Live data from Hacker News

There Have Probably Been Aliens

nytimes.com

161–163 of 163 posts

Re: There Have Probably Been Aliens

#161
post #50

ITT, people start with the assumption live is something incredibly special. Another way of thinking assumes live emerges everywhere an energy gradient and some matter exists. Maybe we are not special at all. https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a-new-physics-theory...

So where is everyone? If intelligent life is at all likely, there ought to be many civilizations that have had millions of years technological head start on us. Given one species with galactic ambitions, but technology only modestly beyond ours, it would only take them one million years to colonize the entire galaxy. So why do we not see any evidence whatsoever? This is the Fermi Paradox.

Well, maybe intelligent does not necessarily include expansive.

Re: There Have Probably Been Aliens

#162
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you believe it is surely extinct by now ? Why do you believe that colonisation of the galaxy means eliminating all other advanced civilisations and life form ? Are you russian ;) Your reasonning is based on many assumptions. Look at us. When did we discover how to fly ? When did we landed on the moon ? Human evolution in science and technology mastering is evolving exponentially. Things can happen much faster…

I'm not suggesting our species will go on a genocidal rampage through the galaxy. Rather, I'm suggesting that if we manage to spread through the galaxy, we won't encounter any other intelligent life, and our galactic colonisation will prevent any other intelligent species from evolving in this galaxy since we'll be fully occupying that ecological niche, just as being the dominant species on this planet makes it much…

> I discount UFOs because I believe the alternative explanations–such as natural atmospheric phenomena, secret testing of military aircraft, confusion, hallucination and delusion–are collectively much more probable than the hypothesis that extraterrestrials have visited us.

I understand but the reality is undetermined. So assuming that UFOs are not real or ET manifestation is taking a risk of error.

My knowledge of the UFO phenomenon is different as I'm very close to the author of the following articles [1](http://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/Propulsion.pdf) [2](http://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/Evidence.pdf) [3](http://www.meessen.net/AMeessen/Production.pdf).

While I agree that a priori we don't know if we can attribute any reality and seriousness to the UFO phenomenon, these studies shows that we should. The author applied the inductive process. If the UFO phenomenon is real and the manifestation of unconventional flying objects, they must respect the law of physics that we know. The author investigated the a priori uncertain data to determine if it is possible to explain what is described by using the law of physics that we know and are valid in our environment (air, water, etc.). The only liberty degree accepted is that since the UFOs may not be of human origin, they could use the laws in an original way not yet known to us.

The referenced articles describe the result of this study. The conclusion is that it is possible to explain the propulsion mechanism of UFOs and its described properties. The mechanism is not yet used by humans and require a supraconducting surface at room temperature and above.

This is a theory explaining the observed phenomenon. The normal scientific process should now be to test that theory. This is the work of an experimentalist, not a theorist.

Of course this doesn't tell us anything on the real origin of the phenomenon. But its theorical validity give credibility to it. Since many reports signal the presence of non human looking beings, this give credit to the ET origin. Finally, supraconductivity at room temperature is not yet mastered by humans. I suppose it would be known by now if it was the case.

Why do these ET behave as they do ? I have no idea. One thing to keep in mind is that the rules and optimal strategies may be different once space travel and energy is not a problem anymore. There may be no benefit in colonizing the galaxy. There is enough space for everybody. My conclusion, influenced by the results of the author is that what matters is to be able to ensure the survival of ones civilization. This means that scientific and technological advance is primordial and determinant as we can see with the war in Syria. We can also see that colonizing doesn't work unless the population is fully under control. This may give credit to the abduction side of the UFO phenomenon, but I'm much more careful on this subject because we have much less data and independent data sources.

Re: There Have Probably Been Aliens

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a winner take all task. If you are the first almost live form, you have plenty of time, and can evolved in an environment that has plenty of food. Something like the brown goo of Titan, with lots of hydrocarbons and other small molecules that you can pick up for free. And nobody is trying to eat you. So the reproduction process can be slow and unreliable, perhaps a few reproductions per day/week?/month??…

If you are the first almost live form, you have plenty of time, and can evolved in an environment that has plenty of food. Something like the brown goo of Titan, with lots of hydrocarbons and other small molecules that you can pick up for free. But there's no food on Titan anywhere! There's no oxidizers for hydrocarbons to react with; hence no accessible chemical energy. That's likely generic for pre-biotic environme…

A very late reply.

I'm not sure if this is for or against your comment, but I hope you find this interesting:

"A cave in Romania that was sealed for 5.5M years" http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150904-the-bizarre-beasts-l... HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11682816 (889 points, 38 days ago, 163 comments)

Post reply on HN