NUCLEAR WAR!

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by Crni Vuk, Mar 18, 2017.

  1. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    Oh sure, some examples among those particular 11 are very disputable. Me, i like the part about eels the most, though. They gotta mate, do they? ;)

    Also,
    Yeah you see, if to start posting all the causality properly, not nilly-willy, then it'd take several pages nobody would ever read anyways. So, why bother. Still doesn't mean it's nilly-willy. Usually it may be, but not always. See me point? ;)

    Example. You say i don't know anything about the curcumstances of the universe. I say i am a bit familiar with astronomers' efforts to measure spectral lines - quite enough to be sure that we have instrumental confirmation that atoms from which distant stars are all built are very same atoms we have in our solar system aplenty - Mendeleev's table upper part, mostly. Nothing "exotic", pretty much. Isn't it a "circumstance", and one quite corner-stone one at that? Etc.
     
  2. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    So you mean to tell us that you have the absolute proof, but you won't show it to anyone because it would be boring. Got it.
    :push:

    /edit:
    Ugh, late editing :D
    That is not what I meant. That the universe is overwhelmingly made up of baryonic matter and not antimatter or something else is a given. What I was getting at is more complex interactions, like frequency of extinction events. Just because a planet is in the habitable zone it doesn't mean that sentient life will appear within a certain timespan or survive. For example, our solar system is in a relatively empty part of space, so it would experience fewer solar collisions, interstellar asteroids, fewer gamma ray bursts and so on than a star in a denser part of space.
    Then there's the whole "We leak a lot of radio waves into space, surely we would measure aliens doing the same!". Well, no, if we'd assume a sentient species living at Proxima Centauri started to use radio around the same time that we did it would be very unlikely to detect any non-directional broadcast on Earth because the amplitude would be too small. Even our finest detector can't pick that up.
    And there are other possibilities that would stop a civilization from broadcasting after only a rather short span. Suicide is one, but there's also technological singularities as a remote possibility, and many more.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2018
    • [Like] [Like] x 2
  3. Juza The Cloud

    Juza The Cloud Nanto Goshasei

    Jun 3, 2015
    This stinks of Bismuth all over again
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 3
  4. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    Please don't kick the dead horse, Hass. Was a joke about conclusive solution to Fermi's, i told so already. What i have is couple pages of things i am pretty certain of (which if properly written down would take more like several dozens pages at the least), which cut off some of otherwise widely acknowledged "possible" solutions to it. So i somewhat narrowed the list of possibilities. And yes, putting all the detail about it into here would be extremely very boring. Hard scientific work is usually boring, don't you agree? Meticulous, with crapload of small detail ruled out and through, this sorta thing. Not forum matherial at all.

    As for original post... There is not just scientific fact. There is also human intuition. When i wrote that thing about all others being dead out there - that was that. I feel that way. Is it a crime to? But at least that's honest thing. I feel that, somehow.
     
  5. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    Eh, I do hard scientific work for a living, so I don't usually find it boring. Posting it a bit on the forum, too, because some people here enjoy it as well.
    Human intuition is not scientific.
     
  6. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    Of course it's not scientific. Is this forum scientific, though? I sure won't do any "i feel that way" part in any peer reviewed journal and such, but here's not, so i sometimes do. Is it OK?
     
  7. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    It's ok, but you have to expect some responses when what you're saying is not exactly agreed upon by people. I mean, you argument in your first post on this hinged on the fact that we'd "easily detect" radio waves coming from other planets. Which is not true, unless it's a deliberate and directed signal.
     
  8. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    Apparently it is so for public opinion. Interesting. Well, i remain sure "we" - as in select few mankind's representatives most able to detect Earth-like non-deliberate, non-direct, unintentional radio waves, - those "we" can detect radio waves from up to at least hundreds parsecs quite easily. Instruments with which we can do it are radio telescopes with synthetic aperture, practical beginnings of which in terms of freely published information can be traced back to at least to 21 years ago.

    I somewhat surprisingly have found numerous quite seriously-looking estimates which confirm your opinion, - ones stating that Earth could only detect other Earth-like planet's radio emissions (not intended as any means of interstellar communication) from distances like 0.5 light years or less. However, afaik, all those estimates are based on single "largest" radio telescopes - ones which do not use synthetic aperture technology.

    Sadly i can't find a paper i've read which had all the details about synthetic aperture radiotelescope networks being perfectly able to detect Earth-like planet up to thousands light years away whenever operator of the system decides to aim the system and spend sufficient time analyzing the output. It was quite a few years ago, probably some time 2011 ... 2013 i've read it. I remember being extremely impressed by it. Now that i tried to find it for you (sadly failed), i also discovered instead that all the "popular" queries about it, including ones in reddit, quora, stackexchange etc are all filled with "certainty" that we can't in fact detect Earth-like planet's radio emissions because our instruments - radiotelescopes, - are not up for the task.

    One wonders how silly must be the people who spend fortunes to build and maintain expensive instruments for SETI, if their instruments are apriori unable to do their job. One also wonders how such a silly people could ever obtain ability to spend 7-digit and higher sums of USD, too.
     
  9. Crni Vuk

    Crni Vuk M4A3 Oldfag oTO Orderite

    Nov 25, 2008
    I am sorry but that's simply how science works. Or I would have to ask you, how to you know that something exists if you can't measure it? I could make all sorts of claims then.

    This is pretty much the biggest issue right now with the String-Theory, as it remains a hypothesis, there is for now no way to make verifable predictions with it, even though almost every mathematican who understands it finds it super beautiful, where as many physicsts simply ask them, what does it predict and how do we measure it?

    For example, if you take Einstein and how he came to his theory of relativity it was a pretty good explanation for certain phenomena, like the Michelson-Morley experiment which caused a problem as it seemed like the speed of light remained the same for all frames/directions something which was already assumed/discussed by a few scientists as far as I remember in relation to electrons? Not sure (see the history of Lorentz Transformation). But Einsteins solution was just that an explanation, what they required was more cases where the Hypothesis of relativity of spacetime actually predicted something. So they ventured out into nature and tried to find something that Einsteins theories predicted, like the gravitational lens effect. And it turned out, it was true. Later Einsteins hypothesis, which was becoming a full theory at that point, started to predict and explain more and more cases, like the movement patern of the planet Mercury in our solar system, which was not possible with the use of newtonian mechanics, from there all sorts of calculations have been made, from black holes, to the time dilliation all things that have been 'measured' and prooven at this point. And just recently, unoticed to a large part of the population, they even made it possible to actually measure gravitational waves!

    Something that only exists on paper, is at the end of the day nothing more but a hypothesis. It could be correct, but it hasn't to be. The only way, to really be sure, is to get out and to measure something that it predicts, and if what you measure doesn't line up with what you predict, then you have to overwork your hypothesis.

    So, how do you measure alien civilisations if you have no data about them?
     
  10. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    Well, yeah, there's the RadioAstron project. But that one has just started, and while it could potentially find weak, unintentional radio sources, I'm not surprised it hasn't found any yet.
    As for SETI, well, they're looking for intentional radio bursts, mostly around the 21 cm hydrogen line as we assume that this would be the most well understood and obvious choice for identifying sentient alien life. Those they could measure, but normal non-interferometric radio telescopes are too weak to measure "leaked" radio waves.
     
  11. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    There are other projects, including ones carried out by my country. Sorry, we are not telling the world any much about them. Perhaps for a reason? And we russians are quite top-notch about all sorts of EM-tech. Military applications, you know...

    I just found this old piece, stating that Arecibo-type radiotelescope, - and that's one without synthetic aperture technology, - can detect Earth-like planet from up to 60 light years. This contradicts "popular" opinion that such a range is less than one light year. It seems something quite dishonest is going on here. Source. Quote: "The radar of US Naval Space Surveillance has a detectability range of leaking terrestrial signals to 60 light-years for an Arecibo-type antenna (Sullivan et al. 1978; Sullivan 1981)".
     
  12. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    It says that the Space Surveillance radar can be detected that far because it has a certain frequency that allows much of it to leak through the ionosphere and a very high power per bandwidth. TV broadcasts and radio don't leak that much, and only to the nightside. And even less now that much of it is digital, requiring less power.
    While 0.5 ly is probably too little, I wouldn't count on reasonable detectability of unintentional radio signals beyond a few parsecs. It's inverse squared, after all.
    But good to know you have secret russian magic that will simply cheat physics.
     
  13. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    Specifics. I am not a specialist in radiometry. I remember few things like the fact that radio frequencies of FM bands - which i recon exactly where lots of Earth's public radiostations broadcast - make Earth much brighter than even the Sun, on these wavelengths. Please forgive me if i'm at times wrong with specifics, yes...

    edit/append.

    You added about inverse squared. I know about it. Well how about the fact synthetic aperture, with substantially lasting observation, has the potential to boost the signal like thousands times in compare to Arecibo-type antennas?

    So we got you admitting "few parsecs" is not beyond possibility - without synthetic aperture. Doubling that distance would require 4 times more sensitive antenna. So, 1024 times more sensitive - synthetic aperture, - would allow 32 times longer distance. Which gets us exactly to the numbers i wrote above - hundreds parsecs instead of just few.

    But that's not all to it. You should consider, as i do for Fermi, that we should not in fact talk about detection of Earth-like planets. Instead, we should talk about type-2 and type-3 civilizations - if they survive for any long, they are certainly way above our technological level. Thermonuclear power will allow for much more potent radio-sources - not intended for interstellar communication, no, merely side effects of certain large-scale industrial projects in their solar system space, when using this sort of power.

    But even that is not the end of the story. It's one such big part i doubt worth starting, but ok...

    What you think any small community does when stranded on an island? They signal out if there is any hope they'll be noticed by other people. What any serious state power does here on Earth when in relations with other nations? Send diplomatic representatives, establish embassies, etc. I do not see any reason how any lasting civilizations in outer space would willignly abandon benefits of cooperation and knowledge exchange. Especially since distances of space and planetary defenses would make it extremely difficult to practice any interstellar warfare - defending side has so massive advantages it's just economically unimaginable to have any profitable kind of "star wars" (no offense to popular fiction movies here, those are entertainment and entirely different story, of course). This goes into much more detail into some works of Efremov and such, i won't go into those here...

    So, i deem it highly likely good percentage of lasting civilizations would set up beacons much like ones we have for sailors who happen to be in emergency - high-powered, omni-directional radio beacons which transmit intense, clearly artificial in composition, but very short-duration pulses, designed to indicate to any other civilizations that there is one civilization right there.

    Radio waves are best for it because of how easy it is to detect them - synthetic aperture is not limited to "Earth-sized", it can be "solar-system sized" as well, and also while inverse-squared is true, it's true for laser and any other transmitter kinds just as well - and radio waves are not as easily blocked as visible light and some other wave lengths.

    Heck, i'd rather expect the sky be full of 'em by now - mind you it's been 4+ billion years of rather calm evolution for our part of Milky Way. But nope. Nada.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2018
  14. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake Admin Orderite

    Aug 16, 2010
    A few parsecs isn't that much. We have a few star systems in a sphere that large, but not all of them will have terrestrial planets and not all of them will be in the habitable zone. Many stars are red dwarfs, and their habitable zone is usually so close that any planet in there will be tidally locked to the star, so sentient life is unlikely to evolve.
    There's two problems with the rest:
    1) No such antennas are currently in operation besides RadioAstron (that we know of),
    and 2) they're still very directional. We can only look at a small section of the sky at a time. Which SETI is doing, but it takes time. There's a reason SETI@Home exists, because they have to sift through lots of data.
    I agree on Type 2 and 3 civilisations. Actually, even full Type 1 with fusion rockets could be visible a few star systems over (infrared can pick up the directional thrusters of the Space Shuttle from several AU, as far as I know). A fusion rocket that would enable reasonably fast interplanetary or even interstellar travel would be super bright for anyone looking, and have a very noticable signature to it. Still, we need to look very carefully, and that takes time, equipment, and money.
    We simply haven't done it that long that we can categorically say that nobody is out there.
    The fact that we haven't found anything is the BASIS of Fermi's paradox, and what you're doing seems to be taking the paradox to be the solution to said paradox: We should be seeing a lot more civilisations, but we don't, so my gut tells me that sentient life kills itself quickly.
     
  15. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    1) no such _space_ antennas are in operation that we know of, besides RadioAstron - VSOP-2 was cancelled. Officially, at least. But Earth-based projects are well and going - LOFAR, SKA, ALMA and few others, each having unique features and advantages. I wouldn't be surprised if some of such systems, possibly even including satellites, would be classified at the time, too.

    2) yep, they are directional, must be. Long distance, no joke. But we talk billions USD invested into such searches (i mean total). And some of best minds of the planet working on it - and not for money, but for the idea. Manhatten project managed to happen just fine using way less effort and investment, i guess. But yes, may be you're right and i'm underestimating the task. One can hope.

    As for my gut, it tells what it tells not because of the empty sky. It tells what it tells because of how i see intelligent life: a planetary catastrophe much worse than, say, oxygen catastrophe. In this, i dramatically differ from say James Lovelock's view - which is that despite initial problems, intelligent life should manage, with time, to adapt and thrive. I rarely disagree with him, but in this case i see things which force me to disagree with him on this matter. Those things is how whole biosphere is affected by humans, which in few words and most broad sense - is that we humans are likely to eventually violate majority, or even all, of bio-chemical adaptations cellular life has evolved to remain stable. We create chemical compounds for minute goals without any proper care about long-term effects, and we create them by dozens thousands. This is like messing with letters by some child who can't read: give the child some blocks forming up any readable line, let the child play with it, and soon enough the message disappears entirely. Well, life is nothing else than a long, long message of "DNA letters", and even now, it gets increasingly broken in both human population (increase of cancers and genetic diseases) and animals (same, plus already happening Sixth Great Extinction).

    I know why it happens - "minute interests" are in fact what allows humans to survive short-term and must not be treated as an error. The way to fulfill those - is an error, but then often times proper way to fulfill those interests - is unaffordable luxury. There are different cases of specifics, but overall, i consider no party "guilty" in this. This all is quite natural way for intelligent life to exploit "newly discovered" mechanics of the matter. Leads to the doom of organic-based intelligent life.

    There is still hope for AIs - if true AIs would be created before humans likely perish, - eventually surviving, but for human kind? Little hope in the long run, if you'd ask me. Same for similar water-based life everywhere, because it's ultimately same chemistry at work. Intellect "hacks" it because only technological civilization can do so (so before intellect, life builds up incredible complexities, but vulnerable to any sort of intelligent exploits, fragile in this sense), but then some (very short in galactic terms) time later - the natural biochemistry fails much planet-wide under too much of such hacks, ruining habitability for "hackers" (and most if not all other species, that is). Death is the result of such process.

    And we already see it starting, mind you. Those are real places which called, unsurprisingly, the "dead zones". Inconvinient truth...

    Sure we can hope till the end, though - the dam thing dies last, eh. Heck, may be some type 3 civ will come in last moment and save our sorry butts, just because we didn't have it the ugliest of all possible ways. Heh. %)
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2018
  16. Juza The Cloud

    Juza The Cloud Nanto Goshasei

    Jun 3, 2015
    I would posit the lack of alien radio waves is maybe because, an intellegent species may not wish to broadcast thier precence. Just speculating on something Sowden was musing about on an episode of StarTalk. It would be ironic if our entertianment is was attracts another hostile alien species into contact with us. Earth is Samarkand to some would be Mongol-like alien species.
     
  17. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    This i already discussed few posts above - see the middle part of post #93 on this page.
     
  18. Juza The Cloud

    Juza The Cloud Nanto Goshasei

    Jun 3, 2015
    This is me responding to that; see my eariler post number. pedantic.
     
  19. Fins

    Fins It Wandered In From the Wastes

    Dec 31, 2017
    Looks like it is ignoring rather than responding. Unless that Sowden mused something which would indicate otherwise, but i wouldn't know, 'cause i cba to seek every last possible musing he ever did. You gotta gimme a link if you want me to check it, otherwise we remain as it is.
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2018