Way Off Topic: Pentagon has "Off-World Vehicles.

[HuskyFich]

Well, the other side of the argument about there being no other life out there despite all the eye witness encounters raises some questions obviously. Just based on the documentaries Ive seen, It seems like the 1950's and 60's was the "heyday" of UFO sightings and the start of the obsession with Area 51. My question would be, were there many UFO sightings well before that going back to the 1800's into the early 1900's? Is it just a coincidence that UFO sightings increased just as aviation technology around the world started to rapidly develop? Because that would support the theory that many of these UFO sightings are just advanced military technology that few people even know about.

Although the sightings have been around for hundreds or more years , The Ufologists(lol) believe that it’s after we learned to split the atom...the disturbances in atmospheres and beyond with bombs and nuclear energy...earth became more apparent.

idk, it’s obviously all very much massive conjecture.

but how can ppl believe that “IF” we did have this technology or access to communication and information; that the general public would be made aware of it? It would be the most important human race/war/power secret in the world.

 

[Adios]

Conspiracy Kitty says:
Damn, I am surprised that you figured that out. Well just keep scooping our poop and we'll get along fine.

You probably would think "ghosts" are dead people.

 

[XLCenterFan]

the mathematical probability we are alone in this universe is pretty much zero.

There are approximately 200 billion stars just in our Milky Way galaxy alone. Each star could theoretically have a full solar system.
Also, they predict at least 100 billion galaxies in our universe and the universe is ever expanding.

Watch The Bob Lazar Story and Unacknowledged on Netflix, crazy stuff.

Couldn't agree more. I've always said this.

Not to mention, thinking that we the only people/beings out here in the universe is extremely selfish.

 

[CL82]

This is not true, the fact that we haven’t bumped into them yet is the real head-scratcher. It’s called the Fermi paradox, and that we’ve been both sending and looking for signals for decades now and haven’t made contact is something that baffles scientists.
This being said, one of my favorite quotes (paraphrased) on the subject: “We’re either alone in this universe, or we’re not. Both are equally frightening”
This pic is of the“entrance” to Area 51 outside Rachel, NV a few years ago. Drove 20-miles into the high desert and got this pic before being chased away by a white truck. Cool experience and I’m no doubt on a government watch list now lol
View attachment 56969View attachment 56969

Even radio signals are governed by physics, and feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, their top possible speed is the speed of light. Even if life were in our neighborhood it is a relatively challenging for us to be able to hear them. If life is further away from that, it’s even harder. Now, that’s just radio signals that’s not actual travel.

But, for the moment, let’s assume that faster than light travel is possible. Even with that ability it is extraordinarily unlikely that anyone would actually stumble onto our little rock. The math is actually against us. It’s not the astronomical amount of stars which may or may not have plants that can sustain life that we can interact with, it is even the more astronomical amount of empty space that would have to be surveyed before you could stumble onto another viable life form. That is the unspoken fault in the “well there’s so many stars, at least one of them has to have a planet that can support life” argument. Yeah there’s a lot of stars but there’s more nothing.

 

[Deuce]

This was a subject that I always found interesting. With so many eye witness accounts on and off the record, I believe there is something. You hear all the theories that UFO sightings are actually top secret USA technology that the government is testing and they actually push the conspiracy that they are UFO’s just to throw people off. I believe its a mix of the two. The government obviously has technology we don’t even know about, but this recent news about UFO’s also proves there are things out there our government/military cannot even explain.

To your last point, It really is amazing to think that when George Washington was President, other civilizations out there may have already had technology to be able to fly.

I agree and what’s even more amazing is that other civilizations may have already had technology to fly for a few hundred million years

 

[Ts5034]

I agree and what’s even more amazing is that other civilizations may have already had technology to fly for a few hundred million years

That really is crazy to think about. That show Ancient Aliens on the History Channel amazes me. Even though some of the stuff they say may be a little out there, it isn't all that far fetched if you watch it with an open mind. Your post reminded me of one of the episodes I saw where the mentioned and showed old Mayan/Egyptian artifacts of rock carvings that look like people flying in saucers.

 

[Apollo]

Well, the other side of the argument about there being no other life out there despite all the eye witness encounters raises some questions obviously. Just based on the documentaries Ive seen, It seems like the 1950's and 60's was the "heyday" of UFO sightings and the start of the obsession with Area 51. My question would be, were there many UFO sightings well before that going back to the 1800's into the early 1900's? Is it just a coincidence that UFO sightings increased just as aviation technology around the world started to rapidly develop? Because that would support the theory that many of these UFO sightings are just advanced military technology that few people even know about.

The rise in sightings started in the 40's after we started testing nuclear bombs. Some of the aviation technology was actually a result of the sightings.

I recently finished a great book called Area 51: The Dreamland Chronicles which speaks to the undisclosed technology to have come out of Area 51. Fascinating read and highly recommended

 

[pj]

Even radio signals are governed by physics, and feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, their top possible speed is the speed of light. Even if life were in our neighborhood it is a relatively challenging for us to be able to hear them. If life is further away from that, it’s even harder. Now, that’s just radio signals that’s not actual travel.

But, for the moment, let’s assume that faster than light travel is possible. Even with that ability it is extraordinarily unlikely that anyone would actually stumble onto our little rock. The math is actually against us. It’s not the astronomical amount of stars which may or may not have plants that can sustain life that we can interact with, it is even the more astronomical amount of empty space that would have to be surveyed before you could stumble onto another viable life form. That is the unspoken fault in the “well there’s so many stars, at least one of them has to have a planet that can support life” argument. Yeah there’s a lot of stars but there’s more nothing.

Three points:

1) Why do you have to survey empty space? If you survey all the stellar systems, you will find all the life. No species is going to confine themselves to empty space and avoid stellar systems. Matter and energy are too useful.

2) Astronomical number of stars - I don't think you appreciate the strength of exponential growth; and that astronomical numbers are not that big. If you make robot spaceships that can duplicate themselves once a year, and start with one, then in a thousand years you have 2^1000 spaceships which is 10^300 spaceships. There are a little over 10^11 stars in the Milky Way, so in a thousand years you will have 10^288 spaceships per star. If in our solar system they focus on earth, where we have less than 10^11 people, that's 10^277 spaceships per human to monitor us.

3) Time to explore - The diameter of the Milky Way is 100,000 light years, so if you are limited by the speed of light, in 100,000 years your spaceships have reached every star in the galaxy. The galaxy is 5 billion years old. There's plenty of time to explore everything.

 

[CL82]

Three points:

1) Why do you have to survey empty space? If you survey all the stellar systems, you will find all the life. No species is going to confine themselves to empty space and avoid stellar systems. Matter and energy are too useful.

2) Astronomical number of stars - I don't think you appreciate the strength of exponential growth; and that astronomical numbers are not that big. If you make robot spaceships that can duplicate themselves once a year, and start with one, then in a thousand years you have 2^1000 spaceships which is 10^300 spaceships. There are a little over 10^11 stars in the Milky Way, so in a thousand years you will have 10^288 spaceships per star. If in our solar system they focus on earth, where we have less than 10^11 people, that's 10^277 spaceships per human to monitor us.

3) Time to explore - The diameter of the Milky Way is 100,000 light years, so if you are limited by the speed of light, in 100,000 years your spaceships have reached every star in the galaxy. The galaxy is 5 billion years old. There's plenty of time to explore everything.

1) you have to separate entities to find where the stars are.
2) I don’t think you appreciate the vastness of space. Yes you’re doubling spaceship or probe doubling in infinite amount of time which is an infinite number. They still have to travel through a vast amount of empty, which brings us to #3
3) first you’ve got to be able to build a lightspeed spaceship. We can’t, but let’s assume someone else can. Your example says there’s more than enough time to visit every star in the galaxy. It’s not quite that simple. First the circumstances have to be right for life to be created. We’ve yet to find that on any world but our own. Our space travels in its infancy though, so let’s assume that’s not an issue. Second the life has to evolve into intelligent life. Third that intelligent life has to develop technology where they can space travel. But not just any space travel, light speed space travel. Fourth it has to decide that it is worth the enormous resources to search every nook and cranny of the galaxy. Five, it has to find life at a point where contact makes sense. So that means that the two societies have to have developed and at least a somewhat parallel basis. If we’re going to make all these presumptions about science and technology I think we also can make one that societies will rise and fall in the same way they have on earth. So not only do you have to have the ability to find someone else, they have to exist at the same time you exist. Even with all the assumptions we’ve made, that becomes very very difficult to do.

The proof is the Fermi paradox. If life exists why can’t we see any trace of it? Now I’m not only saying contact I’m saying radio waves or any indication that anything else is out there. Is it possible that we haven’t had any success yet, because there’s nothing else to find?

 

[Deuce]

1) you have to separate entities to find where the stars are.
2) I don’t think you appreciate the vastness of space. Yes you’re doubling spaceship or probe doubling in infinite amount of time which is an infinite number. They still have to travel through a vast amount of empty, which brings us to #3
3) first you’ve got to be able to build a lightspeed spaceship. We can’t, but let’s assume someone else can. Your example says there’s more than enough time to visit every star in the galaxy. It’s not quite that simple. First the circumstances have to be right for life to be created. We’ve yet to find that on any world but our own. Our space travels in its infancy though, so let’s assume that’s not an issue. Second the life has to evolve into intelligent life. Third that intelligent life has to develop technology where they can space travel. But not just any space travel, light speed space travel. Fourth it has to decide that it is worth the enormous resources to search every nook and cranny of the galaxy. Five, it has to find life at a point where contact makes sense. So that means that the two societies have to have developed and at least a somewhat parallel basis. If we’re going to make all these presumptions about science and technology I think we also can make one that societies will rise and fall in the same way they have on earth. So not only do you have to have the ability to find someone else, they have to exist at the same time you exist. Even with all the assumptions we’ve made, that becomes very very difficult to do.

The proof is the Fermi paradox. If life exists why can’t we see any trace of it? Now I’m not only saying contact I’m saying radio waves or any indication that anything else is out there. Is it possible that we haven’t had any success yet, because there’s nothing else to find?

Worm holes bro

 

[Apollo]

1) you have to separate entities to find where the stars are.
2) I don’t think you appreciate the vastness of space. Yes you’re doubling spaceship or probe doubling in infinite amount of time which is an infinite number. They still have to travel through a vast amount of empty, which brings us to #3
3) first you’ve got to be able to build a lightspeed spaceship. We can’t, but let’s assume someone else can. Your example says there’s more than enough time to visit every star in the galaxy. It’s not quite that simple. First the circumstances have to be right for life to be created. We’ve yet to find that on any world but our own. Our space travels in its infancy though, so let’s assume that’s not an issue. Second the life has to evolve into intelligent life. Third that intelligent life has to develop technology where they can space travel. But not just any space travel, light speed space travel. Fourth it has to decide that it is worth the enormous resources to search every nook and cranny of the galaxy. Five, it has to find life at a point where contact makes sense. So that means that the two societies have to have developed and at least a somewhat parallel basis. If we’re going to make all these presumptions about science and technology I think we also can make one that societies will rise and fall in the same way they have on earth. So not only do you have to have the ability to find someone else, they have to exist at the same time you exist. Even with all the assumptions we’ve made, that becomes very very difficult to do.

The proof is the Fermi paradox. If life exists why can’t we see any trace of it? Now I’m not only saying contact I’m saying radio waves or any indication that anything else is out there. Is it possible that we haven’t had any success yet, because there’s nothing else to find?

Threory on the Fermi paradox is that we aren't advanced enough to be able to interpret the signals being sent, or they just haven't reached us yet.

According to what we currently know about quantum physics (See quantum entanglement) is that it is possible to travel galaxy-wide distances instantaneously, and even to any given point in time.

 

[Apollo]

Size is the key here. Even if there is other intelligent life in the universe, it is incredibly unlikely that we or any others would ever bump into one and other. The phrase the universe is expanding doesn't mean it is adding galaxies. It means the galaxies that exist are getting farther apart.

In any event, the notion that other life is a mathematical certainty, or even a likelihood, is currently not provable. We don't have enough examples of it to understand it. Until we do the idea that "well there are a lot of stars, so there must be life on at least one of the planets that likely surround them is, at best, an unfounded guess, and, more accurately, wishful thinking.

There’s an estimated 2.5 billion habitable planets out there. Which is to say that if we are the only ones, our odds of being here are 1:2,500,000,000. I’m sorry but that’s not just wishful thinking. That’s math, and those odds are just way to extreme to believe we’re the only ones.

 

[Scot-e]

I personally don’t want to meet any other alien life. I’m guessing they would not be very nice. I would however love some proof of other intelligent life as I am a SiFi geek.

 

[CL82]

Threory on the Fermi paradox is that we aren't advanced enough to be able to interpret the signals being sent, or they just haven't reached us yet.

According to what we currently know about quantum physics (See quantum entanglement) is that it is possible to travel galaxy-wide distances instantaneously, and even to any given point in time.

It is entirely possible that there is other life out there, and that it reached us but we lack the technology to interpret it. Of course that’s an unprovable hypothesis so it has little scientific value, but it’s possible.

That’s not how quantum entanglement works at least with our current understanding of it. Initially, the two particles would have to be in the same place to get “entangled.“ So you still have all the normal travel issues. Where quantum entanglement maybe useful is in creating instantaneous communication access space but you still have to get entangled particles from point A to point B.

 

[CL82]

There’s an estimated 2.5 billion habitable planets out there. Which is to say that if we are the only ones, our odds of being here are 1:2,500,000,000. I’m sorry but that’s not just wishful thinking. That’s math, and those odds are just way to extreme to believe we’re the only ones.

Mmmm no it isn’t. Until we understand how frequent life occurs there is no scientific way to predict the number of planets that would be necessary to make its occurrence a near certainty. But, setting that aside a moment, that doesn’t overcome the fact that those theoretically habitable planets, are incredibly far apart. Mind bogglingly far. So the likelihood of ever contacting another intelligent race, or even finding them, is infinitesimal.

 

[Mr. Hand]

This thread is the perfect storm of superstition, ignorance, and conspiracy mongering with a healthy dose of Dunning Kruger sprinkled in.

And my therapist wonders why I'm always so hopeless.

 

[Apollo]

This thread is the perfect storm of superstition, ignorance, and conspiracy mongering with a healthy dose of Dunning Kruger sprinkled in.

And my therapist wonders why I'm always so hopeless.

Ok then, what’s your input if are we all wrong?

Your therapist calls you hopeless? Sounds counterintuitive.

 

[Mr. Hand]

Ok then, what’s your input if are we all wrong?

Your therapist calls you hopeless? Sounds counterintuitive.

Your first sentence: The "paradox" part of the Fermi Paradox is based on the Drake Equation, which is not proven math, it's conjecture. Given the immutability of physics, the scale of interstellar space, and the effects of general relativity, the fact that we see nothing is not only logical, it's the only outcome that makes sense.

Your second sentence: Is this statement indicative of your level of reading comprehension?

 

[Apollo]

Your first sentence: The "paradox" part of the Fermi Paradox is based on the Drake Equation, which is not proven math, it's conjecture. Given the immutability of physics, the scale of interstellar space, and the effects of general relativity, the fact that we see nothing is not only logical, it's the only outcome that makes sense.

Your second sentence: Is this statement indicative of your level of reading comprehension?

Let me get this straight, you have the ability to articulate this wonderful and rational explation but instead opted to call us fake-experts and conspiracy theorists instead. Great attitude, might help explain your hopelessness.
Either way, thanks for the info about the Drake equations, I’ll read up on it.

 

[CL82]

Let me get this straight, you have the ability to articulate this wonderful and rational explation but instead opted to call us fake-experts and conspiracy theorists instead.

Mmm, did he though?

 

[Apollo]

Mmm, did he though?

Yes:

This thread is the perfect storm of superstition, ignorance, and conspiracy mongering with a healthy dose of Dunning Kruger sprinkled in.