I suspect you misunderstand my objection and that I may have used only half of the appropriate analogy
A universe in which your proposed ubiquitous low-matter low-energy interstellar computers exist is one in which space-based self-replication and manufacturing is a thing that happens. This implies the existence of a whole slew of ‘ecological niches’. Indeed, the sort that is generally thought of in these circles (more-or-less industrially turning large amounts of matter near stars into stuff that intercepts light and uses the resultant energy for something or other) is rather simpler, is more similar to the demonstrated cases of terrestrial biology / human industry, and has more matter and energy available than what you propose. The low temperature low energy devices would be more akin to crazy deep extremophile lithotrophic bacteria or deep sea fish on Earth, living slow metabolisms and at low densities and matter/energy fluxes, while things in star systems would be akin to photosynthetic plants and algae at the surface, living at high densities at high flux.
In any situation other than perfect coordination, that which replicates itself more rapidly becomes more common. You will have adaptation and evolution. It doesn’t matter if more computation can be done in one place than another—in terms of sheer matter and energy, that which uses high energy fluxes and large amounts of matter will replicate to large numbers and be dominant in terms of amount of stuff and effect on the physical universe. Other stuff could still exist, but most stuff would be of this faster heavier type. Niches will be filled. And a stellar system niche is not akin to the deep ocean if an interstellar niche is compared to the surface of the Earth, if anything it’s the opposite. The deep sea niche may be where you see all kinds of fascinating bioluminescence and long distance signaling epiphenomena that these organisms care about and of a sort you dont see at the surface, but in terms of biomass the surface niche dominates. Furthermore, competition amongst different things mean they often do things inefficiently so as to gain advantages over each other—those that do become more common faster.
The low temperature low energy devices would be more akin to crazy deep extremophile lithotrophic bacteria or deep sea fish on Earth, living slow metabolisms and at low densities and matter/energy fluxes,
Hmm I think you misunderstood my model. At the limits of computation, you approach the maximal computational density—the maximum computational capacity per unit mass—only at zero temperature. The stuff you are talking about—anything that operates at any non-zero temp—has infinitely less compute capability than the zero-temp stuff.
So your model and analogy is off—the low temp devices are like gods—incomprehensibly faster and more powerful, and bio life and warm tech is like plants, bacteria, or perhaps rocks—not even comparable, not even in the same basic category of ‘thing’.
In any situation other than perfect coordination, that which replicates itself more rapidly becomes more common.
Of course. But it depends on what the best way to replicate is. If new universe creation is feasible (and it appears to be, from what we know of physics), then civs advance rather quickly to post-singularity godhood and start creating new universes. Among other things, this allows exponential growth/replication which is vastly superior to puny polynomial growth you can get by physical interstellar colonization. (it also probably allows for true immortality, and perhaps actual magic—altering physics) And even if that tech is hard/expensive, colonization does not entail anything big, hot, or dumb. Realistic colonization would simply result in many small, compact, cold civ objects. Also see the other thread.
I suspect you misunderstand my objection and that I may have used only half of the appropriate analogy
A universe in which your proposed ubiquitous low-matter low-energy interstellar computers exist is one in which space-based self-replication and manufacturing is a thing that happens. This implies the existence of a whole slew of ‘ecological niches’. Indeed, the sort that is generally thought of in these circles (more-or-less industrially turning large amounts of matter near stars into stuff that intercepts light and uses the resultant energy for something or other) is rather simpler, is more similar to the demonstrated cases of terrestrial biology / human industry, and has more matter and energy available than what you propose. The low temperature low energy devices would be more akin to crazy deep extremophile lithotrophic bacteria or deep sea fish on Earth, living slow metabolisms and at low densities and matter/energy fluxes, while things in star systems would be akin to photosynthetic plants and algae at the surface, living at high densities at high flux.
In any situation other than perfect coordination, that which replicates itself more rapidly becomes more common. You will have adaptation and evolution. It doesn’t matter if more computation can be done in one place than another—in terms of sheer matter and energy, that which uses high energy fluxes and large amounts of matter will replicate to large numbers and be dominant in terms of amount of stuff and effect on the physical universe. Other stuff could still exist, but most stuff would be of this faster heavier type. Niches will be filled. And a stellar system niche is not akin to the deep ocean if an interstellar niche is compared to the surface of the Earth, if anything it’s the opposite. The deep sea niche may be where you see all kinds of fascinating bioluminescence and long distance signaling epiphenomena that these organisms care about and of a sort you dont see at the surface, but in terms of biomass the surface niche dominates. Furthermore, competition amongst different things mean they often do things inefficiently so as to gain advantages over each other—those that do become more common faster.
Hmm I think you misunderstood my model. At the limits of computation, you approach the maximal computational density—the maximum computational capacity per unit mass—only at zero temperature. The stuff you are talking about—anything that operates at any non-zero temp—has infinitely less compute capability than the zero-temp stuff.
So your model and analogy is off—the low temp devices are like gods—incomprehensibly faster and more powerful, and bio life and warm tech is like plants, bacteria, or perhaps rocks—not even comparable, not even in the same basic category of ‘thing’.
Of course. But it depends on what the best way to replicate is. If new universe creation is feasible (and it appears to be, from what we know of physics), then civs advance rather quickly to post-singularity godhood and start creating new universes. Among other things, this allows exponential growth/replication which is vastly superior to puny polynomial growth you can get by physical interstellar colonization. (it also probably allows for true immortality, and perhaps actual magic—altering physics) And even if that tech is hard/expensive, colonization does not entail anything big, hot, or dumb. Realistic colonization would simply result in many small, compact, cold civ objects. Also see the other thread.