1
   

Aliens?

 
 
aperson
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Apr, 2006 11:32 pm
So what if the interrogator asked "are you a human or a computer?" or "What was your childhood like?" ?
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Apr, 2006 11:47 pm
0 Replies
 
aperson
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Apr, 2006 11:52 pm
OK thanks for the info.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:24 pm
I actually just watched a show on the history channel about aliens and whatnot. I personally do not think we have been visited. I DO think there are other intelligent lifeforms out there... However, given that the nearest solar system is about 40 lightyears away, and the impossibility to travel at the speed of light... I don't see any way for other beings to have visited us.

As for people seeing lights and weird shapes in the sky... I'm convinced nearly all of these can be explained by aircraft. Blinking red lights, for instance, would be the left-hand navigation light on any aircraft. Green would be the right side. Bright flashing lights would be the anti-collision strobes. And people that see lights take off at "impossible angles" should read more about thrust-vectoring engines. Using a movable cowling, some jets can manuver at amazing angles. So yeah, that's my thought on the subject. :-)
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 10:00 pm
USAFHokie80,

Even with today's technologies it is quite possible to obtain respectable fractions of the speed of light and visit the nearer stars. There is no need to equal or exceed the speed of light.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 11:50 pm
I beg to differ... Anything on our planet moves at a nearly infintessimal fraction of the speed of light. While we have managed to move a single particle at approximately 95% c, that was a single, near-massless particle. If you are at all failiar with themodynamics and physics, then you would know that as velocity increases, the amount of energy required to maintain the increase also increases exponentially, due to a simultaneous increase in mass. An elementary particle travelling at 94% c is over 122 times as massive as it is at rest. The reason we have never made anything travel faster is because the amount of energy required approaches infinity. And since we do not posess infinit energy, this is impossible. So again, I say, no.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 11:56 pm
What precisely are you begging to differ with? You will need to spell it out clearly and to the point, however you can leave out superfluous explanations, my science is fine.

Are you saying we cannot reach "respectable fractions of the speed of light"?

By respectable fraction: I mean that we can indeed visit the nearer stars with today's technologies, but it means in a multi-generational ship.

By toddy's technologies: I mean not off the shelf devices, but something we can build with our present knowledge.

Sex and Society Aboard the First Starships

Also it's important to understand that I would not necessarily expect the crew to return, and I would likely expect them to consider the relativistic effects to be of benefit.

Technology:
- The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives.
- The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or industrial objective.

"Make no mistake - interstellar travel will always be difficult and expensive. But it can no longer be considered impossible." - Dr. Robert L. Forward

Researchers add that one day the technology could even be used for interstellar flight.
0 Replies
 
aperson
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 12:58 am
USAFHokie80,

Yes I agree with your view on UFOs visiting Earth. Well, the lights bit anyway. Also, if aliens had the technology to come to Earth unnoticed, you'd think that they wouldn't have conspicuous blinking lights on the side of the vessels.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 01:04 am
USAFHokie80 wrote:
I DO think there are other intelligent lifeforms out there...
Have you reviewed The Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation? If so on what do you base your assertion that "there are other intelligent lifeforms out there"?
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 02:00 pm
Chumly wrote:
USAFHokie80 wrote:
I DO think there are other intelligent lifeforms out there...
Have you reviewed The Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation? If so on what do you base your assertion that "there are other intelligent lifeforms out there"?


Actually, I missed those. However, the reason I think there are other lifeforms is that in all the vastness of space, with all its millions or billions or trillions of planets and systems, I cannot believe that we are the singular existance of intelligent, or otherwise, life.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 02:11 pm
Chumly wrote:
What precisely are you begging to differ with? You will need to spell it out clearly and to the point, however you can leave out superfluous explanations, my science is fine.

Are you saying we cannot reach "respectable fractions of the speed of light"?

By respectable fraction: I mean that we can indeed visit the nearer stars with today's technologies, but it means in a multi-generational ship.

By toddy's technologies: I mean not off the shelf devices, but something we can build with our present knowledge.

Sex and Society Aboard the First Starships

Also it's important to understand that I would not necessarily expect the crew to return, and I would likely expect them to consider the relativistic effects to be of benefit.

Technology:
- The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives.
- The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or industrial objective.

"Make no mistake - interstellar travel will always be difficult and expensive. But it can no longer be considered impossible." - Dr. Robert L. Forward

Researchers add that one day the technology could even be used for interstellar flight.


I do not agree with your idea of "multi-generational" travel. It *IS* beyond our abilities. Suppose we need to travel 40 ly. Now, even at the speed of light, 40 yrs is near two "generations." Now, factor in the fact that we travel at such a trivial speed... now you're looking at hundreds if not thousands of generations. Do you know of a technology that can supply food, water, let alone, oxygen, for that many people for that long a period? I can't think of any.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:00 pm
USAFHokie80 wrote:
Chumly wrote:
USAFHokie80 wrote:
I DO think there are other intelligent lifeforms out there...
Have you reviewed The Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation? If so on what do you base your assertion that "there are other intelligent lifeforms out there"?


Actually, I missed those. However, the reason I think there are other lifeforms is that in all the vastness of space, with all its millions or billions or trillions of planets and systems, I cannot believe that we are the singular existance of intelligent, or otherwise, life.
It (at the very least superficially) seems quite reasonable to believe that there is some life somewhere (perhaps a lot of life in a lot a places), however as far as technologically advanced intelligent life goes unless / until you review the Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation and make your arguments from a substantive perspective, I cannot add more about the technologically advanced intelligent life argument pros & cons as I would simply be quoting from sources already available to you.

However, to have further dialogue on the existence of lower life forms that have not / did not develop into technologically advanced intelligent life would mean you would need to present argument as to why this has not happened, any where at anytime, as least as per SETI / Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation. This you have not done.

Remember, evolution suggests that intelligent life is one it's potential results and it would be rather impossible to argue that no lower life from anywhere at anytime has ever evolved into technologically advanced intelligent life. Admittedly it is difficult to know with any certainty whether technologically advanced intelligent life is a common byproduct of the evolutionary process, but since you have argued for the huge potential of the universe (and I agree), you would need to explain why none of the lower life forms appear to have evolved into technologically advanced intelligent life as per as least as per SETI / Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation. (kind'a repeating myself a bit)

Understand there are many arguments and speculations one can make as to why lower life forms would not evolve into technologically advanced intelligent life and I am not biasing myself in any one direction and am quite open to discussing any you feel have merit.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:09 pm
The human mind rebels against restraint, so people gripe about a celestical speed limit (186,000+ mps), and suggest that there are ways to get around. People dream up scenarios of near-light speed travel (puh-leeze), or even of significant fractional light speed travel, simply because they don't want to abandon the thought that we could "conquer" deep space.

Those dreamers ignore human nature. It would required enormous amounts of resources and energy to put even a handful of people into deep space with the necessary supplies and a reasonable expectation of arriving at a habitable star system--and we likely wouldn't know to a certainty, going in, that any given system would in fact prove habitable.

But we can't even get international cooperation in matters which people consider grave (consider AIDS/HIV--nearly 30 years on, and no one international program to address one of the most deadly diseases we've known). The thought that a major fraction of the earth's entire resources would be diverted for decades to build a spacecraft and outfit an expedition to a distant star on a speculation that a habitable planet would be found is highly unlikely even within the next several centuries. The world would have to change politically and socially to an extent which seems improbable.

People who dream of visiting the stars don't like to think that we may, in fact, be grounded here due to mere reality.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:11 pm
USAFHokie80 wrote:
Chumly wrote:
What precisely are you begging to differ with? You will need to spell it out clearly and to the point, however you can leave out superfluous explanations, my science is fine.

Are you saying we cannot reach "respectable fractions of the speed of light"?

By respectable fraction: I mean that we can indeed visit the nearer stars with today's technologies, but it means in a multi-generational ship.

By toddy's technologies: I mean not off the shelf devices, but something we can build with our present knowledge.

Sex and Society Aboard the First Starships

Also it's important to understand that I would not necessarily expect the crew to return, and I would likely expect them to consider the relativistic effects to be of benefit.

Technology:
- The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives.
- The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or industrial objective.

"Make no mistake - interstellar travel will always be difficult and expensive. But it can no longer be considered impossible." - Dr. Robert L. Forward

Researchers add that one day the technology could even be used for interstellar flight.


I do not agree with your idea of "multi-generational" travel. It *IS* beyond our abilities. Suppose we need to travel 40 ly. Now, even at the speed of light, 40 yrs is near two "generations." Now, factor in the fact that we travel at such a trivial speed... now you're looking at hundreds if not thousands of generations. Do you know of a technology that can supply food, water, let alone, oxygen, for that many people for that long a period? I can't think of any.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:22 pm
What setanta said last is the reason, the situation reversed, why I don't expect aliens to arrive here.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:23 pm
Chumly wrote:
USAFHokie80 wrote:
Chumly wrote:
What precisely are you begging to differ with? You will need to spell it out clearly and to the point, however you can leave out superfluous explanations, my science is fine.

Are you saying we cannot reach "respectable fractions of the speed of light"?

By respectable fraction: I mean that we can indeed visit the nearer stars with today's technologies, but it means in a multi-generational ship.

By toddy's technologies: I mean not off the shelf devices, but something we can build with our present knowledge.

Sex and Society Aboard the First Starships

Also it's important to understand that I would not necessarily expect the crew to return, and I would likely expect them to consider the relativistic effects to be of benefit.

Technology:
- The application of science, especially to industrial or commercial objectives.
- The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or industrial objective.

"Make no mistake - interstellar travel will always be difficult and expensive. But it can no longer be considered impossible." - Dr. Robert L. Forward

Researchers add that one day the technology could even be used for interstellar flight.


I do not agree with your idea of "multi-generational" travel. It *IS* beyond our abilities. Suppose we need to travel 40 ly. Now, even at the speed of light, 40 yrs is near two "generations." Now, factor in the fact that we travel at such a trivial speed... now you're looking at hundreds if not thousands of generations. Do you know of a technology that can supply food, water, let alone, oxygen, for that many people for that long a period? I can't think of any.


I'll try to read up on those links you posted... However, my "generic critique" is still valid, generic or not. Can you mention any sort of technology that would allow us to provide oxygen, food/water to a crew for several thousand years? If you can't, then your argument is failed. You can't say "it is possible with today's technology" unless you can cite such technology.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:24 pm
Yeah, even without considering that no other technologically advanced intelligence likely knows we're here, the cost factor in resources is just too high for folks to go wandering willy-nilly around the galaxy.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:25 pm
Chumly wrote:
USAFHokie80 wrote:
Chumly wrote:
USAFHokie80 wrote:
I DO think there are other intelligent lifeforms out there...
Have you reviewed The Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation? If so on what do you base your assertion that "there are other intelligent lifeforms out there"?


Actually, I missed those. However, the reason I think there are other lifeforms is that in all the vastness of space, with all its millions or billions or trillions of planets and systems, I cannot believe that we are the singular existance of intelligent, or otherwise, life.
It (at the very least superficially) seems quite reasonable to believe that there is some life somewhere (perhaps a lot of life in a lot a places), however as far as technologically advanced intelligent life goes unless / until you review the Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation and make your arguments from a substantive perspective, I cannot add more about the technologically advanced intelligent life argument pros & cons as I would simply be quoting from sources already available to you.

However, to have further dialogue on the existence of lower life forms that have not / did not develop into technologically advanced intelligent life would mean you would need to present argument as to why this has not happened, any where at anytime, as least as per SETI / Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation. This you have not done.

Remember, evolution suggests that intelligent life is one it's potential results and it would be rather impossible to argue that no lower life from anywhere at anytime has ever evolved into technologically advanced intelligent life. Admittedly it is difficult to know with any certainty whether technologically advanced intelligent life is a common byproduct of the evolutionary process, but since you have argued for the huge potential of the universe (and I agree), you would need to explain why none of the lower life forms appear to have evolved into technologically advanced intelligent life as per as least as per SETI / Fermi Paradox & The Drake equation. (kind'a repeating myself a bit)

Understand there are many arguments and speculations one can make as to why lower life forms would not evolve into technologically advanced intelligent life and I am not biasing myself in any one direction and am quite open to discussing any you feel have merit.


You apparently misread what I typed. It says "intelligent, or otherwise" as I make absolutely no speculation as to what life on other planets would be.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:26 pm
By the way, one thing which usually bores me about science fiction which involves alien intelligence is the almost guaranteed assumption that such intelligent would represent a unified and internally harmonious civilization, bent on conquering others. It they got that kind of ambitious hostility goin' on, i find it hard to believe they'd be all peace and brotherhood among themselves.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Apr, 2006 04:31 pm
It's like the expectation of old, of "yellow hordes" and the like. Present the enemy as a unified entity bent on your destruction. No individuality allowed.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Aliens?
  3. » Page 4
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/24/2022 at 07:22:00