Why do you believe in UFOs?

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule


How does quantum physics relate to time travel?


I should have stated quantum mechanics.


To other concerns again just because something can't be proven with out current scientific knowledge doesn't mean that in the future it can be proven to be reality, even if today we must at least give consideration to the scientific possibilities, lest we be guilty of narrow mindedness. An unfortunate human characteristic all to common.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
I should have stated quantum mechanics.

No difference. Some buffoon is on PBS right away here, with the program description explaining how this "self-help guru" brings about life improvements using quantum mechanics. Quantum mysticism is hogwash.

As for time travel, unless someone figures out how to make entropy decrease without increasing the entropy somewhere else - i.e. reversing the arrow - I can't see it. And nothing so far noted in quantum mechanics allows any violation of causality; information cannot be transmitted instantaneously.

The problem isn't narrow mindedness. The real problem is the lack of actual knowledge on the topic (or even mathematics in general) on the part of the general public. It's easy to consider time travel possible and fantasize about UFO visits and consider naysayers narrow minded when one hasn't even mastered simple integration.

The world would be very interesting with time travel, superliminal travel, Bigfoot, and aliens visiting us. But, interesting stories about the Philadelphia Experiment, space Nazis, alien abduction, and unknown hominids in the bush are just that - interesting stories - unless some real evidence turns up.

No, none of this means that topic X is impossible. If someone has a scientific theory, it must be testable and tested.

 

[Shannow]

Everything that we do has entropy increasing somewhere else at a greater rate than the order in which we create stuff...making a steel bar here creates more entropy everywhere else...why does a reduction have to be global to allow temporal shifts ?

As to instantaneous communication, I thought that's exactly what quantum physics IS proving with entangled particles.

 

[Garak]

For the first point, that's really a good question. But, localized changes in entropy don't seem to bring about temporal shifts. They do, however, bring about production of steels bars and the like. For anything involving the classic science fiction type time travel (as in the notion that UFOs are future humans visiting the past), that indicates, at least to me, a reversal of the arrow of entropy in a fairly universal fashion.

Knowledge of quantum entanglement and its instantaneous action is far from new. Affecting spin at great distances instantaneously is not a valid way to convey information when the very act of "reading" that information alters the system anyhow. Besides, I don't like the implications for the violation of causality. I certainly could be narrow minded, but it would seem to me that the impossibility of conveying information through quantum entanglement is nature's way of keeping causality in the correct direction.

 

[Shannow]

Isn't the change of state of the two entangled particles, in and of itself an exchange of information (of the state of the initiator)
i.e. instantaneous transfer of information ?

Information in it's purist sense, not the works of Shakespeare over an entangle link...

Time is tricky...there are humans who have lived longer or shorter periods of "time", by virtue of having spent periods in orbit, at relativisticaly small speeds, who are seconds (ahead or behind depending on your paradox)...they are still aging forward, just not at the same rate...and they are still very local.

Going so far as to move backwards in time, while ageing forwards, I can't grasp, but don't discount.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: MolaKule


How does quantum physics relate to time travel?


I should have stated quantum mechanics.


To other concerns again just because something can't be proven with out current scientific knowledge doesn't mean that in the future it can be proven to be reality, even if today we must at least give consideration to the scientific possibilities, lest we be guilty of narrow mindedness. An unfortunate human characteristic all to common.


Times infinity! Humans are resistant to change.

The fact is we simply do not understand the 'finer points' of physics. There is much to learn.

Quantum mechanics is mind boggling!

 

[DoiInthanon]

Originally Posted By: Garak
...The problem isn't narrow mindedness. The real problem is the lack of actual knowledge on the topic (or even mathematics in general) on the part of the general public. It's easy to consider time travel possible and fantasize about UFO visits and consider naysayers narrow minded when one hasn't even mastered simple integration...
+1
This is common in all endeavors. I thought this short piece informative.:
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Incompetent-People-Really-Have-No-Clue-Studies-2783375.php

 

[TrevorS]

Wot! U didunt alredy no dat!

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Isn't the change of state of the two entangled particles, in and of itself an exchange of information (of the state of the initiator) i.e. instantaneous transfer of information ?

Yes, but if we "peek" we screw up the system and that's where the uncertainty kicks in. Unfortunately, I cannot take eight subatomic particles here, tinker with the spin of each to set a byte here, and have it readable across the galaxy. When the "recipient" goes to read this quantum byte, there is no way to tell whether the sender adjusted them such or whether they randomly adjusted themselves as such. Of course, it's not possible to "set" quantum states that way, either. There are theorems on this, but the mathematics is daunting, to say the least. Schroedinger et al left a heck of a mess in our laps, didn't they?

With respect to time dilation issues, the most telling point is that causality is never violated by either observed or theoretical phenomenon. I do the trick of "hanging out" as I cross an event horizon of a black hole or do the 0.99c travel for an extended period, cause an effect remain in order, and entropy is still moving in the correct direction.

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Going so far as to move backwards in time, while ageing forwards, I can't grasp, but don't discount.

That is the tricky one, for sure.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: DoiInthanon
This is common in all endeavors. I thought this short piece informative.

Thanks for the link. There was a story on that on TV, but I hadn't seen it in print yet.

 

[Drew99GT]

There are literally thousands upon thousands of videos of UFOs; Youtube is littered with them.

Are any of you convinced even 1 of those videos is a real UFO, as in an aliens spacecraft? I certainly am not. I'd say 99% of them are absolute hoaxes or explainable phenomenon.

that is the problem with the UFO believing community; if you sit down for an afternoon and look at the OTHER side of the UFOlogy movement and read what the skeptics have to say, you will find a plethora of factual evidence that a great many UFOlogists, especially people that put out a lot of videos, are proven frauds and hoaxsters. They just want to believe, and any and all evidence to the contrary is not even considered for thought.

I was under the assumption that someone with a truly open mind would spend at least 50% of their efforts, if are really that interested in this stuff, by reading the skeptics and debunkers. When you do, you get a much more encompassing picture of modern day UFO "community", if you will.

The problem I see is, there are too many proven fraudsters and scammers. And the big names in the movement are all out there calling each other frauds!

Stanton Friedmon? If you've remotely followed UFO stuff, you know the name. William Cooper believes Stanton Friedmon is a government shill. Stanton Friedmon believes Bob Lazar (the guy who claimed to reverse engineer UFOs at Area 51) is a fraud. At some point, I can only conclude that all these guys are frauds because they have ZERO, zilch, notta, not one piece of objective evidence of their claims. NONE. It's all speculation to get on TV and sell their stories at conferences.

With the advent of modern communication where everyone in the developed world, and increasingly, the developing world, has access to communication and video recording devices, the number of potentially legitimate UFO cases has decreased, and the disprovable fraud has increased. It seems to me that prior to modern communication, it was easier for the hoaxsters to sell their [censored].

The Above Top Secret forum is known by people who don't venture inside it, as nothing but group think about UFOs and conspiracies in general, but if you go head deep in there and find the great debunkers and skeptics, you'll find tons of factual, backed up evidence that the big names in the UFOlogy movement when it was in it's hayday, are questionable at best, and outright frauds at worst.

http://reinep.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/stanton-friedman-questionable/

http://www.skepticblog.org/2008/12/04/stanton-friedman-doesnt-like-me/

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=20841

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
There are literally thousands upon thousands of videos of UFOs; Youtube is littered with them.

Are any of you convinced even 1 of those videos is a real UFO, as in an aliens spacecraft? I certainly am not. I'd say 99% of them are absolute hoaxes or explainable phenomenon.

that is the problem with the UFO believing community; if you sit down for an afternoon and look at the OTHER side of the UFOlogy movement and read what the skeptics have to say, you will find a plethora of factual evidence that a great many UFOlogists, especially people that put out a lot of videos, are proven frauds and hoaxsters. They just want to believe, and any and all evidence to the contrary is not even considered for thought.

I was under the assumption that someone with a truly open mind would spend at least 50% of their efforts, if are really that interested in this stuff, by reading the skeptics and debunkers. When you do, you get a much more encompassing picture of modern day UFO "community", if you will.

The problem I see is, there are too many proven fraudsters and scammers. And the big names in the movement are all out there calling each other frauds!

Stanton Friedmon? If you've remotely followed UFO stuff, you know the name. William Cooper believes Stanton Friedmon is a government shill. Stanton Friedmon believes Bob Lazar (the guy who claimed to reverse engineer UFOs at Area 51) is a fraud. At some point, I can only conclude that all these guys are frauds because they have ZERO, zilch, notta, not one piece of objective evidence of their claims. NONE. It's all speculation to get on TV and sell their stories at conferences.

With the advent of modern communication where everyone in the developed world, and increasingly, the developing world, has access to communication and video recording devices, the number of potentially legitimate UFO cases has decreased, and the disprovable fraud has increased. It seems to me that prior to modern communication, it was easier for the hoaxsters to sell their [censored].


I won't say if I believe or not, but I often wonder if these are the same people chasing Bigfoot?

 

[Drew99GT]

http://badufos.blogspot.com/2012/12/friedmans-frenzy.html

 

[d00df00d]

Just wanted to remind everyone that antiqueshell said this a while back:

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
I like the fact that some folks are shilling here, because in general when they come out and start mocking anyone that doesn't buy into the "official edict" on an issue it tells me that there IS a good likelihood there is substance to it.

In otherwords, heads he wins, tails you lose.

He also uses "you can't disprove it" as a way to say "you have no reason to doubt my story."

For a discussion to be productive, everyone has to be having it in good faith and on the same terms. That doesn't seem to be the case here.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
In otherwords, heads he wins, tails you lose.

He also uses "you can't disprove it" as a way to say "you have no reason to doubt my story."

That, in a nutshell, is the problem. If one's hypothesis cannot be couched in such a way as to be testable, then it's not a hypothesis at all. If evidence to the contrary is dismissed, or, worse, twisted into evidence of a conspiracy, then the argument is over because it's ludicrous.

 

[Virtuoso]

Because I've seen something that I can't explain otherwise. Floating lights above a nearby city. Moving around. Strange.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Virtuoso
Because I've seen something that I can't explain otherwise. Floating lights above a nearby city. Moving around. Strange.


Then that would be....an Unidentified Flying Object.

But an unidentified object does not mean that aliens are visiting Earth.

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:
To other concerns again just because something can't be proven with out current scientific knowledge doesn't mean that in the future it can be proven to be reality, even if today we must at least give consideration to the scientific possibilities, lest we be guilty of narrow mindedness.


It is not "narrow mindedness." To say that in the future science will provide an answer is nothing but "faith."

As Garak stated very well, that is not how science works.

Most scientists are open to new possibilities but an hypotheses must be either backed up by factual proof or the hypothesis must be discarded by what we know in the here and now. This is not to say an old hypothesis could not be revived in the future to fit some new evidence, but we must be careful to make sure there is a correlation between the context of the hypothesis and the new evidence presented.

I.E., forensic science can teach us much as to how to approach evidence, inference, and fact.

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: Astro14


Then that would be....an Unidentified Flying Object.

But an unidentified object does not mean that aliens are visiting Earth.


You could be correct. Those "aliens" could very well be "mankind" in the distant future, or the distant past. The non contact aspect of things would make sense as well because if we/they have mastered time travel interaction with our time could indeed be destructive to the past present or future and they realize this.

My thought is that they are NOT aliens, but in fact us, possibly tens of millions of years in the future, or past, if not hundreds of millions!!

If you look at NASA's own photos of the martian, and lunar surfaces there are lots of things to be seen that are really inexplicable, yet some look like ancient human civilizations relics.

 

[martinq]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
You could be correct. Those "aliens" could very well be "mankind" in the distant future, or the distant past.

Where do you get the idea that a UFO has anything to do with any life-form of any kind?


Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
My thought is that they are NOT aliens, but in fact us, possibly tens of millions of years in the future, or past, if not hundreds of millions!!

How could you, or anyone, rationalize this kind of fanciful logic-jump?

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
If you look at NASA's own photos of the martian, and lunar surfaces there are lots of things to be seen that are really inexplicable, yet some look like ancient human civilizations relics.

I've seen plenty of NASA photos and I've never heard of anything of the kind. At least, not in the last 20 years or so. As our data get better the creative interpretations slowly dissipate.