[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: starship-design: Fermi, again . . .

Hi Group,

As for the Galactic Core - why nobody there? Probably due to GRB detonations
wiping planets out. Gamma-ray bursts probably limit life to the outer
reaches of the Galaxy where the lower stellar density means larger
separations between binary-pulsars [the probable triggers of GRBs] - problem
is in the outer Galaxy there's been less processing of gas and less metals
production i.e. fewer planets. Towards the Galactic core stellar near misses
also increase in frequency and so many systems would be disrupted - planet
losses, lethal comet showers etc. - that intelligence would be unlikely to
develop. The sparsity of metals in the safer outer edges, and the dangers of
the core might mean that in our Galaxy at least intelligence has only newly
arrived. If "They" are in the initial stages of colonising then percolation
theory might explain why they've missed us BUT remember it only works if
interstellar travel is difficult to achieve. If it's as easy as it is in
"Star Trek" then why aren't they here?

----- Original Message -----
From: Curtis Manges <clmanges@worldnet.att.net>
To: <starship-design@lists.uoregon.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 08, 1999 1:33 PM
Subject: starship-design: Fermi, again . . .

> Just got the percolation theory paper today, and it doesn't seem to
>account for the comparative density of stars closer to the center of the
>galaxy, as opposed to where we are, out closer to the rim. This could be a
>factor to consider. Colonization has a purpose, after all; it's a search
>for more living space and/or resources, and those are going to be more
>abundant and therefor easier to get to at the center; there will be more
>choices within a given radius of home. Time taken to use those up before
>expanding further could slow the process. If things get crowded and wars
>break out over the more closely-spaced territories, it could further slow
> Still, given the time involved, they should have been here by now, and
>there's no reason to assume that life wouldn't develop from about the same
>starting time throughout the galaxy.
> Consider also that, in a more densely-populated area, there could be a
>higher turnover rate in colonization, especially in the case of territorial
>conflicts, and that would likely reset the clock, so to speak, for a
>colonization cycle.
> More to chew on . . .
> Curtis