tisjusme Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 How can the good Lord upstairs create an abundance of stars on the horizon and then some for us just to look at? Usually numerous planets in orbit within a solar system. Billions of stars in each Galaxy and at least Trillions upon Trillions of Galaxy's out there that we can't and won't possibly see in 10 Million years as Humans. Why would God create all these different planets with the only signs of life being on just Earth? If you don't beleive in devine creation then how is it possible that Humans are so sucsessfull at life and no other simillar life exists. I have personally seen three lights on the horizon near Geelong Vic, Australia that I can only describe as U.F.O's. I could explain a lot more although I needn't as I am simply stating that I fully beleive in Extra Terestrial Intelligent Life Forms existing. Somebody please explain the Pyramids, Centuries of U.F.O sightings, The Rosewall Crash (just naming the infamous) and all sorts of Questionable and Argumentative topics and we will have the answer to the Topic of E.T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oma Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 I consider the origin of life to be a freak chemical reaction - so in a huge, well, infinite universe it's likely to happen more than once. So my anwer is : yes there is life in the universe, and yes we are alone due to the distances. Two thoughts annoy me: DNA and law. DNA: What if the structure of DNA/RNA is a chemically obvious way of combining molecules? I know that lipids (fats) naturally assembles into sheets or walls on a vacuole = cell-wall. This could mean that we would have something in common with 'visitors' - DNA for genes. And therefore probably also virus. Wheter or not they would be carrying some such with them I don't know - We have lot of retroviruses in our DNA (In the junk DNA - not to worry, they are all thought to be deactivated). Law: There is no law regarding aliens - if one just landed here in Denmark they would actually fall under 'Dyreværns Loven' which here is a law on how to treat animals. This means that abiding by the law we would have to lock them up in a zoo....and only vets are allowed to perform surgery on them. Am I the only one who thinks we might need just a little more legislation on this ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcant Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 Law: There is no law regarding aliens - if one just landed here in Denmark they would actually fall under 'Dyreværns Loven' which here is a law on how to treat animals. This means that abiding by the law we would have to lock them up in a zoo....and only vets are allowed to perform surgery on them. Am I the only one who thinks we might need just a little more legislation on this ??? There's a short story like that, cant remember who wrote it, they had to redefine the laws on murder after the local pest control exterminator killed the first alien who landed lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oma Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 Law: There is no law regarding aliens - if one just landed here in Denmark they would actually fall under 'Dyreværns Loven' which here is a law on how to treat animals. This means that abiding by the law we would have to lock them up in a zoo....and only vets are allowed to perform surgery on them. Am I the only one who thinks we might need just a little more legislation on this ??? There's a short story like that, cant remember who wrote it, they had to redefine the laws on murder after the local pest control exterminator killed the first alien who landed lol HA! LOL! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 The Universe is large enough to be considered infinite, therefore there is an infinite number of stars and planets. Only a finite number of these is inhabited. Any finite number divided by infinity is a near to 0 as makes no difference so the number of inhabited worlds = 0 so universal population also = 0 therefore any people you meet from time to time are mearly the figment of a deranged imagination. SR B) If we allow you to assume an infinite number of stars, why should we also allow you to asert only a finite number of inhabited planets? Your second mistake was to divide the number of inhabited planets by the number of stars and assume that the number of inhabited worlds was therefore 0. Actually, if we grant you a finite number of inhabited planets and an infinite number of stars, this calculation only tells us that the AVERAGE population density of the universe is 0. Thus, any people you meet stand the same chances of being real as you do ... B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 How can the good Lord upstairs create an abundance of stars on the horizon and then some for us just to look at? If you're going to bring God into it, then He/She could have created them just for the pleasure of enjoying us gazing at them and speculating about whether or not others exist. I'm not sure how this is any less plausible that divine creation demands other creatures. Either outcome could be a part of the divine plan - one that we haven't had explained to us yet. (Or we have, depending on whose sacred writings and prophecies you believe in.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonHelton Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 This could mean that we would have something in common with 'visitors' - DNA for genes. And therefore probably also virus. Wheter or not they would be carrying some such with them I don't know - We have lot of retroviruses in our DNA (In the junk DNA - not to worry' date=' they are all [i']thought[/i] to be deactivated). "If it bleeds, we can kill it." - Arnold Schwartsenegger ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 This could mean that we would have something in common with 'visitors' - DNA for genes. And therefore probably also virus. Wheter or not they would be carrying some such with them I don't know - We have lot of retroviruses in our DNA (In the junk DNA - not to worry' date=' they are all [i']thought[/i] to be deactivated). "If it bleeds, we can kill it." - Arnold Schwartsenegger California's most recent disaster ... but he hasn't killed us off yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vystral Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 Arnold Schwarzeneggar...what a piece of work. I know if I was a politician, I'd call my opponents girly men too. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulreaper Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Hm but what if it wasn't an "accident" that the chemichals and all that made up what later became "US"..thought of that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oma Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 This could mean that we would have something in common with 'visitors' - DNA for genes. And therefore probably also virus. Wheter or not they would be carrying some such with them I don't know - We have lot of retroviruses in our DNA (In the junk DNA - not to worry' date=' they are all [i']thought[/i] to be deactivated). "If it bleeds, we can kill it." - Arnold Schwartsenegger ;) Ha ha :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Hm but what if it wasn't an "accident" that the chemichals and all that made up what later became "US"..thought of that? That opens up an entire series of possibilities, doesn't it? A few include being some "higher-being's" science fair project, the existence of God(dess), design/intelligence being a basic part of the universe, much like gravity, the All Possible Worlds theory ... And that was just between bites of pizza. Somebody else jump on the soapbox and expound, please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDawgAMD Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Hm but what if it wasn't an "accident" that the chemichals and all that made up what later became "US"..thought of that? Then that would be the progenitor theory wouldnt it? Or did i miss your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smackemback Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 all kidding and fantasy aside. do you' date=' in your heart of hearts, believe mankind is alone in the universe?[/quote'] No chance how can anyone think that after looking up at the night sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingkong2 Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Hi In case nobody knew warp speed is possible in theory, this with all the corresponding formulas were developed by the Spanish quantum physicist Miguel Alcubierre at the Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Wales. Remember our greats threat is our inability too look with out seing. "For some years I have been afflicted with the belief that flight is possible to man. My disease has increased in severity and I feel that it will cost me an increased amount of money if not my life." -- Wilbur Wright, 1900. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 ......And I would remind you that 1937 Germany was considered quite sane for the time period. :stare: Yeah but by 1941 the whole world knew it was not. :stare: Yes they did, but not for the reason we all know now and the one I guess you are implying. Untill late 1941 I believe the US was still trying NOT to go to war with Germany. And the only reason they did was because their countrymen were also attacked by the subs. It wasn't untill late 1944 that the world discovered the horror the nazi's had caused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonHelton Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Can you post a link or something else to verify what you claim? No offence' date=' but I find it hard to believe.[/quote'] Although not yet issued, UK scientists Andrew Worsley and Peter Twist have applied for their patent on specifications for warp drive technology based on the theoretical underpinnings of both general relativity and string theory. (U.S. Pub. No. 2003–0114313). The Worsley-Twist warp drive does not depend upon traditional emissions of matter to create thrust. Rather, the drive creates a change in the curvature of the space-time continuum  thus allowing travel by warping space-time. Worsley & Twist recently responded to a rejection under Section 101 of the patent act. The patent examiner raised concerns over the possibility of the claimed terms “graviton†and “warp drive.†In their response, the applicants pointed out that the warp drive does not necessarily require superluminal (faster than light) travel. http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2005/03/patents_string_.html B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonHelton Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 NASA Marshall Space Flight Center to Host Physics Conference April 5-7 for Noted Researchers, Future Scientists NASA will gather some of the world's most brilliant and articulate scientific thinkers -- and many students of science -- next month to grapple with physics problems that vexed even the late, lauded physicist Albert Einstein. Organized and hosted by the Science and Technology Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., the conference, "Physics for the Third Millennium: II," will be held April 5-7 at the Von Braun Center in downtown Huntsville. Science students are expected to join well-known physicists, including two Nobel Prize winners, for open discussion of the challenges of physics. More....... http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=16524 :stare: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonHelton Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Can you post a link or something else to verify what you claim? No offence' date=' but I find it hard to believe.[/quote'] http://members.tripod.com/da_theoretical1/warpFAQ.html :stare: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingkong2 Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 http://members.tripod.com/da_theoretical1/wdtheory.html I can't find my pdf copy of the paper right now but when i do i will post it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now