9 Comments
User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

Sure, quantum gravity might possibly allow time travel to the past, negative mass, etc., but probably it will not.

Expand full comment
Doug's avatar

"I'm not sure that I qualify as an insightful commenter"

Don't be so humble!

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

It's a question we just can't answer right now since we haven't solved the quantum gravity problem.

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

I'm not sure that I qualify as an insightful commenter, but I think that probability should be approximately zero.

FTL travel or communication essentially implies physical abnormalities such as time travel to the past, matter with negative mass, etc.

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

Seeding human civilizations into the worlds of other star systems is an established science fiction theme. I'm reminded, in particular, of the late Arthur C. Clarke's novel, The Songs of Distant Earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... ). I suspect he would have been glad to know that such ideas still capture our imagination.

Expand full comment
one of the dudes's avatar

Presumably whole brain upload tech will come before interstellar travel. Uploaded brains will have a huge cost advantage in interstellar travel, compared to biological humans. Could be as simple as "beam me up, Scotty", once the receiver hardware was placed there.However... would uploaded brains want to "move" and "live" somewhere physically distant? Conjestion won't be an issue. Why bother? Slows down connection times. Maybe eventually, when they will "want" to control energy at planetary scale or above.

Expand full comment
Doug's avatar

I'm curious, Robin (or any of the other insightful commenters here), what probability value do you put on FTL travel (or at least communication) being feasible for advance civlizations?

Expand full comment
RobinHanson's avatar

Fixed; thanks.

Expand full comment
clever_ape's avatar

Both of your "more here" links point to the same thing.

Expand full comment