Re: the end of fermi's paradox?

From: Mike Dougherty (
Date: Sat Jan 06 2007 - 10:13:13 MST

On 1/6/07, Jef Allbright <> wrote:
> Considering that the surface of a sphere increases with the square of
> the radius, while the volume increases with the cube, there seems to be
> an inherent physical constraint on the growth of any system that defines
> intentions in terms of itself.
> With increasing growth of "self", and proportionally diminishing surface
> area with which to interact with the "adjacent possible", it would seem
> that expansion would reach a limit and growth would necessarily become
> fractal.

does the surface area/volume analogy extend to a hypersphere? Is there any
difference in the "adjacent possible" relationships between higher
dimensional hypersurfaces and lower? If a 4d space-time is in adjacent
contact with a higher-dimensional parent only at a single point (t=0 for
example) then wouldn't the relationship imply a one-way influence? (such
that the higher dimensional parent could easily influence the life of the
lower order universe through easily randomly accesible 'starting'
conditions, while the low-order universe would appear to be predetermined at

I visualize this not as a mathemagically complex version of a simple sphere
(like a soap bubble), but as more a foam of soap bubbles inside other soap
bubbles. The 'surface area' is the soap, which may be greater than the
surface of the largest containing bubble. A point of adjacency could be
shared between several bubbles in the foam.

It might also be interesting to consider the radiation and reflection
> signature of a highly fractal body in space.

I would google radiation and reflection, but I doubt I will find the context
in which you are using them. Do you have a link that better describes these

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:57 MDT