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.

 

Undetectable Extraterrestrials? World-Leading Physicist Says They Could Exist in Undetectable Forms

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:07 PM
link   
www.dailygalaxy.com...




The intriguing remark was made by Lord Martin Rees, a leading cosmologist and astrophysicist who is the president of Britain’s Royal Society and astronomer to the Queen of England. Rees, who last month hosted the National Science Academy’s first conference on the possibility of alien life, said he believes the existence of extra terrestrial life may be beyond human understanding.


Great article, check it out


[edit on 28-3-2010 by Maddogkull]




posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   
And we still call them gods.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
But, by definition, couldn't anything exist in an undetectable form? It's not a very constructive claim. I could say God or dinosaurs or unicorns exist in undetectable forms. What can anyone do with such a claim? It provides a position for someone to take who wants to believe in something for which they have no evidence. But, if there is no evidence, why believe? And if there is evidence, it's not undetectable.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Fairies exist in Undetectable Forms.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by OnceReturned
 


It’s not a matter of believing, but of indulging in further research.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by OnceReturned
 


I agree it's kind of a pointless article. But Star Trek TNG did a very clever episode on this topic where eventually they realized there was a silicon life form they couldn't detect initially, they had to change their way of thinking about what life was to detect it. So that's the only context where it would make sense to me.

Star Trek TNG 1x17 Home Soil Trailer


And the author of that article, Casey Kazan, is self-contradicting, first pointing out that the Earth was "visible" to aliens for only a short time and is now becoming "invisible" to aliens, and then goes on to claim that it's illogical that aliens could be "invisible" to us after demonstrating exactly the opposite.

Vampires can't be seen in mirrors or photographed right? But that doesn't mean they don't exist, does it? Or maybe it does. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, it's simply no evidence at all.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


Well, how can we even try to build a device to detect something that may or may not exist in some imperceptable from of reality? Where does one begin?

I think as science advances we discover new "things" which we then build detectors for, which is good. But, I'm not sure we should use this claim(that they may exist undetectably) as a way to justify funding for ET research. Again, there's no reason to believe in something for which we have no evidence, and there's no reason to fund research into something that we don't believe in.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by OnceReturned
 


Agreed, but I mean we should try to fund research to make devices to detect anomalies like this.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnceReturned
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


Well, how can we even try to build a device to detect something that may or may not exist in some imperceptable from of reality? Where does one begin?


You can rephrase that question to "how can we even try to build a device to detect a lifeform that may be unlike us?", for example silicon based instead of carbon based. (I don't care much for the alternate reality BS until there's evidence for THAT
)

And it's a valid question. I think it's possible there could be lifeforms that are so unlike us we could miss them by building detectors that look for life like us. But life unlike us may be detectable if we knew what to look for. But we can only speculate about life unlike Earth's and therefore we don't have any way to build detectors for something when we don't know exactly what we're looking for.

[edit on 29-3-2010 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
I'm glad that there is a strong voice in the scientific community which is willing to stand up for the idea that we still have a lot to learn about our universe. The moment we convince ourselves that we know all there is to know about something is the moment we lose the right to truly call ourselves scientists.

Unfortunately, this conclusion by Milan Cirkovic is just such an example:


Somehow, we all get to the point where we end up killing ourselves in a natural course of technological development and thereby self-inflict our own “cosmic roadblock”.


He is making a vast assumption here, and that is:
At least some alien civilizations would develop and advance over the course of millions of years, CONSISTENTLY using technologies which are detectable to the human race right now.

This is absurd. Frank Drake himself, in this very same article, talks about how the digital age is already making our own electromagnetic projections look like white noise. The truth is that any intelligent species would probably not emit any significant light waves for longer than a thousand or so years, and perhaps nothing obvious to us as a sign of intelligence for longer than a few hundred years. Eventually they would move on to more advanced, efficient means of information transmission. One example of this might be Quantum Computing, which could conceivably phase out the use of light and electricity completely. Similarly, such a species would eventually stop bothering to send out SETI-like calls for contact to the stars, because they would find a way to simply travel to the stars themselves and study a planet like ours firsthand. So, the odds of some of these alien signals reaching Earth within the window of the past century are in fact incredibly small.

Additionally, it is absurd to assume that an intelligent race will inevitably destroy itself. The very nature of life itself insists upon a survival instinct, and as long as a species has the desire to live, they will always find a way to do so, even if the worst imaginable civil war were to take place. Even if the Cold War had become a full-blown nuclear fallout, it still wouldn't have come close to wiping out all of humanity. To think that an entire species would knowingly commit suicide is nonsense. And to think that we can stand here and declare what a species 1 billion years more advanced than us is capable of is downright arrogant.

[edit on 28-3-2010 by Magnus47]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


I absolutely agree. The article is contradictory if all the opinions presented are considered.

An intelligent race would not be visible for very long. In fact, I would even say that the fact that we haven't seen any for the past 100 years could help us estimate how many intelligent races there are in the universe. If we are to use our own civilization as an example (the only example we have, after all), then the fact that we haven't seen any signals from aliens over the past 100 years, combined with an assumption that aliens (like us) only project such signals for a few centuries or so, could provide an upper limit on the estimation for how many such species might exist.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Magnus47
 


Well with the new research showing that we have been missing 90% of the observable universe, that puts the range of galaxies in the trillions, so is really hard to estimate the amount of intelligent life in our universe. Even one planet with alien life per galaxy puts the range of alien life sky rocketing.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


I tend to think what he really meant/should have said was that 'Alien life was beyond human experience' not beyond our understanding.

Inter-dimensional beings? I can understand that concept, even if i have no experience of it.

Micro, subatomic sized intelligent alien life? Again, as above.

Energy - matter - energy alien beings? Weird, but once we have the knowledge and experience, it is perfectly within the capacity of human understanding.

There are lots of things we don't understand simply because we have no experience or knowledge, once we have one or the other or both, we can understand the concepts of most things, weird and wonderful ET's included.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:45 PM
link   
I would imagine this man is privy to some pretty sweet information. You know.. the stuff which we would give body parts potentially to know. Haha.. maybe I'm just speaking for myself, and facetiously at any rate.

Star Trek is a very clever show. Roddenberry was a 33 degree mason.. much of his knowledge is blended into the story lines, as my friend (who is an avid trekky) and I have been realising.

Truth makes great science fiction. Ahem*Stargate*ahem.



Do I digress?

My bad.

Nth line.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


I've read the discussion about this subject in another thread... Btw, anyone there has noticed a thread about an EBE You Tube video, that was listed on ATS home page, but had a broken link??? I'm curious, that thread wasn't fixed up??? Does anyone knows the name of that video or the original link??? What strange...



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Maddogkull
 


Good point. Although I have to wonder if something akin to a rogue television signal, sent from a planet in a distant galaxy, would be at all strong enough to be detectable by our sensors here on Earth.

reply to post by spikey
 


I see what you're saying, but remember that every example you just cited is within our understanding. If we weren't able to understand it then you wouldn't have been able to conceive of the idea in the first place. It's impossible to imagine an example because anything we're capable of imagining is something we could potentially understand. The article talks about a comparison between humans and chimpanzees which I think is valid: Chimpanzees are one of the most intelligent creatures ever to walk this planet, but you could never teach them what quantum physics is about, no matter how hard you tried. While their knowledge of weather patterns and use of basic tools qualifies them as geniuses within their own natural environment, the complex world of humanity is something they can only begin to fathom.

Since we don't have any superior intellects on our own planet to compare ourselves to, it's hard for us to imagine that there could be realizations which our brains are incapable of experiencing. But while the knowledge we have about the world around us may be accurate, just as a chimpanzee's knowledge that a hard rock can be used to smash a nut is also accurate, I wonder if our knowledge is vastly incomplete, and if perhaps the greatest mysteries will remain hidden to us until we can actually improve the capacities of our own minds.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 02:55 AM
link   
Its funny that scientsits think that aliens are undetectable yet God is not supposed to be undetectable and that somehow we are smart enough with our technoglogy so that God will show up in our telescopes...mindless arrogant humans.

Undetectable aliens....lmao....What about god....hes is undetectable yet scientists dont utter anything about that...idiots...Just because our technology does not allow for it to be visualised/verified doesnt mean it doesnt exist. We havent seen a black hole, yet theory predicts they exist. We dont know if rosie odonnel is a woman, but theory says that she is.

Just because we dont see it doesnt make it true. These idiots are basically saying....hey lets deny god and lets believe in "undetectable aliens" God is also undetectable you doofi (plural of doof)



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
We havent seen a black hole, yet theory predicts they exist.


While you make valid points about aliens and God, I wouldn't throw black holes into that group.

If you look into space and see a star orbiting in circles very fast around a black point in space, then the fact that it's orbiting around that point where you can't see anything is evidence that something is there, is it not?



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 03:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Yes i am aware of that. There are general relativity equations to describe blackholes. There are no equations to describe love, yet we see it everyday, it is not quantifiable. Is there an equation that describes love?Does it not exist? Just cause scientists have yet to prove God, does not mean he isnt all around us. Some can see it easier than others, there are signs all around...another big discussion that I'm too tired for lol.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   
'Undetectable extraterrestrials' (and much much more) will become 'detectable' when we begin to realize that every single real object (aggregation of atoms/frequencies) displaces through ALL dimensional axes/space. It necessarily has to.

Take the the product of x,y,z,w = dimensions of a real object, where all variables are 2 except w (the 4th dimension).
2 x 2 x 2 x 0 = ?... 0

So, if math strongly predicts the presence of a 4th+ dimension, then all real objects must displace in 4D+ space, otherwise it won't/can't exist in reality, but only in concept. So, there are no such things as 2D objects/beings. There are no such things as 3D objects/beings. Etc. Everything displaces in ALL axes, whether you perceive it or not.

[edit on 29-3-2010 by Flux8]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join