nighttrain
Legend
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2013
- Messages
- 9,216
He contends that humans are not that intelligent because herd mentality prevents even our most scientifically oriented people refusing to accept disparate information that would make them have to change their theories to reflect reality.
Anyone who strays from the norm is labeled lunatic fringe or conspiracy theorist.
All by design.A lot of information has been suppressed for years. Some has always been out there people just choose to ignore it. Hide in plain site. Anyone who strays from the norm is labeled lunatic fringe or conspiracy theorist. Makes them easy to dismiss. I guess I fall in with the lunatics. Who knew.
There's 50 million other life supporting capable planets, but how many didn't develop life? And how many that did are stuck with something like the dinosaurs (not dinosaurs exactly, but not developing society). Of the millions of species on our planet only one is capable of taking the moon. It's not that far out there to say that you could have life on a planet that just never develops in that way.This is simple. To think that we are the only "intelligent" life in the universe is a very arrogant position. IF there are 100 million planets in the Milky Way, (some say 100 to 400 million planers) and half can support life, that's 50 million planets capable of supporting some form of life. Take that and then make the bold assumption that humans are in the middle of that number on the intelligence level means there would be 25 million species smarter than us. And one thing you have to remember, just because we breathe oxygen doesn't mean that other life forms may breathe something else. Life as we know it may not be the same on other planets.
You can be intelligent and never develop interstellar travel.This is simple. To think that we are the only "intelligent" life in the universe is a very arrogant position. IF there are 100 million planets in the Milky Way, (some say 100 to 400 million planers) and half can support life, that's 50 million planets capable of supporting some form of life. Take that and then make the bold assumption that humans are in the middle of that number on the intelligence level means there would be 25 million species smarter than us. And one thing you have to remember, just because we breathe oxygen doesn't mean that other life forms may breathe something else. Life as we know it may not be the same on other planets.
Relativity is real. But given higher dimensions and being able to perhaps fold space in that higher dimension maybe you get that warp envelope we saw in Star Trek. Which means you aren't breaking relativity, you're just taking a short cut.1. The theory of relativity is BS. The speed of light would not be a barrier and nor would gravity.
2. Incredible timing, where our rise from the amoeba to intelligence would have to be simultaneous to a much more technologically advanced civilization. If they are that advanced, they would have the capability to never let us see them.
Definition of life is important too I think. Whatever else life is defined as in the future we know it's fueled by chemical conversion. We're mobile autonomous chemical reactors, eat some food it turns to energy. So from that perspective maybe that definition of life is going to be much broader than we think, and there will be no end of it out there where the conditions allow for it. If we get that far to see some of our galaxy those future humans will see some really cool shit and new life forms.There's 50 million other life supporting capable planets, but how many didn't develop life? And how many that did are stuck with something like the dinosaurs (not dinosaurs exactly, but not developing society). Of the millions of species on our planet only one is capable of taking the moon. It's not that far out there to say that you could have life on a planet that just never develops in that way.
The definition of life is pretty broad. I've no doubt that we'll find crazy stuff that fits. I doubt we'll need to adapt for anything we find as long as we aren't dumb.Relativity is real. But given higher dimensions and being able to perhaps fold space in that higher dimension maybe you get that warp envelope we saw in Star Trek. Which means you aren't breaking relativity, you're just taking a short cut.
Time is the real problem with alien life. They would have to exist in the same window of time with us. So it could be that out on a spiral arm which is where we're at we might not have as good a chance of meeting another intelligent species as those species who have already lived and died in the early days of the galaxy while our neighborhood was still dust.
Actually time in general is a problem tbh. Time dilation in particular, which is kind of mind blowing. To think that if you boost at 1g for 10 years then decelerate for 10 years at the same by the time you arrive at your destination thousands of years would have passed due to your velocity affecting the passage of time. So without a warp envelope yeah it's gonna suck lol.
Definition of life is important too I think. Whatever else life is defined as in the future we know it's fueled by chemical conversion. We're mobile autonomous chemical reactors, eat some food it turns to energy. So from that perspective maybe that definition of life is going to be much broader than we think, and there will be no end of it out there where the conditions allow for it. If we get that far to see some of our galaxy those future humans will see some really cool shit and new life forms.
But yeah even with the assumption that most life won't achieve our own level of development there is room out of the sheer numbers to drive an amazing diversity of life out there.
Relativity is "real" as we know it. That does not mean that it is the end all be all theory. It means that it is the end all be all in relation to the capability of our minds. We have constraints in our minds as to what life is, and how the universe works. And we may be wrong. Of just not capable of understanding more.Relativity is real. But given higher dimensions and being able to perhaps fold space in that higher dimension maybe you get that warp envelope we saw in Star Trek. Which means you aren't breaking relativity, you're just taking a short cut.
Time is the real problem with alien life. They would have to exist in the same window of time with us. So it could be that out on a spiral arm which is where we're at we might not have as good a chance of meeting another intelligent species as those species who have already lived and died in the early days of the galaxy while our neighborhood was still dust.
Actually time in general is a problem tbh. Time dilation in particular, which is kind of mind blowing. To think that if you boost at 1g for 10 years then decelerate for 10 years at the same by the time you arrive at your destination thousands of years would have passed due to your velocity affecting the passage of time. So without a warp envelope yeah it's gonna suck lol.
Definition of life is important too I think. Whatever else life is defined as in the future we know it's fueled by chemical conversion. We're mobile autonomous chemical reactors, eat some food it turns to energy. So from that perspective maybe that definition of life is going to be much broader than we think, and there will be no end of it out there where the conditions allow for it. If we get that far to see some of our galaxy those future humans will see some really cool shit and new life forms.
But yeah even with the assumption that most life won't achieve our own level of development there is room out of the sheer numbers to drive an amazing diversity of life out there.
I did say "bold assumption" that we are in the middle. But who knows. The planet has water is a leap. But then, we have to think outside the box. All too many feel that life has to be carbon-based. That may or may not be true. For us on this planet it is. But who's to say that on some other planet they don't drink acid and breathe carbon dioxide?There's 50 million other life supporting capable planets, but how many didn't develop life? And how many that did are stuck with something like the dinosaurs (not dinosaurs exactly, but not developing society). Of the millions of species on our planet only one is capable of taking the moon. It's not that far out there to say that you could have life on a planet that just never develops in that way.
At this point we're down to a few million in our galaxy. Then you say we're in the middle (which isn't supported by evidence found in this planet, but let's roll with it), and that's 3-6 million potentially smarter than us.
I was watching a show on Netflix about the universe and they talked about kepler 22b. It was weird some of the assumptions they made. For example, they said the average density of the planet was some number, let's say 4 for the sake of simplicity. And this scientist who helped discover it came on and says, "The density of water is 3 and the density of rock is 5. The density of kepler 22b is 4. Do you know what that means? There's only one conclusion, kepler 22b is made of both rock and water! It's a habitable zone planet with characteristics like earth!" That's a paraphrase but the gist is there. What caught me off guard about that was that that he says there's only one conclusion. I may not be an expert, but it's that really the only possible conclusion that could be drawn here? It seems like a stretch and it makes me wonder what other interesting leaps convenience they may have taken. It maybe they just need to explain themselves better. In conclusion, science has a terrible PR department and they need to work on that.
So if we could travel to another planet... and discovered some version of human... would we just come and go? Stay hidden like UFO’s are to us?
I find that... odd?