Oumuamua - artificially made object! 🥳

[Colinde_s]

@Nana_Skalski

It was a thing with properties that never ever have been observed in nature before, beside what could be known as artificially made object.

What are you talking about? What properties?!

• The density thing was pure speculation. No Data tells us about the objects density.
• The Trajectory could be explained by other things as well. Like out-gassing, inaccuracies in the model for the object, inaccuracies in the observational data, and so on.

These scientist that wrote this paper, don’t even themselves say that aliens is the thing that fits the data the best. So what ever you believe is personal.
I still think you should give the authors credit for their interpretation of the results and how they see it fitting into the data. After all you are drawing/basing your conclusions directly from the paper that are not the same conclusions as the authors.
Interpretations is a powerful tool, and how you decide to interpret data, and language is hugely important to how you perceive the world.

Take gravity:
Some Flat-earthers believe that the earth “plate” is accelerating at 9.80665 m/s2.
That is indistinguishable from real gravity effect. true.
If it where not for the observation that ships disappear behind the horizon and calculating paralax of the stars and other basic observations. Flat-earthers choose to ignore much of it. Instead they fill the holes they create in the data with their own wishful thinking.

Now back to Oumuamua.
There are a lot of things we do not have data on about Oumuamua. We probably never will get any more data either. Meaning that there are large holes in the data we need to describe the object accurately.
Even though scientists have speculated on some pretty interesting ideas, discussed in detail in the paper, it is only speculation.
Filling in data, where none are.
If you choose to say that that the aliens explanation fit the data best, you are saying that made-up, speculative, data is as good as factual measurements.
I’m sorry, but you are a threat to science and the scientific method if you keep claiming that aliens is the definite answer. The paper doesn’t say so, nor does the authors. (media is hyping about it, like you though)

It is a slight possibility, I admit, and hope myself that it might be Alien. Trust me. I wish it was so. But I am also a firm believer in the scientific method, and stand extremely critical of any single paper. Especially one that extrapolates on scarce data like this one.

[Ima_Wreckyou]

@Nana_Skalski

Whatever fits data the most must be true, despite how outrageous that idea could appear to ones beliefs.

Actually the saying goes the simplest answer is the most probable. And assuming an alien species of unknown origin who sent a probe to our solar system is a hell of an assumption, compared to that it may simply be a trivial natural phenomenon we don’t completely understand.

What you do is natural for most human beings, unfortunately. We are always looking for agency in natural phenomenons it is an instinct that helped our species survive. But it isn’t really helpful when trying to make sense of the unknown.

[Dom_Arkaral]

This thread is libel

[Colinde_s]

@Dom_Arkaral

This thread is libel

That’s a serious accusation.
When you compare what @Nana_Skalski states to what the paper actually says, and it doesn’t say the same thing, what is others supposed to do?
Bending the truth and people’s words (in the paper) in ones own beliefs is, in my mind, a fair target for others to say: “Hey! Would you please portray the paper you are referencing, accurately, in what the authors actually states?”

I admit, I’m a bit harsh, but I mean nothing personal with it.

[Nana_Skalski]

@Colinde_s

Like out-gassing

There was no observed tail of any kind and the object non gravitationally increased speed while it was leaving our solar system. So the specific dimensions derived from observation altogether with the rest of that data is why they considered a solar sail or similar object.

These are fairly intelligent creatures that wrote that paper, if we can say such things about humans.

[Dom_Arkaral]

I could write a book on why I don’t believe it’s a “spaceship”

Fact remains this is my opinion, and speculation is pretty much also just opinion…

Nothing personal intended

E: there’s just so little we actually know about the universe, life and everything. There’s a lot of things we don’t know about

[Nana_Skalski]

Please discuss the paper, not beliefs now.

[Nana_Skalski]

@Colinde_s

what the paper actually says

Yes, and what it actually says? That the object fits a solar sail description.

[Dom_Arkaral]

That’s literally what the paper is, beliefs

No concrete proof of anything other than a long red thingy passed through the solar system…

[Nana_Skalski]

You unbelievers!
One day when people will find remains of ancient alien civilization, they will ask themselves why they were so stupid that they though they were alone all this time, despite obviious clues in space and considering the history of their own civilization relics, such as antikythera mechanism.

[Dom_Arkaral]

@Nana_Skalski

One day when people will find remains of ancient alien civilization

And what happens if they don’t find anything?
(not that it matters since we’ll probably all be long dead)

[Colinde_s]

@Nana_Skalski

Yes, and what it actually says? That the object fits a solar sail description.

OK… Want to go there?

The observations are not sufficiently sensitive to provide a resolved
image of ‘Oumuamua, and one can only speculate on its possible geometry and nature. Although periodic variations in the apparent magnitude are observed, there are still too many degrees of freedom (e.g., observing angle, non-uniform reflectively, etc.) to definitely constrain the geometry. The geometry should not necessarily be that of a planar sheet, but may acquire other shapes, e.g., involving a curved sheet, a hollow cone or ellipsoidal, etc

So this states that the observational data cant conclude any definitive shape of the object. The data is simply not good enough.

@Nana_Skalski

So the specific dimensions derived from observation altogether with the rest of that data is why they considered a solar sail or similar object.

So this statement you came with, is not even valid as facts. You state facts from speculative things.

here are some more quotes from the paper about the real data:

In this Letter we explore the possibility of ‘Oumuamua being a thin object accelerated by Solar radiation pressure, which would naturally result in an excess acceleration ∆ a ∝ r − 2.

Known Solar System objects, like asteroids and comets have mass-to-area ratios orders of magnitude larger than or estimate for ‘Oumuamua. If radiation pressure is the accelerating force, then ‘Oumuamua represents a new class of thin interstellar material, either produced naturally,through a yet unknown process in the ISM or in proto-planetary disks, or of an artificial origin.

Notice, they state several different possibilities. There is no reason to put more emphasis on a specific one of them.

Since it is too late to image ‘Oumuamua with existing telescopes or chase it with chemical propulsion rockets (Seligman & Laughlin 2018, but see Hein et al. 2017), its likely origin and mechanical properties could only be deciphered by searching for other objects of its type in the future. In addition to the vast unbound population, thousands of interstellar ‘Oumuamua-like space-debris are expected to be trapped at any given time in the Solar System through gravitational interaction with Jupiter and the Sun.

Deep wide-area surveys of the type expected with the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) 4 will be particularly powerful in searching for additional members of ‘Oumuamua’s population of objects. A survey for lightsails as technosignatures in the Solar System is warranted, irrespective of whether ‘Oumuamua is one of them.

Those statements are the closest you come to conclusions in the letter.
All they are saying that nothing can be concluded at all.
I.e. More research required!
A survey for light-sails being warranted says nothing about Oumuamua at all. In fact, they say irrespective to that particular object.

This is how science moves at the fringe. You see something compelling. You write about it, get some notice from the community, the community looks into it further, tries to challenge the results and assumptions. If data is missing, to draw any definite conclusions, you make a call for more data to be gathered (Like a survey as an example.) regardless of the most likely/unlikely scenario. MORE DATA NEEDED!
Even Einsteins equations are being challenged every day in the universities.

Please. Challenge your own beliefs @Nana_Skalski . Being this uncritical of your own hopes about the universe, only sets you up for disappointment. When more objects are found, and they conclude they are comet corpses, you loose, as the universe is as dull as everyone else have said.

However If I’m proven wrong in 10 years when another object is found, I loose as well, but the universe is suddenly a much more awesome place. I’d be partying like mad if we got first contact. I’d be happy to be wrong.

[Nana_Skalski]

@Colinde_s

So this states that

It can be curved sheets, hollow cone and ellipsoidal shape.

These things are mostly fund in spacex and nasa laboratories than anywhere else.

@Colinde_s

MORE DATA NEEDED!

If this data you have and that show in their crudeness that its worth to write about it as it would be artificial object, what would happen when you get similar but more accurate data that point more strongly to artificial origin?

@Colinde_s

However If I’m proven wrong in 10 year

Why 10 years? You dont think you will live longer?

Tho that thing may not have any impact on your life, I think you would agree with that quote:

Because it is clear from the fossil record that almost every species that has ever existed is extinct; extinction is the rule, survival is the exception.

And things in space we launched outside our solar system will survive us and other civilizations. Relation is obvious for me.

[Nana_Skalski]

Also, why this strange object came to our system when we just happen to have a very cozy planet to live on. There is this strange fact we happen to live on earth that was here habitable for billions of years…

[Dom_Arkaral]

Earth hasn’t been a paradise for all 4b years

There’s a long period where it was literally just a wasteland of lava…

And intelligent multi-cellular lifeforms hasn’t been around for that long either…

And lifeforms intelligent enough to send signals and things to space even less (less than a second on the global clock)

[Nana_Skalski]

@Dom_Arkaral

Earth hasn’t been a paradise for all 4b years

But it was in the same spot for time when life emerged. Life was here, so I would say it was habitable, from perspective of a distand observer at least.

[Dom_Arkaral]

The earth moves around the sun, which in turn turns around the center of the galaxy, which in turn moves in the universe…

Anything in the night sky is not where you see it, and hasn’t been for years, decades, centuries, etc etc

[Nana_Skalski]

Dont you have a feeling, watching the night sky, that you are not alone watching it, and there were creatures across galaxy that could see one speck of light here, and thinking the same? Thru billions of years…

[Dom_Arkaral]

Nope
There’s no proof of intelligent life out there either…
Bacterial life, sure, but beyond? Nope

[Dom_Arkaral]

@Nana_Skalski

Please discuss the paper, not beliefs now

And please, try to stick to your talk… lmao