←back to thread

417 points fuidani | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.57s | source
Show context
seanhunter ◴[] No.43714467[source]
Firstly that is completely badass science. The idea that you can use observations to detect the chemical composition of an exoplanet millions of kilometres away is an absolute triumph of the work of thousands of people over hundreds of years. Really amazing and deeply humbling to me.

Secondly, my prior was always that life existed outside of earth. It just seems so unlikely that we are somehow that special. If life developed here I always felt it overwhelmingly likely that it developed elsewhere too given how incredibly unfathomably vast the universe is.

replies(14): >>43714565 #>>43714577 #>>43714584 #>>43714631 #>>43714656 #>>43714773 #>>43714830 #>>43714875 #>>43714914 #>>43714940 #>>43714971 #>>43715045 #>>43717003 #>>43717397 #
ta8645 ◴[] No.43714565[source]
If life is very common in the universe, then that is probably bad news for us. It means that civilizations should exist that are millions of years more technologically advanced than us; and should be leaving telltale signatures across the sky that we'd likely have detected by now. And the absence of those signs would be relatively strong evidence that life, while common, isn't long-lived. Suggesting that our demise too, will come before too long.

If, on the other hand, life is relatively rare, or we're the sole example, our future can't be statistically estimated that way.

replies(34): >>43714604 #>>43714608 #>>43714615 #>>43714618 #>>43714624 #>>43714625 #>>43714636 #>>43714650 #>>43714691 #>>43714706 #>>43714729 #>>43714760 #>>43714766 #>>43714781 #>>43714825 #>>43714839 #>>43714844 #>>43714975 #>>43714991 #>>43715000 #>>43715063 #>>43715072 #>>43715084 #>>43715118 #>>43715227 #>>43715286 #>>43715299 #>>43715350 #>>43716046 #>>43716710 #>>43716759 #>>43717852 #>>43726399 #>>43727782 #
goognighz ◴[] No.43714844[source]
Dark forest hypothesis explains this in a “dark” way. They exist but are smart enough to hide from hostile hunter/predator life forms. Meanwhile our dumbasses are blasting radio signals into space like a little kid trying to talk to every stranger they see.
replies(2): >>43714985 #>>43715170 #
cmsj ◴[] No.43715170[source]
Dark Forest depends on the presumption that interstellar travel is worth engaging in (ie it's possible to do faster than light), and that spectacularly devastating weapons are possible. So far we have no reason to believe that either of those assumptions is smart.
replies(1): >>43715225 #
mkl ◴[] No.43715225[source]
Faster than light travel isn't needed (and IIRC doesn't occur in the series the dark forest name comes from). Spectacularly devastating weapons are definitely possible - redirect an asteroid into an inhabited planet and you're likely to kill most of its inhabitants; redirect enough and you can kill almost everything. That's not even getting into things like antimatter, gamma rays, etc. The dark forest hypothesis doesn't need destruction of solar systems to be possible, just severe damage to civilisations.
replies(1): >>43715356 #
generic92034 ◴[] No.43715356[source]
> and IIRC doesn't occur in the series the dark forest name comes from

The Trisolarians developed FTL travel while they were on the way to Earth, IIRC.

replies(2): >>43715683 #>>43716155 #
1. mkl ◴[] No.43715683[source]
I tried to look it up. I think they didn't ever get FTL, based on https://www.reddit.com/r/threebodyproblem/comments/1blvikg/c... and https://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/trisolaris-in-wh40k.....
replies(1): >>43717604 #
2. generic92034 ◴[] No.43717604[source]
Ah, yes, you are right. They managed to speed up their travel time to Earth greatly, but they did not reach or surpass the speed of light. I have to read the trilogy again.