Posted on 05/25/2016 6:59:50 PM PDT by MtnClimber
When I was a student in the 1960s almost all scientists believed we are alone in the universe. The search for intelligent life beyond Earth was ridiculed; one might as well have professed an interest in looking for fairies. The focus of skepticism concerned the origin of life, which was widely assumed to have been a chemical fluke of such incredibly low probability it would never have happened twice. “The origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle,” was the way Francis Crick described it, “so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.” Jacques Monod concurred; in his 1976 book Chance and Necessity he wrote, “Man knows at last that he is alone in the indifferent immensity of the universe, whence which he has emerged by chance.” Today the pendulum has swung decisively the other way. Many distinguished scientists proclaim that the universe is teeming with life, at least some of it intelligent. The biologist Christian de Duve went so far as to call life “a cosmic imperative.” Yet the science has hardly changed. We are almost as much in the dark today about the pathway from non-life to life as Darwin was when he wrote, “It is mere rubbish thinking at present of the origin of life; one might as well think of the origin of matter.”
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.scientificamerican.com ...
one might as well think of the origin of matter.
In 1835 the French philosopher Auguste Comte predicted that we would never know anything about the chemical composition of stars.
Charles H. Duell was the Commissioner of US patent office in 1899. Mr. Deull’s most famous attributed utterance is that “everything that can be invented has been invented.”
The Kepler telescope has proved otherwise.
Science fiction is fun but fiction nonetheless, ideas and stories from the human imagination. God made us on this planet and there’s nothing else out there, no aliens, no extraterrestrials, no spaceships from far away solar systems or galaxies monitoring life on earth. The pyramids and Machu Pichu and those gigantic, perfectly assembled walls made of huge blocks of stone with joints so precise that you can’t slip a piece of paper between in South America were all man made, end of story. Call me ignorant but prove me wrong.
Commence flaming.
“If we can just keep from wiping ourselves out long enough, we’ll find the way.”
We might fall into a virtual reality pleasure hole, so we would keep existing but never care about exploring anything.
There could be something between stars or galaxies that stops physical SLT probes. The pulsars, black holes and quasars that would do something weird to alert folks that it is artificial would get shut off really fast when something notices. Maybe most might realize this fast, and never start broadcasting so they don’t attract a disinfecting gamma ray burst... this isn’t us, obviously.
Freegards
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation#Range_of_results
What if they didn’t want us to know they were from the future? Seems like anyone that was capable of to-the-past time travel in the first place would also be slick enough to disguise themselves if they wanted.
Freegards
You’re not wrong.
Moderns prefer science fiction to science because mathematics underpins all science and that’s much to tough for our current gaggle of political assholery to grasp.
Speaking of scientific rigor, the core reason the environmental fanatics hold sway is because the average person couldn’t grasp a scientific fact if it jumped out and bit him on the ass.
Consider that earth is at least 4,500,000,000 years of age and that planetary motion, seasonality and weather, growth patterns; among other natural phenomena; have been cyclical over this time period. As such, any change in our climate is both part of a recurring pattern and normal.
“The vastness of the universe...”? It IS infinite space or it exists within infinite space. Even if expanding,what lies past it’s expanding edges? Expanding into what? Infinite space... always has been and always will be, whether partially filled or empty. It is well to ask, what do we know that lasts forever. BeGood
Dang it
That South American site you were alluding to (I think) “Puma Punku?” with the hard Stone and precise inside rectangular cuts that cannot be duplicated today at all, by any means, to the degree of accuracy of the original... without tool marks... even after being polished... period... we can’t ... we have tried and we have failed. We can Cast it but can’t Carve it. (Here is where you plug in the “WE HAVE DONE IT” because as far as I know that doesn’t exist yet)
Yet during the Bronze Age (Those folks were a Continent away from where that was happening) ... with No Wheel... with No Written Language... with No Math THEY DID IT ... why not try to “Prove THEM WRONG” (cause ya can’t, cause they did it)
I think it is just a wonderful mystery that will keep me occupied. You seem to think of it as a Trap Door that must be closed ... How very 7th Century of you ... many Refugees may have your same grasp of reality.
Look at this (you might have fun)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMctBBcr4bQ
Oh yeah they are a bunch of Flying saucer folks ... so what? there are still re searchable “Facts” presented and if you really are in the 7th Century. These guys can’t be much of a stretch for you.
I just get a kick out of the Wonder and trying to figure out the HOW?
In 1898, he was appointed as the United States Commissioner of Patents, and held that post until 1901. In that role, he is famous for purportedly saying "Everything that can be invented has been invented."[2] However, this has been debunked as apocryphal by librarian Samuel Sass[3] who traced the quote back to 1981 book titled "The Book of Facts and Fallacies" by Chris Morgan and David Langford.[4]
In fact, Duell said in 1902:
In my opinion, all previous advances in the various lines of invention will appear totally insignificant when compared with those which the present century will witness. I almost wish that I might live my life over again to see the wonders which are at the threshold.[5]
Another possible origin of this famous statement may actually be found in a report to Congress in 1843 by an earlier Patent Office Commissioner, Henry Ellsworth. In it Ellsworth states, "The advancement of the arts, from year to year, taxes our credulity and seems to presage the arrival of that period when human improvement must end." This quote was apparently then mispresented and attributed to Duell, who held the same office in 1899.[6]
_____________________________________________________
you see? ...
And in fact the suggested origin of this canard in Ellsworth's quoted statement is a disservice to him as well. In fact, he's wondering out loud how long this incredible rate of advancement can persist.
Not quite... Einstein's theory didn't address FTL - just time dilation in the speeds approaching light, and not even the actual speed of light. About what happens faster than that, he said nothing.
Although we already know that the speed of gravity is 20,000,000,000 light speed.
Well, since the development of quantum physics, only in its most general sense. Now atoms are understood to be multiple, interacting, non-material shells of statistically probable energy waves which blink in and out of existence. That's hardly what they had in mind 2000 years ago.
The ancient Greek philosophers inferred the existence of atoms on sound principles and sound reasoning, granted that they didn’t know, and couldn’t know, very much about their nature, which knowledge was left to be discovered by far future generations. But this fact does not diminish, but only increases the status of their intellectual achievement, and properly leaves us in awe of them, and their time.
I have no problem with the Greeks, and accord them their due respect. But we've moved on. If you really want to see who nailed it thousands of years ago, look at the Indian Vedas, which describe the "spanda" or vibration of "Maya" or the unified energy field, which creates all manifestations. They could have litterally been describing the most modern theories of quantum physics we have today. And they also speak of advanced technologies of the past, including zero point energy and non-newtonian propulsion systems.
Yes, to atoms. The very word is theirs.
Not only does the Special Theory of Relativity address all these questions you claim it does not address, it does indeed discuss precisely what objects can be seen in co-moving Lorentz frames at the speed of light, and which ones cannot.
Your original statement is also incorrect: the Theory of Relativity is not only older than 111 years -- because it already existed in Maxwell's Equations as far back as 1861 -- but the fact of relativity is a good deal older than that: about 15 billion years older.
And your original reasoning is mistaken. By analogy, the fact that the Earth is round is about 5 billion years old, even if we've only known it for around 3,000 years. But no matter how many more years pass, no matter how old our civilization gets to be, we aren't going to discover that the Earth is not round. And we aren't going to discover that the FTL travel is possible.
As for the gravity nonsense, you've posted it before, and it's crap. Stop posting it. You look stupid when you post nonsense like this.
People don't understand that the theory of relativity says something about the geometry of our universe. If that geometry is incorrect, then the basic laws of electricity and magnetism do not work (the electromagnetic field is possible only from a correct, relativistic understanding of the classical -- and later quantum mechanical -- fields; at the time James Clerk Maxwell summarized the laws of the classical electromagnetic field, he had already written down the theory of relativity. We wouldn't know that for almost 50 years.)
In addition to electrodynamics, none of quantum field theory works without relativity. There would not -- and could not -- be antimatter since this is a prediction of the Dirac equation, which is based on the Special Theory of Relativity. We know antimatter exists, with the properties predicted by a Lorentz covariant theory. That alone guarantees that the universe has the geometry that it has, and there can never be FTL travel as a result.
That's hardly what they had in mind 2000 years ago.
It's not what we have in mind today either, since virtually nothing in your summary describes the modern understanding of atoms.
Little green men....lol
It depends on who’s writing....most scientists today are tards
I read this two years ago in National Geographic....not exactly a creationism bastion would u say
And you look stupid posting insults in German, instead of specifically explaining exactly WHY something is crap. Too bad your emotional ferver doesn't extend to scientific rigor - you'd have a Nobel prize by now.
Also, this VERY interesting study of the speed of gravity, was done by Dr. Van Flandern, PhD Astronomy, who worked at the U.S. Naval Observatory for 21 years and became Chief of the Celestial Mechanics Branch of the Nautical Almanac Office. What, exactly are your scientific credentials in comparison, if I might ask? As well, I haven't posted this article in years - so take the pin out of your butt and accept that it exists.
Not only does the Special Theory of Relativity address all these questions you claim it does not address, it does indeed discuss precisely what objects can be seen in co-moving Lorentz frames at the speed of light, and which ones cannot.
Nonsense. Theoretical inertial reference frames have nothing to do with the speed of gravity. Stop throwing out fancy terms to muck up the works just because you once took a physics class and copied the glossary. In addition, Special Relativity denies acceleration past c - but tachyon theory posits speeds already faster than c, so needing no such acceleration. And there are a great many physicists who believe such particles exist, by the way, even though they have yet to be proven (like many other aspects of physics these days). So your extreme agitation against this subject is way out of line - again, take the pin out of your butt, because this exists as a valid subject.
Your original statement is also incorrect: the Theory of Relativity is not only older than 111 years -- because it already existed in Maxwell's Equations as far back as 1861 -- but the fact of relativity is a good deal older than that: about 15 billion years older.
Talk abut picking nits! And just imagine Einstein's embarrassment - what a plagiarist he turned out to be! To think, it took 111 years before YOU could come along and reveal that he was a fraud! You really should publish - people need to know this! Poor Maxwell, the unacknowledged discoverer of the Theory of Relativity. Also, I guess all of physics is actually 15 billion years old, given your logic - right? Even the stuff we don't know yet, because hey, it's there. And there's no difference between knowing and not knowing things, so why count? In fact, why have any history of science at all - it's all already here!
And your original reasoning is mistaken. By analogy, the fact that the Earth is round is about 5 billion years old, even if we've only known it for around 3,000 years. But no matter how many more years pass, no matter how old our civilization gets to be, we aren't going to discover that the Earth is not round. And we aren't going to discover that the FTL travel is possible.
I really don't kow what to say to this, because it's obvious that you're using it as a demonstration of what you think passes for logic. It's breathtaking, I'll give you that. Did you write the first draft in crayon, or did you throw caution to the wind and go directly to pen?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.