A possible solution to the Fermi Paradox

[Sena]

The physicist Enrico Fermi calculated that, when we consider the enormous number of galaxies in the known universe, intelligent life should have evolved on a number of them, and those intelligent beings should be communicating with us on a clear and consistent basis. That such communication is not happening is the basis of the Fermi Paradox.
I am aware that there are credible reports of UFO sightings and alien abduction, but the fact is that if I want to communicate with an extra-terrestrial  tomorrow, it is extremely unlikely that I would be able to do so, even if I had access to the most powerful radio telescope.
Various solutions have been proposed or the Fermi Paradox. For instance, the idea that all technological civilizations like ourselves annihilate themselves before they  are able to travel very far through space.
Beatriz Gato-Rivera of the Institute of Fundamental Physics in Madrid has put forward a hypothesis which I find rather convincing and is fairly compatible with the Ra teachings. Her paper is available for free download here:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0512062.pdf

An extract  from the paper:

Two years ago I made a proposal for solving the Fermi Paradox [8]: At present, all the typical galaxies of the Universe are already colonized (or large regions of them) by advanced civilizations. In the vast territory of these hypercivilizations a small proportion of their individuals belong to primitive subcivilizations, like ours. That is, I put forward the possibility that our small terrestrial civilization is embedded in a large hypercivilization unknowingly and this situation should be common in all typical galaxies.

2 It is less known that several years before Crick, in 1960, the astronomer Thomas Gold suggested, during a congress in Los Angeles, that space travellers could have brought life to Earth some thousands of millions of years ago. Curiously, this claim was also made, with a detailed description of ‘the facts’, by the ‘popular metaphysics’ writer T. Lobsang Rampa in the book The Hermit (1971).

The primitive subcivilizations would know or ignore their low status depending, most likely, on the ethical standards of the advanced civilization in which they are immersed. If the standards are low, the individuals of the primitive subcivilizations will be surely abused in many ways and therefore will be painfully aware of their low status. If the ethical standards of the advanced individuals are high instead, then they will respect the natural evolution (social, cultural) of the primitive subcivilizations, treating them ‘ecologically’ as some kind of protected species. In this case, which could well describe the situation of the terrestrial civilization, most primitive individuals would be completely unaware of the existence of the large hypercivilization.

Now some remarks follow:
• Needless to say, the primitive individuals would not be considered as citizens of the hypercivilization and direct open contact would completely destroy the primitive subcivilization.

The ‘alien visitors’, from the viewpoint of the primitive individuals, would not•
be so from the viewpoint of the advanced individuals from the hypercivilization because they rather would be visiting, or working in, their own territory. (The advanced civilizations would surely have underground and/or submarine bases in their primitive planets for military and scientific purposes.)

• I distinguish between aggressive and non-aggresive advanced civilizations. I do not believe that advanced civilizations must have ethical codes concerning primitive life-forms.

• The fact that our civilization has never been attacked by aggressive aliens, as far as history knows, could well be a clue that we belong to a non-aggressive advanced civilization which protects planet Earth, as part of its territory.

If this scenario is true for our civilization, then the Subanthropic Principle [8] would also hold: We are not typical among the intelligent observers from the Universe. Typical civilizations of typical galaxies would be hundreds of thousands, or millions, of years more evolved than ours and, consequently, typical intelligent observers would be orders of magnitude more intelligent than us3.

One may argue against this principle saying that a much higher level of science and technology does not necessarily imply a much higher intelligence or brain capacities. My answer to this objection is that there are two main reasons to think in this way. The

3This means that, if we ‘score’ 10, then they would score 100 or 1.000 or 10.000, etc.
first is simply natural biological evolution as we see it in our planet. The individuals of our species (homo sapiens sapiens) are more intelligent than our ancestors and these were more intelligent than their own ancestors, etc. Since there is no reason why this process should stop with us, it is fully realistic to expect that individuals of much older civilizations must be genetically more intelligent than us. But there is an even stronger argument supporting the views that the older the civilization, the moreTwo years ago I made a proposal for solving the Fermi Paradox [8]: At present, all the typical galaxies of the Universe are already colonized (or large regions of them) by advanced civilizations. In the vast territory of these hypercivilizations a small proportion of their individuals belong to primitive subcivilizations, like ours. That is, I put forward the possibility that our small terrestrial civilization is embedded in a large hypercivilization unknowingly and this situation should be common in all typical galaxies.

2 It is less known that several years before Crick, in 1960, the astronomer Thomas Gold suggested, during a congress in Los Angeles, that space travellers could have brought life to Earth some thousands of millions of years ago. Curiously, this claim was also made, with a detailed description of ‘the facts’, by the ‘popular metaphysics’ writer T. Lobsang Rampa in the book The Hermit (1971).

The primitive subcivilizations would know or ignore their low status depending, most likely, on the ethical standards of the advanced civilization in which they are immersed. If the standards are low, the individuals of the primitive subcivilizations will be surely abused in many ways and therefore will be painfully aware of their low status. If the ethical standards of the advanced individuals are high instead, then they will respect the natural evolution (social, cultural) of the primitive subcivilizations, treating them ‘ecologically’ as some kind of protected species. In this case, which could well describe the situation of the terrestrial civilization, most primitive individuals would be completely unaware of the existence of the large hypercivilization.

Now some remarks follow:
• Needless to say, the primitive individuals would not be considered as citizens of the hypercivilization and direct open contact would completely destroy the primitive subcivilization.

The ‘alien visitors’, from the viewpoint of the primitive individuals, would not•
be so from the viewpoint of the advanced individuals from the hypercivilization because they rather would be visiting, or working in, their own territory. (The advanced civilizations would surely have underground and/or submarine bases in their primitive planets for military and scientific purposes.)

• I distinguish between aggressive and non-aggresive advanced civilizations. I do not believe that advanced civilizations must have ethical codes concerning primitive life-forms.

• The fact that our civilization has never been attacked by aggressive aliens, as far as history knows, could well be a clue that we belong to a non-aggressive advanced civilization which protects planet Earth, as part of its territory.

If this scenario is true for our civilization, then the Subanthropic Principle [8] would also hold: We are not typical among the intelligent observers from the Universe. Typical civilizations of typical galaxies would be hundreds of thousands, or millions, of years more evolved than ours and, consequently, typical intelligent observers would be orders of magnitude more intelligent than us3.

One may argue against this principle saying that a much higher level of science and technology does not necessarily imply a much higher intelligence or brain capacities. My answer to this objection is that there are two main reasons to think in this way. The

3This means that, if we ‘score’ 10, then they would score 100 or 1.000 or 10.000, etc.
first is simply natural biological evolution as we see it in our planet. The individuals of our species (homo sapiens sapiens) are more intelligent than our ancestors and these were more intelligent than their own ancestors, etc. Since there is no reason why this process should stop with us, it is fully realistic to expect that individuals of much older civilizations must be genetically more intelligent than us. But there is an even stronger argument supporting the views that the older the civilization, the more intelligent the individuals: As the civilizations would reach some mastery in the field of genetic engineering, the general tendency would be to ‘improve’ themselves, that is their own species (among many others species) giving rise to an acceleration of biological evolution at unimaginable rates.

Now there is a crucial question. If the Solar System is part of a large hypercivilization, why we do not detect any signs of intelligence from outer space at all? My answer is related to my views that aggressive advanced civilizations must exist: Generically, all advanced enough civilizations camouflage their planets for security reasons, because of the existence of aggressive advanced civilizations, so that no sign of civilization (or any other form of life) can be detected by external observers, who would only obtain distorted data for disuasion purposes. This hypothesis I call the Undetectability Conjecture [8].

Observe that this conjecture predicts a rather low probability of success for the SETI (search for extraterrestrial intelligence) project. The reason is that only primitive civilizations able to produce electromagnetic emissions would be susceptible to being detected by the SETI antennas. But after reaching the level of producing electromagnetic emissions it would take only a few hundred years for a civilization to learn to hide themselves from external observers, becoming undetectable. As a result, the period of detectability of an average civilization could be very short and the probability that a primitive civilization, like ours, detects another primitive civilization would be negligible. For example, it could have happened that planet Earth received the last TV or radio programs from another planet 200.000 years ago, for a period of about 500 years.

How this fits with the Ra teachings

(1) The “hyprecivilizatios” described by the author consist of individuals of fourth to seventh densities, as opposed to third density or lower on our Earth.
(2) The aggressive and non-aggressive hypercivilizations correspond to the negatively and positively oriented planets described by Ra.
(3) The “undetectability” of hypercivilizations is due to security measures adopted to prevent detection by negatively-oriented hypercivilizations.

[Anders]

From the paper: "That is, I put forward the possibility that our small terrestrial civilization is embedded in a large hypercivilization unknowingly and this situation should be common in all typical galaxies."

That actually makes sense. And it's similar to how Ra describes in the Law of One how our planet is in a state of quarantine.