Do you think aliens will ever land?

Page 2 of 4 [ 63 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

21 Jan 2010, 5:15 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

dddhgg wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

From where would they come? And how would they get here. No ponderable massive object can attain the speed of light starting from rest in their frame of reference.

ruveyn

An interstellar spacecraft wouldn't need to travel at speed of light if the beings on board had a very long lifespan, or some means of cryogenic preservation, or the will to make it a multi-generational project. Let's say the beings from Gliese 581c, provided there is life possible there, had a spaceship that could travel at c/10, which I think is feasible for a technologically advanced civilization. It would take them 200 years to get here. But for a being with a lifespan of ~1000 years (also not unimaginable; some trees and other organisms on earth can do this) this is quite doable I suppose.

Just take it easy, and one day the cosmos will be yours.

Yes, such interstellar travel is possible even with our current technology. Back in the 1970's even, when Project Daedalus was being considered. The two main reasons why we aren't already out there are (1) current economy, and (2) cost versus benefit (known financial returns). Also, to some extent, I think the scientific community in general has shifted too far away from the observable universe. There is so much grant money spent on research into origins and biology, but barely any being spent on continuing our advance into space. The Columbia accident slowed things down a bit in terms of public interest, which can partially account for such laxity in regard to this endeavor. But, such is still possible under current technology. The interest in space needs to be regained. Not necessarily the alien aspect of that, though that would certainly be interesting, but just space travel and tourism itself. Wouldn't it be awesome to take a month long space cruise to Mars and actually set foot on another planet? Wouldn't it be awesome to explore the wonders of this solar system? Or even further? But here we sit, while we contemplate our navels.

Although, as a kid back in the late 1930's when what was actually on Mars and the Moon was still something of a mystery, I was enthusiastic about gong into space, today when the robots have surveyed the planets to a degree revealing what is there I find the idea not terribly appealing. The whole business is terribly dangerous, uncomfortable, and not likely to reveal any more than robotic exploration.

Wombat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Oct 2006
Age: 77
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,051

21 Jan 2010, 5:39 am

If there aliens I wonder why they chase people down back roads and turn cows inside out.

Why not not land and do the "take me to your leader" thing?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

21 Jan 2010, 6:03 am

Wombat wrote:

If there aliens I wonder why they chase people down back roads and turn cows inside out.

Why not not land and do the "take me to your leader" thing?

Considering current official leadership turning cows inside out seems to make more sense.

Keith
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,321
Location: East Sussex, UK

21 Jan 2010, 7:03 am

If aliens were to land, they'd drown. Plain and simple. All I will say is land versus water....

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,692
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

21 Jan 2010, 7:37 am

zer0netgain wrote:

Only according to Eisenstein physics. For all we know there are tricks to get around that problem we haven't discovered yet.

BTW, just out of curiosity, does anyone know why photons supposedly set the upper bounds for speed over distance in the universe? I ask because I have a friend who'll bring this up, talk occassionally about non-locality, and he's coming up with the impression that photons are only photons, no more no less, and that it may have no bearing. Any thoughts?

_________________
The loneliest part of life: it's not just that no one is on your cloud, few can even see your cloud.

Avarice
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Oct 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,067

21 Jan 2010, 7:47 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

zer0netgain wrote:

Only according to Eisenstein physics. For all we know there are tricks to get around that problem we haven't discovered yet.

I don't know either. I often question things like that but I'm hardly a specialist.

Another thing I wonder is why people say "This planet is not suitable for life". Maybe not for life that has adapted for living on earth but why not other forms of life that don't need water/oxygen?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

21 Jan 2010, 8:21 am

Avarice wrote:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:

zer0netgain wrote:

Only according to Eisenstein physics. For all we know there are tricks to get around that problem we haven't discovered yet.

Although Eisenstein is well known for his "Battleship Potemkin" it's doubtful his work had much influence on cosmological physics. As a body is accelerated towards the speed of light its mass increases proportionately. This has been tested in particle accelerators and confirmed. The supposed limit is the speed of light but no particle has reached that speed as it's mass would then be infinite and only a force larger than infinite could accelerate it faster and that, of course, is unattainable.

Since life itself is barely defined, and only Earth life is known, not muchcan be said about the possibility of other than Earth type life. Fred Hoyle, the cosmologist, wrote a story, "The Black Cloud" about an interstellar cloud that was not only alive, but quite a bit more intelligent than Earth life. The moon Titan is drenched in liquid methane and there has been some thought about alien life there but so far probes have given no indication of it.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

21 Jan 2010, 9:41 am

Sand wrote:

Although Eisenstein is well known for his "Battleship Potemkin" it's doubtful his work had much influence on cosmological physics.

What?! Have you never heard of the Einstein's Theory of General Relativity?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

21 Jan 2010, 10:10 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

Although Eisenstein is well known for his "Battleship Potemkin" it's doubtful his work had much influence on cosmological physics.

What?! Have you never heard of the Einstein's Theory of General Relativity?

What! Have you never heard of Eisenstein's "Battleship Potemkin"?! !! !!

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

21 Jan 2010, 10:52 am

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

Although Eisenstein is well known for his "Battleship Potemkin" it's doubtful his work had much influence on cosmological physics.

What?! Have you never heard of the Einstein's Theory of General Relativity?

What! Have you never heard of Eisenstein's "Battleship Potemkin"?! !! !!

No, I hadn't. However, the person who made that movie is not the person referred to in zer0netgain's post. Just joking about the use of a wrong name?

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

21 Jan 2010, 11:05 am

zer0netgain wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

From where would they come? And how would they get here. No ponderable massive object can attain the speed of light starting from rest in their frame of reference.

Only according to Eisenstein physics. For all we know there are tricks to get around that problem we haven't discovered yet.

Besides, how do you know we aren't already here.

This is the post. The name is quite clear. Although Eisenstein is a recognized film director he never had much to do with physics.

Vyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Oct 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,070
Location: The fires of the mind

21 Jan 2010, 11:11 am

Well, there's also several star systems much closer than generational distances away as well. And, you also have to take into account that even if they take a long time (for us) to travel here, the time would still be much shorter for them. Alpha Centauri, the closest system, is only 4.6 lightyears away. Assuming a planet with intelligent life beyond the scope of our technology exists there, I doubt it would take them an extremely long time to travel here, again, assuming they have the tech for sufficiently fast travel (or even some unknown form of quantum manipulation for faster than light travel)

_________________
I am Jon Stewart with some Colbert cynicism, Thomas Edison's curiousity, wrapped around a hardcore gamer sprinkled very liberally with Deadpool, and finished off with an almost Poison Ivy-esque love/hate relationship with humanity flourish.

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

21 Jan 2010, 11:55 am

Vyn wrote:

There is considerable concern over the long time astronauts will have to spend in space exposed to celestial radiation on the relatively short trip to Mars. Humans have evolved within the protective magnetic and atmospheric shields that surround Earth. Outside those protections people are in an extremely dangerous situation, not to speak of the long term zero gravity exposure which is also extremely unhealthy. Robotic probes are a much safer bet for interstellar exploration.

This would lead me to suspect that any so-called aliens that ever come to Earth might well be robotic probes sent by real aliens who are just as endangered as we migh be on such an expedition.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

21 Jan 2010, 12:27 pm

Sand wrote:

zer0netgain wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

From where would they come? And how would they get here. No ponderable massive object can attain the speed of light starting from rest in their frame of reference.

Only according to Eisenstein physics. For all we know there are tricks to get around that problem we haven't discovered yet.

Besides, how do you know we aren't already here.

This is the post. The name is quite clear. Although Eisenstein is a recognized film director he never had much to do with physics.

The reference to relativistic physics in the context should have made it clear to you that Einstein was who being referred to, but since you wish to carry on in this over the mere misspelling of a name: "Eisenstein" is not the correct spelling of the surname of the movie maker you're harping about, but rather "Эйзенштейн".

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

21 Jan 2010, 12:30 pm

TheOddGoat wrote:

We already have fossilized alien bacteria.

They landed post mortem.

Does this count?

We might have some micro-organisms from Mars that were embedded in meteorites.

ruveyn

pakled
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,015

21 Jan 2010, 12:39 pm

Battleship Potempkin (inspired by a true story... wasn't that the one with the baby carriage careening down the stairs of the palace?..

There's no reason you couldn't make the journey slower than light, it'd just take a lot longer. There might be artifacts whizzing our way even now. Aliens, I dunno. We've only discovered in the last quarter century more than a gross of new planets (all Jovian-sized or longer, but give us time), so the possibility of alien life keeps going up.

_________________
anahl nathrak, uth vas bethude, doth yel dyenvey...

Page 2 of 4 [ 63 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Jump to:

Do you think aliens will ever land? Post Reply New Topic

Do you think aliens will ever land?