Yet another possibility for Fermi's Paradox

[Moontanman]

3 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

"Although precise measurement of the process of scientific discovery is difficult (Bettencourt et al. 2008), it is well-known that scientific output, whether measured by scientific papers, number of scientific journals, or even the number of new universities, is considered to be one of exponential growth"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3277447/

I find this challenge particularly ironic considering the nature of this thread and the arguments about how far we have come technologically.

We can have a million papers on the finer points of what we already know, not a good way to compare really. 

Quote

Theoretical limits provided we continue to use the same relative materials. Limits would have already been reached decades ago had we stayed with vacuum tubes. 

Did you even bother to read the link? If is a huge word, we are down to real limits, vacuum tubes were huge, individual atoms are a bit harder to use... 

Edited December 16, 2017 by Moontanman

[dimreepr]

18 hours ago, Ten oz said:

I assume you mean knowledge and not physical? In either case I disagree. If knowledge were sand on a beach everything humans know represents a couple of grains of sand. Humans are from a state of diminishing returns with regards to reaching down and picking up more sand. I am confused as to why you'd feel otherwise?

1

We were talking about physics and that our knowledge thereof is approaching an asymptote, but specifically about something other than light that can communicate knowledge at galactic distances; I don't disagree with your sand analogy other than to add, we're currently using tweezers to pick up more. I wouldn't dismiss completely the magic ray DrP talked of, just the probability seems vanishingly low. 

[Ten oz]

14 hours ago, Moontanman said:

We can have a million papers on the finer points of what we already know, not a good way to compare really. 

A human has not set foot on another planet yet, we do not know how life came to exist, if life exists elsewhere, how the universe came to be, if there was other universe before this one, if there will be one after, what's happening in black holes, and extra. We have theories and ideas but there is tremendous room for knowledge to expand as we are able to collect increasing amounts of actual data. When humans finally get to Mars and set up labs their "millions of paper" won't merely be "finer points" but rather a legitimate increase in what's empirically known. Same goes for if and when we get to Europa. The only way knowledge is limited is if information is limit. I personally belief in a finite universe but I don't know for a fact it isn't infinite. Could there is some beyond the universe we know? Either way there are still incalculable amounts of information out there for Humans to collect and covert to knowledge. 

 

14 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Did you even bother to read the link? If is a huge word, we are down to real limits, vacuum tubes were huge, individual atoms are a bit harder to use... 

The link was about heat and addressed that there is debate among experts. I read nothing that indicated limits have been reached based on individual atoms. Your link was about heat in central processing units. My point about materials is that different materials could resolve that issue. It is something people are working which also means more information and knowledge is being learned.

 

"The basic problem with faster processors is the wires, not the transistors.

If we scale a processor down to smaller physical size, the transistors get faster (which is good) and leak more (and thus produce more heat). FinFETs, which are those “3D” transistors, strained silicon, and exotic non-silicon semiconductor layers grown on top of the silicon are all ways to improve speed and reduce leakage.

The wire capacitance * wire resistance, on the other hand, remains constant. Capacitance times resistance is time, in this case the RC time constant of those wires. As you scale a processor down, the wires don’t speed up at all. Modern CPUs are dominated by wire delays.

Please note that these wire delays are not dominated by the speed of light. They do get within an order of magnitude of the speed of light, so that limit isn’t so far away, but resistance and capacitance remain a much larger problem."

https://www.quora.com/Could-we-reach-a-1-THZ-processor-and-if-so-is-there-a-limit-on-clock-speed

23 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

We were talking about physics and that our knowledge thereof is approaching an asymptote, but specifically about something other than light that can communicate knowledge at galactic distances; I don't disagree with your sand analogy other than to add, we're currently using tweezers to pick up more. I wouldn't dismiss completely the magic ray DrP talked of, just the probability seems vanishingly low. 

First we must establish if there are things which move at those speeds and the answer is yes:

"In the simple newtonian model, gravity propagates instantaneously: the force exerted by a massive object points directly toward that object's present position.  For example, even though the Sun is 500 light seconds from the Earth, newtonian gravity describes a force on Earth directed towards the Sun's position "now," not its position 500 seconds ago.  Putting a "light travel delay" (technically called "retardation") into newtonian gravity would make orbits unstable, leading to predictions that clearly contradict Solar System observations."

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/grav_speed.html

Could gravity be used to communicate; I don't know. Theoretical Physics (Quantum Gravity) isn't there yet. A lot still isn't understand which is why there are so many different models like string theory and loop quantum gravity. If the problem of time is ever resolved that would open the door to any number of new disciplines within physics and models of existence....and yes, forms of communication over distance.

"In physics, the problem of time is a conceptual conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics in that quantum mechanics regards the flow of time as universal and absolute, whereas general relativity regards the flow of time as malleable and relative.[1] This problem raises the question of what time really is in a physical sense and whether it is a truly a real, distinct phenomenon. It also involves the related question of why time seems to flow in a single direction, despite the fact that no known physical laws seem to require a single direction"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_time

 

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

First we must establish if there are things which move at those speeds and the answer is yes:

1

Given Maxwell's equations, it's reasonable to suppose that gravity, light and time are one and the same. I'm not saying you're wrong but it is a very interesting tangent, perhaps deserving its own thread.

[Moontanman]

4 hours ago, Ten oz said:

A human has not set foot on another planet yet, we do not know how life came to exist, if life exists elsewhere, how the universe came to be, if there was other universe before this one, if there will be one after, what's happening in black holes, and extra. We have theories and ideas but there is tremendous room for knowledge to expand as we are able to collect increasing amounts of actual data. When humans finally get to Mars and set up labs their "millions of paper" won't merely be "finer points" but rather a legitimate increase in what's empirically known. Same goes for if and when we get to Europa. The only way knowledge is limited is if information is limit. I personally belief in a finite universe but I don't know for a fact it isn't infinite. Could there is some beyond the universe we know? Either way there are still incalculable amounts of information out there for Humans to collect and covert to knowledge. 

The only real answer here is we do not know, no curve can be drawn from one data point. Incalculable amounts of information remains to be discovered about the Earth's make up, as you go into more and more detail the amount of knowledge goes up but that isn't the equivalent of Einstein's theory.   

4 hours ago, Ten oz said:

 

The link was about heat and addressed that there is debate among experts. I read nothing that indicated limits have been reached based on individual atoms. Your link was about heat in central processing units. My point about materials is that different materials could resolve that issue. It is something people are working which also means more information and knowledge is being learned.

 

"The basic problem with faster processors is the wires, not the transistors.

If we scale a processor down to smaller physical size, the transistors get faster (which is good) and leak more (and thus produce more heat). FinFETs, which are those “3D” transistors, strained silicon, and exotic non-silicon semiconductor layers grown on top of the silicon are all ways to improve speed and reduce leakage.

The wire capacitance * wire resistance, on the other hand, remains constant. Capacitance times resistance is time, in this case the RC time constant of those wires. As you scale a processor down, the wires don’t speed up at all. Modern CPUs are dominated by wire delays.

Please note that these wire delays are not dominated by the speed of light. They do get within an order of magnitude of the speed of light, so that limit isn’t so far away, but resistance and capacitance remain a much larger problem."

https://www.quora.com/Could-we-reach-a-1-THZ-processor-and-if-so-is-there-a-limit-on-clock-speed

Really, you are going to use another forum as a source? 

4 hours ago, Ten oz said:

First we must establish if there are things which move at those speeds and the answer is yes:

"In the simple newtonian model, gravity propagates instantaneously: the force exerted by a massive object points directly toward that object's present position.  For example, even though the Sun is 500 light seconds from the Earth, newtonian gravity describes a force on Earth directed towards the Sun's position "now," not its position 500 seconds ago.  Putting a "light travel delay" (technically called "retardation") into newtonian gravity would make orbits unstable, leading to predictions that clearly contradict Solar System observations."

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/grav_speed.html

Could gravity be used to communicate; I don't know. Theoretical Physics (Quantum Gravity) isn't there yet. A lot still isn't understand which is why there are so many different models like string theory and loop quantum gravity. If the problem of time is ever resolved that would open the door to any number of new disciplines within physics and models of existence....and yes, forms of communication over distance.

"In physics, the problem of time is a conceptual conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics in that quantum mechanics regards the flow of time as universal and absolute, whereas general relativity regards the flow of time as malleable and relative.[1] This problem raises the question of what time really is in a physical sense and whether it is a truly a real, distinct phenomenon. It also involves the related question of why time seems to flow in a single direction, despite the fact that no known physical laws seem to require a single direction"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_time

 

No, gravity doesn't travel faster than light, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity , The speed of light isn't about light it's about information, nothing can propagate FTL, gravity is no exception. 

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

The only real answer here is we do not know, no curve can be drawn from one data point. Incalculable amounts of information remains to be discovered about the Earth's make up, as you go into more and more detail the amount of knowledge goes up but that isn't the equivalent of Einstein's theory.  

So you agree there is still massive amounts of knowledge to be obtained but question the value of that knowledge compared to the Theory of Relatively? I am not sure how to even address information over time on a personal value judgement scale. Where would you rate Tesla's contributions compared to Einstein's contributions? 

 

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

Really, you are going to use another forum as a source? 

Your source was an opinion piece dealing with heat in CPU's. I provided an opinion piece addressing heat in CPUs. Are you claiming it is wrong and that research isn't underway to find possible resolutions? 

 

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

No, gravity doesn't travel faster than light

I never said it did.

Edited December 17, 2017 by Ten oz
Changed wording of question for clarity

[Moontanman]

11 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

So you agree there is still massive amounts of knowledge to be obtained but question the value of that knowledge compared to the Theory of Relatively? I am not sure how to even address information over time on a personal value judgement scale. Where would you rate Tesla's contribution to the AC power generation and high frequency against Einstein's contributions to physics? 

 

Tesla 0 Einstein 99 

11 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

 

Your source was an opinion piece dealing with heat in CPU's. I provided an opinion piece addressing heat in CPUs. Are you claiming it is wrong and that research isn't underway to find possible resolutions? 

Research is underway to find possible reasons to believe Mars was destroyed in a nuclear holocaust, or that only god can create life. Showing something is being researched doesn't mean it is the correct thing in any way shape or form... 

 

11 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

 

I never said it did.

You at the very least insinuated it, you keep going for things that are not part of the scientific consensus. Please, if you want to go in that direction we may as well start talking about flying  saucers. 

[Ten oz]

On 12/14/2017 at 12:29 PM, Moontanman said:

The original premise was that a civilization should be quite a bit brighter than our sun is in light but in radio waves. Everything we do that is electrical in nature gives off radio waves. From the 60 cycle hum of transmission lines to TV and radio broadcasts.

 

12 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Tesla 0 Einstein 99 

LOL, Tesla is zero. Tesla is responsible for pretty much everything you reference in the above quote. Marconi was the first to patent radio but it was all based on Tesla's work. Tesla's work applied to communication is the gold standard I thought you were saying wouldn't be exceeded yet Tesla gets zero? I am confused as to which advances in knowledge and technology you consider relevant. It is perhaps time for me to leave this discussion as I cannot wrap my mind around Tesla being a zero.

[Moontanman]

1 minute ago, Ten oz said:

 

LOL, Tesla is zero. Tesla is responsible for pretty much everything you reference in the above quote. Marconi was the first to patent radio but it was all based on Tesla's work. Tesla's work applied to communication is the gold standard I thought you were saying wouldn't be exceeded yet Tesla gets zero? I am confused as to which advances in knowledge and technology you consider relevant. It is perhaps time for me to leave this discussion as I cannot wrap my mind around Tesla being a zero.

Tesla is an often talking point of conspiracy theories, he has been given credit for everything from aliens to time travel. Your assertions would have to be quite a bit more specific to be taken seriously... 

[Ten oz]

2 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Tesla is an often talking point of conspiracy theories, he has been given credit for everything from aliens to time travel. Your assertions would have to be quite a bit more specific to be taken seriously... 

Are you seriously questioning Tesla's contribution to radio? 

[Moontanman]

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Are you seriously questioning Tesla's contribution to radio? 

 No, his detection of alien signals from Mars are indisputable.. Are you seriously going to keep making assertions you cannot back up with mainstream science...?