JSmith
Master Contributor
This is the problem... footage is always grainy and blurry, yet many people have high-res cameras on their phones and satellites can see insane detail.
JSmith
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Poll & discussion: UFOs / UAPs / Other Intelligent Life in Universe
- Thread starter StevenEleven
- Start date
JSmith
Yeah Elon says something like 'show me video that's at least iPhone 1 quality' LOL
And in a video above Commander Frover says one of his biggest regrets is not turning on his helmet camera when he was chasing the UFO...
sailor2005
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2020
- Messages
- 121
- Likes
- 168
Amir needs to get a hold of one of these "craft" for testing. Maybe they can achieve a SINAD of 200.
sailor2005
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2020
- Messages
- 121
- Likes
- 168
Yep.... and yet we still don't see any of the world's militaries locking on targets a couple of miles away with cell phones
Maybe because those cameras work on different light spectrums and for different purposes.
Reading ads of high end audio companies it seems they already did.
Aliens, they have the technology to subvert physics but are too shy to land and say "Take me to your leader".
Destination: Moon
Senior Member
This thread seems like an invitation for y'all to watch:
The History Of Future Folk
Which is a hell of a lot better than the title would lead you to believe
The History Of Future Folk
Which is a hell of a lot better than the title would lead you to believe
WONDERFUL movie.
Artist re-creation of first contact:
I suppose it will be interesting to see what type of info becomes available. I'm pretty skeptical of things that appear to violate known physics - we certainly don't know everything, but there sure do seem to be some pretty basic constraints as to how energy and mass work that cause me to look for more mundane explanations in preference to 'hyper-advanced alien technology that is beyond the ability of our puny human minds to comprehend'
My take is the pretty straightforward rational take, I think. I'm absolutely certain that 'life' exists elsewhere, and may well be rather common. As others point out, creating the basic organic compounds is so easy it seems highly unlikely that life won't emerge elsewhere. However, as one source put it you have to distinguish between 'critters' and 'folks', with 'folks' roughly equating to 'things that can build a radio transmitter'. I strongly suspect that 'folks' are rather rare just due to the range of factors that work against it in terms of planetary balance and stability as well as evolutionary niche - as intelligent as dolphins seem to be for example, they're never going to develop technology.
As for space-faring species, I think the apparent barrier to faster-than-light (FTL) travel makes the universe a cold and lonely place. Given the incredible energy resources available in even a single star, I just don't see how there would ever be a strong drive towards large-scale expansion based on 'need'. Transferring energy between systems would be so complex as to be basically worthless, and moving matter between systems would be pointless. So, IMHO any interstellar expansion/travel would much more likely be for curiosity/adventure/knowledge (and maybe 'survival' in rare cases, but that is solved by just hopping to the next system) than for expansion/aggression. And, given the inherent difficulties of interstellar travel (timescale, entropy, maintenance, resource identification and harvesting etc), it seems that there would have to be a significant payoff to make it worthwhile and 'curiosity' may not really be enough.
But, to a degree the perspective on this probably depends on your perspective on 'intelligence'. Based on our limited sample size, it seems that evolutionary selection pressure to become 'more intelligent' fades as command over your surroundings increases - it no longer confers significant survival advantage. So, this leads to the idea that further improvements in 'intelligence' are likely to be artificial - either purely computational AI or else genetic manipulation. This artificiality may well cause motivations and characteristics to deviate from evolutionary/survival based motivations into more arbitrary motivations, and may well alter the time-scale on which evaluations of 'reward' are calculated.
My take is the pretty straightforward rational take, I think. I'm absolutely certain that 'life' exists elsewhere, and may well be rather common. As others point out, creating the basic organic compounds is so easy it seems highly unlikely that life won't emerge elsewhere. However, as one source put it you have to distinguish between 'critters' and 'folks', with 'folks' roughly equating to 'things that can build a radio transmitter'. I strongly suspect that 'folks' are rather rare just due to the range of factors that work against it in terms of planetary balance and stability as well as evolutionary niche - as intelligent as dolphins seem to be for example, they're never going to develop technology.
As for space-faring species, I think the apparent barrier to faster-than-light (FTL) travel makes the universe a cold and lonely place. Given the incredible energy resources available in even a single star, I just don't see how there would ever be a strong drive towards large-scale expansion based on 'need'. Transferring energy between systems would be so complex as to be basically worthless, and moving matter between systems would be pointless. So, IMHO any interstellar expansion/travel would much more likely be for curiosity/adventure/knowledge (and maybe 'survival' in rare cases, but that is solved by just hopping to the next system) than for expansion/aggression. And, given the inherent difficulties of interstellar travel (timescale, entropy, maintenance, resource identification and harvesting etc), it seems that there would have to be a significant payoff to make it worthwhile and 'curiosity' may not really be enough.
But, to a degree the perspective on this probably depends on your perspective on 'intelligence'. Based on our limited sample size, it seems that evolutionary selection pressure to become 'more intelligent' fades as command over your surroundings increases - it no longer confers significant survival advantage. So, this leads to the idea that further improvements in 'intelligence' are likely to be artificial - either purely computational AI or else genetic manipulation. This artificiality may well cause motivations and characteristics to deviate from evolutionary/survival based motivations into more arbitrary motivations, and may well alter the time-scale on which evaluations of 'reward' are calculated.
Destination: Moon
Senior Member
JuliaCoder
Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2021
- Messages
- 43
- Likes
- 74
I hope physicists are now free to investigate this as a real question. A faster than light space-time bubble is not theoretically impossible (Alcubierre Warp Drive ) but you'd need a star's worth of gravity and maybe negative mass, which may not exist. But we don't know what space-time is, so maybe something could be built that does what these pilots see.
dasdoing
Major Contributor
I can't realy vote here,
"No, but I do believe there is other intelligent life in the Universe."
is the closest, but it's not about believes.
the question is if "intelligent life" on earth was actually an evolution accident, or if it will form naturaly where there is life.
we first have to understand that the universe is unimaginable huge. it is basicly impossible that there is no other place with any form of life.
if "intelligent life" was a accident, we can't really know if it happend again out there. if it is a natural evolution of life, than there is others out there.
"No, but I do believe there is other intelligent life in the Universe."
is the closest, but it's not about believes.
the question is if "intelligent life" on earth was actually an evolution accident, or if it will form naturaly where there is life.
we first have to understand that the universe is unimaginable huge. it is basicly impossible that there is no other place with any form of life.
if "intelligent life" was a accident, we can't really know if it happend again out there. if it is a natural evolution of life, than there is others out there.
So far no one has come out and said they "don't care", unless that was your sideways way of saying it. I would find it difficult to fathom if an otherwise intelligent person was told it was a proven fact that "alien spacecraft have visited earth’s atmosphere" and their response was "je m'en fou".
From the way things happened on Earth alone, it's not hard to figure that intelligent life with a technocratic civilization is extremely rare. Out of all the billions of species that have evolved in this world's 4.2 billion year history only one has produced a technocratic civiliation, and only in the last 400 or so years! And, having done this, we have not proven that we can continue it without triggering our own extinction, and that of every other life form on the planet.
We also know our galaxy is not teeming with such civilizations because, if it were, the electromatnetic signatures would be everywhere we pointed our radio telescopes.
Moreover, pipedream discussions of Alcubiere drives aside, we have not established a basis for FTL travel in physics and engineering, and without FTL travel interstellar expeditions would be millenia-long journeys--a formidible challenge even if all that's being sent out is a Voyager like probe. If it involves life forms, then life support systems capable of sustaining multi generational crews for millenia would be required. And how would any technocratic civilization across the sea of suns know our little star (out of billions) harbored a civilization worth visiting when our own radio signatures are only about a century old?
Simply too many improbabilities for me personally to believe it's space aliens, but everyone, of course, is free to draw their own conclusion.
We also know our galaxy is not teeming with such civilizations because, if it were, the electromatnetic signatures would be everywhere we pointed our radio telescopes.
Moreover, pipedream discussions of Alcubiere drives aside, we have not established a basis for FTL travel in physics and engineering, and without FTL travel interstellar expeditions would be millenia-long journeys--a formidible challenge even if all that's being sent out is a Voyager like probe. If it involves life forms, then life support systems capable of sustaining multi generational crews for millenia would be required. And how would any technocratic civilization across the sea of suns know our little star (out of billions) harbored a civilization worth visiting when our own radio signatures are only about a century old?
Simply too many improbabilities for me personally to believe it's space aliens, but everyone, of course, is free to draw their own conclusion.
Last edited:
Some Math:
- Assume we have been generating radio waves for 100 years and will continue only for another 100 years before armageddon = 200 year window
- 200/4,200,000,000 = 0.000,000,05
- Earth is one of 8 planets
- Let's stipulate, in turn, our solar system is one in a million
- So 0.000,000,05 / 8,000,000 = 0.000,000,000,000,006 of the planets might overlap with us. (14 zeros)
- There are 21,600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the universe (2 plus 23 zeros). https://skiesandscopes.com/how-many-planets/
- So there should be 36,000,000,000 planets with civilizations capable of EM technology (I might have erred by a few decimal places.)
So I suppose our technocratic civilization is both extremely rare and extremely common.
As far as FTL goes, how many dimensions are there? Apparently 10 is the answer, so that might be the clue how "they" are popping up here and there.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 21,022
- Likes
- 38,233
I thought the answer was 11 dimensions.