Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

UFO reports - From Foo fighters to today


  • Please log in to reply
117 replies to this topic

#106    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,014 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 26 March 2013 - 09:02 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

there's no point arguing about this interminably, but really?

Really what, can you be more specific. No offense, but you seem to remember past conversations rather differently than I do. As is outlined above. I am not sure how you came to those conclusions.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

It would make much more sense to "make a phone call" the moment we discover an Intelligent ET race?

Yes it would, or even suspect intelligent life would be at a certain planet. How many times must I list the major advantages? Speed is at the speed of light already, cost is minimal, no risk to life, no machinery to build, minimal prep time. The list of advantages is huge. If we wanted to make something to travel to a new system, we would probably be bogged down in blueprints for 12 months before we even begin costly construction. And remember Apollo 1, 13? Challenger? Discovery? No loss of life can happen with communications.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

Would it not make immeasurably more sense to study them very carefully first, which would mean- it would be the only way we could do it, until we managed to crack their language and system of communications, and we could only do that after careful and prolonged study- studying them through means of probes.

No, I really do not think spying on a new species is a good way to form a relationship. Before we even meet we are sneaking around in the shadows, no I think it is a terrible way to initiate contact. And how much faster would we crack communications with their help? Like us, one starts with something like a sequence of prime numbers, something recognised that is not likely to occur in nature, Math is is universal, you work from there. It's not the astounding challenge you make it out to be, we have been crossing continents and learning new languages for centuries.

What would probes do, other than slow down this mutual exchange that could lead to open communications?

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

Nothing to do with being "rude", that's anthropomorphism to consider that the hypothetical They would think in those ways, it'd be much, much more sebnsible than "making a phone call".

Not at all, if you want to consider privacy a human trait, do so, but near every animal has some sort of territorial ideal. I personally believe that privacy is a universal right. I do not agree with you that regard for privacy is anthropomorphic.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

How would we know what to say, unless we'd made a study of them first?

Hello?

Take me to your leader seems rather popular as well.

Do you really see that as an issue?

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

Unless we do want to spam them with vast reams of math(s) as Carl Sagan suggested that they would to us, and then waste a lot of their time while we left them to figure out what it all meant, if they could even be bothered to. That would seem fairly rude to me. And finally; if they did turn out to be Warlike, then that'd be ok, if we attracted attention to ourselves with a Phone call, well, we'd have loads of time to prepare. To develop super weapons capable of defending ourselves against Death Stars, all because we'd attracted attention to ourselves? :unsure2:

We do not need vast reams of spam, we need to make a common connection, as I said, math. And work from there. How much do you understand about linguistics? I do not claim to be any sort of expert, byt my niece is. Languages are broken down into components, and organised, if we are considering normal speech patterns, but why is that necessary? Most forms of communications are broken down to digital these days, if we cannot make some sort of contact with 1's and 0's then I have to say that I would be rather shocked. Not like 1's and 0's change state due to language, our sun is one star, not matter what language you speak in.

If they did turn out to be warlike, we do not have to go on the attack. We have time to negotiate, try to make peace, offer exchanges, all sorts of things before a last resort like conflict need be entered into, and then if the species is like 10,000 light years distant, were fine, they can rant all they like. At worst, we could even evacuate if no other option was to be realised, point is, comms give us this advantage of being at "the destination" quicker and more efficiently than any other method. I do not disagree that probes would be used, as I said, some places are not habitable, we might go explore a pure diamond sun or something which will not have life on it. Then you need a probe. But where intelligence exists, I think one would be quite mad not to take the quickest, easiest, most productive and cost effective not to mention safest route. What advantage would a probe offer over communications?

Edited by psyche101, 26 March 2013 - 09:07 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#107    Admiral Rhubarb

Admiral Rhubarb

    Often Unsatisfactory

  • Member
  • 23,502 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hammerfest

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 26 March 2013 - 09:51 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 26 March 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:



Yes it would, or even suspect intelligent life would be at a certain planet. How many times must I list the major advantages? Speed is at the speed of light already, cost is minimal, no risk to life, no machinery to build, minimal prep time. The list of advantages is huge. If we wanted to make something to travel to a new system, we would probably be bogged down in blueprints for 12 months before we even begin costly construction. And remember Apollo 1, 13? Challenger? Discovery? No loss of life can happen with communications.
I'm sure that for any Space agency that had any kind of the Right Stuff, any risks (even if we were talking about manned craft) would be seen as worth the risk. And anyway, I'm talking unmanned craft, probes; I'm sure that even the most budget conscious Space agency would consider it worth the cost of sending an unmanned Craft if they suspected that it might lead to the biggest breakthrough in science since our old friend Albert  doodled on a blackboard.

Quote

Not at all, if you want to consider privacy a human trait, do so, but near every animal has some sort of territorial ideal. I personally believe that privacy is a universal right. I do not agree with you that regard for privacy is anthropomorphic.
Universal rights? Isn't that rather a Star Trek concept? :innocent:

Quote

Hello?

Take me to your leader seems rather popular as well.

Do you really see that as an issue?
Oh come now, now we're saying that corny lines from 1950's sci fi would be a good basis for space exploration?


Quote

No, I really do not think spying on a new species is a good way to form a relationship. Before we even meet we are sneaking around in the shadows, no I think it is a terrible way to initiate contact. And how much faster would we crack communications with their help? Like us, one starts with something like a sequence of prime numbers, something recognised that is not likely to occur in nature, Math is is universal, you work from there. It's not the astounding challenge you make it out to be, we have been crossing continents and learning new languages for centuries.

What would probes do, other than slow down this mutual exchange that could lead to open communications?


.... But where intelligence exists, I think one would be quite mad not to take the quickest, easiest, most productive and cost effective not to mention safest route. What advantage would a probe offer over communications?

If we found somewhere where intelligence exicsted, to be quite honest I think we'd be quite mad to say Howdy without checking them out very carefully first, to make sure that it'd be a sensible idea and wouldn't lead to some possibly very serious repercussions. I really don't see how it would be the safest route , surely it might be seen as provocative or intrusive in itself? What advantage would a probe offer? It would enable us to study the place, to see that it's like, perhaps find out something about the inhabitants, decide whether it might be sensible to say Howdy, and if we did, we might have a basis for something to communicate about and in a way that they might understand.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#108    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,014 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 26 March 2013 - 10:26 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

I'm sure that for any Space agency that had any kind of the Right Stuff, any risks (even if we were talking about manned craft) would be seen as worth the risk. And anyway, I'm talking unmanned craft, probes; I'm sure that even the most budget conscious Space agency would consider it worth the cost of sending an unmanned Craft if they suspected that it might lead to the biggest breakthrough in science since our old friend Albert  doodled on a blackboard.

The right stuff? The Right stuff is to needlessly risk life? I thought it was to be innovative and fearless. Not die.

Unmanned probes are still incredibly slow by comparison, and highly expensive.

Wouldn't any space agency want to make the breakthrough quick, safe and effective? Comms can achieve all that much more efficiently than a probe. Why wait for several decades when we could have an answer next week?

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

Universal rights? Isn't that rather a Star Trek concept? :innocent:

Not at all, and I had not only not intended it it that way, but gave you the animal Kingdom as an example. In fact, I wonder how you arrived at Star Trek there? I am quite a fan, and know most episodes inside out, excepting DS9, and I do not know of any that specifically promote an ideal of Universal privacy? Are you referring to any particular episode?

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

Oh come now, now we're saying that corny lines from 1950's sci fi would be a good basis for space exploration?

No, I was being  facetious. Seriously, you did not pick up on that? Remember what I said about beginning with Math?  I assume you are speaking about first contact yes? I think the first thing we would communicate is where we came from and why we were there, did that really need spelling out?

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

If we found somewhere where intelligence exicsted, to be quite honest I think we'd be quite mad to say Howdy without checking them out very carefully first, to make sure that it'd be a sensible idea and wouldn't lead to some possibly very serious repercussions. I really don't see how it would be the safest route , surely it might be seen as provocative or intrusive in itself?

So if this is an advanced species, and our basic probes are detected, how do you think they will take being spied on by an inferior species? How do our nations react to spying? Why would they every trust us when we have not been up front from day one?

If they do not want to make contact, they either do not pick up the phone, or send back a blatant message, like shut the hell up, we do not want to talk to you. Why would a species with the capabilities to explore space see something from space as offense? Would such a species simply not try to hide signs of intelligence from probing eyes?

I cannot agree, and do not see how it is not very rude to be dishonest with a new species. I do not think spying, lying or such is a good way to start of any relationship. Call that anthropomorphic if you will, but I think it is twice the leap to consider that a species is not trustworthy enough to just walk up and meet and that we should consider unethical options for first contact. After all, the key word here is contact is it not?

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

What advantage would a probe offer? It would enable us to study the place, to see that it's like, perhaps find out something about the inhabitants, decide whether it might be sensible to say Howdy, and if we did, we might have a basis for something to communicate about and in a way that they might understand.

And why would it not be sensible to say Howdy? And why could comms not also accomplish this in a fraction of the time by simply saying "howdy" from across space, instead of waiting to say howdy while we spy on them? What reason would we have to not say Howdy, and why would a probe which could well be discovered not make a violent race really angry with us if it was discovered? As we speaking of intelligent species, at least at our level of development, why would they not be able to find a probe, and how is that not a massive risk to destroying good intentions with first contact? Do you feel that most species would like to be spied upon?

Edited by psyche101, 26 March 2013 - 10:29 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#109    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 3,947 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 26 March 2013 - 12:04 PM

View PostKludge808, on 25 March 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

Well, X-Ray astronomers only cover a small portion of the spectrum. [...]
Actually, satellites covered whole X-ray spectrum (i.e. 0,1-100keV): Chandra X-ray Observatory - 0.1 to 10 keV; XMM-Newton - 0.2 keV to 12 keV; RXTE - 2 to 250 keV; and others.


View PostKludge808, on 25 March 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

[...]  What I was thinking about was the fact that we've managed to put a visible laser spot on the moon from Earth without all that much difficulty so it would not be difficult for another species to use the same technology for communications - at least on a local basis.  [...]
Here is X-Ray attenuation & absorption calculator. Select air and just put 0,1keV - 100keV over range of say 0,5km, and you'll see that using X-rays in Earth-Space/Space-Earth communications is not an option.


View PostKludge808, on 25 March 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

[...] For long haul, I'd be tempted to go with quantum entanglement.
As far as I know it still requires... errr... "traditional" communications.

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#110    Admiral Rhubarb

Admiral Rhubarb

    Often Unsatisfactory

  • Member
  • 23,502 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hammerfest

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 26 March 2013 - 03:25 PM

View Postpsyche101, on 26 March 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

The right stuff? The Right stuff is to needlessly risk life? I thought it was to be innovative and fearless. Not die.
Any Space agency would turn down the possibility of finding (all together now) New life, and new civilisations, because they were afraid it might needlessly risk life? That hardly sounds like the spirit that motivated John Glenn, Yuri Gagarin and Neil Armstrong.

Quote

Unmanned probes are still incredibly slow by comparison, and highly expensive.

Wouldn't any space agency want to make the breakthrough quick, safe and effective? Comms can achieve all that much more efficiently than a probe. Why wait for several decades when we could have an answer next week?


in several years you mean, surely, even from a neighbouring star. And if the inhabitants of a distant solar system didn't think it was worth their while replying to a message from somewhere that would never possibly be any use to them (and after they may have taken a few years to work out what we trying to say with all that Math stuff), or if they just regarded it as Spam and ignored it, we'd still be exactly at square one, and we'd still know absolutely nothing, whereas with (even an unmanned) Probe, we'd know that at least there was someone Out there, even if they didn't communicate with them.


Quote

Not at all, and I had not only not intended it it that way, but gave you the animal Kingdom as an example. In fact, I wonder how you arrived at Star Trek there? I am quite a fan, and know most episodes inside out, excepting DS9, and I do not know of any that specifically promote an ideal of Universal privacy? Are you referring to any particular episode?
Well, you keep referring to the principle of not interfering with what you're studying (a basic principle of scientific research) as "some kind of Star trek prime Directive", and an "ideal of universal privacy" sounds very much the same thing. Do we have an ideal of universal privacy when we're studying the behaviour of birds or animals? What i keep trying to explain is that they'd, more than likely, see us, if they discovered us, in just the same way- as just the same as all the other fauna on the planet. They probably wouldn't give two Hoots whether we thought of ourselves as Advanced or Intelligent, they've probably seen all that many, many times before and wouldn't see it as anything remotely remarkable, and would probably give no more Hoots about any Universal Rights that we might think we have.

Quote

So if this is an advanced species, and our basic probes are detected, how do you think they will take being spied on by an inferior species? How do our nations react to spying? Why would they every trust us when we have not been up front from day one?
Would they know where they were from? Why would they take exception to it as Spying? Why do you assume that they wouldn't do exactly the same thing themselves?  Do you see Space exploration as Spying? it'd be absolutely insane to say Howdy without, at the very least, finding out who they were, what their manner of culture was like, even if we couldn't crack their language and had to use Math to talk to them. That would be only polite; doing preliminary research. It'd show courtesy to make an attempt to do some basic research first.
And besides, all this is putting human emotions in the minds of the ETs, isn't it.

Quote

If they do not want to make contact, they either do not pick up the phone, or send back a blatant message, like shut the hell up, we do not want to talk to you. Why would a species with the capabilities to explore space see something from space as offense? Would such a species simply not try to hide signs of intelligence from probing eyes?
Why would they see an exploratory probe as offensive?

I cannot agree, and do not see how it is not very rude to be dishonest with a new species. I do not think spying, lying or such is a good way to start of any relationship. Call that anthropomorphic if you will, but I think it is twice the leap to consider that a species is not trustworthy enough to just walk up and meet and that we should consider unethical options for first contact. After all, the key word here is contact is it not?
Lying? Who on earth or Proxima Centauri II is lying? Doing research first so we know who we're talking to it surely only polite; you know how people resent cold callers, they see it as imploite and intrusive. it's sulrey just be Spam.

Quote

And why would it not be sensible to say Howdy? And why could comms not also accomplish this in a fraction of the time by simply saying "howdy" from across space, instead of waiting to say howdy while we spy on them? What reason would we have to not say Howdy, and why would a probe which could well be discovered not make a violent race really angry with us if it was discovered?
Why on earth would a probe, which very obviously wouldn't be an aggressive weapon, make a Warlik race very very angry, and cold-calling them like someone trying to sell double glazing or filling their inbox with Spam wouldn't? if they were that prickly, surely it'd be much more foolish to send a message and say at the bottom "this who we are, and this is where we are. Why not pop in & say hi"?

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#111    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,014 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 27 March 2013 - 02:30 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

Any Space agency would turn down the possibility of finding (all together now) New life, and new civilisations, because they were afraid it might needlessly risk life? That hardly sounds like the spirit that motivated John Glenn, Yuri Gagarin and Neil Armstrong.

Yes of course they would indeed they would! Needless being the key word there. John Glenn was the third man in orbit, Neil Armstrong alomst did not go to the moon, it was just about scrapped when Buzz Aldrin managed to pull of an effortless EVA saving the moon mission, And as for Gagarin, his doctor had this to say about him:

prepares himself painstakingly for his activities and training exercises, handles celestial mechanics and mathematical formulae with ease as well as excels in higher mathematics

Needless risk is something you just do not do. Do you know how many rockets they blew up before they let someone sit on top of one? It's a risk, sitting on a missile and being hurled into space is a risk enough, needless risks are plain stupid and should never, ever happen. That is what Fighter planes have in many cases been replaced with drones as well.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

in several years you mean, surely, even from a neighbouring star. And if the inhabitants of a distant solar system didn't think it was worth their while replying to a message from somewhere that would never possibly be any use to them (and after they may have taken a few years to work out what we trying to say with all that Math stuff), or if they just regarded it as Spam and ignored it, we'd still be exactly at square one, and we'd still know absolutely nothing, whereas with (even an unmanned) Probe, we'd know that at least there was someone Out there, even if they didn't communicate with them.

An answer from a civilisation yes, but not an answer to the conundrum of crossing space.

Years? I do not think years would be required with two determined species. I'd say more like months. If that. Spam? If comms were to be so common that it could be considered "spam" why can't we hear it? If we send a probe, we have decades of waiting to see if it even gets there. Coms will get there.

With comms, you do not have to build a communications array each time, you just point it and away you go. We could have literally hundreds of such "missions" happening at once. Probes will restrict that dramatically.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

Well, you keep referring to the principle of not interfering with what you're studying (a basic principle of scientific research) as "some kind of Star trek prime Directive", and an "ideal of universal privacy" sounds very much the same thing. Do we have an ideal of universal privacy when we're studying the behaviour of birds or animals? What i keep trying to explain is that they'd, more than likely, see us, if they discovered us, in just the same way- as just the same as all the other fauna on the planet. They probably wouldn't give two Hoots whether we thought of ourselves as Advanced or Intelligent, they've probably seen all that many, many times before and wouldn't see it as anything remotely remarkable, and would probably give no more Hoots about any Universal Rights that we might think we have.

Not "not interfering" privacy, decency, personal space - a trait built from a territorial background. And it is seen in near every species on the planet regardless of shape size of function. If we are looking for life as we know it, it does not seem a stretch to consider that the concept is as universal as evolution, as it is required for the rise of some species.

I honestly do not see how other intelligent species can become boring. Even crossing seas the cultures vary greatly and tantalise the senses, each form of life has something unique to offer, I think it is quite an assumption too assume that we are simply worthless and woud not be considered. If that is the case, they are not the aliens we want to meet, it is after all rather big out there.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

Would they know where they were from? Why would they take exception to it as Spying? Why do you assume that they wouldn't do exactly the same thing themselves?  Do you see Space exploration as Spying? it'd be absolutely insane to say Howdy without, at the very least, finding out who they were, what their manner of culture was like, even if we couldn't crack their language and had to use Math to talk to them. That would be only polite; doing preliminary research. It'd show courtesy to make an attempt to do some basic research first.
And besides, all this is putting human emotions in the minds of the ETs, isn't it.

Why woud they know? Isotopes.
Why would they take exception to spying? Who likes dishonesty?
I assume they would not be doing it themselves? Well yes, as I do find it makes little sense from a resources, speedy, or safety aspect. That they might see this from your point of view I do not find reason to consider the proposal valid. Logically I do not feel you have offered a reason to show that probes would be superior to communications. Just opinion.
Human emotions, how so when so many non-human species on the planet have a regard for privacy? Lions are not humans, try walking into their territory.

I do not see sticking a camera up to study a species before announce yourself as polite at all, I honestly fail to see how you arrive at such a conclusion. I sure hope you do not decide to visit me if you do, I'll be racing around for weeks beforehand looking for CCTV.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

Lying? Who on earth or Proxima Centauri II is lying? Doing research first so we know who we're talking to it surely only polite; you know how people resent cold callers, they see it as imploite and intrusive. it's sulrey just be Spam.

I do not now anyone there is lying, they are all traits I feel really should be avoided when first contact occurs. Lying I see as bad as spying.

No, again, I cannot see spying on other people as polite, in fact I feel that trying to say "we just wanted to make sure first" sounds like a bad excuse. If that was first contact between you and I, then I would certainly never ever trust you again.

And again, if the spam was there, we would have a slice of it, but we do not.

I wonder how some of those dodgy landlords who have put CCTV up in motel bathrooms and the like would go using that one in court? I was not spying your honor, I was being polite and trying to make sure I understood the person properly before asking them to pay their rent.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 26 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

Why on earth would a probe, which very obviously wouldn't be an aggressive weapon, make a Warlik race very very angry, and cold-calling them like someone trying to sell double glazing or filling their inbox with Spam wouldn't? if they were that prickly, surely it'd be much more foolish to send a message and say at the bottom "this who we are, and this is where we are. Why not pop in & say hi"?

If they were that prickly, I have no doubt at all that an honest approach would be the only one seen as not agressive. No spam, that cannot be of our space inbox would have at least something in it. I do not see why it would be foolish to tell people where we are, when the people we are contacting most likely cannot get here to begin with. If it was a significantly advanced species close enough to do so that wished to rape the planet, I doubt we would be here now. Seems a bit late to be hiding in the closet with the Voyager probes entering Interstellar space doesn't it?

Any unannounced intrusive devices can be seen as an agressive action. Why did the USSR shoot down the U2? Human trait? Sure, but not human alone.

Edited by psyche101, 27 March 2013 - 02:35 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#112    Kludge808

Kludge808

    Forum god of all things

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,741 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Completely off the map

  • Proud Member of the Geriatric Squadron
    Proud Member of the Thinking Class

Posted 27 March 2013 - 03:39 AM

View Postbmk1245, on 26 March 2013 - 12:04 PM, said:

Actually, satellites covered whole X-ray spectrum (i.e. 0,1-100keV): Chandra X-ray Observatory - 0.1 to 10 keV; XMM-Newton - 0.2 keV to 12 keV; RXTE - 2 to 250 keV; and others.
Here is X-Ray attenuation & absorption calculator. Select air and just put 0,1keV - 100keV over range of say 0,5km, and you'll see that using X-rays in Earth-Space/Space-Earth communications is not an option.
You're stuck on X-rays and I moved on to lasers.  I don't care about X-rays, only you do.

Quote

As far as I know it still requires... errr... "traditional" communications.
Quantum entanglement overcomes the distance issue and doesn't require anything except paired quarks.  (Possibly other particles but quarks are the only ones I'm sure of.)  The only thing "traditional" required is the actual intelligence carried.

Whirled Infamous Author and all around really strange person
Not a complete idiot.  Some pieces are missing.

One of UM's Happy Mutants

#113    Kludge808

Kludge808

    Forum god of all things

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,741 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Completely off the map

  • Proud Member of the Geriatric Squadron
    Proud Member of the Thinking Class

Posted 27 March 2013 - 04:18 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 27 March 2013 - 02:30 AM, said:

Any unannounced intrusive devices can be seen as an aggressive action. Why did the USSR shoot down the U2? Human trait? Sure, but not human alone.
We don't know that this is a universal truism.

An advanced race may see their probes - with or without crew - as a perfectly reasonable approach when investigating new worlds.  If even one of those "unknown" cases turns out to be an alien craft, not that I expect this to be the case, then their singular avoidance of contact would indicate they're interested in studying Earth but are very, very cautious about making any sort of contact.

A sufficiently less advanced race may see our probes as signs from the gods - or their local equivalent.  This is sort of how the ancients viewed comets and other events which offers a path to that end.  Likewise, a sufficiently advanced race may simply ignore them as meaningless.

Let's look at Mars as an example.  We've been assuming that there is no intelligent life there - or any life, for that matter.  We've got all kinds of devices in orbit around it & on the surface and we've been doing this for quite a while.  Suppose, though, there is an intelligent life form there only it doesn't behave in a way we would take as being such.  We already know we're not going to quit if we find life but rather will intensify the exploration.  If it turns out to be intelligent, do we just pack up and leave or do we continue with the idea of establishing communications at some point?  I'd go with the latter since we've already established a presence there.  Further, how will we identify them as intelligent if they don't follow our markers for intelligence?

Now, suppose that a sufficiently advanced alien race sees humans as a life form but not necessarily intelligent.  Yes, we can bang the rocks together with the best of them but, to their way of thinking, so can a monkey.  We may well not have met any of their markers to indicate intelligence.  To them, we're just another curiosity to be studied.  Nothing more.

Whirled Infamous Author and all around really strange person
Not a complete idiot.  Some pieces are missing.

One of UM's Happy Mutants

#114    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,014 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 27 March 2013 - 04:31 AM

View PostKludge808, on 27 March 2013 - 04:18 AM, said:

We don't know that this is a universal truism.

An advanced race may see their probes - with or without crew - as a perfectly reasonable approach when investigating new worlds.  If even one of those "unknown" cases turns out to be an alien craft, not that I expect this to be the case, then their singular avoidance of contact would indicate they're interested in studying Earth but are very, very cautious about making any sort of contact.

A sufficiently less advanced race may see our probes as signs from the gods - or their local equivalent.  This is sort of how the ancients viewed comets and other events which offers a path to that end.  Likewise, a sufficiently advanced race may simply ignore them as meaningless.

Let's look at Mars as an example.  We've been assuming that there is no intelligent life there - or any life, for that matter.  We've got all kinds of devices in orbit around it & on the surface and we've been doing this for quite a while.  Suppose, though, there is an intelligent life form there only it doesn't behave in a way we would take as being such.  We already know we're not going to quit if we find life but rather will intensify the exploration.  If it turns out to be intelligent, do we just pack up and leave or do we continue with the idea of establishing communications at some point?  I'd go with the latter since we've already established a presence there.  Further, how will we identify them as intelligent if they don't follow our markers for intelligence?

Now, suppose that a sufficiently advanced alien race sees humans as a life form but not necessarily intelligent.  Yes, we can bang the rocks together with the best of them but, to their way of thinking, so can a monkey.  We may well not have met any of their markers to indicate intelligence.  To them, we're just another curiosity to be studied.  Nothing more.

I agree it may not be a Universal truism, but considering our pool of one, and the 50 billion species that have taken shape here, and how important it is to all of them, and that is is an important part of natural selection, makes me think it is highly unlikely to be a unique trait either. Mainly due to the evolutionary aspect, which I do expect to be at least somewhat universal. I agree an less advanced species might see probes as a God, but they would not the be the ones we were talking about, only intelligent species.
Although we cannot know if a species finds us so insignificant as to ignore us, I am not sure we are ready to make contact with such species. If we are only monkeys, we might end up experimental subjects ourselves. As such, comms seems the most efficient way to reach to to a large part of the galaxy and try to work out who we want to visit or rather just make contact with as opposed to going behind the backs of a new species to watch them. Comms I think is a better way to ensure we get mutual contact both species are happy with.
Mars is a great example, but before we went there, we studied it from afar intensely. That is how I expect a comms type scenario to work. We are looking for planerts now, if one has an atmosphere that indicates life, we send a signal, if nothing, well we just keep trying candidates till we get one, then swing into action. If probes can be sent there, like Mars, I would agree that would be a future step, but just sending a probe on blind luck, hoping it will get there, and then not offend others or make the nervous seems so much more likely to give a bad impression, and or fail, than comms does. It is also slower, more costly and requires much greater resources.

Why would comms not be a better option?

Edited by psyche101, 27 March 2013 - 04:35 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#115    Admiral Rhubarb

Admiral Rhubarb

    Often Unsatisfactory

  • Member
  • 23,502 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hammerfest

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 27 March 2013 - 08:06 AM

Just to cut this down to this brief observation:

View Postpsyche101, on 27 March 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

.

Why would comms not be a better option?
because, to put it in a nutshell, If we were trying to find out if there was anyone Out there, if there was anyone "out there", they might not recognise "comms" as a message, or may not consider it worth replying to; therefore, we'd be absolutely none the wiser whether there was anyone "out there" at all. As a speculative means of finding out if there was anyone Out there, it's so hit and miss- with a very good likelihood of it being a miss- that, however economical it might be, it would still be hardly worth doing it.

"Mars is a great example, but before we went there, we studied it from afar intensely. That is how I expect a comms type scenario to work."? However could we do that? However could we study a planet from afar with Comms? "if one has an atmosphere that indicates life, we send a signal, if nothing, well we just keep trying candidates till we get one,"? How incredibly futile and time wasting would that be? If we don't get a reply, assume that there's no one there and try another one? That's so incredibly hit and miss and unscientific that it really is just pointless. Maybe it was like that with the World of Warcraft signal; maybe that was someione trying to do that. So as we didn't reply, they assumed that there was no one here? What kind of method of scientific discovery is that? I'm afraid that worrying about offending some hypothetical Alien race by "spying" really is just Sci fi fantasy.

"I would agree that would be a future step, but just sending a probe on blind luck, hoping it will get there, and then not offend others or make the nervous seems so much more likely to give a bad impression, and or fail, than comms does"? Whaaat? it's a blind shot in the dark sending a Probe, but it wouldn't be sending Comms? Whaaaat? it has more likelihood of failing than Comms? So being able to see a new planet for ourselves and see whether it might have some kind of civilisation, to see it with our own eyes, is more likely to fail than vaguely saying "Howdy", in effect making a spam phone calle? What a strange line of reasoning.

Edited by Lord Vetinari, 27 March 2013 - 08:07 AM.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#116    bmk1245

bmk1245

    puny village idiot

  • Member
  • 3,947 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vilnius, Lithuania

Posted 27 March 2013 - 08:36 AM

View PostKludge808, on 27 March 2013 - 03:39 AM, said:

You're stuck on X-rays and I moved on to lasers.  I don't care about X-rays, only you do.
[...]
Ok, lasers... Cloud cover and you lose communication...

View PostKludge808, on 27 March 2013 - 03:39 AM, said:

[...]
Quantum entanglement overcomes the distance issue and doesn't require anything except paired quarks.  (Possibly other particles but quarks are the only ones I'm sure of.)  The only thing "traditional" required is the actual intelligence carried.
Quarks aside, here is protocol:

Quote

1. An EPR pair is generated, one qubit sent to location A, the other to B.

2. At location A, a Bell measurement of the EPR pair qubit and the qubit to be teleported (for example, quantum state of a photon) is performed, yielding two classical bits of information. Both qubits are destroyed.

3. Using the classical channel, the two bits are sent from A to B. (This is the only potentially time-consuming step, due to speed-of-light considerations.)

4. At location B, the EPR pair qubit is modified (if necessary), using the two bits to select the correct one of four possible quantum states. A qubit identical to that chosen for teleportation (for example, quantum state of a photon) results.
(link; emphasis mine)

Arguing with fool is like playing chess with pigeon: he will scatter pieces, peck King's crown, crap on bishop, and fly away bragging how he won the game... (heard once, author unknown).
Zhoom! What was that? That was your life, Mate! Oh, that was quick. Do I get another? Sorry, Mate. That's your lot. Basil Fawlty (John Cleese).

#117    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 30,014 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 28 March 2013 - 06:09 AM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 27 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

Just to cut this down to this brief observation:

:rolleyes: Whatever.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 27 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

because, to put it in a nutshell, If we were trying to find out if there was anyone Out there, if there was anyone "out there", they might not recognise "comms" as a message, or may not consider it worth replying to; therefore, we'd be absolutely none the wiser whether there was anyone "out there" at all. As a speculative means of finding out if there was anyone Out there, it's so hit and miss- with a very good likelihood of it being a miss- that, however economical it might be, it would still be hardly worth doing it.

Might not recognise comms as a message? are we not talking intelligent species? I do not believe that, not for one second, and I think you are just making stuff up to support your view. Space is filled with RF, if you have looked at space, you would know about comms.

And may not consider it? What is this? They might see your probe coming and just blow it out of the sky too. That would be a lot of effort and resources wasted, and mission over in a split second.

Comms at random like SETI is surely going to take a long time, just blasting at the sky hoping we hit a target is shooting blind. We need to work in with the later projects such as Kepler, which is searching for targets. That should remove the hit and miss. With near three thousand planets already in the pipeline, it seems we should have some targets sometime in the near future.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 27 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

"Mars is a great example, but before we went there, we studied it from afar intensely. That is how I expect a comms type scenario to work."? However could we do that? However could we study a planet from afar with Comms? "if one has an atmosphere that indicates life, we send a signal, if nothing, well we just keep trying candidates till we get one,"? How incredibly futile and time wasting would that be? If we don't get a reply, assume that there's no one there and try another one? That's so incredibly hit and miss and unscientific that it really is just pointless. Maybe it was like that with the World of Warcraft signal; maybe that was someione trying to do that. So as we didn't reply, they assumed that there was no one here? What kind of method of scientific discovery is that? I'm afraid that worrying about offending some hypothetical Alien race by "spying" really is just Sci fi fantasy.

Like we did with Mars, we looked at it, worked out the best way to approach it, and eventually had to send a robot. Had intelligent life resided there, we would have called Mars if we could, and were actually expecting a call from Mars

Posted Image


Yes, the WOW! signal might well have been some type of some such attempt from another civilisation. Does that not indicate that others might well be looking for signals too? The only skeric of possible information that we do have and all agree on believer and skeptic alike indicates signals are the way to go.

View PostLord Vetinari, on 27 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

"I would agree that would be a future step, but just sending a probe on blind luck, hoping it will get there, and then not offend others or make the nervous seems so much more likely to give a bad impression, and or fail, than comms does"? Whaaat? it's a blind shot in the dark sending a Probe, but it wouldn't be sending Comms? Whaaaat? it has more likelihood of failing than Comms? So being able to see a new planet for ourselves and see whether it might have some kind of civilisation, to see it with our own eyes, is more likely to fail than vaguely saying "Howdy", in effect making a spam phone calle? What a strange line of reasoning.

Yes of course it has more likelihood of failing than comms. Crikey, comms has no moving parts for a start! It's wont be affected by a micro-meteor or such. Needs no fuel.

Both are a blind shot in the dark, thats the point. One is a fraction of the cost and risk of the other, so it only makes sense to go with the simpler option first.

Kepler is out there to see these things with our own eyes, and that project is only going to be exceeded by better more powerful projects. This is where it all starts, if we see an atmosphere that indicates life - great, then you try to make contact, and if that works, maybe try to get there in person. In such a case a probe might be bypassed altogether. Where intelligent life is considered, a probe is unnecessary. Such are going to be great with things like Europa, bit again, we watched it, and sent signals bouncing of it to find the supposed ocean beneath it. Flyby's have offered all our information via comms.

Do you feel that there is no way anyone could see being spied upon as a bad thing?

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo 'If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' - Sir Isaac Newton. "Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit." Ed Stewart. Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs. Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Sir Wearer of Hats.


#118    Admiral Rhubarb

Admiral Rhubarb

    Often Unsatisfactory

  • Member
  • 23,502 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hammerfest

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 28 March 2013 - 08:08 AM

What you seem to be doing is rather putting the cart before the horse, and assuming that any planet we might choose to send a Probe to will not only have Life, but it will be Life that will have
developed to a degree of technomological advancement that they'd be capable of sending an invasion fleet to attack us, because they'd be so offended by any Probe we might send. I'm afraid that really does sound like timorousness carried to the extreme. It's rather like the people who said that the Large Halon Collider would create a Black Hole that would swallow the earth. No one would ever have made any significant discoveries if they'd all had that attitude. If we did send a message saying Howdy to a planet that might have, we decide, an Atmosphere that might support Life, and we don't get a reply (after, presumably, allowing the requisite number of years for the message to get there, for them to think about it, and then send a reply), then that'd be it and we'd write it off, is that what you're saying? That sounds such an incredibly hit and miss way of determing anything that it barely seems scientific at all.

Quote

Yes, the WOW! signal might well have been some type of some such attempt from another civilisation. Does that not indicate that others might well be looking for signals too?
So, by your method, since we didn't reply to that, then they'd have assumed that there was no one here, and they'd have lost interest, then. Well, a lot that accomplished, then. That ahrdly says very much for the likelihood of getting any results from your method, does it, and all because you're afraid of antagonising them into sending an Imperial Battlefleet.

Edited by Lord Vetinari, 28 March 2013 - 08:11 AM.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users