Abstract
In the depths of space, how will groups and individuals interact? What will the dynamics be when law enforcement is in pursuit of criminals, or when powerful groups try to constrain the activities of lesser ones? Using some very general assumptions, it is possible to paint a picture of how these dynamics could play out. The most likely options for competing groups are either an exodus at a significant fraction of the speed of light, in order to escape their pursuers, or a mass expansion to claim as many resources as possible. Such a mass expansion could also be used to preemptively prevent escape. This paper assumes that future humans are capable of ‘recursive manufacturing’ (expanding their manufacturing base to make full use of any new resources) and that they can copy and co-opt natural processes, including some of the mental processes. Then both expansion and escape will be relatively easy for any reasonably-sized space-faring group. The ultimate shape of human society in space may well depend on which groups expand first, and under which circumstances.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
We will assume here that human civilization doesn’t collapse in the meantime!
- 2.
This will be far from the current world, when a picture can get around the world in seconds and a military strike in a few hours. This need not make centralised authority impossible, but it does mean such an authority needs to allow local responses without consultation to the centre.
- 3.
Since the acceleration and deceleration are the key costs, with the middle section of the trip just being effortless coasting.
- 4.
On the cosmic scale, at least.
- 5.
This list has some similarities to the work of Albert O. Hirschman, who analysed conflicts in organisations or societies in terms of “exit” (hiding or fleeing), “voice” (negotiating an agreement) or “loyalty” (staying put and accepting the status quo) (Hirschman 1970) One interesting aspect is that if exit is easy, the scope for voice is reduced—dissenters or resource-rich parties will preferentially escape, leaving a more loyal core depleted of reformers. In fact, some powers might encourage exit as long as they do not have any reason to fear subsequent retaliation by the exiles. However, some of the technologies discussed in this chapter, such as recursive manufacturing, do make interstellar exiles potentially dangerous.
- 6.
To pick an example, if group B remained confined to a solar system while group A claimed the galaxy, then group A could eventually crash half a dozen stars into group B’s system without denting their own resources. More likely, they could saturate group B’s domain with fast moving projectiles or destructive energy pulses.
- 7.
We will lay aside the possibility of faster than light expansion, using some as yet unknown loophole in physics. This would enable both escape anywhere, but also presumably catching anyone. It also makes the Fermi paradox far more problematic—FTL drives would allow visits from aliens even beyond the cosmic event horizon. In the end, there is very little that can be said about such an unconstrained case, which—according to our current understanding of physics—would permit time travel.
- 8.
See paper Armstrong and Sandberg (2013) for more details on one possible scenario.
- 9.
This is a stronger assumption that recursive manufacturing. Artificial intelligence would be sufficient for recursive manufacturing, but not necessary.
- 10.
The calculation of these efficiencies is where this approach is most vulnerable to small errors: small loses of efficiency mean dramatically more material needed for deceleration. But the total energy requirements are so low that this does not change the main point on the ease of expansion, though this expansion may end up being slightly slower than envisaged here.
- 11.
In fact, the expansion of the universe creates a ‘Hubble drag’ (Peacock 1999; Bertschinger 1995) that slows probes down relative to their destinations. For the most distant of the galaxies—those barely reachable at all—the probes will arrive with practically no velocity. Thus we will also consider a fourth scenario, that of probes launched at 99 %c with no major deceleration capabilities.
- 12.
The initial paper in this project (Armstrong and Sandberg 2013) was focused on the Fermi paradox: the idea was not to plot the future course of a human cosmic civilization, but to illustrate the ease with which alien species could cross the void between galaxies, and thus worsen the Fermi paradox: life could have reached us from many galaxies with ease, so their absence is puzzling.
The Earth is not among the oldest of terrestrial planets. About 75 % of the planets that could have habitable life on them in our Milky Way are older than the sun (Lineweaver et al. 2004). If we look back 5 billion years (a timespan in which its likely that intelligent life could have evolved on Earth-like planets), then 7.69 × 107 galaxies could have reached us at the slow pace of 50 %c, considerably worsening the Fermi paradox.
- 13.
A few million years is a rounding error for most cosmic phenomena.
- 14.
This might be as simple as improved transparency, allowing all groups to spy on each other, or may be the result of new technology, such as applying workable lie detection to leaders of the various factions.
- 15.
Or whole brain emulations.
References
Armstrong, S., & Sandberg, A. (2013). Eternity in six hours: Intergalactic spreading of intelligent life and sharpening the fermi paradox. Acta Astronautica, 89, 1–13.
Armstrong, S., & Sotala, K. (2012). How we’re predicting ai–or failing to. In J. Romportl, P. Ircing, E. Zackova, M. Polak, & R. Schuster (Eds.), Beyond AI: Artificial dreams (pp. 52–75). Pilsen: University of West Bohemia.
Armstrong, S., Sotala, K., & hÉigeartaigh, S. O. (2014) .The errors, insights and lessons of famous ai predictions—and what they mean for the future. In Proceedings of the 2012 Oxford Winter Intelligence Conference.
Banks, I. M. (1994). A few notes on the culture. Originally posted to newsgroup rec.arts.sf.written on 10 Aug 1994. http://www.vavatch.co.uk/books/banks/cultnote.htm.
Bars, I., & Terning, J. (2009). Extra dimensions in space and time. Berlin: Springer.
Bertschinger, E. (1995). Cosmological dynamics. arXiv lecture notes (astro-ph/9503125). http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9503125.
Bond, A., & Martin, A. (1978). Project daedalus study group: Project daedalus—the final report on the bis starship study. JBIS Interstellar Studies, Supplement.
Bracewell, R. N. (1960). Communications from superior galactic communities. Nature, 186(4726), 670–671.
Brin, D. (1983). The ‘great silence’: The controversy concerning extraterrestrial intelligent life. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 24, 283–309.
Caroti S (2011) Mcfarland.
Church, G. M., Gao, Y., & Kosuri, S. (2012). Next-generation digital information storage in DNA. Science, 337(6102), 1628. doi:10.1126/science.1226355. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6102/1628.abstract.
Drexler, E. (1992). Nanosystems: Chap. appendix A. Methodological issues in theoretical applied science. New York: Wiley.
Dyson, F. J. (1960). Search for artificial stellar sources of infra-red radiation. Science, 131(3414), 1667–1668.
Forward, R. L. (1995). A transparent derivation of the relativistic rocket equation. In Proceedings of 31 st AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit.
Freitas, R. A. (1980). A self-reproducing interstellar probe. The Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, 33, 251–264.
Freitas, R. A., & Merkle, R. C. (2004). Kinematic self-replicating machines. Georgetown: Landes Bioscience.
Freitas, R. A., & Zachary, W. B. (1981). A self-replicating, growing lunar factory. In J. Grey, & L.A. Hamdan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Princeton/AIAA Conference. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Gott, J. R., Juri, M., Schlegel, D., Hoyle, F., Vogeley, M., Tegmark, M., et al. (2005). A map of the universe. The Astrophysical Journal, 624(2), 463–484.
Graneau, P. (1980). Self-energized superconducting mass driver for space launching. In J. Bennett, T. Gora, & P. Kemmey (Eds.), Proceedings of Conference on Electromagnetic Guns and Launchers (Part II).
Hackman, J. (1992). Group influences on individuals in organizations. In M. Dunnette & L. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 234–245). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Hanson, R. (1998). Burning the cosmic commons: Evolutionary strategies for interstellar colonization Preprint at http://hanson.gmu.edu/filluniv.pdf.
Hilbert, M., & López, P. (2011). The world’s technological capacity to store, communicate, and compute information. Science, 332(6025), 60–65.
Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Kolm, H., Fine, K., Mongeau, P., & Williams, F (1979). Electromagnetic propulsion alternatives. In J. Grey, & C. Krop (Eds.), Space manufacturing facilities III, Proceedings of the 4th Princeton/AIAA Conference (pp. 299–306).
Landis, G. A. (1999). Beamed energy propulsion for practical interstellar flight. JBIS, 52, 420–423.
Lineweaver, C. H. (2001). An estimate of the age distribution of terrestrial planets in the universe: Quantifying metallicity as a selection effect. Icarus, 151, 307–313. doi:10.1006/icar.2001.6607.
Lineweaver, C. H., Fenner, Y., & Gibson, B. K. (2004). The galactic habitable zone and the age distribution of complex life in the milky way. Science, 303(5654), 59–62.
Nordley, G. D. (1993). Relativistic particle beams for interstellar propulsion. JBIS, 46, 145–150.
Peacock, J. A. (1999). Cosmological physics. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
Peebles, P. J. E., & Ratra, B. (2003). The cosmological constant and dark energy. Reviews of Modern Physics, 75, 559–606.
Rampelotto, P. (2010). Resistance of microorganisms to extreme environmental conditions and its contribution to astrobiology. Sustainability, 2, 1602–1623.
Sandberg, A. (2006). Dyson sphere faq. Retrieved September 01, 2006, from http://www.nada.kth.se/asa/dysonFAQ.html.
Sandberg, A., & Armstrong, S. (2013). Hunters in the dark: Game theory analysis of the deadly probes scenario. In Poster presented at the National Astronomy Meeting of the Royal Astonomical Society (NAM2013).
Sandberg, A., & Bostrom, N. (2008). Whole brain emulation. a roadmap. Future of Humanity Institute Technical Report #2008-3.
Suffern, K. G. (1977). Some thoughts on dyson spheres. Proceedings of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 3, 177.
Sung, V. W. (2008). Lumped parameter modeling of the ideal railgun: Examining maximum electromechanical energy conversion efficiency. In: 2008 ASEE IL/IN Section Conference, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology.
Tetlock, P. (2005) Expert political judgement: How good is it? how can we know? Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Turner, M., & Wilczek, F. (1982). Is our vacuum metastable? Nature, 298, 633–634.
Vulpetti, G. (1985). Maximum terminal velocity of relativistic rocket. Acta Astronautica, 12(2), 81–90.
Walter, C. (2005). Kryder’s law. Scientific American, 293, 32–33.
Westmoreland, S (2010). A note on relativistic rocketry. Acta Astronautica, 67:1248–1251. http://arxiv.org/pdf/0910.1965.pdf.
Whitmire, D. P. (1975). Relativistic spaceflight and the catalytic nuclear ramjet. Acta Astronautica, 2, 497–509.
Winglee, R. M., Slough, J., Ziemba, T., & Goodson, A. (2000). Mini-magnetospheric plasma propulsion: Tapping the energy of the solar wind for spacecraft propulsion. Journal of Geophysical Research, 105(A9), 21067–21077.
Acknowledgments
We are very grateful for comments, support and help from Milan C′irkovic ′, Pedro Ferreira, Eric Drexler, Nick Bostrom, Timothy Clifton, Toby Ord, Robin Hanson, Daniel Dewey, Nick Beckstead, Charles Cockell, Ian Crawford and Levi Leatherberry.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Armstrong, S., Sandberg, A., ÓhÉigeartaigh, S. (2015). Outrunning the Law: Extraterrestrial Liberty and Universal Colonisation. In: Cockell, C. (eds) The Meaning of Liberty Beyond Earth. Space and Society. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09567-7_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09567-7_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09566-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09567-7
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)