/ratanon/ -The Katechon Hypothesis for Resolving the Fermi Paradox

Name
Email
Subject	REC STOP
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
Password	(Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive	Archive [500 char limit]
* = required field	[▶Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki	Show oekaki applet (replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webp,webm, mp4, mov, pdf Max filesize is16 MB. Max image dimensions are15000 x15000. You may upload5 per post.

The Katechon Hypothesis for Resolving the Fermi Paradox Anonymous 01/27/20 (Mon) 08:06:48 No.14491

>Abstract: A corollary of the Simulation Argument is that the universe’s computational capacity may be limited. Consequently, advanced alien civilizations may have incentives to avoid space colonization to avoid taking up too much “calculating space” and forcing a simulation shutdown. A possible solution to the Fermi Paradox is that analogous considerations may drive them to avoid broadcasting their presence to the cosmos, and to attempt to destroy or permanently cripple emerging civilizations on sight. This game-theoretical equilibrium could be interpreted as the “katechon” – that which withholds eschaton – doom, oblivion, the end of the world. The resulting state of mutually assured xenocide would result in a dark, seemingly empty universe intermittently populated by small, isolationist “hermit” civilizations.

http://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/KatechonHypothesis.pdf

Thoughts?

(Reposted from https://endchan.net/ratanon/res/6740.html)

____________________________

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 01/27/20 (Mon) 23:48:02 No.14494

I'm going to go rephrase my argument from the other board.

I think a multiverse exists, which makes this line of reasoning moot. Any "simulation" is simply a description of a universe which is embedded within a bigger universe. Any agents in a universe shouldn't care about a particular simulation shutting down.

I am basically stating the "math is discovered, not invented" position. The relations between 2, 3 and 6 exist regardless of them being evaluated within a human brain or represented in any particular way. The relations between adjacent time steps of Conway's Game of Life exist regardless of anyone computing them. I think an agent is basically a mathematical structure contained in a larger superstructure which has rules governing the relationship between adjacent time slices, which makes it possible to pursue goals. These structures exist on their own like all math, so it shouldn't matter to their inhabitants in which ways they are instantiated, and they have no reason to fear a particular instance being eliminated.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 02/05/20 (Wed) 06:34:57 No.14499

how does sci-fi like this keep getting put into journals?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 02/08/20 (Sat) 07:35:45 No.14501

>>14499

What journals? This is a self-published paper. (And what your post shows is that people pattern match on file format. Brb republishing all my thoughts in PDF to give them credibility.)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 02/11/20 (Tue) 00:11:58 No.14503

File: a05ac56bda68de7⋯.pdf (7.66 KB,Psychoanalysis of ratanon ….pdf)

File related contains my thoughts on this hypothesis.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 03/19/20 (Thu) 12:35:15 No.14528

File: 6e05a96645113e1⋯.jpg (214.5 KB,1200x1200,1:1,uncle_ted.jpg)

What does /ratanon/ think of Ted Kaczynski's collapse theory?

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/01/kaczynskis-collapse-theory.html

>But once self-propagating systems have attained global scale, two crucial differences emerge. The first difference is in the number of individuals from among which the "fittest" are selected. Self-prop systems sufficiently big and powerful to be plausible contenders for global dominance will probably number in the dozens, or possibly in the hundreds; they certainly will not number in the millions. With so few individuals from among which to select the "fittest," it seems safe to say that the process of natural selection will be inefficient in promoting the fitness for survival of the dominant global self-prop systems. It should also be noted that among biological organisms, species that consist of a relatively small number of large individuals are more vulnerable to extinction than species that consist of a large number of small individuals. Though the analogy between biological organisms and self-propagating systems of human beings is far from perfect, still the prospect for viability of a world-system based on the dominance of a few global self-prop systems does not look encouraging.

>The second difference is that in the absence of rapid, worldwide transportation and communication, the breakdown or the destructive action of a small-scale self-prop system has only local repercussions. Outside the limited zone where such a self-prop system has been active there will be other self-prop systems among which the process of evolution through natural selection will continue. But where rapid, worldwide transportation and communication have led to the emergence of global self-prop systems, the breakdown or the destructive action of any one such system can shake the whole world-system. Consequently, in the process of trial and error that is evolution through natural selection, it is highly probable that after only a relatively small number of "trials" resulting in "errors," the world-system will break down or will be so severely disrupted that none of the world's larger or more complex self-prop systems will be able to survive. Thus, for such self-prop systems, the trial-and-error process comes to an end; evolution through natural selection cannot continue long enough to create global self-prop systems possessing the subtle and sophisticated mechanisms that prevent destructive internal competition within complex biological organisms.

> Meanwhile, fierce competition among global self-prop systems will have led to such drastic and rapid alterations in the Earth's climate, the composition of its atmosphere, the chemistry of its oceans, and so forth, that the effect on the biosphere will be devastating. In Part IV of the present chapter we will carry this line of inquiry further: We will argue that if the development of the technological world-system is allowed to proceed to its logical conclusion, then in all probability the Earth will be left a dead planet-a planet on which nothing will remain alive except, maybe, some of the simplest organisms-certain bacteria, algae, etc.-that are capable of surviving under extreme conditions.

>The theory we've outlined here provides a plausible explanation for the so-called Fermi Paradox. It is believed that there should be numerous planets on which technologically advanced civilizations have evolved, and which are not so remote from us that we could not by this time have detected their radio transmissions. The Fermi Paradox consists in the fact that our astronomers have never yet been able to detect any radio signals that seem to have originated from an intelligent extraterrestrial source.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 03/20/20 (Fri) 17:45:47 No.14529

>>14528

>species that consist of a relatively small number of large individuals are more vulnerable to extinction than species that consist of a large number of small individuals.

A human extinction event wouldn't imply the extinction of eukaryotic cells. In the same way, an extinction of "global self-propagating systems" wouldn't imply the extinction of the human beings which make them up.

Maybe Ted makes a good argument that a globalized economy is inherently unstable, although I'm not sure. But it doesn't seem like a solution to the Fermi paradox. There's nothing here to suggest that humans or our ability to produce radio signals would be permanently destroyed. And even if somehow the "world-system" is a prerequisite to radio, surviving humans would rebuild the system in a very short time on a cosmic time scale. So he would need to demonstrate that industrial civilization will indeed destroy the climate and sterilize the planet. I suspect I am somewhat mindkilled in this area due to such a claim mainly being advanced by members of the hated outgroup, but I am generally skeptical that human activity can render the planet uninhabitable in a matter of centuries.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 05/07/20 (Thu) 03:07:28 No.14725

File: 290bf489e9283d1⋯.png (72.14 KB,470x786,235:393,vitrifyher_katechon_hypoth….png)

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

Anonymous 05/08/20 (Fri) 08:17:51 No.14727

>>14725

Lol, after the first reply it doesn't even seem like they're talking to each other.

>. says:

>If infinite computation is possible, and the universe is a simulation, our universe almost certainly uses infinite computation

Why? Is this some kind of anthropic reasoning? Only events within humanity's light cone could possibly affect our experience, and this is a finite region. It's meaningless to make any kind of claim about computations happening outside this finite region. If computation = experience, then our experience is only what's inside our light cone, you could rip out the adjacent stick of hyperRAM storing the stuff going on outside it and it makes no difference to "our universe". (Really I'm just rehashing my earlier argument that reasoning about being inside a simulation is incoherent.)

>vitrifyher says:

>I think that "computations" are qualia

>reality really can't generate novel qualia ad infinitum

But there are infinitely many possible computations. These are contradictory.

>It seems awfully suspicious that there is so little novelty. There is a lot of recycling of the contents of consciousness.

Why would you expect your brain to be capable of performing novel computations just for fun? Survival and reproduction is Serious Business, and it involves doing the same types of computations (tiger checks, breast size and perkiness evaluations) over and over without wasting energy. Color spaces can have more dimensions than R,G,B, we could perceive color vectors in these spaces that aren't reducible to RGB if our eyes had the right hardware, and this would presumably create novel experiences, but Gnon determined that computing colors from three dimensional input was the best use of our limited computational ability.

>I doubt infinity, infinity itself, would come up with such a shitty and limited experience

Literal theism, just use the G word if you're going to ascribe intentions and value judgments to an abstract metaphysical entity which created the universe. No need to grab an unrelated label for a mathematical concept which has none of these properties.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.