Life might be very common, but intelligent life still be incrediblY rare.
Individuals die but their inventions and insights remain. Individuals can also specialise, which is a kind of civilisational divide and conquer strategy.
Most animals don't have that. Some do train their young to a limited extent, but without writing the knowledge doesn't persist. And without abstraction it only evolves extremely slowly, if at all.
They have to reinvent the wheel over and over, which means they never invent the wheel at all.
We actually have this problem with politics and relationships. We keep making the same mistakes because the humanities provide some limited memory, but there's no symbolic abstraction and prediction - just story telling, which is far less effective.
Bonus points: I often wonder if there's a level of complexity beyond our kind of intelligence, and what it might look like. Abstraction of abstraction would be meta-learning - symbolic systems that manipulate the creation and distribution of civilisational learning.
AI seems to be heading in that direction.
There may be further levels, but we can't imagine them. We could be embedded in them and we wouldn't see them for what they are.
Another 34% is Forrest, much of which is managed for logging.
well, the first one just doesn't leave any chance for any other one.
>Life might be very common, but intelligent life still be incrediblY rare.
the time period between big ape and nuclear bomb is extremely short - few millions years. In a hundred or a thousand - doesn't really matter - years we'll be an interstellar species or may be we destroy ourselves by Covid-2319. The point is that complexity develops exponentially and tremendous changes are happening in an extremely a short period of time - i.e. if life has 4B years to develop when it most probably has 4.01B years to develop civilization.
To reach another star by the laws of physics involves many human lifetimes and that’s just the nearest star.
That in itself makes it more likely that we will never be interstellar.
https://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/109.jvn.spring00/n...
we can build with today's tech - classic nuclear reactor plus ion drive - a 3 stage ship reaching 1000km/s, 1200 years to the closest star. Once we get to fusion, we'll be able to improve that speed a small order of magnitude.
>To reach another star by the laws of physics involves many human lifetimes and that’s just the nearest star. >That in itself makes it more likely that we will never be interstellar.
That is exactly what makes it _inter_stellar:) We'll have generations - 10-15 to the nearest star with the current tech mentioned above - of people living their lives on those ships. Living on a planet will become a strange thing for them.
I think in 10-20 years, once launching into LEO becomes cheap with Starship, companies, universities and wealthy individuals will be launching solar + ion drive and nuclear + ion to all the places in the Solar System and some automated probes - beyond.
https://ia800108.us.archive.org/view_archive.php?archive=/24...