Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I’m 95% on UFOs not being real.
We have thousands of telescopes and radio telescopes trained on deep space, including the JWST and Hubble. We’ve never found anything that’s unambiguously life, and certainly no evidence of technology, no ships, no stations, no artificial signals, no Dyson spheres, nothing of the sort. As such there’s no reason to think that there’s anything out there with the capacity to come here.
Most experts on the topic say that FTL travel isn’t just difficult, it’s impossible. And without it, interstellar travel isn’t feasible. The speed and distance are simply too great for beings with lifespans like ours to do much more than conquer their solar system.
Why would we assume that alien beings have lifespans like ours? Anti-aging technology, digital minds, or some form of hibernation do not seem to violate any known laws of physics, and even merely increasing human lifespans by a factor of five or so would make voyages between nearby stars at appreciable but not unattainable fractions of c the equivalent of 18th century transatlantic ship crossings. Automated probes could travel across the galaxy within a hundred thousand years, setting up infrastructure for colonization.
The fact that we don't see any evidence for such a civilization seems to indicate to me that either we've already passed the Great Filter, that living in some sort of VR or simulation is considered preferable by everyone to taking over the physical universe, or that we're missing some key piece of the puzzle (e.g. the technologies I listed above are actually impossible for some reason, or some version of the Katechon hypothesis perhaps, where civilizations that become too complex are deleted).
More options
Context Copy link
We know that FTL contradicts our contemporary understanding of physics. So let's assume that another species were knowledgeable enough that they could use FTL craft to surveil distant star systems. Would this species really be dull enough to let the inhabitants of those systems see their craft, let alone the things piloting them? This species would not only need to have an entirely different grasp of physics than we do, but they would also need to have an efficient organizational structure that would enable them to manufacture FTL craft en masse - because if they're good enough to send us a single covert craft, then I'd argue it's more than likely that they have several stationed in other systems and that we aren't necessarily unique. For reference, we're nowhere near FTL but we've compulsively sent several probes to every planet in our own star system; and surely, wouldn't this hypothetical species have evolved gradually to arrive at their current state? To an extent, I really think that them being here in the first place implies they're a lot more like us than we realize.
But this is special pleading. Or at least until some new discovery makes these things possible. If you want to argue that FTL travel is being done by aliens, then first it must be established that the laws of physics allows this to happen. And so far every proposed system runs into violations of known physics. If we later discover something that works, fine, but until then waving your hand and saying they’re more advanced is simply a more scientific sounding way of saying “Magic”. And the same is true of the idea of cloaking. There’s no physics that would do this. And furthermore, it still doesn’t explain the lack of artificial structures in general. Even if it were plausible to hide a ship, then where are the space stations, planets with artificial structures, artificial signals, or even signs of life on other planets. And this is the rub of why I think aliens are a poor explanation of anything. Everything in the argument is being used to explain away the lack of evidence, or explain away why physics doesn’t restrain them. And this is a red flag on the theory. Any theory that has to explain away a lack of evidence or excuse violations of known scientific theory is more than likely crap. Aliens are the least likely by far, of any plausible explanation for what people are seeing and what the “whistleblower” is telling people.
I think there’s a difference here in that the argument that a being a million years ahead of us can do Y because it’s more advanced is a pretty poor argument, again, unless we, using current science and mathematics have some reason to suspect that Y is at least a possibility. In suggesting that physics says Y is impossible and therefore unless given a solid reason for doubting Y being impossible is wrong. And unfortunately E=mc^2 is a pretty well established tested and tried law of physics.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
What about Generation Ships?
Which run splat into the telescopes problem— we haven’t seen any anywhere. They’re certainly more feasible than the usual FTL because muh billions of years means that I can ignore known physics.
Seems to me that it may just be unlikely for us to spot any. Theoretically you only need to send one once to colonize a distant place, and they can presumably coast most of the way. Not exactly the stuff that highly visible traffic lanes are made of.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link