[ExI] taxonomy for fermi paradox fans:
rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com
Mon Feb 2 03:54:52 UTC 2015
On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> If your goal includes living a long perceived life, then slowing down
> would be counterproductive. Besides, you can simulate a lot during that
> kind of time period if you have a portable energy source.
> So Giovanni, I see a reason to speed up, but slightly less reason to slow
### On a lark you decide to fork a copy to be downloaded to a von Neumann
probe, which is going to be about the size of a beer can (+ tons of weight
in the laser sail, fusion engine, and the nanotech that eats the sail and
transforms it into reaction mass for braking). You could run your copy at
nominal speed, implying a trillion subjective years of boredom and on-board
politics. You could put the copy into stasis until in reaches orbit around
Alpha Centauri Bb and starts eating it to make more von Neumann probes.
Which one would you choose?
It's the same argument as choosing between a generation starship and
hibernation when sending biological humans to the same destination (not
that I think it's ever going to happen). I haven't heard anybody objecting
to the idea of hibernation as a matter of principle, while s-f about
generation starships tends to have a distinctly dated flavor, this idea
having long since fallen out of favor among hard s-f fans. If biological
hibernation is a reasonable solution to passing a gulf of time and space,
then its cybernetic equivalent is just as reasonable and obvious.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat