Aliens from space (split from Time to talk about UFO's or now as the military calls them UAP's?)

[iNow]

19 minutes ago, Mordred said:

What would be the point of any visitation if you cannot return with any data or resources 

Adventure 

[Moontanman]

16 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Do you want any information resulting from any studies  to return to home planet ? It doesn't matter if the occupants are biological or not in that regard.

What would be the point of any visitation if you cannot return with any data or resources 

No, data can be transmitted at c, no need for a biological being to make the trip, quite possibly no need for biological beings at all during the trip or the exploration. Even we primitive humans see the need for Probes over biological beings in our exploration of just our solar system. 

[Genady]

37 minutes ago, Mordred said:

What would be the point of any visitation if you cannot return with any data or resources

Roadside Picnic - Wikipedia

[Ghideon]

36 minutes ago, Mordred said:

What would be the point of any visitation if you cannot return with any data or resources 

• Home destroyed due to bad management or disaster(s)? 

• propagation?

[swansont]

2 hours ago, Mordred said:

eliminate any need for negative mass.

To paraphrase Dr. Venkman, “I’d call that a big yes” as far as new physics goes

19 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

• Home destroyed due to bad management or disaster(s)? 

• propagation?

Wouldn’t you want to know the planet is habitable before you head out? That requires data return.

In any event, these are not consistent with the sightings we have. Those would be landings; the first one would likely be a large craft.

[Mordred]

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

No, data can be transmitted at c, no need for a biological being to make the trip, quite possibly no need for biological beings at all during the trip or the exploration. Even we primitive humans see the need for Probes over biological beings in our exploration of just our solar system. 

Really and is that particularly practical unless the aliens live on some nearby star system where it's close enough we could detect chemical and biological signatures via spectography or recieve their signals ?

Not very practical in my opinion. Your still looking at years for signals.

32 minutes ago, swansont said:

To paraphrase Dr. Venkman, “I’d call that a big yes” as far as new physics goes

Yeah that would certainly require some new physics lol. However unlikely still has some plausibility.

Edited May 4 by Mordred

[Moontanman]

3 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Really and that particularly practical unless the aliens live on some nearby star system where it's close enough we could detect chemical and biological signatures via spectography or recieve their signals ?

Not very practical in my opinion.

I didn't suggest aliens had to be close by, why do you think they need to be close by? 

3 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Yeah that would certainly require some new physics lol. However unlikely still has some plausibility.

I see no reason for new physics to attain star travel. 

[Mordred]

20 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

I didn't suggest aliens had to be close by, why do you think they need to be close by? 

I see no reason for new physics to attain star travel. 

How about simple practicality ? It makes  absolutely no sense to have to wait a century or more get information returned. You are well aware of time dilation for a craft in regards to the at home time frame compared to flight time. 

 You cannot randomly ignore involved factors.

Great you can send signals back at c. Yeeha so what ?  You still have to get to Earth and factor in the time differentials for time dilation.

It would be more practical to build a solar system scale telescope and get data faster. 

 

Edited May 4 by Mordred

[Moontanman]

11 minutes ago, Mordred said:

How about simple practicality it makes  absolutely no sense to have to wait a century or more get information returned. You are well aware of time dilation for a craft in regards to the at home time frame compared to flight time. 

 You cannot randomly ignore involved factors.

Great you can send signals back at c. Yeeha so what ?  You still have to get to Earth and factor in the time differentials for time dilation.

It would be more practical to build a solar system scale telescope and get data faster.

 

The concept of a Von Neumann  probe negates all that. The time factor is only a viable criticism if you insist on the experiment not being able to outlive the experimenter, in a short lived civilization like ours that is a reasonable complaint but in a civilization a Million years old where biological beings might have practical immortality or even be an intermittent part in or not be present at all in a million year old civilization. waiting a few thousand years for data might not be a problem at all especially when the data inflow involves millions of Probes sending back data as they gain knowledge of the system they were sent to. No reason to sit around and twiddle your thumbs waiting on data from a single probe when it comes in continuously from millions of probes. Such Probes would reproduce and head out for more stars to rinse and repeat.  

 

[Mordred]

Sure but have you ever noticed is that those requirements are incredibly restrictive on any likelihood of existing in the first place ?   Particularly when you start factoring in let's say age of  stellar solar systems vs likelihood of achieving sufficient technological development for the scenario you just described.

One of many

 

Edited May 4 by Mordred

[Moontanman]

3 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Sure but have you ever noticed is that those requirements are incredibly restrictive on any likelihood of existing in the first place ?

 

Quite the contrary I think they speak to how it could done easily by an advanced civilization, Von Neumann Probes are just an easy solution, the motivations of a million year old civilization is as beyond our comprehension as our civilization would be to a Neanderthal.

The parts we do comprehend, assuming for the moment UAP are part of our limited comprehension, require a civilization outside the box we try to shove our own into.  If civilizations never make it beyond what we can comprehend then there are no UAP aliens and its something else... which would be fine with me. 

 

[Ghideon]

59 minutes ago, swansont said:

Wouldn’t you want to know the planet is habitable before you head out? That requires data return.

You are correct and I guess it depends on premise and any options one might have?

• Want to join a trip to a new planet? I want to know if it is habitable.
• We will send our kid to a new planet. I would like to know, like Jor-El*, if the planet is habitable.
• We have to go now or we are doomed! Ok, I'll join and hope for the best.

But to be honest, I have no idea about what could motivate extra terrestrial beings, if they exist. If the goal is to use armadas of self-replicating machines and panspermia to propagate through the universe then I guess data return is of less concern?

1 hour ago, swansont said:

In any event, these are not consistent with the sightings we have. Those would be landings; the first one would likely be a large craft.

True; I did not refer to any sightings, just provided possible answers, from a human perspective. 

(just to be clear: I no not think any sightings or UAPs are in any way related to any aliens activities) 

*) Otherwise I guess Superman would have been in trouble; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jor-El 

[Mordred]

12 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Quite the contrary I think they speak to how it could done easily by an advanced civilization, Von Neumann Probes are just an easy solution, the motivations of a million year old civilization is as beyond our comprehension as our civilization would be to a Neanderthal.

The parts we do comprehend, assuming for the moment UAP are part of our limited comprehension, require a civilization outside the box we try to shove our own into.  If civilizations never make it beyond what we can comprehend then there are no UAP aliens and its something else... which would be fine with me. 

 

Yeah good luck with that. The point being simply achieving such a technological advanced state wouldn't be common place event.  Hence it's restrictive on likelihood..... The other point being is that in order for one to justify alien visitation has huge restrictions on likelyhood. 

 Yeah great possible sure.. what's the likelyhood of any system near enough to potentially matter ?

Doesn't really work to justify that as actually occurring to justify our UFO sitings... 

Edited May 4 by Mordred

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

Great you can send signals back at c. Yeeha so what ?  You still have to get to Earth and factor in the time differentials for time dilation.

I agree - that’s not the issue. It’s either you don’t go close to c and the outbound trip takes a long time, or you do, and time dilation takes its toll.

 

[Mordred]

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

I agree - that’s not the issue. It’s either you don’t go close to c and the outbound trip takes a long time, or you do, and time dilation takes its toll.

 

Absolutely agree on that lol

[swansont]

30 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

You are correct and I guess it depends on premise and any options one might have?

• Want to join a trip to a new planet? I want to know if it is habitable.
• We will send our kid to a new planet. I would like to know, like Jor-El*, if the planet is habitable.
• We have to go now or we are doomed! Ok, I'll join and hope for the best.

But to be honest, I have no idea about what could motivate extra terrestrial beings, if they exist. If the goal is to use armadas of self-replicating machines and panspermia to propagate through the universe then I guess data return is of less concern?

An alien species could have a type of reproductive strategy, where they produce lots of offspring and don’t have much investment in them, or have an attitude like in IVF that most attempts will fail and you accept that. So they might not care if the destination is habitable if they’re sending a probe to multiple planets in their particular goldilocks-zone. But you do have to have them survive the trip or it’s pointless.

[Moontanman]

42 minutes ago, swansont said:

I agree - that’s not the issue. It’s either you don’t go close to c and the outbound trip takes a long time, or you do, and time dilation takes its toll.

 

Why is this a problem for star travel? 

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

Yeah good luck with that. The point being simply achieving such a technological advanced state wouldn't be common place event.  Hence it's restrictive on likelihood..... The other point being is that in order for one to justify alien visitation has huge restrictions on likelyhood. 

 Yeah great possible sure.. what's the likelyhood of any system near enough to potentially matter ?

Doesn't really work to justify that as actually occurring to justify our UFO sitings... 

The self replicating probe scenario solves the problem of distance, one probe could "probe", reproduce and re-probe  the entire galaxy in a few million years at worst, sending out millions of self replicating probes would cut that time down to hundreds of thousands of years. 

Restrictions of likelihood make no sense in this scenario, while I personally think any civilization that wanted to explore and even colonies the entire galaxy would be likely to use this method even one using it would be enough to make a probe in our solar system likely. 

this idea reminds me of the series of books by John Varley  Often called the Gaea Trilogy, a self replicating probe is found in our solar system and of course all hell breaks lose in the series but the premise is sound. 

This all nice to speculate about but we, IMHO, cannot define the phenomena into existence, until we establish the reality of what is happening we can speculate until the cows come home.

Now how about we discuss the paper I listed a few posts ago that describes a sighting by the military of a highly anomalous object by a military aircraft that is probably the very plane all of us wished would encounter a UFO! 

[Mordred]

Lol sorry I find what you described above even more restrictive on likelyhood.

No of course you think restrictive likelyhood isn't an issue. I however feel it does apply and should always be considered. That's one of the reasons I rarely ever join threads involving aliens and UFOs the defenders of UFOs and Aliens always tend to ignore the odds against any likelihood. They also tend to come up with highly imaginative means of justification. 

I provided a few ideas on plausible means of travel and applied a bit of realistic physics. Take that as you will they are factors regardless of conjecture or opinion.

Edited May 4 by Mordred

[Moontanman]

20 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Lol sorry I find what you described above even more restrictive on likelyhood.

No of course you think restrictive likelyhood isn't an issue. I however feel it does apply and should always be considered. That's one of the reasons I rarely ever join threads involving aliens and UFOs the defenders of UFOs and Aliens always tend to ignore the odds against any likelihood. They also tend to come up with highly imaginative means of justification. 

I provided a few ideas on plausible means of travel and applied a bit of realistic physics. Take that as you will they are factors regardless of conjecture or opinion.

I've considered the info you gave, how about you do me the same favor and look at what I supplied. 

@MigL @swansont @Mordred 

 

http://kirkmcd.princeton.edu/JEMcDonald/mcdonald_fsr_16_3_2_70.pdf

[Mordred]

What of it, it's little different of any number of other impressive looking articles on sightings. It's certainly nothing that equates to an accepted and confirmed sighting.

You may choose to believe that article and it's claims doesn't mean I'm about to.

Edited May 4 by Mordred

[Moontanman]

11 minutes ago, Mordred said:

What of it, it's little different of any number of other impressive looking articles on sightings. It's certainly nothing that equates to an accepted and confirmed sighting.

You may choose to believe that article and it's claims doesn't mean I'm about to.

Then we are done, if you can't actually look at what I am proposing them I see no reason to take you seriously either.  

[Mordred]

Oh I read the article I simply don't find it convincing. That's my conclusion after reading it. Simple as that

 

Edited May 4 by Mordred

[swansont]

31 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

I've considered the info you gave, how about you do me the same favor and look at what I supplied. 

@MigL @swansont @Mordred 

 

http://kirkmcd.princeton.edu/JEMcDonald/mcdonald_fsr_16_3_2_70.pdf

I did.

To reiterate: they conclude it’s unexplained. IOW, there’s not enough data to determine what it was. 

[Moontanman]

4 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Oh I read the article I simply don't find it convincing. That's my conclusion after reading it. Simple as that

 

Ok, it would be nice to know why but that would mean actually considering what Dr McDonald had to say in detail, I won't bother you to do that. Dr McDonald was probably the most qualified person to ever be in charge of anything to to do with UFOs, he was an expert in atmospheric physics/phenomena. While his is not the end all be all of anything his contributions were significant even if he disagreed with the main stream.    

[swansont]

23 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Let's do it!

I still haven’t seen any analysis on your part.