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.

 

Was wondering, we always assume that UFO's are enormous, but..

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2006 @ 03:35 PM
link   
could they also be very tiny, like nano small more or less. So small that we possibly couldn't see them with our naked eyes, or with some shots people have taken, could it be a optical illusion that they appear bigger cause there so close to the lens.

Take this example loosely please, but say some planet that has a really heavy gravity (which i think would mean everything stays smaller than our planet since we have less gravity, correct me if i'm wrong please) evolved and traveled here or anywhere for that matter, would we really be looking for something like that?

Also maybe this is one of the many ways they spy and observe us without interfering, cause were always looking for something big. This might sounds nutty, but, i'm sure all of you have heard some much more bizarre things.

Curious to hear your opinions.




posted on May, 24 2006 @ 03:40 PM
link   
No, I don't think it sounds 'nutty' at all. In fact, I have often wondered if extra-terrestrials might not be extremely small. Perhaps they have visited us before but we squashed some thinking they were bugs.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I don’t think that is such a crazy hypothesis at all actually. There is no such thing as infinite smallness or infinite bigness. There can always be something smaller than the previous add infinity.

With how incredibly huge everything in the universe is compared to us such as galaxies and the like, it is often overlooked at how much there really could be at the subatomic level and beyond. Quite possibly entire universes not unlike our own.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Rent the movie "Batteries Not Included".

If I remember correctly, it was one of Speilberg's few "duds", but a while back....and kind of in keeping with your mentioned theory......



posted on May, 25 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Rent the movie "Batteries Not Included".

If I remember correctly, it was one of Speilberg's few "duds", but a while back....and kind of in keeping with your mentioned theory......


Mmmm im sure i saw that movie, half good half sucky, lol, they were pretty small but, i was thinking smaller, way smaller. but thats a good comparison.



posted on May, 25 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   
I have often wondered if aliens could view us with machines that are too small to see. I think if they can move near the speed of light then they wouldn't need to necessarily be that small, they could move faster than our eye can see. I wonder if that is the case?



posted on May, 25 2006 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr X
I have often wondered if aliens could view us with machines that are too small to see. I think if they can move near the speed of light then they wouldn't need to necessarily be that small, they could move faster than our eye can see. I wonder if that is the case?


Thats a good way of seeing it also, i wonder if the same rules for speed and distance is the same as lets say for an example a fly or a small toy car that they claim that can do 100MPH for its size

if they are smaller does one foot equal there one foot or is there a whole conversion that needs to be done



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join