UFOs

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: UFOs

Post by reohn2 »

Jdsk wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 6:36pm
reohn2 wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 6:28pmWe shouldn't forget that Einstein's theory of relativity was considered to be a crackpot idea by a lot of the cscientific community of his day,only later was it proven.
Which one... the special theory or the general theory, please?

Thanks

Jonathan
General I think.
I would need to do some research to find a link it as it's some years since I read about it.

EDIT:- according to the link though not where I read it(I forget where)but it was his special theory:- https://daily.jstor.org/why-no-one-believed-einstein/
But the point is that even scientists can be biased toward the status quo if it goes against the popluar belief of the time.
Last edited by reohn2 on 15 Sep 2021, 6:58pm, edited 1 time in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Jdsk
Posts: 24627
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: UFOs

Post by Jdsk »

reohn2 wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 6:42pm
Jdsk wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 6:36pm
reohn2 wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 6:28pmWe shouldn't forget that Einstein's theory of relativity was considered to be a crackpot idea by a lot of the cscientific community of his day,only later was it proven.
Which one... the special theory or the general theory, please?
General I think.
I would need to do some research to find a link it as it's some years since I read about it.
That was published in 1915. By 1919 Eddington and colleagues had planned and performed and published the observations of the eclipse which hit the front page of newspapers around the world. But there were previous experiments with results that were widely known, including by Einstein. This wasn't only theory.

And it's still argued for which parts of the general theory Einstein should be awarded priority. Hilbert was ahead on some parts and close overall.

I don't think that the associated ideas were considered "crackpot" or that there was much delay in their acceptance or support from experiment.

Jonathan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... relativity
Stevek76
Posts: 2085
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: UFOs

Post by Stevek76 »

Jdsk wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 9:42am "Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena", the 2021 report from US intelligence:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_Repor ... elligence)

... which I expect to change precisely nobody's views.
Some of the apparently still unidentified footage looked rather suspiciously like a combination of parallax/perspective effects of an actually slow moving object combined with lens & camera artefacts, not entirely sure why they didn't figure that out.

reohn2 wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 6:28pm From what I understand there's a LOT humanity don't know,take dimensions,the ordinary wo/man on the street are only aware of three or four,from what I've read,and I lay no claim to understanding the theory behind it,there are many more dimensions eleven at last count I believe .
String/m theory remains theory only of course. The additional dimensions posited in most branches of these theories are effectively 'compactified' so are perhaps not 'true' human scale additional spatial dimensions as featured in some sci-fi.
Mick F wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 2:28pm
Nearest star (other than our sun) is 4.3lightyears away ............... meaning the light from it takes over four years to get here at the speed of light. Alpha Centauri has no planets.

Nearest habitable planet is how far away?
Potentially there's a couple of habitable ones in the 4.2ly of proxima centuri. Though the star might be pelting them with a few too many solar flares! There are a fair few other candidates in the sub 20ly range, over the last decade or so we've confirmed very rapidly that planets are actually common as muck throughout the galaxy.

Also perspective matters. With our current understanding whilst the fastest travel time as seen here on earth might be 4.2 years, if the travellers are moving fast enough it could be an an awful lot faster for them, such is the nature of time dilation, even if that would take a large amount of energy. Whilst star trek style system hopping is definitely not an option with our present physics, something like generation ships are a feasible, albiet one way option.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: UFOs

Post by reohn2 »

Jonathan
You're waayyy ahead of me on this but see my edit.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: UFOs

Post by reohn2 »

Stevek76
Could you explain in layman's term 'compactified' dimensions?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
fausto copy
Posts: 2809
Joined: 14 Dec 2008, 6:51pm
Location: Pembrokeshire

Re: UFOs

Post by fausto copy »

Earlier today I was sorting some sunset photos I took last week up on the Presell mountains.
I seem to have captured an incoming flying saucer (bottom right) on this one.
Saucer.jpg
And I'm sure that's Welsh Dragon up high here.
Dragon.jpg
And I'd only had one bottle of IPA!
Stevek76
Posts: 2085
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: UFOs

Post by Stevek76 »

reohn2 wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 7:04pm Could you explain in layman's term 'compactified' dimensions?
The common analogy (which is very much an analogy, as these things often are!) is of a pipe. Up close, the surface of the pipe is 2 dimensional, but viewed from a long distance it's simply a one dimensional line. The additional dimensions are 'closed' and small. i.e. if you go far enough in one direction you eventually loop round and get back to same spot. Obviously they don't really fit into our three dimensions in exactly the same way as a pipe which is where the analogy falls over but unless you fancy digging into very heavy maths (and you'll get no help from me on that as it was beyond me even fresh out of uni) it'll have to do.

Stevek76 wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 6:58pm
String/m theory remains theory only of course. The additional dimensions posited in most branches of these theories are effectively 'compactified' so are perhaps not 'true' human scale additional spatial dimensions as featured in some sci-fi.
Another quirk of these theories is they make a great deal of use of the interesting mathematical oddity that there is a consistent framework in which one can assign values to ostensibly infinite, divergent series. The most famous of these is perhaps that of -1/12 for 1+2+3+4+.... The maths was, as is often the case, documented decades before anyone started finding practical uses for it.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: UFOs

Post by reohn2 »

Fausto
The thing is,many people won't discuss the subject for fear of ridicule or even ridicule it themselves,personally whilst there are many shysters,crackpots and profiteers writing on the subject,I have an open mind on the subject which,IMHO,needs serious consideration so a definite desicion can be made one way or the other on the subject.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Jdsk
Posts: 24627
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: UFOs

Post by Jdsk »

For many observations there isn't enough information available to make definite decisions.

There's a very important principle in scientific method to be clear about what isn't known, and to say so.

Jonathan
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: UFOs

Post by reohn2 »

Jdsk wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 7:35pm For many observations there isn't enough information available to make definite decisions.

There's a very important principle in scientific method to be clear about what isn't known, and to say so.

Jonathan
I don't disagree with that statement,but there are seems to be apparently intelligent vehicles flying about in the sky that can't currently be explained by science.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: UFOs

Post by reohn2 »

Stevek76
Thanks for taking the time out to explain but I'm no wiser.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Jdsk
Posts: 24627
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: UFOs

Post by Jdsk »

reohn2 wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 7:52pm
Jdsk wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 7:35pm For many observations there isn't enough information available to make definite decisions.

There's a very important principle in scientific method to be clear about what isn't known, and to say so.
I don't disagree with that statement,but there are seems to be apparently intelligent vehicles flying about in the sky that can't currently be explained by science.
I don't agree with "can't currently be explained by science". I prefer "we don't know what they are".

I don't agree with "apparently intelligent". I prefer "seem to react to the observer's actions".

Jonathan
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: UFOs

Post by reohn2 »

OK I'll play.
Jdsk wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 7:58pm I don't agree with "can't currently be explained by science". I prefer "we don't know what they are".
If it can't be explained,it can't be explained which = we don't know what they are, which = can't be explained by humanity,which = can't currently be explained by science.
I don't agree with "apparently intelligent". I prefer "seem to react to the observer's actions".

Jonathan
Are you saying that because they react to the observer's actions they are the observer's intentions or something else?
If so or not could you explain?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
fausto copy
Posts: 2809
Joined: 14 Dec 2008, 6:51pm
Location: Pembrokeshire

Re: UFOs

Post by fausto copy »

reohn2 wrote: 15 Sep 2021, 7:26pm Fausto
The thing is,many people won't discuss the subject for fear of ridicule or even ridicule it themselves,personally whilst there are many shysters,crackpots and profiteers writing on the subject,I have an open mind on the subject which,IMHO,needs serious consideration so a definite desicion can be made one way or the other on the subject.
Back in the 1970's and early 80's, a neighbour of mine, a very well educated man, Dr. Randall Pugh was convinced of extra-terrestrial life and wrote several books and articles on visiting UFO's. Because they either didn't or wouldn't understand, certain people thought him a crackpot, though I know for a fact he wasn't.

I live in an area that was referred to back then as the Broad Haven Triangle, as there were several reported sightings around the St. Brides Bay area. There were several TV programmes made at the time and some apparently serious investigations made by UK forces and also the US Navy, who had a base covering the bay. Nothing was ever substantiated, but there are still people who aren't so sceptical, which I consider could well be a good thing.
User avatar
simonineaston
Posts: 8003
Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
Location: ...at a cricket ground

Re: UFOs

Post by simonineaston »

It occured to me, after I read some of the posts to this topic, and just after I dipped into Treasure Islands: Tax Havens and the Men Who Stole the World a short while ago, that the success or failure of the human animal depends to a large degree, on their ability to distinguish fact from fable. Add to that simple idea, the complexities that group membership brings to our decision making, and it's no wonder we're in such deep deep trouble...
S
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
Post Reply