysis. In the Chinese science fiction of the last century, the universe was a kind place, and most extraterrestrials appeared as friends or mentors, who, endowed with God-like patience and forbearance, pointed out the correct path for us, a lost flock of sheep. In Jin Tao’s Moonlight Island, for example, the extraterrestrials soothed the spiritual trauma of the Chinese who experienced the Cultural Revolution. In Tong Enzheng’s Distant Love, the human-alien romance was portrayed as poignant and magnificent. In Zheng Wenguang’s Reflections of Earth, humanity was seen as so morally corrupt that gentle, morally refined aliens were terrified and had to run away, despite their possession of far superior technology.

But if one were to evaluate the place of Earth civilization in this universe, humanity seems far closer to the indigenous peoples of the Canadian territories before the arrival of European colonists than the Canada of the present. More than five hundred years ago, hundreds of distinct peoples speaking languages representing more than ten language families populated the land from Newfoundland to Vancouver Island. Their experience with contact with an alien civilization seems far closer to the portrayal in Three Body. The description of this history in the essay, “Canadian History: An Aboriginal Perspective,” by Georges Erasmus and Joe Saunders, is unforgettable.

I wrote about the worst of all possible universes in Three Body out of hope that we can strive for the best of all possible Earths.


Relevant passage from The Dark Forest:

“See how the stars are points? The factors of chaos and randomness in the complex makeups of every civilized society in the universe get filtered out by distance, so those civilizations can act as reference points that are relatively easy to manipulate mathematically.”

“But there’s nothing concrete to study in your cosmic sociology, Dr. Ye. Surveys and experiments aren’t really possible.”

“That means your ultimate result will be purely theoretical. Like Euclid’s geometry, you’ll set up a few simple axioms at first, then derive an overall theoretic system using those axioms as a foundation.”

“It’s all fascinating, but what would the axioms of cosmic sociology be?”

“First: Survuival is the primary need of civilization. Second: Civilization continuously grows and expands, but the total matter in the universe remains constant.”

“Those two axioms are solid enough from a sociological perspective … but you rattled them off so quickly, like you’d already worked them out,” Luo Ji said, a little surprised.

“I’ve been thinking about this for most of my life, but I’ve never spoken about it with anyone before. I don’t know why, really. … One more thing: To derive a basic picture of cosmic sociology from these two axioms, you need two other important concepts: chains of suspicion, and the technological explosion.”

“That’s the most important aspect of the chain of suspicion. It’s unrelated to the civilizations’s own morality and social structure. … Regardless of whether civilizations are internally benevolent or malicious, when they enter the web formed by the chains of suspicion, the’re all identical”

Which is to say, they are all threats to each other, intrinsically, and irresolvably. Technological explosion means that any civilization represents a potential menace of inestimable potential, escalating massively within a span of mere centuries, and “On the scale of the universe, several hundred years is the snap of a finger.” An intolerable danger, then.

“That’s … that’s really dark.”

“The real universe is just that black.” Luo Ji waved a hand, feeding the darkness as if stroking velvet. “The universe is a dark forest. Every civilization is an armed hunter stalking through the trees like a ghost, gently pushing aside branches that block the path and trying to tread without sound. Even breathing is done with care. The hunter has to be careful, because everywhere in the forest are stealthy hunters like him. If he finds other life — another hunter, an angel, or a demon, a delicate infant or a tottering old man, a fairy or a demigod — there’s only one thing he can do: open fire and eliminate them. In this forest, hell is other people. An eternal threat that any life that exposes its own existence will be swiftly wiped out. This is the picture of cosmic civilization. It’s the explanation for the Fermi Paradox.”
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby DrEvil » Sun Nov 01, 2015 2:44 pm

I've read the Three Body Problem (minus the last 100 pages or so. SPOILER: didn't like the aliens much. Way too human for such a different world), and it's a pretty good book. Might have to finish it so I can read the Dark Forest.

I really like this take on the Fermi Paradox. If everything is an existential threat you don't have much choice but to shoot first. If aliens have game theory we're screwed.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 4175
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby slimmouse » Sun Nov 01, 2015 2:52 pm

.
If aliens have game theory we're screwed.

Which sole sentient consciousness amidst the aliens will take the decision, or influence others sufficiently to make the screwing of mankind so?

Science is always, ultimately philosophy
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby zangtang » Sun Nov 01, 2015 6:36 pm

Thats extremely poetic. Sounds beautiful. What does it mean?
zangtang
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby Iamwhomiam » Sun Nov 01, 2015 7:05 pm

Which sole sentient consciousness amidst the aliens will take the decision, or influence others sufficiently to make the screwing of mankind so?

That's the way the hive heaves.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:00 pm

Further explanatoriumizing from Liu Cixin, some straightforward Promethean cosmic destiny stuff:

As for encounters with alien civilizations, the only reference points we have are encounters between different human civilizations on Earth and encounters between humans and other species on this planet. The conclusion from history is obviously not optimistic.

Taking the long view, it's impossible for human civilization to continue only in our current environment. Our future is in space. Thus, the potential for long-term human survival depends on whether we can once again recover our enterprising and pioneering spirit and leave the cradle of Earth to find new homes for ourselves. Like Wells once envisioned, humanity will either fill the universe, or perish completely.


Those tricky Fabians. On a related note, a co-conspirator hipped me to this Nick Land piece -- quite free of NRx triggers, too -- about how young our Universe is.
http://www.xenosystems.net/cosmological-infancy/

There is a ‘problem’ that has been nagging at me for a long time – which is that there hasn’t been a long time. It’s Saturday, with no one around, or getting drunk, or something, so I’ll run it past you. Cosmology seems oddly childish.

An analogy might help. Among all the reasons for super-sophisticated atheistic materialists to deride Abrahamic creationists, the most arithmetically impressive is the whole James Ussher 4004 BC thing. The argument is familiar to everyone: 6,027 years — Ha!

Creationism is a topic for another time. The point for now is just: 13.7 billion years – Ha! Perhaps this cosmological consensus estimate for the age of the universe is true. I’m certainly not going to pit my carefully-rationed expertise in cosmo-physics against it. But it’s a stupidly short amount of time. If this is reality, the joke’s on us. Between Ussher’s mid-17th century estimate and (say) Hawking’s late 20th century one, the difference is just six orders of magnitude. It’s scarcely worth getting out of bed for. Or the crib.

For anyone steeped in Hindu Cosmology – which locates us 1.56 x 10^14 years into the current Age of Brahma – or Lovecraftian metaphysics, with its vaguer but abysmally extended eons, the quantity of elapsed cosmic time, according to the common understanding of our present scientific establishment, is cause for claustrophobia. Looking backward, we are sealed in a small room, with the wall of the original singularity pressed right up against us.


Back to Liu Cixin:

I also came up with three conjectures based on the facts as we know them:

First: barriers to communication. It is very difficult for civilizations to communicate with each other and to understand each other across the universe. This is due to 1) the insurmountable time delay imposed on all communications across interstellar distances (at least based on known physical laws); and 2) the vast biological differences between the two sides in any attempt at communications. On Earth, biological organisms are classified into domains, kingdoms, phyla, classes, orders, families, genera, species—the higher you go in the hierarchy, the larger the differences between taxa in the same rank. Humans cannot communicate effectively even with animals in another genus. At the cosmic level, if one takes into account the possibility of non-carbon-based life forms, the differences between them and humans may be greater even than the differences between domains on Earth.

Second: technological explosion. It took humans about a hundred thousand years to advance from stone tools to the age of agriculture, but only two hundred years to go from the steam age to the information age. Explosive advances in technology could occur at any moment in any civilization in the universe. Thus, even a primitive civilization that appears as harmless as a baby or a sprout is full of potential danger.

Third: detection reversibility. This concept is based on the Principle of Reversibility in optics. If one civilization can detect the existence of another in the universe, sooner or later, the second civilization can also detect the existence of the first.

Based on these axioms and conjectures, one can deduce a possible shape for cosmic society, and it is indeed a worst-case scenario, which sits at the foundation of my Three-Body series. The details of the deduction process is set out in the second book in the series, The Dark Forest, and as the title hints, the universe is a dark place where only one kind of relationship is possible between different worlds: as soon as one civilization has detected another, it must do all it can to destroy it. This has nothing to do with the moral conditions of the civilizations involved—as long as one accepts the two axioms, all civilizations must behave in this manner. Chinese readers dubbed this conclusion “The Dark Forest Hypothesis.”

This is also an answer for the Fermi Paradox, a very dark answer. If any civilization exposed itself in the universe, it would soon be destroyed. This is why the universe is so silent.


An equally "dark" answer is what Land hinted towards: what if we're the first planetary civilization?

The weight of that obligation is unthinkable, yet I find myself thinking about it quite a bit these days.

How do bonobos fare in zero gravity environments?
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby Luther Blissett » Mon Nov 02, 2015 1:07 pm

Reorganization began only 450 million years or so after the universe burst into being, forming plenty of surviving stars far older than the sun. The sun is still relatively young at 4.5b years compared to 12-13b year old Methuselahs.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4994
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby coffin_dodger » Mon Nov 02, 2015 1:08 pm

13.7 billion years – Ha!


Indeed.

Halton Arp's study regarding Quasars strikes me as far more conclusive than that of mainstream cosmology, which ergo bases the age of the Universe on incorrect interpretation of red-shift. By extension, mainstream's cosmoligical mis-interpretations do not end there, even going as far as infecting other scientific realms and in particular, dating techniques that are prone to mis-scaling.

An equally "dark" answer is what Land hinted towards: what if we're the first planetary civilization?


This has been my stance for about 30 years. We're it.

We need to take care of this environment - everywhere else wants to fuck us sideways.
User avatar
coffin_dodger
 
Posts: 2216
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:05 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (14)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby slimmouse » Mon Nov 02, 2015 1:22 pm

zangtang » 01 Nov 2015 22:36 wrote:Thats extremely poetic. Sounds beautiful. What does it mean?


It means, to quote coffin dodger, that we're it.

Unfortunately many of us dont get that yet, and they do.


slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby stefano » Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:25 pm

Thanks all! This is good, old school stuff. And the above arguments are similar to the reasons I have to think that no aliens have landed on Earth: if any had, they would have finished us. Not to mention the conceit of thinking that aliens are basically weird-looking people with big eyes and no pubes.
User avatar
stefano
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby DrEvil » Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:39 pm

http://www.space.com/30889-earth-bloome ... ution.html

Earth Bloomed Early: A Fermi Paradox Solution?

Our place in the universe is a conundrum — life on Earth evolved to create a technologically-savvy race that is now looking for other technologically-savvy intelligences populating our galaxy. But there's a problem; it looks like humanity is the only "intelligent" species in our little corner of the universe — what gives?

This question forms the basis of the Fermi Paradox: given the age of the universe and the apparent high probability of life evolving on other planets orbiting other stars, where are all the smart aliens?

According to a new study based on data collected by the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope and NASA's Kepler Space Telescope, it might be that Earth (and all life on it) is an early bloomer. By extension, the logical progression from this new study is that we're not hearing from advanced alien civilizations because, in short, the universe hasn't had the time to spawn many more habitable worlds.

The study, which focuses purely on the likelihood of the evolution of habitable worlds (and not speculation of alien intelligence, the Fermi Paradox implication is my own), finds that when our planet was born from our young sun's protoplanetary disk some 4.6 billion years ago, it was born into an era when only "8 percent of the potentially habitable planets that will ever form in the universe existed." This means that the universe has 92 percent to go until it runs out of the necessary material to produce the stars that go on to produce planets, some of which will be small and rocky and orbit in just the right location for life (as we know it) to thrive.

"Our main motivation was understanding the Earth's place in the context of the rest of the universe," said Peter Behroozi of the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, Md., "Compared to all the planets that will ever form in the universe, the Earth is actually quite early."

Hubble has shown astronomers that young galaxies were churning out stars at a fast rate some 10 billion years ago. However, the quantity of hydrogen and helium involved in stellar production was low compared with the amount of these star-forming gases that exist today.

"There is enough remaining material (after the Big Bang) to produce even more planets in the future, in the Milky Way and beyond," said Molly Peeples, also of STScI.

By combining this knowledge from Hubble with exoplanetary data from Kepler, the researchers were able to form a picture of the habitable planet potential of our galaxy and use it as a model for the number of other habitable worlds existing throughout the cosmos.

Since Kepler started taking data in 2009, we've been introduced to a menagerie of small rocky worlds orbiting sun-like stars. Some of these thousands of worlds orbit their stars within the habitable zone — the region surrounding a star that's not too hot and not too cold to allow liquid water to persist on its surface. By extrapolating from Kepler's comparatively small dataset, astronomers have predicted that there should be around 1 billion Earth-sized worlds orbiting within their stars' habitable zones in the Milky Way. If we consider there are 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe, there's a huge number of habitable, Earth-sized worlds throughout the cosmos.

And the universe, according to this new theoretical study, has only just started in the planetary production business. The last star isn't expected to fizzle out for another 100 trillion years (when the universe will continue toward its perpetual march to "heat death"), so there's lots of time left.

With the help of these observations, the researchers predict that Earth 2.0 (i.e. rocky planets of Earth-like dimensions orbiting within their stars' habitable zones) will most likely pop up inside giant galaxy clusters or dwarf galaxies where reservoirs of star-forming (and therefore planet-forming) gases are known to reside. Alas, the Milky Way's planet-forming days are numbered, as much of these gases have already been consumed during our galaxy's heady "starburst" days.

Noted by the researchers is that the advantage of being an "early" civilization evolving at this time of universal evolution is that we have the awesome opportunity to study the early stages of cosmic evolution, using space telescopes (such as Hubble) to see the early formation of galaxies and witness observable evidence for the Big Bang. For any future civilization in a trillion years time, the universe will look very different than it does now — fewer galaxies will be visible and the earliest evidence for the Big Bang (such as the cosmic microwave background radiation) will have further ebbed away.

It's interesting to ponder how an intelligent alien civilization will interpret a more mature, perpetually expanding universe lacking the cues to its origin that we take for granted today. Would they assume, lacking contradictory evidence, that the universe has always existed? And that just because the universe is expanding, it doesn't mean there had to be a Big Bang?

Of course, this is just a fun thought experiment; predicting the existence of a future alien intelligence, let alone how they may interpret their cosmic environment, is presumptuous at best. But it does pose an existential problem beyond the Fermi Paradox. If the Earth is an early bloomer, and humanity is one of the first intelligent civilizations to pop up in a universe of infinite possibilities, how might our civilization unfold?

Who knows, but it seems the universe has the boundless potential to form new worlds and new life (and new intelligences) that will potentially form long after humanity and life on Earth has come and gone, eventually succumbing to the inevitable death of our sun in about 5 billion years time. This study serves to remind us that our time as an intelligent life form in the universe is fleeting, and it seems many more intelligences will evolve long after we are gone.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 4175
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby Iamwhomiam » Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:47 pm

Image
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby Iamwhomiam » Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:52 pm

"They" could be jerks, too.

Image
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby stefano » Tue Nov 03, 2015 3:06 am

DrEvil » Tue Nov 03, 2015 12:39 am wrote:
Earth Bloomed Early: A Fermi Paradox Solution?

Is there any very strong reason to assume that liquid water on a rocky planet is necessary for life, in the very broadest sense? Or civilisation? Could there not be a species that's comfortable in temperatures of like 800°, drinks copper and breathes water vapour? Or lives at -200°, drinks methane and breathes helium? I've very fascinated by thermophiles, I wonder what could evolve out of creatures like that over time.
User avatar
stefano
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Liu Cixin on S/ETI Implications & Fermi Stuff

Postby zangtang » Tue Nov 03, 2015 7:10 am

zangtang
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests