Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
Followers 7

# Is proof of alien life a risk to society ?

## 425 posts in this topic

The question is not whether or not they are out there, but how far away they are.

##### Share on other sites
nopeda, on 06 February 2013 - 03:26 PM, said:

..That means something MUST make adjustments to the velocity of light. That much is not in question

I'm sorry, but that is completely wrong. You really, *really*, need to find a good book or website for beginners on relativity. Nothing 'makes adjustments' to light speed - it is constant in a vacuum, slightly slower in other media. This is quite well understood and proven, and the concept is used in so many applications (even day-to-day ones like GPS) and in so many mathematical constructs (ones that you clearly accept by other content you have posted), that you can't make such a claim.

I can, did and do. Something would HAVE TO adjust the velocity of light in order for all light from all objects to reach this planet at the same velocity RELATIVE TO THIS PLANET. If it didn't, the velocity between Earth and the emitter would influence the velocity of the light as it influences the frequency. You could say something influences the frequency but not the velocity accept that wouldn't account for the velocities between Earth and emitters, while something influencing the velocity could and quite likely does.

##### Share on other sites
nopeda, on 06 February 2013 - 03:26 PM, said:

There are significant velocities between Earth and many objects that it receives light from. Some of those objects are moving toward the Earth at significant velocities, and some away from it. Yet the light from all of those objects is found to impact this planet and the few other places humans have been able to test at the same velocity relative to this planet. That means something MUST make adjustments to the velocity of light. That much is not in question, and in fact that is the starting line. If you can't get that far, then you can't get to the starting line. If you can, then maybe you can at some point comprehend that if light moves much faster than we think outside of the adjustment area, that could explain how even light from objects moving away from us still arrives at the same velocity relative to Earth, so it is still slowed down instead of speeded up as it seems it might need to be, when it enters the adjustment area.

Ehhh? Don't think so. there are no Adjustments. Some difference in media. The conductivity of space dosnt change. Why? well... No one knows, but it probably has something to with the rules governing infomation transfer between virtual particles on the planck level. Just a guess though.

Something has to make the velocity between Earth and other objects emitting light "vanish" since those velocities DO exist. Accepting that fact is the starting line.

##### Share on other sites

You might thikn I think small, but I think you have a tendency to overreach. Just like this stupid dig, totally unnecessary, however, why do you think attaining FTL is so easy? I agree that even hydrogen molecules at such speeds would be considered a dangerous object, but so is creating a warp field. If you do that too close to a planet, you will obliterate the planet you have come to visit. If we have to come out of warped space far enough away to be safe, we still have a decent journey to the destination.

It sounds to me like you got that last part from Star Trek. FTL is always relative to something. So far no one else I've encountered in this forum seems to appreciate the significance of that particular fact, so how could they move on to consider other details about it? Everyone always just takes it for granted that it's relative to this particular planet as if it were the foundation of the universe and not in motion, even though we're moving at a million miles per hour relative to some things.

##### Share on other sites

Some bad blood here, we both know that, no need to carry on. I am trying to meet you halfway and understand your concept. Your description of light being slowed according to varying mediums is certainly an idea I think is worthy of discussion. Perhaps we should stick to that.

. . .

I agree that distance is a pittance compared to space as a whole, but we have left the solar system. It might be a small step, but in any perspective, the first steps are significant.

We know light it slowed by different mediums, but some of us don't feel that space itself is one. I don't believe it "exists" at all. Whether it does or not it's fairly well believe that light's speed remains constant unless something alters it. That means if an object is moving toward the Earth at 2K miles per second, and it emits light moving at 186K miles per second relative TO THE EMITTER, the the light should arrive at this planet at 188K mps relative to Earth because of the combined velocities. Something that lets us know combined velocities ARE significant is the shift in frequency. The question which is the starting line is: Why not also the velocity? Few people can get to the starting line though from my experience. Most somehow can't appreciate the significance of the question, though I don't see how anyone could miss it.

##### Share on other sites
nopeda, on 06 February 2013 - 03:26 PM, said:

There are significant velocities between Earth and many objects that it receives light from. Some of those objects are moving toward the Earth at significant velocities, and some away from it. Yet the light from all of those objects is found to impact this planet and the few other places humans have been able to test at the same velocity relative to this planet. That means something MUST make adjustments to the velocity of light. That much is not in question, and in fact that is the starting line. If you can't get that far, then you can't get to the starting line. If you can, then maybe you can at some point comprehend that if light moves much faster than we think outside of the adjustment area, that could explain how even light from objects moving away from us still arrives at the same velocity relative to Earth, so it is still slowed down instead of speeded up as it seems it might need to be, when it enters the adjustment area.

Okay, first of all, the speed of light being a measured constant from any give source should tell you that it is because of the very properties of light itself, not some outside agency. Second, and more in keeping with the topic, you still have not given any hypothesis or even idea of what that has to do with alien life.

If the velocity of light was completely constant relative to its emitter, then light would reach Earth at different velocities depending what the velocity of the emitter is plus or minus relative to Earth, PLUS the 186K miles per second the light leaves the emitter at. Instead only the frequency shows influence by those combined velocities, meaning something has to adjust the velocity of the light relative to Earth or the velocity would also show that same influence.

What it could have to do with alien life is that it might remove the restriction of 186K miles per second relative to this particular planet that some people seem to feel is in place. It sure removes it for me, for example.

Edited by nopeda

##### Share on other sites

Would not stronger influences that warp light now perhaps be more likely to influence the speed of a photon? Maybe a Magnetar, or massive suns like VY Canis Major? We have star clusters, could some type of Magnetar or black hole cluster exist that creates a field such as you suggest to alter the speed of light but if so, when the photon returns to normal space and has been warped from it's path, I would suspect that determining the direction of the photon without knowing the nature of the field would make it near impossible to determine the source to begin with. How would one test this?

Photons are light, even when they're in the radio region, microwave, UV, xray and gama ray regions. There is reason to believe gravity has an influence on light, and in fact black holes are thought to be black because of that. But if all that was having influence was different huge influences by gravity from different objects in different places then there would be a variety of different velocities at which light impacts the Earth, not all velocities being the same regardless of what areas of space were passed through. That doesn't mean it's not influenced by gravity from such objects when it get near the. But none the less if we are living in and so far still confined to an adjustment area then that would explain why all light in vacuum that humans have been able to test has been moving at the same velocity...because it's all within the adjustment area.

##### Share on other sites

The question is not whether or not they are out there, but how far away they are.

Or how close...or how close they have been...

##### Share on other sites

The possibilities and consequences of such a discovery have been discussed at the World Economic Forum.

"In 10 years' time, we may have evidence not only that Earth is not unique, but also that life exists elsewhere in the universe," states the WEF Global Risks report for 2013. "The discovery of even simple life would fuel speculation about the existence of other intelligent beings and challenge many assumptions that underpin human philosophy and religion."

No one knows what impacts like that it would or would not have. One thing that could be significant would be a possible change in the value of what are considered to be precious metals however. Even before the first asteroid has been mined a company called Planetary Resources is already thinking about the possible consequences and impact it could have on world economy...

##### Share on other sites

We have no evidence that life can "spread" through outer space nor any reason to believe it can. The universe is not your backyard.

We are at the point of 'spreading' through our own solar system.

##### Share on other sites

It sounds to me like you got that last part from Star Trek. FTL is always relative to something. So far no one else I've encountered in this forum seems to appreciate the significance of that particular fact, so how could they move on to consider other details about it? Everyone always just takes it for granted that it's relative to this particular planet as if it were the foundation of the universe and not in motion, even though we're moving at a million miles per hour relative to some things.

No, not Star Trek, those ships come out of warp even in orbit of planets without any concern. Braking is as important as acceleration, so I just do now see a nice peaceful exit from sub space like we see on the TV with that sort of energy involved.

People just do not take it for granted, the big disclaimer here being that photons are massless and therefore do abide by rules of physics, and that is being taken into account. Your description seems to treat photons like they have mass. That is bound to cause some confusion at least

We know light it slowed by different mediums, but some of us don't feel that space itself is one. I don't believe it "exists" at all. Whether it does or not it's fairly well believe that light's speed remains constant unless something alters it. That means if an object is moving toward the Earth at 2K miles per second, and it emits light moving at 186K miles per second relative TO THE EMITTER, the the light should arrive at this planet at 188K mps relative to Earth because of the combined velocities. Something that lets us know combined velocities ARE significant is the shift in frequency. The question which is the starting line is: Why not also the velocity? Few people can get to the starting line though from my experience. Most somehow can't appreciate the significance of the question, though I don't see how anyone could miss it.

Well, it is true that no evidence for an aether or the more popular term, dark matter, exists, and the very experiments that sought to prove it's existence also showed light remins a constant.

Alright, but again we only have objects with mass to demonstrate the ideals, if we say a car is ravelling downhill at 186K mps, and for instance gravity gives it a push of 2kmps so the vehicle is travelling downhill at 188k mps, (I am not saying this happens, it is just for illustration) when Gravity stops affecting it, mechanics will slow the vehicle back down to 186k mps. If light can be affected in this way, how could it be tested without littering the Universe with sensors to measure the path of a single photon. I cannot say you are "wrong" but observation and calculation do not appear to support a variable speed of light, I am not sure why you suspect this is the case, or do you feel photons may have mass after all?

Photons are light, even when they're in the radio region, microwave, UV, xray and gama ray regions. There is reason to believe gravity has an influence on light, and in fact black holes are thought to be black because of that. But if all that was having influence was different huge influences by gravity from different objects in different places then there would be a variety of different velocities at which light impacts the Earth, not all velocities being the same regardless of what areas of space were passed through. That doesn't mean it's not influenced by gravity from such objects when it get near the. But none the less if we are living in and so far still confined to an adjustment area then that would explain why all light in vacuum that humans have been able to test has been moving at the same velocity...because it's all within the adjustment area.

But using the vehicle model above, it should always go back to the driving force. This is more like Maxwells equations isn't it? Maxwell’s equations led to an apparent paradox or inconsistency in the laws of physics, because it suggested that if one could catch up to a beam of light one would see a stationary electromagnetic wave, which is an impossibility. Einstein then hypothesised that the speed of light actually plays the role of infinite speed in our universe. However, some barrier has to exist to create the fabric of space-time. Otherwise, how do you explain time dilation and length contraction when travelling near c?

##### Share on other sites

We are at the point of 'spreading' through our own solar system.

We are not even at the point of "spreading" to our own barren Moon! We sent a few guys there, the place was a death trap waiting to happen so we never went back.

##### Share on other sites

So in all of earth's history it appears that just ONE little 'thing' capable of reproducing itself ever sprang into being - and luckily, before it got killed, managed to reproduce itself and started to spread..

Again, this seems to point to the likely conclusion that life doesn't just spring up inevitably, and may be incredibly rare. And as stated, astronomers and astrophysicists have no problem with incredible rarity or seemingly impossibly long odds - I can point to several things in the detectable visible universe that appear to be one-offs..

Yes, this was one of the sad things I had to accept as an adult. I grew up on science fiction where life abounded in the universe. Life was simple. It was like baking a cake: as long as the right ingredients are mixed together and cooked the right amount of time, viola, life! As I read more about the theories of how life might have developed on Earth and the other theories on why it wasn't destroyed, I kept thinking that the series of conditions we believe happened are so unlikely it's not just a miracle we're alive; it a series of miracles. And those are the most favorable theories. For all we know life may have actually resulted from something else even more complicated and improbable.

How can anyone think the same thing probably happened in nearby solar systems? Talking about the improbability of other life in the universe will not make you popular. People do not want to hear about it! They want to hear about how there are planets around other suns and some of them are the right distance from their suns to be another Earth (just like Venus).

Then the distances involved made the issue irrelevant to me. So what if there is life in a solar system ten thousand light years away? We might as well still be alone. That's when people will talk about wormholes and FTL travel and other Star Trek concepts that make a trip to a distant star seem like an airplane trip across the country.

I do like one theory about how collections of molecules could inadvertently reproduce themselves. Imagine a molecule that for some reason attracts similar molecules and gets larger and larger until it gets too big and breaks in half then the halves repeat the process. That's a crude system of reproduction. More effective molecules would collect more stuff so you have a crude system of evolution before you even have life. There are still a few hundred steps before you have life but at least it's a plausible start.

##### Share on other sites

We are not even at the point of "spreading" to our own barren Moon! We sent a few guys there, the place was a death trap waiting to happen so we never went back.

We've been pretty lame in regards to the moon. I've read that it's hollow... I've also always been suspicious of it for always keeping the same side facing Earth. I wonder if there are places in the universe where beings can buy hollowed out moons and asteroids, etc.

##### Share on other sites

No, not Star Trek, those ships come out of warp even in orbit of planets without any concern. Braking is as important as acceleration, so I just do now see a nice peaceful exit from sub space like we see on the TV with that sort of energy involved.

. . .

we only have objects with mass to demonstrate the ideals, if we say a car is ravelling downhill at 186K mps, and for instance gravity gives it a push of 2kmps so the vehicle is travelling downhill at 188k mps, (I am not saying this happens, it is just for illustration) when Gravity stops affecting it, mechanics will slow the vehicle back down to 186k mps. If light can be affected in this way, how could it be tested without littering the Universe with sensors to measure the path of a single photon. I cannot say you are "wrong" but observation and calculation do not appear to support a variable speed of light, I am not sure why you suspect this is the case, or do you feel photons may have mass after all?

But using the vehicle model above, it should always go back to the driving force. This is more like Maxwells equations isn't it? Maxwell’s equations led to an apparent paradox or inconsistency in the laws of physics, because it suggested that if one could catch up to a beam of light one would see a stationary electromagnetic wave, which is an impossibility. Einstein then hypothesised that the speed of light actually plays the role of infinite speed in our universe. However, some barrier has to exist to create the fabric of space-time. Otherwise, how do you explain time dilation and length contraction when travelling near c?

No ships that we know of go in or out of warp. It's a concept only and humans certainly don't have any ships capable of it if it's possible. However I will agree that slowing down is a significant aspect.

I don't believe in any fabric of space-time, or ether, or that concept by any other name. Whether or not photons have mass doesn't change the fact that if they leave an emitter at 186K mps and arrive at an object that's moving 14K mps in the direction of the emitter, the combined velocity should 200K mps. And if it's moving at 14K away from the emitter the combined velocity should be 172K mps. You seem somehow comfortable accepting the idea that the velocity of all light arriving at this planet should arrive at the same velocity relative to it, but regardless of the emitter's velocity relative to it. Most people do, yet so far no one else in this forum has been able to explain any way that could possibly be the case, or even seems to appreciate the significance of why it would have to be adjusted. It is appreciated and discussed here though:

http://www.alternati...itterEffect.htm

##### Share on other sites

No ships that we know of go in or out of warp. It's a concept only and humans certainly don't have any ships capable of it if it's possible. However I will agree that slowing down is a significant aspect.

I don't believe in any fabric of space-time, or ether, or that concept by any other name. Whether or not photons have mass doesn't change the fact that if they leave an emitter at 186K mps and arrive at an object that's moving 14K mps in the direction of the emitter, the combined velocity should 200K mps. And if it's moving at 14K away from the emitter the combined velocity should be 172K mps. You seem somehow comfortable accepting the idea that the velocity of all light arriving at this planet should arrive at the same velocity relative to it, but regardless of the emitter's velocity relative to it. Most people do, yet so far no one else in this forum has been able to explain any way that could possibly be the case, or even seems to appreciate the significance of why it would have to be adjusted. It is appreciated and discussed here though:

http://www.alternati...itterEffect.htm

Your lack of belief in space-time no more negates it's existence than believing the world is flat would make it flat.

There can be little doubt that the findings of de Sitter and others confirm that the light from both stars travelled to earth at the same speed.

##### Share on other sites

No ships that we know of go in or out of warp. It's a concept only and humans certainly don't have any ships capable of it if it's possible. However I will agree that slowing down is a significant aspect.

I agree completely.

I don't believe in any fabric of space-time, or ether, or that concept by any other name. Whether or not photons have mass doesn't change the fact that if they leave an emitter at 186K mps and arrive at an object that's moving 14K mps in the direction of the emitter, the combined velocity should 200K mps. And if it's moving at 14K away from the emitter the combined velocity should be 172K mps. You seem somehow comfortable accepting the idea that the velocity of all light arriving at this planet should arrive at the same velocity relative to it, but regardless of the emitter's velocity relative to it. Most people do, yet so far no one else in this forum has been able to explain any way that could possibly be the case, or even seems to appreciate the significance of why it would have to be adjusted. It is appreciated and discussed here though:

http://www.alternati...itterEffect.htm

Maybe the Voyager probes might give some indication when they enter Interstellar space and can offer some new readings? Perhaps not so much an aether, but as you suggested a magnetic sheath such as the Heliopause?

Perhaps that might control the overall velocity of the solar system itself keeping matter restricted to a balance for want of a better word? I am comfortable with the idea of light arriving at earth all at the same speed, because it seems this is what I would consider something of a stabilised region, for instance, if we have 2 people on the ground throwing a ball to each other, and 2 people on a plane throwing a ball to each other, the ball is relative to earth in both cases. The ball will not have the planes velocity added to it as one throws it to another, it will be the same velocity as the ball on the ground (of course considering perfect conditions, that is the people throw a ball of the same weight with exactly the same force) perhaps the solar system is a way of keeping these restrictions in place? If so, all light in the solar system would be at a speed relative to the system itself, but that could possibly be based on the heliopause itself, offering as you have suggested differing speeds under differing conditions relative to each other. One system might have a different speed of light to us, making physics somewhat variable across the Universe, there is a team here in Australia thinking along those lines, they have hypothesised that constants change across the Universe, they speak of "Alpha", as opposed to labelling a resistance:

Sections of sky

At the centre of the new study is the fine structure constant, also known as alpha. This number determines the strength of interactions between light and matter.

A decade ago, Webb used observations from the Keck telescope in Hawaii to analyse the light from distant galaxies called quasars. The data suggested that the value of alpha was very
when the quasar light was emitted 12 billion years ago than it appears in laboratories on Earth today.

Now Webb's colleague Julian King, also of the University of New South Wales, has analysed data from the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile, which looks at a different region of the sky.
The VLT data suggests that the value of alpha elsewhere in the universe is very slightly bigger than on Earth
.

The difference in both cases is around a millionth of the value alpha has in our region of space, and suggests that alpha varies in space rather than time. "I'd quietly hoped we'd simply find the same thing that Keck found," King says. "This was a real shock."

Bar magnet

Moreover, the team's analysis of around 300 measurements of alpha in light coming from various points in the sky suggests the variation is not random but structured, like a bar magnet. The universe seems to have a large alpha on one side and a smaller alpha on the other.

This "dipole" alignment nearly matches that of a
mysteriously moving towards the edge of the universe. It does not, however, line up with another unexplained dipole, dubbed the
, in the afterglow of the big bang.

Earth sits somewhere in the middle of the extremes for alpha. If correct, the result would explain why alpha seems to have the finely tuned value that allows chemistry – and thus life – to occur. Grow alpha by 4 per cent, for instance, and the stars would be unable to produce carbon, making our biochemistry impossible.

Edited by psyche101

##### Share on other sites

I think they are more afraid of us than we are afraid of them. Mabey we are the Klingons of the galaxy.

Edited by venom012

##### Share on other sites

I have shown my close up alien photo to some Mufon members as well as to Stanton Friedman, Bud Hopkins, Dr. John Mack, Betty Hill & many others.

Go Google Images & type "Coast to Coast devoe visitor" & look for the reddish alien looking at you. I was informed that people are just getting use to the crafts & seeing the aliens as well would be too difficult to handle for most people.

##### Share on other sites

Here's how I see it:

It definitely would shake up major religions and conspiracy theorists.

Scientists would try to find some way to study or come in contact with them.

And many would reevaluate the means and worths of their existences.

##### Share on other sites

I have shown my close up alien photo to some Mufon members as well as to Stanton Friedman, Bud Hopkins, Dr. John Mack, Betty Hill & many others.

Go Google Images & type "Coast to Coast devoe visitor" & look for the reddish alien looking at you. I was informed that people are just getting use to the crafts & seeing the aliens as well would be too difficult to handle for most people.

That is confusing, the Coast to Coast site says:

About the photo...taken with a kodak camera...To begin with, a UFO appeared behind my home and business. Two customers asked "what's that?" A UFO I said...Looking at the UFO, I said that evidence was needed to show people that you are for real otherwise few would listen...Two weeks later, a customer walks-in and says keep the photo and he explains why.

But this other site says:

Earlier this year, I was introduced to an individual who had recently moved to Bloomington, and had expressed an interest in local UFO activity. For purposes of this report, I will refer to this person as, "Adrian." I invited Adrian to go along with us on a sky watch, and agreed to swing by and pick him/her up at his/her house, in Bloomington. While there, Adrian handed me a photo of a strange looking creature. Adrian was told it was a "Reptilian," and was taken by an abductee friend, back east.

According to Adrian, The friend was angry and frustrated at the regular intrusions into his life, and decided to snap a picture during one of the alien visits, with his Polaroid camera. Fearful of the consequences of his actions, he gave the photo to a trusted individual for safe keeping.

Supposedly, a day or so later, the abductee was visited by military/government individuals who demanded he turn over the photo to them.

Are you Adrian, Timothy or Lynne?

##### Share on other sites

Go Google Images & type "Coast to Coast devoe visitor" & look for

Google "Coast to Coast devoe visitor"

Search

Your search - "Coast to Coast devoe visitor" - did not match any documents.

##### Share on other sites

Here's how I see it:

It definitely would shake up major religions and conspiracy theorists.

Scientists would try to find some way to study or come in contact with them.

And many would reevaluate the means and worths of their existences.

Scientists are already trying to contact them, though if they're around they're apparently waiting until they are ready to make contact before they reply. How do you think it would make people reevaluate their existence?

I love "Images and Words", and listened to the first album and a few others. The Rush tribute was bad ass!!! Is "Theater of Dreams" a DT album? I haven't paid attention to them in years, but did hear that they got a new drummer recently.

##### Share on other sites

Your lack of belief in space-time no more negates it's existence than believing the world is flat would make it flat.

Quote

There can be little doubt that the findings of de Sitter and others confirm that the light from both stars travelled to earth at the same speed.

In the same way your belief that space-time, space, or time exists doesn't bring them into existence either. If you believe time travel is possible that doesn't make it possible either, which of course it's not regardless of what you believe.

##### Share on other sites

i found something on google and not on any of the other six search engines i checked but as to whether it was an alien or a fire elemental or a false image I can't tell it is so blurred it is , for me at least, unidentifiable. it would have been much better to have been taken during daylight instead of at night ( or against a black background)

## Create an account

Register a new account