Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Galactic Federation

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    thecommander wrote: »
    nyarlothothep wrote:
    Even to other humans, humans are the retarded cousins of the universe and I am not a human.
    Say what?

    <snip>

    but seriously, stuff like this takes ages to trawl through for the few bitsof detail on which its all based


  • Options
    #33
    6th
    Registered Users Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    MC, I dont like having to remove pointless/distracting crap from peoples posts.


  • Options
    #34
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    TheManWho wrote: »
    It's not outside the laws of physics, our comprehension of physics is just primitive in the grand scheme of things. Einstein scrached the surface and now we have about a dozen ideas of faster than light travel, to us they're just idea's, but to extraterrestrials centuarys even thousands of years ahead of us, they might be functional technologies.

    Yes, of course it may be possible to "beat" the laws of physics (as we currently comprehend them). But, the simple fact is, no experiment has ever been carried out that hasn't agreed with a certain law/laws of physics. I've no reason to believe that a certain law shouldn't remain true in all instances (i.e. faster than light travel). Special relativity states explicitly that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light; I've no reason to doubt that claim, and plenty of reasons to believe it.


  • Options
    #35
    gpjordanf1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 867 ✭✭✭gpjordanf1


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    Special relativity states explicitly that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light; I've no reason to doubt that claim, and plenty of reasons to believe it.
    interesting what are these plenty of reason's?


  • Options
    #36
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    gpjordanf1 wrote: »
    interesting what are these plenty of reason's?

    Ok, I'll just state the implications of something travelling very very close/at the speed of light:

    - Photons (the packets which carry light) are massless: they travel at the maximum speed possible. Anything with mass cannot travel as fast. (You should read into Tachyons - they've negative mass and cannot travel slower than the speed of light; they're purely hypothetical, though).
    - The closer a massive object travels to the speed of light, the more massive it becomes. At 99.99% the speed of light, it's 7 times (if I remember correctly) more massive, this increases exponentially. A massive object travelling at the speed of light would have an infinite mass. It would take an infinite amount of energy to propel an infinitely massive object at the speed of light, therefore it's impossible. Also, if it travelled faster than the speed of light, it would have more than an infinite mass - impossible.
    - The closer an object comes to the speed of light, the slower time runs for it relative to another stationary object. At the speed of light, time doesn't run (relatively). Faster than the speed of light, the time would run backwards (relatively).
    - A massive object approaching the speed of light becomes longer in the direction of its travel. At the speed of light it would be infinitely long, faster than the speed of light it would be longer than infinitely long - impossible.

    These are just some of the implications off the top of my head. Nothing with mass can travel at (or faster) than the speed of light: in the typical sense, that is. The only possible way is to alter the fabric of space-time, but, at the moment, that's science fiction.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    gpjordanf1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 867 ✭✭✭gpjordanf1


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    The only possible way is to alter the fabric of space-time, but, at the moment, that's science fiction.
    while i agree with all you've said as i've heard it all before, it is all mostly theory that cant be demonstrated, that's where i lose faith in science. This is the theory and until it's proven otherwise, it's FACT! My point is an advanced civilisation could have already found the technology to travel faster than light.


  • Options
    #38
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    gpjordanf1 wrote: »
    while i agree with all you've said as i've heard it all before, it is all mostly theory that cant be demonstrated, that's where i lose faith in science. This is the theory and until it's proven otherwise, it's FACT! My point is an advanced civilisation could have already found the technology to travel faster than light.

    And even if they did the resources needed to make a a faster than light trip are huge.
    The two main FTL theories (wormholes and warp drive) require energy and matter on a galactic scale to work.
    It's not like Star Trek where you can have thousands of ships zipping around galaxy.


  • Options
    #39
    Ostrom
    Registered Users Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    gpjordanf1 wrote: »
    This is the theory and until it's proven otherwise, it's FACT!

    No, it isnt

    Refer to the section on abstract and concrete objects


  • Options
    #40
    gpjordanf1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 867 ✭✭✭gpjordanf1


    King Mob wrote: »
    And even if they did the resources needed to make a a faster than light trip are huge.
    The two main FTL theories (wormholes and warp drive) require energy and matter on a galactic scale to work.
    It's not like Star Trek where you can have thousands of ships zipping around galaxy.
    Yeah everything is on a galactic scale from our point of view, but even from our perspective in a few hundred year's this might be a simple as commercial flying is now, i mean that was impossible not so long ago. I just dont think everything is impossible.


  • Options
    #41
    gpjordanf1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 867 ✭✭✭gpjordanf1


    efla wrote: »
    No, it isnt

    Refer to the section on abstract and concrete objects
    cant open your link on my mobile phone, sorry.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    gpjordanf1 wrote: »
    while i agree with all you've said as i've heard it all before, it is all mostly theory that cant be demonstrated, that's where i lose faith in science. This is the theory and until it's proven otherwise, it's FACT! My point is an advanced civilisation could have already found the technology to travel faster than light.

    You're wrong. A lot of it can be demonstrated. Some of the implications of special (and general) relatively have been demonstrated.

    I'll give you a few examples.

    - Special relatively's explanation of the failure of the Michelson-Morley experiment and other such experiments to determine the absolute velocity of the Earth can be counted as an indication that it's a correct theory.

    - The relative (i.e. rest mass vrs. relative mass) masses of particles travelling close to the speed of light can be predicted extremely (emphasis on extremely) accurately by special relatively. Particles accelerated in particle accelerators get more massive the faster they travel (their mass can be measured by their deflections in magnetic fields), and the increase in their masses correlates exactly with special relativity's predictions.

    - The measurement of the relation between super-accurate clocks travelling at different speeds correlates perfectly with predictions from special relativity.

    One of the strongest "proofs" for special relatively is its mathematical consistency: it's completely internally mathematically consistent. Therefore, there is no reason to doubt it's implications. Many physical items have been predicated mathematically before they've been proven experimentally (i.e. anti-matter), so don't just assume that internal mathematical consistency counts for nothing.

    Another strong argument for its credibility is the simple fact that nothing, in the last 104 years, has ever been observed to counter its predictions/implications/assumptions.

    I'm not telling you to take it as fact, but don't be so arrogant as to claim that it's "mostly theory that can't be demonstrated", when you're extremely wrong. Certainly, don't let your wrong assumption lead you to lose your "faith in science".


  • Options
    #43
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,226 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    gpjordanf1 wrote: »
    Yeah everything is on a galactic scale from our point of view, but even from our perspective in a few hundred year's this might be a simple as commercial flying is now, i mean that was impossible not so long ago. I just dont think everything is impossible.
    It's on a galactic scale because you need masses on the order of galaxies to make these things work. And most of these masses are of a non existent type of matter.
    It isn't a small feat to do.


  • Options
    #44
    DTrotter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 232 ✭✭DTrotter


    espinolman wrote: »
    As far as i know , there is not going to be a mass alien landing until there is a single world government , so they are aiming for around 2017 , but if there is not a single world government it will not happen , i think things which are happening in the world are being planned around this .
    What do you think would happen if they came now , some countries would probably fight them , but if there is a single world government !

    I represent one of the galactic Overlords, if you want to help pm me and I'll send you my bank account. For a small donation you could be part of a galactic event in 2017 (provided the 2012 thing is bs).


  • Options
    #45
    espinolman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,205 ✭✭✭espinolman


    DTrotter wrote: »
    I represent one of the galactic Overlords, if you want to help pm me and I'll send you my bank account. For a small donation you could be part of a galactic event in 2017 (provided the 2012 thing is bs).

    Depends on who you are representing , is it the Draco Mothmen :

    http://www.greatdreams.com/reptlan/reps.htm


  • Options
    #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    espinolman wrote: »
    Depends on who you are representing , is it the Draco Mothmen :

    http://www.greatdreams.com/reptlan/reps.htm

    That's a joke, right?


  • Options
    #47
    espinolman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,205 ✭✭✭espinolman


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    That's a joke, right?

    No , it's a question .


  • Options
    #48
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    espinolman wrote: »
    No , it's a question .

    What you've linked to is very obviously not real.


  • Options
    #49
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    espinolman wrote: »
    'obviously not real.' in your opinion , why don't you say it is just your opinion , instead of stating this as fact , unless do you have evidence to back up that it is not real .

    It's not my opinion, it's the opinion of common sense.

    The onus is on you to provide the evidence that it is real! The person making the claim provides the evidence. I, nor nobody else, has to provide evidence that it isn't real; you, and people who believe what you believe, do. I could claim any number of an infinite variety of "truths" and use the fact that you can't prove them as untrue as evidence for their truth. But, that isn't correct; that isn't logical.


  • Options
    #50
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It's really "refreshing" when somebody nit-picks a post for a meaningless point that they can argue against, and then completely ignores the main points of your post. I've only posted a few times in this forum, and it seems to have happened over 2/3's of the time.


  • Options
    #51
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    espinolman wrote: »
    Oh ' it's the opinion of common sense' in other words a belief !


    If you're going to continue this line, then I'd like you to ensure that all comments you offer which cannot be proven as indisputable fact (or which you are not willing to so prove) be clearly stated as being your opinion.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    PirateShampoo
    Registered Users Posts: 4,406 ✭✭✭PirateShampoo


    Espinolman do you honestly believe in any of the nonsense that your posting?


  • Options
    #53
    espinolman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,205 ✭✭✭espinolman


    PirateShampoo wrote: »
    Espinolman do you honestly believe in any of the nonsense that your posting?

    Yes and i do want to know what other posters think .


  • Options
    #54
    espinolman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,205 ✭✭✭espinolman


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    It's really "refreshing" when somebody nit-picks a post for a meaningless point that they can argue against, and then completely ignores the main points of your post. I've only posted a few times in this forum, and it seems to have happened over 2/3's of the time.

    OK i deleted my posts , and i am very interested in what you have to say , but i cannot always provide evidence for what i am posting , i do want to know what people think about this , thanks for all the posts here and to all who have posted here .


  • Options
    #55
    espinolman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,205 ✭✭✭espinolman


    PirateShampoo wrote: »
    Espinolman do you honestly believe in any of the nonsense that your posting?

    I don't believe what i am posting is nonsence at all , i mean people have seen Mothmen and Reptilians , it appears to be true :

    http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/et013.html

    Here i have always found this very good it is a description of different alien races :

    http://www.burlingtonnews.net/secretsufo


  • Options
    #56
    6th
    Registered Users Posts: 17,247 ✭✭✭✭6th


    DTrotter wrote: »
    I represent one of the galactic Overlords, if you want to help pm me and I'll send you my bank account. For a small donation you could be part of a galactic event in 2017 (provided the 2012 thing is bs).

    You've had 3 infractions and 2 bans in the last month. Thats not a good sign. Heres another infraction and a month long ban.


  • Options
    #57
    nyarlothothep
    Registered Users Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    espinolman wrote: »
    I don't believe what i am posting is nonsence at all , i mean people have seen Mothmen and Reptilians , it appears to be true :

    http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/et013.html

    Here i have always found this very good it is a description of different alien races :

    http://www.burlingtonnews.net/secretsufo

    I remember hearing that reptiles can evolve any great intelligence equivalent to our own as they're cold blooded.
    Alleged Reptilian inhabitants of the Altair stellar system in the constellation Aquila, in collaboration with a smaller Nordic human element and a collaborative Grey and Terran military presence. Headquarters of a collective known as the "Corporate", which maintains ties with the Ashtar and Draconian collectives (Draconian)

    This bears a striking similarity to the Sheliak who appeared in TNG. They're leaders were also known as the corporate.


  • Options
    #58
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    nyarlothothep wrote: »
    I remember hearing that reptiles can evolve any great intelligence equivalent to our own as they're cold blooded.

    I'm sorry, but that just doesn't make any logical sense at all. It makes such little logical sense that it's actually ridiculous.

    It's similar to saying:

    "I've read that trees can evolve to grow very large because they're green".


  • Options
    #59
    Ostrom
    Registered Users Posts: 3,483 ✭✭✭Ostrom


    nyarlothothep wrote: »
    I remember hearing that reptiles can evolve any great intelligence equivalent to our own as they're cold blooded.



    This bears a striking similarity to the Sheliak who appeared in TNG. They're leaders were also known as the corporate.

    I'm lost for words.

    Also, that latter story is from star trek.


  • Options
    #60
    nyarlothothep
    Registered Users Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    I'm sorry, but that just doesn't make any logical sense at all. It makes such little logical sense that it's actually ridiculous.

    It's similar to saying:

    "I've read that trees can evolve to grow very large because they're green".

    jeez I just remember having a conversation 3 years ago about reptiles and there was some sort of reason for it to do with being cold blooded. My intention was to invite any evidence contrary to or in support of this idea.

    efla wrote:
    Also, that latter story is from star trek.

    I think we've established that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    nyarlothothep wrote: »
    jeez I just remember having a conversation 3 years ago about reptiles and there was some sort of reason for it to do with being cold blooded.

    I'd love to see some scientific citations for that claim.

    It's amazing, I've been posting in this forum for the last two or so days and the sheer amount of wrong scientific information is staggering, especially concerning celestial mechanics. It's no wonder many of you believe in what you do (I'm just talking about the extreme conspiracy theories I've seen, not all of them) when you don't understand certain areas of scientific fields.


Advertisement