RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Moonhead -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 8:54:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
I simply pointed out that travel doesn't necessarily mean ability to destroy with ease. Period.

In this context, travel means the ability to move large masses around space.
Given the amount of asteroids, comets and all manner of other such crap in our solar system, that does mean the ability to destroy with ease. Full fucking stop.
Snarking about iPhones and not following alien technology doesn't really alter the fact that you were wrong about that point, does it?

(And unless we have the rules of physics completely wrong, any technology, wherever it comes from will have to follow what we already know, at least to a certain extent.)




TheHeretic -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 8:57:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

You're the dude with nothing better to do than pile on.



I get up earlier than she does. [;)]




Musicmystery -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 8:58:11 AM)

quote:

Snarking about iPhones and not following alien technology doesn't really alter the fact that you were wrong about that point, does it?


OMG what is wrong with you guys? Lighten the fuck up.

It's a joke if it follows your rules, but it's snark if the fantasy invasion doesn't follow your plan?

Jesus Fucking Christ. Maybe Rich has it---ya'll need to go get laid.

I'm going to the park now. I don't have the power to destroy it, but I'm probably just wrong about that. I'm not an expert on destruction either.




TheHeretic -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 9:00:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
I'm going to the park now. I don't have the power to destroy it, but I'm probably just wrong about that. I'm not an expert on destruction either.




Avoid parking in any dry tall grass. Even if you don't decide to siphon a little gas to start a fire with, the heat from a catalytic converter can do it completely by accident...




TheHeretic -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 9:04:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

Please excuse me. I need to go and pay respects to what used to be American journalism.



LOL, Steve. I'll take this for the weekend, over more speculation on Romney's VP pick.




Moonhead -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 9:05:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
OMG what is wrong with you guys? Lighten the fuck up.

It's a joke if it follows your rules, but it's snark if the fantasy invasion doesn't follow your plan?

Jesus Fucking Christ. Maybe Rich has it---ya'll need to go get laid.

I'm going to the park now. I don't have the power to destroy it, but I'm probably just wrong about that. I'm not an expert on destruction either.

I find somebody trying to weasel out of the fact that they've made a completely indefensible statement by accusing anybody who calls them on it of being anal a bit daft as well, to be honest.
Have fun at the park.




Musicmystery -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 12:02:28 PM)

And I don't know what the fuck you're on about. Aliens, man. Space travel.

You think any technology for travel automatically means capacity to easily wipe out humans. I think that's not automatically a given, and said so. You've spent four pages whining about it, Professor. Weasel out? I keep saying the same thing, and you keep whining the same song.

I'm not sure how you became such an expert on fantasy speculation. Personally, given the extreme problem of time in space travel, I'd suppose any beings who found a practical way to do so probably don't get into a high propulsion vehicle and wait light years until they get there. Personally, I figure any beings who've figured this out probably know more about physics than we do. Maybe even more than you, if that's possible!

OK, you've decided that one possibility, interdimensional travel, is impossible, as it defies the laws of physics, as everyone knows. How special for you. The point was and is, in a light hearted thread you've decided to make a crusade, is that hey, as long as we're speculating, just maybe aliens have a way of travel that doesn't mean throwing asteroids around the solar system.

Fuck you and the asteroid you rode in on. Get a hobby.

This. is. make. believe. GET IT?????

[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Tesseract.gif[/image]




Musicmystery -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 12:07:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
I'm going to the park now. I don't have the power to destroy it, but I'm probably just wrong about that. I'm not an expert on destruction either.




Avoid parking in any dry tall grass. Even if you don't decide to siphon a little gas to start a fire with, the heat from a catalytic converter can do it completely by accident...

Now see, this explains something--why do the aliens always land in the Southwest? Here in the NE, dry grass is a rarity, as we're so water rich being near the Great Lakes.

But in the Southwest, ships can land, burning the tall dry grass with their inter-galatic (but not inter-dimensional...only daft people would imagine that!) catalytic converters, starting the fire they need to move the asteroids that thereby make traveling space possible at multiple times the speed of light so they can actually get somewhere before they die.

[image]http://www.clevelandseniors.com/images/alien5.jpg[/image]




TheHeretic -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 12:38:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Personally, I figure any beings who've figured this out probably know more about physics than we do.



Which was the point Jlf made, which you got all pissy about to begin with, Muse. Remember how it was the study of physics that led to us having the ability to build H-bombs and such?





TheHeretic -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/1/2012 10:57:54 PM)

Well damn. Now I'm wondering if the cops came and hauled him off for the fire at the park, or if the light bulb finally came on.




Moonhead -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 4:04:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
You think any technology for travel automatically means capacity to easily wipe out humans. I think that's not automatically a given, and said so. You've spent four pages whining about it, Professor. Weasel out? I keep saying the same thing, and you keep whining the same song.

A technology for travel can move massive objects into our gravity well. How would that not provide the capacity to easily wipe us out?




jlf1961 -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 6:06:39 AM)

Look, Migual Alcubierre worked out the physics for a warp drive, which warps space time. In reality you do not exceed the speed of light, you just appear to.

Now if our puny minds can figure that out, then some other more advanced civilization has figured it out and found the energy source to make it work.

IF they have that kind of power at their disposal, then they can easily power up energy weapons to wipe us out, and we would not be able to do a damn thing about it.

For one thing, they would have figured out how to generate a field of energy to deflect debris during interstellar travel, which pretty much means anything solid we fire at them will be deflected.

Oh, and they really dont have to use energy weapons, kinetic weapons would do as much damage. Accelerate a mass to enough speed and the energy released at impact would pretty much destroy a city.

Besides, after reading the frequencies that SETI monitors for extraterrestrial intelligence, I have been broadcasting a message stating that I am willing to trade 2/3 of the population of the planet for technology that will end the consumption of fossil fuels, clean up the environment, and to put me and my family in complete control of human civilization.

So we dont have to worry about an invasion.




Musicmystery -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 6:09:37 AM)

This is a silly argument. Besides the burden of proof being on the positive claim, clearly moving a ship and an asteroid are not synonymous. We can travel to the moon. We can't easily move it.

If you want to look seriously at the science, the very notion of interstellar space travel is daft, as the obstacles are extreme. The radiation is deadly. The distances immense. The fuel sources scarce. Even the four "best" theories today for accomplishing it aren't realistic for these reasons. Cool ideas, but incredibly undoable: we can't ride an asteroid between star systems; we can't travel fast enough to collect scarce hydrogen; light sails are a problem once we're away from the sun; fusion and antimatter are far beyond our abilities, with major obstacles in our way--and even with that solved, we're still left with the the tremendous time the journey would take--the closest star is 4 light-years away--and the deadly radiation exposure. And the typically imagined warp-drive, still far beyond our abilities, requires a few of the universe very different than the one we understand.

Any visitors would more likely have a technology that's beyond anything we've imagined, as it would need to bypass those barriers. Whether that's something that could be a weapon is an open question. Whether that weapon could be moved such distances with enough power to work is another open question.

But if you just want to wipe out surface dwellers, simply releasing the known biological killers all at once should do the job. Neither immune systems nor the medical resources could battle all that at once. Not to mention potential new microbes from afar.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110210-mars-trip-asteroids-taxi-cosmic-rays-hitchhikers-space-science/
http://phys.org/news8817.html
http://news.discovery.com/space/warp-drives-making-the-impossible-possible.html




Moonhead -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 6:16:11 AM)

Didn't Alcubierre fail to provide any way for getting whatever has been using his mathematics for superluminal travel out of the warp bubble it's been popped into at its journey's end?
(Dead right that if they have a power source sufficient to make that work, then they could zap most of the solar system without even noticing, though.)




jlf1961 -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 6:24:04 AM)

Muse, the theory behind Alcurbierre drive which basically warps space time requires a huge amount of energy, which could be solved by using either an antimatter/matter reaction, which in and of itself is theoretically possible, or harnessing dark energy, again theoretically possible.

Radiation shielding has come a long way with the advent of some of the composite materials, in fact, water makes a good radiation shield. You seem to have forgotten that the Earth has a radiation shield that works quite well shielding us from the worst of the solar radiation, and that is the magnetosphere generated by the earth's core. And scientists are trying to duplicate that effect for the ship that will travel to Mars.

I think you are confusing a few things. It would be impossible to move any object at the speed of light, or even close to it due to the infinite amount of energy it would need. But physics has already proven there is a way around that just by warping spacetime.

If you have the energy to warp spacetime, then you have enough energy to generate a field that would protect your ship from interstellar debris and radiation. In fact, according to the theory put forth by Alcubierre, you would be in a bubble of real space and everything else would move around you.

Your whole argument about interstellar travel is based on physics that has been rewritten in the last fifteen years and is no longer valid.




Moonhead -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 6:29:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

This is a silly argument. Besides the burden of proof being on the positive claim, clearly moving a ship and an asteroid are not synonymous. We can travel to the moon. We can't easily move it.

If you want to look seriously at the science, the very notion of interstellar space travel is daft, as the obstacles are extreme. The radiation is deadly. The distances immense. The fuel sources scarce. Even the four "best" theories today for accomplishing it aren't realistic for these reasons. Cool ideas, but incredibly undoable: we can't ride an asteroid between star systems; we can't travel fast enough to collect scarce hydrogen; light sails are a problem once we're away from the sun; fusion and antimatter are far beyond our abilities, with major obstacles in our way--and even with that solved, we're still left with the the tremendous time the journey would take--the closest star is 4 light-years away--and the deadly radiation exposure. And the typically imagined warp-drive, still far beyond our abilities, requires a few of the universe very different than the one we understand.

Any visitors would more likely have a technology that's beyond anything we've imagined, as it would need to bypass those barriers. Whether that's something that could be a weapon is an open question. Whether that weapon could be moved such distances with enough power to work is another open question.

But if you just want to wipe out surface dwellers, simply releasing the known biological killers all at once should do the job. Neither immune systems nor the medical resources could battle all that at once. Not to mention potential new microbes from afar.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110210-mars-trip-asteroids-taxi-cosmic-rays-hitchhikers-space-science/
http://phys.org/news8817.html
http://news.discovery.com/space/warp-drives-making-the-impossible-possible.html

That daftness is the issue here, in fact: anything that can deal with the problems posed by interstellar travel is unlikely to have any serious problems dealing with us. Given the vast mass that a viable generation ship is likely to have, whatever propulsion system it uses would be up to shifting some of the less massive objects near to us. The moon is unusual in that it's much larger and denser than most of the other schmutter nearby. There's stuff in the asteroid belt small enough that we could move it quite handily, never mind something that's a bit further ahead than we are.




Musicmystery -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 6:55:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Muse, the theory behind Alcurbierre drive which basically warps space time requires a huge amount of energy, which could be solved by using either an antimatter/matter reaction, which in and of itself is theoretically possible, or harnessing dark energy, again theoretically possible.

Radiation shielding has come a long way with the advent of some of the composite materials, in fact, water makes a good radiation shield. You seem to have forgotten that the Earth has a radiation shield that works quite well shielding us from the worst of the solar radiation, and that is the magnetosphere generated by the earth's core. And scientists are trying to duplicate that effect for the ship that will travel to Mars.

I think you are confusing a few things. It would be impossible to move any object at the speed of light, or even close to it due to the infinite amount of energy it would need. But physics has already proven there is a way around that just by warping spacetime.

If you have the energy to warp spacetime, then you have enough energy to generate a field that would protect your ship from interstellar debris and radiation. In fact, according to the theory put forth by Alcubierre, you would be in a bubble of real space and everything else would move around you.

Your whole argument about interstellar travel is based on physics that has been rewritten in the last fifteen years and is no longer valid.

jif,

I'm down with all that. It's the practicality you're ignoring.

We can't take the earth with us. The idea of asteroid jumping is precisely to hide from radiation. The kinds of shields we'd need--and to get into space in the first place--would be immense. Even the metallic shields we know how to build aren't practical, as they themselves become irradiated and emit even worse forms of radiation.

The problem with the new physics argument is that quantum level wizardry isn't demonstrable at aggregate levels (or we COULD just jump around in time/space/dimension). [Fallacy of composition--atoms are colorless, cats are made of atoms, therefore cats are colorless.] Antimatter holds tremendous promise in terms of power, but it's an incredibly delicate balance, a dangerous line.

Sure, we know travel beyond the speed of light is possible--but not at the space ship level; it would destroy the ship. Yes, we can curve space/time time, but not in any practical/controllable way.

Again, any beings mastering such matters are more likely to have a very different understanding of physics. Think, for example, of Western medicine's inability to work with chi. Eastern doctors have no trouble, but it's outside the model for the West--there is no way to understand it; it's not a part of a human machine. Similarly, as we try to grasp the universe and astrophysics with our theoretical minds, we as much blind ourselves to new possibilities as we expand the understanding we already have. This is why every true scientific break-through is actually a "break-with" what came before, not so much invalidating it as superseding it.

Here's an example--how to overcome gravity and fly? Well, airplanes don't defy gravity--in fact, they use it, as the principle of lift depends on a gravitational field. It's a different understanding than seeking anti-gravity. Other anti-gravity devices we understand so well we don't even recognize them as such--tables and chairs allow us to float ourselves and objects above the floor, defying gravity's pull (well, using it again, but you get the idea).

We're still trying to understand dark matter and anti-matter. We're a long way from using it, or knowing if that's truly possible. Fusion we understand--but using it practically is another matter.




Musicmystery -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 6:57:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

This is a silly argument. Besides the burden of proof being on the positive claim, clearly moving a ship and an asteroid are not synonymous. We can travel to the moon. We can't easily move it.

If you want to look seriously at the science, the very notion of interstellar space travel is daft, as the obstacles are extreme. The radiation is deadly. The distances immense. The fuel sources scarce. Even the four "best" theories today for accomplishing it aren't realistic for these reasons. Cool ideas, but incredibly undoable: we can't ride an asteroid between star systems; we can't travel fast enough to collect scarce hydrogen; light sails are a problem once we're away from the sun; fusion and antimatter are far beyond our abilities, with major obstacles in our way--and even with that solved, we're still left with the the tremendous time the journey would take--the closest star is 4 light-years away--and the deadly radiation exposure. And the typically imagined warp-drive, still far beyond our abilities, requires a few of the universe very different than the one we understand.

Any visitors would more likely have a technology that's beyond anything we've imagined, as it would need to bypass those barriers. Whether that's something that could be a weapon is an open question. Whether that weapon could be moved such distances with enough power to work is another open question.

But if you just want to wipe out surface dwellers, simply releasing the known biological killers all at once should do the job. Neither immune systems nor the medical resources could battle all that at once. Not to mention potential new microbes from afar.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110210-mars-trip-asteroids-taxi-cosmic-rays-hitchhikers-space-science/
http://phys.org/news8817.html
http://news.discovery.com/space/warp-drives-making-the-impossible-possible.html

That daftness is the issue here, in fact: anything that can deal with the problems posed by interstellar travel is unlikely to have any serious problems dealing with us. Given the vast mass that a viable generation ship is likely to have, whatever propulsion system it uses would be up to shifting some of the less massive objects near to us. The moon is unusual in that it's much larger and denser than most of the other schmutter nearby. There's stuff in the asteroid belt small enough that we could move it quite handily, never mind something that's a bit further ahead than we are.

Look, Moonie,

I readily allow that it's likely their technology would do all sorts of amazing things.

To claim it's automatically a given simply isn't true. If it is in your mind, we're all at impasse, let's leave it here.




mnottertail -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 7:00:10 AM)

To claim it's automatically a given simply isn't true. If it is in your mind, we're all at impasse, let's leave it here.

But this is the crux of it, factless, unworkable, pure ideology.  This would favor the teabaggers and neo-cons, ergo; id est: Romeny or Paul.




Musicmystery -> RE: Poll: Obama would handle invading aliens better than Mitt Romney (7/2/2012 7:04:02 AM)

Given that the universe is energy, frequency, and vibration, it's far more likely advanced visitors would arrive energetically, and be confused about our distinction between "physically present" and "energetically present."




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.201172E-02