<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'>>…</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Anders Sandberg<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [ExI] kepler study says 8.8e9 earthlike planets<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 2013-11-05 10:40, Adrian Tymes wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:5.0pt;margin-right:.5in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;margin-left:.5in'>That's the source of your confusion: the illusion of convenient numbers. The actual percentages are probably unwieldy small fractions of a single percent. Nature doesn't care that we decimalize things.<br><span style='color:#1F497D'>>…</span>Bah. See below. <br><br><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>snip{...lots of waaaay cool mathematical reasoning}<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><br><span style='color:#1F497D'>>…</span> So the rational thing is to expect *lots* of biospheres. Which is of course not good news, since that makes a future Great Filter more likely. -- Dr Anders Sandberg<span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>OK so this makes me think it is very possible that there is something very fundamentally wrong with both models. In the first case, we explain the silence everywhere by recognizing the probability of what happened here must be on the order of 1E-20. That compels me to just say something must be wrong with it. Anders suggested the Great Filter model is more likely, but even then, it just feels to me (ja, I recognize the universe doesn’t care how I feel) that occasionally some detectible signal would leak past the Great Filter.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I do sincerely propose we keep thinking, hard, keep pondering and proposing solutions, even if outlandish. Both the above solutions (crazy coincidence and Great Filter) just feel so wrong, even after correcting by F sub a, the factor which compensates for human intuition vs the apathy of the universe towards our human intuition. Even after dividing through by Fa, it still feels like the right answer isn’t yet on our list of theories. The latest Kepler estimate reinforces that notion; if there really are ten billion goldilocks planets per galaxy, the total silence is an anomalous observation in both theories, a still unresolved puzzle.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Think! Keep thinking!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>spike<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><pre><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></pre></div></body></html>