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.

 

The size problem

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Yes, the distances in the universe are mind boggling, so are the numbers of galaxies and stars and possible inhabited planets. I myself am 100% convinced there are millions of planets out there with all kinds of life forms.

But the problem is not only the numbers, but also the fact that for any given potential planet a high-tech culture might only exist for a certain amount of time.

If you look at the Earth..the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, but look how long human exists and for how long we have technology and our (pathetic) space travel.

So, if we look at other planets..how high are the chances that an "intelligent" civilization exists there, *right now*.

This and the mind boggling numbers and distances make (IMO) it rather unlikely that someone from the other edge of the universe would visit us....it's actually almost an absurd idea if you, eg. look at pictures from Hubbble etc. with MILLIONS of galaxies...in each galaxy another million/billion stars...so why on Earth should someone from any of those planets visit US??? Chances: ZERO!!!

As for space travel in general....and if we assume that light speed STILL is the limiting factor (which still has to be proven wrong!) - i actually don't think that a technology thousands of years ahead of us does "conventional" space travel aka "travelling from point A to B" (even if they had craft traveling at or near light speed)...but instead that such technology can indeed alter space/time.

They can possibly bend and warp space so concepts like "distance" don't apply to them....the other possibility is the advanced use (or maybe even "on-demand" creation!) of worm holes. In other words: Even with the limits of light speed interstellar travel would not be a problem.

If UFOs (as in "craft") exist then i am sure they are using such kind of propulsion systems.


edit on 14-10-2011 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Based on your same logic, that this universe is so big, and nature so remarkable that there must be life out there. This leads me to assume that there must be life out there that is more advanced and probably capable of travelling where ever they want. Now if that is the case, either: A)The universe is so big they just havent found us yet B) That other life form wants nothing to do with us C) or at best, they dont not want our leaders to share their pressence as they work in the background ensuring we dont blow ourselves up, while letting us learn lessons and evolve at our own pace.

edit: And I agree our concepts of space and time might not apply to them at all. I sometimes assume the more intelligent we get the more technology we will have to go faster or live longer. I think it would be possible to travel through space without bringing the physical body at all, bringing the mind where it wants and rebuilding a body at the destiantion from the magnitude of power stored at the atomic level. In eastern traditions the yogis or monks are reported to have powers to do just that; if it is true, that seems far more efficient than any technology.
edit on 14-10-2011 by el1jah because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I personally prefer THIS way of travel Space ship> who needs a space ship?




Two Kinds of vm-Teleportation Identified for the Air Force Study

• Traversable Wormhole engineered as a “STARGATE”
(via Einstein’s General Relativity Theory field equations, 1915)

• Faster-Than-Light (FTL) solutions of the Polarizable-Vacuum Representation of General Relativity (Davis,Puthoff, Maccone, 2003; , Puthoff, 1999, 2000) induce a flat-spacetime version of the Stargate via engineering the vacuum EM parameters

Part 1: What are Traversable Wormholes?

• Hyperspace tunnels thru spacetime, which can:

connect together remote regions within our universe
connect together different universes
connect together different space dimensions (for higher dimensional wormholes)
connect together different chronological periods within the same space region (backwards time travel!)

Part 2 - What are Traversable Wormholes?

• Traversable Wormholes possess:

normal or backwards time flow
normal or nonexistent gravitational stresses on space travelers
entry/exit openings (or throats) that can be made to be spherically shaped, cubic shaped,polyhedral shaped, generic shaped, etc.
flat entry/exit openings are possible – a true STARGATE or flat doorway through spacetime &dimensions!



Teleportation via Wormhole-Stargates
U.S. Air Force Teleportation Physics Study
Eric W. Davis, Ph.D., FBIS

www.earthtech.org...



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by el1jah
A)The universe is so big they just havent found us yet.


Imagine a beach somewhere in California with zillions of grains of sand, and another beach somewhere far away...say, in Australia with another zillions of grains of sand. Now imagine the likelihood why microbes/bacteria which reside on that one grain should somehow discover that PARTICULAR other grain of sand eg in Australia. (Mind you there are zillions and zillions of other grains on hundreds of beaches in between
)

Most importantly, what would make our pathetic Earth and humans so interesting that they would chose us "to visit"...and not countless other potential "grains" instead...and what would lead them HERE and not to any other "grain" (planet).

Seriously, the chances are higher to win the lottery 100 times in a row. The sand example is probably not even remotely close to the crazy numbers when it comes to galaxies/stars/planets.
edit on 14-10-2011 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


I guess it depends how many grains are teeming with life, according to our solar system 1/9(or 8!) is pretty good odds.

But I think a highly advanced being on a beach potentially full of life would be using something more intuitive than a microscope to look at the sand. They would pick up on our consciousness or mind energy, at the very least set out to detect all the noise we create with satelites and space programs.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Titor86
I for one believe, that based on the sheer size of the universe alone it must be teeming with life. I find it distasteful and arrogant to assume that even in our one, unremarkable little galaxy our sun is the only star out of 200 - 400 billion with a planet that supports life (by this I mean complex & intelligent life)


Right. Because the bigger something is, the more magic can happen in it.


I was just wondering if anyone could post and material on alternative theories to faster than light travel/wormholes etc etc etc.


The only thing you have to remember is that time is not linear, but only seems that way. Everything else falls into place after that.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by flexy123
Most importantly, what would make our pathetic Earth and humans so interesting that they would chose us "to visit"...and not countless other potential "grains" instead...and what would lead them HERE and not to any other "grain" (planet).


Harvest their crop...




posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   
That's sort of like an aboriginal tribe who has never seen outside humans, other than rumors, speculating on how planes work. They won't understand it.

Is anything new being offered in this thread? Maybe I'm just grouchy today but it seems like another unfocused blurb about UFOs with zero substance. Yeah, the universe is big. There's probably life in it. There's probably advanced tech in it. Interstellar tech could be possible. Generational ships ARE possible. They could be here. Without evidence, none of those statements mean anything.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
humans dont know how to travel beyond the speed of light or they might know how but cant mimic the et technology enough to be able to actually do it, but just because humans cant do it doesnt mean it cant be done imo



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Titor86
 

There are of course most likely life out there. What i dont get though is why people seem to think that they can or even bother to travel all the way to our little planet in middle of nowhere.
The distances like you said is just too great unless there is a way around the limitation of physics as we know it, which right now looks kinda doubtful.

Personally I think there might even be life on other bodies even in our own solar system like microbes on Mars or water based life on one of the water moons around jupiter or saturn.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by saskwatch
humans dont know how to travel beyond the speed of light or they might know how but cant mimic the et technology enough to be able to actually do it, but just because humans cant do it doesnt mean it cant be done imo

It is simply impossible unless you get around physics. All evidence we have now suggest that nothing can travel faster than speed of light.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 


I was going to say about this particle faster than light thing

It needs to be confirmed but if it is true, traveling large distances could not be that impossible for someone who knows how to use such technology properly. So the 'there are no visits from ETs because they would never be able to reach us' can be dismissed as an argument



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by juleol
 



maybe they dont need to travel beyond the speed of light when they can do something totally different, there is no doubt in my mind that they found a different way to alter the time space continiuum
edit on 14-10-2011 by saskwatch because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Titor86
I for one believe, that based on the sheer size of the universe alone it must be teeming with life. I find it distasteful and arrogant to assume that even in our one, unremarkable little galaxy our sun is the only star out of 200 - 400 billion with a planet that supports life (by this I mean complex & intelligent life)


Every time I hear this (and I've heard it for over fifty years now) I wonder, who are you talking about? I have never heard of an "arrogant" person distastefully suggesting we are the only life in the Universe. Never. So I'm thinking this arrogant distasteful person surely is keeping a low profile because I've never heard him utter anything close to this. All I've heard is other people proclaiming that it is "arrogant and distastful" to suggest this.

This is a perfect example of setting up a straw man who does not exist, but is useful to pretend he does to advance your enlightened attitude and show how smart you are. The same is true with proclaiming, "People used to think the world was FLAT!" thereby showing everyone your superior knowledge of the structure of the solar system. But when you look back in history you see that the Greeks knew the world was round 2500 years ago. The Phoenicians knew the world was round 3500 years ago. The Chinese, as far as we know, always thought the world was round.

Even in the Middle Ages, any sea captain knew the world was round. All you had to do is look at the horizon and watch a ship sailing toward or away from you. In the first instance the masts appear first, then the ship itself, clear evidence that the world was at least curved. So what you point out when you say such a thing is to a short-lived middle ages theological argument that lasted a few hundred years and was rapidly eclipsed by the Renaissance. It wasn't based on evidence; it was theological and philosophical. To bring up real-world evidence would have been considered debasing and missing the point. It was the perfect example of an ivory tower academic exercise not rooted in the real world. The whole idea was not all that widespread and did not last all that long, plus it was argued against by scholars of the time as soon as it came up.

As one of my statistics professors said, "The ancients were not stupid." It is JUST AS ARROGANT to proclaim the ancients arrogant and ignorant. It's JUST AS DISTASTEFUL for you to cast aside the theories from the past with a snear. They were working with what they had, were often astonishingly accurate, and built upon what had been learned before, which is exactly the position we are in now.

Look at us! We've decided there must be "life out there." (I concur.) We've also decided that, maybe, they are here. But we're faced with the built-in speed limit of the Universe that proclaims FTL travel is impossible. So what do we do? We make stuff up! We have a vague notion that string theory talks about eleven dimensions, so we suggest "interdimensional travel." We have a vague idea that there might be wormholes that allow travel at great distances (because we saw it on Star Trek), so we suggest wormhole travel is a way around the FTL limitation. We have a vague idea that some scientists somewhere made a couple of neutrinos travel faster than light, so we leap on the idea that our answer lies in those realms.

These leaps of faith from a vague understanding of quantum mechanics to a mechanism for faster than light travel are so wide that they may very well turn out to be the epicycles of our time, thrown on the trash heap of discarded theories when we finally feel our way forward.

I don't object to speculation and imaginative ideas. My objection is our apparent need to place ourselves on a pedestal by calling our predecessors arrogarnt, when anyone standing around this pedestal would call us the ultimate distasteful arrogant specimens of all time.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by saskwatch
reply to post by juleol
 



maybe they dont need to travel beyond the speed of light when they can do something totally different, there is no doubt in my mind that they found a different way to alter the time space continiuum
edit on 14-10-2011 by saskwatch because: (no reason given)

But that would still be just pure speculations and science fiction for now. From what we know now this is most likely not the case.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 

I have actually met quite a few people that still believe that we are completely alone in the universe.
Luckily these group of people are in minority and shrinking by each day.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Wow, you guys FAIL. Havent you read Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy? no? Well here, take this:

It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by spw184
Wow, you guys FAIL. Havent you read Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy? no? Well here, take this:

It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination.


lol thats not meant to be taken seriously .The logic and maths is wrong on so many levels. Douglas Adams has obviously never studied Cantor.

1 - Just because space is infinite it doesn't implicitly mean that all matter is infinite.

2 - if there WAS an infinite amount of worlds (which there isnt) and not all of them were inhabited then there would still be an infinite amount of inhabited worlds. So the population of the universe would be infinite. Thats how infinity works



edit on 14-10-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by juleol
 


well i disagree with your opinion sorry



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixOD

Originally posted by spw184
Wow, you guys FAIL. Havent you read Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy? no? Well here, take this:

It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination.


lol thats not meant to be taken seriously .The logic and maths is wrong on so many levels. Douglas Adams has obviously never studied Cantor.

1 - Just because space is infinite it doesn't implicitly mean that all matter is infinite.

2 - if there WAS an infinite amount of worlds (which there isnt) and not all of them were inhabited then there would still be an infinite amount of inhabited worlds. So the population of the universe would be infinite. Thats how infinity works



edit on 14-10-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)


What I have been reading here is a group of definitions upon theory that by our own limited mental understandings....has a tendency to garnish confusion and contradiction.

One little bit of direction that may at the very least....open a broader concept to Universal states and the word Infinite....is....MULTIVERSE.

We struggle with concepts of INFINITY but the word INFINITY can only apply to the word MULTIVERSE and not UNIVERSE. In reality...we are not finding the connections between the Quantum World and the MACRO Universe....because there is no one existing connection but rather a Symbiotic Relationship that takes more into effect than what happens to energy and Matter in just our reality.

A better way to look at something being INFINITE...is not to constrain ones thinking to size or time in the way we understand them. The better way is to not use size preconceptions at all. An example? OK......if we look at the possibility that our entire Universe as well as Multiverse....is simply the inner makeup of a construct....and that construct is one of many that makeup the basis for another form of Universal or Multiversal quantum particle matrix......and size is of no issue as this concept goes in both directions....into a greater and greater construct as well as into a lessor and lessor construct.....FOREVER.....in every possible timeline or reality or even lack of both......we STILL would not even come close to understanding or defining INFINITY. Split Infinity




top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join