Thread: Aliens created us!

Originally Posted by Xei

At Patrick; the point is this: you can claim virtually anything is possible and nobody can prove you wrong. But if there is absolutely no evidence for it then discussing it is as pointless as discussing why the flying spaghetti monster gave us ten toes. If there is no evidence for something then you must accept that it does not exist. That is the scientific method.

I completely understand; I myself am a scientist in my first year of Neuroscience at university, but why say something doesn't exist when it's still possible, just because we lack evidence? The evidence just may not be apparent.

Bluefinger; I mean evidence like, a method of travelling through space faster than the speed of light (i.e. entanglement). If we discover things like that, the likelihood of alien contact (although still unlikely) increases.

Originally Posted by Pensive Patrick

Bluefinger; I mean evidence like, a method of travelling through space faster than the speed of light (i.e. entanglement). If we discover things like that, the likelihood of alien contact (although still unlikely) increases.

First of all, entanglement has a finite speed, but as one of my friends who does physics at university explained, quantum entanglement is a very fragile state between two particles. It can't really be used for communication, as mere observations are enough to disturb and destroy the entangled state. Also, it can't be used for propulsion, so immediately it is pointless to speculate that entanglement would allow for faster-than-light travel.

Read up on general relativity before thinking about how to go faster than light. Understand the physical implications of just trying to accelerate a kilogram weight to near C speeds (99%). When you approach relativistic speeds, it becomes increasingly difficult to accelerate an object further. You require more and more energy in just to maintain a constant rate of acceleration, not just a steady rate of energy.

So please do your research in what we currently know about these things before speculating. It really helps to make better, more coherent arguments.

Wormholes, time travel? Bending the fabric of space and time. Perhaps there are advanced species who have mastered this..

Off topic, but, does anyone know when CERN is going to turn on and make particles collide?

Originally Posted by Wattage

Wormholes, time travel? Bending the fabric of space and time. Perhaps there are advanced species who have mastered this..

Oh dear again. Wormholes are at the moment only hypothetical features of spacetime, and not only have they yet to be observed, but whether it is even feasible to travel through them is disputed. Also, the issue of time travel is very hot ground, due to all the implications that time travel would incur.

Also, for a species to become THAT advanced would be very few and far between, maybe not even in this galaxy. If there isn't such a civilisation in OUR galaxy, the chances of them ever detecting us (let alone travelling here) would be extremely improbable. Also, such travelling methods would still require a lot of resources and energy to achieve, so they wouldn't come here just for a few shit's and giggles.

Bluefinger, thanks, I understand the science. I really do. The thing is, our knowledge is not infinite. There are things we don't know. We may be wrong in some aspects of our knowledge. You must accept that, at least! Therefore, there may be some knowledge we lack that, if known, would increase the probability of alien contact.

Originally Posted by Pensive Patrick

Bluefinger, thanks, I understand the science. I really do. The thing is, our knowledge is not infinite. There are things we don't know. We may be wrong in some aspects of our knowledge. You must accept that, at least! Therefore, there may be some knowledge we lack that, if known, would increase the probability of alien contact.

Lack of evidence doesn't increase the probability of an already improbable proposition. Also, if we found aspects of our knowledge to be wrong, I think I'll let the scientific community correct what needs to be corrected rather than jump to the "Aliens did it" side of things. For something to be proven wrong, it has to be shown to be wrong through a solid hypothesis that meets the burden of proof with plenty of observational and experimental data, and also be consistent with all the other areas of science that the hypothesis relates to. Hell, if something makes it through peer-review, but fails to show conclusive results by third-parties and doesn't fit in with other related publications and research, it will eventually be disregarded anyway. The Scientific Method is a self-correcting system.

By the criteria I have set out, I can't accept the assumptions made here about Aliens doing whatever. Going for the gaps in knowledge is not a valid argument, as that can be used for justifying anything.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dGYx_U16Cjk

Watch that it gives a bigger insight into this theory

Originally Posted by bluefinger

By the criteria I have set out, I can't accept the assumptions made here about Aliens doing whatever. Going for the gaps in knowledge is not a valid argument, as that can be used for justifying anything.

No no no, I'm not using the gaps in knowledge argument to justify alien contact. I'm using it to justify a slightly increased probability of alien contact. And the probability doesn't increase until the gap in knowledge becomes apparant by us learning that knowledge.