AFAIK, based on our current understanding of physics, faster-than-light travel is physically impossible - it simply can't be done. This would mean that it would be extraordinarily difficult for any extraterrestrials on any sort of realistic timeline. If we were to encounter an extraterrestrial civilization, it would most likely be in the form of them sending some sort of unmanned probe or simply a "hello" message, similar to the ones that we've launched into space.
If we were to encounter an extraterrestrial civilization, it would most likely be in the form of them sending some sort of unmanned probe or simply a "hello" message
If we were to encounter an extraterrestrial civilization, it would most likely be in the form of them sending some sort of unmanned probe or simply a "hello" message
My favourite Asimov story (along with The Hostess) has a nice way of looking at the end of the universe and the beggining of life.
From Wiki
"The last question was asked for the first time, half in jest, on May 21, 2061, at a time when humanity first stepped into the light. The question came about as a result of a five dollar bet over highballs, and it happened this way ... ?Opening line, The Last Question
The story deals with the development of computers called Multivacs and their relationships with humanity through the courses of seven historic settings, beginning in 2061. In each of the first six scenes a different character presents the computer with the same question, namely as to how the threat to human existence posed by the heat death of the universe can be averted. The question was: "How can the net amount of entropy of the universe be massively decreased?" This is equivalent to asking: "Can the workings of the second law of thermodynamics (used in the story as the increase of the entropy of the universe), be reversed?" Multivac's only response after much "thinking" is: "INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER".
The story jumps forward in time into newer and newer eras of human and scientific development. In each of these eras someone decides to ask the ultimate "last question" regarding the reversal and decrease of entropy. Each time in each new era's Multivacs' descendant is asked this question, it finds itself unable to solve the problem. Each time all it can answer is: "INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER".
In the last scene, the god-like descendant of humanity (the unified mental process of over a trillion, trillion, trillion humans that have spread throughout the universe) watches the stars flicker out, one by one, as the universe finally approaches the state of heat death. Humanity asks AC, Multivac's ultimate descendant, which exists in hyperspace beyond the bounds of gravity or time, the entropy question one last time, before "Man" merges with AC and disappears. AC is still unable to answer, but continues to ponder the question even after space and time cease to exist. Eventually AC discovers the answer, but has nobody to report it to; the universe is already dead. It therefore decides to show the answer by demonstrating the reversal of entropy, creating the universe anew. The story ends with AC's pronouncement,
And AC said: "LET THERE BE LIGHT!" And there was light-- ?Closing line, The Last Question[1]
Man is gradually evolving to have bigger noses and four toes. That's right, our air is getting dirtier and your pinky toe is not the best way to walk or run.
BTW, the "Big Rip" is hotly debated. Many physicists feel based on universe expansion rates that instead of a "Big Rip" there will just be a slow choking freeze death or the "Slow Entropy." The edges of the universe will be the last to die because they are the youngest and have the most energy. FWIW, from what I've read recently in physics debates, I feel that things like dark matter and dark energy are just a place holders until scientists really figure out IN FULL what gravity really is, how it runs the universe and how to use its properties effectively to travel in space.
Which leads me to the next point about UFOs and aliens. The likelihood of aliens in other worlds based on the Drake Equation is great, as well as the planets and planetoids that have been found in other star systems adds to our overall knowledge of the possibilities of life elsewhere with substantive evidence. What all this DOES NOT say is any other life form's ability to reach Earth. Space travel is incredibly difficult, and things like Star Trek's transporter room are NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE due to issues of efficiency and accuracy, as well as perfect replication and personality/memory retention. If UFOs represent alien life coming to Earth, they quite possibly are not the life forms from the original planet, but some type of drone sent to do the bidding and research of the home planet. Biological life forms (as we know them) that are complex enough to form a mass of flesh like a human do not like extremes. This includes being bombarded while in space by cosmic rays, x rays, gamma rays, as well as withstanding space travel that requires speeds approaching the speed of light while maintaining your body's structure, as well as the structure of the ship maintaining its stability.
If fabled particle the tachyon actually existed, which theoretically functions at speeds faster than the speed of light, perhaps space travel would be "more manageable." What's interesting about the tachyon, and I have not really heard anyone talk about, is IF it existed, how would it be measured? Could the human eye even see it? Things to think about.
In 2003 they pointed Hubble's most powerful telescope at what appeared to be the most empty part of the night sky and exposed the film for eleven days. The resulting picture showed tens of thousands previously unknown galaxies, containing hundreds of millions of stars.
There's meant to be an estimated 100 billion galaxies in the universe. It makes me wonder why, when you look up at the night sky it's black, and not full of stars. Why is it not nearer the colour it is during the day. (apparently the universe is in fact beige)
My favourite Asimov story (along with The Hostess) has a nice way of looking at the end of the universe and the beggining of life.
From Wiki
"The last question was asked for the first time, half in jest, on May 21, 2061, at a time when humanity first stepped into the light. The question came about as a result of a five dollar bet over highballs, and it happened this way ... ?Opening line, The Last Question
The story deals with the development of computers called Multivacs and their relationships with humanity through the courses of seven historic settings, beginning in 2061. In each of the first six scenes a different character presents the computer with the same question, namely as to how the threat to human existence posed by the heat death of the universe can be averted. The question was: "How can the net amount of entropy of the universe be massively decreased?" This is equivalent to asking: "Can the workings of the second law of thermodynamics (used in the story as the increase of the entropy of the universe), be reversed?" Multivac's only response after much "thinking" is: "INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER".
The story jumps forward in time into newer and newer eras of human and scientific development. In each of these eras someone decides to ask the ultimate "last question" regarding the reversal and decrease of entropy. Each time in each new era's Multivacs' descendant is asked this question, it finds itself unable to solve the problem. Each time all it can answer is: "INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER".
In the last scene, the god-like descendant of humanity (the unified mental process of over a trillion, trillion, trillion humans that have spread throughout the universe) watches the stars flicker out, one by one, as the universe finally approaches the state of heat death. Humanity asks AC, Multivac's ultimate descendant, which exists in hyperspace beyond the bounds of gravity or time, the entropy question one last time, before "Man" merges with AC and disappears. AC is still unable to answer, but continues to ponder the question even after space and time cease to exist. Eventually AC discovers the answer, but has nobody to report it to; the universe is already dead. It therefore decides to show the answer by demonstrating the reversal of entropy, creating the universe anew. The story ends with AC's pronouncement,
And AC said: "LET THERE BE LIGHT!" And there was light-- ?Closing line, The Last Question[1]
I guess this is where Douglas Adams got the idea for Deep Thought in the "Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy"? I still randomly answer questions with the answer "42" from time to time...
It makes me wonder why, when you look up at the night sky it's black, and not full of stars.
In the countryside the night sky
is full of stars.
Sure, but there are enough stars in the universe to cover the entire sky so there would be no dark areas at all. It's something called the Olbers' paradox. maybe wiki can explain it better than I can.
In astrophysics and physical cosmology, Olbers' paradox is the argument that the darkness of the night sky conflicts with the assumption of an infinite and eternal static universe. It is one of the pieces of evidence for a non-static universe such as the current Big Bang model. The argument is also referred to as the "dark night sky paradox" The paradox states that at any angle from the Earth the sight line will end at the surface of a star. To understand this we compare it to standing in a forest of white trees. If at any point the vision of the observer ended at the surface of a tree, wouldn't the observer only see white? This contradicts the darkness of the night sky and leads many to wonder why we do not see only light from stars in the night sky
It makes me wonder why, when you look up at the night sky it's black, and not full of stars.
In the countryside the night sky
is full of stars.
Sure, but there are enough stars in the universe to cover the entire sky so there would be no dark areas at all. It's something called the Olbers' paradox. maybe wiki can explain it better than I can.
In astrophysics and physical cosmology, Olbers' paradox is the argument that the darkness of the night sky conflicts with the assumption of an infinite and eternal static universe. It is one of the pieces of evidence for a non-static universe such as the current Big Bang model. The argument is also referred to as the "dark night sky paradox" The paradox states that at any angle from the Earth the sight line will end at the surface of a star. To understand this we compare it to standing in a forest of white trees. If at any point the vision of the observer ended at the surface of a tree, wouldn't the observer only see white? This contradicts the darkness of the night sky and leads many to wonder why we do not see only light from stars in the night sky
I was just reading about this in that Michio Kaku book parallel worlds (really dope book, perfect post gig wind down so I can actually sleep)
Edgar Allen Poe is the dude who pretty much answered it, which is pretty crazy. The theory is that the light from stars at the farthest reaches of space haven't had time to get here yet. They are farther away from us in light years than the universes age, so we are seeing the empty space from before they existed.
I find it odd, ,though, that there is essentially no evidence of aliens whatsoever, at least none that is available to the public.
Perhaps we're existing at the wrong point in time. The universe is billions of years old comprised of billions of stars and billions X billions of planets. In that time frame advanced civilizations could have developed, zoomed all over the galaxy, perished, and had all of their existence wiped through interstellar erosion. Think about dinosaurs - they lived here millions of years and were all gone by the time humans first inhabited Bedrock. (no Dino).
And it all could've happened the next galaxy over for all we know. Hell, it could've happened on Mars. An entire civilization could be buried 10 feet under the surface (of Mars) and we would never know.
I guess my point was this - if we see UFOs all the time (though sightings seem to have gone down in recent years despite the huge leap in personal cameras and population growth) and have tons of visual and other evidence of their existence, it seems strange that there isn't any decent footage of an alien walking around, an alien skull or some other physical object that could definitely be linked to an alien. Sure, their could have been aliens a billion years ago - but we see UFOs now. BTW, I believe that there were previous 'high civilizations' on earth and it wouldn't surprise me terribly if they weren't human.
Many people presume that UFOs are full of aliens, perhaps they aren't at all.
I find it odd, ,though, that there is essentially no evidence of aliens whatsoever, at least none that is available to the public.
Perhaps we're existing at the wrong point in time. The universe is billions of years old comprised of billions of stars and billions X billions of planets. In that time frame advanced civilizations could have developed, zoomed all over the galaxy, perished, and had all of their existence wiped through interstellar erosion. Think about dinosaurs - they lived here millions of years and were all gone by the time humans first inhabited Bedrock. (no Dino).
And it all could've happened the next galaxy over for all we know. Hell, it could've happened on Mars. An entire civilization could be buried 10 feet under the surface (of Mars) and we would never know.
I guess my point was this - if we see UFOs all the time (though sightings seem to have gone down in recent years despite the huge leap in personal cameras and population growth) and have tons of visual and other evidence of their existence, it seems strange that there isn't any decent footage of an alien walking around, an alien skull or some other physical object that could definitely be linked to an alien. Sure, their could have been aliens a billion years ago - but we see UFOs now. BTW, I believe that there were previous 'high civilizations' on earth and it wouldn't surprise me terribly if they weren't human.
Many people presume that UFOs are full of aliens, perhaps they aren't at all.
I find it odd, ,though, that there is essentially no evidence of aliens whatsoever, at least none that is available to the public.
Perhaps we're existing at the wrong point in time. The universe is billions of years old comprised of billions of stars and billions X billions of planets. In that time frame advanced civilizations could have developed, zoomed all over the galaxy, perished, and had all of their existence wiped through interstellar erosion. Think about dinosaurs - they lived here millions of years and were all gone by the time humans first inhabited Bedrock. (no Dino).
And it all could've happened the next galaxy over for all we know. Hell, it could've happened on Mars. An entire civilization could be buried 10 feet under the surface (of Mars) and we would never know.
I guess my point was this - if we see UFOs all the time (though sightings seem to have gone down in recent years despite the huge leap in personal cameras and population growth) and have tons of visual and other evidence of their existence, it seems strange that there isn't any decent footage of an alien walking around, an alien skull or some other physical object that could definitely be linked to an alien. Sure, their could have been aliens a billion years ago - but we see UFOs now. BTW, I believe that there were previous 'high civilizations' on earth and it wouldn't surprise me terribly if they weren't human.
Many people presume that UFOs are full of aliens, perhaps they aren't at all.
what would you suggest they are full of?
I don't know if I do want to suggest anything, lest people think I'm full of something.
Seriously, though, I have no idea. Secret government projects? Humans from previous high civilization that we don't know about? Unmanned drones? Maybe they are a form of life?
Actually, its no secret that alot of UFOs ARE secret government projects. I saw one flying around Wright-Patterson AFB at night just last year. It was bizarre to see, and it was a flying object that I could not identify, so I guess that makes it a UFO. The dude driving the car and I both stared at it while the lights hovered over the highway and then it just moved off to the left and it was gone.
I'm not saying legitimate UFOs[/b] don't exist, but here is some reading some of you might find interesting. It is quite possible that many UFOs are not objects at all, but distortions of visible light caused by earth shifting.
AFAIK, based on our current understanding of physics, faster-than-light travel is physically impossible - it simply can't be done. This would mean that it would be extraordinarily difficult for any extraterrestrials on any sort of realistic timeline. If we were to encounter an extraterrestrial civilization, it would most likely be in the form of them sending some sort of unmanned probe or simply a "hello" message, similar to the ones that we've launched into space.
Perhaps it's simply because humans have a finite mental capacity and haven't been able to figure it out.
I find it amusing that people assume that either it can't be possible because humans haven't figured it out yet or that they will eventually figure it out.
Case in point, I could train my dog for an infinite amount of time on how to do long division and it is just simply not possible. Groups of dogs spread across generations of them all working on long division still will not figure it out. They don't have the mental capacity for long division.
Similarly, its entirely reasonable that Hawking and Einstein's love child could never, ever figure out faster than light travel even if it is possible.
Or, in other words, I'm never going to be able to play Call of Duty on my old Atari. It's just not happening.
I find it amusing that people assume that either it can't be possible because humans haven't figured it out yet or that they will eventually figure it out.
Perhaps it's simply because humans have a finite mental capacity and haven't been able to figure it out.
I find it amusing that people assume that either it can't be possible because humans haven't figured it out yet or that they will eventually figure it out.
Uh, hence why I said "based on our current understand". The main problem is that faster than light travel requires an infinite amount of energy for any object with a non-zero mass - and that's a huge[/b] problem.
Once again, we're getting into the "disproving a negative" scenario. There's no way to absolutely prove that it's never, ever going to be possible for us to travel at the speed of light, so we need to ask for proof that it is possible.
Nobody is "assuming" anything. They're going with the best scientific evidence available, regardless of what a bunch of dudes on the Internet think.
not by humans... I'm sure that there's a bunch of guys at the Perimeter Institute who would be very interested in your proof of the existence of tachyons.
AFAIK, based on our current understanding of physics, faster-than-light travel is physically impossible - it simply can't be done. This would mean that it would be extraordinarily difficult for any extraterrestrials on any sort of realistic timeline. If we were to encounter an extraterrestrial civilization, it would most likely be in the form of them sending some sort of unmanned probe or simply a "hello" message, similar to the ones that we've launched into space.
Perhaps it's simply because humans have a finite mental capacity and haven't been able to figure it out.
I find it amusing that people assume that either it can't be possible because humans haven't figured it out yet or that they will eventually figure it out.
Case in point, I could train my dog for an infinite amount of time on how to do long division and it is just simply not possible. Groups of dogs spread across generations of them all working on long division still will not figure it out. They don't have the mental capacity for long division.
Similarly, its entirely reasonable that Hawking and Einstein's love child could never, ever figure out faster than light travel even if it is possible.
Or, in other words, I'm never going to be able to play Call of Duty on my old Atari. It's just not happening.
Comments
From Wiki
"The last question was asked for the first time, half in jest, on May 21, 2061, at a time when humanity first stepped into the light. The question came about as a result of a five dollar bet over highballs, and it happened this way ...
?Opening line, The Last Question
The story deals with the development of computers called Multivacs and their relationships with humanity through the courses of seven historic settings, beginning in 2061. In each of the first six scenes a different character presents the computer with the same question, namely as to how the threat to human existence posed by the heat death of the universe can be averted. The question was: "How can the net amount of entropy of the universe be massively decreased?" This is equivalent to asking: "Can the workings of the second law of thermodynamics (used in the story as the increase of the entropy of the universe), be reversed?" Multivac's only response after much "thinking" is: "INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER".
The story jumps forward in time into newer and newer eras of human and scientific development. In each of these eras someone decides to ask the ultimate "last question" regarding the reversal and decrease of entropy. Each time in each new era's Multivacs' descendant is asked this question, it finds itself unable to solve the problem. Each time all it can answer is: "INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER".
In the last scene, the god-like descendant of humanity (the unified mental process of over a trillion, trillion, trillion humans that have spread throughout the universe) watches the stars flicker out, one by one, as the universe finally approaches the state of heat death. Humanity asks AC, Multivac's ultimate descendant, which exists in hyperspace beyond the bounds of gravity or time, the entropy question one last time, before "Man" merges with AC and disappears. AC is still unable to answer, but continues to ponder the question even after space and time cease to exist. Eventually AC discovers the answer, but has nobody to report it to; the universe is already dead. It therefore decides to show the answer by demonstrating the reversal of entropy, creating the universe anew. The story ends with AC's pronouncement,
And AC said: "LET THERE BE LIGHT!" And there was light--
?Closing line, The Last Question[1]
This is what I'm talking about!
The resulting picture showed tens of thousands previously unknown galaxies, containing hundreds of millions of stars.
There's meant to be an estimated 100 billion galaxies in the universe. It makes me wonder why, when you look up at the night sky it's black, and not full of stars. Why is it not nearer the colour it is during the day. (apparently the universe is in fact beige)
I guess this is where Douglas Adams got the idea for Deep Thought in the "Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy"? I still randomly answer questions with the answer "42" from time to time...
Sure, but there are enough stars in the universe to cover the entire sky so there would be no dark areas at all. It's something called the Olbers' paradox. maybe wiki can explain it better than I can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers'_paradox
There's some cool 3D footage and all, but the presentation is terribly unimaginative. It doesn't hold a candle to this masterpiece:
You really suprised me with that one. Care to explain?
I was just reading about this in that Michio Kaku book parallel worlds (really dope book, perfect post gig wind down so I can actually sleep)
Edgar Allen Poe is the dude who pretty much answered it, which is pretty crazy. The theory is that the light from stars at the farthest reaches of space haven't had time to get here yet. They are farther away from us in light years than the universes age, so we are seeing the empty space from before they existed.
I guess my point was this - if we see UFOs all the time (though sightings seem to have gone down in recent years despite the huge leap in personal cameras and population growth) and have tons of visual and other evidence of their existence, it seems strange that there isn't any decent footage of an alien walking around, an alien skull or some other physical object that could definitely be linked to an alien. Sure, their could have been aliens a billion years ago - but we see UFOs now. BTW, I believe that there were previous 'high civilizations' on earth and it wouldn't surprise me terribly if they weren't human.
Many people presume that UFOs are full of aliens, perhaps they aren't at all.
what would you suggest they are full of?
OTHER UFOS. Wrap your head around THAT.
I don't know if I do want to suggest anything, lest people think I'm full of something.
Seriously, though, I have no idea. Secret government projects? Humans from previous high civilization that we don't know about? Unmanned drones? Maybe they are a form of life?
Dunno.
UAV is the official term we use for them.
http://geology.about.com/b/2007/04/30/earthquake-lights-ufos-cant-you-see.htm
Perhaps it's simply because humans have a finite mental capacity and haven't been able to figure it out.
I find it amusing that people assume that either it can't be possible because humans haven't figured it out yet or that they will eventually figure it out.
Case in point, I could train my dog for an infinite amount of time on how to do long division and it is just simply not possible. Groups of dogs spread across generations of them all working on long division still will not figure it out. They don't have the mental capacity for long division.
Similarly, its entirely reasonable that Hawking and Einstein's love child could never, ever figure out faster than light travel even if it is possible.
Or, in other words, I'm never going to be able to play Call of Duty on my old Atari. It's just not happening.
not by humans...
beat me to it....
arrogance will lead to fall of humans...
boogity boogity boogity...
Uh, hence why I said "based on our current understand". The main problem is that faster than light travel requires an infinite amount of energy for any object with a non-zero mass - and that's a huge[/b] problem.
Once again, we're getting into the "disproving a negative" scenario. There's no way to absolutely prove that it's never, ever going to be possible for us to travel at the speed of light, so we need to ask for proof that it is possible.
Nobody is "assuming" anything. They're going with the best scientific evidence available, regardless of what a bunch of dudes on the Internet think.
not by humans...
I'm sure that there's a bunch of guys at the Perimeter Institute who would be very interested in your proof of the existence of tachyons.
I tried hard to debunk your theory via youtube