Re: Fermi Paradox explained (was Re: Memory as Simulation)

From: Dirk Bruere (
Date: Tue Mar 07 2006 - 16:15:20 MST

On 3/7/06, Phillip Huggan <> wrote:
> The simplest refutation of SA is that it is either evil, or as Eliezer
> said pointless. You would in effect be playing a child's game for a human
> lifetime.

Depends on a number of other assumptions

A Fermi Paradox refutation is that life is probably too rare for another
> technological civilization to exist in the universe, let alone our own past
> light-cone. There are around 10^23 stars in the universe. How many of
> these are within our own past light cone? How many are 3rd generation


stars suitable metal rich? How many are not binary or triple star systems
> (the norm)? How many

10^18, 10^17

reside within the edges of the outer arm band of a spiral galaxy sweet spot,
> where gamma ray


emissions are rare but metals are not? How stars exhibit suitable Sol-like
> radiance regularity? How


many have an earth-sized rock within the star's habitable ring? How many of
> these planets have a


tilted axis suitable for regular seasons? How many of these! have a single
> Moon? How many systems


have asteroid sweeper Jupiter? How many of these planets exhibit friendly
> plate tectonics? How


many have oceans large enough to moderate climate, but not too large so as
> to stifle evolution?
> This is not considering prerequisite atmospheric phenomena, any "life
> effects", or geological prerequisites to technological progress (on this
> planet we have had everything handed to us on a silver platter). How many
> metal rich stars are in our own past light cone? That is the starting point
> to whittle the number of earth simulation actors down to a low decimal
> figure.

Not all that low.
Of course, you may disagree with my estimates, in which case provide your


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT