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

[3FEL9]

or a sign of possibly un-healthy knowledge about the ufo phenomena (at least when talking about my posts)

If you know its unhealthy, why do you pursue it ?

 

[humanoidlord]

If you know its unhealthy, why do you pursue it ?

annndddd nobody got my joke
maybe i should start writing 100% serious posts again

 

[3FEL9]

Ok

 

[humanoidlord]

If you know its unhealthy, why do you pursue it ?

why the double posting?! also it was a joke

 

[3FEL9]

why the double posting?! also it was a joke

What double post

Whsts the joke ? That you are serious ¿

 

[humanoidlord]

What double post

Whsts the joke ? That you are serious ¿

nope just me trying to be funny and failling at it

 

[3FEL9]

nope just me trying to be funny and failling at it

You ARE funny.. relax

 

[nivek]

or a sign of possibly un-healthy knowledge about the ufo phenomena (at least when talking about my posts)

I absolutely agree, all this fantasy talk of everything being interdimensional is unhealthy talk and not constructive to understanding any phenomenon but in its stead discourages actual investigation and research...It's akin to telling all scientists not to do anymore research, it's all God and that's all we need to know, well, we don't need a new dark ages...

thats not what i was trying to say
the interdimensional theory solves all the problems with ETH

It doesn't solve anything but merely pushes everything into some unreachable bucket because we are not intelligent enough to figure it out logically, rationally, and reasonably...You forget words of the wise ones, everything can be measured and understood, the laws of reality as above so below...

The interdimensional/paranormal theories puts everything in some unreachable unknown spooky wooky wibbly wobbly timey wimey realm to which we cannot fathom nor ever understand or in some God's hands unreachable by us...There very well may be other dimensions and certainly the paranormal incident do not need to be mixed in with alien contact reports, two totally different things from different sources...Alien crafts are not paranormal, in my opinion, they are misunderstood technology...

...

 

[Thomas R. Morrison]

here we have to ignore the idea of plausibility and instead answer a simple question: does this model explains all the bizzare high strangeness anomalies reported over the years? if the answer is no or maybe then we need to make another hypothesys

This is a logical fallacy known as the conjunction fallacy. In this context, what this means is that the more types of anomalous phenomena that one tries to explain with a single postulate, the less likely that hypothesis is to be true.

For example, 500 years ago everything from lightning to meteors to tornadoes, belonged in the category “unexplained aerial phenomena.” And certainly some people tried to explain all such phenomena with a single explanation, such as “they are all manifestations of divine agency like God and his angels.” I’m sure that many people found that explanation satisfyingly inclusive and compelling. But we now know that they were wrong: they are three completely unrelated phenomena with three completely unrelated explanations.

So the people who seek a single explanation for a variety of disparate phenomena, such as ufos and ghosts or whatnot, are operating under faulty logic. The more phenomena that an explanation professes to explain, the less likely it is to be true, not the other way around.

currently it all speculation

No, you’re mistaking “peer-reviewed theoretical physics based on the foundational tenets of well-established physics," with “speculation.” They’re not the same thing. I could speculate that gremlins crawl of my closet at night to steal my socks. But the concept of gravitational field propulsion is as viable as gravitational time dilation, because they’re both equally valid within the theoretical edifice of general relativity. It’s not an issue of if it could work, but rather, how it be achieved technologically. And in my view, the AAV phenomenon is proof that it can be and in fact has been achieved.

so unless somebody reproduces that effect in a laboratory i am still a skeptic

Am I debating with Jason/marduk here? I’ve had this debate before and he had the exact same position. Anyway, skepticism is good, but it requires an intimate familiarity with the scientific body of evidence available. Skepticism is work. And until you’ve done that work, then all you can claim is having a personal/subjective doubt. Read the papers, study the physics, and then let’s have a more symmetrical debate about this subject.

and there is another problem: why is there so much variety in Ce3 reports? greys are only the tip of the iceberg, we have from the "common ones" reptilians and blondes to everthing from robots to goblins to literal clowns to things that look like the michellin man!

this along with the bizzare behaviour of ufonauts in some reports (the infamous space pancakes along with the jean himgley ufo fairy experiences fall in this category) seems to not make sense in the ETH model

How is an exchange of pancakes for water incompatible with the ETH? I don’t see your reasoning there.

Honestly I don’t pay much attention to CE3 or abduction reports or fairies and whatnot, because I’m not aware of much in the way of empirical evidence to support these reports (although I have heard about the occasional exceptions like the Lonnie Zamora case, and some other landing pad impression cases here and there). So we have no way to really evaluate the veracity of most such reports. I would imagine that a great many reports of bipedal reptilians and the Michelin man and alien clowns could be hoaxes, or possibly evidence of extraterrestrial PsyOps, or even evidence of psychological dysfunction – it’s impossible to cull such reports without supporting empirical data, so I put that stuff in my grey basket and it doesn’t factor into my reasoning on this subject.

We do however have supporting empirical evidence for AAVs operating in our airspace, such as multiple independent witness sightings, radar-visual sightings, trace evidence cases, etc. – so that points to physical craft that radically outperform our top fighter jets. Understanding how that technology operates is the primary focus of my interest. Like I’ve said before: who’s manufacturing these devices is an interesting question, but ultimately irrelevant to the issues of the physics and that technology that interest me.

thats not what i was trying to say is
the interdimensional theory solves all the problems with ETH

The “interdimensional theory” is certainly not a theory. In fact it doesn’t even qualify as a legitimate scientific hypothesis – to qualify as a reasonable hypothesis, it falls upon the advocates to demonstrate a viable physical model for how such a thing could be possible, without violating or somehow circumnavigating the known canon of physics. And that hasn’t happened. So until somebody can do that, it’s merely wild speculation like those gremlins coming after my socks at night. It could be happening, but I see zero empirical reason to believe that it actually is happening, therefore it’s worthless to me as a scientific hypothesis.

And frankly I don’t see how “aliens coming from other as-yet-undiscovered realities” could be considered to be a more plausible explanation than “aliens from some of the billions of potentially habitable worlds have learned how to traverse interstellar distances, and they’re dropping by from time to time to look around or whatever.”

Regardless of what the correct explanation turns out to be, we’re seeing highly advanced aerial devices in our skies, from time to time, that exhibit all of the expected performance characteristics of a gravitational field propulsion technology. My aim to understand how it works.

I leave it to others to figure out who they are and where they’re coming from and why they’re here.

 

[CasualBystander]

here we have to ignore the idea of plausibility and instead answer a simple question: does this model explains all the bizzare high strangeness anomalies reported over the years? if the answer is no or maybe then we need to make another hypothesys

I'm still chewing on TRM's posts.

However space is apparently composed of layers of tensor fields.

Claiming that you can interact with those tensor fields to change their effects or provide propulsion/displacement isn't too much of a stretch.

 

[Thomas R. Morrison]

Claiming that you can interact with those tensor fields to change their effects or provide propulsion/displacement isn't too much of a stretch.

Actually it's been a well-known feature of general relativity since Hermann Bondi's peer-reviewed article for Reviews of Modern Physics in 1957, and was subsequently developed by Robert L. Forward from the 1960s to the early 1990s, then it was fully theoretically elucidated by Alcubierre in 1994, and has been an on-going topic in the academic literature ever since. Nobody argues that the metric performs as described, and until 2013 critics employed the positive energy theorem as an argument against the concept, but at that point Paranjape proved that argument invalid in our accelerating universe. So right now there's no viable theoretical argument against the idea at all. What remains unresolved is A.) what's the maximum possible velocity for such a system?, and B.) how do we approach a technological manifestation of it?

Nobody disputes the validity of the concept anymore, because the positive energy theorem was the last theoretical objection to it, and that's been defeated.

 

[Gambeir]

. You can’t judge a man by the sophistication of his toys - some of the dumbest people I know have private jets and all of the latest technology at their fingertips; and the same could easily apply to alien beings visiting our planet. Look at how far our technology has come in the last century, and look how far we haven’t come as a species in that same interval: the two simply aren’t correlated.

Laughing~ so true.

 

[CasualBystander]

Actually it's been a well-known feature of general relativity since Hermann Bondi's peer-reviewed article for Reviews of Modern Physics in 1957, and was subsequently developed by Robert L. Forward from the 1960s to the early 1990s, then it was fully theoretically elucidated by Alcubierre in 1994, and has been an on-going topic in the academic literature ever since. Nobody argues that the metric performs as described, and until 2013 critics employed the positive energy theorem as an argument against the concept, but at that point Paranjape proved that argument invalid in our accelerating universe. So right now there's no viable theoretical argument against the idea at all. What remains unresolved is A.) what's the maximum possible velocity for such a system?, and B.) how do we approach a technological manifestation of it?

Nobody disputes the validity of the concept anymore, because the positive energy theorem was the last theoretical objection to it, and that's been defeated.

The problem with a "warp" drive is three-fold:

1. The forces (from our current understanding) would propagate at the speed of light.

2. The power requirements would be almost unimaginable.

3. The tidal forces of the spacecraft would rip apart matter into constituent particles. The "bow" wave would compress matter to almost neutron star densities along one axis and the "stern wave" would diffuse matter to densities almost that of normal space.

A warp drive is a fancy way to turn rocks into fine dust.


A real warp drive would work better as a weapon than for propulsion.

But it wouldn't consume a lot of reaction mass and would go faster than we can now.

 

[3FEL9]

Laughing~ so true.

Lol, well said @Thomas R. Morrison

 

[3FEL9]

Until we find another habitable planet it is hard to say there is a lot of aliens out there.

Now come on, Casual, a lot of Aliens..?. If there are more than a couple out there --》 there's a few.

lots of them ; stands true if you think that theres probably a few more additional out there ,, somewhere,, than just
the odd couple or a few green ones.

Look at the night sky ( outside DC ) and think about it.

 

[humanoidlord]

It doesn't solve anything but merely pushes everything into some unreachable bucket because we are not intelligent enough to figure it out logically, rationally, and reasonably...You forget words of the wise ones, everything can be measured and understood, the laws of reality as above so below...

The interdimensional/paranormal theories puts everything in some unreachable unknown spooky wooky wibbly wobbly timey wimey realm to which we cannot fathom nor ever understand or in some God's hands unreachable by us...There very well may be other dimensions and certainly the paranormal incident do not need to be mixed in with alien contact reports, two totally different things from different sources...Alien crafts are not paranormal, in my opinion, they are misunderstood technology...

...

what is better: claiming that we have no idea what UFOs are or understand what they are or use a theory (ETH) wich has basically no proof only speculation?
this is why i choose the interdimensional theory (among other factors)

 

[humanoidlord]

This is a logical fallacy known as the conjunction fallacy. In this context, what this means is that the more types of anomalous phenomena that one tries to explain with a single postulate, the less likely that hypothesis is to be true.

For example, 500 years ago everything from lightning to meteors to tornadoes, belonged in the category “unexplained aerial phenomena.” And certainly some people tried to explain all such phenomena with a single explanation, such as “they are all manifestations of divine agency like God and his angels.” I’m sure that many people found that explanation satisfyingly inclusive and compelling. But we now know that they were wrong: they are three completely unrelated phenomena with three completely unrelated explanations.

So the people who seek a single explanation for a variety of disparate phenomena, such as ufos and ghosts or whatnot, are operating under faulty logic. The more phenomena that an explanation professes to explain, the less likely it is to be true, not the other way around.

paranormal phenomena all have three things in common:
elusiveness
impossibility or near impossibility to get material proof
trickster or oodly sentient nature of the phenomena
these three things make a good case we are dealing with the same thing

No, you’re mistaking “peer-reviewed theoretical physics based on the foundational tenets of well-established physics," with “speculation.” They’re not the same thing. I could speculate that gremlins crawl of my closet at night to steal my socks. But the concept of gravitational field propulsion is as viable as gravitational time dilation, because they’re both equally valid within the theoretical edifice of general relativity. It’s not an issue of if it could work, but rather, how it be achieved technologically. And in my view, the AAV phenomenon is proof that it can be and in fact has been achieved.

again i am the kind of man that wont believe in it until someone reproduces it in laboratory, it may not be speculation but to a poor and useless civilian like me it has the same value

Am I debating with Jason/marduk here?

no idea who he is, is he some guy from paracast?

Anyway, skepticism is good, but it requires an intimate familiarity with the scientific body of evidence available. Skepticism is work. And until you’ve done that work, then all you can claim is having a personal/subjective doubt. Read the papers, study the physics, and then let’s have a more symmetrical debate about this subject.

that is impossible, i am just a random idiot in the internet, you are a bonafide scientist

How is an exchange of pancakes for water incompatible with the ETH? I don’t see your reasoning there.

well lets see:
you are a alien crew with a superluminal drive, on transit to earth you discover that you forgot water (wich itself is ridiculous, do you ever remenber seeing NASA forgetting anything?) so instead of doing the sane thing: aborting the mission and going back to home (again, superluminal drive) you instead ask a farmer of an inferior species in middleoffuckingnowhere/USA a bottle of water, i dont know you but that makes no sense

Honestly I don’t pay much attention to CE3 or abduction reports or fairies and whatnot

and there you have failed , CE3 is the bread and butter of the UFO phenomena, the most interesting and scientifically important experiences lie in the CE3+ sphere
i suggest you research these kind of experiences, you may change your belief after seeing them

 

[humanoidlord]

PART 2

We do however have supporting empirical evidence for AAVs operating in our airspace, such as multiple independent witness sightings, radar-visual sightings, trace evidence cases, etc. – so that points to physical craft that radically outperform our top fighter jets. Understanding how that technology operates is the primary focus of my interest. Like I’ve said before: who’s manufacturing these devices is an interesting question, but ultimately irrelevant to the issues of the physics and that technology that interest me.

but those dont answer the ultimate question: what is at the "helm" of these AAV's?

The “interdimensional theory” is certainly not a theory. In fact it doesn’t even qualify as a legitimate scientific hypothesis – to qualify as a reasonable hypothesis, it falls upon the advocates to demonstrate a viable physical model for how such a thing could be possible, without violating or somehow circumnavigating the known canon of physics. And that hasn’t happened. So until somebody can do that, it’s merely wild speculation like those gremlins coming after my socks at night. It could be happening, but I see zero empirical reason to believe that it actually is happening, therefore it’s worthless to me as a scientific hypothesis.

i believe thats why nobody takes it seriously, it's too weird and alien to them and isnt relatable to anything they have seen in sci-fi
and thats why the cover up exists, revealing the existence of such a thing would collapse all religions and scientific institutions and possibly even cause WWIII if the current state of the world is the "common" one

And frankly I don’t see how “aliens coming from other as-yet-undiscovered realities” could be considered to be a more plausible explanation than “aliens from some of the billions of potentially habitable worlds have learned how to traverse interstellar distances, and they’re dropping by from time to time to look around or whatever.”

its much more complex than that, i believe we are dealing with a very powerfull entity that probally dont comes in plurals, just appears to be so

 

[Kchoo]

gene and his gang believes in the co-creation model, in wich the entity needs us humans to exist, i believe in the theater model where we are just observers of a incomprehemsible circus

But.. if we are visited, how did they get here.

 

[humanoidlord]

I'm still chewing on TRM's posts.

However space is apparently composed of layers of tensor fields.

Claiming that you can interact with those tensor fields to change their effects or provide propulsion/displacement isn't too much of a stretch.

time will tell....