It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Where are the aliens?

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kojiro
a reply to: tanka418

Okay, you go show me an experiment of someone frying a person with a radio. Prove your theories. Put it into practice. Because frankly, if the frequency gets high enough, the radio wave is no longer a radio wave, it is a microwave. These are different spectral bands.


ROFLMAO!!!

And after all of that; it is still only electromagnetic radiation.

Have you ever noticed how trees, walls of buildings, even you cast a shadow? That is those objects blocking light. If it were not for the diffusion provided by the atmosphere it would be easier to see, but, I'm surprised you didn't pay attention in science class, nor make your own observation regarding this.

But if you want an experiment; get a heavy strip f cloth, one that is opaque, tie it around your head so that it covers your eyes.

Here is my scientific prediction; you can't "see" anything. The reason is that light is blocked from your eyes. In the same way interstellar dust will block light from other sources. This blocking will occur at ay frequency that is high enough to prevent penetration, and will be highly dependent on the material. This is the primary reason that lasers, and light in general can't be used effectively in technological communications. Lower frequencies, like microwave on the other hand can penetrate most materials, thus a dust cloud won't disrupt anything. The best part is that the "radio" propagates exactly the same as the laser (they are both electromagnetic radiation).




posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: taoistguy

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: taoistguy

The usefulness of liquid hydrocarbon fuel is based on universal chemistry.

If you had to pick out a design for safe portable energy and given the periodic table & chemistry textbook, you'd come up with kerosene.


what do we know of universal chemistry???


Did you know that science in general, and, quite specifically chemistry; is indeed "universal"?

Earth is not a special place where the laws, axioms, theories, etc. of science are different from everywhere else.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 08:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: taoistguy

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: taoistguy

The usefulness of liquid hydrocarbon fuel is based on universal chemistry.

If you had to pick out a design for safe portable energy and given the periodic table & chemistry textbook, you'd come up with kerosene.


what do we know of universal chemistry??? Did you know that science in general, and, quite specifically chemistry; is indeed "universal"?

Earth is not a special place where the laws, axioms, theories, etc. of science are different from everywhere else.



Though your logic may sound good, we haven't been, everywhere else, to document similarities or differences in chemistry or physics. We can only ever assume they are the same, until it is proven, scientifically, and that means to test your theory, somewhere else. There may be a entirely different class of elements out there that defy our knowledge or understanding.


edit on 19-7-2015 by All Seeing Eye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

So tell me, how did Lockheed Martin do this with a laser?



How is this guy doing this?



After all, if all it takes to block a laser is dust or a sheet of paper, these acts should be impossible, right?



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

Ever wonder why infrared sky studies are made? It's because infrared penetrates dust clouds quite well.
Ever hear of infrared lasers? Of course, there are masers too, but you run into bandwidth difficulties.


cat.inist.fr...



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: taoistguy

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: taoistguy

The usefulness of liquid hydrocarbon fuel is based on universal chemistry.

If you had to pick out a design for safe portable energy and given the periodic table & chemistry textbook, you'd come up with kerosene.


what do we know of universal chemistry??? Did you know that science in general, and, quite specifically chemistry; is indeed "universal"?

Earth is not a special place where the laws, axioms, theories, etc. of science are different from everywhere else.



Though your logic may sound good, we haven't been, everywhere else, to document similarities or differences in chemistry or physics. We can only ever assume they are the same, until it is proven, scientifically, and that means to test your theory, somewhere else. There may be a entirely different class of elements out there that defy our knowledge or understanding.



Your right, there definitely are elements out there where the stars of other systems are much larger than ours, so that super heavy elements with stable isotopes can be made by the star, unlike our solar system which can only get up to the unstable radioactive heavy elements. I have spoken to a few physicists who feel this is a given.

Having said that, I'm sure for the most part that the laws we know of that are here would be everywhere as far as what is found in nature, and lots of surprises as well.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: taoistguy

originally posted by: mbkennel
a reply to: taoistguy

The usefulness of liquid hydrocarbon fuel is based on universal chemistry.

If you had to pick out a design for safe portable energy and given the periodic table & chemistry textbook, you'd come up with kerosene.


what do we know of universal chemistry??? Did you know that science in general, and, quite specifically chemistry; is indeed "universal"?

Earth is not a special place where the laws, axioms, theories, etc. of science are different from everywhere else.



Though your logic may sound good, we haven't been, everywhere else, to document similarities or differences in chemistry or physics. We can only ever assume they are the same, until it is proven, scientifically, and that means to test your theory, somewhere else. There may be a entirely different class of elements out there that defy our knowledge or understanding.



Ya know, given the limited number of sub-atomic particles, the number of "ways" they can combine is also kind of limited. Thus the manner, way, that these particles interact with the universe can easily be "mapped". This allows us to know, with a very high degree of confidence, just how the "Chemical" world works, regardless of it location. The same goes for Physics, Mathematics, etc.

When we speak of "Laws of Physics" or science; we are talking about immutable properties of the Universe that can not, do not change based on time frame or location.

If you continue to have difficulties I might suggest you take a first year Chemistry course...you might try our local community college.

@Posthuman....you are wrong on all levels and would seriously benefit from the first year of Physics. Again, try your local community college.

Do you remember the air borne laser the Air Force tried to build? Do you know "WHY" it failed? Do you know what happens when a light beam enters a dust cloud?

Obviously, you haven't thought this through!



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 11:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: tanka418

Ever wonder why infrared sky studies are made? It's because infrared penetrates dust clouds quite well.


So...what happens to any data applied to the infrared? What does all the diffusion due to dust do the data impressed upon the laser?



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418




What does all the diffusion due to dust do the data impressed upon the laser?

Not a whole lot. Re: the link I posted.
The signal to noise ratio is maintained well within usable limits. But even detecting a carrier would go a long way to determining an intelligent source. No need to decode it.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 11:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: tanka418




What does all the diffusion due to dust do the data impressed upon the laser?

Not a whole lot. Re: the link I posted.
The signal to noise ratio is maintained well within usable limits. But even detecting a carrier would go a long way to determining an intelligent source. No need to decode it.


Perhaps...depending on frequency. However, the ability to decode to is still a design consideration of ET, thus, he may not use a system like due to issues of that nature. Plus, the use of lasers provides no benefit over lower frequencies.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418



Plus, the use of lasers provides no benefit over lower frequencies.

I guess.
Not if you don't care about bandwidth.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: tanka418



Plus, the use of lasers provides no benefit over lower frequencies.

I guess.
Not if you don't care about bandwidth.


Couple of things...bandwidths like what would be available are of little use...and practical systems can be built at lower frequencies, that will exhibit fewer operating issues.

Your linked paper did not address issues like I was referring to. The distortions to the signal and the resulting errors introduced into the data stream could easily become untenable. Making the use of such systems unsuitable for communications.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418



Your linked paper did not address issues like I was referring to. The distortions to the signal and the resulting errors introduced into the data stream could easily become untenable.

Incorrect.

Previous calculations of laser transmission efficiency are shown to be incorrect because an essentially lossless laser transmission system is feasible and star noise can be rendered inconsequential. New perceptions regarding the feasibility of laser technologies, together with reassessments of signal-to-noise considerations, indicate both the feasibility and desirability of optical interstellar transmissions, particularly at infrared and visible wavelengths.

cat.inist.fr...



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

I'm still waiting for your experiment of something getting baked by a radio wave. Oh dear, radio waves are going all the way through us right now. We may be dead already!



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 01:14 AM
link   
If we are to believe in evolution, or, at the very least, intelligent design, I think circumstances are this:

Lots of carbon-based civilizations have both risen and fallen in the history of this galaxy. This is due to a variety of reasons - self-destruction, inability to propagate, lack of ingenuity leading to technological advancement, and so on.

Meanwhile, a select "few" - a couple dozen, maybe - civilizations have evolved into or combined with silicon-based life. Their means of communication and way of living are indecipherable to us, and they either don't know we exist, or don't care. They operate on a level of existence completely different with the way we live and the way we think. They are, for all intents and purposes, immortal, save for some who decide to free themselves from their physical bodies.

There are a few civilizations in our galaxy that have reached the same stage as us: They are sending exploratory probes, they are sending messages to the stars, and they are listening. But these civilizations are so far away from each other that they - we included - will never hear from each other. All that will remain will be a faint whisper of civilizations that once were.



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kojiro
a reply to: tanka418

I'm still waiting for your experiment of something getting baked by a radio wave. Oh dear, radio waves are going all the way through us right now. We may be dead already!


Wow...you really know how to deny ignorance!!!!!

Try this: take a chicken breast. Place it in your microwave oven. Set the timer for 120 minutes. Start the machine...walk away.

Return in 2 hours. and inspect your chicken.

Now...report via post here on the condition of your chicken, include images...before and after.

Next...go find a community college and enroll...that is IF you are old enough.

So now; that's two experiments I've given you.


edit on 20-7-2015 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
cat.inist.fr...


This is real nice an all. But, I try to find links that are both working, AND in an appropriate language...like English ...as differentiated from French.

It also help quite a lot IF the page given has more than links to a "HTTP: 500" error...it appears that no only does your paper not address the real science behind the technology, but, they can't even get their servers to work properly.

You sir; like the others who find it necessary to argue something they know nothing about; are in serious need of an education.

Seriously man, instead of picking inappropriate articles, that seem to illustrate your point, you might try actually educating yourself on the subject...at least to the point where you can fake it intelligently.

What you are doing here is adding to the level of ignorance of the others...One could almost ask; "why you are trying to mislead everyone?" Then ya have to wonder IF it is deliberate...



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Phage
cat.inist.fr...


This is real nice an all. But, I try to find links that are both working, AND in an appropriate language...like English ...as differentiated from French.

It also help quite a lot IF the page given has more than links to a "HTTP: 500" error...it appears that no only does your paper not address the real science behind the technology, but, they can't even get their servers to work properly.

You sir; like the others who find it necessary to argue something they know nothing about; are in serious need of an education.

IMO, you should look to your own education.
Specifically, the difference between an abstract (free) and a paper in a scientific journal (paywall.)

Harte



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
IMO, you should look to your own education.
Specifically, the difference between an abstract (free) and a paper in a scientific journal (paywall.)

Harte


So now we have to pay some third party to deny ignorance?!!?

You need to get a grip man...this "requirement" invalidates the purpose of the scientific journal. and makes a laughing stock of the whole "peer review" process...not that it's particularly valid anyway...




edit on 20-7-2015 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

Ya know, given the limited number of sub-atomic particles, the number of "ways" they can combine is also kind of limited. Thus the manner, way, that these particles interact with the universe can easily be "mapped". This allows us to know, with a very high degree of confidence, just how the "Chemical" world works, regardless of it location. The same goes for Physics, Mathematics, etc.
What Universe are you referring to? Ours? And what is the name of our universe?


If we do, in fact, live in a multiverse, with multiple universes arising out of the Big Bang, how many are there? Andrei Linde and Vitaly Vanchurin at Stanford University have been working to calculate a number, based on quantum fluctuations in the early state of the universe. Their tally indicates that there are at least 10^10^10^7 universes out there. The human brain, however, could not possibly distinguish between all of those universes, however, as it is only capable of 10^10^16 configurations.
io9.com...

How many galaxies are in a universe?


According to the best estimates of astronomers there are at least one hundred billion galaxies in the observable universe. They’ve counted the galaxies in a particular region, and multiplied this up to estimate the number for the whole universe.
www.physics.org...

As you can see by the above, the odds for your conclusion being valid become as significant as a fly's fart on a windy day, on Saturn.


If you continue to have difficulties I might suggest you take a first year Chemistry course...you might try our local community college.
Personally, I find the above to be complimentary in nature. I am not bound by the thinking of a system that is quite closed minded, as you have pointed out. I find the entire institution of "Higher" learning to be filled with the same corruption that has infiltrated every other aspect of life.


Obviously, you haven't thought this through!
Obviously.

When it is said that there can be no more, in essence you are ending other possibilities, and new ideas, new developments, new understandings, new knowledge. And that, is not in the human nature. We are a species of explorers, and that is what we will do till the end, regardless of what any "Institution" limits us to. Your "education" is what limits you.




top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join