Intelligent alien life: astronomy, astrobiology, and the age of inhabitable worlds

Discussion in 'UFOs & Sightings' started by Thomas R. Morrison, Jun 6, 2018.

  1. ImmortalLegend527

    ImmortalLegend527 The Messenger Of All Gods old and new

    Messages:
    395
    When looking into time and the evolution of history...humans are the aliens.Legend.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,145
    In my opinion the problem here is that we're all debating this question as if it's still 1970.

    A lot has changed, scientifically, especially in the last 25 years. But the skeptics and the "cosmic trickster" folks are pretending that all of our modern data doesn't exist because it brutally hobbles their arguments.

    This is all very simple - let's look at it one step at a time.

    1.) Thanks to the Kepler Mission data and other exosolar planetary research, we now know that there are at least 20 billion warm, Earth-like planets in the habitable zones of Sun-like stars within our galaxy alone. And those planets are on average 2-3 billion years older than our planet - providing ample time for intelligent life to evolve and vastly transcend our extremely primitive technological capabilities.

    2.) We've also learned that water and the basic building blocks of life are basically ubiquitous throughout the universe, and we now know that Earth-like planets will have very similar core compositions, magnetic fields, and atmospheric compositions. After decades of uncertainty, we now know that our planet and the conditions here are fairly ordinary. So there's no logical basis to assume that life is uncommon, because the conditions for life are quite common.

    Which brings us to the Morrison Rule: extraordinary outcomes typically require extraordinary conditions. The conditions on Earth are ordinary, so the outcome we see here on Earth is probably also ordinary: the universe is most probably teeming with intelligent life that has a 2-3 billion year head start on us.

    3.) Theoretical physics has essentially solved the problem of rapid manned interstellar spaceflight: using a gravitational field propulsion system we now know that it's possible to traverse vast interstellar distances in arbitrarily short timescales with no time dilation, no intrinsic energy expenditure (unlike the reaction propulsion principle) once the field is established, and no subjective g-forces regardless of the rate of accelerations or decelerations.

    Furthermore, all of the most commonly observed and very distinctive performance characteristics of nearly all credible UFO reports match the predicted performance characteristics of a gravitational field propulsion system. We observe no fiery emissions, no downward wind when these things hover above your head, and these devices can leap from a standstill to hypersonic speed in a fraction of a second - all of which is impossible using our own primitive reaction propulsion technologies. So we understand how these things fly, but we don't know how to build one. I'm going to take a wild guess and bet that we'll figure it out within the next 2-3 billion years - which is how much time our intelligent galactic neighbors have had to figure it out and arrive here with significant annual frequency.

    Given these new scientific facts of the last 25 years, frankly it's absurd that we're still debating the extraterrestrial hypothesis. At this point it's the obvious theory, not a mere hypothesis.

    And given that our primary international occupation consists of endless mass murder operations and global exploitation by a bloated and sociopathic neofeudal overlord class, it seems that our more advanced neighbors aren't interested in offering us the hand of galactic friendship...which is not a surprising decision.

    So as I see it, the debate is settled. The only people still arguing about it are the cynics who can never admit that they're wrong even when the preponderance of scientific evidence and simple logic presents an insurmountable counterargument, and the superstitious simpletons who want to drag us back to the Dark Ages to argue that a Loki-like trickster god is toying with reality on a global scale just to confound us.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2019
    • Awesome Awesome x 5
  3. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    973
    This is the only point on which I disagree. Otherwise the above post is masterpiece.

    General Relativity has next to nothing to teach us about UFOs. I hope I'll be able to prove it in near future. Until than long live quantum gravity.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. ImmortalLegend527

    ImmortalLegend527 The Messenger Of All Gods old and new

    Messages:
    395
    I,am in a Time Zone in which humans believe that water is the key to all life.They believe that aliens are monsters with legs and eyes and ears.They believe in microorganism aliens and aliens in space ships.

    It's... hard, for humans to understand the branch of the eyes and what they observe and create.If The alien horses buffalo and camels didn't exist...Cars and vehicles would be obsolete in this time.Those aliens taught humans the branch of the 4 ,that something can be ridden.

    The mighty 'Alien whale' taught humans how to build a submarine with out its design the submarine or underwater sea travel would also be obsolete from this time.

    Where not going to talk about the average bird or insects with wings..we all understand and fully comprehend what would be obsolete from this time.

    The Alien bat,whale and dolphin with out ones alien power of sonar,lol,then 98% of every thing above is obsolete.

    The alien Dragonfly created your helicopter. Your basic flying Alien squirrel taught created your flying suits.

    Your alien gophers ants and termites taught humans underground building.

    Your alien bumble bees work hard to pollinate food for you humans.

    Can you imagine...a simple..animal created your 78.9% of your electronic branch of life..lol a simple animal.You,humans are programmed in various ways and one program is that aliens are these fantastic astro travelers from another world in spaceships etc.Your, programmed, to believe, that these aliens have knowledge of great power and will verbally or has verbally shared with you humans over time.

    Bottom line is. Every thing breathing on this earth are aliens,and they have more technology that they are going to share with you.

    Copy written by iml257 august26 3019.

    'THE ANIMAL BRANCH'
     
  5. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,145
    This is incorrect. The performance characteristics of a typical AAV precisely match all of the performance characteristics predicted for both types of gravitational field propulsion (GFP) systems that have been described in the language of general relativity. GFP systems are also the only method for superluminal spaceflight.

    And this will all still hold when we finally arrive at a quantum model of gravity, because just as classical electrodynamics still holds at the macroscale following the advent of quantum field theory, classical gravitodynamics will still hold at the macroscale when we learn how to engineer gravitational fields using a quantum theory of gravity.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    973
    Of course that general relativity will hold, but general relativity is effect not the cause. Exactly in the same way that magnetism is caused by quantum spin. Once we know the cause the effect will be less important.

    And I am on a good track to find and experimentally confirm that cause.

    As a matter of the fact, in all my 4 years of investigations of trends in physical effects related to UFOs I only found some semblance of relativistic effect three times, out of, say, 500 times or so. High g turns that you are talking about could be simply a consequence of them flying remotely controlled drones without crew. It doesn't mean at all that they are relativistic machines. Electronics inside smart artillery shells can stand acceleration of 30,000 g and that's our own present day technology.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2019
  7. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,145
    You think that the effect of the magnetic field is less important than the cause? I can't see how you can defend that statement: the utility of magnetic fields is entirely in their effects, not their cause.

    The same is true of a gravitational field propulsion system: it's the effects that matter. The cause is only meaningful in the sense that once we better understand the cause we'll be able to engineer the effects that we want to achieve, such as superluminal spaceflight without any time dilation effect.

    You're making an egregious error of logic here: an artillery shell is accelerated by a powerful explosive reaction. AAVs like the Tic-Tac exhibit accelerations of 5600+ g's with absolutely no emission signature. So they're not reaction propulsion devices. And the only way an object can exhibit levitation or acceleration with no emission signature, is gravitational field propulsion.

    So nearly every credible AAV report is evidence of a gravitational field propulsion system at work, and gravitational field propulsion is an entirely relativisitic effect.
     
  8. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    973
    Yeah, we are splitting rethorical hairs here. If you don't manage the cause, effect will manage you.

    "gravitational field propulsion" is ambiguous term. One can erase gravitational and inertial mass and achieve the same huge acceleration with trivial expenditure of energy. No need for hydrogen bomb or not even nuclear reactor. Only, in that case, gravitation will be zero, so it would be improper to call it "gravitational propulsion", but maybe inertial boyancy propulsion.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2019
  9. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    18,643
    Herein lays a point which concerns me about broadcasting ourselves in space or even putting plaques and information in our probes that could lead unknown species back to earth...What if some of these space faring alien races 'grew up' very similar to our species, through conquest and blood and developed highly advanced technology in the process, and now take that attitude out into space and slowly fight and conquer other species, perhaps even less developed species...Overall we are a violent species, killing each other off in droves but we are also developing more and more advanced technology, perhaps soon we will be able to traverse the galaxy, visiting other star systems...If we are out there in space, how long do you think it will take before we butt heads with another intelligent species, perhaps go to war with them, or find a less developed species on a planet living on top of precious metals and ore...How long before our esteemed leaders decide to pillage that place and take it for ourselves?...Apologies, I know this is a negative view but its also a valid one, we are literally burning our world down, how long before we take another world for ourselves and at who's expense?...

    Its so completely barbaric to attribute UFOs of all things to some god or demon...

    ...
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,145
    That's not true - we've been making very powerful magnetic fields and manipulating them just fine since long before the advent of quantum field theory. I doubt it would change a thing regarding magnetism if we had never discovered its quantum origin.

    The main reason why I'm not so enamored as you are with Alzofon's theory is this: even if you could reduce the inertial mass of a device down to zero in the manner he proposed (which I very much doubt), the maximum speed it could ever attain is still limited to the speed of light.

    In fact I think that inertial mass reduction would be limited. Let's say that a device could reduce the overall inertial mass by a high percentage, like 90%. So a 10-ton device would be reduced to 1 ton. Now how do you explain high accelerations at hypersonic speed, or even levitation above a witness, with no observable emissions? You can't. The craft would still have to expel a reaction medium via some kind of thruster. And there's zero indication of any type of thruster in >99% of all AAV reports.

    So I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

    If you can confirm the effect experimentally, that would be cool. But I don't think it resolves the AAV propulsion issue.

    It's a pretty revealing indictment of our species that the worse-case scenario is the one where alien visitors are like us.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Spaceman spiff

    Spaceman spiff Honorable

    Messages:
    419
    Id think those kinds of species rarely even survive their infancy on their own world. Which might happen to us before we become spacefaring.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  12. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,145
    That's a good point. And a chilling one. We do seem to be hell-bent on assuring our own extinction (and taking countless other species with us along the way).
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  13. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    18,643
    At the 37:50 mark he discusses the evidence supporting the ETH, good stuff and on point...

    ...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    973
    Sure we used fire long before understanding chemistry. Some 30,000 odd year passed since discovering fire by chance. But once we understood chemistry we made rocket engines and landed on the Moon. Not something that can be achieved by somebody who depends just on luck.

    One can find examples for both sides of the argument. General Relativity, Antimatter, Transistors, GPS, lasers, NMR and superconductors all were figured out by ourselves, while fire and magnetism are just a lucky dips given to us by Gods.

    Yeah, it is a heartbreaking story for me, I lost my electronics lab and will be unable to try anything for at least six months or more.

    But, somewhat luckily, I found an another man, by the name of Floyd Sweet, who successfully performed exactly the same experiment as Dr Alzofon's in a thousand times cheaper setup. Two men both worked back in 80's, never knew of each other and experiments work on exactly the same larger principle. So experimental proof is there, we just need to prove it for ourselves.

    The larger principle seems to be, in the shortest form, that gravity is based on entanglement and if one stops particles from entangling each other gravity and inertia go to zero. Preventing entanglement is the same as preventing quantum decoherence and because that can be done with a whole macroscopic object one ends up with quantum object the size of a classical object.

    I dug up 3, or even 4, experiments which stopped entanglement and produced macroscopic quantum objects: Dr Alzofon's, Floyd Sweet's and US Navy patent US20190058105A1. So far it seems that entanglement can be stopped in two ways: by NMR style precession of atomic nuclei (like @spacecase0, Dr Alzofon & Floyd Sweet did) and by super fast mechanical acceleration of conductors with ultrasound as in US20190058105A1 patent.

    And 4th would be a member of this forum @spacecase0 and experiment described in an AE thread a curious device His device behaved exactly as macroscopic quantum object.

    As Dr Alzofon explained, the key with nuclear precession method is hitting it on Larmor frequency, the frequency of nuclear precession. Floyd Sweet was an electric engineer and he did the same, by luck or by smart observation. He reported almost complete loss of weight on the sample during the experiment. Additionally, there would be significant freezing exactly as Dr Alzophone suggested. And it seems that whole system becomes an open system and starts sucking in energy from the whole environment around but I cannot explain that and Dr Alzofon never mentioned it.

    Here is the overview of Floyd Sweet's very simple setup:

    In a shortest short, what he is showing in that video is mini NMR machine. Basically you have three coils on XYZ axis. On X axis you have coil with static magnetic field, on Y-axis you have a coil with sinusoidal AC current and on z-axis you have a pickup coil in NMR setup, nothing in Dr Alzofon's setup or in Sweet's setup an output coil. All three XYZ coils are wrapped around barium ferrite brick. Static field on the X-axis alignes all the atomic nuclei, sinusoidal field on the Y-axis starts precession of atomic nuclei around X-axis and coil on Z is either used for making NMR imaging, or overunity according to Sweet.

    The reason why NMR people never picked up nether weight loss nor over unity is because they just do a single pulse and then they look for an EM bounce of the nuclei to make their image. Both Dr Alzofon and Sweet are actually using continuous EM waves on Y-axis to provoke precession resonance of nuclei that lasts for indefinite duration of time.

    Trick is that Sweet kept frequency off operation secret, to be able to comercialise the opportunity, but Dr Alzofon didn't. And frequency is Larmor frequency. Hundreds of people tried to repeat Sweet's experiment, but failed because they did not understand that experiment was based on a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance or NMR. Here I wrote short instructions how to calculate Larmor frequency for the particular element in periodic table that you want to try it on. Sweet achieved it with only 10 Volts at 0.3 micro Amperes at mains frequency of 60Hz. Dr Alzofon used Aluminium nanoparticles, while Sweet used barium ferrite which is a compound with 12 atoms of iron.

    Technologically speaking this was all achievable in early 50s because NMR was discovered in 1946. If this investigation of mine works out all the way to a string off successful experiments, then amateur scientists are up for giving the mainstream scientists good run for their money.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2019
    • Like Like x 2
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  15. Kaipo

    Kaipo Adept

    Messages:
    37
    Scientifically, do you think that life could evolve to prosper on a gaseous planet that we can not yet see?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    18,643
    I've wondered if there is a solid core inside gas planets like Jupiter, Neptune, or Uranus, I would assume there is a core in those planets, a rocky core...Judging by how we find life here on earth in the most inhospitable places it seems plausible to me that life exists on those gas giants, perhaps forms of life we would not immediately recognize as life...

    ...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. Toroid

    Toroid Founding Member

    Messages:
    6,598
    Jo Ann Richards said there's gaseous beings that feel on methane & ammonia. She got that information from her husband Mark Richards.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,145
    I think that life will arise wherever the required conditions for life exist. We're not yet entirely certain what those conditions are, but progress is being made, and from what we've learned so far I can see no reason why a warm and watery planet with a thick gaseous atmosphere couldn't evolve a thriving ecosystem.

    It's a little bit more complex than that - life needs to establish a foothold before it can adapt to harsh conditions. For example we find life in conditions on Earth which are more harsh than conditions on, say Mars. It's possible that life never established a foothold on Mars. But if the conditions on Earth would gradually become like conditions on Mars, it seems very likely that it would survive in some form via adaptation, probably beneath the surface.

    I read an interesting paper a few months ago about new discoveries in astrobiology, and it appears that our Sun is in a family of stars that goes through an intense UV phase early in its development. They see that phase as crucial in creating the kinds of complex organic chemicals that arose on Earth. Then as the Sun's spectrum shifted into cooler regions and the surface of the Earth cooled, complex systems of organic chemistry became possible. So I think that something like that pattern may be required for life to spontaneously arise anywhere. But it seems very likely that this pattern could play out on almost any kind of planet with the right warm and wet dynamic conditions, and the right type of star.
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2019
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  19. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    973
    Life is unimaginably fascinating. Just look at complexity of DNA.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  20. nivek

    nivek As Above So Below

    Messages:
    18,643
    Apparently, the meteor impact on Jupiter recently has shaken up Jupiter's core...The core is quite large too it seems, I kind of expected that since Jupiter is quite large...

    Beta Pic’s New Planet, Jupiter’s Fuzzy Core & An Ancient Star

    Impact Might Have Mixed Up Jupiter’s Core

    Astronomers suggest that in the early, impact-heavy era of our solar system, a protoplanet smashed head on into Jupiter, explaining some of the giant planet’s strange features.

    Scientists have long thought that intense pressure might squeeze hydrogen at the planet’s center into an exotic fluid that sloshes within a compact core. Moreover, any elements heavier than hydrogen or helium ought to have sunk into this tiny core. But gravity data collected as NASA’s Juno probe orbits Jupiter have revealed that the gas giant’s core is actually quite large. Heavy elements are mixed up in a region extending to nearly half of Jupiter’s radius. This has presented a challenge to the core accretion theory of planet formation.

    Now, astronomers think they might know why Jupiter’s core is so “fuzzy.”

    Shang-Fei Liu (Sun Yat-sen University, China) and colleagues published simulations in the August 14th Nature, explaining the possible effects of a giant impact. After simulating multiple scenarios, the team was able to say that a giant impactor — really giant, as it would have had to have 10 times Earth’s mass — could have shattered Jupiter’s primordial compact core shortly after it formed, mixing up the planet’s inner layers.

    [​IMG]
    Snapshots of density distribution during a merger event between a proto-Jupiter and an impactor with 10 times Earth's mass. Shang-Fei Liu

    The researchers then used the output from the impact simulation for a second set of simulations, which calculated how the planet would have evolved over the next 4.5 billion years. In some of those models, the fuzzy core persisted to the present day.

    Read more about the research in the NCCR press release and Rice University’s press release.


     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page