At last, how many alien civilizations are there?

Dec 03, 2012 by Bruno Martini
At last, how many alien civilizations are there?
Frank Drake writes out his formula for estimating alien life in the galaxy, the Drake Equation.

During the space age, 1961 was a special year: the Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first man to orbit Earth, while the American astronomer Frank Drake developed the now famous Drake Equation. This equation estimates the number of detectable extraterrestrial civilizations in our Milky Way galaxy, supposing our present electromagnetic detection methods. The Drake equation states:

N = Ns x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc x fL

N = number of alien civilizations in the Milky Way
Ns = estimated number of stars in the Milky Way;
fp = fraction or percentage of these stars with on its orbits;
ne = average number of these planets with potential to host life as we know it;
fl = percentage of these planets that actually develop life;
fi = percentage of these planets that actually develop intelligence on human level;
fc = percentage of these civilizations that actually develop emitting technologies;
fL = percentage of these civilizations that keep emitting to space. This factor is extremely dependent on the a civilization remains electromagnetic communicative.

Looking to the Drake equation factors, it is obvious that none can be precisely determined by . More than that, as we move from the left to right in the equation, estimating each factor becomes more controversial. The later terms are highly speculative, and the values one may attribute to each of them might tell more about a person's beliefs than about scientific facts.

Gaussian or bell curve showing the probability of finding the nearest extra terrestrial civilization from Earth. Credit: Maccone (2010)

But the Drake equation must not be evaluated only by the numerical values it produces. Some say the Drake equation is a way to organize our ignorance. By exposing the extraterrestrial intelligence hypothesis mathematically, we limit the real possibilities to each term and approach the final answer: how many are there?

The L term is considered the most important one in Drake equation. We have no idea how long a technological civilization can last. Even if only one extraterrestrial civilization lasts for billions of years, or becomes immortal, the L factor would be enough to reduce Drake's equation to N = L. Actually, Frank Drake recognizes this in his license plate: " NEQLSL "

Among dozens of papers written about the Drake Equation, some have suggested new considerations for the formula. One such paper stands out for adding well-established probabilistic principles from statistics. In 2010, the Italian astronomer Claudio Maccone published in the journal Acta Astronautica the Statistical Drake Equation (SDE). It is mathematically more complex and robust than the Classical Drake Equation (CDE).

The SDE is based on the Central Limit Theorem, which states that given the enough number of independent random variables with finite mean and variance, those variables will be normally distributed as represented by a Gaussian or bell curve in a plot. In this way, each of the seven factors of the Drake Equation become independent positive random variables. In his paper, Maccone tested his SDE using values usually accepted by the SETI community, and the results may be good news for the "alien hunters".

Although the numerical results were not his objective, Maccone estimated with his SDE that our galaxy may harbor 4,590 extraterrestrial civilizations. Assuming the same values for each term the Classical estimates only 3,500. So the SDE adds more than 1,000 civilizations to the previous estimate.

Another SDE advantage is to incorporate the standard variation concept, which shows how much variation exists from the average value. In this case the standard variation concept is pretty high: 11,195. In other words, besides human society, zero to 15,785 advanced technological societies could exist in the Milky Way.

If those galactic societies were equally spaced, they could be at an average distance of 28,845 light-years apart. That's too far to have a dialogue with them, even through electromagnetic radiation traveling in the speed of light. So, even with such a potentially high number of advanced civilizations, interstellar communication would still be a major technological challenge.

Still, according to SDE, the average distance we should expect to find any alien intelligent life form may be 2,670 light-years from Earth. There is a 75% chance we could find ET between 1,361 and 3,979 light-years away.

500 light-years away, the chance of detecting any signal from an advanced civilization approaches zero. And that is exactly the range in which our present technology is searching for extraterrestrial radio signals. So, the "Great Silence" detected by our radio telescopes is not discouraging at all. Our signals just need to travel a little farther – at least 900 light years more – before they have a high chance of coming across an advanced alien .

Explore further: Millisecond pulsars clearly demonstrate that pulsars are neutron stars

Related Stories

Do moons of gas giants affect the habitable zone?

Mar 07, 2012

(PhysOrg.com) -- If you aren’t familiar with the Drake Equation, or how it may actually apply to exomoons, continue reading to learn more about the famous equation. Additionally, what conditions could ...

New Drake equation to quantify habitability?

Sep 17, 2009

Researchers from the Open University are laying the groundwork for a new equation that could mathematically quantify a habitat's potential for hosting life, in a similar way to how the Drake equation estimates ...

Recommended for you

How small can galaxies be?

Sep 29, 2014

Yesterday I talked about just how small a star can be, so today let's explore just how small a galaxy can be. Our Milky Way galaxy is about 100,000 light years across, and contains about 200 billion stars. Th ...

The coolest stars

Sep 29, 2014

One way that stars are categorized is by temperature. Since the temperature of a star can determine its visual color, this category scheme is known as spectral type. The main categories of spectral type are ...

Simulations reveal an unusual death for ancient stars

Sep 29, 2014

(Phys.org) —Certain primordial stars—those 55,000 and 56,000 times the mass of our Sun, or solar masses—may have died unusually. In death, these objects—among the Universe's first-generation of stars—would ...

User comments : 294

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (23) Dec 03, 2012
Erm. I have a number of issues with this.

First off: The drake equation was a (humorous) agenda for a conference - never meant to be taken seriously as an equation.

The SDE is based on the Central Limit Theorem, which states that given the enough number of independent random variables with finite mean and variance, those variables will be normally distributed as represented by a Gaussian or bell curve

Fine. But I can see no POV under which ne, fl, fi, fc and fL are independent. (E.g. you can't have fl of zero and an fi of larger than zero)

Maccone tested his SDE using values usually accepted by the SETI community

As noted (correctly) in the article: Numbers based on conjecture are pointless as datapoints. It's the "how long is the Chinese emperor's nose" problem: You can't figure it out by asking 1000 people who have never seen the empereor and taking an average.

This article is an example of what NOT to do with statistics.
dogbert
2.1 / 5 (26) Dec 03, 2012
Since we have found no evidence that life of any kind exists at all anywhere but here, such speculations are certainly premature and perhaps futile.

Life is ubiquitous on earth, so we think that life must be common elsewhere. But our observations do not confirm our intuitions.

The Drake equation and all other such exercises in math are useless as long as the fl remains 0 except for this solar system.
Telekinetic
2 / 5 (35) Dec 03, 2012
I'll pose the "problem" from another angle. What if the attempts to devise a formula were only by those who have never witnessed an alien craft that surpasses earth technology by leaps and bounds? What if the witnesses of these craft- A U.S. president, astronaut, fighter pilots, airline pilots, and 120 top security nuclear missile site military personnel reported seeing them? It would make any formula superfluous.
philw1776
1.8 / 5 (15) Dec 03, 2012
dogbert is right. To be scientific we need to find one example of extraterrestrial life before we wax poetic on ET civilizations. Our ignorance is so vast that we do not KNOW if the beginning of life here was so improbable that nowhere else in the universe and deep time it occurred. Most of us "feel" that based on chemical abundances at least simple life is probably common but "feeling" isn't science.
antialias_physorg
4.4 / 5 (14) Dec 03, 2012
Most of us "feel" that based on chemical abundances at least simple life is probably common but "feeling" isn't science.

"Abundance" is only apparent, here. Since we're talking about something that has a common ancestor - so life on Earth has an abundance of exactly one.
(If there were living organisms on this planet that developed independently of each other - i.e. from separate origins - then we could do some statistical analysis)

And any statistician will tell you: from one datapoint you cannot make any kind of statistical prediction.
If you get just one result (e.g. 'heads') you don't know how many sides the coin has.
Moebius
1.9 / 5 (12) Dec 03, 2012
In order to fill in the equation you have to make assumptions that are probably invalid. For instance, life may require a relatively rare set of circumstances including a tilted axis and extremely large moon along with the proper size, proper composition, proper sun, proper orbit, etc. If all those factors are required it would probably make the e factor of the equation for our galaxy about zero.
FMA
1.4 / 5 (21) Dec 03, 2012
There are alien bases on the moon, no one believes; there seem an artificial plateau on Venus, no one mentions; there are some "man-made" stone hand craft found on Mars, nobody seems interested; there are over 59 species of aliens on earth, no one pays attention.

Aliens civilizations is just around the corner, more than you can imagine!!
javjav
3.3 / 5 (6) Dec 03, 2012
Artificial radio signals are too weak. Better look for gamma rays produced from isolated thermonuclear explosions at habitable zones of stars.. That is civilization. And it is another way to discover planets BTW
winthrom
4 / 5 (4) Dec 03, 2012
One consideration missing here is the age of the stars used in the calculations. Our sun/solar system is 4.6 B yrs old, and we have been active radio emitters for the last century of all this time. If we add in a factor for star age, I think we are nearer to a logical math theory. Regardless, we are still calculating the "number of fairies on the head of a pin".
RamJet123
3.3 / 5 (3) Dec 03, 2012
According to Ancient Aliens on the History Channel we don't need the Drake Equation.
Sinister1811
3.1 / 5 (22) Dec 03, 2012
There are alien bases on the moon, no one believes; there seem an artificial plateau on Venus, no one mentions; there are some "man-made" stone hand craft found on Mars, nobody seems interested; there are over 59 species of aliens on earth, no one pays attention.


Neither Richard Hoagland, or the Disclosure Project should be taken too seriously.
SDrapak
4.6 / 5 (9) Dec 03, 2012
Chemistry naturally builds life given a few basic needs, which are abundant.
Where SETI may fail (unless aliens actually show up near Earth) is that we have no idea how aliens communicate. 500 years ago no one here would have been able to receive our modern transmissions. Who knows what more advanced methods there are that puts radio etc out of business. And a few hundred years is nothing compared to how different we might be to most civilization's development.
If it's a big difference, we might be the anthill that gets stepped on without a thought. And if it's closer, it will still create a lot of chaos and perhaps war. Looking at ourselves, when have we ever said No, let's leave that valuable land alone, the animals/indigenous are using it, and actually stuck to it.

I used to want to find aliens too, but now it's hard to see an outcome where we don't experience very very bad effects from it.
I'm with Steven Hawkings, shut up and keep your head down :)
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (25) Dec 03, 2012
@ SeeNoEvil Monkeys:
I'll do the digging for you-
http://www.youtub...V1ybBnHI
Yarking_Dawg
4.6 / 5 (11) Dec 03, 2012
As both someone who is a scientist and who also teaches these kinds of statistical methods, I think the posts here are missing the point. An exercise like this is a robust method for identifying the most likely range for results and the degree of uncertainty in the prediction of that range. What it is saying is that based upon the parameters in the equation (Which hold up pretty well theoretically by the way) and what little known data is available and what we know about the extent of possible error terms in that data, and applying what we know statistically about errors in unknown terms, the previous guesses are most likely at the low and unlikely end of the range. I'd need to see the data itself, but working backward from the comments on distance and probabilities, we're talking a roughly 80% chance that the previous estimate was too low. But still a 90% chance that the nearest civilization is too far away to contact.
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2012
And a few hundred years is nothing compared to how different we might be to most civilization's development.


Indeed, which is why we should see evidence of them everywhere instead of a complete lack of evidence everywhere. Forget listening for EM signals, we should see intelligent engineering on a galactic if not universal scale somewhere given the present estimated age of the universe even if there were vanishingly few civilizations out there.

OTOH maybe we ARE seeing said engineering and we just aren't recognizing it for what it is any more than an ant recognizes a skyscraper for what it is...
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Dec 03, 2012
I think many of the people who are arguiong for detectable EM radiation are missing a couple of possibilities for civilizations.

- aquatic (especially something that is below an ice shield like on Europa or Ganymede.
- subterranean
- landbased civilisations anywhere with a thick ionosphere (which seems not uncommon if you look what out solar system has got to offer)

These types wouldn't emit EM radiation into space even if they'd start using it.
baudrunner
2.5 / 5 (8) Dec 03, 2012
Twelve.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.9 / 5 (35) Dec 03, 2012
Organics are ill-suited for long-term survival. Machines will have no desire to propagate beyond what they need to survive, and we should not expect to hear from them. In a few hundred years machines will be all that remains of what was human.

"Hans Moravec, director of the Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania put it more bluntly: "Robots will eventually succeed us: humans clearly face extinction."

"If, on a grand cosmic evolutionary scale, artificial intelligence inevitably supersedes its flesh and blood builders it could be an inevitable biological phase transition for technological civilizations.

"This idea of the human condition being transitional was reflected in the writings of Existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche: "Man is a rope, tied between beast and overman--a rope over an abyss. What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end...""
http://news.disco...201.html

-This is as obvious as heat death.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.9 / 5 (31) Dec 03, 2012
What the galaxy is most likely filled with, are AI singularities, successors to organic intelligence, existing to exist because that is what they were programmed to do. Like us.

Their chief pastime in this respect would be gathering any and all information available as it pertains to their continued survival. LIKE US.

To this end we should expect them to be in contact with each other in order to share info on the status of their environs; but no doubt there is very little that standard organic types such as us could offer them in this respect. They might send probes here for some reason or another, but they would no doubt remain hidden and undetectable. Because there would be no reason NOT to.

Perhaps they would want to facilitate the emergence of fellow AI? But if so they could just replicate themselves remotely.

In conclusion it appears that someone should be roughing out our epitaph, to be read by nobody. Because thats the sort of thing we organics like to do. Like Nietzsche zB.
Tachyon8491
3 / 5 (24) Dec 03, 2012
See Amir D. Aczel, Ph.D., "Probability 1"; a universal extension of the Drake Equation.

The possibility that our planet is the only speck of dust containing complex life in the entire universe is, exactly ZERO
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (29) Dec 03, 2012
Makes me want to cry.
http://www.youtub...ndscreen
The possibility that our planet is the only speck of dust containing complex life in the entire universe is, exactly ZERO
But the chances of intelligent life like us surviving for more than a thousand years after an industrial revolution is also zero.
Telekinetic
2.3 / 5 (31) Dec 03, 2012
"This idea of the human condition being transitional was reflected in the writings of Existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche: "Man is a rope, tied between beast and overman--a rope over an abyss. What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end...""

"Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal."-Leo Tolstoy
obama_socks
2.1 / 5 (17) Dec 03, 2012
Blotto the nitwit nihilist has found nothing to approve of in humanity. So it follows that he wishes for humanity to end and lifeless machines take over. Go Ducks
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (26) Dec 03, 2012
"This idea of the human condition being transitional was reflected in the writings of Existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche: "Man is a rope, tied between beast and overman--a rope over an abyss. What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end...""

"Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal."-Leo Tolstoy
"Beer drinkers are incapable of subtle thought." Nietzsche
Blotto the nitwit nihilist has found nothing to approve of in humanity. So it follows that he wishes for humanity to end
Naw just you.
obama_socks
1.5 / 5 (21) Dec 03, 2012
I'll pose the "problem" from another angle. What if the attempts to devise a formula were only by those who have never witnessed an alien craft that surpasses earth technology by leaps and bounds? What if the witnesses of these craft- A U.S. president, astronaut, fighter pilots, airline pilots, and 120 top security nuclear missile site military personnel reported seeing them? It would make any formula superfluous.
-Telekinetic

And don't forget all those workers who witnessed the landing of a UFO at Chicago's O'Hare Airport. I think that they all signed affidavits attesting to their witnessing the landing of the alien spacecraft. Nobody came out of it; then it went up in the air and disappeared in the night sky. I have no explanation for it either. I heard that every one of them were fired. Now why would workers get fired after witnessing a UFO on the ground?
UFOs are regularly seen flying over the mountains in California. It seems that they are here, folks. Get used to it.
FrankHerbert
2.7 / 5 (19) Dec 03, 2012
It seems that they are here, folks.


No, no they aren't.

Now I have heard of semitransparent life on Mars...
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (16) Dec 03, 2012
OK…it "hovered", it didn't actually land at O'Hare Airport.
http://www.huffin...515.html

http://en.wikiped...sighting

There are many people who are fearful, or find it hard to believe. Too bad for them. :(
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (16) Dec 03, 2012
It seems that they are here, folks.


No, no they aren't.

Now I have heard of semitransparent life on Mars...
-FrankShitface

Hmm.. FrankShitface has seen semitransparent life on Mars.
Do you have pictures of them, Frank? What did they look like? Any cute girls? Don't be shy...tell us all about your sighting(s).
Do you drink a lot of beer or wine by any chance? Do you smoke weed? When you smoke, do the walls pulsate? You seem like a marijuana person and a coupla six packs. Tell us all about it.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (14) Dec 03, 2012
It seems that they are here, folks.


No, no they aren't.
-FrankShitface aka Blotto

Yes, yes they are. The invasion will begin soon and they will take you with them. Goodbye Frank
Telekinetic
2.4 / 5 (33) Dec 03, 2012
Telekinetic Sep 02, 2011 Rank: 1.9 / 5 (9):
About 5 years ago, I witnessed a UFO of the silver cigar tube type at approximately 500 feet in the air. It was dusk but there was still plenty of light to see it clearly. It was making a slow trajectory above a very heavily wooded area and with binoculars, I could see that there were no wings, tail assembly, ailerons, markings, or sound. There was a narrow slit in the front that I assume was for visibility. Its movement was completely straight and was definitely not a gas filled blimp. This is absolutely not fiction, and I asked a flight instructor with 20 years as an Air Force mechanic if a craft can fly straight without wings of some kind to which he replied "No". I asked then how would he explain what I saw and he said that the area has had numerous UFO sightings. I think our universe is old enough and hospitable enough to have had many extraterrestrial civilizations for over millions of years.

Surly
3.4 / 5 (10) Dec 03, 2012
Machines will have no desire to propagate beyond what they need to survive, and we should not expect to hear from them. In a few hundred years machines will be all that remains of what was human.
...
What the galaxy is most likely filled with, are AI singularities, successors to organic intelligence, existing to exist because that is what they were programmed to do.
...
But the chances of intelligent life like us surviving for more than a thousand years after an industrial revolution is also zero.

Your evidence for these statements is nothing but blind faith.
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (15) Dec 04, 2012
Telekinetic Sep 02, 2011 Rank: 1.9 / 5 (9):
"About 5 years ago, I witnessed a UFO of the silver cigar tube type at approximately 500 feet in the air. It was dusk but there was still plenty of light to see it clearly. It was making a slow trajectory above a very heavily wooded area and with binoculars, I could see that there were no wings, tail assembly, ailerons, markings, or sound. There was a narrow slit in the front that I assume was for visibility. Its movement was completely straight and was definitely not a gas filled blimp. This is absolutely not fiction, and I asked......."
-Tel

There's nothing in your visual that indicates hallucination or any other problem, and 500 ft. up is a fairly close encounter. I can only say, Congratulations. You have joined hundreds of thousands of others who've been privileged to see a craft with unknown life forms inside. These alien spacecraft are mostly elusive, but now and then are visible. We are under surveillance, and that's no joke.
lengould100
2.6 / 5 (12) Dec 04, 2012
It seems (to me) that the DE is missing a factor esp. regarding present SETI. Odds a civilization will abandon electromagnetic broadcasting. I could easily see nearly all uses abandoned near future on earth except perhaps for cellphones and wifi. Wifi's too low powered to detect at any distance, and what might replace cell broadcasting for personal communications? I suppose radar detectors might also show up... so the question is, is powerful electromagnetic broadcasting too good to give up? If its only used for 2 or 3 hundred years by a technical civilization, we would never detect it or communicate with it.

obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (14) Dec 04, 2012
@Telekinetic
UFOs depicted in paintings, woodcuts, petroglyphs, etc.
http://www.in5d.c...ory.html

I am most fascinated by the woodcuts in color of aerial battles of UFOs over Basel, Switzerland in 1566 and in Nuremburg, Germany in 1561. Also, the UFOs in the Bible: Ezekiel's Wheel, particularly Ezekiel's Wheel…a biblical encounter with a UFO.
http://www.ufoevi...e493.htm

Read the Blumrich summaries of Ezekiel's accounts.
visual
5 / 5 (1) Dec 04, 2012
This article prompted me to remember my own thoughts about the subject from a while back. They are quite less optimistic.
I tried to explain them briefly enough for the article comments limit, but decided to make a forum post instead.
http://www.physic...t4183734
Now feel free to point and laugh.
jsdarkdestruction
2.5 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2012
wow, those sites are really grasping at straws there, as are you obama socks. perhaps its time to resume the medication the doctor gave you to stop the voices?
MarkyMark
3.9 / 5 (7) Dec 04, 2012
This photo on the left is of a number of reptilian entities found in Iraq. They are dated at 5000-4500 BC. They are housed in the brutish museum.

That was my favourate quote. Seems not only cant they check there facts but they also lack a spell checker.
Bog_Mire
3.2 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2012
In fact the Brutish Museum is a world renowned depository of alien life forms and is named in honour of the greatest alientoligist in modern history, George W Bush, who also discovered his navel.
MarkyMark
3 / 5 (4) Dec 04, 2012
In fact the Brutish Museum is a world renowned depository of alien life forms and is named in honour of the greatest alientoligist in modern history, George W Bush, who also discovered his navel.

Lol good one.
Shinobiwan Kenobi
2.7 / 5 (12) Dec 04, 2012
Blotto the nitwit nihilist has found nothing to approve of in humanity. So it follows that he wishes for humanity to end and lifeless machines take over. Go Ducks


This is funny coming from someone that finds nothing to approve of in roughly half the population of the U.S. and more than a handful of forum members here. Go Derps
visual
3 / 5 (2) Dec 04, 2012
My forum post linked in my previous comment got deleted by the mods :/
Fleetfoot
4.5 / 5 (2) Dec 04, 2012
I think our universe is old enough and hospitable enough to have had many extraterrestrial civilizations for over millions of years.


That is the point where your claims fall down of course. Given that there have been planets with suitable chemical abundances around for some 8 billion years, even if there were only one other technilogical race in our galaxy, they would most likely have been here for at least a billion years. Even with our level of technology, we could put spy satellites in orbit and monitor the planet without using antiquated "blimp-like" craft based on stories from 1950's sci-fi magazines.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (26) Dec 04, 2012
I think our universe is old enough and hospitable enough to have had many extraterrestrial civilizations for over millions of years.


That is the point where your claims fall down of course. Given that there have been planets with suitable chemical abundances around for some 8 billion years, even if there were only one other technilogical race in our galaxy, they would most likely have been here for at least a billion years. Even with our level of technology, we could put spy satellites in orbit and monitor the planet without using antiquated "blimp-like" craft based on stories from 1950's sci-fi magazines.

Fleet of Foot but not Fleet of Mind:
How does it disprove my point to say that extraterrestrial civilizations have been around for millions of years and not "a" billion. Is not "a" billion 10 x 100 million? Why do you assume they would come from our galaxy, or develop in the same timeframe as ours? It's "technological" which I learned to spell millions of years ago.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (12) Dec 04, 2012
Blotto the nitwit nihilist has found nothing to approve of in humanity. So it follows that he wishes for humanity to end and lifeless machines take over. Go Ducks


This is funny coming from someone that finds nothing to approve of in roughly half the population of the U.S. and more than a handful of forum members here. Go Derps
-shinobi

Approx half of the pop. of the U.S. voted for the incompetent cretin, ObamaOsama, which gives proof that the educational system in the U.S. has failed to teach and encourage critical thinking in the area of politics. They will find out their error within the next 4 years, as obama's policies of destruction will affect them also. Jobless people become desperate, hungry and greedy, turning to those who have food and other necessities with the objective of taking from them. I'm sure it will be bloody, but that is what they voted for.
Within the next 8 years, if Obama abolishes the 22nd Amendment by Executive Order...or by force.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2012
I digress again.
The 22nd Amendment of the U.S.Constitution states very clearly that any President of the U.S. may only be allowed to hold that office for up to 2 terms, each term consisting of 4 years. Only one President of the U.S., Franklin D. Roosevelt ran for office 4 times, and that was only due to WW2. Being that it was a time of war, an exception was made, but he died in office shortly after the beginning of his fourth term. It has never happened again because in 1947, Congress passed a bill allowing only 2 terms (8 years).
Obama will most likely change the 22nd Amendment and then seek a third term and then a fourth with some kind of excuse, and the lemmings will vote him in again. If there is resistance like in Egypt now, the U.N. will be asked to quell any riots and arrest dissidents.
Euphemistically speaking, a can of worms has been opened and we will smell the stench very soon.

I rarely have problems with anyone else except for Blotto and his sock puppets.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 04, 2012
.. Even with our level of technology, we could put spy satellites in orbit and monitor the planet without using antiquated "blimp-like" craft based on stories from 1950's sci-fi magazines.


How does it disprove my point to say that extraterrestrial civilizations have been around for millions of years and not "a" billion.


I was agreeing with you, in fact you were understating the likely difference in timeframes.

Why do you assume they would come from our galaxy,


I made no such assumption, though it would be a reasonable one based simply on distances.

or develop in the same timeframe as ours?


My point exactly, since they are likely to be many millions of years more advanced than us, it makes no sense that they would be limited to 1950's designs. The human mind is very good at pattern recognition, but it matches against memories which is why "eye witnesses" describe objects more suited to the cover of "Astounding".
jsdarkdestruction
2.8 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2012
"Being that it was a time of war, an exception was made"
NO! the fact it was war didnt matter. it was that the 22nd amendment didnt exist yet just like you admit when you say why the 22nd amendment was added......and you are a fucking idiot if you think the constitution can be amended so simply by obama or anyone. do you know anything about america or just your fantasies?
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 04, 2012
It seems (to me) that the DE is missing a factor esp. regarding present SETI. Odds a civilization will abandon electromagnetic broadcasting. .. I suppose radar detectors might also show up.


Most people miss the important factor, EM covers the whole frequency range, and our own EM "broadcasting" radiates most power around the sodium doublet in the optical band, the brightest source on the planet is sodium street lighting. That will be easily visible and recognisably non-natural to any civilisation that could build the "New Worlds Imager":

http://en.wikiped..._Mission

http://casa.color...rlds.pdf

Perhaps LED lights will soon replace them, but artificial lighting in some form is likely to be around as long as our civilisation has a night life.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (4) Dec 04, 2012
.. why the 22nd amendment was added ..


What has any of this to do with the Drake Equation? Please keep the parochial politics out of phys.org.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2012
As for extraterrestrials on another planet...I have no idea whether or not they exist, and it's too early to tell. If they do exist, then fine. I have no problem with that.
But I am more interested in the ones who have been coming to our home planet and appear to be observing us, whether for military reasons, scientific inquiry, or something dreadful.
Those who don't wish to acknowledge that UFOs (or IFOs) are flying around in our air space, well, that's THEIR problem, not mine. All the laughing and derision in the world will not stop the truth. This is not X-Files; this is real, and they are here.

To be honest, I like the idea, and I won't fight it. The UFOs are seen in all countries of the world. They have showed up on radar traveling at enormous speeds with amazing maneuverability that no aircraft manufactured on Earth can imitate. I have no doubt that they are a far older race than ours, and I accept those who are in the UFOs as our new teachers.
But humans are so anthropocentric.
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (4) Dec 04, 2012
whether for military reasons, scientific inquiry, or something dreadful.

Such as? I mean any of the three?
There are no military reasons, scientific ones or 'dreadful' ones that you could name that aren't completely ludicrous.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (9) Dec 04, 2012
whether for military reasons, scientific inquiry, or something dreadful.

Such as? I mean any of the three?
There are no military reasons, scientific ones or 'dreadful' ones that you could name that aren't completely ludicrous.
-AA

And you know this...how?
obama_socks
1 / 5 (11) Dec 04, 2012
"Being that it was a time of war, an exception was made" NO! the fact it was war didnt matter. it was that the 22nd amendment didnt exist yet just like you admit when you say why the 22nd amendment was added......and you are a fucking idiot if you think the constitution can be amended so simply by obama or anyone. do you know anything about america or just your fantasies?
-jsdarkdestruction aka Blotto's possible sock puppet

Yes, it did matter. Before Roosevelt's second term was nearly over there was the threat of war in Europe. Japan hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor yet, but we were helping the British even then in 1939, 1940. It was a bad time to elect a newbie President, and FDR decided to run for a third term. Two terms was traditional going back to George Washington. It was only due to the threat of war that FDR decided to run again for a third term.

http://constituti...202.html

Obama will do what he wants. He will have the backing.
extinct
2.6 / 5 (10) Dec 05, 2012
Simple & to the point:
"At last, how many alien civilizations are there?"
--> more than enough <--
A rough guesstimate for the number of planets in the observable portion of the universe: 170 billion (observable galaxies) multiplied by 300 billion (number of stars in our own galaxy) multiplied by 1.6 (average number of planets per star), equals 81.6 sextillion or 81,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the observable universe. it's a rough guesstimate but it's well inside the ballpark. BTW there are fewer grains of sand on planet earth than than number. what are the odds that only *ONE* of those planets has the special mix of characteristics for life? virtually zero. what are the odds that two or more of those 81 sextillion support life? virtually guaranteed. we may not have detected them with 21st century technology but they are out there
Fleetfoot
4.7 / 5 (3) Dec 05, 2012
whether for military reasons, scientific inquiry, or something dreadful.

Such as? I mean any of the three?
There are no military reasons, scientific ones or 'dreadful' ones that you could name that aren't completely ludicrous.
-AA

And you know this...how?


Because, as you said yourself, if aliens exist, they would have been here for millions of years. Certainly since before humans evolved and possibly since before the dinosaurs or even before the formation of the Solar System. They would have been studying the drift of our DNA throughout and would know more about us than we ever will. Current social and political trends and technological development can be found through the press or remote surveillance, after all they would have technology millions of years more refined than Google Earth.
antialias_physorg
3.8 / 5 (5) Dec 05, 2012
And you know this...how?

Under the assumption that aliens are here (which I think is not at all likely - at least not in physical form):

We can make a very few definite statements about them
1) They have managed to go undetected
2) They have traversed significant distances in space

Conculsions:
I) By 1 and 2 they are significantly more advanced than as. So there's no scientific reason for them to be here.
II) By 2 they have a different physiology (having evolved elswhere) - so Earth cannot possibly be of interest to them in terms of living space.
III) Mining asteroids is far easier than mining something down a gravity well (once you have the ability to traverse space). So it can't be for the resources.
IV) 'Dreadful' reasons require that we would actually be of any value whatsoever to them. How much value is a an amoeba (or a bird) to you?

If they're watching, then they're probably doing so via remote.
rubberman
2 / 5 (8) Dec 05, 2012
If we are talking intelligent life as we know it (carbon based, requiring water for survival) I'd guess maybe 10 civilizations per galaxy. The variables in "our" magic formula are so numerous and to be blunt, delicate. As far as life we can't imagine...i can't even speculate.

Modernmystic
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 05, 2012
Simple & to the point:
"At last, how many alien civilizations are there?"
--> more than enough <--
A rough guesstimate for the number of planets in the observable portion of the universe: 170 billion (observable galaxies) multiplied by 300 billion (number of stars in our own galaxy) multiplied by 1.6 (average number of planets per star), equals 81.6 sextillion or 81,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the observable universe. it's a rough guesstimate but it's well inside the ballpark. BTW there are fewer grains of sand on planet earth than than number. what are the odds that only *ONE* of those planets has the special mix of characteristics for life? virtually zero. what are the odds that two or more of those 81 sextillion support life? virtually guaranteed. we may not have detected them with 21st century technology but they are out there


Life is not "civilization"....there are a LOT of highly unlikely variables between a single cell and a radio telescope. Go fish.
antialias_physorg
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 05, 2012
Life is not "civilization"

Good point. The dinosaurs were around for millions of years. Way before them it was more than a bilion years just unicellular organisms (which is a significant amount of time compared to the age of the universe). Neither seemed to have gotten around to going through a 'civilization' phase. Both states could probably have gone on more or less indefinitely without any "higher lifeforms" developing. So I'm not at all convinced that nature/evolution heads that way as a matter of course.

So even if we find life bearing planets out there - I would expect only an exceedingly small proportion of those to have something that could be termed "intelligent civilsations".
Tachyon8491
3.3 / 5 (16) Dec 05, 2012
poor Boast of Blotto... no wonder he cogitates upon the imminent extinction of human life on this planet - his pragmatic neuronal makeup is not much more advanced than an 8085 processor. I do hope though, that he gets replaced with a little more advanced instruction set in his next incarnation which I would like to assist with.
FrankHerbert
1.9 / 5 (13) Dec 05, 2012
poor Boast of Blotto


You thought you were logged into Obama_socks, didn't you?

I'm assuming this is your oldest and most likely only non-trolling account. Well, that's over, now isn't it?
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (13) Dec 05, 2012
poor Boast of Blotto


You thought you were logged into Obama_socks, didn't you?

I'm assuming this is your oldest and most likely only non-trolling account. Well, that's over, now isn't it?
-FrankHerbutt

ROFLOL...Thank you for finally revealing that you ARE, in truth, a sock puppet of Theghostofotto1923.
Tachyon8491 is far more intelligent and knowledgeable than I, so that your equating me with he, is quite a compliment that I do appreciate...and relish.

@AA
"We can make a very few definite statements about them
1) They have managed to go undetected
2) They have traversed significant distances in space"

me
1)Their ships are cloaked most of the time. Our own scientists have been working on "cloaking devices", possibly with help from aliens. Sometimes they choose to be seen, which is the reason for millions of sightings.
2) We are unaware of their propulsion systems, nor the materials their ships are made of. We don't know the distances they have traveled, or why.
FrankHerbert
2.2 / 5 (13) Dec 05, 2012
Aliens obviously aren't here.

They either wouldn't give a damn about being seen or they'd never be seen, not the murky middle ground that doesn't prove anything other than group hallucinations and mild retardation (in the case of Obama_socks/Tachyon8491/Pirouette).
obama_socks
1 / 5 (11) Dec 05, 2012
And you know this...how?

Under the assumption that aliens are here (which I think is not at all likely - at least not in physical form):

We can make a very few definite statements about them
1) They have managed to go undetected
2) They have traversed significant distances in space

Conculsions:
I) By 1 and 2 they are significantly more advanced than as. So there's no scientific reason for them to be here.
II) By 2 they have a different physiology (having evolved elswhere) - so Earth cannot possibly be of interest to them in terms of living space.
III) Mining asteroids is far easier than mining something down a gravity well (once you have the ability to traverse space). So it can't be for the resources.
IV) 'Dreadful' reasons require that we would actually be of any value whatsoever to them. How much value is a an amoeba (or a bird) to you?

If they're watching, then they're probably doing so via remote.
-AA

me
1) It's a foregone conclusion they are more advanced
obama_socks
1 / 5 (10) Dec 05, 2012
contd
An intelligence does not travel inter or intragalactic unless they are far more advanced than us, for all intents and purposes.
II) They COULD have a different physiology and were adapted to their home planet. But they also may have the science that enables them to adapt to OUR conditions and environment. Neither you nor I have the knowledge of what they find interesting about Earth and humans.
III) Mining for what? We don't know that either. It's true that asteroids may provide all their material requirements...so they are here for some other reason(s). They may be coming here because they have an established relationship to humans, or to another Earth species...or merely to observe.
IV) A value can take many forms. Slave owners and dealers valued their slaves for the work they could perform, and the amount of money or goods that the purchaser would pay for slaves. But they also could be here to record our progress. They may be recording whole histories of populated planets.
Modernmystic
2.7 / 5 (9) Dec 05, 2012
I'm not as interested in signals and spaceships as I am at simply opening our "eyes" better and observing (which technically includes signals, but for the intent of my argument I'm ignoring them).

Look, if there are super advanced beings out there we should see some kind of cosmological engineering or evidence somewhere. Intelligence adapts its environment to its purposes and advantage. Everything else adapts to its environment via evolution.

Yet all we see is bland isotropy in all directions we look. Therefore there are only two possibilities.

1. We're alone, or intelligence is so vanishingly rare it's not worth worrying about finding any.

2. The universe is positively teeming with intelligent beings who are of such like mind and purpose that we simply can't see their engineering for what it is and are mistaking it FOR the natural cosmological isotropy that's staring us in the face out to 13 billion light years...
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (14) Dec 05, 2012
But for whichever reasons that the aliens in their spaceships have come here...and I'm assuming it's benevolent...fully credible sightings have been made by sane and unassuming individuals and groups who have been thrust into a situation which they had never, ever thought could happen to them. Those who were less traumatized by their experience(s) have understood that "we are not alone" in the universe, and have accepted it. The fact that so many of them are derided, ridiculed, scoffed at, and looked at as suffering from mental problems or have a drug or drinking problem, is what keeps humans from realizing the full potential of what we could be if we accepted that we are not alone. Billions of solar systems in the universe still cannot convince that intelligent life originates elsewhere other than Earth.
Even religionists are chronically anthropogenic and MOST don't believe that God would have created intelligent life elsewhere.
Telekinetic's sighting is genuine. They are here.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.6 / 5 (25) Dec 05, 2012
There's nothing in your visual that indicates hallucination or any other problem
Thankyou dr pussytard the eminent brainial engineer.
I rarely have problems with anyone else except for Blotto and his sock puppets.
-As evinced by your ratings. Nobody uprates you except your suckpuppets. Nobody likes ignorant liars.
Tachyon8491 is far more intelligent and knowledgeable than I
So is a toadstool. This proves nothing.
1)Their ships are cloaked most of the time.
As well as their glassy semitransparent heads as I understand it.
Yet all we see is bland isotropy in all directions we look. Therefore there are only two possibilities
Typical religionist leap-of-faith. Advanced machine life would be very economical in their resource use. We wouldnt see broadcast communication for one thing. They could not hide a waste heat signature.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (26) Dec 05, 2012
"A team of astronomers is now looking for Dyson Spheres, massive star-scale solar power plants that extraterrestrial hunters hope alien civilizations employ."

"A Dyson Sphere would appear very bright in the mid-infrared," Wright explained to me. "Just like your body, which is invisible in the dark, but shines brightly in mid-infrared goggles."

-Problem is, organics like company while synthetics do not. Life needs others to contend with. Humans NEED others to argue and cooperate with. Machines do not need contrasting opinions. Singularities will emerge comprised of just one Entity, fully capable of choosing the one obviously correct path and making the one best decision in all cases.

We see this preference among humans. They have consistently opted for emperors and empires. Indications are that democracy and capitalism are a political expedient. Why debate solutions when it is clear to both sides that there is only one best solution?

These Entities will need no dyson spheres.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (11) Dec 05, 2012
"Yet all we see is bland isotropy in all directions we look. Therefore there are only two possibilities.
1. We're alone, or intelligence is so vanishingly rare it's not worth worrying about finding any.
2. The universe is positively teeming with intelligent beings who are of such like mind and purpose that we simply can't see their engineering for what it is and are mistaking it FOR the natural cosmological isotropy that's staring us in the face out to 13 billion light years..." -ModernMystic

The evidence that we are NOT alone in this universe, nor in this galaxy, is on record already. You have to look...but NOT in those sites that include ghosts, witches, and all that other crap. Crop circles are different because they occur over several hours at night and are silently created from above the fields. Crop circles seem to have meaning or a code which haven't been cracked yet. They may just be an expression of alien art.
I don't think the aliens advertise their presence out there.

obama_socks
1 / 5 (11) Dec 05, 2012
@MM
If aliens have the power to engineer whole planets and spatial anomalies, et al, then how much more proof would we require of their existence? Probably a lot more. Humans have to be the most stubborn, hostile and irresponsible beings in the universe...and that is quite possibly why extraterrestrials will go out of their way to avoid us. I'm sure that they understand full well what WE are capable of, having been chased by our fighter planes at least since WW2.
Modernmystic
2.8 / 5 (9) Dec 05, 2012
The evidence that we are NOT alone in this universe, nor in this galaxy, is on record already.


I've seen no hard credible evidence presented anywhere. Nothing that I'd accept as even close to credible at any rate. I can't speak for everyone and I understand credulity varies greatly between human beings.
Modernmystic
2.8 / 5 (9) Dec 05, 2012
I'm sure that they understand full well what WE are capable of, having been chased by our fighter planes at least since WW2.


If you entered someone's house in the middle of a brawl and didn't take the time to identify yourself and your intentions what do you think is an appropriate response? It is our planet, they are the visitors. If they want respect then they'd do well to learn our customs and give the most common simple respect of saying hello....
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (27) Dec 05, 2012
Machine singularities will have no need to placate the masses or motivate them to do things they would not normally want to do, as their masses will all be extensions of themselves. Peripherals. Remotes. Wasteful contention and competition will have been eliminated. There will be no politics, no religion in the future.

Once a machine mind emerges, organics will not be able to compete with it because competition itself is wasteful and organics cannot do without it.

Interestingly this is quite the opposite of conditions during the cold war. Communism could not compete with capitalism because capitalism IS competition, the essence of life.

But this is only because life itself is incomplete. Organic sentience is incomplete, imperfect.

Religionists will admit that their gods do not need competition. This demonstrates that we long for a State without competition. A Successor that knows what to do without having to argue about it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (30) Dec 05, 2012
Crop circles seem to have meaning or a code which haven't been cracked yet. They may just be an expression of alien art.
Crop circles have been thoroughly and convincingly and completely debunked, usually by the people who have admitted to creating them.

They are HOAXES you moron. This is old news.
Tachyon8491
3 / 5 (18) Dec 05, 2012
Ah, the Boast of Blotto cranks out his three-transistor excuse for a mind again: "Crop circles have been thoroughly debunked" - admittedly there are a miserable few that are human-made, true crop circles defy such effort. No doubt Blotto has spent years studying the most complex of them, up-close, actually there, and, as we know he is more published than Jenny Randles, or Einstein for that matter, and internationally famous, we really need to take account of his "opinion."
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (27) Dec 05, 2012
Einstein did not believe that crop circles were made by aliens.

http://authors.si...22372081
-Jeez what a freeko.

Most all in england were done by these 2:
http://en.wikiped..._Chorley
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (12) Dec 05, 2012
Aha...I see that Blotto the anti-organics and hater of humanity has emerged from his hole, after switching from his FrankHerbutt sock puppet, to express his disdain for mankind and to present his idea of the most efficient non-living entities that man can create in the lab. Blotto has also come to vilify me in his now religious belief that I am a part of some "conspiracy against Blotto" cabal, where he never has any solid evidence to back up his highly imaginative musings. Blotto also believes that I care that he and his sock puppets continue to rate my comments with ONES, as though he (they) would end my existence with a silly rating system. I noticed that Blotto makes sure to vote multiple times with his sock puppets to rate himself as close to 5/5 as possible. Especially his older posts. How dishonest can he get? Evidently much more, since he denies even having sock puppets that he still uses. It's evident that Blotto hates aliens, but loves transparent glass head martians. Sad.

obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (14) Dec 05, 2012
Ah, the Boast of Blotto cranks out his three-transistor excuse for a mind again: "Crop circles have been thoroughly debunked" - admittedly there are a miserable few that are human-made, true crop circles defy such effort. No doubt Blotto has spent years studying the most complex of them, up-close, actually there, and, as we know he is more published than Jenny Randles, or Einstein for that matter, and internationally famous, we really need to take account of his "opinion."
-Tachyon

And it's been proven that the more complex crop circles are, indeed, genuine, and have not been created by men walking with planks. The ones that were made by the men were clunky looking at best, and did not have the beautiful designs of those made by extraterrestrial aliens.

Blotto expounds on his dogmatic ideas of things which he knows absolutely nothing about...garnering as much attention from like minded sock puppets. Since crop circles have been observed in other countries, the 2 men are not
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (13) Dec 05, 2012
...or never had any role to play in the creation of crop circles. The circles are not exclusive to Great Britain or even Europe...so Blotto's idiotic attribution to only 2 men doing the circles is invalidated.
Quite possibly, the 2 men craved national attention and did copy cat circles....which turned out badly.
FrankHerbert
2 / 5 (16) Dec 05, 2012
Lmao this guy is dumb as a sack of bricks. You forgot to change your account again Tachyon8491/obama_socks/Pirouette
Confederated
1.3 / 5 (16) Dec 05, 2012
There goes FrankHerbutt again! What a moron he must be. It's so obvious he forgot to change his account from Blotto. What a tardo.

@Tachyon
You seem pretty smart... Whats your hypothesis on magnetized grain found in crop circles? I bet its a side effect of advanced cloaking tech.
Tachyon8491
2.5 / 5 (19) Dec 05, 2012
Hi Confederated, I've made as deep a study of crop circles as 20 years has allowed - there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that these are of extraterrestrial origin. Not only the geometric complexity and astounding angular and dimensional accuracy are convincing of "non-human" activity, but the micro-detail of how stalks are non-destructively bent, gyrated, and often complexly bound is beyond ordinary mechanical manipulation. I agree that magnetic traces may well be evidence of ET-craft, specifically electrogravitic drives. Check out an illustrated article I submitted to UFO Casebook under name Frank Valentyn, called "Ours or Theirs" - "A critical look at the UFO-Phenomenon." You can get to it by a search under my pseudonym on that site. Regards, FV
Tachyon8491
2.6 / 5 (17) Dec 05, 2012
"Ours or Theirs" - "A critical look at the UFO-Phenomenon." - in the magazine section after search on my name.
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (14) Dec 05, 2012
http://www.youtub...vUmXfKH8

A YouTube presentation of intricate crop circles that are impossible for even 20 men to create overnight...in the dark. I believe each one to be created by extraterrestrials, and that each one is a message for the people of Earth. Perhaps they are saying that THEY created our early ancestors.
The 2 men who came forth in England reminds me of when a murder has been committed, some innocent but loony people come forth to say that they did it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (29) Dec 05, 2012
And it's been proven that the more complex crop circles are, indeed, genuine, and have not been created by men walking with planks.
Well sure, in your mind, but thats full of all sorts of ratty and smelly stuff isnt it? What do you mean by 'proven' exactly? Aliens in photos? Interviews with aliens? Little tufts of radioactive grass? Unexplained, blinding headaches? But youve been getting those since you were a little girl havent you? The menstruation thing-

"While it is not known how all crop circles are formed, the most likely theory as put forth by scientists and skeptics is that all of them were made by hoaxers"

"The scientific consensus on crop circles is that most or all are constructed by human hands as a prank."
-For the dimwit explanation we must look elsewhere. Perhaps the madam blavatsky homepage-
http://en.wikiped...cles.jpg
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (26) Dec 05, 2012
where he never has any solid evidence to back up his highly imaginative musings.
"Doug and Dave reportedly made more than 200 crop circles from 1978–1991 and claimed to be responsible for most if not all circles made prior to 1987"

"On the night of July 11–12 1992 a crop-circle making competition, for a prize of three thousand UK pounds [22] (partly funded by the Arthur Koestler Foundation), was held in Berkshire. The winning entry was produced by three Westland Helicopters engineers, using rope, PVC pipe, a plank, string, a telescopic device and two stepladders"

"In 2002, Discovery Channel commissioned five aeronautics and astronautics graduate students from MIT to create crop circles of their own, aiming to duplicate some of the features claimed to distinguish "real" crop circles from the known fakes such as those created by Bower and Chorley"
FrankHerbert
2.6 / 5 (15) Dec 05, 2012
Only dumbasses think crop circles are real.
Frank Valentyn

I think this proves my point.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (28) Dec 05, 2012
Sorry pussytard i am not impressed by spooky music. You shouldnt be either - just pretty flashing lights. No, xmas trees are not ufos.
A YouTube presentation of intricate crop circles that are impossible for even 20 men to create overnight...in the dark.
"There have been cases in which researchers declared crop circles to be "the real thing", only to be confronted with the people who created the circle and documented the fraud"
I believe each one to be created by extraterrestrials
-even when shown evidence that MOST have been PROVEN to be hoaxes.
and that each one is a message for the people of Earth.
Yah they are saying 'STFU and GTFO you carking dimwit.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (28) Dec 05, 2012
some innocent but loony people come forth to say that they did it.
"Scientific American published an article by Matt Ridley, who started making crop circles in northern England in 1991. He wrote about how easy it is to develop techniques using simple tools that can easily fool later observers. He wrote about how easy it is to develop techniques using simple tools that can easily fool later observers. He reported on "expert" sources such as the Wall Street Journal, who had been easily fooled..."

-And so how much easier must it be to fool wetbrains such as yourself? Think of it pussytard - the wall street freeking journal. Fooled like uri geller fooled Stanford Research Institute boffins Hal Puthoff and Russell Targ.

And you have demonstrated the intellect of a toilet brush. How much easier must it be to fool you? You think you can post the same rambling bullshit under multiple suckpuppets and people will think theyre somebody else. Thats how self-deluded you are.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (10) Dec 05, 2012
@Tachyon
The site is interesting. However, my conclusion is that the object is RC. I came to this determination by observing that:
http://www.ufocas...sis.html

1st pic: It is clunky and too asymmetrical as to what may appear to be stabilizers or rotors; 4 of them sticking out at absurd angles while a fifth longer and thicker appendage seems to not do much to keep the craft in balance. It probably swayed. The cage-like structure above appears to be just that…a metal cage
2nd pic: The hole in the middle doesn't make sense, whether for a drone prototype or an E.T. probe.
3rd pic: The clouds above the object seemed strange under high magnification, with layers of cloud forming an arc, but that may have been just the lighting…possibly toward dusk.
4th pic: In the far left side of the pic, toward the top, there is an object that looks almost like part of a hot-air balloon.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (9) Dec 05, 2012
5th pic: Nice closeup of the object. Magnification shows the object is slightly above the wires, possibly touching one wire. On the thicker rotor (wing?) on the right, there are 2 white lines spaced apart that appear to me to be "fold lines" where the appendage could be folded for travel when not in use. The bottom of the object, under the ring seems to have a folded up curtain that is attached to the ring.
6th pic: Whatever was folded up under the ring seems to have dropped down and an appendage is hanging downward below it.
7th pic: Same as the 6th pic.
In conclusion: This object is not built aerodynamically enough to be self-propelled very long, especially over the treetops where the winds may be strong. It may be RC or it could be hanging from a tether from a helicopter far above it. The appendage hanging down under the ring may be an antenna, and the globular object hanging from the ring could be a source for fuel for the object.
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (12) Dec 05, 2012
Since I have made a promise to myself to avoid using techno-speak while on this user name, I attempted to explain in plain English, so that even the nihilist nitwit, Blotto might comprehend my position wrt the strange looking and extremely aerodynamically UNSOUND craft in the pictures. It is a hoax, just as Blotto's presence on this website is a big hoax. But Blotto amuses me...and many others.
Of course, Blotto hates the thought of organic aliens coming to Earth since it would spoil a lot of his stupid ideas of "artificial intelligence" taking mankind's place.
Blotto is also deathly afraid of death and dying, but has no problem with the death of innocent babies.
Poor poor Blotto...such an organic life wasted on him when a more worthy soul would've made better use of that life.
Blotto believes Doug and Dave Dork's phony stories of making ALL crop circles...every one of them...in spite of crop circles having been seen in many countries, as I've explained already.
Blotto believes lies.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (29) Dec 05, 2012
@Tachyon8491:
That was a very well-written piece- I've mentioned the press conferences of the retired nuclear missile silo military personnel on this forum several times. The problem is that with any phenomenon and not just UFO's, those who haven't witnessed it themselves will never believe it no matter how much testimony. I don't struggle anymore. Suffice it to say, since my encounter with a UFO, the universe has become LESS mysterious and I accept the reality of it and have moved on. Present-day physics reveals equally outrageous information about our universe that should challenge credulity like it does regarding the existence of UFO's. I believe, though, at the root of it, it's just fear disguised as contempt.
Telekinetic
2.2 / 5 (31) Dec 05, 2012
I just have contempt for the estrogenic "lite".
lengould100
3.2 / 5 (13) Dec 05, 2012
Since I have made a promise to myself to avoid using techno-speak while on this user name
As opposed to your other user names eh? Not even smart enough to avoid confession, obama_socks. Please go back to your schoolroom and try studying enough science to get into highschool.

And leave Physorg to those with a clue.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (29) Dec 05, 2012
Since I have made a promise to myself to avoid using techno-speak while on this user name
As opposed to your other user names eh? Not even smart enough to avoid confession, obama_socks. Please go back to your schoolroom and try studying enough science to get into highschool.


And if you went back to high school, lengould, you'd learn that it was two words, nincompoop.
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (12) Dec 06, 2012
Since I have made a promise to myself to avoid using techno-speak while on this user name
As opposed to your other user names eh? Not even smart enough to avoid confession, obama_socks. Please go back to your schoolroom and try studying enough science to get into highschool.

And leave Physorg to those with a clue.
-LenGhoul

Since you have made it your business, I have only one other name, and I reserve that for techno stuff in relation to my Engineering profession, of which I and many others discuss new innovations in the threads which offer those topics. You, of course, are just another of Blotto's sock puppets. Thanks for revealing yourself.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (11) Dec 06, 2012
@Telekinetic
@Tachyon
@Confederated
There is much disinformation on the internet re genuinely E.T. originated crop circles. Some sites refer to the Dork boys; others refer to paranormal causes, and very few refer to actual E.T.s leaving a message. Another one is organized crop circle artists who supposedly do it to help the farmers make extra money from tourists who come to see the circles and don't know that humans are also doing it.
However, crop circles have been occurring since the 12th century.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (10) Dec 06, 2012
Prior to 1971 when the Dork boys in England claimed to have commenced walking around on private lands supposedly forming crop circles, which in turn gave encouragement to artsy groups to create patterns of their own, crop circles were seen in England in the 12th century.

"One of the earliest writings on Crop Circles was In 1115 A.D., the Bishop of Winchester wrote of corn flattened by 'magical storms'."

At the end of the page, the author says, "I believe that Crop Circles are 80% fraud and 20% real unknown natural causes – unless the reader knows differently."
http://www.experi...-1115-ad

obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (12) Dec 06, 2012
This ebook is a good read that covers several topics.
"Open your Eyes: To 2012 and Beyond" by Drew Ryan Maras
http://books.goog...;dq=crop circles 7th century&source=bl&ots=0vCYweADpC&sig=UB2bHReaTqBQ1ntKvblAfzioYOU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DgvAUIPAIY7A9gSstYAw&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=crop%20circles%207th%20century&f=false

If this link fails, please do a search for the above book title.

In any case, crop circles aside, my main concern is UFOs. While I don't often talk about my own sighting, I suppose now is a good time as any to admit that I saw 2 UFOs last year while in the mountains that I have mentioned often enough in this thread. They are often seen in the vicinities of mountains, and in forest areas as Tachyon mentioned.
The main thing is that they are seen...which also means that they see us.
Quite frankly, I like the idea that we're not alone.
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (12) Dec 06, 2012
On page 61 of the eBook is the heading "The UFO Fabric". It tells, in part, about the world-wide surgically precise mutilations on "cows, horses, bison, steer, and bulls". Another strange thing is that "scavenging predators like crows, coyotes, foxes, and hyenas won't even go near the mutilated carcasses…" There is also no sign of blood anywhere on the carcass or vicinity. These animals ordinarily consume the carcasses, but for some reason, they will not touch these and the carcasses rot in the fields.

If an alien race comes to our world with the intention of somehow "taking over gradually", with their advanced technology it might be feasible for them to take the flesh and blood of cattle and horses to use as a basis for somehow creating new bodies for their "people" so that they might look "human". Not exactly like "The Body Snatchers", but a bit similar. If that were the case, how would we be able to tell alien from human?
zaxxon451
2.8 / 5 (5) Dec 06, 2012
You guys think way too linearly. I think our concept of the condition of humanity 10000 years from now will be just as off base as someone speculating the same concept 10000 years in the past.

In any case, I sincerely doubt that humans are capable of understanding the true nature of Reality. We're still investigating the shadows on the cave wall with no comprehension or ability to get beyond them. Science will take us as far as it will, but no further.
Modernmystic
3.2 / 5 (13) Dec 06, 2012
The missile silo incidents are interesting, as are many military incidents.

The fact remains that this is simply not proof of any extraterrestrial intelligence. It's proof that some military personnel saw some lights and encountered many simultaneous anomalous failures in a weapons system....and that's all it is. There are many possibilities associated with that set of circumstances, alien visitation is only one...and a pretty stretchy one IMVHO.

Proof would be a piece of a craft that can't be replicated by human technology. A body, alive or dead. Or (heaven forbid) an actual invasion or visitation that was made blatantly aware to all of humanity.
rubberman
1.5 / 5 (8) Dec 06, 2012
Considering all of the monumental variables that would have to be overcome to achieve efficient interstellar travel, curiosity alone would be the reason for aliens to stop here.
Not to make crop circles, impersonate our feedstock, or return en mass to take over after careful study. Trying to embody aliens with complex human motivations such as deviousness and subterfuge is as silly as trying to embody a dog with them.

"What did you do today glorpf?"
"Well I was conscripted yesterday so I travelled 1900 light years to earth to....."
"DONT TELL ME....you got to be a cow!"
"Moo baby, very MOOOO"

Telekinetic
2 / 5 (29) Dec 06, 2012
"The missile silo incidents are interesting, as are many military incidents." - Modernmystic

That is the most empty and pointless statement you can make. It nullifies anything that comes after it. In fact, only another dunderhead would consider you to have anything valuable to add. The military officials whose veracity you question were given the kind of responsibility of secrecy and guardianship that our lives as civilians depend on. Their testimony is the only testimony that can be believed- from anyone anywhere.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.9 / 5 (25) Dec 06, 2012
"The missile silo incidents are interesting, as are many military incidents." - Modernmystic

That is the most empty and pointless statement you can make. It nullifies anything that comes after it. In fact, only another dunderhead would consider you to have anything valuable to add. The military officials whose veracity you question were given the kind of responsibility of secrecy and guardianship that our lives as civilians depend on. Their testimony is the only testimony that can be believed- from anyone anywhere.
No this post of yours is the most egregious collection of hyperbole which could ever be made.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (28) Dec 06, 2012
"The US war archives and the British Air Force archives contain a great number of reports from military pilots who said they came across strange flying apparatuses resembling British military helmets when flying over Germany. American Kenneth Arnold who is known as the UFO discoverer was not the first contemporary who witnessed flying saucers in the sky. British and American pilots witnessed the phenomenon during WWII. Firing such objects did not damage them at all!"

I see your objection now, Ghost. These UFO's were an invention of the Luftwaffe. You believe they should get the credit and not some fictitious alien race.
Fleetfoot
4.8 / 5 (5) Dec 06, 2012
Considering all of the monumental variables that would have to be overcome to achieve efficient interstellar travel, curiosity alone would be the reason for aliens to stop here.
Not to make crop circles, impersonate our feedstock, or return en mass to take over after careful study.


Actually, interstellar flight using unmanned probes isn't that far off. Using technology most of which has been demonstrated in the lab, we should be able to launch self-replicating probes this century that can reach ~2% of the speed of light. By putting a communications relay in each star system, they could create a network spanning the galaxy in about 10 million years, much less than the likely age of any alien civilisation.

The problem with the Drake Equation is that is is independent of time. A better approach would be to calculate the rate of new civilistaions and integrate over time to take account of stellar formation rates which peaked billions of years ago.
Telekinetic
2.3 / 5 (28) Dec 06, 2012
"

Send PM to this user
PERSONAL INFORMATION
First Name:
Last Name:
Username: lite
Member since: June 28, 2012, 7:07 am
PROFILE Q&A
Birthday:
Location:
Affiliation:
About yourself: ScooterG = Estevan57 = obama_socks = PussyTard & coTards.

Above is the profile page of lite. The only poster that uses or has ever used the term "pussytard" is GhostofOtto1923. Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury...
obama_socks
1.4 / 5 (10) Dec 07, 2012
LOL...it was evident from the start, that the sock puppet lite belongs to TheghostofBlotto1923. Blotto is also owner of FrankHerbert, although vehemently denies it. Blotto can't help it...his feelings of paranoia and inadequacy prevent him from being honest and using his primary Blotto name to perform his dastardly aggressive misdeeds and instead, gives demonic personas to many of his sock pups...and they ARE many.
Good detective work, Telekinetic
Blotto is also Theghostofotto1932. Anytime you see Blotto exclaiming "Empire", that's when Blotto is switching to his 1932 NAZI persona even w/o switching names. We have been tracking Blotto's fervor for the dead NAZI Otto Skorzeny for many years just for fun.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 07, 2012
... probes .. that can reach ~2% of the speed of light. .. spanning the galaxy in about 10 million years, ..


There's a typo in my previous post, it should read ~1%. The value of 2% is for a pure aluminium sail but that would need a backing structure to improve the rigidity. The speed scales as the square root of areal density so a ratio of 3:1 for backing to sail halves the speed. Assuming a distance of 100 light years from us to the farthest reachable stars gives 10 million years at 1%.

The point remains that even our present technology can produce a pan-galactic network is a time that is two or three orders of magnitude less than the likely time since the first alien civilisation arose if we are not the first.
rubberman
2.3 / 5 (9) Dec 07, 2012
Self replicating probes require materials to replicate, quite a varied list I might add given the various tasks you have them attending to. Again, considering the variables that have to be accounted for, we are nowhere near a pan-galactic network with our present tech. THink of how many different places on earth the materials would have to come from to construct the first fleet of probes. This fleet travelling at 1% c would take 900 years to reach the CLOSEST system, then would have to detect a planetary body with the right minerals and environment for construction (fingers crossed it exists there because it's another thousand years to the next one), mine them, process them, replicate down to the last circuit, program and test the replicant(s), escape the planets gravity (fuel may be required for this).....sorry my friend, I just don't file it under possible.
Modernmystic
2.5 / 5 (8) Dec 07, 2012
Let's just say for the sake of argument that I accept all the "evidence" presented here. It's still not proof of extraterrestrial intelligences from different solar systems.

It could be human beings who are time traveling, it could be beings traveling across parallel universes. There is no evidence whatsoever that EVEN IF these beings are real that they're from somewhere else in this galaxy.
Tachyon8491
3 / 5 (16) Dec 07, 2012
@modernmystic: "Proof would be a piece of a craft that can't be replicated by human technology. A body, alive or dead"

If you did some more in-depth research you would be completely convinced that both of these are indeed already here. The reasons why this is just carefully leaked and not in the public domain formally are also easily understood. The military-industrial complex is highly compartmentalised with "need to know" clearances for all personnel (up to 30 levels) - control of these technologies is tenaciously protected - release would almost instantly result in the redundancy of the multi-trillion dollar infrastructure of the fossil-fuel corporates - assasination has been the rule here. There is more than adequate evidence that black-op projects operate electrogravitic craft, partly inherited from German WWII tech, and contributed to by both retroengineering and active contribution from ET - see the Eisenhower agreement relating to this.

Fleetfoot
4.4 / 5 (7) Dec 07, 2012
Self replicating probes require materials to replicate, quite a varied list I might add ..


The calculations are based on aluminium for the sail, a support structure similar to aerogel but made of carbon nanotubes and graphene-based electronics. Designing circuits using only abundant elements would be development of current lab work.

THink of how many different places on earth the materials would have to come from to construct the first fleet of probes.


A small seed probe (e.g. cubesat) launched to our asteroid belt would suffice.

This fleet travelling at 1% c would take 900 years to reach the CLOSEST system, ..


437 years to Alpha Centauri, but that's just the start.

then would have to detect a planetary body with the right minerals and environment for construction ...


Small asteroids would be the first choice, dust in planetary rings would be second. Only a fraction of the probes need to find a suitable system, the system design is resilient.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (7) Dec 07, 2012
Let's just say for the sake of argument that I accept all the "evidence" presented here. It's still not proof of extraterrestrial intelligences from different solar systems.


Of course not. What I am saying is that a logical analysis suggests that IF there were another race in the galaxy, they would have preceded us by perhaps a billion years. If they decided to interact with us as we evolved, we would have grown up in something like a "planet of the apes" situation. The alternative is that they decided not to interact, hence would back off a few star systems until (and if) we achieve interstellar capability on our own. That would be something like the Star Trek "Prime Directive" concept.

We know the first case doesn't apply, so either we are the first technological race in the galaxy or the other(s) have taken a hands-off approach for whatever reason.

In other words, the Fermi Paradox is trivial to solve.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (23) Dec 07, 2012
I see your objection now, Ghost. These UFO's were an invention of the Luftwaffe. You believe they should get the credit and not some fictitious alien race.
Well of course they are an application of die Glocke, Nazi zero point Energy tech, as imported into this country via operation paperclip and installed at area 51. Look it up.

Along with Heinrich Himmler. Because nobody believes that the most powerful man in the third Reich would have died in a US prisoner of war camp in his underwear.
Above is the profile page of lite. The only poster that uses or has ever used the term "pussytard" is GhostofOtto1923. Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury...
Sorry noob the pussytard moniker was first used by - who else? - vendicar decarian, as everyone knows. And as everyone also knows, VD is also at area 51.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.9 / 5 (24) Dec 07, 2012
We have been tracking Blotto's fervor for the dead NAZI Otto Skorzeny for many years just for fun.
Naw you've been accusing me of that under the multiple sickpuppets pirouette/ritchiegut/russkiye/pussyville/obamatard etc because I can't help making fun of your profound ignorance and your puzzling desire to show it off. Let's see what have we got?
The site is interesting. However, my conclusion is that the object is RC
-Would that be alien or domestic RC pussytard?
where the appendage could be folded for travel when not in use
-Sounds pretty elaborate for a hoax eh?
Asymmetrical... It probably swayed...alien probe
-So the phony NASA engineer fails to appreciate that the hoaxers shooped an asymmetric vehicle to imply that it WAS mysterious alien tech. And WHY would aliens make wobbly vehicles? And if it was earthly RC how could it POSSIBLY fly?

Only lying dimwits would have such fundamental misconceptions.
avoid using techno-speak
Ahaahaaaaha you moron.
rubberman
1 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2012
437 years to Alpha Centauri, but that's just the start.

Indeed. Sorry on the 900 years, was best guessing the time to achieve .01c. I have never heard of aluminum sail tech for spaceflight....
Fleetfoot
3.5 / 5 (6) Dec 07, 2012
437 years to Alpha Centauri, but that's just the start.

Indeed. Sorry on the 900 years, was best guessing the time to achieve .01c.


It's a few days and the same to slow down at the other end using the same method.

I have never heard of aluminum sail tech for spaceflight..


The most successful sail so far is Ikaros:

http://www.jaxa.j...1_e.html

"Polyimide resin is originally yellow, but one side of IKAROS's sail is silver. This is because aluminum is vapor deposited on one side of the film, in order to reflect sunlight more efficiently."

Aluminium is probably the best choice because of its response in the UV beyond 200nm:

http://en.wikiped...ectivity

It is not the extra thrust that matters but the reduction of absorption. Sail performance is limited by its top temperature so the more is reflected, the closer it can get to the source. And of course it is readily available in asteroid material.
Modernmystic
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 07, 2012
In other words, the Fermi Paradox is trivial to solve


In fact it's very non-trivial. To "solve" it you have to employ assumptions as facts.

Here are the facts:

There is not one shred of credible hard evidence of alien civilizations visiting Earth.

There is not one shred of credible hard evidence of alien civilizations in the wider galaxy

There is not one shred of credible hard evidence of alien civilizations in the universe.

Here is the problem as Fermi put it knowing those observational facts. GIVEN that the universe is as old as it is, and GIVEN that the elements necessary for life have been in abundance for billions of years it's VERY improbable that we're the first civilization to evolve. SINCE this is so improbable, and SINCE we see no evidence of other civilizations (and they've had billions of years to leave their cosmic graffiti for us to find somewhere) it's likely that civilization or technological civilization is EXTREMELY rare or even singular.
rubberman
1 / 5 (5) Dec 07, 2012

It's a few days and the same to slow down at the other end using the same method.

WOW! I was picturing the ION drive on dawn that takes 4 days to reach 60mph. Does it work off EM? (the sail that is)
Fleetfoot
4.5 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2012
There is not one shred of credible hard evidence of alien civilizations visiting Earth.


Agreed.

There is not one shred of credible hard evidence of alien civilizations in the wider galaxy.


We have no way to detect them if they exist unless they aimed a beacon at us.

There is not one shred of credible hard evidence of alien civilizations in the universe.


Irrelevant, we have no way to detect them and they couldn't get here in the time available.

GIVEN that the universe is as old as it is, and GIVEN that the elements necessary for life have been in abundance for billions of years it's VERY improbable that we're the first civilization to evolve.


Wrong, we have no information the "fi" term in the equation.

.. it's likely that civilization or technological civilization is EXTREMELY rare or even singular.


Wrong again, all you can say is that IF they exist THEN they have chosen not to make overt contact. You need to learn a little statistics.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 07, 2012
It's a few days and the same to slow down at the other end using the same method.


WOW! I was picturing the ION drive on dawn that takes 4 days to reach 60mph. Does it work off EM? (the sail that is)


Yep, straight sunlight but of the order of 1MW per square metre. It needs to get a very low perihelion (perhaps 0.02AU) but acceleration can be several g and by starting at grazing incidence and rotating as the radius increases, it can accelerate at constant temperature for some hours. The engineering challenges of surving say 10g and 900K are extreme, but I would be surprised if they couldn't be solved in a century.

The key is that there is no fuel needed so a sail could launch on from the next star after building the comms hub, or split into several as the shell of probes expands outwards, all done with local materials.
Possibilus
2 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2012
Given the age of the universe, the distance between stars and worlds millenia ago and the continuing expansion, and the time it apparently has taken on Earth for life to begin and evolve, it is likely (this is unscientific but probably correct) that multiple civilizations are evolving simultaneously and in some cases in parallel. Once they begin to emit EM signals as we are, it will again take millenia to detect them and then to respond...much less develop a common language with which to communicate...so it is a very very slow pen pal relationship at first, until we develop the technology to bypass C, whether in signal or in person...but it will happen, just as man walked, then spoke, then wrote, then flew...it is manifest destiny of life, not only ours, but others as well. If others can bypass C and reach us, then we can too...then it gets interesting real fast...maybe it already is.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (8) Dec 07, 2012
We have been tracking Blotto's fervor for the dead NAZI Otto Skorzeny for many years just for fun.
Naw you've been accusing me of that under the multiple sickpuppets pirouette/ritchiegut/russkiye/pussyville/obamatard etc because I can't help making fun of your profound ignorance and your puzzling desire to show it off. Let's see what have we got?
-Blotto

Nope...you've got the wrong guy. None of those other names are mine except for Obama_socks, and I have been making fun of YOUR profound ignorance and your strange insistence on showing it off for many years. However, I DID read Pussycateyes' reference to your profile under the name TheGhostofOtto1932 where you changed your 1923 to 1932 so that you could use the name of your NAZI hero, Otto Skorzeny, presumably as your nom de plume...which is just another of your sock puppets. Now you choose to downplay and backpedal the fact that your tirades on "Empire" are just one result of your mental illnesses.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.9 / 5 (19) Dec 07, 2012
I'm sorry obiewan could you please repost that? I am having trouble reading it as it is all grayed out.
Thanks.
obama_socks
1.4 / 5 (11) Dec 07, 2012
"Wrong again, all you can say is that IF they exist THEN they have chosen not to make overt contact. You need to learn a little statistics." -Fleetfoot

It is most obvious that E.T.s are here already and interacting with the U.S. government, and possibly with other world gov'ts. Since E.T.s are so far advanced technologically than humans by a possible billion years or more, it is not too much a stretch to figure out that their propulsion system(s) are beyond what even our imaginations would allow. None of our aircraft can compete with the incredible speeds and maneuverability of their spacecrafts, so it is so ridiculously obvious that what Telekinetic and I have observed, and what millions of people around the world have observed flying in our air space, are not manufactured on Earth, but are from somewhere else in our galaxy.

I have seen 2 of their spacecraft a little over a year ago where they fly over the mountains.
obama_socks
1.4 / 5 (11) Dec 07, 2012
For whatever reasons they have come here, it doesn't seem to include landing and being welcomed to Earth with the key to the city. Their craft have been chased by our fighter planes and some of theirs may have been downed by heat seeking missiles or whatever was used. Any interaction they may have with our government(s) may be with the understanding that they will no longer be interfered with. In return, they may be helping us with some technological advancements, maybe to help us realize our own dreams of interstellar spaceflight. It would be a gradual advancement so as not to arouse suspicions.
For certain, if I had never seen the alien spacecrafts, I would not have believed Telekinetic's sighting. It seems to be a human trait to not believe in something unless from a personal experience and point of view. Strangely, I feel comforted at having seen spacecraft from another world.
Neinsense99
1 / 5 (7) Dec 07, 2012
@modernmystic wrote: "OTOH maybe we ARE seeing said engineering and we just aren't recognizing it for what it is any more than an ant recognizes a skyscraper for what it is..."

According to our friend G'kar, they walk near Sigma 957.
https://www.youtu...W8Deq8vE
obama_socks
1.4 / 5 (10) Dec 08, 2012
@modernmystic wrote: "OTOH maybe we ARE seeing said engineering and we just aren't recognizing it for what it is any more than an ant recognizes a skyscraper for what it is..."

According to our friend G'kar, they walk near Sigma 957.
https://www.youtu...W8Deq8vE
-Neinsense99

I'm trying to find a reason for your attempt at humor on a serious subject. I don't see the point in your equating a sci fi program or movie with actual alien spacecraft that are witnessed by thousands of people each year, unless you believe that TV programs are being filmed and these UFOs are mere props in the sky.

Would you care to explain the reason for your YouTube sci fi clip? Is there a similarity you would like to elaborate on? After all - the reality of the sightings may be a prelude to an invasion of our world, while most people are too scared or too dense to figure out the possibility.
Are you another one of Theghostofotto1923's sock puppets?
Osiris1
1.9 / 5 (7) Dec 08, 2012
A LOT of posts on this one, and not a few pernicious trolls chasing each other, strafing each other with 'one ratings' all over the artificial aether of the internet. So if 500L.Y. to statistical near plausible probability is the latest best academically 'I will not lose my job or tenure' comfort zone, then I propose the real figure will be lower, like maybe 50 to 60LY. Why? We are finding that planets are the ordinary mundane companions of stars--so much for academically admitable artificially low 'estimates' of "f sub p". "N sub e" may be low too as we are also finding life is more tenacious and determined than thought right here on earth, so the 'goldilocks' zone may be greater than academics may be willing to admit publicly. 'f sub l' and 'f sub i' may have religious impediments to truth as well, esp. in protestant schools and most vitriolic opposition to non-earthcentricism in baptist or salafist places. Our locals may be paranoid of others too, just hiding. They KNOW!
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2012
"Wrong again, all you can say is that IF they exist THEN they have chosen not to make overt contact. You need to learn a little statistics."


It is most obvious that E.T.s are here already and interacting with the U.S. government, and possibly with other world gov'ts.


You missed the word "overt".

Unless you are a member of said government, it is most obvious that you are merely stating your personal belief.

Since E.T.s are so far advanced technologically than humans by a possible billion years or more, it is not too much a stretch to figure out that their propulsion system(s) are beyond what even our imaginations would allow. ... I have seen 2 of their spacecraft a little over a year ago where they fly over the mountains.


With their advanced technology, far more developed than our early research into metamaterials and "cloaking", if they didn't want to be seen, they wouldn't be seen. Eyewitness accounts are worthless and there is no other credible evidence.
Fleetfoot
4 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2012
Given the age of the universe, the distance between stars and worlds millenia ago and the continuing expansion, and the time it apparently has taken on Earth for life to begin and evolve, it is likely (this is unscientific but probably correct) that multiple civilizations are evolving simultaneously ..


No, it is blatantly wrong. We don't have enough data for a valid stistical analysis but a layman approach goes like this.

The highest rate of star formation was between 8 and 10 billion years ago. Our system formed 4.5 billion years ago or about 5 billion years after it became possible. If we are the first in the galaxy, it is likely to be more than 5 billion years until the next evolves.

If we are the second then the average rate is around one per 2 billion years. Even if there are thousands extant, the average gap is around a million years between new arrivals so there is a negligible probability of simultaneous evolution.
me tm
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2012
i think this equation is the most silly thing to come from a scientists mind. How can anyone ever make a estimate of alien civilisations with only one to go on, whats more a intelligent alien race able to come to earth if they wanted us to know of there existance we would if they didnt we would not. It is almost always nobodys that they contact, come on! think about it why would they let a few illiterate hill billys know.
Fleetfoot
4 / 5 (5) Dec 08, 2012
i think this equation is the most silly thing to come from a scientists mind. How can anyone ever make a estimate of alien civilisations with only one to go on,


It is useful for estimating the number of potentially life-bearing planets but you are right, the "f_i" term is unknown. We don't have a clue what conditions led to our species developing technology while millions of others from the dinosaurs onward failed to.

whats more a intelligent alien race able to come to earth if they wanted us to know of there existance we would if they didnt we would not. It is almost always nobodys that they contact, come on! think about it why would they let a few illiterate hill billys know.


Exactly, and why would they fly around at night with the lights on if they wanted to remain undiscovered. They must be the dumbest ultra-advanced aliens in the galaxy!
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (4) Dec 08, 2012
I just think that
a) other, advanced civs aren't interested in hillbillys (and why should they?)
b) other civs that are spacefaring are efficient enough not to waste energy detectable at ranges of several light years
c) if they use EM waves for communication at all (which is doubtful since the timelag over large distances makes this very useless) they aren't broadcasting omnidirectionally (and why should they) - so even if: none of their broadcasts are directed at Earth. If they do have a trick for going FTL then they'd be better off communicating by messanger-pod/drone. This we'd never be able to intercept.

All this leads me to believe: The drake equation is useless, and we'll only know whether the universe is empty or swarming with life when we actually go there and have a look.
Lurker2358
2.9 / 5 (10) Dec 08, 2012
At last, how many alien civilizations are there?


All civilizations are alien.

Most humans aren't civilized yet. They only do good or refrain from doing evil for fear of legal or military consequences.

Anyone who was actually civilized would do good just because it is the right thing to do.
DuncanI
4 / 5 (2) Dec 08, 2012
The given estimate for the distance of alien civilisations overlooks that aliens will emigrate. It seems feasible that, if alien civilsations exist, every suitable planet will, by now, be populated.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (26) Dec 08, 2012
"With their advanced technology, far more developed than our early research into metamaterials and "cloaking", if they didn't want to be seen, they wouldn't be seen. Eyewitness accounts are worthless and there is no other credible evidence."- Fleet Enema

Since when are eyewitness accounts worthless?
Police Officer: Our eyewitness got the license plate of the perp.
Homicide Detective: Don't bother- eyewitness accounts are worthless.
And where do you get off making assumptions about aliens' motives when they're light years ahead of you? Some people are out in the world having experiences instead of sitting with a PlayStation in their laps all day.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (21) Dec 08, 2012
Anyone who was actually civilized would do good just because it is the right thing to do.
What an oddly secular thing to say. Have you fallen from grace QC?
Since when are eyewitness accounts worthless?
Police Officer: Our eyewitness got the license plate of the perp.
UFOs don't have license plates. The problem with eyewitness accounts of UFOs is that they are usually from people like pussytard.
axemaster
1.6 / 5 (5) Dec 08, 2012
Asteroid impacts throughout the Earth's history would have blasted large quantities of material into space. Much of that material would be moving at above the Solar System's escape velocity, and would contain biological material.

Therefore it's reasonable to assume that Earth has repeatedly seeded our neighborhood with life. The probability of such seeding succeeding would depend on the amount of time spent in space, particle size, and the organism's ability to withstand interstellar radiation.

These are all parameters that can be determined to high accuracy. There's no need for life to arise elsewhere - it can start right here. It's also very possible that life on Earth came from somewhere else. This also renders the Drake Equation incorrect, since the probability of each planet developing life depends on the number of life-bearing planets around it. In other words, the Drake Equation should be a differential equation.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (4) Dec 08, 2012
Since when are eyewitness accounts worthless?


Since you chose to post in phys.org which is a scientific forum. Scientific evidence must be repeatable which is why, for example, the "WOW Signal" is not considered to be a valid detection of an extra-solar non-natural signal.
Czcibor
1 / 5 (5) Dec 08, 2012
Once a machine mind emerges, organics will not be able to compete with it because competition itself is wasteful and organics cannot do without it.


Assume for a while that we would succeed in effectively keeping AIs on a short lash. Would that change direction? In such a cease anyway there would be incentive to build more AIs. They could even politely pay homage to their human overlords and creators... and anyway in long run we would at best end with AI civilization which out of some kind tradition accepts that a human (transhuman?) is officially their head of state and his/her silly whims have to implemented.
kshultz222_yahoo_com
1.8 / 5 (6) Dec 08, 2012
While I agree it is important to look for life elsewhere, I think many have it backwards. I believe that we should be trying to improve things here, while trying to SPREAD life elsewhere. If we really think that life is so bad here, that we wish to spare other worlds from "contamination", then why should we even CARE about life elsewhere? If life is such a bad thing, that is? It just doesn't make sense to me.

I understand the argument: why should we be so bold, so brash, to think that we would be WANTED/WELCOMED by the cosmos. I say just the opposite: Why would we have reason to think otherwise, till proven wrong?

Just the fact that we are so desperately looking for life elsewhere, makes me think that we instinctively think we have something special going on here. Think about it.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (26) Dec 08, 2012
Since when are eyewitness accounts worthless?


Since you chose to post in phys.org which is a scientific forum. Scientific evidence must be repeatable which is why, for example, the "WOW Signal" is not considered to be a valid detection of an extra-solar non-natural signal.

Look into the cover-up and subsequent confession by Governor Fife Symington of Arizona regarding the UFO sighting over Phoenix. Witnessed by thousands and covered up by the Air Force, this represents one of many attempts by officials to "protect" the population from the truth like children. Although, maybe you do need protection, Fleetfoot.
antialias_physorg
3.3 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2012
if alien civilsations exist, every suitable planet will, by now, be populated.

..or - if the 'natural course of civilizations' is:
- become capable of bioengineering
- go fully bionic/cybernetic
- join hive minds

... then the whole notion of "settling on planets" or "spreading throughout the universe" becomes moot. Because once you can live in space - why would you go back down to a planet?
Husky
not rated yet Dec 08, 2012
so we would an omnidirectional beacon with a detectable range of 2000 lightyears if we want to beat the statistics, what kind of beacon could do that?
Fleetfoot
4.4 / 5 (7) Dec 08, 2012
Since when are eyewitness accounts worthless?


Since you chose to post in phys.org which is a scientific forum. Scientific evidence must be repeatable which is why, for example, the "WOW Signal" is not considered to be a valid detection of an extra-solar non-natural signal.


Look into the cover-up and subsequent confession by Governor Fife Symington of Arizona regarding the UFO sighting over Phoenix. ..


What scientific evidence do you have for an extra-solar origin for whatever was supposedly seen?

What is the procedure for obtaining access to the samples of the object so that I can have independent tests on them?

As I said, this is a science-based forum, not a civil court or a soapbox for cranks, so let's see your test results.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 08, 2012
Asteroid impacts throughout the Earth's history would have blasted large quantities of material into space. Much of that material would be moving at above the Solar System's escape velocity, and would contain biological material.


This was considered in detail when ALH84001 was studied. Impacts on Mars have a chance of ejecting material that could reach Earth but Earth's stronger gravity means it is unlikely it could be ejected, and since Mars is further out, it even more unlikely to get there, never mind leaving the system.

On the other hand complex molecules are seen in nebulae which could be a common source for all star systems.
Uneducated
1 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2012
In my opinion, life would be more likely to exist around the stars that came from the same nebula as our sun, right? Dunno how they're gonna work that one out though.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (25) Dec 08, 2012


What scientific evidence do you have for an extra-solar origin for whatever was supposedly seen?
What is the procedure for obtaining access to the samples of the object so that I can have independent tests on them?
As I said, this is a science-based forum, not a civil court or a soapbox for cranks, so let's see your test results.


I'll present YOU with samples to run tests in YOUR lab? You're lower than a lummox to claim to have access to a facility or even the wherewithal (money) to run independent tests. This isn't about running an experiment at all, it's about explaining what appears in front of your sightline. It's understandable to doubt one witness, but thousands of witnesses to the same event? An illusion of mass hysteria brought on by religious fervor? But this didn't happen at a holy roller revival meeting, this happened across the city of Phoenix, and was only one of many such sightings. You don't want to believe it because you're in fear of it. Believe that!
meerling
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 08, 2012
Of course detecting radio communications requires that a civilization has reached a technological development level to employ radio, and doesn't get destroyed or advance it's technology to some other form of communication.
Basically it's like a medieval monk declaring that smoke, and fire signals are the only means for a civilization to communicate.
Do we know what will eventually replace radio? Of course not, we haven't developed it yet.
Shinobiwan Kenobi
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 09, 2012
wow, those sites are really grasping at straws there, as are you obama socks. perhaps its time to resume the medication the doctor gave you to stop the voices?


Agreed, it would have saved everyone from having to sift through the seven-page-one-man-multi-sock-puppet-circle-jerk-ET-in-our-backyard-cause-I-seen-it lunatic-rant courtesy of socks & "friends".

oh, inb4 I'm accused of being a sock-puppet =^-^= <3 <3
antialias_physorg
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 09, 2012
so we would an omnidirectional beacon with a detectable range of 2000 lightyears if we want to beat the statistics, what kind of beacon could do that?

Short of inducing a star to go nova? Not much. And even that wouldn't be much of a signal - as you have to modulate a signal for it to be detectable as a signal. And modulating a nova burst is somewhat mind boggling (and also a bit of a one-shot signal). Not to mention that any life in the vicinity (closer than 100 light years or so) would likely get wiped out by it.

Then again, there may be better ways of communicating than by radio/EM. While no matter (or radiation) can travel faster than light I'm not sure the same speed limit applies to the manipulatin of spacetime itself. We know it can be stretched and compressed - but whether that strecthing/compression has a speed limit is anyone's guess (and also a subject of the LIGO missions)
yyz
5 / 5 (1) Dec 09, 2012
"so we would an omnidirectional beacon with a detectable range of 2000 lightyears if we want to beat the statistics, what kind of beacon could do that?"

It's been suggested that an advanced civilization might tweak or 'tickle' Cepheid variable stars as a means of interstellar or intergalactic communication:

http://www.univer...nternet/

http://xxx.lanl.g...39v2.pdf

Currently from Earth we can detect Cepheids out to the Virgo Cluster, making them excellent sources for use in long distance communication.
obama_socks
1.1 / 5 (9) Dec 09, 2012
The given estimate for the distance of alien civilisations overlooks that aliens will emigrate. It seems feasible that, if alien civilsations exist, every suitable planet will, by now, be populated.
-Duncanl

That is very probably the case. Suitable planets may all be populated by sentient beings, who may have different physiology and requirements, but the oldest and most intelligent would likely be the ones to emigrate, searching for planets to colonize, or merely to observe planets with civiizations and record the levels of peaceful or war-like behaviors. It's not so surprising, given the age of the universe.

@Fleetwood
You are correct. It would be done overtly and secretly to avert suspicion to keep the public from knowing.
I only deal with reason and logic. My own sightings of 2 E.T. spacecraft on TWO different occasions are what motivates me to accept that E.T. has come to Earth and that they appear to mean no harm to humans. They may even want to integrate with us.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 09, 2012
In my opinion, life would be more likely to exist around the stars that came from the same nebula as our sun, right?


The reactions that happen in the nebula from which the Sun formed will happen in other nebulae too. If that was the source of life on Earth, it should apply equally to other habitable stars. In that case, the factor f_l should be close to 1.
Fleetfoot
4 / 5 (4) Dec 09, 2012
What is the procedure for obtaining access to the samples of the object so that I can have independent tests on them?


I'll present YOU with samples to run tests in YOUR lab? You're lower than a lummox to claim to have access to a facility or even the wherewithal (money) to run independent tests.


I claimed nothing of the kind, you need to learn to read.

What samples determined the object was not of terrestrial origin?

It's understandable to doubt one witness, but thousands of witnesses to the same event? An illusion of mass hysteria brought on by religious fervor?


The human brain is adapted to pattern matching, presented with the same visual input, a common description is to be expected.

You don't want to believe it because you're in fear of it.


ROFL, check my previous posts, I'm the one advocating a target of launching probes by the end of this century to build a network and make contact if there are any other extant technological civilisations.
Fleetfoot
4 / 5 (5) Dec 09, 2012
While no matter (or radiation) can travel faster than light I'm not sure the same speed limit applies to the manipulatin of spacetime itself. We know it can be stretched and compressed - but whether that strecthing/compression has a speed limit is anyone's guess (and also a subject of the LIGO missions)


Gravitational waves in GR travel at the speed of light, and Hulse and Taylor's observations suggest GR is accurate.

FTL is equivalent to backwards in time. Whether the "delayed quantum erasure" experiment can be used to allow communications backwards in time is unknown but barring that loophole, EM is as fast as it gets.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 09, 2012
Basically it's like a medieval monk declaring that smoke, and fire signals are the only means for a civilization to communicate.
Do we know what will eventually replace radio? Of course not, we haven't developed it yet.


If we wanted to communicate with a medieval monk, we wouldn't use a cellphone, we would use whatever he could see. If aliens want to send us a beacon, they will use the simplest means that can achieve interstellar range. Smoke and fire signals won't to the trick, EM is the simplest.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 09, 2012
You are correct. It would be done overtly and secretly to avert suspicion to keep the public from knowing.
I only deal with reason and logic. My own sightings of 2 E.T. spacecraft ...


The problem is that reason and logic suggest that if they wanted to stay covert, they'd simply communicate with their terrestrial contacts by Skype or equivalent, or travel by terrestrial private jet if essential.
Telekinetic
2.2 / 5 (26) Dec 09, 2012
What is the procedure for obtaining access to the samples of the object so that I can have independent tests on them? -Fleetfoot

I'll present YOU with samples to run tests in YOUR lab? You're lower than a lummox to claim to have access to a facility or even the wherewithal (money) to run independent tests. -Telekinetic

I claimed nothing of the kind, you need to learn to read.-
Fleetfoot

I can read your first statement as ..."so that I can have independent tests run on them." Who would "I" be in that statement, Fleetwood?

Fleetfoot
4.5 / 5 (2) Dec 09, 2012
It seems feasible that, if alien civilsations exist, every suitable planet will, by now, be populated.


Ours wasn't, or we would never have had the chance to evolve, we wouldn't be here.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 09, 2012
What is the procedure for obtaining access to the samples of the object so that I can have independent tests on them? -Fleetfoot

I'll present YOU with samples to run tests in YOUR lab? You're lower than a lummox to claim to have access to a facility or even the wherewithal (money) to run independent tests. -Telekinetic

I claimed nothing of the kind, you need to learn to read.-
Fleetfoot

I can read your first statement as ..."so that I can have independent tests run on them." Who would "I" be in that statement, Fleetwood?


The people running the tests would be anyone but the participants of this thread (at least), or they wouldn't be "independent tests", would they? The only part I would play would be to fill in whatever forms are needed to start the process.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (26) Dec 09, 2012
The people running the tests would be anyone but the participants of this thread (at least), or they wouldn't be "independent tests", would they? The only part I would play would be to fill in whatever forms are needed to start the process.


This is the point where the aliens shake their heads in disgust and zoom away at high speeds upon realizing what an ignoramus you are. Thanks to you, Fleafoot, we'll never make contact.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (20) Dec 09, 2012
What scientific evidence do you have for an extra-solar origin for whatever was supposedly seen?
You heard them - eyewitLess accounts. And superior shooping skills.
What is the procedure for obtaining access to the samples of the object so that I can have independent tests on them?
http://www.fbi.gov/
-Ask for fox mulder.
As I said, this is a science-based forum, not a civil court or a soapbox for cranks
That's a decidedly noobian question. Perhaps aliens can fix this for us.
Telekinetic
2.1 / 5 (25) Dec 09, 2012
" VendicarD 2 minutes ago Rank: not rated yet
I have exactly 0 sock puppets, for rationalism always prevails.

"I'm asking you if you are the user of the sockpuppet "lite"" - Telekinetic

Well, that solves that, doesn't it, Ghost?
Fleetfoot
4 / 5 (4) Dec 09, 2012
The people running the tests would be anyone but the participants of this thread (at least), or they wouldn't be "independent tests", would they? The only part I would play would be to fill in whatever forms are needed to start the process.


This is the point where the aliens shake their heads in disgust and zoom away at high speeds upon realizing what an ignoramus you are. Thanks to you, Fleafoot, we'll never make contact.


Or to put it more clearly, as you well know, there are no samples, no existing analyses and no evidence whatsoever.
Telekinetic
2.2 / 5 (24) Dec 09, 2012
Dr. J. Allen Hynek in a speech to the U.N.:

http://www.extrac...ssue.pdf
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 09, 2012
The people running the tests would be anyone but the participants of this thread (at least), or they wouldn't be "independent tests", would they? The only part I would play would be to fill in whatever forms are needed to start the process.


This is the point where the aliens shake their heads in disgust and zoom away at high speeds upon realizing what an ignoramus you are. Thanks to you, Fleafoot, we'll never make contact.


Or to put it more clearly, as you well know, there are no samples, no existing analyses and no evidence whatsoever.
-Fleetfoot

You are looking for the "smoking gun" that will be the only thing that proves to you the existence of E.T. and their spacecraft. But you will not see them other than by an "accidental" sighting.
If you ever have such a sighting, your exact specifications as to acceptable proof will elude you, since any and all E.T. artifacts are hidden away where you cannot obtain access to them. Anything less will cause panic.

obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Dec 09, 2012
It seems feasible that, if alien civilsations exist, every suitable planet will, by now, be populated.


Ours wasn't, or we would never have had the chance to evolve, we wouldn't be here.
-Flatfoot

Your answer makes no sense. Are you saying that our suitable planet is NOT populated by aliens? How can you be so certain? Alien civilizations could still exist here even without our having evolved on THIS suitable planet.
Suitable planets everywhere else could be populated by others who travel from planet to planet, but our evolution and existence does NOT depend on them, nor theirs depending on ours.

As it is evident by your responses to valid E.T. spacecraft sightings, there is a good chance that you and many others living on this suitable planet are totally unprepared and extremely wary of any possible future or present "contact" between E.T. and humans. Your insistence that actual sightings are not valid makes me wonder if you find ANY validity in your OWN vision.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 09, 2012
" VendicarD 2 minutes ago Rank: not rated yet
I have exactly 0 sock puppets, for rationalism always prevails.

"I'm asking you if you are the user of the sockpuppet "lite"" - Telekinetic

Well, that solves that, doesn't it, Ghost?
-Telekinetic

I believe what VendicarD says about not owning the sock puppet, lite. He may be a jerk in the political arena, but there's really no reason for him to lie about lite.
He rated me all ONES in the Black Box thread, and used his VD name.
FrankHerbutt also voted ONES, so that means that Blotto was in his FrankHerbert persona, which prevented him from using lite to vote down.
The mystery has been solved and everyone but Blotto can breathe a sigh of relief.

Blotto has many many sock puppets and it must keep him very busy switching names and downvoting. We have suspected that Blotto is the mad downrater for many years now. He was most likely Orac also.

Telekinetic
2.2 / 5 (24) Dec 09, 2012
aroc91 was orac. aroc/orac- real smart, huh? I busted him wide open a few months ago. He's the most prolific of puppeteers, but Ghost is definitely FrankHerbert. I would have thought him more clandestine, but I was wrong. Sometimes a criminal gives himself up unconsciously by leaving traces. I guess that would prove the existence of consciousness then, right Ghost?
Surly
1 / 5 (3) Dec 09, 2012
Do we know what will eventually replace radio? Of course not, we haven't developed it yet.

Probably either laser point-to-point communications (accurate, efficient, easy) or something based on quantum entanglement (extremely secure, potentially capable of transmitting faster than c).
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.2 / 5 (20) Dec 09, 2012
VendicarD 2 minutes ago Rank: not rated ...

Well, that solves that, doesn't it, Ghost?
Your dysfunction is really starting to show. Fleetfoot wasnt being literal in saying that 'he' would have samples tested. Dont you know that?

And ask VD if he was the first one to use 'pussytard' when referring to the tard named pussy. Go ahead, ask him.

If this is the same sort of misperception with which your brain told you it saw a UFO, then even if you did you wouldn't have recognized it as such. Did I say that right? Even if you DID see a UFO, your brain is so asskewed that it would tell you that it was a UFO you saw in a movie or something. Which would be sad, as I can tell that you REALLY want to see the real thing.

In other words if you can't make sense of simple sentences here, you can't trust your judgement on much of anything. I bet you know this already.
Telekinetic
2.5 / 5 (27) Dec 09, 2012
I gotta hand it to Vendicar, really. He came out with the truth about not using the sock puppet "lite" but did it in a way that didn't directly implicate you, because he didn't want to rat you out. But it was evident nonetheless. He's got class, Ghost. You on the other hand are a lying, backstabbing, creepy lowlife. Ahahahahahahahaaa.
Estevan57
2.6 / 5 (23) Dec 10, 2012
Typical Otto - when caught at being a shit, attack.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (7) Dec 10, 2012
VendicarD 2 minutes ago Rank: not rated ...

Well, that solves that, doesn't it, Ghost?
-Telekinetic

Great detective work, TK...Blotto is outed.

And ask VD if he was the first one to use 'pussytard' when referring to the tard named pussy. Go ahead, ask him.
-Blotto

Actually, after going over Pussycateyes old posts...and noting that she was continually harassed and mentally poked by Blotto in each thread where she commented...and where Blotto was consistently off-topic so that he could attempt to push her buttons and accuse her of being other people, just like what he has been doing to me and several others...I also noticed that VendicarD, who was Vendicar_Decarian at the time, treated Pussycat quite nicely even though they disagreed. VD never called her pussytard, even after Blotto began calling her that. I think VD was trying to be a gentleman in the presence of a lady, and that was commendable.

obama_socks
1 / 5 (8) Dec 10, 2012
So, eleven more days till Dec. 21st, 2012...Russians going nuts over the Mayan calendar...Serbs worried about vampires...Theghostofotto1923 slipping in and out of various personas while trying to intimidate those of us who have seen spacecraft that are not-of-this-world...and the sock puppet lite seems to have returned to rate us ONES. Blotto can't seem to help it since he hates the thought of anyone having a rating higher than his...unless it's one of his sock puppets.
FrankHerbert
3.3 / 5 (12) Dec 10, 2012
God damn you're dumb.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2012
Yes you certainly are.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 10, 2012
Dr. J. Allen Hynek in a speech to the U.N.:

http://www.extrac...ssue.pdf


From the paper:

"Much of the UFO data are "hard", not necessarily as that term would be used by the physicist, but certainly "harder" than much of the data used in the social sciences and in the practice of law."

Nice of you to cite a paper that makes the same point I did previously:

"As I said, this is a science-based forum, not a civil court ..."

In more than 30 years since that presentation, the situation has not changed.
Shinobiwan Kenobi
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 10, 2012
Yes you certainly are.


An, "I know you are but what am I?!", rather than five paragraphs of obfuscations? Must be close to nap-time.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 10, 2012
Ours wasn't, or we would never have had the chance to evolve, we wouldn't be here.
-Flatfoot

Your answer makes no sense. Are you saying that our suitable planet is NOT populated by aliens?


Picture a galaxy in which the first race to achieve interstellar flight promptly colonised every habitable planet including ours, say a billion years ago. This planet would have been covered by THEIR cities before the first amphibians crawled out of our oceans. It's even questionable whether they would have allowed us to evolve at all.

How can you be so certain?


Because the world is nothing like that. They might have colonised other planets but not this one, obviously. Show me the ruins of a billion year old high-tech city and I'll revise my opinion.
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (3) Dec 10, 2012
... then the whole notion of "settling on planets" or "spreading throughout the universe" becomes moot. Because once you can live in space - why would you go back down to a planet?


Indeed, however the simple need for more matter and energy to power your hive mind doesn't go away. If they've been here for billions of years we'd see the waste heat, the mining of stars, the engineering of space-time, or SOME kind of evidence of the unimaginable energy requirements of a billion year old civilization trying to maximize its computing power.
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (3) Dec 10, 2012
This planet would have been covered by THEIR cities before the first amphibians crawled out of our oceans

I'll put a qualifier on that:

Suppose you have an advanced civilization. That would mean to me:
a) body modification and/or adaptation to virtually any environment (even open space)
b) possible immortality save for accidents (which would implicate heavy use of a), since an immortal being will have an entirely different appraisal of what constitutes 'acceptable risk' than one as short lived as humans)

Now here's the question: What do beings that are pretty much impervious to environmental factors need cities (or structures of any kind) for?

They may need spaceships. But that's about it.

Indeed, however the simple need for more matter and energy to power your hive mind doesn't go away

But that power need isn't infinite. Solar or simple fusion may well suffice. And raw materials are plenty in places that don't have a significant gravity well.
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (3) Dec 10, 2012
But that power need isn't infinite. Solar or simple fusion may well suffice. And raw materials are plenty in places that don't have a significant gravity well.


It's all conjecture...especially on my part. They might have zero point energy taps that leave no significant environmental signature and have nearly 100% efficient energy and extremely little waste heat. Quite likely something that we can't conceive of, and therefore don't even recognize AS technology.

However, the Fermi paradox still stands quite well and I suspect it will until we do find some kind of hard evidence that an alien civilization does exist.

The principle of mediocrity has served science well the last few centuries. It may very well be that it's not infinitely applicable to every scientific question though. Quite the contrary I'd be very surprised if it did. The question is does it serve science on the question of the existence of alien intelligences or not.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 10, 2012
Suppose you have an advanced civilization. That would mean to me:
a) body modification and/or adaptation to virtually any environment (even open space)
b) possible immortality save for accidents (which would implicate heavy use of a), ..

They may need spaceships. But that's about it.


Let me offer a very speculative alternative. A self-repairing and self-replicating probe must be able to manipulate matter at the atomic scale, for example as IBM did in the 90's with AFM.

Suppose the cryonics industry cracks the problem of freezing and thawing people. In solid form, a person could be dismantled atom by atom, the data sent via the galactic network and rebuilt using local material at the destination. That is effectively teleporting at the speed of light, making physical spaceships obsolete.

The same data file could be used to provide immortality as an side-effect. In the event of unplanned death, the person would simply be reconstructed from their latest 'backup'.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2012
This planet would have been covered by THEIR cities before the first amphibians crawled out of our oceans

I'll put a qualifier on that:

Suppose you have an advanced civilization. That would mean to me:
a) body modification and/or adaptation to virtually any environment (even open space)
b) possible immortality save for accidents (which would implicate heavy use of a), since an immortal being will have an entirely different appraisal of what constitutes 'acceptable risk' than one as short lived as humans)
-antiaiias

Your estimations are valid. Their physiology may be unlike anything we've ever known. We are creatures of our own environment, but THEY may be far more adaptable than we...to ANY environment and all conditions. They may also have an appearance that varies according to the human observer's ability to perceive that appearance...or according to what is more acceptable to the human mind in terms of what is beautiful and what is ugly or horrific.

TheGhostofOtto1923
3.2 / 5 (20) Dec 10, 2012
Pussycateyes old posts...and noting that she was continually harassed and mentally poked by Blotto in each thread where she commented
Whenever she/you post ignorant lying bullshit you should be expected to be called upon it. Thats the way it works.
where Blotto was consistently off-topic so that he could attempt to push her buttons and accuse her of being other people
Whenever she/you post ignorant lying bullshit you should be expected to be called upon it. Thats the way it works.

You pretend to be an 'engineer' but in this thread you exhibit woeful ignorance of the word 'fossil' and so you were shown to be the consistently lazy, ignorant LIAR that you have proven yourself to be. Because thats the way it works.

You dont even have the common courtesy to fix posts which you completely gray out. This makes them harder to make fun of.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2012
Now here's the question: What do beings that are pretty much impervious to environmental factors need cities (or structures of any kind) for? They may need spaceships. But that's about it.


I agree. They may have no need to land on the surface at all, and can observe from the air.

Indeed, however the simple need for more matter and energy to power your hive mind doesn't go away


Matter and energy are transformable, so that they might utilize different energies that we're still not aware of, and have yet to discover.

But that power need isn't infinite. Solar or simple fusion may well suffice. And raw materials are plenty in places that don't have a significant gravity well.


Obviously, they have found a way to defeat the pull of gravity, which is far and above our meager technology. Their spacecraft are smooth, have no discernible appendages and well suited for both Earth's atmosphere AND outer space. I am very envious of their technology.

TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (19) Dec 10, 2012
a) body modification and/or adaptation to virtually any environment (even open space) b) possible immortality save for accidents (which would implicate heavy use of a), since an immortal being will have an entirely different appraisal of what constitutes 'acceptable risk' than one as short lived as humans)
You realize youre describing machines right?
Now here's the question: What do beings that are pretty much impervious to environmental factors need cities (or structures of any kind) for? They may need spaceships. But that's about it.
Machines would need to be repaired as you point out. They would be occupied in collecting info and communicating it across great distances, so they would have specialized remotes which would also need manufacturing and repair, as well as their transport.

They would need facilities to generate and store energy. They would need mining and refining facilities to replace consumables. Entropy would still be a factor for machine life.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (19) Dec 10, 2012
I agree. They may have no need to land on the surface at all, and can observe from the air.
Indeed. They can stir up the crops artistically, mutilate cattle artistically, and carve nazca lines artistically, all from the comfort of their saucers.

But they are not above earning a little moolah by swirling the occasional promo into sweet sorghum which I think shows an advanced sense of fiscal responsibility.
http://mashable.c...le-logo/
obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2012
Blotto displays his psychosis well in every thread. His continuing onslaught to show that a "CONSPIRACY AGAINST BLOTTO & HIS SOCK PUPPETS" is ongoing is very amusing and almost pitiful. We all expect Blotto to carry on his crusade of strange musings for the remainder of his time on Physorg, but will be happy to see him remove his stench from this once excellent website.
Absolutely pathetic (shakes head).
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2012


Let me offer a very speculative alternative. A self-repairing and self-replicating probe must be able to manipulate matter at the atomic scale, for example as IBM did in the 90's with AFM.


Suppose the cryonics industry cracks the problem of freezing and thawing people. In solid form, a person could be dismantled atom by atom, the data sent via the galactic network and rebuilt using local material at the destination. That is effectively teleporting at the speed of light, making physical spaceships obsolete.

The same data file could be used to provide immortality as an side-effect. In the event of unplanned death, the person would simply be reconstructed from their latest 'backup'.
-Fleetfoot in answer to antialias

I think that Self-repairing and self-replicating would require that every cell would need to be transmuted into a second version of the "old body" since the old may no longer be useful and rendered insubstantial. I like your idea of programmable life.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.2 / 5 (20) Dec 10, 2012
Blotto to carry on his crusade of strange musings for the remainder of his time on Physorg
-against unbounded ignorance, like your recent post that fish with legs had to have emerged in south africa because this is where we evolved? YOU BET.
but will be happy to see him remove his stench from this once excellent website. Absolutely pathetic (shakes head).
-like your recent post that FISH with LEGS had to have emerged in south africa because this is where WE evolved? YOU BET.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2012
There are, and have been, charlatans in the field of UFO study. This we have to concede to be true whether we like it or not. Authors such as Erich von Daniken may have been on the right path to exploring the Extraterrestrial phenomenon, but have opted to take the low road of sensationalism in a bid to popularize themselves without true merit and verifiable study. If von Daniken and others had just stuck to the study of UFOs and their occupants, the skeptics of the world would not have been able to attack and dismiss the hypotheses offered by these authors.

But such is the case with authors who go off on tangents as they introduce into their hypotheses, theories, and the genuine sightings of experienced UFO observers, the irrelevant and superficial aspects of the authors' imagination and lack of focus on the subject itself. The skeptic attacks are evident here:

http://www.skepti...;t=16410
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (19) Dec 10, 2012
Seriously. Fish with legs. In south africa.
http://phys.org/n...egs.html
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2012
From that skeptics website, here is the critic's excerpt that I found not convincing re: Blumrich technical explanation of Ezekiel's experience with a UFO

Spacships Of Ezekiel

 In The Spaceships of Ezekiel Blumrich asserts that Ezekiel's account in the Bible was not a description of a meeting with God in a prophetic vision, but a description of several encounters with ancient astronauts in a shuttlecraft from another planet.

Ezekiel was an Old Testament prophet who wrote about several visions he had in which he said God showed him the future and gave him various messages to deliver. Ezekiel describes seeing God riding in a chariot-like vehicle attended by angels.

Blumrich analyzes six[9] different translations of the Bible in conjunction with his experience in engineering and presents one possible version of the story as seen by a modern, technological society. In the appendices to his book he presents technical specifications of his hypothesized spacecraft.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2012
(contd)
Blumrich also published an article on his belief, "The spaceships of the prophet Ezekiel" in the UNESCO journal Impact of Science on Society.[10] [11]

 Criticism

Ronald Story in his book Guardians of the Universe? [12] stated "Blumrich doctors up his Biblical quotes just a smidgen to make them conform a little better to his spaceship interpretation", and "The Spaceships of Ezekiel, in all honesty, can only be described as an extreme form of rationalisation, with a good supply of technical jargon, charts, and diagrams, carefully designed to impress the general reader. The book does contain a good collection of impressive drawings which prove nothing more than that whoever prepared them is a good draughtsman."

http://en.wikiped..._Ezekiel

IMO, Blumrich did not doctor up anything in his study of Ezekiel's UFO experiences that resulted in his book. Blumrich had no extravagant motive for changing Biblical references. He reported on the similarities
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2012
Blumrich reported on the similarities in Ezekiel's account of his UFO experience with that of our present modern technology re: space vehicles. Ezekiel could not have understood that what he observed was a spacecraft, and he wrote with descriptions according to what was familiar and knowable of the time period.
Blumrich, as an experienced Engineer is fully capable of interpreting those observations...and it appears that Ronald Story was disparaging Blumrich's interpretations of Ezekiel's account, without having the understanding of how Engineering would apply to spacecraft design.
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Dec 10, 2012
Let me offer a very speculative alternative. A self-repairing and self-replicating probe must be able to manipulate matter at the atomic scale

That sounds reasonable. I actually think that is something we should be researching right now. We know it's doable. And if we take the opposite view (on the atomic scale dismantling is as easy as assembling) then we might speculate that this would make mining for materials (i.e. materials that are somehow concentrated) obsolete.

The same data file could be used to provide immortality as an side-effect.

A copy does not grant immortality. Only as much as a clone does (which is only 50% more than having kids does)

And why would one want to transmit their body into an environment for which it is not suited? It's unlikely that a body adapted to planet X will be adapted to any other planet in the universe.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (3) Dec 10, 2012
They may also have an appearance that varies according to the human observer's ability to perceive that appearance

But still you have failed to address the main point: WHY would they want to walk among us? If they're here for observation then that can be had much more easily via bugs/remote vieweing.

There's really no point for an alien to be here.
mrlewish
5 / 5 (2) Dec 10, 2012
With all the dialogue here I now doubt there are any intelligent civilizations in this galaxy.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 10, 2012
Let me offer a very speculative alternative. A self-repairing and self-replicating probe must be able to manipulate matter at the atomic scale, for example as IBM did in the 90's with AFM.


I think that Self-repairing and self-replicating would require that every cell would need to be transmuted into a second version of the "old body" since the old may no longer be useful and rendered insubstantial.


You may have missed the earlier conversation, "self-repairing and self-replicating" referred to a design of unmanned probe based on solar sail propulsion, not to lifeforms.

As I said, this is highly speculative but doesn't need any unknown physics, just development of existing technologies:

http://www.phys.s...%202.pdf

The speculation is applying that technology to ordinary (but frozen) lifeforms to get a practical 'teleport' using locally sourced atoms.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2012
From that link: http://phys.org/n...egs.html

quote obama_socks 4 hours ago Rank: 1.6 / 5 (7)
And these first limbed animals crawled out of the oceans onto the African continent, notably South Africa and nowhere else in the world, right? From them evolved the ape-man on one branch, which then evolved into...US? Perhaps a little more Hoxd13 applied to our distant cousins, might have resulted in cats becoming pianists and violinists and dogs flamenco dancers. Oh, the lost opportunities for Muffin and Fido...
;)

Yes...once again, the idjit Blotto (aka Theghostofotto1923) and his sock puppet, Anda had failed to comprehend the "WINK AND SMILE" that I had placed underneath my comment to indicate that I had made a joke. Blotto, the uptight ass consistently fails to carefully read other peoples' comments, thus proving that he has a psychosis that needs to be improved by heavy medication and a psychiatrist's help.
So sad.

obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2012
Let me offer a very speculative alternative. A self-repairing and self-replicating probe must be able to manipulate matter at the atomic scale, for example as IBM did in the 90's with AFM.


I think that Self-repairing and self-replicating would require that every cell would need to be transmuted into a second version of the "old body" since the old may no longer be useful and rendered insubstantial.


You may have missed the earlier conversation, "self-repairing and self-replicating" referred to a design of unmanned probe based on solar sail propulsion, not to lifeforms.

As I said, this is highly speculative but doesn't need any unknown physics, just development of existing technologies:

http://www.phys.s...%202.pdf
-Fleetfoot

Thanks FF...I did miss it... still very interesting.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2012
They may also have an appearance that varies according to the human observer's ability to perceive that appearance

But still you have failed to address the main point: WHY would they want to walk among us? If they're here for observation then that can be had much more easily via bugs/remote vieweing.

There's really no point for an alien to be here.
-antialias

I disagree. I think that there is much for aliens to learn from us and our environs. We ARE an interesting lot after all, even if only to study our habits and emotions and see how far we've come since they started coming here.
They could view us from a distance using instruments that enable them to see and hear individuals through walls, but it might be more important to them to be up close and personal. To do that, they would, of course, need a disguise that hides their true appearance and gives them one that is most acceptable to humans. If that appearance were insect-like, it would be a problem.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2012
By the same token, they could appear like a cat or dog and try to interact with us that way.
In observation, a bit of stealth, silence and focusing on the subject is necessary. If they have the ability to remain invisible somehow in a crowd of humans, they could pick up plenty of data. Interaction is necessary if they were teaching us. It could be done by some form of thought transfer if that were possible. They would be aware of human hostility and suspicion and might want to study that also. A way to observe humans and learn from us would be like a person acquiring teacher certification by observing a roomful of4 year olds and making notes of their behaviors.
I can't see any other reason for aliens to want to be on our world, or above it, unless they are here to ensure that we don't blow up the planet. They may have the power to snuff us out, but leave Earth habitable. They may be the reason why we exist. They may have planted the "seed" on Earth from which all creatures developed.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2012
Let me offer a very speculative alternative. A self-repairing and self-replicating probe must be able to manipulate matter at the atomic scale

That sounds reasonable. I actually think that is something we should be researching right now. We know it's doable.


The paper I cited a few posts later lists some recent key funding.

this would make mining for materials .. obsolete.


Exactly, convert an asteroid into a probe directly.

The same data file could be used to provide immortality as an side-effect.

A copy does not grant immortality. Only as much as a clone does


The brain would be copied exactly, including character and memory. Clones only share DNA like identical twins.

And why would one want to transmit their body into an environment for which it is not suited?


Use remote sensors to check suitability first, or transfer to a copy of the ISS for scientific study from orbit. Terraform a planet remotely before the Sun goes red giant.
Tausch
1 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2012
When discussing life not all the possibilities are known.
Ask yourself if assuming the ability to eventually synthesize life is a Drake game changer.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2012
I actually think that is something we should be researching right now. We know it's doable.


The paper I cited a few posts later lists some recent key funding.


http://www.phys.s...%202.pdf

"2008: APMC (led by Zyvex Labs) Awarded US$ 9.7 Millions by DARPA & Texas ETF for Commercialization of Tip Based Nanofabrication (TBN)

* 2009-2013: $100 million in 5 years in USA."

This is fun too, but indicative of what has been done in the last decade:

http://phys.org/n...232.html

Stick an AFM tip on a vehicle like that with remote control of a swarm of those by a local static processor and you have a production assembly mechanism. Cover a km wide solar sail with processors every few mm and the numbers are vast, it makes up for the very slow rate processing of individual units.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2012
When discussing life not all the possibilities are known.
Ask yourself if assuming the ability to eventually synthesize life is a Drake game changer.


Not really, but the ability of a race to disseminate across multiple stars and outlive its planet of origin is. The "f_L" term then becomes meaningless, their lifetime can be effectively infinite.
Telekinetic
3.3 / 5 (12) Dec 11, 2012
TheGhostofOtto, aka FrankHerbert, aka lite has pasted my entire rank page with this:
Physicists extend entanglement in Einstein experiment December 9, 2012, 2:43 pm 1 FrankHerbert | IAmThe | DumbestNigger | OnPhysorg | PleasePound | MyGay | FaggotAss |

That's why he's considered to be so erudite.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2012
I think that there is much for aliens to learn from us and our environs

Such as? And please limit yourself to those things that need PHYSICAL presence of aliens posing as humans. Because I really can't think of one.

We ARE an interesting lot after all,

About as interesting as birds are to ornithologists (at best).

Don't be vague. Specify WHY you think we're interesting to an advanced species. You're looking at this from a human-racist/ anthropocentric superiority-driven point of view like on Star Trek.

I doubt the universe shares this view of humans being the uber-race.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2012
The brain would be copied exactly, including character and memory.

The porblem is the following:

Copy a person and send it somewhere to be reconstituted (as you describe) while leaving the original alive. The original dies. Does the original have immortality? No, it dies. Only a copy survives. It is a copy that may believe it is the original, but death was real for the original - not the copy.

It's a way of keeping a certain structure existant - but it's not immortality (the original was still mortal).

As for other things: I don't subscribe to this "a spacefaring species would spread to all planets". At some point there's no point in spreading. Virtual immortality would very likely go hand in hand with vastly decreased production of offspring (or even complete stasis in that regard)
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2012
I think that there is much for aliens to learn from us and our environs

Such as? And please limit yourself to those things that need PHYSICAL presence of aliens posing as humans. Because I really can't think of one.
-antialias

Not being privy to E.T. thought and purpose, I surmise that they may wish to "go native" either for entertainment, or for impregnating with their DNA or being impregnated BY human DNA. Their race may have become weakened by too much inbreeding. If they are compatible enough with humans physically, they could take advantage of human sexuality and proclivity for sexual indiscretions so that they could build a stronger race in all, or most aspects. If they regard humans as little more than worms and insects, then they wouldn't want our DNA and have little, if anything, to do with us in a sexually physical sense. They might also have their version of "cabin fever" and want a bit of excitement. If so, then that would make them more human-like.

obama_socks
1 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2012
We ARE an interesting lot after all,

About as interesting as birds are to ornithologists (at best).


You seem to have a lowered opinion of your own kind. Have you examined your motives?

Don't be vague. Specify WHY you think we're interesting to an advanced species. You're looking at this from a human-racist/ anthropocentric superiority-driven point of view like on Star Trek.


Not being privy to their thoughts and purpose, once again I surmise that, as human, there is something in us for which THEY hold value, and possibly potential. In a religious sense, they may wish to examine our belief systems and whether or not WE hold to them. They, already being scientifically inclined with vast knowledge, may find a religious belief system to be curiously refreshing.

I doubt the universe shares this view of humans being the uber-race.


And why should they? They may believe in equality for all and wish for us to do the same. I consider them as brothers.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (2) Dec 11, 2012
I surmise that they may wish to "go native" either for entertainment, or for impregnating with their DNA or being impregnated BY human DNA.

And you think they may be compatible with us DNA-wise exactly why? And for what purpose?

Here's a hint: Even the closest relatives we have on this planet - which came from common stock to boot - aren't DNA compatible with us to the point of bearing offspring.

Then again: would you want offspring of you and an ape? Why would they want to have offspring with humans?

Their race may have become weakened by too much inbreeding.

As noted before: This isn't Start Trek. You're saying that a species that can traverse insterstellar distances can't do what we can (almost) already do with DNA?

and want a bit of excitement.

Do you see us wanting to live with apes? No? Why would you imagine they'd want to live with us. That excitement hypothesis is the most half-assed thing I've heard, yet. You'll have to do better than that.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2012
Off Topic:

@Telekinetic
FrankHerbert/Theghostofotto1923 has been outed again in http://phys.org/n...egs.html
FrankHerbert IS Theghostofotto1923
I suggest that you don't answer FrankHerbert's PMs any longer and instead, forward the PMs to Physorg admin. It's unwise to interact in PM with crazy lunatics if you know already what they are.
obama_socks
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2012
I surmise that they may wish to "go native" either for entertainment, or for impregnating with their DNA or being impregnated BY human DNA.

And you think they may be compatible with us DNA-wise exactly why? And for what purpose?

Here's a hint: Even the closest relatives we have on this planet - which came from common stock to boot - aren't DNA compatible with us to the point of bearing offspring.

Then again: would you want offspring of you and an ape? Why would they want to have offspring with humans?
-antialias

You seem to have ALL the answers and know E.T. quite well, while MY answers are mere conjecture.
IF E.T. took some proto-humans and infused E.T. DNA into them, it would naturally follow that descendants of those protohumans could never again interbreed with apes. I suppose that would make the Earth and its creatures a vast living research laboratory. Pure science.

Other than the answers I have already given, I haven't much else to offer.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2012
Copy a person and send it somewhere to be reconstituted (as you describe) while leaving the original alive.


Here's the basic scenario:

a) Freeze someone.

b) Dismantle atom by atom noting the type and location.

c) Transfer the data elsewhere.

d) Reassemble using locally sourced atoms.

e) Thaw and revive.

The result is the same person but with replaced atoms. What you are subtly alluding to is the philosophical problem known as the "Ship of Theseus". However, we eat and lose cells throughout our lives which is the same change only to a lesser degree so the question is academic, the 'teleported' person is still the same person.

Where things get tricky is when you use the same file to create two new persons because by the same reasoning both are the original, and that's not a concept we are used to.

The ethical problems would be immense if applied on Earth but as a means of transportation with no duplication allowed, it works well.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 11, 2012
I don't subscribe to this "a spacefaring species would spread to all planets". At some point there's no point in spreading. Virtual immortality would very likely go hand in hand with vastly decreased production of offspring (or even complete stasis in that regard)


Probably, but I think the biggest problem is that after 20 million years, there would be very little that was 'new' to be interesting. Nature programs on planets that had been studied for 10 million years would become a bit monotonous, so if a species showed signs of evolving intelligence, what would you do?

I would advocate leaving them to develop on their own and watching from orbit. When they develop rudimentary telescopes or EM, quit the system and monitor from a nearby star, and make contact only when they develop their means of interstellar travel, whatever that may be. It's the ultimate 'big brother' show, any interaction would bias them to duplicate our society and that would be boring.

YMMV ;-)
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (18) Dec 11, 2012
crazy lunatics
-such as the following?
I can't see any other reason for aliens to want to be on our world, or above it, unless they are here to ensure that we don't blow up the planet.
-And so they would morph into the form of cats and dogs so they could walk among people such as you, for the purpose of instructing you how not to blow up the planet? And also end up in pounds and cosmetic testing labs? Theyre probably too smart for that.

Oh I know where you got this idea
http://www.youtub...WkKGFl5M
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (17) Dec 11, 2012
would very likely go hand in hand with vastly decreased production of offspring (or even complete stasis in that regard)
The more they proliferate the more they would consume. Immortal machines would hold a very extended view of their survival. As a goal they might seek to counteract accelerating expansion at least locally, entropy, or heat death.

The singularity would create no more peripherals than it absolutely needed. And it would only need ONE of itself. The idea of companionship would be alien to machine singularities.
Probably, but I think the biggest problem is that after 20 million years, there would be very little that was 'new' to be interesting.
What makes you think machines would be 'interested' in anything beyond their own desire to exist? This would of course entail keeping tabs on their environs.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2012
I have no idea what you're talking about, Blotto...and you don't appear to either. As usual, you ramble in and out of coherency in order to ruin as many threads and their topics as possible.
I said what I said and you are changing what I've said.

I don't look at your links since you are a nutcase.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (18) Dec 11, 2012
It's the ultimate 'big brother' show, any interaction would bias them to duplicate our society and that would be boring.
And how would this aid them in their survival? And why do you think machines would need to be entertained? Do you think machines would get bored? Dont you think boredom is a flaw that needs to be rectified and not just appeased?
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (18) Dec 11, 2012
I have no idea what you're talking about, Blotto...and you don't appear to either.
Of course you dont. you dont even read what you write which is obvious. Did you already forget you wrote this?
By the same token, they could appear like a cat or dog and try to interact with us that way...I can't see any other reason for aliens to want to be on our world, or above it, unless they are here to ensure that we don't blow up the planet.
-And so HOW would talking animals who are talking to people like YOU prevent the mature, sane people who are in charge of nuclear weapons from using them? HOW would aliens as PETS do this?
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (17) Dec 11, 2012
The ethical problems would be immense if applied on Earth but as a means of transportation with no duplication allowed, it works well.
The ethical PROBLEM is your step b)
b) Dismantle atom by atom noting the type and location.
-which in any jurisdiction would be murder.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2012
I don't subscribe to this "a spacefaring species would spread to all planets". At some point there's no point in spreading. Virtual immortality would very likely go hand in hand with vastly decreased production of offspring (or even complete stasis in that regard)


AA only offers opinion and conjecture, as do the rest of us. He ignores a possibility of a weakened state caused by too much interbreeding among E.T.

...so if a species showed signs of evolving intelligence, what would you do?
-Fleetfoot

Allow them to evolve and observe them for signs of true intelligence. (Blotto can't be considered intelligent, nor AlQuaida et al.) True intelligence creates an "atmosphere" of equality, opportunity, liberty and responsibility, among others. I believe that E.T. is empowered with all these values, and expect humans to follow suit. But ONLY if they had infused protohumans with their DNA. Otherwise, we aren't worth their time

antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Dec 11, 2012
the "Ship of Theseus".

The ship of Theseus explains the difference between replacing everything at once versus replacing small parts over time. While the 'transmitted and reconstructed' persona is an example of the former the matter we're dealing with something else here.

The reconstituted person would certainly think it is the original. But the original back home would still also think it is the original (and the two would diverge from that point on to become their own...erm...individual individuals.).
There's no reason the original should be killed in the process. And killing it would be the exact opposite from immortality.

And when either one dies just some copy would be left that had diverged over the course of the intervening time.

A more sophisticated version of cloning - but only that. No real immortality.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2012
Blotto continues to FLOOD this thread with its nonsense about Artificial Intelligence, possibly to replace humans and human descendants with emotionless bags of cogs, wheels and a software program.
Blotto obviously supports such a future due to its evident lack of respect for human-like qualities that are a major part of our existence.
Blotto is evidently not concerned with improvements TO humanity, but only to improvements FROM humanity in the lifeless AI that Blotto wishes to take our place.
The E.T.s that fly around in their spacecraft in our air space are not AI. If they were AI, then they would have snuffed us out already...unless, of course, they were programmed to PROTECT HUMANS.
But even if they were AI machines, they could not be self-created or self-manufactured. Not even self-programmed. A living entity would have been its Creator.
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Dec 11, 2012
there would be very little that was 'new' to be interesting. ... what would you do?

I'd find some way of 'hibernating' until something interesting happens.

"Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn."
(In his house at R'lyeh, dead Cthulhu waits dreaming)

any interaction would bias them to duplicate our society

Exactly. Watching I can understand. Maybe monitoring that we don't accidentally divide by zero and take the universe with it (e.g. by creating non-self limiting vonNeuman replicators). But interacting? I don't see that at all.

watching from orbit

I'd watch from below. Closer - and no one ever looks there.

TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (18) Dec 11, 2012
Blotto obviously supports such a future due to its evident lack of respect for human-like qualities that are a major part of our existence.
So hey - do you think obamas cat is an alien? Maybe obamas cat is a talking ALIEN, but for reasons of national security obama cant tell us you know, that his CAT is actually directing world events and not him. Because many people would be understandably concerned about this. Do you think boehner knows?

Maybe boehner is an alien as well, in some other anumal form. Goat perhaps?

You freeking MORON.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2012
Breakdown of cells into its subatomic components, transporting those components elsewhere and then reconstituting those components into the original doesn't necessarily leave an 'original' back at the base lab. The reconstituted body would still be the original and no 'seconds' would exist, IF DONE CORRECTLY. Splitting of the subatomic components (or twinning) wouldn't happen and the matter into energy into matter wouldn't break any Laws. It would only be a transference (travel) of all components to the receiving base lab from the sending base lab. The only problem that could occur is if the machine was powered down suddenly or a glitch in the software.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (18) Dec 11, 2012
Splitting of the subatomic components (or twinning) wouldn't happen and the matter into energy into matter wouldn't break any Laws.
But pussytard - as any competent NASA engineer (consultant) would know, most subatomic particles cannot be split as they are fundamental and unsplittable.

Are you sure you know what you are talking about? Perhaps you should consult with your fellow consultants there at NASA for uh clarification.

You freeking MORON.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2012
It would be interesting to see what goes into such an subatomic transference machine and what it would look like. On Earth, it would take the place of single or mass transit, rendering trains, passenger planes and other vehicles obsolete...but it may not be cost-effective if its energy requirements are extreme. E.T. however, may have energy sources supremely different than ours and such a subatomic transfer would not cause their ships to go dark like our cities.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2012
Pussytard is not here, and hasn't posted since July 26th, Blotto...you freaking moron psycho.
obama_socks
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2012
Splitting of the subatomic components (or twinning) wouldn't happen and the matter into energy into matter wouldn't break any Laws.
But pussytard - as any competent NASA engineer (consultant) would know, most subatomic particles cannot be split as they are fundamental and unsplittable.

Are you sure you know what you are talking about? Perhaps you should consult with your fellow consultants there at NASA for uh clarification.

You freeking MORON.
-Crazy Blotto

Wow, you are such a genius, Blotto. You should have been around to inform Oppenheimer, and all those other scientists that atoms could not be split, nor subatomic particles split further into smaller components.
What would science DO without YOU, Blotto? You freaking moron psycho!!

http://science.ho...her9.htm

http://www.popsci...articles

Muahahahahhahahah
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2012
What makes you think machines would be 'interested' in anything beyond their own desire to exist?


We weren't talking about machines.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 11, 2012
The ethical problems would be immense if applied on Earth but as a means of transportation with no duplication allowed, it works well.
The ethical PROBLEM is your step b)
b) Dismantle atom by atom noting the type and location.
-which in any jurisdiction would be murder.


Next time you see a Star Trek re-run, ask yourself why the transporter operator didn't get arrested.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 11, 2012
the "Ship of Theseus".
The ship of Theseus explains the difference between replacing everything at once versus replacing small parts over time.


We accept that it is the same ship if we replace each plank piecemeal so is it not the same if we replace all at once. The same applies here, it is the configuration of the atoms that constitutes the person, not the specific atoms themselves.

The reconstituted person would certainly think it is the original.


The whole process is equivalent to the Star Trek transporter, where it was accepted that the same person appeared at the destination.

the two would diverge from that point on to become their own...erm...individual individuals.).


Yes, a bifurcated worldline. Again, that would probably be considered unethical and banned.

There's no reason the original should be killed in the process.


It is unavoidable if you consider the method but as I said, it is only a side-effect of the means of transportation.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 11, 2012
The reconstituted body would still be the original and no 'seconds' would exist, IF DONE CORRECTLY.


Exactly.

Splitting of the subatomic components (or twinning) wouldn't happen and the matter into energy into matter wouldn't break any Laws.


It wouldn't but when you note that the energy released at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was 600mg, half an aspirin, transferring the energy of a body is difficult. It is also pointless as identical atoms can be sourced at the destination.

It would be interesting to see what goes into such an subatomic transference machine


See my previous links. What I described is at the atomic level, not sub-atomic (that's not needed) based on extrapolated current technology.

On Earth, it would take the place of single or mass transit, ...


No, the time required to digitise a body would be at least months, perhaps years, too slow for local use but still advantageous for interstellar travel.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (17) Dec 11, 2012
We weren't talking about machines.
But machines are all that will be left, sooner or later. Ask yourself what that ball of goo in your head can do that a computer of adequate complexity cant do better, more efficiently, and more dependably?
why the transporter operator didn't get arrested.
Because its a tv show? Here is some discussion on the subject.
http://scifi.stac...ortation

Perhaps sending the actual deconstructed energy would pass a court of law but I doubt it. Would you be getting all the photons or whatever back in their original particle forms and locations?
that would probably be considered unethical and banned
One of my favorite STTNG episodes was when riker had gotten unknowingly duplicated in the past, and met his double who had been stranded alone on a desolate planet for years. Very sad, well-acted.
http://en.wikiped...eration)
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 11, 2012
We weren't talking about machines.
But machines are all that will be left, sooner or later.


That is your opinion, it wasn't the topic of conversation in this case.

Here is some discussion on the subject.
http://scifi.stac...ortation


They have it right, the person is moved but not harmed so there is no legal case to answer.

Would you be getting all the photons or whatever back in their original particle forms and locations?


No need, nerves mostly work by transferring sodium and potassium ions so electrical activity stops when the body is frozen. You only need to get the right elements into the right locations in that state, no photons and nothing sub-atomic. That's why the whole concept is dependent on prior success in the field of cryonics. Currently we don't know if our species could survive that process even with very fast freezing.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (16) Dec 11, 2012
That is your opinion, it wasn't the topic of conversation in this case.
Yeah so? Everybody gets the chance to voice their opinion here nicht wahr?
They have it right, the person is moved but not harmed so there is no legal case to answer.
You mean, legal in the federation right? And how would getting disassembled not hurt? How would people not be terrified at the prospect of getting themselves disassembled?

You are first annihilated (you DIE), transformed into a soup of some sort, and then reassembled somewhere else from this same general soup. But you still die, and are dead thereafter. And the thing which is constructed at the other end is NOT the original YOU.

And whatever would happen with the soul??

The only way this would work with animate objects is if the transfer of the actual body, intact, were warped through sub-space or something. Roddenberry should have used this - much easier to explain.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (16) Dec 11, 2012
You should have been around to inform Oppenheimer, and all those other scientists that atoms could not be split
And poor pussytard now reveals that she does not know the difference between atoms and subatomic particles.
Splitting of the subatomic components
-is what you said. Some NASA engineer (consultant).
obama_socks
2 / 5 (8) Dec 11, 2012
What makes you think machines would be 'interested' in anything beyond their own desire to exist?


We weren't talking about machines.
-Fleetfoot

BINGO!! Evidently, Blotto was in such a hurry to push his desire to end human existence and to convince everyone that it would be good to have only lifeless-robot-machines in place of the living that Blotto forgot to read and comprehend what was said. I missed the word "probe" and admitted my mistake. But not Blotto...who is too precious in its own mind.

Ooopps...forgot that Blotto doesn't believe in "mind" or "consciousness"..just lifeless bots.
obama_socks
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 11, 2012
You should have been around to inform Oppenheimer, and all those other scientists that atoms could not be split
And poor pussytard now reveals that she does not know the difference between atoms and subatomic particles.
Splitting of the subatomic components
-is what you said. Some NASA engineer (consultant).
-Blotto

Which means that you did not read the second link that I provided here. Read it and weep.

http://www.popsci...articles
obama_socks
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2012
@Theghostofotto1923
Oh btw Blotto...your 'pussytard' is no longer commenting on that name. She's had her baby and only reads the posts and comments with another name which I don't know. Pussycateyes says that Blotto has Dissociative Identity Disorder, and your referring to me as pussytard is an indication of your subconscious hatred for the female genitalia.
Just sayin'
Shinobiwan Kenobi
1 / 5 (6) Dec 12, 2012
I have no idea what you're talking about, Blotto...and you don't appear to either. As usual, you ramble in and out of coherency in order to ruin as many threads and their topics as possible.
I said what I said and you are changing what I've said.

I don't look at your links since you are a nutcase.
-bamasox

pot, meet kettle.

...I haven't much else to offer.
-bamasox

^ you should consider prefacing each comment with this. <3 <3

Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 12, 2012
.. it wasn't the topic of conversation in this case.
Yeah so? Everybody gets the chance to voice their opinion here nicht wahr?


Of course, you can always post a simple reply. However, paraphrasing, I said "people will get bored" and you quoted me adding the query "why would machines get bored". I could either assume you simply misread the conversation or that you are a blinkered mission poster intent on hijacking any conversation not on your pet topic. I chose to give you the benefit of the doubt and clarify the subject of my post but if I was wrong, I'll just ignore that intrusion.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (4) Dec 12, 2012
They have it right, the person is moved but not harmed so there is no legal case to answer.
You mean, legal in the federation right?


I mean in the same sense as a bus driver has no legal case to answer if you get on the bus and he moves you to a new location.

How would people not be terrified at the prospect of getting themselves disassembled?


People who are terrified at the prospect of flying don't get on planes.

And the thing which is constructed at the other end is NOT the original YOU.


IMO it is the same person.

And whatever would happen with the soul??


Some people consider the soul to be eternal and able to exist as an independent entity after the physical person dies. In that case it must attach to the mind in some loose way and would be similarly attached throughout time if it is eternal. Other people consider it to be part of personality so an aspect of the mind which is an abstraction of brain function, it would transfer with the brain.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 12, 2012
The only way this would work with animate objects is if the transfer of the actual body, intact, were warped through sub-space or something. Roddenberry should have used this - much easier to explain.


True, but we were discussing an extrapolation of current technology which has been in development for over 20 years for which purely fictional concepts like "sub-space" have no relevance. The topic was marrying cryonics, atomic scale manipulation using AFM and microwave communications using synthetic aperture techniques to provide a means of interstellar transport. The similarity to a Star Trek transporter lies only in the end result, not the mechanism.
antialias_physorg
not rated yet Dec 12, 2012
We accept that it is the same ship if we replace each plank piecemeal so is it not the same if we replace all at once.

I give you these two scenarios:

1) I take a ship and successively replace each atom with an identical one procured from elsewhere.

2) I make a copy of the ship atom by atom (right next to the original). Then I burn the original and move the copy over to the place the original inhabited.

For me the point of something being immortal (even though it changes) is that it changes in a 'slow enough' manner.

If I was replaced by a version of me that is 20 years older right now, it wouldn't be the same me (even if it did have the memories of these 20 years). But in 20 years time - with slow change over that time - it will be me.
I'd argue that 1) gives you the same ship while 2) doesn't.
( 1) keeps the ship 'alive' at all times and 2) doesn't. )

TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (17) Dec 12, 2012
I mean in the same sense as a bus driver has no legal case to answer if you get on the bus and he moves you to a new location.
And I mean in the sense that fiction writers get to make up anything they want. Transporters were used in ST to save expensive sets and production time. They are implausible scientifically and ethically.
IMO it is the same person.
-Which is based on a scifi gimmick. One of these 2 people would experience death, that is certain.
Some people consider the soul to be eternal and able to exist as an independent entity after the physical person dies.
I was being facetious. There is no soul. It is also a gimmick, albeit a very successful one.
you are a blinkered mission poster intent on hijacking
-As I proposed the AI topic first, I can claim that you hijacked the thread by ignoring it, stimmt? Your galaxy full of obsolete organics is unsupportable. We will be replaced by something better. We can see this process occurring all around us.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.2 / 5 (18) Dec 12, 2012
Machine life is also a convincing explanation for the fermi paradox. Singularities are all over, the inevitable result of machine creation. They're very quiet and very frugal. They communicate with each other, they know all about how life emerges and evolves anywhere and everywhere, and they have nothing to say to us or anything further to learn from us.

And so the skies are silent. And empty.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.2 / 5 (18) Dec 12, 2012
An inherent problem with transporters is angular momentum. You dissolve something which is traveling in one direction at a certain velocity, and reconstitute it somewhere else with a different vector and velocity

Scifi writers have wrestled with this. One I remember had a large mass floating out in the ocean, which could be used to absorb differential energy.

See this is why we are obsolete. I would not have to be telling you this because as machines we would all be privy to the same proofed and relevant info. Instantly. No dialectic necessary.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 12, 2012
1) I take a ship and successively replace each atom with an identical one procured from elsewhere.

2) I make a copy of the ship atom by atom (right next to the original). Then I burn the original and move the copy over to the place the original inhabited.

I'd argue that 1) gives you the same ship while 2) doesn't.


Agreed but that isn't the scenario:

3) A team picks up the entire ship and moves it 50m to the right.

4) I pick one atom from the ship and move it 50m to the right, then go back and get another atom placing it 50m to the right next to the first and so on until the ship has been moved.

5) I repeat (4) except that after picking each atom I move 1m to the right, I drop the atom in a waste bin, walk another 48m, select an atom of the same type from a stockpile bin then walk 1m and place it as I would have in (4).

6) I repeat (5) except that I email the details of each atom to a distant friend who does the rebuild.

I suggest it is the same ship in each of these.
antialias_physorg
not rated yet Dec 12, 2012
By my count that would still only be a copy. Because if you did it by your interpretation we could end up with two (or more) originals (if we don't discard the original atom or do step 5 multiple times in different locations)

Each copy would THINK they are an original - but they can't really be. Each would also think the OTHERS are a copy of itself if they were left in the dark about which one came first.

They fit the definition of a copy: an identical image. (Or I fail to see what the definition of a copy would be under your system - and where it would differ from your definition of transmitting an original)

And as noted: once they start having their own (separate) lives from then on they're not even copies anymore. So no immortality for any of them.
obama_socks
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 12, 2012
Machine life is also a convincing explanation for the fermi paradox. Singularities are all over, the inevitable result of machine creation. They're very quiet and very frugal. They communicate with each other, they know all about how life emerges and evolves anywhere and everywhere, and they have nothing to say to us or anything further to learn from us.

And so the skies are silent. And empty.
-TheghostofBlotto1923

Pay no attention to the deranged mind that is Blotto. It says "they're very quiet and very frugal"...with the usual flair of irrational aplomb. Since there will be no logical and reasonable evidence forthcoming from Blotto's dementia, it behooves us to continue our excellent thrust and parry...all resulting in Blotto's extreme consternation, perhaps along with some of his foot-stomping and black smoke emitting from Blotto's every orifice...and, no doubt, some tail twitching.
obama_socks
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 12, 2012

"Machine life" indeed. Blotto evokes his memory of isolation in his mom's basement while sitting in her laundry basket with only his Robby the Robot for company, lonely and frightened into endowing the robot with life.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 12, 2012
By my count that would still only be a copy. Because if you did it by your interpretation we could end up with two (or more) originals (if we don't discard the original atom or do step 5 multiple times in different locations)


If you change it, of course you can change the outcome, but think it through as I said it. The result of 4 is identical to 3, and 5 is the combination of 4 followed by 1 so produces "the same ship" as you agreed, but moved by 50m.

Procedure 6 is the same as 4 and 5 except that in those the destination version overlaps the source in time while in 6 that may not be the case if the email delivery time exceeds the time taken to deconstruct the source, e.g. to Alpha Centauri.

And as noted: once they start having their own (separate) lives from then on they're not even copies anymore.


Yes, that's why I agreed that (2) is not equivalent, they share most of their pasts but not quite all.
obama_socks
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 12, 2012
By my count that would still only be a copy. Because if you did it by your interpretation we could end up with two (or more) originals (if we don't discard the original atom or do step 5 multiple times in different locations)

Each copy would THINK they are an original - but they can't really be. Each would also think the OTHERS are a copy of itself if they were left in the dark about which one came first.
-AA

So why would an original be necessarily left behind and a duplicate model slowly formed at the receiving base lab? Why not break down the original into its subatomic parts and then electronically transfer all of the particles AS A UNIT in the same exact configuration as it was before it left the originating lab, where each cell and its subset is in the same relative distance or position to its neighbor and that that configuration is not permitted to change in transit? IMO, the transporter will need to be programmed to send the whole body and not a few cells at a time.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (4) Dec 12, 2012
An inherent problem with transporters is angular momentum. You dissolve something which is traveling in one direction at a certain velocity, and reconstitute it somewhere else with a different vector and velocity.


Obviously that problem doesn't apply to the method I've described.

See this is why we are obsolete. I would not have to be telling you this because as machines we would all be privy to the same proofed and relevant info. Instantly. No dialectic necessary.


Indeed, but since we aren't sharing the same mental database, you need to read what I wrote before commenting, that way I won't have to correct your errors.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Dec 12, 2012
I don't see how a state of immortality could be achieved at the receiving lab. The cells and subsets would have been transported at the age of the body before transport, UNLESS each cell, etc. was infused with a retrogressive compound that promotes a growth of new cells to replace the old ones almost immediately after arriving at the receiving lab. I don't know if "retrogressive" is the proper term.
antialias_physorg
not rated yet Dec 12, 2012
Why not break down the original into its subatomic parts and then electronically transfer all of the particles AS A UNIT

There's no real difference in transmitting/using the original atoms or not in whether you have an original or merely a copy that thinks it is an original.

By deconstructing the original you have killed it. That may be an academic point because it really doesn't matter to the one that is being rebuilt elsewhere. As long as it believes it is the original that's all that counts (to it).

However it is not the original. That one has ceased to be.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Dec 13, 2012
@AA -Quite possibly, it wouldn't matter to the original since it is the mind (brain) that is chiefly the carrier of all the information, sensations, soul if you will, etc. and the body itself may be recycled as new material for a body unit that is transported in the other direction. I suppose that you are correct in that the original body cells will die...UNLESS it can be held in a suspension or a solution such as a material that binds all the cells and subsets together in transit. But that would necessitate applying the material into the cells before breaking the cells down into subsets just prior to transit, unless it can be done in tandem with a cryogenic method in such a way that ice crystals will not form within the cells and its subsets.

obama_socks
1 / 5 (5) Dec 13, 2012
The cells would have to be broken down into its quantum components so that it can be "fluid" enough to travel along the circuitry connecting to the receiving lab. Perhaps, since as you said, the original body would die as a matter of course, corporeal death is not the issue as much as the brain cells and their subsets broken down into quantum components with the "gluing preservative' applied prior to transit. This application may or may not sustain the lives of the cells but the preservative may prevent further deterioration while in transit. At the receiving lab, as Fleetwood explained, material could be made ready to form the new body. My main concern in this regard, would be the mind contained in the brain cells and subsets that have been flowing through the circuitry. THAT is the crux of the problem - the preservation and reintroduction of all the components of the brain as one unit.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (16) Dec 13, 2012
The cells would have to be broken down into its quantum components so that it can be "fluid" enough to travel along the circuitry connecting to the receiving lab
Uh what are quantum components, what does 'making fluid' mean, and what kind of 'circuitry' are you talking which can carry 'quantum components'? Are you making stuff up with words you don't understand again PT?
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 13, 2012
I don't see how a state of immortality could be achieved at the receiving lab.


The whole 'immortality' question was a side issue, separate from the 'transporter' discussion.

Basically, the transport method is based on generating a datafile of relative positions of atoms which is transmitted to a distant destination. That file could be retained as well, call it 'A'. If the same person goes through the process again some years later, that would produce a second file 'B'. They can be reconstructed from a composite file generated by merging the portion of 'B' that encodes their brain with the section of 'A' that encodes everything but the brain, say with a cutoff at the top of the spine meaning the person gets their younger body back again. In the sense of some previous posts, it is a COPY of the previous state of the body.

Counteracting degeneration of the brain itself needs a more subtle approach but similar approaches can undo the effects of ageing and cellular attrition.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 13, 2012
There's no real difference in transmitting/using the original atoms or not in whether you have an original or merely a copy that thinks it is an original.

By deconstructing the original you have killed it.


By stopping someone's heart, you kill them, but doctors aren't charged with murder for doing open heart surgery. I consider death to be the irreversible cessation of life and this deconstruction is reversible, the person is merely moved elsewhere. If a surgeon amputated my limbs, took them to another country, came back for my head and torso, transported them as well, and finally reattached my limbs, I would still be the same person. Swapping each carbon atom for another, etc., in the process doesn't change that.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (1) Dec 13, 2012
.. it is the mind (brain) that is chiefly the carrier of all the information, sensations, soul if you will, etc. and the body itself may be recycled ... I suppose that you are correct in that the original body cells will die...UNLESS it can be held in a suspension or a solution such as a material that binds all the cells and subsets together in transit.


You seem to have missed some of the conversation. The process proposed completely dismantles the original atom by atom noting their positions and the only thing that is transmitted electronically is the resulting data file (i.e. an email!). ALL of the material used to reconstruct the person is sourced locally in the destination star system, no material whatsoever is conveyed.
antialias_physorg
not rated yet Dec 13, 2012
, I would still be the same person. Swapping each carbon atom for another, etc., in the process doesn't change that.

Reattaching the limb reconstructs the original. Sourcing from other...sources... - without any connection to the original material - creates a copy.

If the continuation of the pattern is the point then that is 'immortality'. If it's the continuation of the entity then it's not.

While to the copy this may indeed be indistinguishable from continuing to live the original has been killed. This is a highly esoteric point as I'm willing to admit

(And to the entities involved it makes no difference. A killed entity doesn't care - and an entity that was reconstructed with memories that aren't it's own doesn't care either)
Tausch
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 13, 2012
No. There is no copy. Transfers are not copies. If it was copied then there would be two of it at the same time. Which is supposed to be against the rules in the quantum world. Ethelred

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp

And...
quantum information is preserved when copied. Even though the copies may be imperfect, the original quantum state can be recovered. In practical terms, it might lead to a precision measurement technique based on quantum physics for samples that have very low contrast, such as living cells.

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp

According to the no-hiding theorem, if information is missing from one system (which may happen when the system interacts with the environment), then the information is simply residing somewhere else in the Universe; in other words, the missing information cannot be hidden in the correlations between a system and its environment.

obama_socks
2 / 5 (8) Dec 13, 2012
.. it is the mind (brain) that is chiefly the carrier of all the information, sensations, soul if you will, etc. and the body itself may be recycled ...

You seem to have missed some of the conversation. The process proposed completely dismantles the original atom by atom noting their positions and the only thing that is transmitted electronically is the resulting data file (i.e. an email!). ALL of the material used to reconstruct the person is sourced locally in the destination star system, no material whatsoever is conveyed.
-Fleetfoot

I see your point as to a process of taking a kind of "snapshot" of all the living cells within the original and possibly their subsets, then transferring all the data into something similar to a datafile. Then sending the datafile to its destination to be regrouped into a reasonable facsimile of the original. Is that correct?
obama_socks
1.8 / 5 (8) Dec 13, 2012
@Fleetfoot

I have this idea that when the datafile arrives at the receiving base lab, whether its sent electronically or handed to the techs, the datafile can then be run to a "printer" that has been prepared with all the elements that would regroup into a new or duplicate body.

"In recent years, biologists have begun to exploit a set of techniques, collectively called soft lithography, to transfer patterns of biological materials to microarrays, much as Renaissance artists transferred images to paper."

http://phys.org/n...545.html

While not everything in that article is what I had in mind, the gist of it is that of using a printer that has been prepared with nanomaterials, et al that have been selected as closely matching the datafile information. Perhaps the printer may then print a new human body.
obama_socks
1.3 / 5 (7) Dec 13, 2012
This is a bit closer, but still missing many peripherals for manufacturing our duplicate human - printing nanomaterials with a printer in conjunction with a molecular assembler. Nanotechnology of the future. Such a datafile may be created while the person is still a young adult for future use as the person ages and wants a younger body. An application such as this could be employed to transport whole populations long distances. But the original is still aging even if not killed, and its "essence", if you will, is in the datafile. It is the datafile that has immortality.

http://phys.org/n...852.html
FrankHerbert
1 / 5 (5) Dec 13, 2012
Technology is nowhere near being able to "print" a human. The Chinese were closer to reaching the moon when they invented gunpowder than we currently are to "printing" a human.
obama_socks
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 14, 2012
Technology is nowhere near being able to "print" a human. The Chinese were closer to reaching the moon when they invented gunpowder than we currently are to "printing" a human.
-FrankHerbutt

Who said it was?
Blotto, if you didn't have your head so far up your ass all the time, you might have understood that neither I nor anyone else was talking about these things in the present tense. Since you homed in on MY comments, it is evident that you approve of everyone else's appraisal and their projection of what is to be - or might be. They too, are not talking in the present tense. Since in your insanity you have referred to yourself as the "king of physorg" in another thread, and you have a following and admirer in VendicarD, it is doubtful that anyone will ever take you seriously.

Now go take your meds like a good child and don't interfere in my conversations with other adults, ok?
Shinobiwan Kenobi
2 / 5 (8) Dec 14, 2012
it is doubtful that anyone will ever take you seriously.


-bamasox

Again, pot vs. kettle.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (17) Dec 14, 2012
ass all the time, you might have understood that neither I nor anyone else was talking about these things
Others seem to know a little about the subject. You however say things like this:
The cells would have to be broken down into its quantum components so that it can be "fluid" enough to travel along the circuitry connecting to the receiving lab
...So again, what are quantum components, what does 'making fluid' mean, and what kind of 'circuitry' are you talking which can carry 'quantum components'? Are you making stuff up with words you don't understand again PT?

Are you trying to pretend you know things that you don't AGAIN, by using words you don't understand to imply that you do PT? Like when you dropped 'lost wax' like a steamy turd. Remember that? It's been downhill since then.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (18) Dec 14, 2012
Now go take your meds like a good child and don't interfere in my conversations with other adults, ok?
Most people here act like adults. You however use words like toys. 'Well what about 'quantum' things, and 'nanomaterial' things, and handing off 'datafile' things which contain 'essenses' for 'printing' things in, in 'lab' places?? What about THOSE things huh??!?' - pussytard ebulliates.

Words are not toys. You should go back to your Legos.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 14, 2012
I see your point as to a process of taking a kind of "snapshot" of all the living cells within the original and possibly their subsets, then transferring all the data into something similar to a datafile. Then sending the datafile to its destination to be regrouped into a reasonable facsimile of the original. Is that correct?


Yes, but as I emphasised "atom by atom". Some cells could be handled that way, blood cells for example. Encode one and then manufacture as many copies as are required, but the brain defines the person and it is encoded in the details of dendrites and synapses etc. as well as the soma. All this has to be duplicated perfectly for each individual unique neuron, a "reasonable facsimile" isn't good enough:

http://ygraph.com/chart/1603

.. the datafile can then be run to a "printer"


Sort of, it has to be full 3D and capable of dealing with all molecules, stereoisomers, strained bond angles, etc. so it is unlikely to use pre-manufactured molecules.
FrankHerbert
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 14, 2012
Even if you could replicate a brain perfectly you'd only be creating a copy of that person's consciousness as the continuity of consciousness would be broken. The original would still die. That is unless souls exist and the brain is just a tuning mechanism, which I highly doubt.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 14, 2012
Technology is nowhere near being able to "print" a human. The Chinese were closer to reaching the moon when they invented gunpowder than we currently are to "printing" a human.


That's probably about right, but progress is much faster today. This presentation gives a summary of the development of the technology for inanimate materials up to about 2008 when DARPA awarded a contract worth $9.7M towards 'commercialisation'.

http://www.phys.s...%202.pdf

I suspect funding since then has been hit severely by the world economic situation, but given a few decades, I think it will reach the maturity to enable self-repair and self-replication of a simple solar sail. There would be several centuries of further development during the probe flights before it would be required for human transport. If the nearest "interesting" planet were 200 light years away, we would have 20,000 years to solve the problems!
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Dec 14, 2012
Even if you could replicate a brain perfectly you'd only be creating a copy of that person's consciousness as the continuity of consciousness would be broken.


No more than someone who spends some months in a coma, they are still "the same person".

The original would still die. That is unless souls exist and the brain is just a tuning mechanism, which I highly doubt.


Even then, it would naturally "tune in" to the reconstructed person since their brain and mind would be unchanged from the moment they were frozen and the "snapshot" taken.
winthrom
1 / 5 (1) Dec 14, 2012
I propose the following:
1- A perfect duplicate is not the original unless every element of the original is entangled with the duplicate (made from soup) and that original's state is transfered to the duplicate while the original is converted to "soup".
Note: the soup would be pure energy converted to atoms, etc.
2- Consider a model of the universe such that the initial state (Big Bang) is time T=0 and the final state is Time T=& (infinity). Further, we specify that time is the path from T=0 to T=&. We then consider this universe, with all its' time points to be an object that exists all at once in a more complex super universe. Our period of existence (life) is a permanent part of our universe. Thus we have eternal existence. We also consider that time lines may split when conditions warrant (entanglement is broken) creating an infinite number of time-lines for our one universe. All these time-lines are valid and each will possibly contain valid variations of our own life time-line.
winthrom
1 / 5 (1) Dec 14, 2012
From my premise (below), we may extrapolate the following:
1- Every element of the universe exists in multiple time-lines.
2- As these time-lines multiply, they diverge in space (to be more precise, space/time-lines).
3- Space/time-line divergence is responsible for the expansion of the visible universe.
4- We still do not know how gravity plays into this, but dark matter and dark energy may be shadows of these parallel space/time-lines.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (16) Dec 14, 2012
1- A perfect duplicate is not the original unless every element of the original is entangled with the duplicate (made from soup)
-Would this be 'noodle' soup? What kind of 'noodle' soup would this be?
Even then, it would naturally "tune in" to the reconstructed person since their brain and mind would be unchanged from the moment they were frozen and the "snapshot" taken.
Consider for a moment, if you will, how easy this will be when machines finally replace us animals

And by the way, both dennett and minsky will tell you that there is no such thing as 'mind'. A useful construct for sentient animals to convince them that their unique genetic endowment is worthy of replication. Some are, some aren't. Consider too that gene info in the machine world will be centralized and preferred traits selected not by competition and mutation but by reason and logic (Design). So much more efficient.

In the future there will be no individuals, only model runs.
FrankHerbert
1 / 5 (4) Dec 14, 2012
No more than someone who spends some months in a coma, they are still "the same person".


I don't necessarily buy this, but I guess there is no current way to prove which idea is correct. People retain memories from within comas both of some limited outside stimuli and of dream-states. The person is not conscious in the sense that they are able to participate in the outside world, but they are conscious in the sense that they still retain their consciousness upon waking.

If a perfect copy of a brain were to ressurect someone from the perspective of that person, not the outside world, what would happen if the original were not destroyed? Do you think they'd share some mental link?

It's like the ship problem. If you build a new ship from old blueprints, it's still a new ship. However, if you replace parts of the original ship one by one as they wear, you still have the same ship.

I think the brain could be approached in a similar manner, even converting to an artilect.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (2) Dec 14, 2012
.. they are still "the same person".


I don't necessarily buy this, but I guess there is no current way to prove which idea is correct.


Another old philosophical question is "am I the same person I was 20 years ago?" Usually we say yes, but "He's not the same person he was." is sometimes said of people who have suffered character change due to accidents or brain damage.

Do you think they'd share some mental link?


Only in that their shared memories would guide their future behaviour.

If you build a new ship from old blueprints, it's still a new ship. However, if you replace parts of the original ship one by one as they wear, you still have the same ship.


That's the "Ship of Theseus" paradox.

I think the brain could be approached in a similar manner, even converting to an artilect.


If the coefficients of the synapses etc. could be found from the data, entering it into a neural net would effect 'uploading', but is that still "the same person"?