Jump to content


Photo

The silence is deafening....

  • Please log in to reply
644 replies to this topic

#626 Ekyprotic

Ekyprotic

    Vostok 1

  • **---
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2012

Posted 09 January 2014 - 04:49 AM

why would you say wormholes are "impossible"? Kip Thorne of CalTech believes otherwise. also you wouldn't have to go "faster than light" to traverse a distance in less time then it takes light to conventionally go that way, as per the NYT article I was reading NASA scientists are conducting research right now into the folding of space.

#627 Muffin Research

Muffin Research

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2077
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Belgium

Posted 09 January 2014 - 08:22 AM

inorganic life is a possibility- we only have a sample size of one- so "as we know it" may actually be vastly in the minority as far as different types of biochemistry are concerned


Maybe but on the earth-like planets we are looking for because we are scanning for the elements we like, isn't it possible that on those worlds very similar constructions might be formed?

#628 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 09 January 2014 - 10:19 AM

Wormholes are a theoretical idea. GR and string theories have problems at the limit of black holes. Some solutions predict wormholes but they are not fact by any means. Also, Would you fly into a black hole?

#629 maugi88

maugi88

    Postasaurusrex

  • -----
  • Posts: 3382
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013
  • Loc: SE MN

Posted 09 January 2014 - 12:57 PM

Um, if someone else did first. And came back of course.

#630 groz

groz

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1954
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Campbell River, BC

Posted 09 January 2014 - 07:50 PM

I think we do not let evolution in the Darwinian sense by protecting the weak, feeble, curing disease etc.. The more civilized societies don't allow it.


It's still happening, we are just changing the selection criteria. Some criteria that were once 'hard stop' selection items, are no longer. Polio would be a good example. Other selection criteria that were once inconsequential, are now brought to the forefront.

That is in fact the premise on which Darwin based his writings. He is often misquoted with 'survival of the fittest', which in fact he never said and/or wrote. What he wrote was 'survival of the most adaptable'.

For Darwinian evolution to happen, it's a case of who adapts best to changing conditions, ie, changing the selection of the criteria. This is happening a lot today in our modern human society, and much to the chagrin of some, 'fittest' is not a primary selection item anymore within our population. Thru modern medicine, many folks that would have been deemed 'unfit' in historical reference, are cured of problems trivially at an early age, and go on to lead full lives. That is an adaptation, in action. The human population is adapting to modern medicine, which makes many historical 'fit' selection criteria, obsolete.

#631 Ekyprotic

Ekyprotic

    Vostok 1

  • **---
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2012

Posted 10 January 2014 - 02:51 AM

No lol, the idea of flying into a black hole and turning into spaghetti isn't very inviting lol.

However I've been reading about spinning black holes (Kerr?) and how they have ring singularities so there might be a way to avoid the shredder with these? Also, the large black holes at the center of galaxies are actually not that dense at all and from what I've read- you wouldn't even know you were inside its event horizon?

Some interesting ideas I read about in Brian Greene's books- another was the possibility of a spinning charged black hole generating a universe within it (and the possibility of our own universe having been generated in this way) as well as Roger Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology and "patterns" in the CMBR he found- however this is hotly debated. The Baum Frampton cyclic model seems to have some things going for it- among others, it uses dark energy to predict an oscillating universe. Long ways to go still.

#632 Ekyprotic

Ekyprotic

    Vostok 1

  • **---
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2012

Posted 10 January 2014 - 02:54 AM

I would like to think that we're evolving towards higher intelligence, but I was reading a Stanford study awhile back that indicated humanity peaked in intelligence between 2000 and 5000 yrs ago? I wonder how they determined that.

At any rate, once we find a cure to cancer (it's not as far off as you might think) expect another boost in the breeding baseline.

#633 Ekyprotic

Ekyprotic

    Vostok 1

  • **---
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2012

Posted 10 January 2014 - 02:55 AM

Yes it is- but I'm also interested in silicon based life as a possibility- particularly since silicon is so similar to carbon AND we use silicon in our computers.

#634 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22378
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 10 January 2014 - 10:21 AM

I would like to think that we're evolving towards higher intelligence, but I was reading a Stanford study awhile back that indicated humanity peaked in intelligence between 2000 and 5000 yrs ago? I wonder how they determined that.

At any rate, once we find a cure to cancer (it's not as far off as you might think) expect another boost in the breeding baseline.


One has to be careful with studies like that. There is some evidence that brain size was larger a few thousand years ago in certain areas than it is today -- but brain size is only weakly correlated with intelligence. Neandertals had generally larger brains than modern humans, but there is no indication that their intelligence was greater.

The organization and wiring of the brain is as important as its size, and that unfortunately doesn't fossilize well.

#635 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:13 PM

Of course evolution is still going on for humans but the question is, what sort of evolution give the heavy influence of technolgy, medicine, social/political structures?

#636 groz

groz

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1954
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Campbell River, BC

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:29 PM

At any rate, once we find a cure to cancer (it's not as far off as you might think) expect another boost in the breeding baseline.


There is no cure for cancer in the near future. To find a cure, would kill the single largest fund raising industry on this planet. The absolute LAST thing all those fund raising organizations want, is a cure. It's like cutting the head off of the golden goose.

As for changing the breeding baseline, cancer typically effects the population after breeding ages. It'll have no effect on the breeding population, other than ensure more of them have grandparents alive thru the early part of the brood rearing cycle.

#637 ColoHank

ColoHank

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2316
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2007
  • Loc: western Colorado

Posted 10 January 2014 - 04:47 PM

There is no cure for cancer in the near future. To find a cure, would kill the single largest fund raising industry on this planet. The absolute LAST thing all those fund raising organizations want, is a cure. It's like cutting the head off of the golden goose.



It may be true that a cure of cancer isn't imminent; it's a terribly complex suite of conditions, and unraveling all of its mysteries may take a very long time. Perhaps we'll never succeed. But to allege that a cure or even meaningful management of the disease would be delayed because fund raisers don't want to kill the golden goose is absurd. Fund raisers and their loved ones are as likely to develop malignancies as anyone else. Ditto oncologists and their loved ones. Everyone is vulnerable, and everyone would like to see the end of it.

#638 jca345

jca345

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 35
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2013
  • Loc: SE Pennsylvania

Posted 14 January 2014 - 08:59 AM

Couldn't it be that we are in fact the very "first" sentient, intelligent beings to inhabit the universe? The Drake equation is logical and sensible, however, somebody should be the first... Perhaps we are "it"--or not. It is a possibility. Time-Space is at least incomprehensibly large, perhaps infinite. Either situation would allow for a high degree of probability of life forming and becoming sentient--we just don't know whether we are the first ones in a very long line or not.

Who knows? :question:

#639 Pess

Pess

    (Title)

  • *****
  • Posts: 2872
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Toledo, Ohio

Posted 14 January 2014 - 02:26 PM

Couldn't it be that we are in fact the very "first" sentient, intelligent beings to inhabit the universe? The Drake equation is logical and sensible, however, somebody should be the first... Perhaps we are "it"--or not. It is a possibility. Time-Space is at least incomprehensibly large, perhaps infinite. Either situation would allow for a high degree of probability of life forming and becoming sentient--we just don't know whether we are the first ones in a very long line or not.

Who knows? :question:


Anything is possible. But life arose on Earth almost immediately after it cooled to the point where life could exist.

That's pretty solid evidence that life comes along as soon as it can.

Pesse (Just say'n) Mist

#640 GregLee1

GregLee1

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 669
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Waimanalo, HI

Posted 14 January 2014 - 03:11 PM

That's pretty solid evidence that life comes along as soon as it can.

You mean because of the principle that anything which happens once must always happen? There are no singular events -- all is universal. Yes, I think I see that, if I squint my eyes.

#641 Pess

Pess

    (Title)

  • *****
  • Posts: 2872
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Toledo, Ohio

Posted 14 January 2014 - 03:28 PM

That's pretty solid evidence that life comes along as soon as it can.

You mean because of the principle that anything which happens once must always happen? There are no singular events -- all is universal. Yes, I think I see that, if I squint my eyes.


The fact is that we can trace life back to within 700 million years of when the Earth cooled...and life probably goes back much further than that. The fact that the Earth didn't sit around sterile very long is strong, not incontrovertible, but strong evidence that life comes along almost immediately if given a stable niche.

Sure Earth could have won a lotto with such early appearance of organisms, but with reference to Occam's razor, the simplest explanation is probably the right one.

What's probably going on is that some advanced civilization out there is busy running around the Universe stamping out all developing technological societies for fear they will compete with them if allowed to develop past a certain stage. Maybe they will just hit the Oort cloud and fling enough boulders our way to set us back a bit. They did it with the Dino's which were a Super-intelligent species....

Pesse (Only Barney Survived.) Mist

#642 Mxplx2

Mxplx2

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 249
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2012
  • Loc: PA USA

Posted 14 January 2014 - 04:41 PM

Perhaps there is a reason the silence is deafening. If we were being observed since the dawn of human civilization by aliens, they would have seen a violent and murderous people as per link.

http://en.wikipedia....s_by_death_toll

Would you want to drop in and say hello?

#643 maugi88

maugi88

    Postasaurusrex

  • -----
  • Posts: 3382
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013
  • Loc: SE MN

Posted 14 January 2014 - 08:52 PM

What's probably going on is that some advanced civilization out there is busy running around the Universe stamping out all developing technological societies for fear they will compete with them if allowed to develop past a certain stage. Maybe they will just hit the Oort cloud and fling enough boulders our way to set us back a bit. They did it with the Dino's which were a Super-intelligent species....


Crossed my mind.

Just thinking, no conspiracies here. Just not impossible.

Not saying the evil overlord really exists, or does he. :grin:

#644 Pess

Pess

    (Title)

  • *****
  • Posts: 2872
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Toledo, Ohio

Posted 18 January 2014 - 03:23 PM

If we were being observed since the dawn of human civilization by aliens, they would have seen a violent and murderous people. Would you want to drop in and say hello?


Pesse (Sure, if I was a Marine recruiter for Alpha Centori..) Mist

#645 dickbill

dickbill

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 937
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2008

Posted 20 January 2014 - 12:01 PM

Impressive!!
Gemini Planet Imager First Light
http://www.gemini.edu/node/12113

As an amateur, I'd like to know the resolution achieved and the exposure time, but anyways the result is here.
Quote:
“Seeing a planet close to a star after just one minute, was a thrill, and we saw this on only the first week after the instrument was put on the telescope!” says Fredrik Rantakyro a Gemini staff scientist working on the instrument. “Imagine what it will be able to do once we tweak and completely tune its performance.”

Indeed. It comforts my opinion that a significant sample of terrestrial planets in the liquid water zone will be studied in the near future (less than a hundred years) and therefore, IMO the question asked by Otto will be answered in that timeframe with a very high confidence.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics