Even a picture of a blackhole is still just a photo of unicorn. No one can go there and do the hard science to prove it is not just some visual anomaly. I was told by a scientist ( hard skeptic ),
Having a picture of a saucer is not scientific proof, you could have an ink pen from the saucer’s dash console, and it still would not be scientific proof. We need the physical object in question to study, then you have proof of existence. Proof of origin is yet another question.
Black holes are not wormholes. Wormholes are theoretical science – kind of like philosophy – they need to find one to study. You have many scientists and physicists discussing, IF a wormhole exists, THEN here is my mathematical model of how it MIGHT work. Some physicists, such as Stephen Hawking, Kip Thorne, and others, have discussed what effects might make it possible to stabilize a traversable wormhole. They are the believers and have faith in something yet to be proven.
The concept of black holes have inspired artists as well as scientists. There seems to be plenty of evidence to make one believe in the suggested models. Until they can study one by sending up a probe or some kind of physical apparatus, we only know three factual information for certain about them; mass, charge, and angular momentum.
That’s a lot of text not to dispute my core point, which is that wormholes and warp drives are not exactly fiction. It is more accurate to say that they are theoretical.
We don’t have direct evidence that these things do or could exist, but we have math that suggests they could exist. Their existence is theoretical, and the math directs our search for further evidence that the theory is correct.
We do not, for example, have math to show how a broomstick could fly, or how spells could shoot from the tip of a wand, because magic and wizards are fiction. And this is my only point, that “theoretical” does not equate to “fictitious.”
Do you ever have anything to add that isn’t simple-minded contrarianism?
Let’s see… There’s an actual field of study called theoretical physics (distinct from experimental physics). However, “fictitious physics” doesn’t seem to be a thing. So I guess there’s more than a little difference in meaning between the two words.
Do you have a degree in fictitious physics? Did you get it from Hogwarts or Starfleet Academy?
simply because we don’t know what an intelligent form of life can take physically. Are there physical limits? We have life that exists in extremely harsh environments on earth itself. Left to fester long enough, how intelligent might it become? I don’t know but to assume all life would look humanoid is a stretch to me at least.
FTFY. How many content of the people have you seen on these forums (since your read time statistics of this place are double the amount of mine) who have reported the results of their conducted and attempted experiments to replicate those from the “paranormal” instruction manuals? Unless you were applying a nosism, then I can’t talk about that.
For example, just because I haven’t cared about researching the science of chemistry, nor haven’t seen any consumer chemicals “misbehave”, doesn’t mean I can declare on the behalf of entire world that there aren’t hazardous advanced chemical combinations that can cause disaster on a massive scale.
Now, if I feel that I care about asking around and go and talk to all of the shopkeepers in my immediate area about if there are such things as promotions for pizza of “buy one and get another on the house”. in the area, they’ll tell me with confidence and reassurance that there is no such thing as that because of the current state of economy. If I ask 20 of them and all of them say the same thing and I finally settle that there is no such thing and accept it as a fact, then that would be my reality. I mean, they’re telling the truth in their voice and their eyes! How can it be false?
But taking in the consideration that:
They are all from rural areas where there were no pizza places while growing up.
Their diet of choice consists of the same 10-15 pot dishes in rotation they bring in metal pots with lids from home so eating pizza is not their cup of tea.
They’ve taken multiple transports to get to their workplace to uptown every morning and never went further away than the perimeter of 200 meters from the shops they work at at that location to discover places, not having spared even 30 minutes of their entire total workweek(or weekend) to discover the area and never seen a pizza place in the neighborhood as a result.
They might end up not being the right people to ask that information from.
But if you or them keep the open mind that it might be possible, walk 1 kilometers up the street, where the restaurants are located to ask them instead, will likely find out that there is a pizza place, not any, but a Pizza Hut further up that they happen to be doing that promotion of buy 1 and get 1 free. Now that you know there is such a promotion, do you run down the street to rough up those shopkeeper people who unanimously convinced you what they believed as a result of their perception? No! They weren’t lying to you, they just didn’t know any better or care and they were the wrong people to be asked, sharing their own lack of seeing at the wrong location in the first place!
But if your question was inquiring the source of my knowledge, rather than the amount of knowledge I know and acknowledging that you haven’t done many research due to not being interested in it full-time, thus possessing no knowledge of the subject, then that’d be different.
I would never question your amount of knowledge. Your better at most of the games details than I am and I have learned a lot from you. I was simply pointing out that in an ocean world (as an example) could not crabs become intelligent? It’s only the physical shape I was asking about.
Humans are mostly afraid of the unknown. While the human species is the most dangerous form of life on this planet, and, as far as we know, in the universe, human is familiar to another human, and thus we are not afraid of other human beings. A life form that is different – that is what scares us. Of course, this ‘‘difference’’ angle is also what sometimes drives human violence against other humans.
No amount of wandering around will lead your shopkeepers to discover that there is a dragon in a garage, because such a thing doesn’t exist.
Neither wandering around will lead to prove that there is not a teapot orbiting Jupiter, because such thing can’t be neither proven nor disproven.
This is why Science only accepts that which can be disproven but has failed to so far…
…which is why theoretical physicists painted themselves in a really, really stupid corner when the ego of two men has kidnapped the last 40 years of the field for a grand total production of literally NOTHING. Astrophysicists keep running into roadblocks and WTFs with each new round of deeper observation of the universe while theoretical physicists either circle jerk with string theory or better find another job, and so far string theory has proven that you can’t math things into reality and a reality that can be mathed but not tested is fantasy, not science.
Yet at least physicists are slowly, begrudgingly, humanly becoming aware of the mistake, even if they can’t find a way out, even if the fact that nearly all grant money is locked around string theory makes very hard to dissent, and even if the necessary reckoning in times of anti-reason will cost dearly since they’ve given the obscurantist crowd a whole arsenal of arguments against Science and reason.
There just isnt a material on planet Earth that could be used to manufacture a spaceship capable of withstanding the hazards of spaceflight. That’s in addition to the technology required for shields and FTL travel.
There’s just no evidence of any of it.
And UFO simply means something that’s flying but you don’t know what it is. Everyone’s seen that. UFO in no way means that it’s from another planet.
I mean… the history of human spaceflight would seem to dispute that statement. Did you mean interstellar spaceflight or something? Even then, though… Voyager?
The last time I checked, human spaceflight consisted of going from this planet to its moon and back. That’s all. That’s all that was done.
Voyager I and II have sent back limited data indicating that interstellar travel is far more dangerous and they were not moving faster than the speed of light. There’s no solar wind protection out there. The heliospere protects us quite well.
“The history of human spaceflight” includes both manned and unmanned missions. Yes, we’ve sent humans to the moon, but we’ve also sent probes to the sun, the moon, the asteroids, and most of the planets. We’ve put rovers on Mars. We’ve sent probes into interstellar space.
Obviously, there is “material on planet Earth that could be used to manufacture a spaceship capable of withstanding the hazards of spaceflight.” So I just found that statement kind of bizarre.
Let’s see… There’s an actual field of study called 