Posted by Ariarule 5 hours ago
Occams razor definitely points to this just being a sterilization problem. But it would be funny if the bacteria was just way more stable than people expect.
Today the Sun is very far from other stars, but early in star formation (within nebula) the stars are
1. much closer together
2. have a higher rate of material ejection (mass exchange)
3. likely have more benign radiation environments unless near a star, due to GCR shielding by nebula gas
4. likely have higher equilibrium temperature in interstellar/interplanetary space
Combined, these factors yield orders of magnitude improvement in panspermia efficiency vs the Sun.
The key was to change "nebula" (returning results for "stellar nebula") to "star forming region."
It would make a fine science fictional scenario that could get around the Fermi problem: those 10,000 or so systems could have life, but the rest of the universe not have life.
>those 10,000 or so systems could have life, but the rest of the universe not have life.
I was thinking bigger: if panspermia gets dramatically more viable, then nebula could switch over in their probability distribution from "default sterile" to default teeming.
In this scenario, we could find (related!) life essentially everywhere, and caused by panspermia no less, despite numbers still saying panspermia is wildly improbable for mature stars.
But if OoL is extremely unlikely, the cluster panspermia idea still allows extraterrestrial life to reasonably exist and be reachable, because that life didn't require a separate highly unlikely OoL event.
I think SETI should focus on stars that look like the Sun's siblings.
The Fermi paradox assumes we'd be good at observing aliens, and that aliens will leave evidence that's conspicuous to us. These two statements are roughly equivalent, basically saying there can't be too much "impedance mismatch" between the two.
But again, even besides that, the nebula can still "teem" even though we never see any here on Earth, because the Sun vs nebula math is just so different for interstellar travel too. Many civilizations, seeded from common dirty chemistry, then permanently separated by vast distance as the star migrates out of the nebula.
TL;DR nebula parameter differences solve Fermi even in a teeming universe, but I doubt we'd see the aliens even if they were here. ;)
I wonder how my life would have turned out differently. I am a nerd. I am an introvert. I am single. Mostly, I am enjoying it. Sometimes - and increasingly more often - I am questioning it. I have baggage. Was visiting my (younger) sister's grave today. She had baggage with a sad outcome. I am thinking more about my existence.
I wish this world would be a more kind place. And I am praising anyone who is contributing to that. Try to be a contributor.
(As a side note, I wish titles were more fitting to the article, vs. trying to bait clicks with catchy titles that often suggest a different topic.)
I'm not thrilled with this kind of clickbait-y title, but when you're subscribed to the blog, you know what it's likely to be about and ignore that, and the problem only appears here when this context is lost.
"Hey lonely HN nerds, wipe the tear from your eye and come read about microbe survival times in salt, permafrost, and open space"? Something else? I'm open to suggestions.
In my 20s and early 30s whenever I left the city sometimes on the weekends, I'd feel this FOMO like I'm missing something fun.
Something changed as I got older. I think around the pandemic. When I was in the city on a beautiful day, I felt this sad feeling like I should be in nature instead.
I eventually got a place in the country. Now that I'm not single, I couldn't give two craps about going out, meeting people, and I hate crowds and noise. There's no greater pleasure than sitting and listening to water sounds outside, reading and studying.
People are overrated, but you need them sometimes. Don't feel bad about being an introvert.
But not sure how helpful they are.
My advice is, go dancing. Learn to enjoy your body and how to move it freely for fun, then you will find a likeminded body to enjoy together. But depending where you life, finding a good place to dance with nice people and not just drunk idiots can be a bit harder unfortunately.
The problem with nerds finding a social scene for what they already enjoy doing already is that there's a very good chance it's going to be a male-dominated activity. Going to a tech meetup or a board game night is a decent way to make friends, but not so much a mate.
Dancing is the language of the body. I don't like small talk and am probably a introvert, but by dancing - connection comes easy and natural to me (at the right place).
Besides, the village dance was the traditional way for couples to hook up. And before that, there was the tribal drum.
And then you try climbing outdoors on rocks big and small and thats it, people quit their careers and do vans/camping for rest of their lives just to do climbing (plus connected sports, there are many).
Can be many other activities, dancing ain't more special than many others. I'll stick with my climbing, you with your dance. Everybody wins.
Sounds like you like dancing. Congratulations and I'm happy you met someone doing something you like. That's a good strategy.
As far as village dance blah blah, people absolutely meet at parties, lots of people also dance at parties, correlation is not causation.
Maybe do some more casual science on social history?
But you surely can meet partners however you like and not everyone needs to love dancing, but the "obsession" people have with it simply goes back a looong way.
And aside, I actually do claim anyone who is not physically handycapped, very likely enjoys dancing if introduced to it in a easy way (look at how most children behave if you give them a rhytm), most grownups nowdays just associate it with awkward social situations, which I think is sad. I know some fellow nerds of mine, forever single, forever avoiding all situations where they would meed potential partners.
Time seems to go faster, the older you are. When 5, a day lasts enormously, a month forever away.
When 30, a day is still noticeable. When 50, a day flies past. When 70? A week vanishes so very quickly.
A bitter truth of age, is the older you get, the less time you have left? Well, the faster that time seems to move to you. It's as if the more you try to hold on, the faster it goes away.
There are ways to improve this. New experience is one. Doing the same thing every day, with no challenge or change, just makes life fly by.
You can be an introvert and still experience loads of new and of change. Trust me on this. And as a geeky introvert, you have a mind to learn daily, and more importantly, learn different things, not just tech.
But I guess what I'm saying is, do indeed "live more", but do it as you. Don't let these weirdo extroverts make you dance to their tune.
It is not the gotcha you think it is.
To answer the question, you should really not “wait” for anything in life anymore past 30. At some point between 35-45 you will likely cross the halfway point of your life and will begin the journey of being on your way out. Life has a cadence, and it’s not fun to be past that point still “waiting” for things you thought you’d have.
Obviously this advice will hit differently for people past a certain age, I’m mostly talking to people in their 20s. They can be saved, but others it may be too late.
You must actualize the person you want to be as early as you can, so you can maximize your time in life being that person. That’s when you will have “arrived” to your life, and can focus on just living instead of constantly chasing who you want to be. If you don’t, you might never get there, and then in the end if you think too much you’ll realize your life will have been a waste. That is a private hell.
At some point, if you wait too long, there may no longer be enough time or resources to actually live the life destined for you, and then it’s all over. Your chance at life expires: dreams unfinished, like cutting off in the middle of sente