PlaneShift
Fan Area => The Hydlaa Plaza => Topic started by: LARAGORN on November 23, 2006, 06:37:03 pm
-
It took five years for this to surface, thats our press for us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsLj2ScRkFo
After you watch it, I would like your oppinions :)
-
115min? you must be kidding me
-
If you don't watch it then don't bother posting.....
I'm 25 min in and I've seen nothing yet other than people promising that what they've said is true. I have no doubt that there's other life out there. I remain doubtful that anything out there has visited us though, or that the USA has alien technology kept hidden away. I'll see once I've finished watching this.
-
115 mins? Great, something to do at work tomorrow lol.
Il post back tomorrow afternoon ;)
-
I'm not going to watch this movie... I waited for it to load and jumped towards the end where some guy says an object can move with a speed higher than speed of light which is not possible. Are we alone? No, of course not. Do we need weapons in space? Maybe, to point them at annoying enemies on Earth, but to fight aliens? I doubt it since we don't know what can harm them.
-
I'm not going to watch this movie... I waited for it to load and jumped towards the end where some guy says an object can move with a speed higher than speed of light which is not possible.
Assuming Einstein's theories are correct, which isn't proven. I'm at 85 min now and it's just more "Believe what I say because I'll swear it's true". Hopefully it'll get better. If what I've gathered from these mini-speeches is true and these aliens do use anti-gravity technology, then it would be possible to move faster than light (I don't really believe it either). Zero-point energy theories may well have a foot in the truth, but they're very far from proven, or even close to behaving to the model of our universe.
Edit: Ok, finished. Hasn't changed my opinion at all. There was no proof there, just a load of people swearing that they're telling the truth and talking about far from proven theories. I agree that there's loads of money going into secret projects using advanced technology in the US and other countries, but that doesn't mean that it's from 'UFOs', just that there's loads of money going into military research. So yeah <.< I remain totally unconvinced that t3h alienz have landed.
-
May I make a polite request, could people please not give away what happens before people get the opportunity to watch it?
This doesnt apply to me because I will just ignore this thread untill ive watched it, people who come to this thread for the first time might not want to know what happens before they see it.
-
Well it's a bit hard to express our opinions if we can't say anything about it. :P
-
well, thats a mighty good point lol, maybe try to be a little vague for atleast the next 18 hours ;D
-
I did watch it and i wanted to waite before posting my thoughts so there would be no biased views.
I for one have had experiences that have prooven to me that without a doubt we are not only arent alone, but have been visited aswell. This thread however isnt about me or my expeiriences.
If you do a little searching around it isnt hard to find the energy power Greer mentions, as he stated Tessler discoverd the energy source in the early 1900's. All tesslers equipment was confiscated and kept as classified, including all designs and drawings. However before his death tessler devided the designs of his invention, knowing that any one power that had this would be able to control most of the world. Tessler then sent a portion of the designs to at least 8 different countries, in the hopes they would have to come together to use it. One theory about this energy design is that a few of the countries are trying to fill in the blanks and create a weapon from it; The meteor that hit Siberia is said to have been a test of such a weapon made from Tesslers energy design.
If any of you think that the people who run this world couldnt keep this a secret, well think again. This is the first (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8INQbApbED0) of five, in which it explains why and how the secret is kept. This is just of many realities that are being hidden from the worlds population, all for the sake of power.
-
From what I know of the theories of how to use zero-point energy, I'm glad that it's being kept secret if it is. If anyone made a zero-point energy bomb with even 1% yield for say 1 cubic centimeter of space (that's a huge amount, but yeah) ... goodbye earth..?. We're just too violent and unstable. Maybe when the whole race isn't stuck on this one ball of rock it'd be a good idea... if such technology even exists and works, which I doubt.
-
i love conspiracy theory,
you are all nuts.
thats just my opinion no offense.
well a little but not much.
you're all still crazy too.
-
From what I know of the theories of how to use zero-point energy, I'm glad that it's being kept secret if it is. If anyone made a zero-point energy bomb with even 1% yield for say 1 cubic centimeter of space (that's a huge amount, but yeah) ... goodbye earth..?. We're just too violent and unstable. Maybe when the whole race isn't stuck on this one ball of rock it'd be a good idea... if such technology even exists and works, which I doubt.
The theory around siberia was that only one micron was used, but they faild to launch the micron, and incinerated miles of forest.
-
Right, so we really shouldn't be using this technology right now. Let's keep it locked up for another 100 years or so.
-
Right, so we really shouldn't be using this technology right now. Let's keep it locked up for another 100 years or so.
Locked up? But why? It would do wonders for threatening others with annihilation if they don't agree with our ideas :|
I'm not going to watch this, Xordan's summary is enough for me and I've seen enough "Aliens are out there" programs to last a lifetime. There's no proof that we're not alone, but it's foolish to think that in a universe so vast, with so many galaxies and stars and planets, that none but earth would have evolved to support life. Likely we'll both be long gone by the time the distance between us could have been travelled.
-
I'm not going to watch this, Xordan's summary is enough for me and I've seen enough "Aliens are out there" programs to last a lifetime. There's no proof that we're not alone, but it's foolish to think that in a universe so vast, with so many galaxies and stars and planets, that none but earth would have evolved to support life. Likely we'll both be long gone by the time the distance between us could have been travelled.
This is not just another "beam me up scotty", "i've been abducted" movies, this is a world press confrence. The pannel is 21 high ranking officials from many areas of the air force, army, norad, navy and more. It is the first time in history that respected people with respected proffessions have come forward together, asking congress to here them and release the clasified information.
-
When was that held btw? I saw something somewhere which makes me think "2001". If that's the case, then not much has happened the last 5 years.
-
The only thing I have to add to this topic is it is pretty ignorant to think we are the only planet with life. I don't believe or disbelieve in aliens. I will believe when I see with my own eye's but until then will keep the mentality that there maybe life out there.
-
When was that held btw? I saw something somewhere which makes me think "2001". If that's the case, then not much has happened the last 5 years.
Here (http://www.disclosureproject.com/) it explains why nothing has happend in five years. Simply put, journalists wanted to investigate and report but the higher ups always stopped them. It isnt new news that the media is controlled, there may be the small paper here and there that isnt, but their voice is small. There is alot of info at www.DisclosureProject.com, that keeps the 'trailer park' crap out of it. Whether you believe or not, the site is worth a look.
-
personaly i got tired of watching the movie and closed it
but i still think that there realy are other lifeforms far away it is a proven theory that space is infinity so then how can in infinity exist only one kind of creatures does make some sense
-
Type "Area 51" at Google Earth search button...
It is interesting to see that the "secret" organization that supposedly cover up their existence since Roswell incident called Majestic 12 have even its own site: www.mj12.com (http://www.mj12.com) and thus exists. Not sure what they really do as they neither confirm nor deny anything.
-
ahaha i didnt watch it but i beleive in aliens :P
-
personaly i got tired of watching the movie and closed it
but i still think that there realy are other lifeforms far away it is a proven theory that space is infinity so then how can in infinity exist only one kind of creatures does make some sense
No it isn't a proven theory that space is infinite.
Firstly you can't have a proven theory. It's not a theory if it's proven, it's a law.
Secondly, nobody has proven that space is infinite, far from it. Where do you get your 'facts'? :)
However, the rest of your logic makes sense, assuming I'm working it out right. In a universe so huge (I would guess at 1000000000000000000 (billion*billion) stars at any given time), what are the chances that we're the only life.
-
The only thing I have to add to this topic is it is pretty ignorant to think we are the only planet with life. I don't believe or disbelieve in aliens. I will believe when I see with my own eye's but until then will keep the mentality that there maybe life out there.
I don't think it's ignorant Akaye, and i'm with a small minority that feels there is no life outside earth.
I'm a Biology Major, going into Microbiology soon, and life is very sensitive.
People talk all the time about how life thrives where we think it shouldn't, but you notice even these creatures needed things that are VERY hard to obtain elsewhere.
The size of the planet, whether it's near a sun, presence of water, the atmosphere, Oxygen-Co2 level, all are things we take into account.
People have thought from the start that we'd have found life by now, because of the Trillions of Stars there are, but when we studied the conditions on the few planets near those stars, as well as the size of the planets, we all seemed to lose hope.
I've lost all hope, and i feel we will never find intelligent Life outside our own, i'd love to find it just as much as anyone here, it would be great to wake up and see the papers saying Aliens have landed at white house and are holding talks.
I'd be thrilled.
But from what i know thus far, Life is too sensitive a thing to be generated, and that Earth is One of a Kind.
~~Datruth
P.S: I'll watch the videos and comment on Their content soon.
-
I think it's extremely egocentric to think that ours is the only planet with life in the universe. While it's true that there are nearly countless of factors that have to be "just right," our universe is absolutely vast, and our abilities to search through it for life have begun to expand only recently. We can in no way say that just because nothing has been found among the centimeters that we have searched (in the scheme of things), we can make any sort of conclusion on the subject.
Besides, there's an incredible difference between finding alien microbes on a planet within a distant solar system, and hearing "The aliens have landed!" in your local paper.
-
I think it's extremely egocentric to think that ours is the only planet with life in the universe. While it's true that there are nearly countless of factors that have to be "just right," our universe is absolutely vast, and our abilities to search through it for life have begun to expand only recently. We can in no way say that just because nothing has been found among the centimeters that we have searched (in the scheme of things), we can make any sort of conclusion on the subject.
Besides, there's an incredible difference between finding alien microbes on a planet within a distant solar system, and hearing "The aliens have landed!" in your local paper.
I hate that cop out... "Our Universe is Vast"
MOST OF IT is just empty space lol :)
The only parts we are looking for is a particular type of star, with a particular type of planet, a particular Distance away, with a particular atmosphere, and you get the picture.
When you do that.
I say we have maybe a Billion or Less candidates, then when you get REALLY intrinsic, you have maybe 1 million or so candidates.
These numbers are pure speculation on my part, they are here just to show you my comparison of Given and Result.
IF you truly look at how many planets have candidates for life, you will see the number isn't as big as you think.
So no.... the universe being BIG or even HUGE, has nothing to do with this, it's the Planets we're looking for.
~~Datruth
-
"Cop out" from what, exactly? You seem very eager to suggest that we are somehow special in this wide world of ours, but I disagree with such a stance. Although the numbers you provide are "pure speculation" as you so kindly pointed out, I can share with you numbers that have been calculated in a more ...serious manner. Are you familiar with the Drake Equation?
Unfortunately, the limitations of current technology mean that only giant planets (like Jupiter) have so far been detected, and smaller, rocky planets similar to Earth remain for the most part out of sight. Finding planets like Earth could take a while.
-
The only thing I have to add to this topic is it is pretty ignorant to think we are the only planet with life. I don't believe or disbelieve in aliens. I will believe when I see with my own eye's but until then will keep the mentality that there maybe life out there.
I don't think it's ignorant Akaye, and i'm with a small minority that feels there is no life outside earth.
I'm a Biology Major, going into Microbiology soon, and life is very sensitive.
People talk all the time about how life thrives where we think it shouldn't, but you notice even these creatures needed things that are VERY hard to obtain elsewhere.
The size of the planet, whether it's near a sun, presence of water, the atmosphere, Oxygen-Co2 level, all are things we take into account.
People have thought from the start that we'd have found life by now, because of the Trillions of Stars there are, but when we studied the conditions on the few planets near those stars, as well as the size of the planets, we all seemed to lose hope.
I've lost all hope, and i feel we will never find intelligent Life outside our own, i'd love to find it just as much as anyone here, it would be great to wake up and see the papers saying Aliens have landed at white house and are holding talks.
I'd be thrilled.
But from what i know thus far, Life is too sensitive a thing to be generated, and that Earth is One of a Kind.
~~Datruth
P.S: I'll watch the videos and comment on Their content soon.
ahahah but we examine this all from earths perspecitve and earths physics. things could be radically different somewhere else. and there are more galxies than this one that we have no idea how to aplply physics properly to it
i know nothing about this stuff other than an occasional reading of "quintessence" but i definately think its possible
-
Kalika, i'm fairly sure the Natural Laws of our Universe remain the Same regardless of what Galaxy we are in.
It's not a question of Misinformation in my opinon.
It's a question of Hope, Those who hope for E.T, and those who don't.
Both have numbers on their side to back it up, but as i stated in my first post, i've lost hope in this matter.
~~Datruth
-
....if we lived on another planet would every scientific law apply there?
i dont know, i dont like to assume that the rules for life here are the same for there, wherever there is...
but i dunnos, whatever makes people happy in what they believe works then :D
-
Scientific laws are generally laws because they are universal (at least within our known universe), and will apply irregardless of the planet or galaxy.
Datruth, I believe it is far too early to say something like "I've lost hope for extraterrestrial life." As I've pointed out, our technological advances are still akin to baby steps. I find it very strange that at such a time when our knowledge of the "corners of the universe" is expanding someone can actually feel despondent.
(Also: I can't seem to reply to your PMs - evidently because my post count isn't high enough yet. I hope it's okay with the mods if I answer it here - yes, my signature graphic is my own, CS2.)
-
the things that you list as requirements for life Datruth are far from the truth. The only currently recognised requirement is water. Water is only a necessitiy for life on earth because the 1st forms of life originated in the oceans, therefore we still require water to conduct our chemical reactions within our cells. you could argue that all life requires DNA or at the least RNA but that may just be earth bound life because thats the only thing we have had oppurtunity to examine. Life IS extremely resilient, you dont need sunlight (life copes perfectly well in caves aswell as around oceanic volcanic vents), you dont really need too much warmth, life funcitions fine in Antarctica (certain forms of bacterial microbes live within rocks and generate antifreeze within their cells) on the opposite side too much heat is generally coped with quite well (again, volcanic vents harbour life quite well at near boiling temperatures), PH levels can vary masively (some life functions perfectly well in conditions of such extreme PH that your hand wold dissolve were you to put it in). Oxygen is well known to not be a requirement (nitrogen fixing bacteria, plants(do require O2 but perfectly capable of making their own via photosynthesis)) And finally it is also known that most forms of bacterial life will survive (although not prosper) in a complete vacuum.
The question that is harder to argue is is there intelligent life out there, and even harder, would we recognise it as such if we found it. My opinion on that matter is if we did realise it then we would probably kill it.
The all important question in my opinion is that if life is so abundant, why dont we see their communications signals, if they are anything like us they must use radio waves and such to transfer info.... Or do they all know something we dont and have a very good reason to keep quiet.
[Edit- to fix some little errors, on the whole im impressed with myself because I wrote this within 2 minutes of waking up this morning ;D]
-
The all important question in my opinion is that if life is so abundant, why dont we see their communications signals, if they are anything like us they must use radio waves and such to transfer info.... Or do they all know something we dont and have a very good reason to keep quiet.
That has a really obvious answer. Let me throw a few numbers.
1) How long have we had radio? Let's say 100 years.
2) How long does it take to reach other stars at light speed? Between 4 and millions of years (depending on the star).
3) How old is the universe? About 14 billion years, which leaves say 9 billion years for life to have cropped up.
4) Is there a better way of communicating other than radio? Possibly.
So for us to have detected signals, the timing of other species using radio would have to have been absolutely perfect. 100 years either side and we'd miss it totally. 100 years out of 9 billion is nothing. So small in comparison that it's not even noticeable. Life can appear and vanish very quickly :) Plus, we're only monitoring a very very small section of our sky. We can't even see most of our own galaxy, let alone have the accuracy to pick up anything like faint radio from others. I very much doubt that we'll have contact with other intelligent life for hundreds (thousands even) of years, assuming we don't find a way to move around very quickly :) Getting a colony off this planet would be a good start, so there's less chance of the whole race being wiped out by some event.
-
That is a true point but not as simple as it appears,
100 years either side and we'd miss it totally
Radio waves have a handy knack of bouncing all over the place so it would be seemingly possible to atleast pick up on the stray signals. This would lead to a signal sent during that 100 year sweet-spot being bounced around for millenia.
I would really expect to see some sort of cosmic interference that was decipherable in some way. infact it doesnt even need to be deciphered, just not random.
The one obvious argument I can see is from your last point,
4) Is there a better way of communicating other than radio? Possibly.
The answer to that is yes, focused LASERs are a much more effective way of transmitting data, that is if you dont want others to recieve it.
-
I think you underestimate the size of space :) A deflection of 0.0000000001 radians (smaller even) would mean the difference between the signal missing us by a million miles or getting it. Plus, the signal will degrade a lot over thousands of years, especially if it's hitting a lot of things (also radio can be absorbed by objects, not just deflected).
Yes, I've heard of testing being done between space craft (one near Venus I think) and earth where the communication is by laser. It would make more sense for advanced species (because any out there are highly unlikely to be at the same level as us technologically, most certainly more advanced) to use lasers to communicate.
-
I'd have to say this is a VERY interesting thread, i mean the most interesting thread i've seen since being on this board.
Extraterestrial life boggles the mind, and yet now people are thinking it as common as Gravity.
What can i say that hasn't already been said,
Well i can say this, the one thing Idoru failed to mention was the size of the Planet, Regardless if the planet has Water or not, or even looks exactly like earth, if it's size is too big... then we lose, Too much gravity and that will ruin the chance for any life to form.
And distance from the Star is another KEY factor in determining Life, If you notice, Earth is Precicely the Perfect distance away from the Sun, for life to grow.
We notice planets like Mars who are a bit off, an even with the presence of water, we do not see life, or signs of it.
We see planets closer such as Mercury and Venus who are too scorching hot for any DNA, RNA, or Single celled organisms to survive.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So just with those two factors alone:
Size of planet, and distance from the sun, We probably cut the majority of candidates for planets with life.
And EVEN if it pases these 2 tests, we still have to take into account the CO2-Oxygen factor, as well as presence of water, as well as a myriad of other circumstances.
I have to analyze life twice a week for 2 hours, and the complexity of it IS marveling, and i understand we have Found life in the arctic, and in Deep sea vents; i mean i've studied it lol.
But There are soo many factors that are just unnavoidable for life to get around.
I think we have a one of a kind Gem here, this Earth.
Anyone who disagrees with me, i challenge them to find me one other like this, thus far we've found close comparisons, but no clear matches.
~~Datruth
-
Anyone who disagrees with me, i challenge them to find me one other like this, thus far we've found close comparisons, but no clear matches.
Okay, well, you've just challenged the entire world to continue doing what they are already doing :P I think people have already explained how we are only analyzing tiny points within our own galaxy at this time - and there may be billions of galaxies. No one is arguing over the complexity or beauty of life, but we definitely cannot be the only planet with the Goldilocks zone. It's mathematical inevitability.
-
Datruth; I think what people are saying is... all we know is life as we know it :) It's quite possible for other forms of life to spring up which work differently to us, and which can survive in far far different conditions. Life is incredibly good at adapting, and even if the only possible way for intelligent life to exist is as a carbon based CO2-Oxygen needing species (which I highly doubt), I think that the chance of there being at least 1 (only 1 is needed remember) other intelligent species in the whole universe is very high, simply because the numbers point in favour of that. Even if only one out of every 100 billion stars has a earth (that's a huge number of stars btw), then there's going to be or have been or will be millions of life forms out there.
-
Anyone who disagrees with me, i challenge them to find me one other like this, thus far we've found close comparisons, but no clear matches.
Okay, well, you've just challenged the entire world to continue doing what they are already doing :P I think people have already explained how we are only analyzing tiny points within our own galaxy at this time - and there may be billions of galaxies. No one is arguing over the complexity or beauty of life, but we definitely cannot be the only planet with the Goldilocks zone. It's mathematical inevitability.
Thank you for reminding me of a great book that i was own
The God Hypothesis, Discovering Design in our "Just Right" Goldilocks Universe.
(http://images.bestwebbuys.com/muze/books/70/0742513270.jpg)
It actually gives you mathematical formulas to worth with as well as showing you the amount of work it takes to create life.
And Excellent Point Xordan, we don't know the limits of life, for all we know, there could be life living in ways we'd have though impossible.
~~Datruth
-
That book, isnt that creationistic? :-\
Anyway, I'm sure there's life out there, but the universe is so vast and travel/communication so slow that we'll probably never find alien life unless we invent some kind of warp engine.
-
*MIBs are spotted invading lordraleigh's house...
Not sure about it. But I witnessed twice strange lights in the sky that moved ridiculously faster to be human planes and in too different patterns to be falling starts and also I saw one of those cigar-shaped UFOs once. In my opinion, if aliens really exist, the governments across the world wouldn't be very willing to let us know and probably made a conspiracy to cover up their existence.
The Conspiracy is REAL: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/mj12.html
and here is the official site of the Majestic Twelve: http://www.mj12.com
(It usually have as information: "we neither confirm nor deny" .... "classified" .... "classified" X-/ )
Anyway, the probability of we being totally alone in the universe is null... it is ridiculously vast(if not infinite) so even the small possibility of a planet having conditions to bring life becomes much larger...
-
It is great to see the Ideas being discussed here :thumbup:
As has been pointed out, life does not have to conform to earthly standards to exsist. First lets look at our "laws" of our planet. Our known to be fact laws have changed with our understanding of our environment. It was law that the earth was flat at one point in history, it was law that the earth was the centre of the universe, and the list goes on. Basicly all our laws are still just theories based on our limited knowledge of what is possible and what isnt. Our most intelligent scientists still say somethings are impossible, even when they are proven wrong, simply because they go agianst their accepted laws..
This is an example
Right click this link and save as to your desktop or whereever. A short demo of the cell. No electrolysis plates, only concentric TUBES of t304 steel. no electrolytes just tap water...works with distilled water as well believe it or not. in a pasta jar. 7 cells inside but only 1 hooked up for this demo. about 20v input and only about 2 amps. potential to run an engine on water...not hydrogen, but water.
http://www.thequantumrealm.com/celltest.avi
If this gas is isolated, it is impolosive. If mixed with outside air, then explosive. This is NOT electrolysis and is not within the realm of Faraday's law of electrolysis. I'm pumping unidirectional dc high frequency impulses into the water. The electrons absorb the potential and crank the atoms to higher energy states and it takes on the form of a vapor but is still a fully INTACT water molecule.
And this,
Check out this video:
http://www.thequantumrealm.com/bedini-sg.wmv
Brushless, pulsed dc motor from a sony reel to reel. 4 coils every 90 degrees.
input is 2 X 12v gel cell batts for 24v input. each is about 1.6ah. The ampmeter
is on 10 amp scale but will only go to 1 amp input and you can see input voltage
drops on the batt bank of course since drawing a load.
BUT...you see the amps go up, 200ma, 500ma, 800ma, then 1amp at 5000rpm.
THEN...you see the amps start going backwards and the input voltage starts
climbing back up and by the time it is at 10000rpm, the input amp is only 200ma.
So, 1000ma input for 5000rpm but only 200ma for 10,000 rpm???
It is NOT because of momentum reducing the input requirement. You can see
that the input drops very quickly under FAST ACCELERATION and not after
it gets up to speed and the input drops a little.
After about 5000rpm, the circuit kicks into RESONANCE and instead of the
electromagnetic coils being charged NORTH to repel NORTH magnet on the
rotor...INSTEAD, the speed gets so fast that the NORTH charge on the coils
ATTRACTS the SCALAR SOUTH field in between the magnets.
so, from repelling mode to attracting mode.
It takes work to have an electromagnet get charged to repel an opposing magnet
because the charging of the coil has to work against a like field.
But, when the south field that the north charge is attracted to is not only not
resistance to the coil but a negative resistance that helps to actively pull it out
of the coil. At this point, the magnets on the rotor ADD energy back to the circuit
and you can see the input amps drop backwards towards zero and the input
voltage on the battery climbs back up.
Realistically, the energizer is about 99% efficient..the input battery will eventually
go down but takes a long time. BUT...the output is pure voltage potential, pure
dc impulses...pure longitudinal impulses versus transverse waves and that output
can be absorbed by water molecules or can be absorbed by a dead battery.
Another example of what was thought impossible: http://www.cheniere.org/
There are many more examples around, you just have to look. When a theory is made into law, it is reshearched on a exact course of thinking and all reshearch is to prove the theory according to laws accepted as trueth. I would be willing to wager anything that most of our quantum physics laws and our laws of the univers will change once again as our knowledge increases. Einstien had many theories that have yet to be proven simply because no one has been able to have the same mindset and understandings that he had. The same can be said of Tessler (Tesla).
If we have the ability to consider things with an open-minded skeptisism, we will be able to understand many many more possibilitys. When Tessler (tesla) invented the radio ( yes Tesla not marconi) no one could have evn imagined how the transfer of information would change in the future, but today we are able to do the impossible by yesterdays standards.
Fermi Paradox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_Paradox) has been used by people on both views of ET, it is an interesting read.
/me walks of still mumbeling
Editted to add: This (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4250355609710916273&sourceid=docidfeed&hl=en) video is just under 2 hours, although I dont agree with a lot of Greens views, it does open a lot of new questions.
-
I hope you guys have read my last posts about why the size of the universe doesn't potentially matter.
It could be tiny, or 100 lightyears big, all that matters is the number of Potential Candidates for life.
You all saying that the numbers are so high, High enough to guarentee life.......
Is like me saying, there are so many oxygen Atoms, that one of them Must turn to Gold when put inside a brown paper box.
It just doesn't work, Putting an oxygen atom in a brown paper box will not make it turn to gold.
But datruth...... There are SOO many oxygen atoms, you couldn't have possibly tested them all, the number is just sooo vast.
And who knows what Oxygen Atoms are capable of, our understanding of them has changed many times over the years.
Who are we to say we know all the inner workings of Gold and what it's about, i truly believe that an oxygen atom can be turned into Gold in a brown paper box, you just need the right atom.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You see what i mean, it's all speculation, and false hope.
I hoped too at one time.... i admit... i was actually completely sure, that is untill a took a few more classes in College and it dawned on me.
We know what it takes for life to survive, we've tested it, and if we want to find life elsewhere, we need certain factors in the making of the planet.
Thus far we've found no planet with all the factors we need for life, and that's a fact.
Even missing one factor, such as distance from the Star, will ruin the whole planet.
Saying life can thrive on Mercury, or Mars, is again false hope, we've seen the devestating effects of nearness to the sun as well as the effects of planets whose vacinity has been too far from the sun.
And having Water alone on a planet isn't the end all be all, because as we know Mars has Water, and yet there is no life.
I don't mean to burst your bubble, or my own, I Want intelligent life, ANY life, it doesn't matter to me.
But i also want World Peace, and I know both are equally unlikely.
~~Datruth
-
it is possible to move faster than light speed! you have to use anti matter. its a process where protons or nuetrons are speeded up to very high speeds and then slam into something and create an antimatter or something like that... i was a little High on life :devil: and i saw it on the history channel and looked it up at a library, i cant remember everything it was years ago but something about there is a .05 percent rate of transfering matter into antimatter, and they used the example of a car. we can only make at the most like 1 penny worht of gas, it would take 400 years as of right now to fill that gas tank up to travel light speed. there is a building in washington DC that speeds the protons like in a 3 mile circle underground to speed them up. if they could find a way to speed up the process and increase the percentage they could travel faster that light speed, but from what they explained... it would take a few masters to understand how work with it.
-
Datruth, the example is a bit skewed, to say the least. I don't know how many planets have actually been found, but I don't think that more than a couple of star systems have been examined for planets. And while noone has as of yet found an oxygen atom changing into gold, thus noone knows if it is possible (Edit: except if you artificially fuse it to the right amount of protons and neutrons, obviously /Edit), we all know that life is possible. Given then that we can't even make out indvividual star systems in the many distant galaxies, how can you even think of claiming that a sufficient percentage of planets have been examined to disprove possibility of life?
Also, noone as of yet knows if Mars harbours life. Noone knows if it may have done so in the past. Yes, life does need certain properties, and Mars doesn't have them. Not anymore, anyway. It is possible that Mars once had a decent atmosphere containing water, even had oceans. Thus life may have formed, even if it only got to bacteria before Mars lost it's ability to support it. If that is true, then we'd have not only life somewhere in the universe, we'd have had life on two adjacent planets.
Even if not, the presence of both mars and venus shows one thing: that it's certainly not uncommon for planets to be of the right size and at the right distance. So they both are a tad off, but let only one comet hit one of them, and they may change distance and move where earth is ATM. There are plenty of those comets around the universe.
It is assumed that the moon stabilises earth and thus makes life possible. The oon is also assumed to have come from such a collision. It certainly is improbable, but then again, give it not only an innumerable amount of options (AKA, solar systems), but also close to infinite time, and I'm certain that once in a while life will appear. Given that there are galaxies which are just forming, and also galaxies that have existed for ages before this one formed, noone can know what the solar systems will be or have been in the past. Maybe life existed in one of the old galaxies, even, but doesn't anymore? The history of life on earth as we know it is only quite brief compared to the universe.
Also, radio signals as used for everyday communication would get extremely weak when far away from earth. Life would have to be pretty close to this solar system in order to send radio that could be received here AFAICS.
Regarding Tesla, I think he had noticed that resonance is the key to efficiency anywhere. Todays technology rarely makes use of resonance at all. A tuned circuit poses almost no resistance to a signal, thus one would think power transmission could be much more efficient if resonant lines were used. In fact, Tesla suggested the use of high frequency power transmission, and I suspect that it was for exactly this purpose, as well as the fact that with high frequencies, transformers can be significantly smaller. That's BTW why computers use switching power supplies instead of normal ones.
However, the power industry had by that time just finished the adoption of AC transmission (before that, it was DC). IIRC, that also was Tesla's concept. Thus they didn't want to yet again ditch all their equipment. Understandable, but sad, as todays world is stuck with clumsy low frequency power transmission.
This technology you're referring to must be the EM weapon ("death ray") that he allegedly had developed. Teslas Wardenclyffe Tower never was finished, and never even in operation. However, the magnifying transmitter that it was supposed to be is still a bit of a mystery, so it may or may not have caused the Tunguska explosion, be it as weapon test or accident. I think Tunguska was something else, though. Transmitting energy is one thing, but focusing it in one place is something else entirely, especially when you only have one single nondirectional transmitter, so you can't even rely on interference. I might be wrong there, though, since Tesla obviously used different mechanism which may easily have different characteristics and effects.
The free enery things have crept up very often as of yet. One time it's magnets, then it's static electricity, then it's water. I've seen several websites claiming to have a working free energy source, and that it was ready for mass production "by the end of next year". Oddly, I haven't been able to purchase one yet. So if they'd actually have developed one, and managed to keep their website up so long (long enough for me and loads of other people to stumble accross it), wouldn't they also have managed to finish the thing? Of course the governments could have seized the stuff, but if that'd have happened, why would they wait so long? It's surely possible. And if it is the case, then I find it quite humorous that it obviously was the greed of the inventors that enabled the governments to steal it. Had they provided a full disclosure (not the usual stuff that leaves out the crucial parts), and had they posted a link on for example slashdot (even if it stayed online for only a few hours), then there'd have been no way for the knowledge to ever disappear again. Maybe they got scared by the prospect of giving everybody a device to annihilate earth... though in this case, they all choose an interesting point for that realisation. No, I am pretty sure these are fakes.
As for the motor, I have yet to look at it, but I doubt that it manages to retain this performance when a load is connected to it. A motor that doesn't move anything besides itself isn't exactly useful, and usually the power to drive the load us usually much greater than that required to move the motor itself, so whether or not the motor itself puts a strain on the power source doesn't really matter in terms of efficiency. If it converts 99% of it's input power to movement of it's load, then that would be something different entirely.
Edit: I've never heard that antimatter could move faster than normal matter. AFAIK, antimatter didn't have any properties different from matter (except the "polarity" so to speak, obviously).
Edit 2: Oh, BTW: if you were an alien lifeform, capable of movement through the universe to rwach and observe earth, would you not do your best to avoid humanity's attention at all costs? Seriously, humanity is more than PG-18 to intelligent life.
Given that humanity is on the verge of annihilating itself, if life on another planet didn't take radically different directions (meaning more or less a very different concept for nature's and evolution's workings), it very likely wouldn't have developed to the point where it had the option to contact earth before blowing itself up or just damaging it's host planet beyond habitability.
-
Meteorite may hold secret to life outside earth (http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2006/11/30/meteorite-yukon.html) for what it is worth.
-
Actually, this may be earth's messenge to outer space as well... once mankind blows itself up, pieces of earth will journey through space for ages and possibly will land on another earth to suggest that there once was life elsewhere.
It's even possible that such a meteorite has happened to earth and was the carrier of the life that afterwards developed. Maybe by blowing earth up, mankind will therefore manage to colonise another planet? Given that life's sole plan is to spread, this might be a perfectly logical decision.
-
I've never heard that antimatter could move faster than normal matter. AFAIK, antimatter didn't have any properties different from matter (except the "polarity" so to speak, obviously).
You are correct about that.
Things CANNOT travel faster than the speed of light.
the only reasonable (IMO) method of traversing vast distances basically come down to the use of Wormholes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormholes)
Personally I wouldnt be particularly willing to be the 1st to try and traverse such an anomaly.
it is possible to move faster than light speed! you have to use anti matter. its a process where protons or nuetrons are speeded up to very high speeds and then slam into something and create an antimatter or something like that...
I believe you are refering to a particle accelerator, these cannot accelerate particles past the speed of light, primarily because its impossible to do with any technique and secondly because the accelerator uses magnetism to propel the particles at higher and Higher velocities, considering that magnetism is an elecrtromagnetic energy and has a maximum velocity of the speed of light then it wouldnt work from our perspective...... but then the law of relativety says that if you were to travel at 99% the speed of light and someone stationary was to shine a laser beam in your direction of travel you would see the light pass you at the speed of light relative to your own speed...... Relativety makes my head hurt :'(
-
Actually tachyons are said to travel faster than light although their existence has not been proven.
-
but then the law of relativety says that if you were to travel at 99% the speed of light and someone stationary was to shine a laser beam in your direction of travel you would see the light pass you at the speed of light relative to your own speed...... Relativety makes my head hurt :'(
That's because time will be passing at a different for you, the light and for the shiner of the laser. It does work out kinda xD
And tachyons are strange (if they exist) because they can't travel slower than c.
-
Doesnt your time stop relative to those who are stationary? Time slows down as you approach the speed of light, eventually stopping? (for you, not the universe)
-
Doesnt your time stop relative to those who are stationary? Time slows down as you approach the speed of light, eventually stopping? (for you, not the universe)
Well nothing is stationary. A big part of relativity is that there's no way to tell who's moving away from what at what speed, only what's moving relative to another. Same with time, your time slows down relative to the time of the object you're comparing with, and it would theoretically stop at light speed.
-
your time slows down relative to the time of the object you're comparing with, and it would theoretically stop at light speed.
yup, thats what I meant by:
Doesnt your time stop relative to those who are stationary?
I didnt follow it up particularly well with my second sentance lol