The Extradimensional Ultraterrestrial Hypothesis: Superstition Masquerading as Science

Discussion in 'UFOs & Sightings' started by Thomas R. Morrison, Sep 10, 2018.

  1. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Honorable

    Messages:
    196
    It's not really subjective. Strength of the fields inside collider's sensors is very precisely known. So when shower of particles flies into that precisely known field, field bends particle trajectories in a very specific way, that is predicted from equations in QM and electrodynamics. If, say Higg's boson, has certain predicted energy, it's trajectory will curve in a predictable way within some range and that trajectory-curvature would be unique only to Higg's boson. No other particle could do that.

    But scientist are human, many theories are incomplete, and scientists can get territorial. That's why experiments are done.

    Oh please, just one more. Give me just one prediction that psychology made that wasn't already accepted as a common sense by all practical people (excluding idealists and book warms). I mean something that was unimaginable and earth shattering like radio waves, or transistor, or aeroplane.

    I absolutely have no problem with people getting paid to do jobs they love, if they can get away with it, as I am sure many psychologists do. But, I have a big problem with psychology adding more confusion in already confused subject of ufology. Suffice to say, ufology is in a desperate need of earning public trust. Only a deterministic science, like old school classic physics and maths, can offer us some solid ground to step on and show us a way out of the mess that thousands of UFO witnesses testimonials inadvertently created.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2019
  2. Carl Grove

    Carl Grove Adept

    Messages:
    35
    Just one more, then. What findings have psychologists made that are contrary to common sense? What could be more common sense than that we see things as they are? Yet numerous experiments have shown that what we imagine to be perception is more like a reconstructive process, fitting fleeting perceptions into a clever illusion, almost. Show subjects stimuli that contradict expectation (e.g. playing cards with the reds and blacks reversed -- red spades and black hearts -- and their response speed slows and becomes less accurate. When this experiment was first run int the 50s, before we got used to weird films and TV shows, some subjects were actually disturbed and one had to be hospitalised). Things that we expect to be big (such as the moon) change in apparent size with their proximity to known objects (when high in the sky and isolated it seems small, but when close to nearby objects such as houses it appears bigger. Even knowing that this is illusory doesn't prevent it happening. Memory too has turned out to be more of a reconstructive process than common sense would expect. This is one reason why eye witness testimony turns out to be unreliable. We think logically, don't we? Well, the overwhelming majority of subjects are unable to draw even the simplest logical inferences from stimuli shown to them. They make a guess (a belief, if you like, or even a hypothesis) and tend to stick with that, seeking only stimuli that support their theory and ignoring those that contradict it when the effective thing is to do the exact opposite. This sounds a lot like Science actually.
    Are these things as explosive as radio or other physical discoveries? They might not seem so dramatic but their implications for our thinking processes, our logic, our perception, in fact our entire lives, are immense. If you really think that only things like classic physics and maths can help us out in the investigation of UFOs, then you need to think about these things as well. How witnesses perceive, interpret, and remember UFO sightings is surely a question of major interest. Yes, there have been physical traces, radar tracks, and photos, but has that convinced a majority in the scientific community that UFOs even exist, never mind that they are extraterrestrial craft? Have any of those ufologists with a background in the hard sciences really made any significant progress in understanding the phenomenon?
    Incidentally, none of the examples you give -- radio, transistors, and aeroplanes -- reflect purely scientific experimentation, they are actually technological advances. Neither Marconi nor the Wright brothers were scientists, they were inventors.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  3. Carl Grove

    Carl Grove Adept

    Messages:
    35
    As a p.s. and going back to your comments about UFOs, I looked at Wikipedia and found that Vallee holds the following qualifications: B.SC Maths, M.S. Astrophysics, and Ph.D. Computer Science. He began his career as astronomer at the Paris Observatory, after going to the US he became a Research Assistant in Astronomy under Gerard de Vancouleurs at U. Texas, where they compiled NASA's first comprehensive map of Mars. Following this he worked as Systems Analyst and helped to develop a computer network that predated the Internet. I think most people would regard him as a scientist on this basis.
     
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  4. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Downing petulant pilots with logic since 2018

    Messages:
    499
    No you’re still not getting this straight, and you’ve mutilated my analogy beyond recognition – the magnetic lodestone in my analogy is analogous to naturally occurring mass-energy generating very weak fields, whereas a simple inductive coil produces a much stronger field with very little current.

    I’m suggesting that we’ll make a similar breakthrough with gravitation, and eventually figure out how to build a gravitational inductive device analogous to an electromagnetic coil. It’s evident that other civilizations have already figured out how to do this, so it can be done.

    First of all, drop the useless and impertinent GSR idea and listen to what I’m actually saying.

    We already know of several theoretically viable approaches to amplifying the gravitational field; 1.) by concentrating the density of mass-energy – the density and not just the magnitude of mass-energy attenuates the strength of the gravitational field, and 2.) by modulating the coupling constant in the Einstein field equation, as Dr. Jack Sarfatti has recently proposed in his Low Power Warp Drive paper, 3.) pressure - positive pressure generates gravitation, and tension (negative pressure) represents a negative gravitational term, and 4.) stress, strain, and momentum - the other terms in the stress-energy tensor. So yes, such approaches can “be even imagined with modern physics.”

    That’s wrong. Once a gravitational field exists, it takes no energy to operate. A negative gravitational field on the front side of a craft would divert matter out of its way without any expenditure of energy. Just as the Earth doesn’t expend any energy to attract meteors, but in this case the effect is reversed.

    Ball lighting isn’t a quantum object, it’s just a plasma sustained by internal electrical currents. Small versions have been produced in the lab, and very small versions can be made in a microwave oven at home.

    Good point. I find it revolting and frightening that many of those are still going on right now.

    I haven’t seen it. All I see him doing is defending his cosmic trickster mythology, and attacking everything that refutes it (which is pretty much everything).

    I didn’t suggest that it’s incompatible with scientific reasoning, I was pointing out that there’s as much evidence for other universes as there is for the existence of Santa Claus, unicorns, and mermaids – i.e., none. I’m not saying that it’s impossible or illogical (unicorns could exist, for example), I’m saying that we have zero reason to believe that they do exist.

    The evidence for these things is so tenuous at this point, that it’s quite possible that these are some as-yet-unidentified cognitive aberrations like déjà-vu, rather than actual objectively real phenomena. But I’m keeping an open mind. Still, they’re a very weak motivation for developing new theories of physics and postulating entire other universes (Occam’s razor and all that).

    I just explained the conjunction fallacy. That’s what that is. Bad logic.

    I’m not saying “unacceptable.” I’m just pointing out that the empirical basis for such considerations is empirically insubstantial. I’m an empirical thinker – I want to see evidence or a compelling theoretical motive for exploring an idea in terms of physical science.

    I enjoy idle speculation about other universes and new physics all the time – it’s fun. But I draw a clear distinction between that stuff, and meaningful empirical reasoning. So while I enjoy a good Stargate episode about alternate realities, I see zero empirical or theoretical reason to seriously consider that such a thing exists. But the moment that changes, if that changes, I’ll be happy to delve into it. And meanwhile I find that there are plenty of fascinating mysteries to focus on which merit serious consideration, like the dark energy effect – something we have compelling empirical reasons to take seriously.

    Well now you’re getting into details which aren’t in evidence: show me two objects of the same size merging, and remaining the same size afterward. At best we probably have an anecdotal account to go by, which may or may not be true, or may or may not have been a misperception of some kind.

    Humanloidlord makes this error constantly: he accepts every crazy close encounter story as absolute fact, indiscriminately, and then tries to explain them all via the magical action of some supernatural divine invisible omnipotent entity. Data has to be culled, or you end up with more noise than signal. And then you find yourself trying to explain things that didn’t actually happen, or didn't happen the way you thought they did.

    We don’t have the technology to pioneer the field of “applied general relativity” to any significant extent yet. But the theory is solid, so we can describe what’s possible under specific conditions. Engineering a device which is larger on the inside than on the outside is possible under specific configurations of gravitational field. This has been known for decades. We can’t do it yet, but we can’t make a craft hover silently in mid-air yet either, and for the exact same reason – we don’t have a gravitational technology yet. One day we will, if we survive as a technological civilization. Because others do, and they’re visiting our planet with some frequency, evidently. So if they can get here, then they also have the technology to build craft which are larger on the inside than on the outside – the same technology is required for both; it’s just a different application of the same field effects.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2019
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Honorable

    Messages:
    196
    Hmmm, very interesting. It's pity that these current memories can not be determinedly reversed back to real memories. I don't think hypnosis can do that.

    ABSOLUTELY!!! I've gave you a link few posts back. But I am sure you didn't read it because it is boring :). Most of truth is really boring. What can be more "significant progress" than actually having a tool to control UFO crafts? No other branch of UFO research can come even close.

    Human psychology is a big problem :). People don't want to learn physics (except myself), they want exciting killer flight-or-fight narrative that is going to keep them awake at night. Problem is, lets admit it, is that most people are lazy or don't have time, they want to explain everything quickly and within content already present inside their comfort zone.

    Second human downfall is adulation of authority. Nobody wants to dig and check facts, they want authority with a strong branding to give them one simple and final cut.

    Explained bellow.


    Because classic physics (not including QM) is so deterministic, these papers on that link, show clear cut and sequential physical phenomena. Thing A happens, than thing B happens, than C and so on, just as it would be predicted by a seasoned physicist. That's the hidden beauty of thousands of UFO witness testimonials. Testimonials are in a perfect harmony with classic physics, or Maxwell's electrodynamics to be precise. And these A-B-C steps from electromagnetism make actionable predictions and practical deterrence tools.

    For example, to cut the boring stuff :) a bit short, UFOs produce a range of sequential EM phenomena with confirmed high statistical significance. A good haunch, like a policeman's or journalist's, would be that UFO propulsion has, at least in a part, to do something with electricity. So, (as UFO lore goes, from Col. Corso and few other sources) military had started pointing a strong, already available, radar pencil-like beams at UFOs in a hope to either bring them down or at least disrupt them. Idea is that radar's EM waves would produce electrical effect on UFOs. And according to at least Col. Corso they were successful. Essentially, it worked first time (because chain of electro-magnetic causalities is deterministic) and gave governments a practical and powerful tool to menage or threaten UFOs. This practical tool (strong pencil beam radar) immediately translates into a government's political tool, where UFOs can be controlled, crashed or denied access to any given areas and even maybe used for some kind of negotiated settlement between government and aliens. Obviously, this would be unknown to general public.

    Weather we use physics or psychology and discounting for character assassinations, we here always have to work from a basis of UFO lore and have to accept these sources at a face value. We count on some scientific tools, like statistics and big data analysis, to weed out delusions and hoaxes. In the above case, UFO lore is back-to-back supported by scientific determinism of classical Maxwell's Electrodynamics. 99% of people don't see that, because unfamiliarity with electricity, but anybody schooled in EM fields would suss it out on the spot.

    And this is not just information that came out of a single testimonial, so somebody can say: "ohhh, this crooked engineer cooked it all up, to make money ... " or whatever. This is all pieced together from many different, but scientifically consistent stories, which increases it's credibility.

    Essentially, you give an electrical engineer or familiar scientist that link to read it and I guarantee he'll come out dumbfounded. Like: "Nobody ever told me this???", implying that that info is too real to bear. Engineers and scientists depend on shared verified knowledge so they don't need "authority" or "brands" to do thinking for them. Very unlike people in humanities who are unashamed suckers for "authority" and "brands".

    And I hope, we all implicitly agree, that "authority" or "brands" are deep down just head-fakes. But that's a whole new topic for another day.

    Well, than it's all Vallee's fault, because in that interview he made it all sound as if he was college dropout. Maybe he wanted to be modest etc.

    Don't agree with that all, because that's only descriptive thinking.

    Yes, to accelerate spaceship one can do with relatively small gravitational field. But to deflect oncoming particle beam moving at c or even FTL, one would need very strong gravitational field. So it's very unlikely that gravitational field be at all used for oncoming particles deflection. Which, in turn means, that GR warp-drive still has oncoming particle beam problem. Not a show stopper, just something to think about.

    That's why I am saying, very speculatively, that these 8D Quantum Gravity theories might be onto something, because they would completely avoid oncoming particle beam problem. Possibly-maybe they might enable worm hole type of jumps through interstellar voids, because 8D theories thrive on non-locality. Non-lociality being this non-physical timeless and spaceless spooky action at distance property of QM systems, that is, in laymen's terms, explained as "one is all, all is one" etc.

    And that's why I am now gona listen to that podcast with Cohl Furey.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2019
  6. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    we need to study all paranormal phenomena toghether as an sstudy called forteanism, no more ufology, cryptozoology or demonology
     
  7. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    both false, while i believe a lot i believe that a lot of abduction cases (specially those persons who claim multiple experiences) are purely psycological in nature, all the ones that seem real have clear genetic motivation, apparently to give the illusion that the human race is being taken over by a superior hybrid race
    also the UFOnauts can easily blend without being seen in a crowd, as many of the cases studied by john keel show
     
  8. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    i ain't talking about dimensions in the flatland sense, i am talking about other dimensions in the other universes sense
    why is it so hard for you to understand that?
     
  9. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    THIS RIGHT HERE
    i am talking about other universes, not more mathematical dimensions, those are impossible in your 3D world
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Downing petulant pilots with logic since 2018

    Messages:
    499
    What page are you on humanoidlord? Because we already went over this.

    You were using the word "dimension" wrong. Words mean things. And none of the definitions of "dimension" means "universe," so we had to figure out wtf you were trying to say:

    Definition of DIMENSION

    Like I said before, I think it's insane that people like yourself have some big problem with the idea of intelligent beings arriving here from neighboring star systems...and yet wholeheartedly embrace the idea of other intelligent beings arriving here from another universe.

    Not only is there no evidence of any kind that other universes actually exist in the first place, or indication that intelligent life could exist there...but obviously traveling between universes would be far more difficult than making the jump between stars - we haven't got any idea how interuniverse travel might be achieved, or if such a thing would be possible at all (my guess would be "not possible" since even the highly speculative wormhole concept only links two points in the same universe).

    By comparison we know that billions of other star systems have Earth-like planets orbiting Sun-like stars in their habitable zones in our galaxy alone and the average age of those worlds is about 3 billion years older than our Earth (so the existence of highly advanced civilizations is essentially a statistical certainly), and we have an explicit theoretical proposal based on one of the most successful physics theories of all time, for traversing interstellar distances at faster-than-light speeds (so we know that it's physically possible and theoretically attainable for any sufficiently technologically advanced civilization).

    So based on everything that we know today, it would be far more bizarre and inexplicable if we weren't being visited by other technological civilizations, than it would be if we are being visited by our interstellar neighbors.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2019
    • Like Like x 2
  11. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    3 words: personal cloaking device, if they can make one for their ships, why can't they do a portable one?
    also i doubt anyone would notice the missing sperm flasks, they probally would think they forgot to store them or something
    so in the end, yep abductions make no sense
    thomas is very close minded sometimes, i told him a while ago that he should read some vallee or keel to open a bit his mind, but apparently he din't hear my call
     
  12. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    there are also cases where the UFOnauts were seen going trough walls
    keel wasn't a scientist either and frankly that means nothing, it's almost impossible for any serious scientist to investigate IDH due to the ridicule
    very bad comparison, IMO
     
  13. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Downing petulant pilots with logic since 2018

    Messages:
    499
    Actually I've been reading Vallee and listening to his interviews frequently over the last few months, and I've given detailed rebuttals to many of his arguments right here in this thread over the last couple of days. I started to read one of Keel's books but it didn't hold my attention, so I'll have to get back to it when I have more free time. But Keel isn't a scientist, and this is a scientific question, so I don't expect to find anything of significance in his hypotheses. I'm willing to check it out though, to find out what he has to say. However it's not encouraging that literally everyone who cites him as an authority in this area has totally failed to provide a compelling argument.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2019
  14. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    keel was a journalist, so his best was talking and interviewing people and i can assure you that with that mindset he has gone to places no scientist has ever gone before (well except, maybe, the military contractors that investigated skinwalker)
     
  15. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    agree, steinberg's trial is in the horizon, i can almost feel it
     
  16. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    ok, *sigh*, i will try to say universes or realities instead in the future
    its like the radiation spectrum, except bigger and possibly infinite
    the "cosmic trickster" somehow has found a way to "tune the radio"
    again you should read their work before saying anything, you probally will be as impressed as me
     
  17. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    what else do i call it, then?
    its a fun tongue-in-cheek name, don't take it too seriously
     
  18. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    that is a handwave, because we have no idea, what a civilization far in the future would have, its even possible that they would discover that there is something in the universe that makes gravitational propulsion a impossibility
    there are various cases where UFOs were seen being first manifestations of radiation crossing the entire visible spectrum (changing color) before the materializing as solid atomic masses that left imprints in the ground
     
  19. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    you are as biased as me, i have never seen someone that likes ETH turning into a IDH believer either
     
  20. humanoidlord

    humanoidlord ce3 researcher

    Messages:
    3,561
    exactly, you may not like my conclusions but my research is interesting!
    for some reason nivek like to make fun of IDH just because i say cosmic trickster (wich is in itself a tongue-in-cheek term because i can't find a better word to describe it) and so he mentions the nordic god loki who also said that he was the great trickster
     

Share This Page