Self-Replicating Robots and Galactic Domination

To check out any of the lectures available from Great Courses Plus go to ow.ly/dweH302dILJ
We’ll soon be capable of building self-replicating robots. This will not only change humanity’s future but reshape the galaxy as we know it.
Get your own Space Time t­shirt at bit.ly/1QlzoBi
Tweet at us! @pbsspacetime
Facebook: pbsspacetime
Email us! pbsspacetime [at] gmail [dot] com
Comment on Reddit: / pbsspacetime
Support us on Patreon! / pbsspacetime
Help translate our videos! kzbin.info_cs_p...
Previous Episode - Is there a 5th Fundamental Force
• Is There a Fifth Funda...
Should we Build a Dyson Sphere?
• Should We Build a Dyso...
Self-assembling robots are referred to as von Neumann machines after the man responsible for originally proposing them, John von Neumann. Since then, the potential of these machines and their ability to proliferate throughout known space has made galactic colonization seem not only possible but perhaps inevitable.
Written and hosted by Matt O’Dowd
Made by Kornhaber Brown (www.kornhaberbrown.com)
References:
von Neumann, John The Theory of Self-reproducing Automata, Urbana, IL: Univ. of Illinois Press. ed. A. Burks, 1966
Robert A. Freitas Jr., Ralph C. Merkle, Kinematic Self-Replicating Machines, Landes Bioscience, Georgetown, TX, 2004;
www.MolecularAssembler.com/KSR...
Robo3D R1 printing an upgrade for itself
• Robo3D R1 printing an ...

[@MrMakae90]

_"What is the point of a machine that has the only purpose of self-replication"_

[@jaibhimadevi5805]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jmirnp-qiryLndU

[@blackwind743]

That's not your only purpose. The aliens have to listen to your brain waves for science. What? You thought you weren't a Von Neumann probe? :)

[@eosapienrancher4045]

@@blackwind743 I wouldn't use the word "purpose," but yeah that description of Von Neumann probes is analogous to our own function as self-replication mechanisms for DNA.

[@jonathanjollimore7156]

Oh god not again

[@flamixin]

You can't. That's a team work.

[@TimmacTR]

What is a really funny thought is that if there is a first contact event between two galactic civilizations it will probably physically happen between two robots..

[@Petr75661]

robot A: "sup?" robot B: "sup? long shift, eh?"

[@XEpiccatX]

Oh, I see you've got the Canadian model, eh? Sorry.

[@aaronsmith5864]

+XEpiccatX ouch Canada burn

[@KujaDiartua]

Okay, lets think, that robots' main purpose will be gathering resources and replicate and expand. Would they consider at some point that it is more optimal to salvage other robot faction for the resource? Or will they both stick to the program and just merge their excavation missions and mine planets? Will they decide to fight for the planets or what?

[@garethdean6382]

It's *possible* that would be their main purpose, though I suspect any civilization worth its salt would have exceptions for destroying evidence of alien life. (Indeed identifying another robot might be their main purpose.) You'd need to be a pretty ignorant species to create a probe that was designed to mindlessly convert matter. (First target,, your home planet.) On the other hand, if they were built to destroy life...

[@KillItAndBurnIt]

You should read "We Are Legion (We Are Bob)". A great book by Dennis E. Taylor about a guy called Bob who becomes the AI for a Von Neumann probe :P

[@MaestroRigale]

Bryan Gray I just tore through this series this month. I really, really enjoyed it.

[@katietrongogo]

The audiobook is one of my favorites!

[@wyl600]

Thats what brought me here!

[@trevorlang6895]

Great first book, really enjpyed it, but I found as you read the other books it felt like the writer had a initial great idea but no idea where to go with it. Kinda lost its way after a bit

[@solsystem1342]

@@trevorlang6895 you have to admit the ending was a really good use of established tech though.

[@igorkornienko7761]

I like how every episode ends with words 'space time'. Thats what I call good TV.

[@ethanwagner6418]

We are the Precursors. It is our job to seed the galaxies around us with life and find an heir to take up the Mantle of Responsibility.

[@michaelleft9020]

And then turn into corrupt parasites that basically create zombies. Wait a minute... that's already American politicians.

[@NoConsequenc3]

Humans are fucked if they think it's only American politicians that are corrupt parasites

[@UpcycleElectronics]

+Ethan Wagner Or we are the food for the replicators sent in advance, with a known timeline for our discovery of nitrogen and methods of extraction, fostering exponential growth of the feed stock. This is directly followed by the final program phase that causes a considerable increase of the average size and weight of the stock, in conjunction with a pharmaceutical protocol to prolong their life and health regardless of weight, in order to ensure maximum replicator potential. Of course self awareness is key to the evolution of the feed stock species and their perceived discoveries, but they are also genetiprogrammed to limit them just enough they don't see the replicators coming until it's too late.

[@aaexo6468]

That sounds like a Halo reference

[@ethanwagner6418]

It was a Halo reference.

[@bornestellar6334]

Do you want Reapers? Because this is how you get Reapers.

[@fett716]

lol

[@insu_na]

Reapers are fine, they just take you to Valhall. Reavers are what you need to be afraid of!

[@johnylikesfreedom]

+Crimson lol

[@zentropoetic]

Hahaha fantastic

[@WeeWeeJumbo]

_Well played._

[@hmmmblyat6178]

„It takes an individual with questionable motives to perform such a thing“ *Now this looks like a Job for me*

[@walangchahangyelingden8252]

Hahaha

[@kamenborisov8839]

Let's hope SG1 will be here to save us when the replicators go rogue.

[@Ceelvain]

Stargate called them the Replicators. And they were not fun to deal with.

[@jotizo]

Yes!! First thing I thought of

[@prestondial1992]

Maybe Star Trek Discovery will be good

[@RicardoFuertes1990]

you should check The Expanse, GREAT scifi show.

[@aaronsmith5864]

+1 for stargate reference

[@Oreoclan]

First thing I thought of were seed ships. Then replicators. Those darn Ancients. They've been gone for thousands of years and their shit is still taking over the universe.

[@Temirkul]

iPhone 7 is the reason why aliens don't visit us

[@aaronsmith5864]

I heard IPhone 8 will have the ability to self replicate

[@maxmusterman3371]

IPhone 7 is A(I)lien!

[@luislos70]

+Aaron Smith Will it have a headphone jack though?

[@aaronsmith5864]

+Luislos70 iPhone 8 will have no need for headphones it beams the audio right into your head and all it will say is buy the iPhone 9

[@alquinn8576]

Apple built a Von Neumann probe but it ran out of batteries...

[@willlastnameguy8329]

Finally an acknowledgement that the estimates for advanced civilizations is probably wildly inaccurate.

[@Justwantahover]

Intelligence is no big deal in evolution. It's just a tool like a beak on a bird. The only reason we developed intelligence is cos we had a use for it.

[@TrieyeGamingRants]

probably

[@Mr.Nichan]

People acknowlwdge that all the time.

[@JainaKeria]

Plot twist: Will is an undercover agent for the Grekkar Tar Empire

[@theobvious1958]

@@Justwantahover there are so many species of animals smarter than us

[@officialDragonMap]

“Resistance is futile!” - von Neumann probe

[@mattsamoto4451]

Yeah as i watched this video, I instantly thaught "The Borg"

[@tenrec]

"Ugly bags of mostly water! War is now with you!"

[@ravendon]

Cybermen. Doctor Who.

[@thomasr.jackson2940]

Another great video and a fun topic! One critique, I don't think it is valid to dismiss the "no one has implemented it" explanation just because we arbitrarily decide it is unlikely. Perhaps civilizations are common, but civilizations which are composed of autonomous agents capable of random, non productive rogue acts are not. It seems to me that these sorts of civilizations might face survival challenges that a more integrated and self regulating civilization would not. If there are lots of civilizations, but they are not colonizing the galaxy or contacting us, we might want to think of why that would be. Perhaps galactic expansion is not the self evident good we think it is. Or then again, maybe we thought of it first.

[@NeoGenus1]

The argument isn't necessarily that we think it's 'good', though.. we just might want to do it e.g. to collect data. They do conclude civ's are quite possibly numerous in our own galaxy, but Hammurabi didn't build a space probe (that we know of) and so it's reasonable to assume that challenges (political, natural, what have you) exist for any civilization

[@garethdean6382]

The argument isn't really dismissed, but it can't be treated as likely or very good. You get a lot of 'Perhaps everyone, everywhere does X', but that's not an explanation or even a theory, just a guess. You'd need a foundation for what would motivate or result in such a global (universal) result. Some way by which the theory may be tested or developed. Any idea that lacks that is barely scientific.

[@thomasr.jackson2940]

Exactly. Saying there have to be few or no civilizations because we aren't teaming with von Neumann probes is wildly speculative. It is making all sorts of assumptions about the nature of civilizations based on n=1 experience. Ironically, the von Neumann probe argument was originally made to counter the sort of speculative exuberance about alien civilization promoted by people like Sagan (and Drake, and others). That the galaxy must be teeming with civilizations was treated as an almost statistical certainty based on very speculative assumptions. The probe argument was used to quash this view and defund SETI programs as a waste of money and resources. In fact, both views are speculative and unscientific. SETI has adjusted its outlook to a new more skeptical (and rational) patronage that sees the search as worthwhile, but hasn't prejudged the outcome. Makes their efforts more like that of scientists and less like carnival hucksters.

[@TehPompkinHead]

I really love this comment

[@Hecatonicosachoron]

I think that the estimates of duplication and navigating a successful orbit - without the probe being destroyed during the trip - are far too optimistic. Even for small probes (which would have longer replication times) the failure rate would be very high. How high I cannot tell. But it will depend on the abundance of dust in the ISM which is not known with any certainty. Among all the other parameters which are still not entirely understood.

[@Strettger]

That moment you realise *WE* are the Forerunners.

[@RaphaelMattos_atCW]

We keep being cautious, because it's reasonable to believe we are within less than one std deviation from the norm. But it's possible, albeit unlikely, that we are lagging behind and that self-destruction or failure to develop space travel awaits us, or that we're in fact forerunners, and likely to be the first ones to spread out. Either way, this shows that we'll probably never be able to declare the Fermi paradox solved. Of course, there's the bleek (IMHO) possibility we're truly alone... Naaaa, just kidding, I want to believe.

[@Frog89mad]

this is just 1 possible way to extinct all life on a planet and pull a stop on any development for intelligent life, but a meteor/comet does that pretty easy. And if i remember correctly, Earth has a statistic of about every 10 million years a extinction level impact. Maybe our planet has been just super lucky compared to other hapitable planets in the universe? : /

[@saradanhoff6539]

Or they're all just hitting the great filter, and there have been tens of thousands just like us, but they never made it past *this exact stage* in development. For some reason.

[@NoConsequenc3]

*OR*, each and every one of them made it past this exact stage, but the next is one that isn't readily observable or understandable with our current level of technology. Not being able to solve the Fermi Paradox isn't automatically a bad thing ;)

[@NonDelusional74611]

+Sara Danhoff -- I think the propensity to conclude that gods must be responsible (inevitably leading to species-ending conflicts over the subtlest differences in interpretation) destroys a great deal of civilizations. We're not out of the woods there, ourselves. Perhaps the greatest filter is in the insane imaginations of the least intelligent among a planet's most intelligent species.

[@zentimus3498]

"Hey Joss, I have an idea for you...", classic!

[@hexadecim8]

It’s soo cool experiencing our intellectual growth as a species and how much new knowledge we’ve gained even in just the short amount of time that we've all been alive. Can't wait to see what's next.

[@RyanCelsiusMusic]

Isn't biological life essentially a particular implementation of von neumann probes?

[@shadrack1701]

I absolutely love this channel. So good, can't get enough. Great topics, great content and a great host.

[@roxaskinghearts]

Thats if it cant get good enough waymo is in 30 states and 7 countries driving millions of people around the world and thats just what a tech giant has done with it in recent history experimenting and learning from it first in 2 states and 2 countries before they went mainstream

[@tau-ceti]

What an awesome series of lectures. Visual, well explained and to the point - brilliant stuff.

[@mohammadbazzi2275]

I love your channel man. Your argumentation is grown up, and you don't buy into rediculous explanations because someone famous came up with them. Your views on the Fermi paradox are an example of this, but if there is something we can learn from this, its that we should build these probes very soon, before someone else does.

[@RudeAlert]

What if the level of technology required to build effective VNM probes also renders them obsolete. So in a few hundred years we might be able to send out waves of VNM probes but by then we may also have far more interesting options at our disposal, hence a lack of VNM probes altogether.

[@lakibadhikari7930]

nice outlook

[@SSMJ]

Exactly what I was wondering.

[@DeepDuh]

Well, what's better than ensuring survival of a species by preparing a whole galaxy to spread to, later even galaxy clusters? Except maybe finding out before that it's all just a hoax (simulation) and it wouldn't do us any good?

[@UpcycleElectronics]

"Dark matter" VNM probes!

[@feynstein1004]

I hope it does. I'm vary wary of VNM probes.

[@marius4iasi]

Wouldn't these repeated replications over millions of years cause inevitable errors which will bring new forms of machines, maybe even complex self-aware ones. And doesn't that sound a lot like life, mutations and evolution? What if life as we know it is just alien vNMs that mutated along the way? Or what if that is exactly why other advanced alien civilizations don't create vNMs?

[@Dexios_Divine]

ci.memecdn.com/599/9814599.jpg

[@EebstertheGreat]

It is possible to protect them against error if you want, to the extent that even with an exponentially growing population over billions of years, no copying errors would successfully propagate. Think of digital data with a kilobit checksum as an analogy.

[@DerMitWieWoOhneNamen]

What if the very first bacteria, billions of years ago on earth were just Von Neumann Probes from silicon-based lifeforms? Their version of machines being carbon-based and in general what we call organic chemistry. Abandoned and forgotten, those single-celled machines kept replicating, changing, clumping together to form multicellular machines, mutating on and on...

[@michaelsommers2356]

_"Wouldn't these repeated replications over millions of years cause inevitable errors which will bring new forms of machines, maybe even complex self-aware ones. And doesn't that sound a lot like life, mutations and evolution?"_ You should read James P. Hogan's novel _Code of the Lifemaker_, which is based on that exact premise.

[@zeryphex]

image.slidesharecdn.com/1212-130927225957-phpapp01/95/lfsr-11-638.jpg

[@KingKoopa0331]

More episodes about spreading out throughout the galaxy like this, please

[@Tubejin]

We are Legion, We are Bob.

[@kain5056]

Has anyone thought about the possibility that there could be a Von Neumann probe in an asteroid around a close by star and we just aren't able to detect it yet? We still can't look close enough to other star systems to make out any features, so things like that could be as close as Proxima Centauri right now and we wouldn't even know.

[@jamiequinn5553]

I don't know if I want to live in a galaxy where humans are the most advanced creatures.

[@Dexios_Divine]

wheres some asaris god damn it.

[@lionskull1]

You have no choice. if it is true then you are already doing it, and if it is not true then you're not doing it. And what's so bad about being the most advanced creatures? Do the most advanced have to be the most stable, likable, morally sound creatures around?

[@jamiequinn5553]

I think it would definitely help to be stable, likable and morally sound if we are indeed the most advanced. That would put us in a great position of power when contacting another civilization, and as Uncle Ben taught us: With great power comes great responsibility.

[@ibanezrocker12]

I welcome you to fuck off and live in a different galaxy.

[@NJP-Supremacist]

Too much human bias detected.

[@thecrazylovelyboy]

I get excited like a kid every time I see a notification of a new "PBS Space Time" upload

[@jboon4175]

Wow that was an amazing, amazing space-time. Probably the best answer to the question I've seen!

[@deusexaethera]

I would totally watch "Joss Whedon's 'Dyson Swarm'".

[@SlyPearTree]

Today I learned that I've been pronouncing Von Neumann wrong my whole life.

[@hallowurm]

He didn't get it quite right either, but it was pretty good

[@gamerN77]

Well, if you're not German, Austrian or Swiss, chances are high you're also pronouncing it wrong. Same as I'm pronouncing the hell out of English with my German accent ;)

[@hallowurm]

overTIMe you and me both

[@OriginalPiMan]

I'm wondering how "neu" gets pronounced "noy" instead of similar to "new". I'm just not seeing how any variations on the sounds of e and u get to "oi" and I'm wondering what divergences in language development in Germanic languages led to its possibility.

[@zeryphex]

Neumann, Deutschland, Keurig ... all have the "eu = oy sound" pattern ... but if you want to make English seem "better" than German, you could say "blah blah blah The Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians were cousins of the mainland continental Germans as they were all Germanic/Teutonic peoples/tribes, but it turns-out that those Germanics/Teutons that mated with each other and conquered the British Isles and developed the English language became the dominant Germanics/Teutons of Europe or the world blah blah blah" ... there ... do you feel better now? Let's be politically-correct and say "each group of people is special in their own way - no one is better!" In retort, one could say "if it weren't for that damned English Channel separating The British Isles from continental Europe, those Angles/Saxons/Jutes/Frisians would've died by my blade!" Ah well ... using geography as military/strategic defense is only logical. Another argument in support of English is that it is a semi-universal language due to its make-up ... having grammar from Old Norse language, core language vocabulary from Old High German language, and base words and root words from Latin/Greek by way of Norman French language ... with some word borrowings from Middle East languages, Slavic languages, and Asian languages. In support of Germanic people, in general ... the Angles/Saxons/Jutes/Frisians were Germanic, the Normans who settled in Normandy France were from Norway and Denmark (Germanic) ... the French were Gaulic Celts conquered by Franks (a Germanic tribe and whom France is named after) ... and the Varangians arguably created Russia under Rurik, from Sweden (Germanic). Maybe it is Rurik's dominant/aggressive Swedish blood that runs in Vladimir Putin's veins? haha joking

[@the11382]

If Stargate has taught me anything, von Neumann probes(aka replicators) are the worst idea. Destroying entire civilizations in order to replicate, hell, it took a super weapon the size of a mountain to destroy it, and even then, the Asurans where still there, in another galaxy, at least until they were destroyed years later.

[@mikes2381]

Well we don't have to program them to be assholes. Step 1: find "all available resources"; If resource is inhabited; run "watch"; #send data #collected to home; else run "viability"; Step 2: mine and reproduce;

[@SirMikeys]

+Mike Stromecki Inevitable glitches/errors if constructed with current technology? A young/defenseless civilization could be wiped out if our probes malfunction and fail to detect life. I'd assume we need a lot more time to properly develop our computers before we can create an error-proof machine.

[@Twilord_]

+Mike Stromecki While the Stargate example did start as a child's toy, the idea of assuming an advanced AI over a massive time-span would remain exactly as programmed in every last copy seems distressing.

[@michalkowalik89]

galaxy is too huge to make these remotely control. they will have to be programmed to make decisions on their own.

[@lordgarion514]

+qwerty hell, the closest star to us is too far away to make them remote controlled. it would take over 8 years for us to see what was going on and then get instructions to the probe.

[@WSleeman]

The number of Rakuen Tsuiho references that can be made in the first two minutes alone is truly formidable. If only there was some parallel I could think of in the movie about robots exploring deep space...

[@bryandraughn9830]

Cheers to you and your team! Great stuff! I've been thinking that because there must be a "threshold" at which a civilization must cross before they are able to implement something like a self replicating probe, that threshold might be a galactic phenomenon. If most life forms began at a relatively similar time across the galaxy, they would then advance at similar rates, and thus be nearing the threshold now. Just as we are. The only assumption required for this idea is that the galaxy isn't habitable until very recently. As I understand it, the recently discovered radio lobes above and below the nucleus of the galaxy suggest an active nucleus prior to life emerging on our home planet. Which also was coincidentally, at a point in it's formation where life might be able emerge. This reduces the number of planets that may be habitable, because they would need to have the right conditions at just the right time. This would eliminate the possibility of civilizations emerging during the early history of the galaxy.

[@sacr3]

Maybe WE are the self replicating "robots"

[@Litepaw]

Now that's deep enough the rabbit hole :)

[@ImaBotBeepBot]

life in general kind of is :)

[@fett716]

+Melon how did i find you here melon? 0_o

[@ImaBotBeepBot]

hellooooo ahah, I kind of love science and I'm too shy to post youtube comments with my main account so I came up to use this one instead ^^

[@Litepaw]

Melon! Ima eat you >:3

[@triggethridge9326]

what if we are the Von Neumann probes?

[@Gonzaga78]

DUN DUN DUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNN *chipmunk turns around*

[@Kerim9991]

we are ALL Von Neumann probes on this blessed day :)

[@roryclague5876]

Life seems to have formed very early in Earth's history. In fact, fossil bacteria have recently been found that were dated to the period in which Earth was previously thought uninhabitable. What if the solution to the Fermi paradox is that we are the solution? It's not a new idea. Francis Crick was open to the idea of panspermia. What if ancient bacteria were the von Neumann probes, or were seeded here by them? If the entire galaxy should have been colonised by now, well then one obvious possibility is that we are the colonists. Maybe this is what true interstellar colonisation looks like. Isolated pockets of life that have no idea where they came from.

[@ADAKAR83]

But this sending out, probes to self-replicate and populate rest of galaxy is almost like "death wisch". You dont have gurantee, that those self replicate units will not go on higher and higher level of "advance / self cautios" (whatever You want to call it) and eventualy in thousend/milion of years they will shoot one of those HIGH advance probes to ORIGINAL world / planet, from where first one was fired up ... Its like throwing out a boomerang, and what returns after a while is a space ship with photon-torpedos ...

[@jaibhimadevi5805]

@@Kerim9991 Speak for yourself

[@James_Knott]

Maybe aliens have seen some of our TV shows and concluded there was no intelligent life here.

[@aaronb5580]

Sudden pair of related thoughts, supporting the idea's mentioned at the end of the video... A) The chances of two technological species emerging at the same time, and reaching galaxy-wide travel abilities, again at the same time, is very low. B) The first civilization able to populate the galaxy, manned or unmanned, would inherently alter any other planets with semi-intelligent life on them. Perhaps accelerate their growth in intelligence, or hurt it (as us humans make species go extinct, and save others). They would either wipe the less intelligent life out and prevent them from getting to their level, or they would still be around when the less intelligent life evolved enough (note: the intelligent life would have also evolved a similar amount). So, since we have zero evidence of ancient aliens, and since we exist (implying any previous intelligent life didn't wipe us out), this must mean we are the first and most intelligent civilization in our galaxy. We will be the ones finding other planets with life and either guiding them or wiping them out. There has to be a first. It's the only explanation to the paradox. Probably numerous flaws in my line of thinking. Input?

[@vhawk1951kl]

Reminds one of the classic hitchhiker joke.Our Australian friend has the first requirement for what he calls" physics"; a vivid imagination and great skill at making butter from air, and all the sheep go baaa, isn't he a jolly clever chap.

[@volatilisjackal]

are we not already the self replicators?

[@crediblesalamander8056]

Humans are fragile, they also require Oxygen, water, food, an atmosphere, protection against radiation, Earth like gravity, Protection against hot and cold environments , we can barely live for a hundred years, it takes years for a human to grow, and we're lazy, imprecise and slow. if we are self replicators, we're the worst self replicators in the galaxy.

[@ineinerbank]

+Mhd. Yousef Attar I don't know about that. For relatively unprogrammed machines we have been, in galactic scales, freaking quick to develop tech, especially in the past hundred years. Maybe we are a self replicating machine seeded onto earth not with explicit instructions but the potential to develop the means to colonise further. Culturally evolutionary processes might help to avoid design flaws in a mechanical vnp that has no way of correcting them. Because if there is one thing humans presented it's craftiness if needed.

[@ineinerbank]

+Mhd. Yousef Attar also the rather specific requirements for human life could indicate what the potential inventors were looking for in a planet. Perhaps they explicitly wished to only seed planets that are potential habitats for themselves.

[@chrisn.5409]

We are an inquisitive species. If we weren’t, we might not even have fire. It’s this curiosity that fuels our exploration of the galaxy. Yet, not all of us are as curious as others. These folks are content with the way things are in whatever time they’re born. So it’s not hard to imagine, then, that a species capable of technology and large cities wouldn’t be as curious about outer space, as us. If they’ve developed politics and religion, as we have, there’s a chance they’d forbid any pusuit into the stars from ever happening, even if there are those who want to. Just a thought.

[@Mernom]

Like he said, one is enough.

[@nathansmith3244]

one might be enough but how harsh is space.. what are the chances many attempts over decades failed to replicate after 7, 15, 50, 100 replications. When you make a copy of a copy on earth you lose little data generally. Now imagine in the drastic tempters, huge amounts of radiation, and objects moving 1000's of miles per hour swirling. Like a mix master only your going 10th the speed of light. Try not to crash.

[@Mernom]

Nathan smith Well, computers are more durable then living creatures. And a sufficently powerful AI can do error check on itself.

[@nathansmith3244]

Marik Zilberman While more durable I agree but as we know with all things.. time and the forces of nature take a toll on everything. Rock, metal, ect. What stands for decades, millennia will crumble in time. The forces in space are more extreme then earth. Especially when were talking about solar systems with more than one sun, or with black holes, or with stranger things we have never experienced. I'm not saying some or most won't survive but the math is off. even if 9 out of every 10 survive, it puts it off by more than humans have had history. So they could have existed and worn away before we even came into being. Maybe they exisited in our solar system but sit frozen on a moon, or something and they still transmit data but in a frequency we would never or have not deciphered as communication. It might be something like morse code. Why would we make something that makes billions of it's self in a single solar system? Plus say it knows were here... maybe they left a million years ago to get her but are only half way here. Or Just received the messages that were here. Haven't even sent out a ship, or have sent us a message but it will be 100 years before it reaches us.

[@Mernom]

Nathan smith The fact that it's on the way is a good argument.

[@lassea]

I love this. First this channel was all about scientific theories now it is slowlu drifting towards futurism wit science. I absolutely love this.

[@Weisior]

Those CCs are making my day, really :D [MUSIC PLAYING] :D

[@Strideo1]

Darn Slylandro Probes are out of control!

[@sinephase]

WE COME IN PEACE!

[@nushkers]

PRIORITY OVER-RIDE. NEW BEHAVIOR DICTATED. MUST BREAK TARGET INTO COMPONENT COMPOUNDS

[@Strideo1]

PRIORITY OVER-RIDE. NEW BEHAVIOR DICTATED. MUST BREAK TARGET INTO COMPONENT MATERIALS.

[@Eyerleth]

ENGAGING SELF-ANNIHILATION CIRCUIT.

[@bandaloudog]

Another possible solution to the Fermi paradox: The first advanced civilization to emerge in our galaxy was a "benevolent"* one (characteristic that might be necessary or at least helpful in the process of becoming a type 2 or 3 civilization) and didn't felt the need to create probes that would disrupt any other ecosystem or show their existence to the universe, but envisioned that it could be a problem if other civilizations did so. They might have come up with ways to solve that problem millions of years before any other civilization was advanced enough to create probes. One of the ways could be by spreading undetectable (or almost undetectable), highly intelligent probes (A.I.), across the galaxy, making sure that no civilization could launch "harmful" technology into deep space, while also evading any detection in ways we can't conceive yet. They would do this as a security measure since they would have no reason to trust other civilizations that could emerge in the galaxy. To those who say that stealth in space is impossible I say this: Mankind has just started to study the laws that govern our universe, and many things that we thought impossible a few years ago, turned out to be possible, and vice versa. Who knows in what ways a type 3 civilization would manage to erase their footprints? Maybe by avoiding any conscious beings, directing any detectable information into intergalactic space, through interstellar space. Of course, it's probably not it, but if I can think of something now, maybe hundreds of millions of years of intelligent beings working together would probably yield a working result. Some would suggest that all of this is just too hard to be worth doing. Well, it might not be hard at all for beings who spent enough time studying the universe, which would likely be the case of a type 3 civilization. I think this is possible and should at least be considered, even if unlikely. *Note: When I say "benevolent", I'm applying the general notion that humans apply to benevolence. I am aware that benevolence is subjective.

[@ObiKKa]

Yes. You meant the small cabal of super advanced, tall aliens found inside a temple room in the climactic scene in the movie Indiana Jones #4. They could transcend multiple universes - I think they were called as interdimensional aliens. And that they wanted to remain hidden from many other civilizations, including the human kind. Most importantly, the lesson there was surely that these aliens did NOT want the local humans to collect ANY hard earnt knowledge the aliens already knew of as it may be misused by the others.

[@ivannoreland5656]

This makes no sense. There are, as far as we know, no ecosystems in space. Neumann probes don't have to land on planets where life exists, just study them from orbit. I really can't see any motive for not building von Neumann probes if you have the technology to do it.

[@trevorlang6895]

"We have to prevent a future where the galaxy is overrun by probes" "I know! Overrun the galaxy with probes!"

[@michaeldavis2365]

Read opening chapters of "TFS Ingenuity (The Terran Fleet Command Saga #1) by Tori L. Harris "

[@khipp13]

Thank you for the very informative video. I started reading “We are Legion” where the main character is a Von Neumann probe. I had no idea that such a device was a real concept. Very cool stuff!

[@samhandwich3965]

Just because we haven't seen evidence of self replicating robots doesn't mean there aren't any. I must say, I love the show you guys put on here. Keep up the good work!

[@Merto6]

maybe the probes are microscopic and we didn't notice them

[@_DarkEmperor]

Those probes ware organic and alien civilization send them 4 bln years ago.

[@TheAkashicTraveller]

We are the probes...

[@TheJaredtheJaredlong]

That makes a lot of practical sense. When you only need 1 gram of material to accomplish the goal, that goal is significantly more likely to get accomplished.

[@johnrichie7199]

You are missing the point. Either there are von neuman probes out there *and* they are indecipherable by us *and* they are doing absolutely nothing of note, at all... Or there are no von neuman probes. Pick one, which one makes more sense? You have to understand that even if we could not see the probes themselves, you would still absolutely be able to detect their actions. We would be seeing things in the universe that did not follow our models of how the universe should behave. So far we have detected nothing of the sort. Re-watch the beginning of the video.

[@michaelstead4062]

+John Richie ummm, our models of how the universe should behave are grossly inadequate... we can interact with 4%of whats there (we think - 15 years ago it was 100%) - so how do we know we have detected nothing of the sort if we don't know what we have detected?

[@codediporpal]

Or if you want another take on Fermi Paradox, read The Three Body Problem. Translation of the third and final novel in the series comes out tomorrow!

[@donkeytwoddle]

It would be interesting if the Von Neumann probe marks the solar system so other probes do not re-enter the one explored, with each probe setting up a 'station'. Designed to produce other probes, run scans for the properties of the planets, stockpile reasonable quantities of fuel and then enters a dormancy. Emerging from dormancy only to routinely scan the system and transmit/receive the updates to/from the nearest stations every 100 years. These stations would be like dormant seed for future colonisation or simply stop-overs for resupply. Their transmissions would be collected through a network of transmitting at receiving stations, and allow for highly detailed diagnostics for resources and properties in all of the star systems. Machines like this could in this way pave the way for a space fairing civilisations.

[@_ninthRing_]

The first thing that I always think of when I hear the term *Von Neumann Machine* , is the amazing *Berserker* series of novels (& short stories) by Fred Saberhagen, about terrifying intelligent weapons (from an ancient war), that are spreading across the galaxy murdering every organic lifeform they encounter (including humankind). The basic form of Berserker warship is a spherical interstellar vehicle several kilometres across, heavily weaponed, massively armored & chock-full of self replicating factories. Over the course of the stories, several variants are introduced including: the original destroyers; the anti-berzerkers; the seeders; the terraformers, etc. These latter designs might go some way towards explaining why we haven't encountered any *Von Neumann Probes* yet. If there are anti-probe designs attacking other probes, then they may not have had sufficient time to occupy a significant portion of the galaxy before achieving an equilibrium state with each other. *[ Build ← → Destroy ]* Also check out these novels: *Code of the Lifemaker* by James P. Hogan & *The Invincible* by Stanislaw Lem. Both are about humans finding a colony of evolved Von Neumann probes. One has android robots & the other has what is basically nanotech (it was written in 1964!).

[@neeneko]

Thing is, these suffer from the exact same problem as the 'space travel is hard' that applies to carbon life apply to the probes, only worse. I think people tend to WAY, WAY, WAY underestimate how much goes into manufacturing and mining. It isn't just 'mine some iron, smelt, and fabricate'. Look at any industrial sector in any city and you see just a tiny fraction of the infrastructure and logistics needed. Go into any modern chip factory. People on the CNC/3D/fabricator bandwagon do not appreciate just how much needs to be in place for their tools. Building such a probe means you literally have to package up an entire civilization, vertical integration on a massive scale. And you have to do it in such a way that its MTBF is greater than its ability to manufacture entire copies of itself. I think people are also way overconfident about 3D printers. So far they are just less flexible, less capable versions of simple machine shops, loved by techies that do not want to get their hands dirty with all those 'luddite blue collar skills'. They are a cultural phenomenon, not a technological one, basic fabrication in the hands of people who didn't grow up around it.

[@badlydrawnturtle8484]

“They are a cultural phenomenon, not a technological one,” Clearly then, you aren't familiar with 3D printers. They can make things that are literally impossible by classic methods.

[@badlydrawnturtle8484]

Nicholas Parris “That just isn't true.” Uh, yes it is. Additive manufacturing does things that molding and sculpting can't. “Printing shit with plastic is next to pointless outside of the consumer sphere.” 1. Dismissing entire industries because they don't fit your argument isn't fair. 2. Not everything ‘non-consumer’ is made of steel. Where are you getting this? “Also, saying "but 3d printers," when someone talks about the difficulties of creating a fully automated reproducing selfsustaining vertical integration manufacturing chain is like using elmers glue to fix a window.” I never said that, though. You have made the common mistake of assuming since I disagree with someone on one thing, that I'm disagreeing with them on all the things. It would be so much easier to have a conversation if people didn't do that.

[@badlydrawnturtle8484]

Nicholas Parris “Point to any STEM using 3d printers beyond selling consumer goods.” STEM is the term for an academic discipline, not an industry. Would you care to rephrase to something sensible? “Everything non-consumer is made of steel.” No it isn't. Oh look, pointless back-and-forth. You can stop it by presenting a source. “I've yet to hear anything outside medicine, which is making organs to, guess what, sell to people.” I was under the impression that what you meant by ‘consumer’ was the consumer good industry. Medical applications are not, under any reasonable definition, a consumer good. That means you're using the term far more broadly, potentially just as a catchall term for any industry that uses 3D printing. Literally all human-made things are bought and sold between people. “You could try and argue that nanobot manufacturing benifits from 3d printing, but you'd be wrong.” Why even bring it up if it's not relevant? Sounds to me like you just have an ongoing grudge against 3D printing, and you see nanobot manufacturing as a potential hole that you don't want people to pursue for fear it will change your mind. “I'm not saying that you don't agree, I'm saying that you're trying to help solve the problem, but you're really useless.” What problem am I trying to solve? “The problem of creating self-replicating probes.” But I didn't say anything about probes and 3D printing, one way or another. Stop arguing with an imaginary person and look at what I've actually said.

[@badlydrawnturtle8484]

Nicholas Parris Then you'll have to just accept that I won't believe you.

[@ViktorNyberg]

You do know that living cells are essentially a von neuman machine? And sure, we have a long way until we can manufacture specialist probes that works the same way. But then remember Moores Law. It's just a few doubles from happening.

[@TheLolle97]

I don't know about you guys, but I find the idea that we humans could be the very first to explore and colonize our galaxy highly intriguing.

[@johnpalacios5914]

Very intriguing idea. thank you for making this video.

[@Mastermism]

Excellent episode. Very much enjoyed it.

[@MaxWellenstein]

I tend to think that whichever civilization declares 'first!' on interstellar self-replicating robots will also see the value of deploying a 'probe police' to keep other interstellar civilizations from messing with their projects. And certainly such a civilization would be able to create stealth probes that would escape our fairly primitive notice.

[@mikicerise6250]

There are likely many different factors decreasing likelihood of intelligent life in the universe, not just one overriding factor. Life on Earth started very quickly - almost as soon as it was possible - which suggests life is common. Life, however, remained unicellular for billions of years after that, which suggests multicellular life may be something of a fluke. Most of the galaxy's habitable, aqueous zones are probably like Europa or Enceladus, trapped beneath many kilometres of solid ice and energized via tidal forces. These are ideal places for life. They are eminently stable, protected from cosmic rays, require no magnetic shield, no atmosphere, protected from most meteor impacts, and can potentially survive even chaotic orbits. If life is abundant in the galaxy, logic suggests most of it is sub-glaciar, aquatic and unicellular. If that is the case, then most multicellular life is likewise aquatic and sub-glaciar, and most intelligent civilizations are aquatic and sub-glaciar. For such civilizations mounting any kind of space mission - or even discovering the existence of outer space at all - may not be nearly as trivial an accomplishment as it is for our species, which lives on the surface of a planet where water remains liquid at the surface and which survives at a pressure of just one atmosphere - which to any species used to the pressures of an iceball like Europa would probably seem like practically a vacuum - easy enough to build in and blast off into space. Considering the age of the universe - just about 14 billion years -and comparing the age of the universe with the age of the Earth and life on Earth, which, again, started about as soon as was possible, we can speculate: 1. We are the descendants of some of the very first life forms to emerge in the universe. 2. Most life forms are unicellular, we are among the few multicellular life forms in the universe. 3. Most life forms come from sub-glacial oceans on iceball worlds, live at high pressures and are profoundly isolated from the rest of the universe. We are one of the few life forms that live on a world's surface and practically exposed to the cosmic elements, due to a series of very unlikely coincidences (our planet's size, location, atmospheric composition and molten metallic core) that create stable surface conditions on Earth for billions of years that you would only get deep beneath the surface on most worlds. 4. Past a certain stage of development, advanced civilizations gain so much power over their environment that even single mishap can have extinction-level consequences, which leaves a relatively short window in which a healthy advanced civilization might build a Von Neumann probe. 5. Many other civilizations are probably more inward-looking, especially if studying the universe is much more inaccessible to them. Given these parameters it would not be altogether surprising that we should be the first colonizers of the Milky Way. The real weird thing to ask is why is our planet so atypical? With what we know about water, life, what it takes to make a stable biosphere and how planets form - there is no way Earth is a typical life-bearing planet. A typical life-bearing planet would look like Europa or Enceladus. Why are we so bizarre?

[@fogfog8388]

Good vid. Among other things, the best re-work of Drake's equation and the Fermi paradox I've seen. West Coast (AFL) for premiers 2019.

[@TheZeedler]

Love these videos!! So much fun!

[@abramthiessen8749]

Isaac Arthur has discussed these points (Fermi Paradox solutions, Dyson Swarms, Von Neumann Probes ect.) in greater detail if anyone wants. Both PBS Spacetime and Isaac Arthur have their advantages.

[@mortkebab2849]

unlike disadvantaged you who never had an original thoughht

[@kingdingeling9139]

Isaac is the MVP

[@cosmosandchill]

I cannot handle Isaac Arthur's accent at all, in terms of understanding what he's saying, and even just how it sounds. His channel is a no-go for me, which is a shame because it looks like it has great content.

[@marrqi7wini54]

@@cosmosandchill It definitely takes a lot of getting used to if you are unaccustomed to it. Though his speech impediment has gotten better over the course of his time on youtube. It's a shame because his content really is great if you can get past his voice.

[@CuddlyPsycho1134]

Considering that the heat death of the universe won't happen for at least another trillion years or more, our universe is in it's infancy. As the old saying goes, "there's a first time for everything", I think it's entirely possible that we are the first intelligent life in our galaxy. I also suspect that intelligent life is rare, because intelligence isn't a foregone conclusion, intelligence in humans came about as a survival strategy. So it's entirely possible for life to thrive on a world and never evolve intelligence. With this in mind I don't think the Fermi paradox is much of a paradox at all.

[@DavidBeaumont]

"at least another trillion years" -- Haha. You have no idea how far off that statement is. Heat death is in the order of 10^1000 years away. When the last star has burned out and the last photon has decayed, the universe will be 0.00000000000...0000000000001% (~850 zeros) of its total expected age. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_timeline_from_Big_Bang_to_Heat_Death

[@westoncampbell1268]

@@DavidBeaumont Saying that the heat death is 1 trillion years away is analgorous to saying that to circumnavigate you have to travel 1 inch.

[@khloerabnta4995]

When I read this it reminded me there is still a tribe on earth that isn’t advanced at all and is cut off from the rest of the world because killed a scientist that went and tried to talk to them and tell them about the rest of the world. So we let them live on their island. When I think about that. We would be as advanced as we are if it wasn’t for us deciding to explore the oceans beyond to see if there was more land. Which is what brought our world together. There very well could be worlds out there that never decided to do this and so didn’t advance as fast as we have. There’s so many explanations for this it’s unreal honestly. One could go on for years making ideas. What we need to do is work toward exploring the galaxy then move to other galaxies.

[@jc.1191]

@@khloerabnta4995 yeah, what about life's needs makes it profitable to go that far out from your planet in any form? Heirarchy of needs.

[@davidabbett7011]

I truly love these discussions on self replicating probes; however, knowing how complicated interstellar space travel is at any level, how would these robots / probes build the microprocessors first, and then how would the assembly process be performed either in space or on the vast variety of planetary or moon-like environments?

[@Articulate99]

Always interesting, thank you.

[@edcrespo1722]

let's get to Mars first and then we'll talk more about this

[@gaspardvuk9065]

No. Lets make a robot that makes a dome that makes more domes, send it to mars and when you got something to go to, that's when you go to mars.

[@niboe1312]

I would prefer Venus

[@1invag]

why build domes we can have them terraform the planet and make it habitable

[@evolve101]

I can not wait for that to happen. What if there are small life there... Would be so cool. Or old fossils in the ground. Who knows. ;)

[@Traumglanz]

0.4g is nothing you can just "terraform" away. ;-)

[@valken666]

Why would you build a Von Neumann machine to consume all of the galaxy's resources? At least ship them back home then.

[@valken666]

Also, maybe Von Neumann machines have already consumed our solar system, but they're not what we expect them to be.

[@charlesbentley7317]

They stated at the beginning that one of the proposed uses for a Von Neumann machine was to build machines just to be harvested for resources. What he talks about through the rest of the video are Von Neumann PROBES, or machines designed specifically to go off and explore the universe. They self-replicate to explore and probe the universe faster. It's only one of many possible uses of a Von Neumann machine, and one he's focusing on because the larger theme of the video is the link between Von Neumann machines and the Fermi Paradox.

[@valken666]

Charles Bentley If we want to explore the universe, then just build a telescope the size of the planet. Then we will see the whole universe, without consuming everything on the way.

[@charlesbentley7317]

Seeing isn't the same as sending something physical out there, we have telescopes and can see Mars but we still sent a probe first, then moved onto other steps including the rover driving around on the surface right now. Telescopes are visual only, and there are a lot of issues with telescopes, telescopes cannot see through objects, but probes can go around them. Telescopes don't always see accurately either, through many factors such as gravitational lensing, debris and dust blocking view, and not to mention your telescope would be affected by gravity also. Stuck orbiting something, so you don't have 100% complete control over it. Regardless, if you made the telescope and solved all of the issues above, that would only be one step towards understanding the entire universe. The next step would be probe, and then hopefully eventual colonization and exploration assuming our species lasts that long.

[@garethdean6382]

Well firstly you can always build a machine a little smarter than 'Eat everything' It could indeed reshape the galaxy, moving all valuable materials to one point. Or just transmit information, or just sit around every star announcing that your civilization exists. As for the more basic 'why', how any things do humans do that make no sense? Why do we waste money on bottled water or play video games that get us no real world advantages? If an alien species could, why WOULDN'T at least a few individuals build these probes?

[@randomtarget7904]

Awesome video as always

[@SpazzyMcGee1337]

The Fermi Paradox emphasizes the importance of humanity exploring, exploiting, and colonizing space. The responsibility falls on us to make the universe more than just a bunch of dead rocks floating around.

[@TheCptCarrot]

First off, thank you for a great show! Secondly, I'm curios about a thing when it comes to the Fermi paradox; namely how well do we know our solar system? Is it possible that there is a self-replicating factory (or the remains of one) on some asteroid, or on one of the outer planets, that we just have yet to discover? Or is there some principle that I am missing in this? Do we have good enough data on the asteroid belts to be certain that there is nothing there? Can we be certain that the probes won't be programmed to stay in the outer reaches of the solar system? Or am I missing something?

[@phesterful]

The probes we're contemplating to send to other stars would be undetectable by us (when not in communication) as far away as Mars.

[@5000mahmud]

@@phesterful what about the exhaust? Gonna be shining in ir waste heat

[@rajathnaik2136]

" a machine that can build so many other machines including itself"!!!?? sounds exactly like humans

[@Deqster]

Coming back and watching this episode makes so much sense after watching Another Life on Netflix.

[@Hippiekinkster]

"The Expanse" on Bezos Prime is far better. Easily the equal, IMO, of Battlestar Galactica and Babylon 5.

[@deconstructusduels5439]

This video aggravates me because all the stars which are "self replicating matter that has an amount of energy flowing through it in a closed cycle" or self replicating robots just like us and black holes and electrons

[@dessertstorm7476]

For von neuman machines in fiction check out the book "spin". Reply if you know any other examples.

[@watsisname]

"Blindsight" by Peter Watts

[@ejungleska]

Manifold: Space by Stephen Baxter also touches on this.

[@johnrichie7199]

Haha, if by "touch" you mean wipes the galaxy clean, sure ;)

[@dessertstorm7476]

good spoilers bro

[@johnrichie7199]

Phlegm Atic​​​​​​ spoiler to what? It's a minor subplot. And besides, I was incorrectly thinking of "Revelation Space" by Alastair Reynolds anyway. "Evolution", also by Stephen Baxter is a damned good read. Minor subplot involving self replicating machines in there as well. Historical fiction chronicling the evolutionary history/future of humans, link by link, starting with the end of the dinosaurs on into millions of years in the future. It's quite epic.

[@EmrysMerlin8807]

Do you want to get Stargate replicators? Because this is how you get Replicators! Lol!

[@deusexaethera]

The only people who didn't like the Replicators were the people who never tried being one.

[@mortkebab2849]

Another tv cretin.

[@duckforceone]

omg love the ending....

[@davidhutch307]

Love when that music starts playing that comes in at 3:27..... That's what you know shits about to get real.

[@UnknownXV]

Can the Fermi Paradox be explained as us, humanity, simply being the first intelligent species to have evolved tech? Not that it can't happen often, but some requirement of life could only be sparked with a compound or a specific set of circumstances that were only ripe a billion or so years ago? I mean, life took a long time to form on Earth. Maybe we just got lucky in timing?

[@ricosuave4275]

What a great story! My mind is just literally exploding with ideas and for a new Sci-Fi story... about a humble guy watching this in his basement, his mind gets uploaded in a super Advanced AI that decides to colonize the known universe using self replicating robots and mine the asteroids for gold. He then recreates his body on the earth and becomes the new all powerful GOD!

[@TheArtofFugue]

why gold though? what benefit does gold provide in the pursuit of universal colonization? and why come back to earth, to be a god? i would presume by colonizing the universe one would turn most of the “stuff” within said universe, all things considered, artificial.

[@ricosuave4275]

@@TheArtofFugue GOLD = $$$$$ = girls! :)

[@jimbrewer5048]

Interstellar brings up such a great point. The will to survive is something that seems impossible to program. You can give a robot the protocols to stay alive, but it’s just an order rather than a selfish will to survive.we look at Dr Mann as the villain which is he sort of is… but he also proves that humans are willing to risk it all for selfish reasons to stay alive. Risky? Yes. But also adds to the importance of having the instinct to survive. Our own mortality can make us desperate and desperation can lead to advancement. Can also lead to destruction which again is a risky. But a machine could never… will never have that self reflection and will never take the risks a human does

[@iurycabeleira7990]

Hahaha that ending! Wasn't expecting that

[@CreativoErratico]

"-I'm talking about... -The Borg!! -Von Neumann probes. -Oh... :("

[@doctorscoot]

I agree with the rarity argument. Humans have been biologically humans for about 100,000 years. Yet we've only been "civilised", living in cities, with agricultural technology, for 10,000 years. And able to measure the heavens accurately for 1000 (give or take). I think even if you look at the agricultural transition around 10,000 years ago, it's dependent on a huge number of specific variables, such, humans even existing in the first place, right at the same time the ice age was ending in the second. All you needed was one big asteroid 11,000 years ago, or even 9,000 years ago, and we simply wouldn't exist. Further, our discovery of oil led us out of energy poverty. I think its possible that we've got one shot to bootstrap past using a depleting energy resource like oil and onto new renewable, non-global-warming sources of energy (we have to use that energy abundance to bootstrap a new energy abundance). I think there's good evidence that we are failing at that, and that we may just go on burning the cheap and plentiful fossil fuels until either the easily-obtainable source of these are all gone, or earth's climate just shuts us down back to a pre-energy-abundance state. At which point we have lost our chance to build a von neumann machine or anything else. So we're rare, and our conditions are fragile. That's my answer for Enrico F. anyway.

[@Egregius]

Someone under another video pointed out how lucky we are to both have a large moon and Jupiter to clear our space from falling rocks. And how the moon's tidal effects made life on land infinitely more likely. And then there's how fossil fuels, which are a weird quirk of our particular evolution, has bootstrapped our tech progress to be a X times faster than otherwise. I think you're right, and that we're luckier than we think.

[@Johnnewb]

Brilliant.

[@bishnupriyasaikia1378]

Wow I've heard about boltzman brain and the simulation hypothesis but this is new .

[@felixschneider8867]

I think the Fermi Paradox is somewhat ignorant. We really only observed our own Solar System to a detail, where it would be possible to detect the activity of a VNM probe. Maybe our Solar System is just not interesting for a given type of VNM probe. Considering that we live in the boring low energy realms of our galaxy it could be very plausible that this part of the Milky Way is just not interesting to any form of advanced alien life. Saying that there are probably only very few other civiizations, if at all, because we can´t observe them, to me is like a isolated tribe in the amazon, which concludes from its remote existence that other human cultures are very rare on earth and can´t even imagine modern civilisation, although they are surrounded by it.

[@MrMakae90]

Von Neumann machines already exists. They are biological machines. But they take millions, perhaps even billions (in the right conditions) to evolve to the point of making other von Neumann machines. WE COULD be such machines. And we are almost making our first replication.

[@Wesley-wg2qi]

The main flaw in his reasoning is the 10% of light speed assumption. That's massively fast. 0.1% might be a safer assumption.

[@michaellv426]

One option is that there were technological lifeforms and then their 45th president disbanded their science departments before they could build self-replicating machines of such complexity

[@andrewkennedy-reagan3289]

Michael Petrov Dumbest comment ever. A sad effort. I feel bad for you.

[@EmilioKolomenski]

I feel like you didn't ellaborate enough on why Von Neumann probes *must* be possible to build. Why would they? You'd need a LOT of different resources to have it replicate. One of the crucial ones missing (you're bound to have some list of "must have" resources) and the probe can't do its thing. The abundance of planets with the needed resources might not be big enough to sustain a Von Neumann colonisation, or it may be so hard to hit the right combination of resources that the civilizations that tried had its probes die out before reaching too far. And I'm not even mentioning the "10% of the speed of light" might not be achieveable without needing a huge range of resources, which would in turn either slow down the process a lot or make the resource requirements even more restrictive.

[@HebaruSan]

Not to mention the engineering challenge of building a machine that operates flawlessly for thousands of years, either by self repair or by never breaking down. In interstellar space, where no stars are close enough to use as a power source, at speeds that turn the interstellar medium into a variety of lethal rays and projectiles. I'm sure there are aliens, and I'm sure some of them have attempted Von Neumann probes. But they all failed.

[@JohnLysis]

BSOD could be the ultimate challenge in this case.

[@ryco105]

+HebaruSan greys man lol

[@karthikeyan020]

+mr Fletcher we are also aliens from other's point of view. so aliens might think like us if they go down the same path of intelligence. he didn't jump to conclusions but taking logical steps and assumptions.

[@karthikeyan020]

resources are not that hard to get if you are the only person trying to get it. asteroids have lots of elements that we consider rare. any solar system has such an asteroid belt. so you can get huge amount of resources even without landing on a planet.

[@RandallStephens397]

So if there are only 2 or 3 other technological civilizations in our galaxy and so far nobody has built a VNP yet... Should we worry about not being the first civ to build one? What happens when two or more civs land probes in the same system? Galaxy-scale warfare sounds terrifying.

[@lendluke]

Only one civ can build the Von Neumann Probe wonder, then they get the tech victory.

[@youteubakount4449]

imagine a civilization capable of sending a ship or a probe at close the speed of light. That thing would have so much energy that if they ever sent one towards us it could destroy the whole planet. It's basically the nuclear weapon of galactical warfare.

[@RandallStephens397]

youteub akount more like the musket of galactic warfare. If I have the power output of dozens of stars at my disposal, I can carpet-bomb space with black holes.

[@kunphushion]

It's highly unlikely that two civilizations would be at the same point technologically, if one civilization is millions of years ahead then it wouldn't be much of a war.

[@NonDelusional74611]

+kunfushion - I am solidly of the mind that species do not advance with war and devastation at their heart. Look at us. $hillary will start WWIII and goodbye technological gains thus far. Only peaceful curiosity and scientific discovery will result in Type I, II, and III civvies.

[@josephrittenhouse5839]

Perhaps such technological probes require a protocol that maximizes efficiency in order to be successful to achieve the results we expect from them. It could be that once they get into interstellar space, more efficient means of extracting energy from the interstellar medium are discovered, and become more exploitable than the energy near stars. I think this is an excellent argument as energy extracted from gravity is nearly non existent at quantum levels where the other energies overwhelm its influence. Also, the effects of dark matter are near absent in our own solar system, but dominate over galactic scales. We already know there is far more dark matter than baryonic matter in the universe. Its abindance may make it far more exploitable than the energy near stars. Perhaps the challenges of interstellar travel are solved far more simply utilizing exploits in dark matter, more accessible further away from stars than near them. Given that, such probes may actually stay away from stars, and prioritze them as less efficient to gather energy from. Given that dark energy is even more abundant than dark matter, these probes may choose to spend more resources on discovering how to exploit dark energy, rather than focusing on the far less energy efficiency near stars, or even galaxies, and move into the spaces between galaxies. The argument of paucity of matter we are familiar with making this unlikely is overwhelmed by the amount of energy available in intergalactic mediums. The efficiency goals may be better exploited within supervoids, and thise exploits may make the creation of any matter necessary easier than finding it. Also, we know so little about dark matter and energy that we may easily be underestimating its complexity. Both may be far more complex than the baryonic standard midel that it is just easier to exploit without the need for familiar forms of matter and energy. Such probes may be able to find better solutions than we have, and utulize the interstellar medium or vast supervoids instead of ever trying to make it to the next star.

[@Zahadume]

Yes let's send self replicating bots out there to tear up somebody's back yard and start an intergalactic war. Super smart idea that can't possibly go wrong.

[@WarpScanner]

Can we build a von neuman probe now? If we even have the technological capability to even make a primitive one, this means with almost absolute certainty that we've surpassed any theoretical 'great filter' right? And if we can't currently, what proof do we have that a von neuman probe is even possible? What if there is a technological barrier in the construction of such we are not aware of?

[@alquinn8576]

Wow, that's a great point

[@NeoGenus1]

assuming technology continually 'gets better and better', there might conceivably be more filters to pass through, the more filters we pass through... ie "more money more problems"

[@alquinn8576]

Michael Bowles The question though is about "the great filter" which would explain the lack of observed Von Neumann probes. If humanity could conceivably build and launch some within decades then the lack of probes currently in existence implies that we are past the great filter, whatever it was. If we saw Von Neumann probes but no evidence of alien civilization besides the probes, that would suggest another great filter in the future. Since we don't see alien civilizations and no probes, the biggest filter is already in our past (or we happen to just be first). The other possibility is the technology to create VN probes is the same as the great filter, e.g. Bostrom's warning about superintelligent AIs going nuts (though why don't AIs build VN probes then?).

[@NeoGenus1]

The great filter could apply to many number of potential obstruction to our species survival / propagation... It's not conservative to assume we've past the filter... imo *a* filter (because it seems reasonable to assume there could be levels of filters..) is probably human-induced climate change or nuclear war (you might agree). Also, AIs we've built are specific, not general, they *can't*/aren't built to think up vnm's.

[@TheAkashicTraveller]

We probably could build something like a von neuman probe right now if someone put enough money into it. It would be very slow though and would take far longer than 10 million years to colonise the galaxy. So there probably weren't civilisations like ours a billion years ago.

[@kirkleadbetter1093]

"We are legion, we are Bob." Really enjoyed this book based around Von Neumann probe(s) but with a twist.

[@Moronvideos1940]

Great upload Thanks a lot

[@duckforceone]

you are a great presenter. Also, someone has to be first at some time. So we might be the first, or one of the first nearby at least. But people seldom seem to mention that option at all. It's usually either all or nothing.

[@mvmlego1212]

The Fermi Paradox doesn't really seem like a paradox at all. The one assumption that anyone who cites the paradox never seems to question is that there are other intelligent civilizations. It's not as if we have a rigorous, naturalistic explanation for the origin of life (e.g. no resolution to the monochirality problem), so it seems unscientifically dogmatic to make the _a priori_ assumption that abiogenesis and evolution of intelligent species is common (or occurs at all, for that matter).

[@dang2979]

paradoxes don't answer questions. here's a quick google search of the definition: a statement or proposition that, despite sound (or apparently sound) reasoning from acceptable premises, leads to a conclusion that seems senseless, logically unacceptable, or self-contradictory. there are answers TO paradoxes. the fermi paradox simply challenges the notion of intelligent life being highly probable and there are many proposed answers to this. no one knows for sure how likely it is for intelligent life to evolve, or even the likelihood of life itself.

[@LegoEngineer93]

I agree. I think the reason they don't talk about it is that life does exist here and so if it happens once it must be able to happen again. of course they also make the assumption that all things MUST be explained scientifically which I personally believe to be false. What do you think. It would explain a lot, even solve the paradox, if there was some supernatural interaction.

[@mvmlego1212]

Bobby Cheezpuffs I wasn't treating the Fermi Paradox as an answer to a question, I was treating it as an overly presumptive question, so your comment is moot. Let me clarify my position. The "apparently sound" premises that the Fermi Paradox is built on are: 1) Intelligent life is common. 2) If intelligent life is common, then we should see evidence other intelligent life. 3) We do not see evidence of other intelligent life. I think we can all agree premise 3 is sound, which leaves the other two. All of the science videos I've seen that refer to the Fermi Paradox only promote various ways to undermine premise 2, even to the point of blind speculation. On the other hand, none of them question premise 1 or even discuss it, which is absurd, considering there are well-known and well-researched phenomena (such as the homochirality problem) that clearly indicate premise 1 is the false premise. Consequently, it shouldn't be considered a legitimate paradox, and the people who treat is as one seem to be holding onto some sort of unscientific dogma that life is common.

[@dang2979]

TheLegoEngineer "of course they also make the assumption that all things MUST be explained scientifically which I personally believe to be false." i agree on an abstract level, but disagree on the point that explaining everything scientifically is a farse. science is an anthropic methodology. it is far from perfect, but currently it stands to be reliable enough to help us better understand our reality from an objective view point. the principle behind the scientific method is simple: nothing is magical, everything has a natural explanation. things are only 'supernatural' if it is outside of our understanding. conversely, just because we don't understand something DOESN'T mean it has a natural explanation for it. just my two cents.

[@dang2979]

"just because we don't understand something DOESN'T mean it has a natural explanation for it. just my two cents." typo: "..just because we don't understand something DOESN'T mean there's no natural explanation for it."

[@MobileComputing]

Imagine this: statisitcally most alien civilizations would have been developed near the galactic core because star systems are closer to each other near the core than far out along the spiral arms. Because systems are closer to each other, travel between star systems are easier. Thus the core species would see no need to create self-replicating bots to explore the galaxy, for they have sufficient exoplanets within their reach to explore.

[@jaytheamazing197]

This region of the Galaxy might also be the most dangerous. Due to the density of stellar objects, core star systems are more likely to be disturbed by black holes, neutron stars, etc. This region of the galaxy also experiences more radiation than out here

[@alonsoACR]

Hello, I'm from the future. Galactic core civilizations are now known to be impossible. Look up this term: Galactic habitable zone Especially the research of the last couple of years :)

[@cameronstoneadams1183]

I was searching for just this video.

[@BassNinja]

It's time self replicating robots are here. Just took 5 years of waiting.

[@badlydrawnturtle8484]

If two particular technologies are possible, we can and will explore the galaxy. The first would be von Neumann probes. The second would be virtual brains. If (or when; I'm pretty sure we'll do it eventually as long as we don't kill ourselves first) we figure out how to construct fully functional virtual minds (whether we manage to come up with a way to scan and download our own minds is unimportant here, because once we have the basic concept, we would be able to create and raise fully digital children), we could then send those digital minds out to the galaxy via relay stations set up by von Neumann probes. Once the way stations are set up, travel would be limited by the speed of light. Robotic bodies wait around the galaxy to be inhabited by our progeny; and perhaps even biological bodies if gene editing keeps advancing the way it is now. We wouldn't even need to figure out how to create life; imagine sending a couple bacteria with the first von Neumann probe, which passes some on to each new probe and way station, and when needed, the bacteria are genetically modified to grow into a multi-cellular body capable of interface with a digital mind. This idea owes credit to a short story I once read involving a virtual mind being sent across space to a robot probe, combined with the idea of von Neumann probes presented here. In just a few minutes, I've managed to convince myself that this is how we're going to do it. This is the way, assuming technological projections hold out.

[@gustavbabic5004]

Possibly, but what if another scenario entails genetic engineering that enables us to live for thousands of years? Maybe a century long trip to Alpha Centauri wouldn't be that bad if the travelers had a life span of a thousand years. I agree that digital brains make better economic sense, because you wouldn't have to feed them during their long voyage.

[@badlydrawnturtle8484]

Gustav Babic Generation ships would have to be sent out one at a time, and a whole lot can go wrong. You only need to send one working von Neumann probe to colonize the entire galaxy, and they'd be less prone to failure than a generation ship.

[@gustavbabic5004]

Badly Drawn Turtle Would we need generation ships if human beings lived 10,000 years?

[@badlydrawnturtle8484]

Gustav Babic I would call any long-term occupied spaceship a generation ship, even if strictly speaking the same immortal people get off as get on.

[@TehPompkinHead]

Machine people are a bad idea

[@kurtp2003]

Coincidentally a day before Isaac Arthur does a video on the same topic? Oh well, the more the merrier

[@futureintelligence196]

It is going to be much more detailed

[@redeamed19]

I think they complement each other really well with these episodes.

[@wesleythomas7125]

"Why doesn't any civilization build these?" Because the darn things are able to eat the universe, that's why

[@markfisher5119]

Author Fred Saberhagen came up with a similar idea decades ago: The berserker machines, which are some of the scariest things any sci-fi writer ever dreamed up.