reply to post by Vasa Croe
This may have been stated before but your argument essentially boils down to this:
It's 230 BC and your community is reviewing the work of Aristarchus of Samos
who came up
with a method for (sorta) calculating the distance to the moon. (Side note: He's a good guy to look into for just how long the "right" answer
(heliocentrism) can be rejected by people who think they have proof the suggestion is impossible.)
Someone says "I believe humans will walk there."
You build a model that shows how far you understand people are capable of travelling, especially vertically, given the understanding of the laws of
physics (at the time), the technology available, the time a human has to live, the size of a vessel needed to bring all the food needed to sustain
their lives, etc.
You show a series of images demonstrating just how utterly massive the distance is among other difficulties, and conclude "This isn't possible".
Fast forward to now where we know that the only thing people lacked in 230 BC to go to the moon was a more complete understanding of physics and more
capable technologies. The people themselves were *always* capable of going to the moon. The materials required to do it was always there. The
mathematics and physics were always there.
The only thing lacking was THOSE human's awareness of the possible hidden right under their nose/feet.
You are free to believe it *isn't* possible/probable, but it requires only a modest understanding of the history of "progress", especially in travel
to see how rather naive it is to assume that YOUR concept of what is possible given the information available NOW has any bearing on what is actually
It doesn't require thinking we're all that special for the same reason that "tribes" that were encountered in the spread of Western and Eastern
civilizations weren't "special" but were still stumbled across. People who *love* insects don't discover new species because they are "special"... but
because they are actively out there looking for them or stumble across them while looking for something else.
Despite your protests... we DO go out of our way to visit ant hills. Not all of us, but some of us.
We must learn from our past... that whatever is *actually* possible right now is only limited by our awareness, not by the size of the universe
relative to our bodies. If that were true, no tribe would have crossed an ocean. No man would have gone to the moon. No probe would reach the outer
edge of the solar system. Etc.
So we each as individuals get a choice. We can be part of the group that sits around waiting for someone else to tell us what is possible and spending
our imagination time trying to prove why something is impossible. Or we can be part of the group spending our imagination time trying to figure out
why so far we've managed to do so many things that were previously unimaginable (possibly considered insane enough to kill someone for)... and thus in
the process discover what is missing in US that is preventing EVERYTHING we can imagine to be possible.
What if it's possible to travel by thought alone, thus removing ALL distance issues? (Hint, there are plenty of people already exploring this.)
It's no more far out than suggesting "seeing" Paris from New York in real time to someone living during the American Revolution. Now we just call it
wireless video transmission and splash advertisements and propaganda all over the image.
edit on 2012/3/23 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)