News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Fermi Paradox Revisited: Technosignatures and the Con... by denton-scratch on Tuesday December 20, 2022 @06:21PM (#34074291)
> so maybe it is a sequence

At that point, you introduce the assumption that the interval is quantized. Up until then, you're dealing with an arbitrary period of time, which is a real, and can't be made into sequences. Once you have sequences you have integers, and so you can have primes. But you can't just switch from reals to countable numbers without explanation, and then say that two reals can be relatively prime.

Re:The Fermi Paradox Revisited: Technosignatures and the Con... by actionfromafar on Tuesday December 20, 2022 @07:08PM (#34074825)
So begin with a sequence of 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. That establishes a baseline cadence of minutes, or hours or whatever. A clock signal if you will.

Then switch to primes. I think anyone looking at that kind of message will figure it out eventually. It can't be mistaken for a natural occurence.

Re:The Fermi Paradox Revisited: Technosignatures and the Con... by denton-scratch on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @11:18AM (#34082633)
> So begin with a sequence

That is the trick that I was calling out. The intervals are reals, and cannot be made into a sequence. Beginning with a sequence is even worse; what is in evidence (for the aliens) is a set of real intervals. That's what the aliens have to begin with.

Now explain how they get to primes.

Re:The Fermi Paradox Revisited: Technosignatures and the Con... by actionfromafar on Thursday December 22, 2022 @08:10AM (#34092864)
If the precision between the intervals is good, how can you not get to primes? Of course the intervals would be real, but there would be a very discernible pattern.

It would stare you in the face, or what am I missing?

Re:The Fermi Paradox Revisited: Technosignatures and the Con... by topaz0 on Thursday December 22, 2022 @04:02PM (#34098631)
I disagree. Sequences of reals are still sequences. So maybe hypothesis one has nothing to do with integers, maybe it's that the intervals are increasing geometrically. You're still going to take ratios and and start having suggestive numbers fall out. "can't just switch ... without explanation". The point is that this putative alien observer would be looking for the explanation. Maybe the first few explanations they come up with are the wrong ones, but they are trivial to check. It's not like it's a research project to reject the Fibonacci hypothesis.So you would still have the right answer on day one.