Churchill ordered UFO cover-up

humanji

Again, that's nothing to do with Occam's Razor.

charlemont

any one with a decent knowledge of pre christian irish mythology will see the similarities between the ufo/ alien stories of today... im not going into detail about this because its so obvious to anyone with half a brain ...

humanji

Then why bother posting?

maninasia

Your opinion, Occam's razor depends on which accepted truth is thought of as the likeliest. Now we see the likiehood of what type of alien life exists being subtly shifted by scientists, Occam's razor conclusions will change.
Basically Occam's razor has no place in this debate and should be kicked into the dustbin.

humanji

Occam's Razor is a deductive method of guessing. It is not, I repeat NOT a valid scientific method of defining fact. Nobody has claimed it was. And that clip is about what alien life could be like. It's nothing definite, just a guys opinion. That's all it is.

maninasia

Exactly, just like Occam's razor , opinion and guesswork.

Anyway, the reason why I posted that guy's 'opinion' is that anybody with common sense would have foreseen that advanced civilisations are likely to be very different from our present state of technology and evolution, but that his public annoucement of suggesting other life-forms somehow makes the news.

Ash.J.Williams

Judging by the diagram in the op:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_%28game%29

Mystery solved.

DustyMan

Complex Life Elsewhere in the Universe?
'I think this is an occasion where that old principal of good science, Occam's Razor, is helpful. Apply Occam's Razor to the question of the origin of life on Earth. We look at the Earth, and with regards to that origin, as best we know, no special or freak circumstances were required. It took water, organics, a source of energy, and a long time. Deep-sea vents are the current favorite and a reasonable place for the origin. But even if they weren't the culprits, the chemists have found a multitude of other pathways that produce the chemistry of life. The challenge seems to be not to find THE pathway, but the one that was the quickest and most productive. The prime point is that nothing special was required. There will be a pathway that works, on Earth and on similar planets. Then, by Occam's Razor, the origin of life on Earth is nothing more than the result of normal processes on the planet. Furthermore, life should appear very frequently on other Earth-like planets. There will be microbial life nearby the solar system.'
Frank Drake of 'The Drake Equation'.

DustyMan

And just to open another can of worms!

Fermi Paradox - Where Are They?

Enrico Fermi pondered extraterrestrial life
He thought it would take about 10,000,000 years to colonize the Milky Way
We haven't seen them - Why? - This is the Paradox of Fermi
1.Perhaps civilizations are content to stay at home
2.Perhaps it takes longer
3.Perhaps it has happened but we are not aware of it.

RoboClam

DustyMan wrote: »

Complex Life Elsewhere in the Universe?
'I think this is an occasion where that old principal of good science, Occam's Razor, is helpful. Apply Occam's Razor to the question of the origin of life on Earth. We look at the Earth, and with regards to that origin, as best we know, no special or freak circumstances were required. It took water, organics, a source of energy, and a long time. Deep-sea vents are the current favorite and a reasonable place for the origin. But even if they weren't the culprits, the chemists have found a multitude of other pathways that produce the chemistry of life. The challenge seems to be not to find THE pathway, but the one that was the quickest and most productive. The prime point is that nothing special was required. There will be a pathway that works, on Earth and on similar planets. Then, by Occam's Razor, the origin of life on Earth is nothing more than the result of normal processes on the planet. Furthermore, life should appear very frequently on other Earth-like planets. There will be microbial life nearby the solar system.'
Frank Drake of 'The Drake Equation'.

To continue this point, look what was discovered recently here.

Life may not be as rare as we think. Well, single celled organisms at least. I don't doubt that somewhere in the universe there is intelligent life. The universe is so big that it's only a matter of time. But distance is the main problem. The nearest Earth like planets that we know of are 100s of millions of light years away. I just cannot believe that there are aliens here, simply due to the impracticality of traveling to this planet. I'd love to be wrong on this of course.

maninasia

DustyMan wrote: »

Complex Life Elsewhere in the Universe?
'I think this is an occasion where that old principal of good science, Occam's Razor, is helpful. Apply Occam's Razor to the question of the origin of life on Earth. We look at the Earth, and with regards to that origin, as best we know, no special or freak circumstances were required. It took water, organics, a source of energy, and a long time. Deep-sea vents are the current favorite and a reasonable place for the origin. But even if they weren't the culprits, the chemists have found a multitude of other pathways that produce the chemistry of life. The challenge seems to be not to find THE pathway, but the one that was the quickest and most productive. The prime point is that nothing special was required. There will be a pathway that works, on Earth and on similar planets. Then, by Occam's Razor, the origin of life on Earth is nothing more than the result of normal processes on the planet. Furthermore, life should appear very frequently on other Earth-like planets. There will be microbial life nearby the solar system.'
Frank Drake of 'The Drake Equation'.

Is this a wind-up?
Anyway it just illustrates that the concept of 'Occam's Razor' can be applied anyway you wish according to their personal preferences. I don't see where it take's its place here though because we just don't know enough even about the principles of life formation. We certainly DO NOT know if life took a long time or not to appear on Earth, in fact it seems to have started on Earth very soon after the crust formed and it could well have formed off Earth and been brought here by Panspermia.

I agree with the conclusions he reaches though.

maninasia

RoboClam wrote: »

To continue this point, look what was discovered recently here.

Life may not be as rare as we think. Well, single celled organisms at least. I don't doubt that somewhere in the universe there is intelligent life. The universe is so big that it's only a matter of time. But distance is the main problem. The nearest Earth like planets that we know of are 100s of millions of light years away. I just cannot believe that there are aliens here, simply due to the impracticality of traveling to this planet. I'd love to be wrong on this of course.

I answer this old hedgehog again and again on Boards. Distance is NOT an issue. Why?

- Universe is 14 billion years old
- The Milky Way Galaxy is 100,000 light years across
- Contains 2 x 10*12 planets or so
- Travel across Milky Way at half speed of light would take 200,000 years
- Robotic entities are probably more common than biological in space
- Robotic entities are immortal and can replicate in vast numbers
- Any civilisation travelling through the galaxy could replicate and split off to new areas as it travelled, giving us a rough estimate of 1 million years to cover the entire galaxy at speeds much less than the speed of light
- 1 million years is less than .00017% the time of the universes existence or put in terms of an 80 year olds man's life about 5 days

So tell me why is distance a problem for intelligent entities to get around? The numbers tell us it is almost a 100% certainty that intelligent entities are ALREADY all over the galaxy...given the high likeliehood there are at least 100s -1000s of intelligent civilisations developing in the Milky Way over the billions of years preceding our development. To argue that there are not intelligent entities in our zone of space would mean that the physics/chemistry of our region is somehow special compared to everywhere else...I don't think so..even if it is special to be a 1 in a million solar system that still leaves possibly TWO MILLION solar systems developing intelligent life JUST in the Milky Way Galaxy!

BTW, all the above don't include modern theories such as multiverse, extra dimensions, possible faster than light travel, wormholes etc.

RoboClam

maninasia wrote: »

I answer this old hedgehog again and again on Boards. Distance is NOT an issue. Why?

- Universe is 14 billion years old
- The Milky Way Galaxy is 100,000 light years across
- Contains 2 x 10*12 planets or so
- Travel across Milky Way at half speed of light would take 200,000 years

You say the milky way is 100,000 light years across which is true. But you do not mention that the volume of the milky way is ~3.3 × 10^61 m³ or 39 million million cubic light years. This is obviously, huge. Any civilization could not hope to make a dent in this. The energy requirements for travel at half the speed of light would be insane, but assuming that it's possible then in 200,000 years all that would be accomplished would be traveling the diameter of the galaxy.

- Robotic entities are probably more common than biological in space
- Robotic entities are immortal and can replicate in vast numbers

This is just an baseless assumption really, especially the bolded bit.

- Any civilisation travelling through the galaxy could replicate and split off to new areas as it travelled, giving us a rough estimate of 1 million years to cover the entire galaxy at speeds much less than the speed of light

I think you might need to rethink your maths on this one based on the volume of the galaxy I posted above. Also would one civilization last for a million years? How would their colonies communicate? Would each colonised planet have to rebuild its civilization on the new planet, only to make new ships to colonise other planets? Doesn't really sound like the best course of action for a highly advanced race.

So tell me why is distance a problem for intelligent entities to get around? The numbers tell us it is almost a 100% certainty that intelligent entities are ALREADY all over the galaxy...given the high likeliehood there are at least 100s -1000s of intelligent civilisations developing in the Milky Way over the billions of years preceding our development.

We have been evolving for ~4 billion of years to get to the point we're at now. Only recently have we attained knowledge which allows us to even comprehend space. We still are not even close to figuring out interstellar travel. Based on what we know, it would be fair to assume the same for any intelligent life. So civilization as we know is only a small blip on our planets history. If there are other planets which can support intelligent life, who's to say that it does support it now? Your argument is based on the idea that civilizations do not die out and that once they form, they will exist forever.

An advanced civilization probably has a limited window of opportunity in which to actually meet another advanced civilization.

To argue that there are not intelligent entities in our zone of space would mean that the physics/chemistry of our region is somehow special compared to everywhere else...I don't think so..even if it is special to be a 1 in a million solar system that still leaves possibly TWO MILLION solar systems developing intelligent life JUST in the Milky Way Galaxy!

You say "just" inside the Milky Way Galaxy as if it's a small place. Assuming your 2 million number, how many of these planets would form multicellular organisms? How many would form intelligent life? How many would be able to make it to the level we're at? And finally, how many would be able to break the laws of physics as we know them and be able to travel at high speeds to other planets?

BTW, all the above don't include modern theories such as multiverse, extra dimensions, possible faster than light travel, wormholes etc.

All of which are interesting, but hypothetical.

DustyMan

maninasia wrote: »

Is this a wind-up?
Anyway it just illustrates that the concept of 'Occam's Razor' can be applied anyway you wish according to their personal preferences. I don't see where it take's its place here though because we just don't know enough even about the principles of life formation. We certainly DO NOT know if life took a long time or not to appear on Earth, in fact it seems to have started on Earth very soon after the crust formed and it could well have formed off Earth and been brought here by Panspermia.

I agree with the conclusions he reaches though.

No! Not a wind up. Why would you think that? I'ts of intrest in the context of the discussion here.
p.s I'm sure Mr. Drake would be glad you agree with his conclusions!

maninasia

Wow Roboclam did you not read anything I wrote instead of reflexively trying to deny the basic logic. There's a few misconceptions that cropped up in your post.

It would NOT require massive energy to reach half the speed of light, it would just require a high % of the mass of the ship to be dedicated to propellant (although I don't pretend to be expert on the physics). Acceleration can be relatively gradual, something you don't seem to understand.

The robotic entities would be essentially immortal...of course, there is nothing baseless about it! They could have the capacity to download themselves into new machinery at will. Get your head around that yet? In fact this capacity will probably emerge in our own lifetimes. The robotic entities could well have originally have been biological.

The real explorer probes would replicate in millions/billions in each star system for moving onto the next system in each direction in an every increasing bubble outwards. So volume as you say is not an issue, only diameter. They will evolve as they spread outward so the ultimate effects of their exploration in different areas are unknown. This is one scenario.

A very likely alternative scenario is that intelligent (and non-intelligent such as bacteria) life forms spread through the universe NOT as part of a civilisation but simply in the search for new territories and resources, it only happens that these life forms have the capability to travel through space. The idea that 'planets' and 'space' are somehow separated is simply a technological limitation of our time. It only takes ONE life form to gain ability to travel through space...as it spreads into different territories it will diverge and evolve to take advantage of the local resources, exactly the same thing happens on Earth, speciation is driven by time and isolation. ALL LIFE ON EARTH IS THOUGHT TO HAVE EVOLVED FROM ONE CELL.


Again you state that the 'Milky Way is huge'. This is according to YOU. Your anthropomorphic way of thinking. Take YOU out of the equation the galaxy is not small/big, it just depends on technological capabilities and lifespans, exactly the same difference in perception as the Atlantic appeared to early Viking explores and now appears to us as we jet across to New York for a shopping trip. Please remove YOUR position in your view and let all the possibilities be entertained equally.

maninasia

DustyMan wrote: »

No! Not a wind up. Why would you think that? I'ts of intrest in the context of the discussion here.
p.s I'm sure Mr. Drake would be glad you agree with his conclusions!

You can read my comments about Occam's razor earlier..it seems everybody who like to join UFO/Alien threads likes to start out with this too...'according to Occam's razor....' even famous scientists such as Drake.

RoboClam

maninasia wrote: »

Wow Roboclam did you not read anything I wrote instead of reflexively trying to deny the basic logic. There's a few misconceptions that cropped up in your post.

It would NOT require massive energy to reach half the speed of light, it would just require a high % of the mass of the ship to be dedicated to propellant (although I don't pretend to be expert on the physics). Acceleration can be relatively gradual, something you don't seem to understand.

The robotic entities would be essentially immortal...of course, there is nothing baseless about it! They could have the capacity to download themselves into new machinery at will. Get your head around that yet? In fact this capacity will probably emerge in our own lifetimes. The robotic entities could well have originally have been biological.

The real explorer probes would replicate in millions/billions in each star system for moving onto the next system in each direction in an every increasing bubble outwards. So volume as you say is not an issue, only diameter. They will evolve as they spread outward so the ultimate effects of their exploration in different areas are unknown. This is one scenario.

A very likely alternative scenario is that intelligent (and non-intelligent such as bacteria) life forms spread through the universe NOT as part of a civilisation but simply in the search for new territories and resources, it only happens that these life forms have the capability to travel through space. The idea that 'planets' and 'space' are somehow separated is simply a technological limitation of our time. It only takes ONE life form to gain ability to travel through space...as it spreads into different territories it will diverge and evolve to take advantage of the local resources, exactly the same thing happens on Earth, speciation is driven by time and isolation. ALL LIFE ON EARTH IS THOUGHT TO HAVE EVOLVED FROM ONE CELL.


Again you state that the 'Milky Way is huge'. This is according to YOU. Your anthropomorphic way of thinking. Take YOU out of the equation the galaxy is not small/big, it just depends on technological capabilities and lifespans, exactly the same difference in perception as the Atlantic appeared to early Viking explores and now appears to us as we jet across to New York for a shopping trip. Please remove YOUR position in your view and let all the possibilities be entertained equally.

You're totally focused on these "robotic entities". Yeah, I saw that episode of Stargate too and they were pretty cool. Your entire argument is based off the fact that such entities are possible. You make out that half the speed of light is trivial, but it really isn't. A quick google tells me that "Accelerating one ton to one-tenth of the speed of light requires at least 450 PJ or 4.5 × 1017 J or 125 billion kWh" which is huge (and no, not just huge to me). How would something which I assume is quite small carry the fuel necessary for travel at such speeds? How would they simply replicate on other planets which only contain unprocessed ore embedded in rock? Is there anything these robots can't do? Why haven't we seen any evidence of them yet? By your logic they should already have taken over this planet at some stage in the past.

Your entire post, while a nice fantasy, is simply science fiction.

maninasia

Sure it's science fiction backed by a lot of science fact, unlike your unimaginative and repetitive pronoucements, still thinking the galaxy is huge, because it is, to you, that's clever

You like to disparage me as picking ideas up from Stargate, but these ideas have been around for at least 100 years, before the modern IT era.

I am also not totally focused on 'robotic entities', if anything bacteria should also be common through the galaxy. But intelligent machines would have the brainpower and technology to spread much quicker in a direct way, as they could adapt their machines to the resources of the host system (unlike a biological organism which does not have the power to do this and has a programmed life span and a total dependency on the environment which it evolved in).

Anybody with half a brain can see the exponential acceleration in IT capabilities, mind reading instruments are already being developed, bionic parts, parallel procession chips doubling in power every couple of years, UAV taking over combat operations, everything networked and going wireless, quantum computers just over the horizon. It's VERY clear what is happening already. This is in the period of 50 years, a literal microsecond in evolution..the whole process is accelerating now.

Why we cannot see already...maybe they are here we just can't detect them or else they are hiding as I said previously. It makes MORE sense to think that life has already spread through the galaxy than not, and I have given the basic reasoning already not least the age of the Universe and the time when life started on Earth along with the recent rapid technological developments of humans, 3 solid facts which you cannot refute.

TalkieWalkie

RoboClam wrote: »

Is there anything these robots can't do? Why haven't we seen any evidence of them yet? By your logic they should already have taken over this planet at some stage in the past.

Your entire post, while a nice fantasy, is simply science fiction.

Were only finding out that Churchill ordered a cover-up of UFO's for 50 years; now.

Surprise !!!, in 50 years time we'll find out about other sh!t they are covering up today.

Is that an impossibility ?

Is it ? !!!!

TalkieWalkie

DustyMan

maninasia wrote: »

You can read my comments about Occam's razor earlier..it seems everybody who like to join UFO/Alien threads likes to start out with this too...'according to Occam's razor....' even famous scientists such as Drake.

I did. Drake makes much more sense. I'm sure Drake was asked for his considered opinion on the matter (re Occam's razor and its application to the question of life outside our Planet) at some time and replied accordingly.
By the way, I did'nt join this thread and start off with 'according to Occam's razor...'. I have to say however I've been enjoying your debate with RoboClam! Very intresting.

RoboClam

DustyMan wrote: »

I did. Drake makes much more sense. I'm sure Drake was asked for his considered opinion on the matter (re Occam's razor and its application to the question of life outside our Planet) at some time and replied accordingly.
By the way, I did'nt join this thread and start off with 'according to Occam's razor...'. I have to say however I've been enjoying your debate with RoboClam! Very intresting.

I think it's interesting too. And I will have a proper reply to the last post later on tomorrow when I have time.

But before I do, I want to say that maninasia, I don't wish any hostility towards you. You seem to have come on the offensive in this discussion. I think it's an interesting thought exercise to discuss the possibility of other life, but I really don't see an argument benefiting either of us. I was probably a bit harsh in comparing your ideas to Stargate.We're just discussing the possibilities of what could happen. We obviously have no evidence of how advanced civilizations could propagate.

Everything that has been mentioned has nothing to do with the CT forum really and I would prefer to either take it to PM or continue the discussion in a more suited forum. BUT if it fits and the mods allow it, then I would happily continue. Anyway, I don't like arguing about something which I'm not sure about, but I would have no problem discussing the logistics of space travel and propagation of lifeforms through space.

maninasia

DustyMan wrote: »

And just to open another can of worms!

Fermi Paradox - Where Are They?

Enrico Fermi pondered extraterrestrial life
He thought it would take about 10,000,000 years to colonize the Milky Way
We haven't seen them - Why? - This is the Paradox of Fermi
1.Perhaps civilizations are content to stay at home
2.Perhaps it takes longer
3.Perhaps it has happened but we are not aware of it.

Where are they indeed? Now they could well be in the next solar system having a grand old time but our telescopes cannot even resolve that far yet.

Where was America but hiding in plain site for 1000s of years from the rest of the 'civilised world', and Europe vice versa to the Mayans and Inca. Even though the Vikings discovered America among others nobody really bothered to follow up for 100s of years until long distance seafaring really took off.

There could even be life on satellites and planets in our own solar system that we haven't detected yet, very possible.

We could be the aliens, why not? All life on Earth is currently descendant from one cell. Why didn't life evolve multiple times or life have multiple ancestors? Does that mean life came from elsewhere, not neccessarily but it's certainly possible.

Also they could be hiding or we cannot perceive them as life forms or refuse to accept their reality even though they are in plain site (UFOs?).

Finally life indeed could be rare and hard to travel around the galaxy, but it doesn't make much sense compared to what we predict should happen.

The question certaily remains that life on Earth doesn't seem to have been interfered with in an obviously technological way (that we would recognise like buildings and relics in ancient rocks, strange chemical signatures or pockets of elements that are outside of the Periodic Table) during our evolution, at least we haven't noticed anything yet.

maninasia

I think nanotechnology, the ability to manipulate things atom by atom, may play a part in the ability of small probes to multiply rapidly in most environments.

One could think instead of a massive mining operations, some probes could dig into the planet looking for the metals and elements essential to their replication. Another scheme is to build a fusion reactor (or transport a fusion reactor with you) and create the elements that you need on site.

Also intelligent entities may be tiny and be propelled across space in vast numbers by solar winds..they could take the 'instructions' for assembling the next generations with them...and build up the capacity to create more advanced machinery, generation by generation, after they arrive in suitable areas. Kind of sounds like the idea of panspermia on Earth right, bacteria first and then moving on to multicellular organisms becoming intelligent. It took 3-4 billion years on Earth throught the random vagaries of evolution to get to us, but with intelligence guiding the operation in a planned and directed way maybe it could happen in 100 years?

This is all speculative of course. As for the energy requirements for travel at half the speed of light, looking into that now.

DustyMan

How easy would it be to detect life on Earth from distant worlds?

Mass of the Earth = 6x1027 grams Mass of the atmosphere = 5x1021 grams Biological material on surface of Earth = few x 1017 grams THEREFORE Life = 0.01% of the atmosphere

(10-10 of the Earth)

"Biological Rust"

• very small effect
  Ref: Shklovskii and Sagan - page 248

maninasia

Anything written by Sagan will be at least 20 years old now. It's not the quantity of biological material only but the unique signature that it would produce, certain organic chemicals are a strong signal of life, some gases are removed from the atmosphere if not continually replenished.

DustyMan

I see Paddy Power have slashed the odds on finding ET in the next decade from 33/1 down to 10/1. In 2001 the odds were 100/1.
But you know what? I kinda hope we're the only intelligent life in the Universe!

DustyMan

maninasia wrote: »

Anything written by Sagan will be at least 20 years old now. It's not the quantity of biological material only but the unique signature that it would produce, certain organic chemicals are a strong signal of life, some gases are removed from the atmosphere if not continually replenished.

Carl Sagan died in 1996. May he rest in peace.
In my reference of Sagan, he reflects on the hypothesis on the likehood of ET finding/detecting EARTH i.e Earth's unique biological 'signature' in the Cosmos. It goes without saying that this 'signature' has constantly changed over the millenia.
Sagan was adwarded countless honours and include but are not limited to lecturing/researching at Harvard and having full Professor status at Cornell. To list all his educational and scientifice achivements and awards would require many many pages here. He pioneered exobiology and for his work in this field he was awarded Nasa Medals for Exceptional Scientific Achivement. His awards and achivements are pratically unsurpassed in Science and critical thinking.
In short? Not a man to easlily challenged and or contradicted. His work and achievment speaks for itself.

maninasia

I'm not contradicing him, but science has probably moved 20 years ahead since his time, in modern astronomy and biology that is a long time. At that time the ubiquity of bacteria and their living environments wasn't really understood, that is a very importat point to take into account.

akkadian

They've been coming here for a very very long time.