British UFO Files Released

[fulcrum1]

TA DA! you just found the true shortest way between two dots.

This is a very simplistic definition of a worm hole. Quantum mechanics suggest this can be true, so too can forward or backward time travel.

Backward time travel is based on infinite multiverses. If you went back in time and changed it you will at that moment create another split in time, another multi-verse to which you then will live the rest of your life in it as you can't go back to your original multi-verse. However the multi-verse that you time traveled from will go on as it has before you changed past time.

Professor of Theoretical Physics Michio Kaku does much to explain these theories. It's all fascinating theoretical science.

I think Michio Kaku is a quack with a few scientific contributions which are overshadowed by his insufferable pseudo-scientific fantasy. His success relies on an utter lack of skepticism both in himself and of his fans. He throws up the theories with no evidence, but he is a master of tossing on a glosscote and promoting himself. I got no problem with people throwing up ideas...but passing them off as valid raises flags with me.

[toadwbg]

No valid stats are out there. All I've ever seen or heard is how special the Earth really is and how unique and alone we are, this comes from the top brains when I went to college a few years back. With the exception of the PR gurus at Nasa who'll ....

Yes of course, if the stats and experts say so they must be right. Because they said so.

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but I encourage people to make their own instead of regurgitating the opinion of experts! Experts also believed the earth was flat back in the day.....

[toadwbg]

Can only be explained by what Les has proposed. There can be no other explanation. A photo of a ruler of Rome, taken over 2,000 years ago...and one taken of the same man in 2002.

How is this possible? It boggles the mind.

Dude that was hilarious!

[Miccara]

Everyone is so busy on the internet.....no one goes outside anymore.

Now THAT'S... funny!

[VADM Fangschleister]

Experts also believed the earth was flat back in the day.....

What...are....you....implying? All my maps are flat. Geez some people completely ignore the obvious.

[toadwbg]

What...are....you....implying? All my maps are flat. Geez some people completely ignore the obvious.

I'm implying all those latitude and longitude lines in said flat map are a hoax! I've traveled to were several of them should be, but they are NOT there. As if even nature would form such perfect strait lines. For years I thought they must have been proof of a higher intelligence and technology laying them down perfectly in a grid as only alien tech could allow....

But I digress....these days my real unsolved mystery is who is abducting the matching socks from our laundry room. I suspect a sock monster of sorts!

[VADM Fangschleister]

(Artist's rendition from eyewitness accounts)

[Les / Creative Edge Photo]

I think Michio Kaku is a quack with a few scientific contributions which are overshadowed by his insufferable pseudo-scientific fantasy. His success relies on an utter lack of skepticism both in himself and of his fans. He throws up the theories with no evidence, but he is a master of tossing on a glosscote and promoting himself. I got no problem with people throwing up ideas...but passing them off as valid raises flags with me.

He bases much of his theories in an understanding of physics. He is clearly a Professor of theoretical physics. He is not pulling things out of his butt but is taking things science knows and understands to extrapolate a greater thinking on theories in physics. He is not afraid of skeptism either. His ideas are inspiring and entertaining and as such if they help promote science and greater thinking by others so be it.

As sound as we are able to make of such of theoretical physics, Dr. Kaku is not a quack but a thinker and as such helps push us forward in wanting to better understand science and things around us. He is not alone as others talk the same and many of our most credible examples of science past to present both practical and at one time theoretical have proven to be more correct than wrong. Many of them are now respected today even though they were often ridiculed, persecuted and even imprisoned by society and the powers of society who often like to straight jacket people into simplistic ideals and thinking. A more intelligent society can be seen as a threat to those who like power and use power to control others in society. Dr. Kaku in his own way helps to push us to want to be more intelligent and to think outside the simple box of life and our known reality.

[Murph]

No valid stats are out there.

First, you're setting up a straw man argument. These are the "statistics":

1) The number of galaxies. An estimated 50 billion galaxies are visible with modern telescopes and the total number in the universe must surely exceed this number by a huge factor, but we will be conservative and simply double it. That's 100,000,000,000 galaxies in the universe.

2) The number of stars in an average galaxy. As many as hundreds of billions in each galaxy.

Lets call it just 100 billion.

That's 100,000,000,000 stars per galaxy.

3)The number of stars in the universe.

So the total number of stars in the universe is roughly 100 billion x 100 billion.

That's 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars, 10 thousand, billion, billion. Properly known as 10 sextillion. And that's a very conservative estimate.

4) The number of stars that have planetary systems. The original extra-solar system planet hunting technology dictated that a star needed to be to close to us for a planet to be detected, usually by the stars 'wobble'. Better technology that allows us to measure the dimming of a stars brightness when a planet crosses its disk has now revolutionised planet hunting and new planets are being discovered at an ever increasing rate. So far (August 2003) around 100 have been discovered so we have very little data to work on for this estimate. Even so, most cosmologists believe that planetary formation around a star is quite common place. For the sake of argument let us say it's not and rate it at only one in a million and only one planet in each system, as we want a conservative estimate, not an exaggerated one. That calculation results in:

10,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the universe. Ten million, billion, as a conservative estimate.

5) The number planets capable of supporting life. Let's assume that this is very rare among planets and rate it at only one in a million. Simple division results in:

10,000,000,000 planets in the universe capable of producing life. Ten billion!

They don't say that life exists elsewhere, they merely point out the probabilities of earthlike conditions elsewhere that might produce life. BTW, that's a rather xenocentric view, who knows what is required to support life? The original conditions that produced life on earth would kill a human in minutes.

All I've ever seen or heard is how special the Earth really is and how unique and alone we are, this comes from the top brains when I went to college a few years back.

What is so special about Earth? In fact, the more scientists look the more they find rocky planets Click here outside our solar system and conditions within our own solar system (water on Europa and pre-organic compounds in Jupiter's clouds) that produced life here. Given the sample size for our solar system that's a pretty strong argument, especially given the stunning variety and resilience of life on Earth. Does that mean I am saying there is life elsewhere? No. I am simply pointing out what others with a lot more qualifications than me think are possibilities of life elsewhere. In fact, our only verifiable case of an Earth like planet (our own) has a 100% case of life occurring in wild variety. If life did happen elsewhere, then you now have to go back to my previous post of whether or not it has evolved and how far and whether or not they actually have dropped in on us.

Regards,

Murph

Edited March 5, 2011 by Murph

[Jinxter13]

He bases much of his theories in an understanding of physics. He is clearly a Professor of theoretical physics. He is not pulling things out of his butt but is taking things science knows and understands to extrapolate a greater thinking on theories in physics. He is not afraid of skeptism either. His ideas are inspiring and entertaining and as such if they help promote science and greater thinking by others so be it.

As sound as we are able to make of such of theoretical physics, Dr. Kaku is not a quack but a thinker and as such helps push us forward in wanting to better understand science and things around us. He is not alone as others talk the same and many of our most credible examples of science past to present both practical and at one time theoretical have proven to be more correct than wrong. Many of them are now respected today even though they were often ridiculed, persecuted and even imprisoned by society and the powers of society who often like to straight jacket people into simplistic ideals and thinking. A more intelligent society can be seen as a threat to those who like power and use power to control others in society. Dr. Kaku in his own way helps to push us to want to be more intelligent and to think outside the simple box of life and our known reality.

This and many other forums like it would not exist; had not Orville and Wilbur said those two very large words "What if", a theory is an unproven fact, and vice versa. Some theories can, will be/have been passed as BS for time immemorial yet proven to be true; while others accepted as fact have been proven to be about as viable as a lead balloon. Do I believe all Dr Kaku says no, but I do find a lot of what he says as my hero (Mr. Spock) so brilliantly states it "intriguing, Captian". Only the greatest story teller of all will bear him out or not, and that orator is time itself.

[Horrido]

Does life exist elsewhere in the universe? Certainly. The questions I have are: Is it even technologically feasible to generate the energy required to approach the speed of light, fold space, go warp, whatever would be necessary for interstellar travel. Theoretical physics be hanged -- think, imagine, pray, pretend all you want, it matters not unless something practical and useful develops from it... In regards to aliens, we're presuming their lifespan equates to ours, which may not be the case. If you live thousands, perhaps millions, of years, a slow sub-light journey may not be such a bad thing... And even if you made it to Earth, could you even set foot on it? Different proteins, and not even the pathogens so written about, could be enough to cause fatal allergic reactions, so it's possible all you could really do on a xeno-zoological tour is sight-see from a sealed container.

Any fans of Babylon 5, here? It really cracked me up, that the First Ones had gotten so old and crotchety, they had ****** off all of their peers and developed so many deep-rooted grudges to the point they wanted nothing more to do with each other.

[Moai Vincent]

Any fans of Babylon 5, here? It really cracked me up, that the First Ones had gotten so old and crotchety, they had ****** off all of their peers and developed so many deep-rooted grudges to the point they wanted nothing more to do with each other.

YOUR MOAI IS FAMILIAR WITH THAT PROBLEM.

HE HOSTED A BARBECUE AND FASHION SHOW WITH THEM JUST THE OTHER MILLENIA.

MOAI VINCENT HAS SPOKEN.

[Fishwelding]

I think Michio Kaku is a quack with a few scientific contributions which are overshadowed by his insufferable pseudo-scientific fantasy. His success relies on an utter lack of skepticism both in himself and of his fans. He throws up the theories with no evidence, but he is a master of tossing on a glosscote and promoting himself. I got no problem with people throwing up ideas...but passing them off as valid raises flags with me.

You'd have to elaborate on that one for credibility. Specifically, where do you find fault with his published work? In what scientific journals, books, or popular media has he said things you regard as irresponsible?

I also think you jab at NASA is somewhat moot. So they seek funding? What science organization--or anyone else--does not seek funding? Researchers, whether they on a University campus or in a pharmaceutical corporation lab, will tell you that their research is worthy of funding, just as the infantry will assure you they need a new weapons system to protect you, and highway officials tell you they need more money for pavement, and social workers will tell you they need more funding to promote public health programs. Why should NASA be any different?

[Murph]

Any fans of Babylon 5, here? It really cracked me up, that the First Ones had gotten so old and crotchety, they had ****** off all of their peers and developed so many deep-rooted grudges to the point they wanted nothing more to do with each other.

The comment by Marcus about them was worth the price of admission.

Regards,

Murph

Edited March 5, 2011 by Murph

[fulcrum1]

You'd have to elaborate on that one for credibility. Specifically, where do you find fault with his published work? In what scientific journals, books, or popular media has he said things you regard as irresponsible?

Anytime he talks with CNN about Global Warming or tries to get people interested in physics by selling his “Theory of Everythingâ€. The utterly shameless (to the point of immoral) promotion by string of string theory as the Theory of Everything that explains everything (including the Big Bang!), despite the fact that string theory explains precisely nothing in reality (the "explanations" only work inside the fantasy worlds of string theorists). If you ever hear him lecture ask him one word, gravity. All of sudden he’ll be back pedaling like a politician who just saw a photo of himself with an underage prostitute.

It does more harm than good in my opinion with the presentation of these outrageous fantasies and speculations of string theorists as scientific facts. This is especially unforgivable, because a respectable media company like BBC has the responsibility to clearly distinguish between fact and speculation in their science programs. It's like showing a science program on modern medicine and then interviewing witch doctors as though they're the authorities. It makes no sense. Kaku isn’t the only one, Rendhall and others are just as guilty, but hey, they’re dynamic speakers so we’ll forgive them like we did Carl Sagan so people will get interested in what physicists do.

I also think you jab at NASA is somewhat moot. So they seek funding? What science organization--or anyone else--does not seek funding? Researchers, whether they on a University campus or in a pharmaceutical corporation lab, will tell you that their research is worthy of funding, just as the infantry will assure you they need a new weapons system to protect you, and highway officials tell you they need more money for pavement, and social workers will tell you they need more funding to promote public health programs. Why should NASA be any different?

When they throw integrity out the window and get the PR spin doctors going you get this:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2010/12/0...-of-alien-life/

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/11/30/...oint-life-mars/

[Julien (UK)]

Sorry Julien, but having shredded more than a few government documents in my time that is hardly surprising. It's odd how the same govenrments we all like to accuse (based on our first hand experience) of incompetence suddenly become capable of all sorts of incredible feats when it comes to evil, world conquering conspiracies.

Regards,

Murph

Murph,

I was not saying that it was a conspiracy or anything, just that the files are gone!

More down probably to someone saying "get rid of that lot" than anything else. There is also the big possabilty that they were destroyed just because there was an american element to things and it was easier to do.

Having worked in the defense industry for a few years more things are down to incompetance and errors than to any great plan by our supposed leaders.

Given our civil service the files are probably still in a big warehouse some where but the record of the records got lost!

Julien

Edited March 5, 2011 by Julien (UK)

[Murph]

Given our civil service the files are probably still in a big warehouse some where but the record of the records got lost!

Julien

TOP men are working on it.

Regards,

Murph

[Fishwelding]

Anytime he talks with CNN about Global Warming or tries to get people interested in physics by selling his “Theory of Everythingâ€....

When they throw integrity out the window and get the PR spin doctors going you get this:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2010/12/0...-of-alien-life/

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2009/11/30/...oint-life-mars/

I haven't gotten the impression that these guys are presenting their theories as facts. I haven't seen them saying they have all the answers, but that they have current theories based on rational inquiry (lots of math). Indeed, in many late science documentaries, I've seen physicists admit that their ideas could change with new discoveries, a commendable ethic in learning, I think. Even so, some of the abstract thinking in 20th century physics and math is now powering our digital electronics revolution.

On the same note, the disputes surrounding your NASA citations are scientific debate, which even occasionally gets into debates over methodology, particularly when different sub disciplines feel encroached upon or threatened by others. These debates go on all the time, as they do in other fields, such as history. Academic politics can be as dirty as any other; I've seen first-hand some really petty nastiness between scholars, but this shouldn't surprise us as they are humans, like anyone else. Media outlets spin this sensationally, because that's how you sell advertising. But it's part of a process, and on balance, has produced science reliable enough for advances in healthcare, engineering, and digital technology, for example.

Science isn't just the sifted accumulation of fact, like stacks of lab reports. Instead, there's a constant, ongoing process of argumentation. Such argumentation leads to further experimentation, theorizing, argumentation, and development of more complex understanding. Occasionally, something profound comes along that overthrows lots of previous theory. But then again, we have working technologies based on the science already done, so it can't be all simply Voodoo, right? As in history, this messy and complicated process is troublesome for lay persons, who are impatient with complexity and might not want their preconceived notions threatened. Business as usual in human civilization.

These guys have a tough job, because in America we have a cultural trait, grown stronger in the last several decades, to loath experts and higher education as anti-democratic. (Aristocrats, who presume how to tell the rest of us how to think!) Plus, our political structure, culture, and traditions were largely composed by and since run by attorneys, who just as easily attempt to discredit experts, as employ them, in court.

Just a thought: before you judge Dr. Kaku so harshly, I'd suggest you read his books, rather than take in what's filtered through TV. The latter is a poor medium for complex stuff. I might say the same for NASA's science, too.

Edited March 5, 2011 by Fishwelding

[Julien (UK)]

TOP men are working on it.

Regards,

Murph

lol! that is probably closer to the truth than we would like to think.

Julien

[VADM Fangschleister]

TOP men are working on it.

TOP men

[Mola Ram]

Occasionally, something profound comes along that overthrows lots of previous theory. But then again, we have working technologies based on the science already done, so it can't be all simply Voodoo, right?

I like voodoo.

[Fishwelding]

As if on cue...

Again, this is the beginning of a long, long scientific debate. Not the end.

Edited March 5, 2011 by Fishwelding

[Fishwelding]

I like voodoo.

I'm the world's biggest F-101 fan. Mind you, that's somewhat rare. The plane basically existed in the shadow of it's cousin, the F-4, and doesn't get a lot of press.

But then again, I have an affinity for the SB2C, which is downright odd. Even pilots who flew that pig seem to lack good things to say about it.

[Fishwelding]

Update: Bad Astronomer's analysis of the latest "fossil-in-a-meteorite" claim.

[Murph]

NASA disavows scientist's claims Edited March 8, 2011 by Murph