Pentagon releases UFO videos

[jammies]

There are many aspects of reality, both natural and artificial, that engender a sense of wonder in me. Think about the Sun burning for almost 5 billion years, for just one example - and did you know if the sun was made of wood and was putting out the same amount of energy, it would only be able to burn for 3000 years? Think about the eye evolving independently many times and in many different ways(which, btw, is an argument for convergent evolution mandating similar solutions to similar problems faced by all biological organisms). Consider that we have created artificial elements never seen in the natural world, we've made entirely new kinds of matter.

Or, in the human realm, think about how amazing was Sarah Biffin, a 19th century artist who learned to paint despite having no arms or legs; how Slawomir Rawicz escaped the gulag in Siberia and walked four thousand miles to freedom in India, crossing the Gobi and the Himalayas on the way; and the astonishing coincidence of Newton and Leibniz independently and contemporaneously discovering the calculus.

There are countless well-grounded ideas and facts to marvel at without the far-fetched vapidity of UFOs or ghosts or healing crystals or whatever other extremely improbable popular garbage people glom onto instead. Look around you, the world is a beautiful orb of real magic, and believing in pseudo-plausible smoke dreams doesn't make you open-minded, it just means you lack the imagination to go find something real to admire.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blankall

Another thought.

Maybe highly advanced civilizations aren't as aggressive and warlike as we think. If that was the case, they'd never be able to get over their own internal struggles. A species that has a natural tendency to expand to the point it exhausts resources and needs to keep on expanding might not be able to develop to the point where they can create interstellar technologies.

Perhaps advanced aliens, via process of selection, are benevolent and see the inherent positives of allowing other intelligent species to develop: Diversity of thought, experience, technology, biology, etc...

Perhaps they’re benevolent because they never required anything else to evolve and see no value in anything to do with us but don’t have any ability or interest to do anything with us in the first place.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by ripTDR

So I guess I'm one of those downers that thinks nothing has been here. I don't believe nothing with mass can travel faster than light, which is the biggest barrier for interstellar travel IMO, but it got me thinking...


What if we created a warp drive and could travel faster than light? Is there orders of magnitude faster than light? Is it instantaneous? Can you see where you are going? How do you know where to stop or slow down because you are going faster than light? And this is just for galactic travel. What about intergalactic travel? You should be able travel galaxies going faster than light. What about the space expanding between the galaxies. Now you have to contend with that.



Another one is wormholes. Lets say we can create one. Where do you create it to? How do you know where the destination opening is? How can you make it open relative to where you are were you make it go where you want?

Nothing travels faster than light period. Anything with mass cannot reach the speed of light without an infinite impute of energy. Infinite energy doesn't exist, so only massless objects (Ex photons) can travel at the speed of light. So in order to travel at lightspeed, you'd have to make yourself massless.

At the speed of light, time also stops for the object travelling at that speed. The observers continue to experience time. So if we travelled at light speed to a place that's 1 million light years away, we would perceive it as occurring without the passage of time. Meanwhile, anyone back on Earth would experience 1 million light years of time. Humanity wouldn't exist, in any recognizable form, by the time you got back.

So interstellar travel must involve not only the manipulation of space/speed but also time.

One of my thoughts was that if particles are just waves moving along a quantum field, perhaps it's not possible to create a wormhole, as you would need to unhinge those waves from the field their on and attach them to a different portion of the field. But maybe I'm thinking of particles and fields too much like beads on a string, and they don't actually exist like that. Maybe it's more like wave in a pool, so it's a question of finding a way to make those pools jump from one pool to another. I don't really know enough about the subject to comment.

[Jiggy_12]

Originally Posted by jammies

There are many aspects of reality, both natural and artificial, that engender a sense of wonder in me. Think about the Sun burning for almost 5 billion years, for just one example - and did you know if the sun was made of wood and was putting out the same amount of energy, it would only be able to burn for 3000 years? Think about the eye evolving independently many times and in many different ways(which, btw, is an argument for convergent evolution mandating similar solutions to similar problems faced by all biological organisms). Consider that we have created artificial elements never seen in the natural world, we've made entirely new kinds of matter.

Or, in the human realm, think about how amazing was Sarah Biffin, a 19th century artist who learned to paint despite having no arms or legs; how Slawomir Rawicz escaped the gulag in Siberia and walked four thousand miles to freedom in India, crossing the Gobi and the Himalayas on the way; and the astonishing coincidence of Newton and Leibniz independently and contemporaneously discovering the calculus.

There are countless well-grounded ideas and facts to marvel at without the far-fetched vapidity of UFOs or ghosts or healing crystals or whatever other extremely improbable popular garbage people glom onto instead. Look around you, the world is a beautiful orb of real magic, and believing in pseudo-plausible smoke dreams doesn't make you open-minded, it just means you lack the imagination to go find something real to admire.

Excellent points there. And its very possible to do both - be interested in this topic yet still marvel at all the incredible events, coincidences, and "miracles" that take place around us on Earth and in our universe.

However, don't you find this topic worth discussing? as regardless of where your needle lies on the "aliens are real" meter - there is a very real story happening here. And whichever way it ends up going...I think its worth paying attention to.

[ripTDR]

Originally Posted by blankall

Nothing travels faster than light period. Anything with mass cannot reach the speed of light without an infinite impute of energy. Infinite energy doesn't exist, so only massless objects (Ex photons) can travel at the speed of light. So in order to travel at lightspeed, you'd have to make yourself massless.

At the speed of light, time also stops for the object travelling at that speed. The observers continue to experience time. So if we travelled at light speed to a place that's 1 million light years away, we would perceive it as occurring without the passage of time. Meanwhile, anyone back on Earth would experience 1 million light years of time. Humanity wouldn't exist, in any recognizable form, by the time you got back.

So interstellar travel must involve not only the manipulation of space/speed but also time.

One of my thoughts was that if particles are just waves moving along a quantum field, perhaps it's not possible to create a wormhole, as you would need to unhinge those waves from the field their on and attach them to a different portion of the field. But maybe I'm thinking of particles and fields too much like beads on a string, and they don't actually exist like that. Maybe it's more like wave in a pool, so it's a question of finding a way to make those pools jump from one pool to another. I don't really know enough about the subject to comment.

This is why I'm skeptical about alien visitors. It's hard enough to contend with the speed of light problems, but to be able to jump from one pool of particle waves to another, like you say(and I realize your comment about not knowing enough) you would have to know what pool to jump to in the first place. How do you come up with a destination in space?

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

However, don't you find this topic worth discussing? as regardless of where your needle lies on the "aliens are real" meter - there is a very real story happening here. And whichever way it ends up going...I think its worth paying attention to.

No, this subject is only worth debunking. I do think it's highly likely aliens exist. it's just the idea that they are flying around America (and very infrequently elsewhere, for "reasons") playing peek-a-boo with the military and crashing into cornfields that is ridiculous. All the arguments in favour of UFOs being extraterrestrial and intelligent in origin bear the marks of conspiracy theory thinking and thus are as credible as flat earth, fake moon landings, and jewish space lasers.

I don't even find it very amusing anymore, it's just exhausting. Why do people insist on giving nonsense credence and reality their contempt? It's like they haven't gotten past the teenage phase where you smoke dope with your buddies and indulge each other's seemingly profound bs.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by jammies

No, this subject is only worth debunking. I do think it's highly likely aliens exist. it's just the idea that they are flying around America (and very infrequently elsewhere, for "reasons") playing peek-a-boo with the military and crashing into cornfields that is ridiculous. All the arguments in favour of UFOs being extraterrestrial and intelligent in origin bear the marks of conspiracy theory thinking and thus are as credible as flat earth, fake moon landings, and jewish space lasers.

I don't even find it very amusing anymore, it's just exhausting. Why do people insist on giving nonsense credence and reality their contempt? It's like they haven't gotten past the teenage phase where you smoke dope with your buddies and indulge each other's seemingly profound bs.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

If there's nothing else, let people have their discussion. It's not going to cease just for you and because you think it's ridiculous. Thinking it should is equally as childish.

A mature person who is truly past that adolescent, dope smoking phase can respect people with different views too and agree to disagree but not have this incessant need to continue to try to police any discussions that go on that clearly aren't for them with this attitude thar their view reigns supreme.

Do you maybe have a better, more productive way to spend your day, Mr. grown adult man?

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

"jammies" also probably wasn't the best username to pick if you want people to regard your posts as the words of a wise and sage adult.

[Jiggy_12]

Originally Posted by jammies

No, this subject is only worth debunking. I do think it's highly likely aliens exist. it's just the idea that they are flying around America (and very infrequently elsewhere, for "reasons") playing peek-a-boo with the military and crashing into cornfields that is ridiculous. All the arguments in favour of UFOs being extraterrestrial and intelligent in origin bear the marks of conspiracy theory thinking and thus are as credible as flat earth, fake moon landings, and jewish space lasers.

I don't even find it very amusing anymore, it's just exhausting. Why do people insist on giving nonsense credence and reality their contempt? It's like they haven't gotten past the teenage phase where you smoke dope with your buddies and indulge each other's seemingly profound bs.

Well I think debunking is an important part of this discussion. Because if we do end up ruling out aliens (or something similar) then, what are we left with? Did those 3 guys just lie under oath? Or are we dealing with advanced human made tech?

Either way it’s all part of the discussion. I just want to see the bottom of it

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

If there's nothing else, let people have their discussion. It's not going to cease just for you and because you think it's ridiculous. Thinking it should is equally as childish.

A mature person who is truly past that adolescent, dope smoking phase can respect people with different views to and agree to disagree but not have this incessant need to continue to try to police any discussions that go on that clearly aren't for them with this attitude thar their view reigns supreme.

Jammies didn’t request that the discussion cease nor did he try to police anyone like you’re doing now, he’s adding something to the conversation.

That OK with you?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by blankall

Another thought.

Maybe highly advanced civilizations aren't as aggressive and warlike as we think. If that was the case, they'd never be able to get over their own internal struggles. A species that has a natural tendency to expand to the point it exhausts resources and needs to keep on expanding might not be able to develop to the point where they can create interstellar technologies.

Perhaps advanced aliens, via process of selection, are benevolent and see the inherent positives of allowing other intelligent species to develop: Diversity of thought, experience, technology, biology, etc...

To be fair to humans, most of our existence has been a slog. The competition for resources was driven more by climate cycles and habitat changes for most of our existence. The resources available to us were relatively small. We adapted to meet the challenges, mainly by biologically selecting for intelligence and aggression. But like putting a starving person in front of a buffet, it's instinct to take what you can when you can get it. When we gain the ability to exploit new resources, we are driven to take advantage of it. It's the way our species has been able to survive in a world as dynamic as Earth. The agricultural revolution kicked it off, but it has really only been since the industrial revolution that we have needed to start considering the limitations of our nature. This requires social cooperating and social contracts to curb our natural tendencies in a way that reconciles with the carrying capacity of the planet. We are a post-natural animal at this point and we need to force adaptation to that reality, no different than how our species had to adapt to live through ice ages and interglacial periods.

It's possible that an advanced alien civilization evolved to be benevolent, or maybe becoming benevolent was a social ideal they adopted because it suited their post-natural existence.

One thing to keep in mind is that while competition, lack of resources, and adversity can lead to aggressive behaviour, as evident in numerous species on our planet, it is also one of the main driving factors of evolution. Without that, our planet likely would have never developed the biodiversity it has, which has given life forms here the resiliency to survive multiple mass extinction events. In a static world without competition, species would settle into their perfect niche and as long as they were surviving, there would be little evolutionary pressure to adapt to anything else. It's why an animal like crocodiles have been around longer than humans, but never had to become clever or adapt much. They found their static niche and settled in.

It makes me wonder what factors would drive evolution in the direction of being cleaver tool users if having to struggle for finding new resources wasn't a factor. The first tools humans developed were for extracting food sources while expanding into new habitats. The same things that made us an aggressive species, also drove our intelligence. Maybe it doesn't need to be that way, but we know for sure that it can be because we are proof of that.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

respect people with different views

Try respecting my viewpoint that belief in UFOs is asinine and misguided.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

To be fair to humans, most of our existence has been a slog. The competition for resources was driven more by climate cycles and habitat changes for most of our existence. The resources available to us were relatively small. We adapted to meet the challenges, mainly by biologically selecting for intelligence and aggression. But like putting a starving person in front of a buffet, it's instinct to take what you can when you can get it. When we gain the ability to exploit new resources, we are driven to take advantage of it. It's the way our species has been able to survive in a world as dynamic as Earth. The agricultural revolution kicked it off, but it has really only been since the industrial revolution that we have needed to start considering the limitations of our nature. This requires social cooperating and social contracts to curb our natural tendencies in a way that reconciles with the carrying capacity of the planet. We are a post-natural animal at this point and we need to force adaptation to that reality, no different than how our species had to adapt to live through ice ages and interglacial periods.

It's possible that an advanced alien civilization evolved to be benevolent, or maybe becoming benevolent was a social ideal they adopted because it suited their post-natural existence.

One thing to keep in mind is that while competition, lack of resources, and adversity can lead to aggressive behaviour, as evident in numerous species on our planet, it is also one of the main driving factors of evolution. Without that, our planet likely would have never developed the biodiversity it has, which has given life forms here the resiliency to survive multiple mass extinction events. In a static world without competition, species would settle into their perfect niche and as long as they were surviving, there would be little evolutionary pressure to adapt to anything else. It's why an animal like crocodiles have been around longer than humans, but never had to become clever or adapt much. They found their static niche and settled in.

It makes me wonder what factors would drive evolution in the direction of being cleaver tool users if having to struggle for finding new resources wasn't a factor. The first tools humans developed were for extracting food sources while expanding into new habitats. The same things that made us an aggressive species, also drove our intelligence. Maybe it doesn't need to be that way, but we know for sure that it can be because we are proof of that.

This all assumes that evolution is relevant to “intelligent” alien life.

[photon]

Originally Posted by ripTDR

Another one is wormholes. Lets say we can create one. Where do you create it to? How do you know where the destination opening is? How can you make it open relative to where you are were you make it go where you want?

Another problem with FTL is the whole idea of causality.. basically going faster than light breaks it and makes it easy to create paradoxes. What happens if you create a paradox? Does the universe prohibit actions which can lead to paradoxes simply with its basic structure (i.e. prohibiting FTL travel)?

Anyway on the idea of wormholes, I did read once the idea that causality problems with them could be avoided by wormhole "ends" have to start out at the same place in spacetime and then you'd have to drag one end out to where you'd want to go at conventional sub-light speeds. Then once there if you traversed the wormhole from point A to B at FTL or even instantaneous speeds because you're visiting the destination in your origin's frame of reference causality is safe.

I have no idea if that actually works math wise.. what happens if you had multiple wormholes starting in different places could you still arrange things to violate causality? It was interesting though.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

Well I think debunking is an important part of this discussion. Because if we do end up ruling out aliens (or something similar) then, what are we left with? Did those 3 guys just lie under oath? Or are we dealing with advanced human made tech?

Either way it’s all part of the discussion. I just want to see the bottom of it

Advanced human tech in my opinion is the most likely. You look at the comments about how fast aerospace advanced behind government doors. It’s the only answer that has potential to be explained with things that exist.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

To be fair to humans, most of our existence has been a slog. The competition for resources was driven more by climate cycles and habitat changes for most of our existence. The resources available to us were relatively small. We adapted to meet the challenges, mainly by biologically selecting for intelligence and aggression. But like putting a starving person in front of a buffet, it's instinct to take what you can when you can get it. When we gain the ability to exploit new resources, we are driven to take advantage of it. It's the way our species has been able to survive in a world as dynamic as Earth. The agricultural revolution kicked it off, but it has really only been since the industrial revolution that we have needed to start considering the limitations of our nature. This requires social cooperating and social contracts to curb our natural tendencies in a way that reconciles with the carrying capacity of the planet. We are a post-natural animal at this point and we need to force adaptation to that reality, no different than how our species had to adapt to live through ice ages and interglacial periods.

It's possible that an advanced alien civilization evolved to be benevolent, or maybe becoming benevolent was a social ideal they adopted because it suited their post-natural existence.

One thing to keep in mind is that while competition, lack of resources, and adversity can lead to aggressive behaviour, as evident in numerous species on our planet, it is also one of the main driving factors of evolution. Without that, our planet likely would have never developed the biodiversity it has, which has given life forms here the resiliency to survive multiple mass extinction events. In a static world without competition, species would settle into their perfect niche and as long as they were surviving, there would be little evolutionary pressure to adapt to anything else. It's why an animal like crocodiles have been around longer than humans, but never had to become clever or adapt much. They found their static niche and settled in.

It makes me wonder what factors would drive evolution in the direction of being cleaver tool users if having to struggle for finding new resources wasn't a factor. The first tools humans developed were for extracting food sources while expanding into new habitats. The same things that made us an aggressive species, also drove our intelligence. Maybe it doesn't need to be that way, but we know for sure that it can be because we are proof of that.

Humans are capable of striving to accomplish without the pressures you're talking about. I was just watching a YouTube video about a skateboarder attempting to replicate a trick. It took thousands of attempts to accomplish it. Similarly, humans can apply the same motivation to accomplish greater works. At a certain point a society can leave behind a violent competitive nature. They would then make great accomplishments and evolve for the purpose of furthering themselves, without the need destroy something else.

Technologies that would supply unlimited energy and food would likely be easier to attain than technologies that would allow for interstellar travel. So you could assume that an alien species visiting us may not be interested in harvesting resources.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Actually, us earthlings fly through thunderstorms all the time and its one of the most dangerous things you can do in a plane. There are hundreds to thousands of crashes that have resulted from lightning strikes taking out engines or damaging the integrity of the plane itself. Commercial carriers have multiple engines so are not at such a high as risk, but they still go down as a result of lightning damage. And that's running on strictly mechanical means. If your craft were driven based on electromagnetism or magnetic drives, then a lightning strike could be catastrophic to the system.

Do you even pretend to understand half of the bull#### that comes out of your mouth?

https://simpleflying.com/what-happen...t-by-lightning

While this may seem like an unpleasant experience, modern jetliners are designed with lightning strikes in mind. According to a 2018 TIME Magazine article, the last commercial plane crash directly caused by lightning occurred in 1967. Aircraft undergo specific lightning tests to ensure they can withstand hits as part of their certification.

Wikipedia has a whole 7 articles on crashes/incidents caused by lightning

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego...htning_strikes

[Fuzz]

Ya, but the recovered crashes were before 1967, so the aliens didn't get to integrate our anti-lightning tech until we had figured it out. Duh.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Ya, but the recovered crashes were before 1967, so the aliens didn't get to integrate our anti-lightning tech until we had figured it out. Duh.

Once our planes incorporate intergalactic travel tech, the anti-lightning tech may be incompatible and cripple it.

[Muta]

Jammies - what’s your opinion on the Gimbal/tic-tac videos released by the DoD, the whistleblower testimonies on the activity off the coasts with fighter jet interference, and the Congressional hearings that have recently happened?