Genady

They will agree on the age of the universe in comoving reference frame.

I've missed St.Petersburg time by one hour, and never heard of Doomsday Book.

Yes, it started early, but is there any estimate of how many of them were needed / how long did it take to accumulate significant amount of heavy elements throughout the universe?

I'd like to add that we are not latecomers to the game, considering that we evolved on a planet that exists about a third of the age of the Universe, and considering that the chemical content of the Universe was poor most of the time before that.

Ah, I see. No, I don't see an obsession with the pursuit of GAI. Unlikely but plausible. About 1/millions chance. The same as any other intelligent civilization. It becomes an anthropocentrism only if one believes in it, not by suggesting it as a plausible possibility.

Please, explain.

Maybe. IDK. We are not closer to GAI now than we were 50 years ago. The recent advancement in AI is tangential to that direction.

This is right. However, I don't see what the place of GAI in this threat is specifically. Any terrorist organization can do something like this.

Thank you for all the information. Keep it coming, please. I will have what to work on after I finish the 500 pages book I'm working through now (that's on QFT).

Here is an interesting plausible possibility that I didn't see mentioned yet. Given that a physically accessible part of the Universe is finite, there can be only a finite number of intelligent civilizations in it. Among this finite number of civilizations there is one which is the most scientifically and technologically advanced. Which one is it? It is plausible that we are the one.

I see an important difference between this example of a low probability event and the event of intelligent aliens' invasion: we know with certainty that there are plenty of flying rocks in the Solar System.

Historically, after Newtonian formulation of mechanics, alternative formulations were developed, i.e., Lagrangian and Hamiltonian. In QM, after wave mechanics, matrix mechanics was developed. In QFT, there are S-matrix and path integral formulations. Which alternative formulations of GR are known today? PS. I think, in SR the parallel examples are Einstein and Minkowski formulations.

Backup like computer files? I don't think this analogy is correct. You take a backup and put it aside, hoping that you will not need it. This is nothing like reproduction. In reproduction, the previous generation is replaced by the next.

Do you want to discuss a hidden meaning? Why to hide it?

Refuted what? The facts? This story reads just like a fairy tale. One can write a story that develops differently. Maybe even closer to real life and real people.

What is wrong with looking down at your feet? Or anywhere else than stars? What does it have to do with work? I wouldn't recommend looking up at the stars while hitting a nail with a hammer. And regarding the last part. Life can be empty with or without work. It also can be full with or without it. Never give up work? Any work? Useless work, too? Work for a negative goal, too? Isn't the whole statement taken out of context, by any chance? Regarding your addition. Do they actually want a work or a pay?

Where did I see it before? Ah, yes, Arbeit macht frei.

Here is a shorter proof: If q is the smallest positive number, then 1/q is the largest positive number. But there is no largest positive number because we can always add another positive number. Thus, there is no smallest positive number.

In spite of the title, I didn't see anything in this thread that pertains to real numbers. All the arguments, such as non-existence of the next or the smallest numbers, equally apply to rational numbers. Ancient Greeks could discuss and resolve it.

From the latest local bi-weekly: The OP picture was taken in Lagun, one if the three collection / extraction areas. So, it does not represent the situation in general.

"Humanity, Post Humanity, A.I & Aliens"

And it is not OT, how?

Your clarifications do not make it any clearer to me. I think it is safe to say that nobody here understands what it all means. I'll be glad to hear if I'm wrong in this estimate.

It is not what I called sci-fi (as I have explained above.) I call it sci-fi because it is one of millions of other possibilities, and not in any way more plausible / important / interesting than others.

I think it is possible. I don't think it is quite possible. No, I do not.