That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox · HackerPapers discussions

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — HN submission

Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:33:43 GMT

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation for Fermi's paradox

3 points; 2 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — HN submission

Mon, 21 Mar 2022 13:23:05 GMT

The aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi’s paradox

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — mentioned by dubya23

Wed, 10 Oct 2018 19:09:50 GMT

I think you are seriously overestimating our current understanding of the universe/physics. For instance we don't even know if our universe is finite or not, if it's infinite then your point is moot and you literally would have access to infinite compute. I disagree, I have seen research indicating that it's reasonable to have a computing system with on the order of 10^69 bits. There doesn't seem to be anything magical about this thinking at all. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.03394.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — HN submission

Sat, 30 Jun 2018 17:04:48 GMT

The aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox

1 point; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — mentioned by OscarCunningham

Sat, 30 Jun 2018 12:31:55 GMT

This goes together nicely with the Aestivation Hypothesis (https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.03394). If a civilisation puts itself on hold for a trillion years, just waiting around doing nothing, then when it wakes up the universe is much colder and it can do computations 10^30 times more efficiently. If the civilization consists of minds running on computers then they've increased their own lifespans by the same factor.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — HN submission

Wed, 03 Jan 2018 14:49:09 GMT

The aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — HN submission

Sat, 25 Nov 2017 19:28:49 GMT

That is not dead which can eternal lie

3 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — HN submission

Sat, 18 Nov 2017 11:54:01 GMT

The aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi’s paradox

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — mentioned by philipkglass

Wed, 19 Jul 2017 23:44:54 GMT

Shortcut to full PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.03394.pdf On a first reading, and accepting the major premises for the sake of argument, this seemed like the weakest point: The reader might wonder whether starting these computations now is rational since the universe is quickly cooling and will soon (compared to the overall lifespan of the civilization) reach convenient temperatures. The computational gain of doing computations at time t is ∝ exp(Ht): it increases exponentially until the temperature is dominated by the internal heating rather than the outside temperature. Since most of the…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — mentioned by kaj_sotala

Thu, 06 Jul 2017 10:23:44 GMT

Yeah, their institute just put out a quarterly update a few days ago: https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/quarterly-update-summer-2017/ . It mentions their previous Fermi Paradox paper, "That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi’s paradox" ( https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.03394 ), and also a "future paper" that sounds like this one: > Anders Sandberg, Stuart Armstrong, and their co-author Milan Cirkovic published a paper outlining a potential strategy for advanced civilizations to postpone computation until the universe is much colder, and thereby producing up to…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — HN submission

Fri, 09 Jun 2017 12:51:02 GMT

The aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox

3 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

That is not dead which can eternal lie: the aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi's paradox — HN submission

Mon, 15 May 2017 03:49:55 GMT

The aestivation hypothesis for resolving Fermi’s paradox [pdf]

2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.