Aliens

[ScouserInExile]

, and he passed 50% of the polygraph tests he undertook . The other 50% were inconclusive .

Sorry to pick up on one minor point, but this is actually the problem with polygraphs - they are sufficiently unreliable that you may as well be flipping a coin. Due to what they use to detect the "lies", you can easily fool them by basically being a good liar. Which is why they are inadmissable as evidence just about everywhere in the world except for the US and Jeremy Kyle (for the non-UK types: Jemery Kyle is like a low-rent Jerry Springer).

 

[TJC_69]

Sorry to pick up on one minor point, but this is actually the problem with polygraphs - they are sufficiently unreliable that you may as well be flipping a coin. Due to what they use to detect the "lies", you can easily fool them by basically being a good liar. Which is why they are inadmissable as evidence just about everywhere in the world except for the US and Jeremy Kyle (for the non-UK types: Jemery Kyle is like a low-rent Jerry Springer).

I respect what you're saying there . Most of the scientific community disregard the accuracy and it is perceived to be around 61% accurate , although the testers themselves claim it's almost foolproof.

 

[Exorcet]

Skimming the video, "Gravity A" (The Strong Force) is due to gluons (particles). He seems to think that gravity is only a wave (What happend to wave-particle duality?)


EDIT 1

The above kind of negates his "heavy atom theory". Gluons won't be very strong, or even noticeable past the radius of the atom.

EDIT 2

100% energy from an anti matter explosion cannot be harnessed.


EDIT 3

100% efficient conversion of heat to energy? Violates thermodynamics. The entire spaceship would need to be at absolute zero temperature for there to be 100% efficiency.

 

[niky]

I respect what you're saying there . Most of the scientific community disregard the accuracy and it is perceived to be around 61% accurate , although the testers themselves claim it's almost foolproof.

If they are 61% accurate and he fails 50% of the time, that statistically gives him even odds of lying.

Of course, if you know how to spoof a polygraph, your odds of beating the test are much higher than 39%...

 

[ScouserInExile]

I respect what you're saying there . Most of the scientific community disregard the accuracy and it is perceived to be around 61% accurate , although the testers themselves claim it's almost foolproof.

"Perceived" is an interesting choice of word there. Perception would imply a lack of evidence and reliance on feelings, intuition or some other sense rather than actual fact.

Which brings us back to polygraphs - they rely on emotional responses, which is a problem when it comes to spotting lies. People with sociopathic or psychotic tendencies have no problem with lying, so they get a free ride, because the have no problems with lying. Even "normal" peple can learn to control their emotions in ways that will "fool" polygraphs, it's actually not difficult at all. There is also the issue that the phase "you lie so much you believe yourself" is very true: you tell the same lie often enough then you start to beieve it yourself... at which point you can fool a polygraph.

 

[TJC_69]

Skimming the video, "Gravity A" (The Strong Force) is due to gluons (particles). He seems to think that gravity is only a wave (What happend to wave-particle duality?)


EDIT 1

The above kind of negates his "heavy atom theory". Gluons won't be very strong, or even noticeable past the radius of the atom.

EDIT 2

100% energy from an anti matter explosion cannot be harnessed.


EDIT 3

100% efficient conversion of heat to energy? Violates thermodynamics. The entire spaceship would need to be at absolute zero temperature for there to be 100% efficiency.

And you're qualified in these fields I take it ? Please cite your evidence to disprove his claims so that the scientists who comment on this page can validate / disprove your claims.

If you are pulling that from Wikipedia , then you should know that anybody can edit a wiki.

AND you " Skimmed " the video ? So you knew all that already Exorcet and it bored you I see ?

 

[Exorcet]

I'm an engineer, not a particle physicist. So I wouldn't put the first two points under my qualifications, if you mean field of study.

That said, I'll start with 3 first.

Energy transfer through heat can only occur when there is a temperature difference. If something is colder than something else, it cannot transfer heat to that object, hence, you would need something at absolute zero to collect 100% of heat from the object.

They hypothetical Carnot Cycle is the most efficient one predicted by Thermodynamics (though in practice it cannot reach 100% efficiency, because a 0 K reservoir is not obtainable).

http://web.mit.edu/16.unified/www/FALL/thermodynamics/notes/node24.html

On 1 and 2, I've not dedicated myself to particle physics study, but I do have an interest and have learned a few things on my own. Of course, my knowledge is incomplete, but the video disagreed with my knowledge.

1, The strong force (wrongly called gravity A in the video) uses Gluons to carry force (I'm pretty sure these have been discovered and confirmed). Although gluons create more force the farther you go from them [if you have color], this only occurs up to a point. The range of the strong force is only enough to bind quarks into larger particles, and bind those larger particles into nuclei. Notice that a nucleus has a positive charge. It should blow itself apart because of electromagnetic repulsion. The strong force overcomes this repulsion and keeps the nucleus stable. However, when atoms approach each other, the strong reaction is no where to be seen. Atoms [with preferable electron structures and no charge] do not bind to each other because electromagnetic forces dominate all other forces.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/569442/strong-force

Now on number 2, if the anti matter reaction does lead to 100% conversion of mass to energy (ie photons), unless you have a 100% reflective/absorbing surface, you will lose some of the photons as they radiate into and are absorbed by surrounding material (which could include living tissue, that's a problem). I based this on my understanding that there is no perfect reflecting surface, though if there is, I guess I'm wrong. Also, this whole paragraph ignores that Lazar said the reaction would produce heat, which invokes 3, and means 100% efficiency is impossible.

 

[Dennisch]

I foresee someone posting here on very short notice.

 

[Sam48]

Are there Earth-like species on other planets? Almost certainly.

What do you mean when you say, "Earth like species"? Are you simply referring to the generic two legs, two arms, and a head on top, or something more or less general?

 

[Dennisch]

What do you mean when you say, "Earth like species"? Are you simply referring to the generic two legs, two arms, and a head on top, or something more or less general?

Earth like species would be more or less general Earth like species.

From Bacteria to Whale. 👍

 

[GTShadowKing]

They are watching us

 

[Sam48]

Earth like species would be more or less general Earth like species.

From Bacteria to Whale. 👍

Well yes, I phrased that poorly, but I was referring only to humans. In other words, if intelligent life was discovered, would they most likely be similar to us in form? Does evolution automatically end up giving you something like us?

 

[TJC_69]

I foresee someone posting here on very short notice.

This is reference to me perhaps ? I'm done with this thread anyway .
Too many anal probe jokers & too little in the way of intelligent argument.

Have fun & enjoy.

My last statement on this page is this - There is life on Venus , Mars & the moon . And no , the diluted version of Science that the everyday man studies can't prove it . You live in an information suppressed society , you are not academically or scientifically given the right information , and much is hidden from you as you were not born into the right to see it.
Read this comment again in the near future & reflect upon what was discussed.

Peace to all.

👍

 

[arora]

If this is reference to me then

It's not.

Unless you post in indigo and have a cult-ish following

 

[Famine]

Too many egos & too little in the way of intelligent argument.

 

[Tesla]

 

[Exorcet]

My last statement on this page is this - There is life on Venus , Mars & the moon . And no , the diluted version of Science that the everyday man studies can't prove it . You live in an information suppressed society , you are not academically or scientifically given the right information , and much is hidden from you as you were not born into the right to see it.
Read this comment again in the near future & reflect upon what was discussed.

Coincidentally, this happens after your information was challenged.

Are you saying you were born into the right to know?

Do you trust your computer built by diluted science?

What is difference between diluted science and "real" science?

Have you studied any field of diluted science in depth to disprove it?

Have you studied any field of "real" science? (Where? When? How?)

What will we reflect on? Even on the off chance that you're correct, it's only coincidence since you have no evidence.

 

[Encyclopedia]

Another conspiracy theorist...

 

[axletramp]

Funny isn't it that the 'real' truth can never be backed up by evidence as it is this very evidence that is being covered up by a secret few. Convenient isn't it...

...quite like religion in a way, but that would be for another fun thread.

 

[Dennisch]

Well yes, I phrased that poorly, but I was referring only to humans. In other words, if intelligent life was discovered, would they most likely be similar to us in form? Does evolution automatically end up giving you something like us?

They could be like us, or even further evolved, no need for bodies anymore.

This is reference to me perhaps ? I'm done with this thread anyway .
Too many anal probe jokers & too little in the way of intelligent argument.

Hmm. Well, your form of "intelligence" isn't quite the intelligence I was aiming for.

 

[dhandeh]

This thread, like others here is interesting reading, while standing back. And they always blow up into chaos!

 

[Dennisch]

This thread, like others here is interesting reading, while standing back. And they always blow up into chaos!

Yes, especially when being told that we are wrong, and they are right.
We all need to be open minded, people.

 

[dhandeh]

This thread should have been locked after the 2nd post. There is your proof.

 

[Touring Mars]

What do you mean when you say, "Earth like species"? Are you simply referring to the generic two legs, two arms, and a head on top, or something more or less general?

I really meant life based on similar or even the same chemistry upon which all life on Earth is based e.g. amino acids, nucleic acids, and in Glasgow, ethanol.

However, there might be life out there that is extremely alien to us, as Steve/Dotini suggests - inorganic life, or replicating 'organisms' that are not even made of solid 'stuff' at all. But I think we are far more likely to discover evidence of organic life first (like that found here on Earth, with the exception of some pubs in Aberdeen). Whatever led to organic life taking root on planet Earth is likely to be able to produce a similar result on a similar planet. The basic building blocks of life are abundant in space, and hence there is atleast some physical evidence that organic life could take root elsewhere, rather than some other form of life that we might be able to imagine/hypothesize.

 

[homeforsummer]

It's quite likely that the first life we'll find is of the "extremophile" type, as you might find on Earth generally in the oceans and generally where no light and little air is available. Plenty of species have been found around geothermal vents for example, with temperatures of hundreds of degrees, no light at all, and in heavily sulphuric water. Since we've not yet discovered planets with the same live-giving factors of our own yet, extremophile life is probably a more likely discovery.

 

[PeterJB]

It's quite likely that the first life we'll find is of the "extremophile" type, as you might find on Earth generally in the oceans and generally where no light and little air is available. Plenty of species have been found around geothermal vents for example, with temperatures of hundreds of degrees, no light at all, and in heavily sulphuric water. Since we've not yet discovered planets with the same live-giving factors of our own yet, extremophile life is probably a more likely discovery.

I believe that Europa, Callisto and Enceladus are all potential hotspots for life like this.

 

[Dotini]

Before he died, the noted sci-fi writer Arthur C Clarke claimed the following NASA photos showed life on Mars in the form of something resembling Banyan trees on Earth. http://www.marsruins.com/clarkesbanyantrees/clarkesbanyantrees.htm

I don't know what they are. If they are organisms, it seems unlikely to me that they would be vegetation. Once I heard it speculated that they may be more analogous to geology than botany. Living stone, I presume?

Respectfully,
Steve

 

[ampire]

Before he died, the noted sci-fi writer Arthur C Clarke claimed the following NASA photos showed life on Mars in the form of something resembling Banyan trees on Earth. http://www.marsruins.com/clarkesbanyantrees/clarkesbanyantrees.htm

I don't know what they are. If they are organisms, it seems unlikely to me that they would be vegetation. Once I heard it speculated that they may be more analogous to geology than botany. Living stone, I presume?

Respectfully,
Steve

Geological activity erupting through ice.
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2006/08/16/4351112-martian-mystery-solved

 

[Touring Mars]

Living stone, I presume?

Nice one.

It seems that more recent images (such as those at the bottom of the page you linked to) have resolved these structures much more clearly, and contrary to what Arthur C. Clarke may have thought of them, they're not vegetation. One thing is for sure, though - if NASA were trying to cover up the issue of life on Mars, they weren't trying very hard - firstly for taking the images in the first place, and then for putting them up on the internet for all to see!

 

[axletramp]

I for one welcome our martian tree overloads!