321 replies to this topic

[psyche101]

Ryegrog, on 25 August 2012 - 07:20 PM, said:

It was once thought to be impossible to go to the moon because there is no oxygen to breath, but we brought our own.
But then maybe you're one of those conspiracy theorist that think the apollo missions were faked.

That is not true, I challenge you for a single name that thought such. We have been diving since Da Vinci's times with apparatus, we knew how to take a bubble of air with us before we even knew half the planets existed over our heads.
Life is not truth and conspiracy theories, you might want to consider the vast area between the two.

[psyche101]

Ryegrog, on 25 August 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

Why do some people with an IQ of 130 or better let their homes deteriorate instead of hiring a contractor
to keep their house in good shape?

Common sense really, tradies cost 60-120 $ an hour. And that's just to look at the job. Labour and parts add up quick when appliances break. When something breaks I know I generally do not have a few hundred to throw around.

Budget is why.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

psyche101, on 27 August 2012 - 06:25 AM, said:

I don't see it like that, all I see is removing human error from the equation.

Yes, exactly, Alienz must be infallible and would never be so foolish and primitive as Humans.

[psyche101]

Kludge808, on 26 August 2012 - 01:55 AM, said:

First off, I got out of the hospital Thursday where I'd been treated for a respiratory infection.   So I'm home, still sick as [phrase deleted that would have caused my Most Beloved DotNM to blush most daintily] but participation will be spotty at best until I can sit up for longer than 5 minutes without fatigue/dizziness.  And even then when Meli isn't around to do the Big Stick thing to take care of Papa.  This is kind of like the Big Stick thing daughters use on daddies to keep them in line.

Anyway, I'm going to answer this as an engineer.  Hopefully it'll help a little.

The best an engineer can do is allow for any imaginable failure modes.  It's the unimaginable ones that are the problem.  But they're part of the risk of going into space, an environment hostile to any being requiring anything vaguely resembling Earth-style conditions.  We know that.  Any space faring species does.  We - and they - also have a set of what's considered "acceptable risks" that go with space exploration.  One such that comes up a lot is radiation.  It's there and can be fatal to both beings and equipment but it's also part of being in space or at least this close to a star.  We do what we can about it but it won't go away just because it's an inconvenience.  Look at the astronauts sitting on top of a launch vehicle.

The more advanced space faring species have a definite lead on us in understanding and managing a wider range of imaginable failure modes but they also are subject to unimaginable ones.  (Well, unless they're gods in which case they don't need spacecraft.)  They learn from experience just like we do - and I would hope a darn sight better in some things - and have a far, far broader knowledge/experience base than we do but they are not gods.  They are fallible.  Neither they nor their machines are perfect.  They know just like we do that "fail safe" isn't and that the universal truism of "Nature favors the hidden flaw" holds sway.  And they know that they both have to be taken into consideration although in the latter case they have no idea what they're designing to avoid.  That just makes it a little more interesting.

There's more but my brain is shutting down again.  As it is it took me 6-7 tries to get this much done.  Maybe later when I'm feeling better?

That is exactly the case Kludge, you build to eliminate risk, and as I mentioned to 747400 probes might have a higher acceptable risk because they do not carry human life, and because they do not they will be less expensive to build without all those systems that keep our own chemical machines running in a little capsule in a hostile environment. The care factor of the equipment is directly proportional to the cost of it.

Another thing these guys keep missing is that we are looking at life as we know it as far as I am aware, or so the descriptions and recollections would have you. Lost Shaman did a stirling job of pointing out this is the safest and most common atmosphere in the universe. Storms on the likes of Jupiter make our wildest cyclones look like a summer breeze. They most certainly are not Gods, and that is why human (or in this case alien) error is eliminated with mathematical systems. So to say that these things are crashing all over the shop when the majority of people cannot even spot one seems rather a tall order, wouldn't you agree?
And all of this hangs on the big IF a space fearing species such as has been imagined here actually exists, and then visits here as well. When 747400 speculates such, I am never sure if he assumes such exists or is yet to exist.

So sorry to hear about the state of your health. I hope things pick up a bit.

Kludge808, on 26 August 2012 - 01:55 AM, said:

You won't.  It'll be imbedded subcranially.

I still reckon they will have read it before joining starfleet

[psyche101]

747400, on 27 August 2012 - 06:32 AM, said:

Yes, exactly, Alienz must be infallible and would never be so foolish and primitive as Humans.

We Primitive humans have computers too though. So what is that advantage?

[Kludge808]

psyche101, on 27 August 2012 - 06:43 AM, said:

That is exactly the case Kludge, you build to eliminate risk, and as I mentioned to 747400 probes might have a higher acceptable risk because they do not carry human life, and because they do not they will be less expensive to build without all those systems that keep our own chemical machines running in a little capsule in a hostile environment. The care factor of the equipment is directly proportional to the cost of it.

This is why I suspect that if they are of ET origin the vast majority of the UAPs sighted are unmanned drones or are "manned" using bipedal robots of some order.  Why would they use bipedal?  Heck, I don't know.  It's lousy as to stability but I'm not ET so I don't know how they'd think.  OTOH, that seems to be the most common form reported so I went with bipedal.

Quote

Another thing these guys keep missing is that we are looking at life as we know it as far as I am aware, or so the descriptions and recollections would have you.

In watching all the new discoveries as to where life's tenacity is shown, I've come to the conclusion that there is no limit as to what form life can take.  Once it takes root, it hangs on literally for dear life, mutating and growing and combining and mutating again to meet local conditions.  It will use what's at hand for building blocks to grow and improve and diversify as needed with no two worlds being anywhere close to alike.

Quote

Lost Shaman did a stirling job of pointing out this is the safest and most common atmosphere in the universe.

We really don't know that it's the most common since we only know a very, very tiny portion of the local neighborhood.  But it is a relatively safe atmosphere in which to navigate with only a few glitches that can catch one unaware.  Even someone used to flying in it. *ahem*

Quote

They most certainly are not Gods, and that is why human (or in this case alien) error is eliminated with mathematical systems. So to say that these things are crashing all over the shop when the majority of people cannot even spot one seems rather a tall order, wouldn't you agree?

If all the crash reports were to be believed with the attendant body counts added in, we should be hip deep in deceased aliens.  We should also have enough examples of alien tech to have already made it to Alpha Centauri and back (manned flight, of course)* with tourist excursions in place and scouts out looking for Other Cool Places to vacation.

I believe that 98% of the reported crashes are explainable or hoaxes with the remaining 2% unknown.  Not ET, but unknown.  (This is as opposed to 95% and 5% for sightings in general.)  As you pointed out and with which I agree, non-manned probes/scouts do carry a higher acceptable risk factor but that has a penalty of making them more susceptible to failure.  Crewed probes would be built to more exacting standards but that doesn't put them outside the realm of possible failure.  Probable, yes.  Possible, no.

You mentioned ICU equipment as I recall and specified defibrillator paddles as having never failed to your knowledge.  I suspect they're rotated out of service for routine maintenance fairly often and may even have telltales on them to indicate something is out of kilter.  That's how I'd design them anyway.  However, again speaking as an engineer, having no knowledge of them ever failing and them being incapable of failure are two separate things.  The odds of failure are miniscule but they are also still non-zero - close enough that the medical community feels the risk of failure acceptable.

Quote

And all of this hangs on the big IF a space fearing species such as has been imagined here actually exists, and then visits here as well. When 747400 speculates such, I am never sure if he assumes such exists or is yet to exist.

I'm sure they exist.  Whether they've ever stopped here or are doing so now is up for question.

Quote

So sorry to hear about the state of your health. I hope things pick up a bit.

Meli says I'm behind the recovery curve but then turns around and reminds me I'm getting old so I should expect that.  I wonder if she's taking Brat lessons from Noelle ...   She's still trying to find someone to take her place so she can concentrate on university & her regular job and, much as I'll miss her, I have to agree she's right.

Quote

I still reckon they will have read it before joining starfleet

Starfleet Prep School.  Prerequisite for academy aspirants and enlisted alike.  Someone doesn't get through there then the dream ends right there.  

[psyche101]

Kludge808, on 27 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

This is why I suspect that if they are of ET origin the vast majority of the UAPs sighted are unmanned drones or are "manned" using bipedal robots of some order.  Why would they use bipedal?  Heck, I don't know.  It's lousy as to stability but I'm not ET so I don't know how they'd think.  OTOH, that seems to be the most common form reported so I went with bipedal.

Gidday Kludge

Bipedal robots is indeed quite a question. I would have to agree that it makes little sense on the surface, but we evolved to be bipedal for functionality, so it seems possible that we might simply not be advanced enough to make machines that can take advantage of the structure. It makes little sense, but I agree, it cannot be written of on our understanding with our limited celestial exploration.

Kludge808, on 27 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

In watching all the new discoveries as to where life's tenacity is shown, I've come to the conclusion that there is no limit as to what form life can take.  Once it takes root, it hangs on literally for dear life, mutating and growing and combining and mutating again to meet local conditions.  It will use what's at hand for building blocks to grow and improve and diversify as needed with no two worlds being anywhere close to alike.

I agree for basic life, but intelligence requires a form that can easily manipulate objects. I think many worlds would be surprisingly familiar. Considering examples of convergent evolution here on earth we can see that successful shapes win out. As such I would not be at all surprised to see a decent percentage of body designs that we have right here all over the place. Some claim it is vanity and thinking everything should be like man, but what such people forget is the old chicken and the egg syndrome.

Kludge808, on 27 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

We really don't know that it's the most common since we only know a very, very tiny portion of the local neighborhood.  But it is a relatively safe atmosphere in which to navigate with only a few glitches that can catch one unaware.  Even someone used to flying in it. *ahem*

It would be common to "life as we know it" I would think, which from basic descriptions, if there is so much as an ounce of truth to them, indicate beings that eat, sleep, and even enjoy the more aesthetic components of life, such as Ms Burchmores legs.
But yes, compared to every planet we have seen, including exoplanets, our blue marble is something of an oasis. No alien wrecks on the moon, none drifting down through the atmosphere like meteors or lazily through any asteroid belts, nada. They seem to all be right here in the best possible place to fly about.

Kludge808, on 27 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

If all the crash reports were to be believed with the attendant body counts added in, we should be hip deep in deceased aliens.  We should also have enough examples of alien tech to have already made it to Alpha Centauri and back (manned flight, of course)* with tourist excursions in place and scouts out looking for Other Cool Places to vacation.

I believe that 98% of the reported crashes are explainable or hoaxes with the remaining 2% unknown.  Not ET, but unknown.  (This is as opposed to 95% and 5% for sightings in general.)  As you pointed out and with which I agree, non-manned probes/scouts do carry a higher acceptable risk factor but that has a penalty of making them more susceptible to failure.  Crewed probes would be built to more exacting standards but that doesn't put them outside the realm of possible failure.  Probable, yes.  Possible, no.

I agree, it does not put a manned craft out of the realm of possible failure, but we are expected to believe many have crashed here, and considering the conditions that seems a rather tall tale. Yet everything that crashes has "bodies" claimed.
But I bet as the ETH matures, this will be a new development Bodies will stop showing up and tech "that the Government took away" will.

Kludge808, on 27 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

You mentioned ICU equipment as I recall and specified defibrillator paddles as having never failed to your knowledge.  I suspect they're rotated out of service for routine maintenance fairly often and may even have telltales on them to indicate something is out of kilter.  That's how I'd design them anyway.  However, again speaking as an engineer, having no knowledge of them ever failing and them being incapable of failure are two separate things.  The odds of failure are miniscule but they are also still non-zero - close enough that the medical community feels the risk of failure acceptable.

Indeed, and this is how a craft would be engineered. If life was on board any part that wears out would have to be largely stocked, or able to be manufactured. You would pull the part out on it's half life and replace massively reducing the likelihood of failure. I swear that some think that aliens bang together a few cans and push of into space. Odds of failure would be minuscule or less, and then for so many to crash in this remote part of the cosmos? Seems  rather a tall order without any proof.
I think 747400 has alluded to Roswell being explained by drones, but I just do not know how he would shoehorn that one in with all the other claims people make about it. In fact, I bet some would be upset at possibly losing the tale of the bodies, and he would find intense opposition.

Kludge808, on 27 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

I'm sure they exist.  Whether they've ever stopped here or are doing so now is up for question.

I wish I could be sure. I strongly suspect other intelligent life has arisen due to the sheer numbers and sizes, but more intelligent than us? I really do not know. It took a long time for population 1,2 & 3 stars to undergo evolution to the current state and create the elements that we take for granted today, has enough time passed for so many species to evolve? What exactly does Abiogenesis need for that initial spark? Does earth hold a secret ingredient that make that spark happen? Are we the first or are we the last, or are we just insignificant? Does the overall Universe itself have a Goldilocks zone? With so many questions, I admit, I have not so much as an inkling where the actual truth may lay.

Kludge808, on 27 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

Meli says I'm behind the recovery curve but then turns around and reminds me I'm getting old so I should expect that.  I wonder if she's taking Brat lessons from Noelle ...   She's still trying to find someone to take her place so she can concentrate on university & her regular job and, much as I'll miss her, I have to agree she's right.

You guys have to be the most level headed human beings I have ever had the honor of conversing with, She is completely right, and to take responsibility in the face of adversity indicates a very strong person. So many would simply give up, not you guys. It is an honor to have spoken with you. I cannot express how much I respect you and your families fortitude, if anyone was ever made of the "right stuff" it is your family.

Kludge808, on 27 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

Starfleet Prep School.  Prerequisite for academy aspirants and enlisted alike.  Someone doesn't get through there then the dream ends right there.  

Actually, I have to say, I think that sounds more like Starship Troopers.  I'd buy that for a dollar

Cheers.

Edited by psyche101, 28 August 2012 - 04:08 AM.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

psyche101, on 28 August 2012 - 04:04 AM, said:

I think 747400 has alluded to Roswell being explained by drones, but I just do not know how he would shoehorn that one in with all the other claims people make about it. In fact, I bet some would be upset at possibly losing the tale of the bodies, and he would find intense opposition.



Cheers.

The answer is, I wouldn't, since all the subsequent colour (particularly about Bodies and so on) was added later in the way of elaboration. why would I be worried about intense Opposition? I'm not trying to promote any theory or other, it's just speculation as to how it might have happened in a way that I find might be reasonably plausible.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

psyche101, on 28 August 2012 - 04:04 AM, said:

But yes, compared to every planet we have seen, including exoplanets, our blue marble is something of an oasis. No alien wrecks on the moon, none drifting down through the atmosphere like meteors or lazily through any asteroid belts, nada. They seem to all be right here in the best possible place to fly about.

perhaps because they'd naturally take the most interest in places that have plenty of life (literally and figuratively)? So, after checking out the Mooon, they'd tick it off the list as having been studied and focus on to next door. And there wouldn't be nearly so many hazards on the Mooon that might cause them to encounter premature termination of flight? And could we really be certain that no aliencraft have ever come to grief in the atmosphere of Jupiter or venus, or indeed that they might not be being studied by ET probes right now as we Speak?
And surely we haven't possibly come anywhere near to being able to analyse exoplanets in any kind of detail at all to be able to say anything definitive about them? The ones that have been easiest to detect so far have been the most conspicuous, i.e. gas Giants, after all, but I think we have found quite a few 'earth-like' in terms of size at any rate already.

[psyche101]

747400, on 28 August 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:

The answer is, I wouldn't, since all the subsequent colour (particularly about Bodies and so on) was added later in the way of elaboration. why would I be worried about intense Opposition? I'm not trying to promote any theory or other, it's just speculation as to how it might have happened in a way that I find might be reasonably plausible.

Although you say the premise is plausible, the overall ideal does not fit any of the claims to date by a long shot. You would have to pretty much re-write Roswell to make it drones and or robots. There is no indication to wander this path, or I assure you, many would have already. It is after all a 60+ year old story. I think every avenue that can be explored with regards to ET has been, and if Robots made some story easier to pass of, it would have been done.

And I did not say you were worried about intense opposition, just that you would receive it. And if you try to push a robot Roswell, you will indeed find intense opposition. Look at the opposition to MOGUL. Just because people do not understand MOGUL.

Not that it was anything out of this world to begin with.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

psyche101, on 28 August 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Although you say the premise is plausible, the overall ideal does not fit any of the claims to date by a long shot. You would have to pretty much re-write Roswell to make it drones and or robots. There is no indication to wander this path, or I assure you, many would have already. It is after all a 60+ year old story. I think every avenue that can be explored with regards to ET has been, and if Robots made some story easier to pass of, it would have been done.

And I did not say you were worried about intense opposition, just that you would receive it. And if you try to push a robot Roswell, you will indeed find intense opposition. Look at the opposition to MOGUL. Just because people do not understand MOGUL.

Not that it was anything out of this world to begin with.

Why? Would have to be re-written about Roswell? The bodies? The bodies were irrelevant to the original story. A small, lightweight craft, that wouldn't have to be designed for deep space flight (although obviously it would have to be able to cope with re-entry*), would fit the bill quite nicely. And if there were in fact two craft, and they collided, that too would account for a few of the questions about the apparent variation on crash sites and Debris.

* or entry, in this case, I suppose

[psyche101]

747400, on 28 August 2012 - 07:19 AM, said:

perhaps because they'd naturally take the most interest in places that have plenty of life (literally and figuratively)? So, after checking out the Mooon, they'd tick it off the list as having been studied and focus on to next door. And there wouldn't be nearly so many hazards on the Mooon that might cause them to encounter premature termination of flight? And could we really be certain that no aliencraft have ever come to grief in the atmosphere of Jupiter or venus, or indeed that they might not be being studied by ET probes right now as we Speak?

Yet not a one has ever crashed on the moon? I think that Earth might be easier to handle having an atmosphere and all, as that does assist flight mechanics. Not to mention it has no protection from meteors at all, hence the surface. We can be certain that the moon is not littered with alien craft, as the earth appears to be if one believes all the crash stories out there. We could not know if something crashed onto Jupiter in the distant past, but as with all the meteors that hit Jupiter, an explosion will be noticed. Remember the amateur community picked up the last 2 Jupiter strikes, not NASA. And I never said anything about seeing something crashing into Jupiter, the storms on Jupiter are thousands of times more volatile than what we see here, many planets have far more volatile atmospheres, that is what I am saying, as far as places to fly go, this spot is pretty decent. But yet everything seems to crash right in our backyard, a calm and predictable place.

747400, on 28 August 2012 - 07:19 AM, said:

And surely we haven't possibly come anywhere near to being able to analyse exoplanets in any kind of detail at all to be able to say anything definitive about them? The ones that have been easiest to detect so far have been the most conspicuous, i.e. gas Giants, after all, but I think we have found quite a few 'earth-like' in terms of size at any rate already.

We know they are too big and too hot for life as we know it. And the more we find, the deeper we delve, these planets are hardly a hop skip and a jump away, and yet still nothing we could go visit for a holiday even of we did have the means to travel parsecs in a short time frame, which we, and I believe no others, can. Best bet to date I believe is Kepler 22b. But it orbits it's Sun far too close to allow intelligent life as we know it.

I am still backing communications. It is by far the most sensible approach to long distance space travel.

[psyche101]

747400, on 28 August 2012 - 08:08 AM, said:

Why? Would have to be re-written about Roswell? The bodies? The bodies were irrelevant to the original story. A small, lightweight craft, that wouldn't have to be designed for deep space flight (although obviously it would have to be able to cope with re-entry*), would fit the bill quite nicely. And if there were in fact two craft, and they collided, that too would account for a few of the questions about the apparent variation on crash sites and Debris.

* or entry, in this case, I suppose

ET is irrelevant to the original story.
For a start, all those military people that so many hang their hat on have to be outright lying, no possibility for error or misinterpretation there, it does not fit the descriptions of debris wether you are a believer or skeptic and the GAO found no such indication in any report. Not a single witness has claimed robots or automated systems, every single proponent is calling for bodies, the only people who believe it was ET believe the people who say there were bodies.

What on earth makes you think that a Robot or Drone explains any part of Roswell away? All you are doing is re-writing that tired tale yet again with no premise, just speculation. The only Hypothesis that really bothers to reference documents from the time frame is Lost Shamans Hypothesis.

Edited by psyche101, 28 August 2012 - 08:41 AM.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

There's no point arguing, is there, it's not like I have a theory to promote or anything. I might just be permitted to offer a few comments, though,

psyche101, on 28 August 2012 - 08:16 AM, said:

Yet not a one has ever crashed on the moon? I think that Earth might be easier to handle having an atmosphere and all, as that does assist flight mechanics.

But according to me theory (the one I don't have), they probably wouldn't use aerodyanmic lift for flight, they'd probably do something involveing Gravity.

Anyway, like I said, it's not like i'm desperately anxious to convince everyone to my way of thinking of anything, just that the way i've suggested doesn't seem illogica, implausible or irrational to me.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

psyche101, on 28 August 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

ET is irrelevant to the original story.
For a start, all those military people that so many hang their hat on have to be outright lying, no possibility for error or misinterpretation there, it does not fit the descriptions of debris wether you are a believer or skeptic and the GAO found no such indication in any report. Not a single witness has claimed robots or automated systems, every single proponent is calling for bodies, the only people who believe it was ET believe the people who say there were bodies.

What on earth makes you think that a Robot or Drone explains any part of Roswell away? All you are doing is re-writing that tired tale yet again with no premise, just speculation. The only Hypothesis that really bothers to reference documents from the time frame is Lost Shamans Hypothesis.

Really, do i have to draw a diagram or something? What is so illogical, implausible or irrational about an unmanned Craft? That would account for its small size & lightweight construction. Obviously it would need to be designed to coep with re-entry, but I'm sure that alien materials (or some way of eliminating surface friction) wouldn't find that insuperable. Did the Contemporary accounts of materials found mention Bodies? That was a subsequent embroidery. I know you're a big fan of Lost Shamans Hypothesis, and a very imaginative one it is too, which is something I'm always pleased to see, but really, why should a small, unmanned craft really need to re-write the entire history of the Roswell Incident?