[ExI] Alien Civilizations May Only Be Detectable For A Cosmic Blink Of An Eye

[John Clark]

On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:


> *>How do you account for dust not being blown out of the system by light
> pressure like a comet tail?*
>

*If it were produced in a lab a comet tail would be considered a high grade
vacuum, the sort of dust cloud I'm talking about would be MUCH denser.
Billions of years ago, after a primordial cloud had produced the sun but
only just started making planets, the solar system would probably have
looked like Tabby's star to an ET that was 1500 light years away, if such a
being existed, but I don't think It did.*


*John K Clark*




>
> Keith
>
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 11:19 AM John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 1:28 PM Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> > How do you distinguish dust from computronium discussed on this list
> >> since sometime in the 1990s?
> >
> >
> > Occam's razor. If simple and very common dust particles can explain the
> observed phenomenon, and it can, then why conjure up exotic and ultra
> complex computronium?
> >
> > John K Clark
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >>
> >> Keith
> >>
> >> On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 3:36 AM John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 11:35 PM Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>> >>"That's why I think, at least in the observable universe, we are
> alone. "
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > That's what I thought until the astronomers found almost 2 dozen
> blinking stars in a 2000 ly volume around Tabby's Star.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > That's an old claim from 2019, and even then the paper says the
> question of whether the 21 stars are really "Tabby-alikes" requires further
> investigation, but as of 2025 the claim remains unconfirmed and is now
> considered dubious by nearly all professional astronomers. The paper about
> the odd behavior of those 21 stars was based on data from a ground-based
> telescope over a period of just 11 months, but the data about Tabby's Star
> came from the Kepler space telescope over a period of 9 years and 7 months,
> so there was insufficient data to say that the two phenomenon were the
> same. And those 21 stars were "close" to Tabby in that they were near to it
> in the night sky as seen from earth, but that doesn't necessarily mean they
> were close to it physically.
> >> >
> >> > And the theory that the dimming of Tabby's Star is caused by an
> uneven cloud of small dust particles orbiting the star explains
> observations quite well, but the theory that the dimming is caused by a
> megastructure built by ET does not. In short, that 2019 paper has been
> largely superseded by subsequent astronomical research and astronomers have
> moved on to more interesting things.
> >> >
> >> > John K Clark
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That makes absolutely no sense to me! What does AI have to do with
> it? It makes no difference if the brain that develops Drexler style
> Nanotechnology is wet and squishy or dry and hard because then they could
> make a von Neumann probe, and even if they couldn't move them faster than
> 0.001 C, which they almost certainly could, they could send one to every
> star in the galaxy in less than 50 million years (a blink of the eye
> cosmically speaking) and then a blind man in the fog bank could tell that
> the galaxy had been engineered. But even with our most powerful telescopes
> we've never seen a hint of such a thing. That's why I think, at least in
> the observable universe, we are alone.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >  John K Clark
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20251018/d2dd6438/attachment.htm>