Skip to main content

The Fermi Paradox

 


As a graduate of Enrico Fermi High School, I see myself  as only one degree of separation away from all things Fermi. Accordingly....

Consider the Fermi paradox. If there are intelligent life forms in this galaxy, aside from those of Earth ... where is everyone?  Why haven't we unequivocally heard from them? 

This is NOT a paradox in the traditional sense of the term.  It is simply a question and, given the premises, a good one. 

One answer: the universe is actually hostile to the development of intelligent and tech capable life. There is one and only one contrary example because ... miracle. A God who performs miracles. 

If you believe that, you have a lot of questions to answer, and I will leave you there.  Supernatural miracles notwithstanding, it seems much more likely there is someone out there. 

And this leaves us with the unanswered question. Of course, one answer is that techie civilizations come into existence, yet don't last very long.  Maybe they all follow the same route, destroying their environment or entering upon devastating wars, before any of tjem is able to do any interstellar communication and learn that it is not alone. 

So each, effectively, is ... alone and each dies alone.

But consider another possibility.  Maybe if intelligent species follow a rule-based course of development, it is a quite different one.  Perhaps space travel is a brief phase, roughly coterminous with the development of artificial intelligence and virtual reality.  Virtual reality eventually teaches a society that there are an infinity of adventures at home -- and interest in space travel or interplanetary communication dies off.  

More fully developed races become contented stay-at-home folks.  THAT is why we don't have visitors. They are at home with their VR sets and don't want to look for us. We will soon be likewise.  

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
24 comments
Read more

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
10 comments
Read more

The Growing Block Theory of Time

My own disposition, in regard to the philosophy of time, is toward the "growing block" theory. This is the view that past events remain realities, that present-moment events are also realities, but that future events are not yet real. The image is of the universe as a block with an edge on (say) the right-hand side. The block is expanding because that edge is moving ever further right, and that edge is what we call the present, or, simply, "now." Everything to the left of that edge is both static (the past is complete) and, still and forever, real. Think of the phrase "the moving finger writes." The chief alternatives to the growing-block theory are "presentism" (only the now-edge itself is real) and "eternalism" (past, present, and future are all real." I believe that time is a growing block because (1) that's what it feels like, (2) we should stick with the introspective phenomenon unless we have good reason to abandon ...
8 comments
Read more