Is it possible we are being "OBSERVED " by a higher life form ?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Well, it could be. But with no evidence, there is no reason to think so.

 

Do you really believe I have an invisible pink unicorn in my garden? I mean, it sounds right to me.

Yes but that is just an arbitrary statement.

 

If however , one put forward an idea , which had absolutely had no evidence , yet there were other evidence to do with similar 'things ' then one could have a winning idea , yet without evidence. I think super symmetry is like this ,if I have picked it up right . They suggest a whole set of particles may exist in another form , but not one of them has yet been discovered . Or am I behind the news ?

 

More simplistically we could theorise , there is another earth with human style life on it. But no evidence yet .

 

Mike

Edited March 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

Yes but that is just an arbitrary statement.

 

It is no more arbitrary than suggesting we are being watched by invisible superior beings. In fact it exactly parallels it.

 

 

More simplistically we could theorise , there is another earth with human style life on it. But no evidence yet .

 

The difference is, we know that planets exist, we know that human life exists, we know what conditions are required for human-like life to live. So it is quite reasonable to hypothesize that there may be another planet with similar forms of life.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

It is no more arbitrary than suggesting we are being watched by invisible superior beings. In fact it exactly parallels it.

 

 

 

The difference is, we know that planets exist, we know that human life exists, we know what conditions are required for human-like life to live. So it is quite reasonable to hypothesize that there may be another planet with similar forms of life.

.

I think with our active looking , listening , and desire to locate other intelligent life in the universe , we perhaps ought to concentrate on how it is possible to communicate with them .

 

If they are. :-

 

1 )there,

2. ) more advanced than us

3) possible very much more advanced than us .

 

Then seeing as how they would be totally aware of us , possibly if Roger Penrose is right , through our micro tubules , we ought to use our micro tubules to " Ask them if they are there ?

 

If they are not there/ not able to listen. / not inclined to listen/ not inclined to reply . ..

Then we will not get an answer.

 

If they are there ! And inclined to reply , we better get in touch with SETI. Well there is a thought ?

 

Mike

 

Ps ? I have already tried.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

I think with our active looking , listening , and desire to locate other intelligent life in the universe , we perhaps ought to concentrate on how it is possible to communicate with them .

 

Have you heard of "active SETI"?

 

If they are. :-

1 )there

 

Where? There is absolutely no reason to think they are here. (Thinking that would, quite reasonably, be considered a sign of mental illness. Just like someone who really believed I have an invisible pink unicorn in my garden.)

 

Then seeing as how they would be totally aware of us , possibly if Roger Penrose is right , through our micro tubules ,

 

Two ideas with zero evidence do not add up to something meaningful.

 

If they are there ! And inclined to reply

 

As they don't communicate with us and are totally invisible, then I think we can safely assume they are not here.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

 

As they don't communicate with us and are totally invisible, then I think we can safely assume they are not here.

Visible or invisible is not a big issue , what is an issue having thought about this very thoroughly.

 

At this stage with any possible early communication. I believe Ambiguity is essential . Otherwise cultural impact would be devastating to our fragile civilisation. So I believe , if I am right , there will be a serious case of Serendipity, surrounding any communication from a higher intelligence . In this way you would not readily know if the communication was a complete random fluke or a fortunate coincidence of the serendipitous variety .

 

If you were to say , I have seen a little green man , You would probably get shot by some fanatic , and/ or the impact suddenly of " we are not alone" the economy would collapse in a matter of weeks , then a spiral of violence , and goodness knows what . I think any higher intelligence would know this and introduce communication ambiguously , certainly to begin with.

 

If you want to know where I am at , with all this . I take note of any Serendipity, quite fun really , because I can pass it all off as Fortunate Coincidence or think , " now that is interesting ".

 

 

Link to Serendipity :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serendipity

 

Mike

Edited March 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

In this way you would not readily know if the communication was a complete random fluke or a fortunate coincidence of the serendipitous variety .

 

If there is no way of distinguishing this supposed communication from chance, then there is no communication.

 

 

Otherwise cultural impact would be devastating to our fragile civilisation.

 

Would it? Really? This argument is often used by people claiming the government is covering up UFO contacts. It seems totally baseless and is just an excuse for lack of evidence.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Strange

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

A) If there is no way of distinguishing this supposed communication from chance, then there is no communication.

 

 

 

B) Would it? Really? This argument is often used by people claiming the government is covering up UFO contacts. It seems totally baseless and is just an excuse for lack of evidence.

A) Communication. . I was and I suppose still am a Radio Amateur . In days gone by we used to tune in very carefully between all the signals , the atmospherics, the static, the interference. We would listen , perhaps for morse code or a voice signal so faint. Listening for your call sign G4Hxx. You had to tease the tuning to lock in . Nowerdays it's all computer controlled.

With the communications I am talking about here , it's a matter of ' possibly ' teasing out serendipity from random chance , that is , if you are looking . If you are not looking , then one will only see coincidence , and shrug it off , which is easy to do. But what if one makes a serious attempt?

 

B) With the 'government supposedly covering up UFO 's . I can not get my head around that one . However there is some pretty fancy pictures of a Canadian official talking about these things .

 

 

Mike

Edited March 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

With the communications I am talking about here , it's a matter of ' possibly ' teasing out serendipity from random chance , that is , if you are looking .

 

And how, exactly, are you going to distingiush these "messages" from random chance?

 

Because of your wish to see messages in random events, how do you intend to rule out apophenia, confirmation bias, selection bias and all the other sources of error?

 

You must have an objective measure of whether or not a communication has taken place. And that must be defined in advance. Otherwise you might as well be talking to my unicorn (she knows some great jokes).

 

Your radio ham analogy makes no sense because:

a) We know radios exist

b) We know other people have radios

c) We know that they use those radios to communicate

d) We know they use Morse and or speech to communicate

 

Those known facts allow us to receiive and understand radio messages.

 

In contrast:

a) Tubules are not the cause of consciousness

b) These beings don't exist

c) They don't communcate

d) There is no way of distinguishing meaningful random events from meaningless random events (especially when they are all meaningless).

 

So I think we can safely say that there is no such communication taking place.

 

 

B) With the 'government supposedly covering up UFO 's . I can not get my head around that one .

 

I'm surprised. It is a claim with as much evidence and rationality behind it as yours.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

A) And how, exactly, are you going to distingiush these "messages" from random chance?

 

Because of your wish to see messages in random events, how do you intend to rule out apophenia, confirmation bias, selection bias and all the other sources of error?

 

You must have an objective measure of whether or not a communication has taken place. And that must be defined in advance. Otherwise you might as well be talking to my unicorn (she knows some great jokes).

 

Your radio ham analogy makes no sense because:

a) We know radios exist

b) We know other people have radios

c) We know that they use those radios to communicate

d) We know they use Morse and or speech to communicate

 

Those known facts allow us to receiive and understand radio messages.

 

In contrast:

a) Tubules are not the cause of consciousness

b) These beings don't exist

c) They don't communicate

d) There is no way of distinguishing meaningful random events from meaningless random events (especially when they are all meaningless).

 

So I think we can safely say that there is no such communication taking place.

 

 

 

B) I'm surprised. It is a claim with as much evidence and rationality behind it as yours.

.

A) There is nothing wrong with listening . SETI does it . Short Wave listeners , used to do it for the thrill. Radio Amateurs did it for the Technical Challenge , among other reasons. NASA is spending a reasonable budget looking for life( could be advanced Civilisation .

So my little noticing Serendipity , well now I agree it is different , but is still a challenge .

 

I have not said I accept Roger Penrose Microtubules . I am open on that one . If I was going to communicate , I would just use my voice ( transmission ) all-be-it into the air . As regards the other direction , that is where the possible Serendipity comes in . It would be a ' fortunate coincidence if there was some way to ' encode ' a reply . So encode it . That is what Morse , did he encoded a morse code , it worked for a 100 years . Various encoding goes on in Computer communication . ASCII ( American Standard Code for Information Interchange. ) etc . I have made a very simple Code for Serendipity Communication CSC .

 

B) As I said I find it difficult to get my head round the strange looking aliens that are portrayed .they look like something out of a 1920's movie If anything , I think they would look just like us, pretty well , for 'no shock' reasons .

 

Mike

Edited April 1, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

I noticed that you ignored the only question in my post:

 

How, exactly, are you going to distinguish these "messages" from random chance? In other words, how do you intend to rule out apophenia, confirmation bias, selection bias and all the other sources of error?

You must have an objective measure of whether or not a communication has taken place. And that must be defined in advance. Can you do that?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

I noticed that you ignored the only question in my post:

 

How, exactly, are you going to distinguish these "messages" from random chance? In other words, how do you intend to rule out apophenia, confirmation bias, selection bias and all the other sources of error?

 

You must have an objective measure of whether or not a communication has taken place. And that must be defined in advance. Can you do that?

Yes. But I have to be careful . I do not want you to categorise me as a crank ! That could be easily done .

I have gone about this quite logically , reasoned out , no spooks , no fear,

 

The objective measure ,as to wether the communication has taken place is the Serendipity event that has taken place . No event no communications .

 

Excuse me I need to look up apophenia .......

 

Link :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia

 

 

O.k. Patterns , ( like looking in tea leaves ) . No

 

I have a simple code . Right . Wrong . Neither .

 

Mike ( ps need to go . Full day ART .tomorrow , catch you tomorrow . Bye )

Edited April 1, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

The objective measure ,as to wether the communication has taken place is the Serendipity event that has taken place . No event no communications .

 

You still haven't answered the question: how do you objectively distinguish this "Serendipity event" from pure chance?

 

How do you define a "Serendipity event" in such a way that everyone will agree it has happened?

Edited April 1, 2015 by Strange

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

You still haven't answered the question: how do you objectively distinguish this "Serendipity event" from pure chance?

 

How do you define a "Serendipity event" in such a way that everyone will agree it has happened?

.

That is a big question. I will give it some thought while out on my double day of painting .

 

Mike

[CasualKilla]

Aliens are real. How do i know? They tuk ur jerbs!!!!

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

That is a big question. I will give it some thought while out on my double day of painting .

Mike

Firstly , as I said previously , at the core of this supposed communications , is , it must be possible for it to be interpreted by anyone ,including the operator , as AMBIGUOUS . In other words the experience CAN be interpreted as pure random happening , coincident or no coincidence . This for Impact avoidance for all concerned.

 

As regards the method of protocol and indications of which of the three alternatives. Then :-

 

Having settled into an alone situation , then

 

The statement is made . (" Bla de bla de bla de bla ....... ...."

 

An event of significance occurs , within the next five minutes .

 

either to the right , establishing the statement is correct.

Or to the left , establishing the statement is wrong .

Or to the centre, establishing the statement is neither right nor wrong , both a bit right and a bit wrong.

 

Remembering the whole thing can be interpreted as ambiguous , and one walks away unscathed. Or one accepts the indication as a useful contribution for consideration, in the same way one might interpret a colleagues views on your subject as their opinion.

 

Nobody is hurt by this exercise . Far from it ,I have experienced such Serendipity events , in the spirit that was expected . A useful contribution to ones thoughts.

 

Remember, I can walk away from this as an ambiguous experience , or a useful input .

 

------------------ --------

 

Now you could put all sorts of interpretations on this exercise , ranging from ' talking to yourself ' to ' tapping into some serendipity mechanism , to gaining access to some sort of universal super wi-fi established by some ' Higher life form ' ?

 

Well it's very easy to say , " load of gobble-de- goop " , or is there the seed of something interesting?

 

Mike

Edited April 1, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

So it is purely subjective and based upon whether you think it is significant. It is therefore utterly meaningless as a test of communication. Feel free to convince yourself that They are communicating with you. But don't be surprised when the men in white coats turn up!

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

A) Feel free to convince yourself that ..They ... are communicating with .. you. ..

 

B) So it is purely subjective and based upon whether you think it is significant. It is therefore utterly meaningless as a test of communication

 

 

 

A) But we do not consider there is any ' they '. Or a particular 'you ' , when we go on the internet .

 

There is no one individual sitting there , saying , " oh there is mike smith asking another question " Or really any individual logging I have been at it .

 

So why could there not already exist a very widespread , very sophisticated internet universe wide Internet , already set up , by some long since pre existing intelligent master race . And that system is sufficiently designed to give us information that we ask for in the way or protocol that we request. ( significant events left right and center as requested. ) . Why not , if we can imagine it , it could be done.

 

But just like our internet , it will not give us , unless we ask for it ( except adverts that is ) .

 

So the men in white coats do not need to visit me , unless they want to know how this ' serendipity universal wide internet ' , performs. Then I could show them . Although I have only ever done this once , with another person present. And it made us both Jump.

He was a friend , so he never called up the men in white coats.

 

B) I did it today , while waiting by the side of the road , for a friend to pick me up ,in between Art Groups.

It worked . I am still a free man ! I can't think of any time , much that it has failed. Each time I think it will fail , then it does not.

 

See maybe SETI is listening on E-M signals at hydrogen frequency , and a number of other frequencies , when really , the system is already linked up ,in a strait forward question and answer system . We just need to specify how we want the information. A bit like transfer of money ( do you want it by cheque, bank transfer, cash or personal delivery . )

 

Even with today's technology , some systems will automatically work out a protocol that will work. In days gone by you had to set baud rate , goodness knows what , handshaking to get comms to work. Even now there are intelligent systems . What will it be like in 200 years . We would not recognise it, it would be so transparent. Maybe like the way I am trying .

 

Mike

Edited April 1, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

INDEPENDENCE DAY

 

Independence Day is currently playing on U.K. TV . (Channel 4+1)

 

Despite the Hollywood artistic licence , makes for interesting watching if you have any inkling that a hostile alien life could exist in the universe , in such an advanced form that they could visit earth .

Some of the lines and argument make entertaining and interesting ideas.

 

Personally , I think if there is a type of life , similar in form to us existing on a world like ours , near enough to visit us , then : - I think it would NOT be hostile , ( unlike those on Independence Day) , but reasonably benign . Kindly disposed .

 

If a race continues to be overly hostile as development to the point , inter star system , space travel is achieved,

 

:- Then : they would bound to be either kindly or self destructive ( these latter type , namely .."self destructive". . in which case they would NOT have survived ,so as to make the journey ) .

 

Thus any visitors ,I think will be kind, non destructive ( unlike those in Independence Day film style ) , however the film , nonetheless , has some interesting aspects.

 

Mike

 

. .the end ..

Edited April 11, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Moontanman]

INDEPENDENCE DAY

 

Independence Day is currently playing on U.K. TV . (Channel 4+1)

 

Despite the Hollywood artistic licence , makes for interesting watching if you have any inkling that a hostile alien life could exist in the universe , in such an advanced form that they could visit earth .

Some of the lines and argument make entertaining and interesting ideas.

 

Personally , I think if there is a type of life , similar in form to us existing on a world like ours , near enough to visit us , then : - I think it would NOT be hostile , ( unlike those on Independence Day) , but reasonably benign . Kindly disposed .

 

If a race continues to be overly hostile as development to the point , inter star system , space travel is achieved,

 

:- Then : they would bound to be either kindly or self destructive ( these latter type , namely .."self destructive". . in which case they would NOT have survived ,so as to make the journey ) .

 

Thus any visitors ,I think will be kind, non destructive ( unlike those in Independence Day film style ) , however the film , nonetheless , has some interesting aspects.

 

Mike

 

image.jpg

. .the end ..

 

 

The premise of independence day was a non starter, the resources they were supposedly coming for are widely available in places like the asteroid belt or the kuiper belt, why fight another species for that which you could get free? The idea that aliens would want our planet IMHO is silly, we have evolved to fit our planet, the earth is not some special oasis that all alien life would gravitate toward. Alien life would evolve to fit their own planet, no reason to think all life bearing planets would be enough like earth for us to live there or for them to live here. A minor trace element like mercury would be enough to make a planet uninhabitable by humans.

 

I have been reading where at least some scientists think the earth may be unique in having such a thin atmosphere, an earth sized planet should have a much more dense atmosphere. If this is true then aliens from a planet with a 10 bar atmosphere might have a rough time adapting, other trace elements like CO2 could render a planet useless. The variables are endless and each species would be adapted to a specific set of conditions unlikely to be repeated anywhere else..

it is the same as asking about seeing a magnetic field or energy, we see its effect, how it gives life, and makes a living thing unique.

 

 

I can show you a magnetic field, can you show me a spirit?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

The premise of independence day was a non starter, the resources they were supposedly coming for are widely available in places like the asteroid belt or the kuiper belt, why fight another species for that which you could get free? The idea that aliens would want our planet IMHO is silly, we have evolved to fit our planet, the earth is not some special oasis that all alien life would gravitate toward. Alien life would evolve to fit their own planet, no reason to think all life bearing planets would be enough like earth for us to live there or for them to live here. A minor trace element like mercury would be enough to make a planet uninhabitable by humans.

 

I have been reading where at least some scientists think the earth may be unique in having such a thin atmosphere, an earth sized planet should have a much more dense atmosphere. If this is true then aliens from a planet with a 10 bar atmosphere might have a rough time adapting, other trace elements like CO2 could render a planet useless. The variables are endless and each species would be adapted to a specific set of conditions unlikely to be repeated anywhere else..

 

 

I can show you a magnetic field, can you show me a spirit?

It would be nice if someone were to make a really credible film ! Do you know of one ?

 

Arthur c Clark , and Isaac Asimov , wrote some really futuristic yet credible stories . I suppose 2001 a space Odessy was quite good , with its follow ups 2010 etc . I also quite liked 'Contact ' by ....' thing me ' ?

 

Mike

Edited April 11, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Moontanman]

It would be nice if someone were to make a really credible film ! Do you know of one ?

 

Arthur c Clark , and Isaac Asimov , wrote some really futuristic yet credible stories . I suppose 2001 a space Odessy was quite good , with its follow ups 2010 etc . I also quite liked 'Contact ' by ....' thing me ' ?

 

Mike

 

 

There are a couple of credible films about what would happen if we were invaded but i have yet to see a credible reason why we would be invaded...

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

...VOYAGER MISSION...

 

Karl Sagan has just been explaining how a message would go out on the NASA voyager mission . Here in u.k. BBC 4 ( as we speak ) is reviewing this amazing once in 170 year window to launch a space mission going without fuel across the solar system and beyond . Started in the 1970s the mission would sling shot around the planets , using gravity, and the sun at each stage. It has only as a continuing mission left the outer edges of our solar system .

 

On the mission craft is a message to other races, what we like , what we say , how we look , our music , our literature.

Karl Sagan led this PR both to the sponsors on Earth , and any contact with any alien , that ultimately found the craft.

 

I think any race finding us will be totally benign. In the mean time there might be some observation going on .

 

Mike

Edited April 12, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

In the mean time there might be some observation going on .

 

There might be. But there is zero evidence for this.

 

The best you have come up with is that some (unspecified) coincidences are meaningful (to you) in some (unspecified) way.

 

As you refuse to provide any objective definition of what would make a coincidence meaningful, there is no reason for anyone else to think this is anything other than your imagination / wishful-thinking.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

There might be. But there is zero evidence for this.

 

The best you have come up with is that some (unspecified) coincidences are meaningful (to you) in some (unspecified) way.

 

As you refuse to provide any objective definition of what would make a coincidence meaningful, there is no reason for anyone else to think this is anything other than your imagination / wishful-thinking.

Well I must admit , I have often questioned myself , is this just talking to yourself ? , it might be an effective mechanism for questioning ones own beliefs on the subject identified. In other words " talking to yourself very effectively " A sort of mild , conscious , self hypnosis , on a visually grand scale , .......trouble is this definitely invokes the men in white coats ! I think you better send them in !

 

Mike

Edited April 13, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Spyman]

Well Mike, you are claiming, that on more or less daily basis and when you are alone, you have a ritual where you can ask questions directed to a higher power. This more advanced life form will then, within a few minutes, reveal the answer to you by manipulating your surroundings and show you a mystical sign. Moreover you think you have a method to correctly decipher this serendipity and are accepting this information as useful contribution for consideration.

 

So I can only see four possibilities here:

1) You want to believe this is true so badly that you fool yourself by finding and interpret random events to support your wishes.

2) You lie deliberately and tries to deceive us with this exotic fantasy for some unknown reasons.

3) You are really losing your grip on reality and should seek professional help as soon as possible.

4) You are correct and there actually exists a higher life form which is communicating with you.

 

IMHO the first alternative is the very best and most likely of them, I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, I don't wish the third to happen to anyone and for humanity's sake, I hope the last option is false, I don't think higher powers nor advanced life forms, who hides and secretly interferes with human business will do us any good.

 

Looking at the options, an insane person would very likely have revealed himself already and an objective and honest person would actively and eagerly seek a way to discern the truth and try to scientifically verify it, which is something that so far, from your side, is painfully missing throughout the whole thread.

 

That leaves us with the first and second alternatives which both have the trouble that if true, you will do your best to avoid and dodge anything that could expose the opposite of your claim, both logic conclusions and scientific tests.

 

It's fine by me if you want to keep your belief, but if you want to convince us that something actually exists and communicates with you, then you really need to start to engage in the discussion, answer questions directly without superfluous and misleading thoughts and seriously search for a scientific way to verify or falsify this supposed communication.

 

The friendly community here can more than likely help you devise a scientific blind test if you truly are willing to fully commit.