# Former astronaut: Man not alone in universe



## tshadowchaser (Apr 21, 2009)

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/04/20/ufo.conference/index.html

Just throwing this out for thoughts


----------



## Sukerkin (Apr 21, 2009)

"NASA does not track UFOs. NASA is not involved in any sort of cover-up about alien life on this planet or anywhere else -- period," Michael Cabbage said Monday.

Hmm, well if you know what it is you're tracking then it's not a UFO is it ?

Seriously, there is a lot of modern folklore-like tales about 'Aliens' and there are also a lot of recorded incidents where there was no conclusive evidence for a conventional explanation. What we do not yet have is conclusive evidence of the existence of life elsewhere or that they travel to here.

It's a fascinating area of research, I do agree and it is one that I delved in for a number of years in my youth. The big problem is the 'media effect' contaminates the discourse, creating false trails and pre-forming peoples perceptions so that they see and report things in line with the current 'mythology' of what UFO's (and aliens) look and behave like. Plus, to be brutally frank, many reports are suspect for obvious reasons but also because most people are just not good observers.

The really big problem that undermines the subject tho' is that for some it has become a matter of 'faith' rather than reason as to whether such things exist. That is never a good thing.


----------



## seasoned (Apr 21, 2009)

What fascinates me, is the thought of eternity anything. Point to the sky, and it goes on for ever, hard to fathom. If there is nobody up there, then there is a lot of space and area going to waste. If were just a speck, in the dust of life, that is ever harder to comprehend.


----------



## Lisa (Apr 21, 2009)

I find it very hard to believe that we are the only "intelligent" life in the universe.  I feel there are others out there, now whether or not they have the technology to come an visit us, who knows but with all the myth and theories around there has to be some truth to it.  I hope I find out someday that it is true.  I have so many questions and wouldn't mind a ride.


----------



## Ronin74 (Apr 21, 2009)

Lisa said:


> I find it very hard to believe that we are the only "intelligent" life in the universe.


Perhaps we're considered one of the dumb ones... lol.


----------



## Lisa (Apr 21, 2009)

Ronin74 said:


> Perhaps we're considered one of the dumb ones... lol.



Perhaps we are and that is why they have not let us know they are around...

This conversation is sounding very Star Trekish to me pretty soon I will be quoting the Prime Directive


----------



## arnisador (Apr 21, 2009)

I believe we cannot be alone, but proof would be nice!


----------



## Empty Hands (Apr 21, 2009)

It's all about math and distance.  Given the enormous scope of the universe, mathematically speaking, there *is *life out there somewhere.  Also, given the distances involved, that life will never likely come into contact with each other.


----------



## grydth (Apr 21, 2009)

Given another thread up here at the same time...... suppose extra terrestrial life exists and is even wackier than we are..... what if they land here and demand we hand over all our 'crush' dvds?


----------



## MA-Caver (Apr 21, 2009)

seasoned said:


> What fascinates me, is the thought of eternity anything. Point to the sky, and it goes on for ever, hard to fathom. If there is nobody up there, then there is a lot of space and area going to waste. If were just a speck, in the dust of life, that is ever harder to comprehend.


  You remind me of what my eldest brother had done one night with me... took me outside with a flashlight and taught me to look up as he shined the beam up into the clear night sky, telling me that the beam of light will travel forever even after *click* he shuts it off... that beam continues to travel until it hits a solid object or a star/sun. Helped me to appreciate the vastness of space. Perhaps that beam he shone so long ago is still traveling. I've since fired several laser pointers up into the night sky (and hoped whatever aliens are out there weren't thinking they were being fired upon... :lol: 
But the concept of eternity and the number of stars and knowing that stars usually have planetary bodies around them and the very IDEA that we are the ONLY ones with intelligent life on it... no, I just cannot accept that... especially seeing pictures like the one below where you see hundreds of galaxies knowing that galaxies are comprised of millions/billions of stars. 



Lisa said:


> I find it very hard to believe that we are the only "intelligent" life in the universe. I feel there are others out there, now whether or not they have the technology to come an visit us, who knows but with all the myth and theories around there has to be some truth to it. I hope I find out someday that it is true. I have so many questions and wouldn't mind a ride.


 I wouldn't mind a ride either as long as they don't have anal probes or _cookbooks_. :lol: 




Empty Hands said:


> It's all about math and distance. Given the enormous scope of the universe, mathematically speaking, there *is *life out there somewhere. Also, given the distances involved, that life will never likely come into contact with each other.


I dunno, it seems with all the reports of sightings and encounters that at least a few of them are true. Maybe we are a planet revolving around an "insignificant star" but the things on our planet (pyramids and other fantastic ancient ruins) must attest to previous visitations. 



grydth said:


> Given another thread up here at the same time...... suppose extra terrestrial life exists and is even wackier than we are..... what if they land here and demand we hand over all our 'crush' dvds?


:idunno: having not SEEN any of the crush videos they can have 'em... but please take our copies of Ishtar and other bad movies that we choose to forget... :lol:

(Edit: add on as I just found this article...)
Hmm... what was I  just talking about with billions of stars and each having planetary systems around them ?? :uhyeah: 



> *Scientists discover a nearly Earth-sized planet*
> 
> By JENNIFER QUINN, Associated Press Writer        Jennifer Quinn, Associated Press Writer               30 mins ago
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090421/ap_on_sc/eu_britain_new_planetHATFIELD, England  In the search for Earth-like planets, astronomers zeroed in Tuesday on two places that look awfully familiar to home. One is close to the right size. The other is in the right place. European researchers said they not only found the smallest exoplanet ever, called Gliese 581 e, but realized that a neighboring planet discovered earlier, Gliese 581 d, was in the prime habitable zone for potential life.
> ...


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Apr 21, 2009)

The surest sign that intelligent life exists out there is that none of it has tried to contact us.


----------



## AoCAdam (Apr 21, 2009)

I find it alot less probable that we are the only forms of life in the entire universe. Space is infinite and there is no way there isn't some other form of life around. I can go by belief I don't know if I would really want proof though.


----------



## arnisador (Apr 21, 2009)

I'm ready! Bring on the aliens!


----------



## grydth (Apr 21, 2009)

Sheesh! There's at 12 million of 'em already in the country! How many more do you want?


----------



## arnisador (Apr 21, 2009)

Just one with point ears and antennae, please!


----------



## grydth (Apr 21, 2009)

Check "The Study", then.........


----------



## dnovice (Apr 21, 2009)

yes man is not alone in the universe. I'm here too. :mst:


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Apr 21, 2009)

arnisador said:


> I'm ready! Bring on the aliens!



We are the aliens.  I say bring on the nubiles.  But if you're not a Stranglers fan, you didn't get that.

Or...



> Mr. Spaceman - The Byrds
> 
> Woke up this morning with light in my eyes
> And then realized it was still dark outside
> ...





> That is a lot of fun. It's a universal translator. We're not even supposed to have it, and I'll tell you why... Human thought is so primitive it's looked upon as an infectious disease in some of the better galaxies. That kind of makes you proud, doesn't it? huh?


 - Kay, Men in Black


----------



## hongkongfooey (May 6, 2009)

I don't think for a minute that we are alone.


----------



## Archangel M (May 6, 2009)

I think that the sheer size of the universe and the enormous quantity of stars and planets out there all but statistically assure there is other life out there.

However...science fiction aside...the odds that we are more "advanced" life forms than whats out there are probably as good as us being the inferior life forms a la "Predator".."When the Earth stood still" and so on.


----------



## grydth (May 6, 2009)

As messed up as this place is, if there is truly intelligent life 'out there', they won't want to contact us even via a collect call.


----------



## jim777 (May 6, 2009)

Space isn't infinite, its only seemingly infinite. The idea that there is one and only one universe doesn't thrill me either. I find the multiverse theories much more entertaining, and there have been some excellent articles on them in Scientific American lately.
That said, I think everyone knows these recently found planets are extremely far away, and if any ship from some other world did actually show up one day, it would more than likely be a robot itself. We don't even send people to Mars because of the time involved in the travel required, I'm not sure why popular folklore is always filled with grey colored aliens who almost certainly would have had to travel tens of thousands of light years (and therefore years) to get here. Life as we know it isn't living 30 thousand years in a tin can ship just to drop in, shake some hands, and split with a few pizzas and the occasional zoo specimen. Life as we imagine very likely isn't living anywhere near 30 thousand years. Life breaks down, only machines can go on and on. But I do believe there is other life out there. I just imagine they have nearly as many issues as we do. If they don't.....they are either too smart or too dumb to be good company. :lol:


----------



## K-man (May 6, 2009)

jim777 said:


> Space isn't infinite, its only seemingly infinite.


If it isn't infinite, what is on the other side?


----------



## jim777 (May 6, 2009)

K-man said:


> If it isn't infinite, what is on the other side?



Another universe


----------



## Bill Mattocks (May 6, 2009)

seasoned said:


> What fascinates me, is the thought of eternity anything. Point to the sky, and it goes on for ever, hard to fathom. If there is nobody up there, then there is a lot of space and area going to waste. If were just a speck, in the dust of life, that is ever harder to comprehend.



Supposedly, it does not go on forever.  The universe has a size, it is expanding, and what is beyond it is unknown.  But it is finite.


----------



## matt.m (May 6, 2009)

If you go by Star Wars, Star Trek folklore then a light year. In an of itself would mean that if the distance between point a and b is 200 light years then the people starting out and their kids would be dead, etc.  Plus, anything actually holding up and not being destroyed from pressure then well I don't think it is ever possible.

So if your family dies by 5 or so generations in travel alone then what would the point be.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (May 6, 2009)

K-man said:


> If it isn't infinite, what is on the other side?



Unknown.  Possibly nothing.

I find that concept harder to grok than an infinite universe, actually.

But if the 'Big Bang' theory is correct, at one time the universe did not exist, and there was nothing - no 'there' there.

Then, there was a singularity. It contained all the mass, all the energy, and space-time, that has ever existed.  It exploded.  It is still expanding, with nothing to stop it.  Past the boundary of the explosion, nothing is known.


----------



## shesulsa (May 7, 2009)

I've personally stopped thinking about it.  Other life forms from other places will visit us if and when they are capable if they are not doing so already ... as will we.  We are almost assuredly not "here" ... "alone" ... even though Hawkins thinks we are.  The lack of evidence that something exists doesn't mean it doesn't ... of course it doesn't mean it does, either.


----------



## kaizasosei (May 7, 2009)

I have one old 19th century book, in which the author believed as did many of his contempories, that there were people living on the other planets in our solar system.
The book starts out by explaining the animal kingdom and plant life, it goes on to explain that just as plants are a lower lifeform than human beings, he proposes that stars are a higher lifeform still.  Of course there is no way to prove this and as far as science goes, the sun is nothing more than a burning ball of energy.  Furthermore, our sun that sustains all of the planets life as well as physically holding the planet through an almost magical trick of gravitation, is known in astronomy as a yellow star, a small one at that.  

But i doubt many people have thought of this possibilty.  Because if it is true that stars have conciousness, is our human conciousness related to that individual stars conciousness or is the same conciousness consistently the same throughout the galaxy or even universe??
Sometimes i believe that it could be possible just as basically everything we have comes from the sun, maybe our conciousness as well-
or is the sun just a machine and conciousness something that is intrinsically without and within??


----------



## jim777 (May 7, 2009)

Bill Mattocks said:


> But if the 'Big Bang' theory is correct, at one time the universe did not exist, and there was nothing - no 'there' there.


 
I don't think this is correct. My readings on the theory tend to describe the universe as to how it existed at the moment of the expansion, no that there was a point at which 'nothing at all' suddenly became 'everything there is'. Maybe you are thinking of a point before pure energy became energy, matter, and various other particles and such? Pure energy would still be something.

Anyway, I know you're interested in this, so here's a cool link as to yet another possible explanation of what existed pre-Big Bang


----------



## Makalakumu (May 7, 2009)

Empty Hands said:


> It's all about math and distance.  Given the enormous scope of the universe, mathematically speaking, there *is *life out there somewhere.  Also, given the distances involved, that life will never likely come into contact with each other.



The distance variable is just a matter of technology.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (May 7, 2009)

jim777 said:


> I don't think this is correct. My readings on the theory tend to describe the universe as to how it existed at the moment of the expansion, no that there was a point at which 'nothing at all' suddenly became 'everything there is'. Maybe you are thinking of a point before pure energy became energy, matter, and various other particles and such? Pure energy would still be something.
> 
> Anyway, I know you're interested in this, so here's a cool link as to yet another possible explanation of what existed pre-Big Bang



Thanks for the link, it is fascinating.  I have some doubts about a ping-pong model of the creation and recreation of space-time, matter, and energy; but what do I know?

What I was referring to was the singularity.  It existed outside space-time, because it contained all matter, energy, and space-time within itself.  It exploded, at which time 'time' itself started moving.  One cannot properly refer to the moment before the bang, because there was no 'moment' so to speak.  But if you'll permit me a slight logical fallacy for the purpose of illustration, one could say that there was a singularity, and prior to that, there was no singularity.  It is this non-universe to which I refer.  Before there was a universe, there was the singularity.  Before that, nothing.

That is, unless the theory you linked to is true.  In which case there was a universe prior to the current universe, and so on, and so on,  and so on.  Makes one quite dizzy.

However, referring to time since it exploded into being, the 'universe' had and has a boundary, ever-expanding though it is.  One could theoretically go to the edge of it, but one could not even theoretically go beyond that edge - there is nothing - no time, no space, no matter, no energy, beyond the expanding boundary.  Imagine a piece of paper with only one side.  You can see one side - flip it over and there is nothing.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 7, 2009)

maunakumu said:


> The distance variable is just a matter of technology.



That's just handwaving.  We have no reasonable scientific expectation that "warp" drives or other technology are possible.  To the extent of our knowledge, the speed of light constant is the limit to our ability to travel.  Even that is unlikely, since actually getting close to _c _would cause massive problems for actual large constructions of matter (us) like what happens when you run into dust particles at relativistic speeds or that our relativistic mass would massively increase as we approached light speed.  There's a reason that photons are massless, or nearly so.  The energy required to accelerate a starship within a few percent of _c _boggles my mind.  It's probably not technologically even possible, absent the other problems.  That's ignoring what would happen to an actual human being as their relativistic mass starts rapidly increasing.  I'm not even sure what would happen.

Anyway, the point is you can't just wave your hands and say "technology".  Even if we somehow could accelerate ourselves to light speed, we are still talking 100,000 years from the Earth frame of reference just to cross our galaxy, which is in our neighborhood.  Although the travelers themselves would experience only a fraction of that time, depending on how close they got to _c_.

Also, many of the conclusions of general and special relativity have been empirically supported.  The theory isn't going away anytime soon, which makes it unlikely in the extreme that our understanding is so flawed that these objections don't matter.


----------



## Makalakumu (May 7, 2009)

Empty Hands said:


> That's just handwaving.  We have no reasonable scientific expectation that "warp" drives or other technology are possible.  To the extent of our knowledge, the speed of light constant is the limit to our ability to travel.  Even that is unlikely, since actually getting close to _c _would cause massive problems for actual large constructions of matter (us) like what happens when you run into dust particles at relativistic speeds or that our relativistic mass would massively increase as we approached light speed.  There's a reason that photons are massless, or nearly so.  The energy required to accelerate a starship within a few percent of _c _boggles my mind.  It's probably not technologically even possible, absent the other problems.  That's ignoring what would happen to an actual human being as their relativistic mass starts rapidly increasing.  I'm not even sure what would happen.
> 
> Anyway, the point is you can't just wave your hands and say "technology".  Even if we somehow could accelerate ourselves to light speed, we are still talking 100,000 years from the Earth frame of reference just to cross our galaxy, which is in our neighborhood.  Although the travelers themselves would experience only a fraction of that time, depending on how close they got to _c_.
> 
> Also, many of the conclusions of general and special relativity have been empirically supported.  The theory isn't going away anytime soon, which makes it unlikely in the extreme that our understanding is so flawed that these objections don't matter.



I understand what you are saying and, to a point, I agree.  However, there are all sorts of things about this universe that we don't understand and that we are just coming to better understand.  Below are a couple of examples pertinent to this discussion.

Quantum Tunneling

Quantum Teleportation

Particle Entanglement

Who knows how some of these concepts could be put to use in the future?

When you consider that a civilization out there could have possibly existed for a billion years, we simply have no comprehension of what could be possible on that scale.  

So yeah, we have a lot figured out, but there's a long way to go.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 7, 2009)

maunakumu said:


> So yeah, we have a lot figured out, but there's a long way to go.



In general of course, I agree.  Our understanding is always open to change and refinement as more information is uncovered.  General and special relativity however are very well supported and it will take a lot of startling new information to change the problems those theories have with FTL travel.

As for quantum entanglement, there are several interpretations or explanations that do not violate classical quantum theory.  One could be, basically, that each particle in the pair has it's spin already set when they entangle, and once you separate and measure the particles, you are simply uncovering already set states that do not require information transfer.  Even in the true "teleportation" sense however the only thing being transmitted is information - and even to accomplish say, sending information to Mars instantaneously, you would first have to take one half of a particle pair to Mars by normal methods.  Meaning you have to travel somewhere first before you can teleport there - assuming that is even possible, when it probably isn't.


----------

