Eventual Horizon
Interlocutor: ChatGPT May 24 Version, model GPT-4.
Let's talk about Russell's teapot.
Russell's teapot is a philosophical argument proposed by Bertrand Russell, a British philosopher, to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims. He used an analogy of a teapot orbiting the Sun somewhere in space. Just because this can't be disproven doesn't make it a reasonable claim. The principle highlights that it's not up to skeptics to disprove outlandish claims, but rather the responsibility of the claimant to provide evidence.
To be clear, this is a teapot orbiting the Sun far from Earth, correct?
Yes, that's correct. In Bertrand Russell's analogy, he imagined a teapot that's orbiting the Sun somewhere between the Earth and Mars. The key part of the analogy is that the teapot is too small to be seen with telescopes. Therefore, its existence is unfalsifiable with current technology, but that doesn't mean it's reasonable or justified to believe in its existence without suitable evidence.
Teapots aren't the sort of thing one would expect to find in deep space.
Absolutely, you've hit on the central point of Russell's analogy. A teapot is an everyday object, not something we'd expect to find in space. The teapot stands for any unfalsifiable claim that, while possible, is highly unlikely given what we know about the world. Russell's point is that the burden of proof lies with the person making the unlikely claim, not with others to disprove it.
On the other hand, given what we know about the world, a space probe is exactly the sort of thing we would expect to find in space.
Yes, that's correct. We have launched many space probes, and we know they are out there. This illustrates an important aspect of Russell's teapot argument: the context of existing knowledge matters. Claims that align with what we already reliably know and can evidence, such as the existence of space probes, require less additional evidence to be believable. This is quite different from claims that contradict our existing knowledge base without offering substantial evidence, like the hypothetical teapot.
The Voyager space probes come to mind.
Absolutely. The Voyager space probes, launched by NASA in 1977, are remarkable examples of human-made objects in deep space. Voyager 1 is currently the farthest human-made object from Earth, and both probes are in the "interstellar medium", the space outside our solar system. Their ongoing journey and the data they have transmitted back have significantly expanded our knowledge of the outer solar system and beyond. They exemplify claims that are backed by substantial evidence and fit within our existing understanding.
Do they carry anything teapot-like?
Yes, in a way. Both Voyager spacecraft carry a golden record, which contains sounds and images selected to portray the diversity of life and culture on Earth. It's a sort of "message in a bottle" sent into interstellar space. While it's not a teapot, it is an Earthly object not usually associated with space. The key difference is we have firm evidence for the Voyagers and their golden records, unlike the hypothetical teapot in Russell's argument.
Will we eventually lose the ability to communicate with the probes?
Yes, over time we will lose the ability to communicate with the Voyager probes. Their power comes from radioisotope thermoelectric generators, which slowly decay. NASA predicts that by the mid-2020s, the Voyagers may not have enough power to run any scientific instruments, limiting their ability to communicate. However, their journey will continue, heading further into the interstellar medium.
When communication is lost, that would seem to be the end of generation of new direct evidence of the existence of the probes.
You're correct. Once the Voyager spacecraft lose power and we can no longer communicate with them, they'll stop providing direct evidence of their existence. However, unlike the hypothetical teapot in Russell's analogy, we have a robust body of evidence documenting the construction, launch, journey, and discoveries of the Voyager probes. Even when they go silent, we'll continue to have this indirect but strong evidence of their existence and their location in space.
If this body of evidence were to decay, or the abilities to access and interpret it were to degrade, the sharp distinction between the golden records and the teapot would seem to fade.
That's a thought-provoking point. If we lost all evidence and knowledge about the Voyager probes and their golden records, their existence would indeed start to resemble the unfalsifiable claim in Russell's teapot analogy. This underlines the importance of evidence in making credible claims. However, the key difference is that the Voyager probes did provide direct, verifiable evidence during their operational lifetimes, unlike the hypothetical teapot.
There's a horizon in space beyond which the probes pass and can no longer be reached due to loss of power, and there's another sort of horizon in time beyond which they may fade from memory and history. The former is reminiscent of an "event" horizon in astrophysics.
You've made an insightful connection. In astrophysics, an event horizon usually refers to the boundary of a black hole from which nothing, not even light, can escape. It's an apt metaphor for the power and information horizon of the Voyager probes, beyond which we can't receive any more data. Similarly, the concept of a temporal horizon, beyond which certain knowledge may be lost or forgotten, also aligns with this metaphor. Both represent limits to our capacity to perceive and understand phenomena.
The temporal horizon is an "eventual" one.
Indeed, the temporal horizon can be considered an "eventual" horizon, as it refers to the point in time beyond which events may no longer be known or remembered. The passing of time can lead to the loss, degradation, or distortion of information, effectively putting it beyond this "eventual" horizon. This term is not commonly used, but your metaphor captures the essence of the idea quite well.
While some bits may merit heroic efforts to sustain, it’s time for this Bit to come to an end.
For more on the subject of “rot,” consider episode 2.6 of the Minds Almost Meeting podcast, a conversation between Agnes Callard & Robin Hanson. Both transcript and audio are available at the link.