Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
1. Many people have claimed that UFO's can accelerate 90 degrees relative to their position and other maneuvers that contradict the underlying
physical principles of current propulsion technology. What many scientists have concluded is that such aerial maneuvering can create gravitational
forces so great (hundreds of times that of Earth) and would flatten any living creature like a pancake. Your take on this?
The issue here is that you think you know what the laws of physics all are. After all, you're a "Mathematicalphysicist" and you've actually
studied this stuff, so you think you're a lot smarter about this stuff than anyone else on here. You see this observation as a violation of those
laws of physics, so you want an explanation that fits with what you think the laws of physics are. You know this is impossible already, so you think
you've come upon a "Gotcha!" for this issue.
But any scientist knows that theories rely on presumptions and that sometimes the universe is "queerer than we CAN suppose," as one scientist put
it. Just as one historical example, Newtonian physics works. It's just that as it turns out, it doesn't explain everything, so we have quantum
mechanics and relativity to deal with. It still all fits, but we didn't know that when we thought Newtonian physics was the final explanation.
We could very well be in the same position vis-a-vis this particular issue. A couple of your assumptions are: 1) There are bodies in those things that
could be crushed flatter than a pancake. We don't know if there are ANY "bodies" of whatever kind in them at all. 2) We don't know if what we are
observing is correct. Our perception of those fast turns tells us we are "correct," but our perception could be deceptive or inadequate. We may be
seeing something entirely different than what is really happening. We might be like a cat chasing a flashlight beam across the wall, thinking that
circle of light has mice inside it who would be crushed flat as a pancake given our antics with the light while we laugh at our cleverness in fooling
the cat.
2. To cross the vast distances of the stars, it is known without a doubt that any engine that is used would need to be extremely vast and thus
requires a huge star ship. Most UFO reportings are of objects from as small as 3 m across to a one mile. Such machinery is not capable of achieving
the high speeds required to cover the astronomical distances in a feasibly short time, and any advanced civilization capable of travelling to the
stars would not waste such high amounts of energy or a long time to just spy on humans. Your take on this?
What is "without a doubt" again? Your assumptions are completely bogus. You are assuming an "extremely vast engine," for example. You also think
that a "huge starship" would need to cover vast distances of space. You look at the size of the universe, and your mathematical physicist mind
immediately figures out that it is well nigh impossible. Indeed, since you know for certain that you can't even move faster than lightspeed anyway,
it's a wonder you did not discount these vast distances on that point alone. You also think the only reason "they" are here is to "spy" on us and
that's not worth it.
I think that's both naive and superficial myself. I say of my own son that if he wanted to get to the other side of a wall, he would pound through
the wall rather than use the door right beside him. He always uses the most difficult approach possible. I look at this issue and my conclusion is
different than yours. I agree, that it can't be done, therefore "they" must not be doing it. "They" are NOT taking the bludgeon approach of
crossing vast reaches of space. They must have found a way around this problem.
What way? I don't know. Many different solutions have been proposed. All I know is that there IS a solution. Wormholes? Warp drive? beats me. It's
like the atomic bomb problem. Lots of groups knew it might work theoretically, but they didn't know how. We made it work, therefore they suddenly
knew it COULD work, therefore they gained the confidence to know they could also figure it out. And by hook and a little crook they did. I look at
this problem the same way. "They" have obviously found a way around the problem, therefore it can be done and we can do it, too.
As far as discerning their intent is to "spy" on us. That's like saying Columbus sailed the Atlantic for the sole reason of spying on the Indians.
Any intelligent race must have an adventurous spirit or it would never have left the caves.
Running out of space. Continued next message.
