All About UFO's

[Petrushka]

This isn’t complicated. Trust spooks and politicians, or trust Einstein.

Either way, you don’t know for sure, but which is the safest bet?

 

[Petrushka]

Theories like relativity and Quantum describe phenomena that were observed in nature long before we had equations.

Show me the natural phenomena that suggest FTL or anti-gravity.

 

[solderdude]

There's a strong push for more evidence, either developed or revealed, and should result in less speculation. Enough to satisfy the most skeptical? We don't know, but that it's become an openly discussed topic among scientists, congress, defense officials, etc in our life time is promising. I'm tired as hell of speculating.

One can push and demand for evidence but what those agencies do not want to be known will never be made public.
My guess is that skeptical people will still be skeptical and that the evidence is not going to be conclusive and not end speculation.

What is not simple to explain is why so many people, most very highly respected, coming out of very high positions in government assert the former is the truth, while physical evidence to support their positions wholly is lacking in the public domain.

Another thing that is in common with audiophoolery. Here too there are plenty of well established reviewers and designers stating the biggest nonsense and having wild theories.

And in case of UFO's... who says they are manned... might as well be drones and may even be fully automated.

The fact that millions of tax payers dollars is used is not a guarantee it is well spend or spend on something that eventually pays of.

For now... and in the future I am quite sure everything is speculation.

 

[Jim Taylor]

What is not simple to explain is why so many people, most very highly respected, coming out of very high positions in government assert the former is the truth, ...

Many people in this thread have fallen prey to both the "appeal to authority" fallacy and the "authority bias". People who occupy higher positions in society are no less prone to fallibility than are we. In fact, it is my opinion that people who are more influential are MORE prone to fallible behavior, mostly due to the fact that their position fosters a greater sense of self-confidence.

Jim

 

[oceansize]

One can push and demand for evidence but what those agencies do not want to be known will never be made public.
My guess is that skeptical people will still be skeptical and that the evidence is not going to be conclusive and not end speculation.


Another thing that is in common with audiophoolery. Here too there are plenty of well established reviewers and designers stating the biggest nonsense and having wild theories.

And in case of UFO's... who says they are manned... might as well be drones and may even be fully automated.

The fact that millions of tax payers dollars is used is not a guarantee it is well spend or spend on something that eventually pays of.

For now... and in the future I am quite sure everything is speculation.

The UFO curse (from 1983!)

THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF PHILIP J. KLASS
To ufologists who publicly criticize me, ... or who even think unkind thoughts about me in private, I do hereby leave and bequeath:THE UFO CURSE:
No matter how long you live, you will never know any more about UFOs than you know today. You will never know any more about what UFOs really are, or where they come from. You will never know any more about what the U.S. Government really knows about UFOs than you know today. As you lie on your own death-bed you will be as mystified about UFOs as you are today. And you will remember this curse.

 

[kemmler3D]

Show me the natural phenomena that suggest FTL or anti-gravity.

Relativity suggests FTL is possible if you can figure out how to manipulate spacetime distortions at will. As you note, there's nothing in nature to suggest this is actually possible, but we haven't definitively ruled it out yet, either.

 

[617]

Relativity suggests FTL is possible if you can figure out how to manipulate spacetime distortions at will. As you note, there's nothing in nature to suggest this is actually possible, but we haven't definitively ruled it out yet, either.

Asr members can't even interpret a csd graph I'm not sure how constructive this discussion would be.

 

[Petrushka]

Relativity suggests FTL is possible if you can figure out how to manipulate spacetime distortions at will. As you note, there's nothing in nature to suggest this is actually possible, but we haven't definitively ruled it out yet, either.

Quantum phenomena and relativity effects were observed long before we had equations. FTL might be possible with a Jupiter sized mass of unobtanium, but there are no observations of naturally occurring FTL. Or anti-gravity.

Unlike fission, fusion, and tunneling, there is nothing to harness through engineering.

FTL would cause lensing, or worse. Alien spaceships would leave fingerprints in spacetime.

 

[kemmler3D]

FTL would cause lensing, or worse. Alien spaceships would leave fingerprints in spacetime.

This is true, and in fact scientists are actually looking (not sure how hard they are looking) for such signatures, on the off chance. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a61598321/warp-drives-are-possible/

There are no naturally occurring submarines, no animals have wheels, lasers on a sub-astronomical scale don't occur naturally, and nature doesn't appear to harness the casimir effect, (just a few examples) so this line of argument is suggestive but not conclusive IMO.

 

[oceansize]

This is true, and in fact scientists are actually looking (not sure how hard they are looking) for such signatures, on the off chance. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a61598321/warp-drives-are-possible/

Even there, they're suggesting signatures for a warp collapse at 0.1c. FTL travel would break causality, in that an observer could see something arriving before they could see it setting off.

 

[kemmler3D]

Even there, they're suggesting signatures for a warp collapse at 0.1c. FTL travel would break causality, in that an observer could see something arriving before they could see it setting off.

FTL without warp is said to break causality because it implies time dilation such that the object is traveling back in time. AFAIK FTL with warp doesn't necessarily break causality, but you would still see the ship departing well after it arrives... it doesn't actually go FTL, just moves space around to arrive faster. But given that it doesn't actually need to go back in time, I think it doesn't violate causality any more than hearing thunder after you see the lightning.

 

[oceansize]

FTL without warp is said to break causality because it implies time dilation such that the object is traveling back in time. AFAIK FTL with warp doesn't necessarily break causality, but you would still see the ship departing well after it arrives... it doesn't actually go FTL, just moves space around to arrive faster. But given that it doesn't actually need to go back in time, I think it doesn't violate causality any more than hearing thunder after you see the lightning.

The information that the ship had arrived precedes the information that the ship has departed

 

[WillBrink]

FTL without warp is said to break causality because it implies time dilation such that the object is traveling back in time. AFAIK FTL with warp doesn't necessarily break causality, but you would still see the ship departing well after it arrives... it doesn't actually go FTL, just moves space around to arrive faster. But given that it doesn't actually need to go back in time, I think it doesn't violate causality any more than hearing thunder after you see the lightning.

Several papers linked in this article on latest theoretical Warp drives that's an interesting read for those interested in the topic:

Warp drives: Physicists give chances of faster-than-light space travel a boost

If humanity wants to travel between stars, people are going to need to travel faster than light. New research suggests that it might be possible to build warp drives and beat the galactic speed limit.

theconversation.com

 

[Petrushka]

This is true, and in fact scientists are actually looking (not sure how hard they are looking) for such signatures, on the off chance. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a61598321/warp-drives-are-possible/

There are no naturally occurring submarines, no animals have wheels, lasers on a sub-astronomical scale don't occur naturally, and nature doesn't appear to harness the casimir effect, (just a few examples) so this line of argument is suggestive but not conclusive IMO.

No naturally occurring submarines? Hmmmmm.


The flagellum is a natural rotary motor.

 

[Mikig]

I have no answers to give, but only questions to ask.

We are human-centric, so we think of the UFO as a species that is between a cat and a man, green, that experiences the same life impulses as us, that uses telepathy like Mr. Spock or that eats rats like the very bad guys in Visitors or that looks like a cute puppet like ET.
But if it were an inhabitant of a planet with a different chemical composition to ours, atmosphere and soil, are we sure that it could be as we have always imagined them?
they could be substantially different, with different purposes and different capacities... they could be made of light, or gas, they could be non-thinking, like jellyfish, or they could be living stones... who knows….

one thing seems certain to me: we have always looked for and imagined our similar ones on a carbon basis, but we don't know if and what could exist on other chemical bases...

 

[Petrushka]

I have no answers to give, but only questions to ask.

We are human-centric, so we think of the UFO as a species that is between a cat and a man, green, that experiences the same life impulses as us, that uses telepathy like Mr. Spock or that eats rats like the very bad guys in Visitors or that looks like a cute puppet like ET.
But if it were an inhabitant of a planet with a different chemical composition to ours, atmosphere and soil, are we sure that it could be as we have always imagined them?
they could be substantially different, with different purposes and different capacities... they could be made of light, or gas, they could be non-thinking, like jellyfish, or they could be living stones... who knows….

one thing seems certain to me: we have always looked for and imagined our similar ones on a carbon basis, but we don't know if and what could exist on other chemical bases...

I have no opinions about exo-biology. I have some expectations about the physics of interstellar travel.

 

[Mikig]

I have no opinions about exo-biology. I have some expectations about the physics of interstellar travel.

I just ask myself questions and the main one is what are we looking for?
we could wander with the lantern for centuries in the universe looking for what is not there without realizing that we never thought of what exists...

 

[Petrushka]

I just ask myself questions and the main one is what are we looking for?
we could wander with the lantern for centuries in the universe looking for what is not there without realizing that we never thought of what exists...

I think that is BS. We were not looking for ionizing radiation. Were were not looking to overturn Newtonian gravity. We were not seeking to overturn Maxwell.

The conservative accumulation of data forced reinterpretations.

If aliens were flitting around faster than light, reality would exhibit local weirdnesses. It is possible that aliens could arrive before the evidence of their departure, but they would have to do something to stop at our doorstep, and that would be as disruptive as their departure.

 

[sonitus mirus]

I just ask myself questions and the main one is what are we looking for?
we could wander with the lantern for centuries in the universe looking for what is not there without realizing that we never thought of what exists...

I think that many serious people have long considered the possibility that intelligent, self-aware entities might exist beyond our preconceived ideas of fundamental physical laws. These entities could potentially traverse what we perceive as great distances and unfathomable gaps in time, coexisting with us and observing or recording our activities. But, really, after everything we've experienced so far, would that even make a difference? I mean, would we even notice between the tic-tac-shaped objects drilling perfect holes in cattle and making pretty patterns in cornfields?

 

[WillBrink]

I think that many serious people have long considered the possibility that intelligent, self-aware entities might exist beyond our preconceived ideas of fundamental physical laws. These entities could potentially traverse what we perceive as great distances and unfathomable gaps in time, coexisting with us and observing or recording our activities. But, really, after everything we've experienced so far, would that even make a difference? I mean, would we even notice between the tic-tac-shaped objects drilling perfect holes in cattle and making pretty patterns in cornfields?

Here's a fun rabbit hole that's in line with one of various possibilities:

Are Creatures Living Among Us in Parallel Dimensions?

We've yet to find intelligent life outside of planet Earth. But instead of space, should we be looking right here but in other dimensions?

science.howstuffworks.com