The Fermi Paradox poses a question I've heard many times, and it's one that has many answers which seem somewhat satisfactory, but (in my opinion) those answers don't completely answer the question.
First of all, let's talk about the question itself in order to more fully understand it, and therefore, be better equipped to answer it.
Scientists over the course of the past century or so have sought to rate the probability of finding extraterrestrial life. While to some it may seem like a menial task, there are very real implications the existence of extraterrestrial life can have. Some of these implications are positive, some of them are negative. For instance, they could communicate us details of advanced technology which we could then use to better our world (positive), or they could be looking for worlds with resources for them to consume without due regard to the inhabitants (negative).
So, with the desire to rate the probability of finding alien life, scientists went forth and did some rudimentary math based on observations of already known solar and extra-solar planets.
From Wikipedia:
With this, Enrico Fermi asked: "Where is everybody?"
Multiple solutions have been found for this alleged contradiction, and I'm confident many of them are factors that combine together in explaining this, but I want to talk about my theory on this, and maybe get some feedback from you guys.
My theory is similar to that which posits Alien civilizations isolate themselves, and are not contacting us intentionally.
It goes as follows:
1. All civilizations, societies of sentient beings, or large individual sentient beings (like a planet-wide network of neurons or computers) tend to develop.
This fact is a similar statement to the principle that living things evolve via natural selection, except that sentient beings, being natural apex predators and highly intelligent, are freed from much of the pressure that natural selection imposes on most living creatures. This is coupled with the fact that sentient beings develop/advance via the acquisition of knowledge, whereas normal organisms tend to advance via evolution, and it makes the analogy a bit poorer. Nonetheless, both evolution and civilization development ultimately result in increases to the organisms fitness and (probably) complexity.
2. As civilizations or organisms increase in complexity, their desire to communicate or "bother with" beings of less complexity/importance decreases.
This should go without saying: Humans are not concerned whatsoever with the opinion of an ant, and nor does anyone of sane mind try communicating with them.
3. Simultaneously, as civilizations/sentient beings advance, they become increasingly concerned with the waste of energy they collectively generate.
The United States, for example, in the late 2000s led a campaign of regulations, subsidies, and other actions to increase the efficiency of consumer and business appliances. As a result, the energy usage of machines continues decreasing to this day, which makes way for more technology and new power-hungry inventions to consume the void in energy usage. So, from this we can be certain to a high degree that societies will seek to limit their energy usage in order to allow 'more... More... MORE!', and in addition, any sufficiently advanced civilization will recognize that if the Universe continues on it's current path and is not stopped somehow, energy will inevitably become more and more valuable over time.
4. Therefore, given all of the above, the civilization in its final stages of development will not bother expending energy on communicating or attempting to communicate with other beings which may likely not have anything to offer for them, but rather, will focus all efforts on preserving itself and achieving maximal efficiency. This civilization would not be detectable, at least not with any realistic level of ease; all electromagnetic waves would be absorbed on their planet's surface to be transformed into energy for their use. Their planet would be a perfect black body.
Looking at their planet, all you'd see is what appears like empty space.
Note that these civilizations would be well aware of the probable existence of extraterrestrial life, but ultimately find attempts to contact such life useless or wasteful.
One additional (not required, but interesting) thought is the idea that a network of computers or neurons could exist under the surface throughout the entire planet, completely replacing a society of individual beings with a network of VERY powerful computation. In this sense, the planet itself becomes a single organism.
Please remember that this is all very speculative. I made some assumptions that (while they may be accepted by scientists) I partially disagree with. I tried to make this theory without due regard to my own opinion. For instance, I made the statement that energy will become more valuable over time, and while it's generally agreed upon in the scientific community, I believe we as humans could have the power to change that, but this belief is for another post.
Anyways, tell me what you think!
Here's my name for citations/references:
~Ezra N. Kirkpatrick~
First of all, let's talk about the question itself in order to more fully understand it, and therefore, be better equipped to answer it.
Scientists over the course of the past century or so have sought to rate the probability of finding extraterrestrial life. While to some it may seem like a menial task, there are very real implications the existence of extraterrestrial life can have. Some of these implications are positive, some of them are negative. For instance, they could communicate us details of advanced technology which we could then use to better our world (positive), or they could be looking for worlds with resources for them to consume without due regard to the inhabitants (negative).
So, with the desire to rate the probability of finding alien life, scientists went forth and did some rudimentary math based on observations of already known solar and extra-solar planets.
From Wikipedia:
- There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are similar to the Sun,[2][3] many of which are billions of years older than Earth.[4][5]
- With high probability, some of these stars will have Earth-like planets,[6][7] and if the Earth is typical, some might develop intelligent life.
- Some of these civilizations might develop interstellar travel, a step the Earth is investigating now.
- Even at the slow pace of currently envisioned interstellar travel, the Milky Way galaxy could be completely traversed in a few million years.[8]
With this, Enrico Fermi asked: "Where is everybody?"
Multiple solutions have been found for this alleged contradiction, and I'm confident many of them are factors that combine together in explaining this, but I want to talk about my theory on this, and maybe get some feedback from you guys.
My theory is similar to that which posits Alien civilizations isolate themselves, and are not contacting us intentionally.
It goes as follows:
1. All civilizations, societies of sentient beings, or large individual sentient beings (like a planet-wide network of neurons or computers) tend to develop.
This fact is a similar statement to the principle that living things evolve via natural selection, except that sentient beings, being natural apex predators and highly intelligent, are freed from much of the pressure that natural selection imposes on most living creatures. This is coupled with the fact that sentient beings develop/advance via the acquisition of knowledge, whereas normal organisms tend to advance via evolution, and it makes the analogy a bit poorer. Nonetheless, both evolution and civilization development ultimately result in increases to the organisms fitness and (probably) complexity.
2. As civilizations or organisms increase in complexity, their desire to communicate or "bother with" beings of less complexity/importance decreases.
This should go without saying: Humans are not concerned whatsoever with the opinion of an ant, and nor does anyone of sane mind try communicating with them.
3. Simultaneously, as civilizations/sentient beings advance, they become increasingly concerned with the waste of energy they collectively generate.
The United States, for example, in the late 2000s led a campaign of regulations, subsidies, and other actions to increase the efficiency of consumer and business appliances. As a result, the energy usage of machines continues decreasing to this day, which makes way for more technology and new power-hungry inventions to consume the void in energy usage. So, from this we can be certain to a high degree that societies will seek to limit their energy usage in order to allow 'more... More... MORE!', and in addition, any sufficiently advanced civilization will recognize that if the Universe continues on it's current path and is not stopped somehow, energy will inevitably become more and more valuable over time.
4. Therefore, given all of the above, the civilization in its final stages of development will not bother expending energy on communicating or attempting to communicate with other beings which may likely not have anything to offer for them, but rather, will focus all efforts on preserving itself and achieving maximal efficiency. This civilization would not be detectable, at least not with any realistic level of ease; all electromagnetic waves would be absorbed on their planet's surface to be transformed into energy for their use. Their planet would be a perfect black body.
Looking at their planet, all you'd see is what appears like empty space.
Note that these civilizations would be well aware of the probable existence of extraterrestrial life, but ultimately find attempts to contact such life useless or wasteful.
One additional (not required, but interesting) thought is the idea that a network of computers or neurons could exist under the surface throughout the entire planet, completely replacing a society of individual beings with a network of VERY powerful computation. In this sense, the planet itself becomes a single organism.
Please remember that this is all very speculative. I made some assumptions that (while they may be accepted by scientists) I partially disagree with. I tried to make this theory without due regard to my own opinion. For instance, I made the statement that energy will become more valuable over time, and while it's generally agreed upon in the scientific community, I believe we as humans could have the power to change that, but this belief is for another post.
Anyways, tell me what you think!
Here's my name for citations/references:
~Ezra N. Kirkpatrick~
