this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2025
586 points (98.3% liked)
Technology
69298 readers
3841 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Absolutely, based on the information we have today.
That dark swarm of asteroids that was launched out of the Magellanic Cloud 8 billion years ago that's coming on a direct collision course against the Milky Way rotation - yeah, we don't know about that one.
The thing about our probabilities of events that haven't happened yet to leave a scar that we can notice on the surface of the Earth, we haven't been very good at observing the sky except for the last 100 years or so, really 50. So, we're learning more and more about things and newly discovered hazards don't lower the probability of occurrence...
That we know of the mechanism that produced the burst. What we don't know about that star is the super Jupiters orbiting it in a quasi stable multi-body arrangement that could collapse a bunch of mass into the star and turn it from Jekyll to Hyde under your bed ASAP.
You guys are prepping for Jupiter to become a second sun? That’s hard fucking core man!
Spoiler alert: pretty sure that was the big finish to Clarke's 2010.
Space is BIG. Even if your asteroid idea happened, I can confidently say it won't hit us, because the numbers are so much in favor of them not. Earth is a ridiculously small target compared to the space in the solar system, and we have Jupiter that throws everything out and protects us. It's not happening, and even if it did it'll likely hit water, and even if it hits land it likely won't be near you.
Prepare for a car accident. Don't prepare for asteroid impact. Youre wasting your time and money in the later and, though the former is relatively unlikely to be needed, it's actually realistic that it may happen to you. Until you're prepared for that, for a house fire, for a break in, for a medical emergency, and for anything else that's relatively likely, you're wasting your resources.
Andromeda is going to hit the Milky way, and it likely won't do anything to most earth-like planets because the densities of both (all) galaxies are so low.
Individual low odds things don't happen frequently, but collectively they happen a lot more often because there are so many low odds things with potential to happen.
The Holocene may only run 12,000 years - it looks like the Anthropocene is the most likely end for it, but life has been evolving on Earth for 3.5(ish) billion years, making the Holocene just 0.00034% of that period, 1/300,000th in round numbers.
Yes. This is why you shouldn't play the lottery even though you may see people win it fairly frequently. Most people lose, and the cost of anyone winning is higher than the payout. Similarly, the cost for preparing for some incredibly low odds events is higher than the likelihood it'll ever be useful.
Right. You have to dream up counterfactual fantasies in order for it to be a problem.
And you don't need to worry about it, because as I said, the human mind is very bad at intuitively grasping the implications of very large or very small numbers.
Go ahead and actually calculate what risk there might be from something like this. How much mass do those asteroids have? What's their collective cross-section, and how does that compare to the volume of space they'd be passing through? How big is Earth in comparison?
I'm betting the odds will still be microscopic. I feel safe betting that because we have real world evidence that bodies in our solar system don't frequently get hit by ghost asteroids from the Magellanic Cloud (there's an 80's sci-fi movie title for you). Large impacts are few and far between these days,
Once again, sure, you could imagine that ordinary stars sometimes miraculously pop like balloons to spray us with liquid death.
If you want it to actually be a worrying scenario, though, it needs to be backed up with some kind of evidence or theory that makes it plausible. And again, we don't actually see frequent gamma ray bursts in reality, so whatever mechanism you propose needs to be rare for it to fit the data.
I don't worry about it, because it is a very small number and my life is likely very short by comparison, but... the very large number of potential sites for life to evolve in the visible universe still yields zero evidence of a technological "WE ARE HERE" sign that we can understand. That implies that either: A) we really are the center of the universe, first to develop technology or B) such developments of energy manipulating technology are an exceedingly small number rare for... reasons that we do not yet understand. And of course C) those of us who have seen irrefutable proof of alien technology are hiding it from the rest of us for... reasons.
Of the possibilities, I find A) much less likely than B), and C) to be impossibly absurd - people just aren't that good at keeping secrets for long periods of time.
You're analyzing a risk we could imagine, what you can't do is analyze a risk we haven't imagined yet. Looking at the vastness of the Universe and the rate at which our theories about how it all works evolve, I find it far more likely that we haven't imagined more of actual reality than we have.
Not miraculously, we know some of the causes that make this happen. What we don't know is all of the causes or all of the existing conditions that will precede such events.
When such event does "miraculously" happen we may be able to learn from observation what likely triggered it and then it won't be "miraculous" anymore, it will have an analyzable probability - with a rather large window of uncertainty.
Until such an event kills us all, or at least tanks civilization. We won't likely learn much from that one.
How do you find that? Through some kind of rigorous analysis, or just an intuitive feeling?
As I keep saying, the human mind is not good at intuitively handling very large or very small numbers and probabilities.
What you can't do is analyze a risk without doing an actual analysis. For that you need to collect data and work the numbers, not just imagine them.
Yes, and all the causes that we know don't apply to any nearby stars that might threaten us. You have to make up imaginary new causes in order to be frightened of a gamma ray burst.
When data is absent, rigorous analysis is impossible. When data is severely lacking, attempts at rigorous analysis are more intuition than anything else.
And when the data can't be collected? Contingency planning and resource allocation for the unknown is folly, right up until it is the smartest thing to do.
That we know of.
We should focus on expanding our knowledge and plan based on the best data we have, but like the first lunar astronauts spending 21 days in quarantine, a bit of planning and care for the unknown isn't a bad idea either.
There are an infinite number of things for which there is no evidence. Preparing for those things would be taking effort away from preparing for things that are actually real.
The first lunar astronauts spent 21 days in quarantine because we know that diseases are real and in the past there have been real examples of explorers bringing back new diseases from the places they visited. They didn't simultaneously get ritually cleansed by a shaman because there is no evidence of actual lycanthropy being a thing.