It is estimated that on any given night, you could see over 100,000,000,000 stars in the milky way.

Now just for argument lets just say that one percent of those stars could have a planet that could support life. That is 1,000,000,000 that MAY support life.  Now lets say that one tenth of those planets are advanced enough to come here.  That is 100,000,000 planets that could come here.

Now lets just add that one percent will come here.  That is 1,000,000.  I think will take those odds.

We Are Not Alone.

The Fifth Column says hello... John Mays lives!

We are of peace, Always.

YUM!

If theres intelligent life out there, I'm pretty sure there smart enough to stay the eff away from here...

Seriously, look at the way humans treat humans who are different... Imagine what we would do to some other species.... yeah...

My final note on this... if there is intelligent life out there that has come to visit, shouldn't we be more worried about there super destroyers that are being sent to wipe out the horrible and dangerous human race than some conspiracy by our own governments?

A hyperspacial physicist, like I once was back when I did my degree in it, would tell you that in a 10 dimensional multiverse it is simply not necessary to travel fast, to go long distances in a short time. Instead you need only develop the means to access the other dimensions, which conveniently are much smaller, and take a short cut across them.

The brane which you call 4 dimensional spacetime is nicely folded in upon itself so that in the 10 dimensional field all points in space and indeed time are actually quite close to each other. All you need is a bit of understanding and some advanced technology.

But the truth is you are too late earthlings... for we walk un-noticed among you already.

I think it was Carl Sagan who also presented the calculations, said that he did not believe Earth has been visited since there is a lack of space junk. It was in reference about how much junk we left on the Moon.
I like your theory Jenny, have you tried it in a London traffic jam?

Hugs

Cindy

Quote from: transnikki on July 12, 2010, 09:55:36 PM
About superluminal craft, there are a lot of ways to do that without wormholes (spacetime shortcuts), even without invoking quantum theory.  The speed of light is only a limit in special relativity, which only applies in perfectly flat spacetime, which is by definition impossible (any mass anywhere in the universe will affect all points in spacetime since relativity is a classical theory).  The easiest way to make your ship go faster than light is to isolate it in it's own spacetime metric (a warp bubble).  Depending on the configuration, speeds at least several times the speed of light are possible, though of course it's all relative ;-).  And no I didn't make up the term Einstein barrier :-p.  It refers to the limit in special relativity (v = c) whereby subluminal & superluminal objects cannot reach.  It's slightly more specific than saying "speed of light," since there are theories whereby the Einstein barrier is not c_0 = 299,792,458 m/s.

[citation needed]

While the universe is endless, matter is not.
The probability of life is quite low.
Life is on earth; the probability is fulfilled.

It is possible that there is life elsewhere. It is possible that that life is intelligent. It is possible that that life is more intelligent than humanity.
I don't think it is possible for that life to be here. You see; even íf worm-holes are real, which is qúíte debatable, to travel them would be rather silly. You'd never know where you'd end up, or how to get back. Or even if the way is linear.
Then comes another problem: The 'tube' would have to pass zero-space. Small surprise there: There is no space in zero-space. Space needs matter to be space. To do that without this tube would be to stop existing, in all logic, or to create a new universe in zero-space, as there is suddenly matter. Who knows what would happen?
Also: There is no evidence for alien life. That's why France and Belgium are so easy with giving up their reports for the public. It's just investigations leading to nothing, anyway. There is no cover-up.

Colonization of Mars would take decades. It requires quite a lot of factories, and quite a lot of fuel. In short: It possibly requires more money than any government hás. A program like that might bankrupt both the US and Europe.
Lessee.. We need lots of carbon, but we might get it there. Water.. Is probably present, though frozen. Nuclear energy: Check; we'll have to transport the power sources from Earth to there. Then transport the facilities. Build them. Find a way to trigger vulcanic activity. (A nuclear bomb might do, but it might just as well not.) Basically, you'd need a to transport a lot of finite resources from earth to there, because you need to tools to get to the local resources, which aren't plentiful to start with.
The moon: Only doable with biodomes. They require quite a lot of glass. There's a lot of silicone in the moon; sure. But are you really going to make the biodomes from the moon itself? How are you going to get the construction tools and factories?

I'm all for stopping the Alien Conspiracies.. But I'm afraid the only way to do that is for the believers to simply toss in the towel and call it a day.
It's not logical. Very cool, and perhaps even remotely possible.
But.. Even then, the theory runs into some trouble. First one: If that alien species is so superior, then why haven't they taken over yet? Oh; yes. Lizardpeople theories, like in V. But even then, we'd still use up their resources, so we're still competition. Cloak and dagger doesn't help; superior weapons do. That's not happening.
The other problem is the Earth's atmosphere. It's violent, ever-changing, and quite toxic. Humans can deal with it. All life on earth can deal with it. Who's to say some species from another planet can?
Of course; there's distance that forms a problem, but we've already talked about that.

Dryad;
Those are the very same reason I think that we are sharing this planet with anouther indiginous spiecies. Said species being the 'Aliens', are not aliens at all, they evolved here in the oceans or underground.
There is no conflict of resource needs if they have a diferant habitat than us (say deep ocean or subteranean ocean).

Thats my theory. They are not aliens, they are our neighbors.

Cynthialee: The keyword you used is 'Think.'
I think not.
But I'm quite fine with you thinking differently; it offers me a new way of looking at things.
I must admit it's the best theory so far. Hmm.... Thinking of Cephalopoda (Or however you write 'squids'), though... They would be the most successful option.

On the matter of colonising Mars.

The question is what for?

What exactly would anyone do there?

Quote from: rejennyrated on July 13, 2010, 03:19:07 AM

But the truth is you are too late earthlings... for we walk un-noticed among you already.

That is what I tell my co-workers about transsexuals...

We walk among you already...

-Sandy

Quote from: spacial on July 13, 2010, 04:44:22 PM
On the matter of colonising Mars.

The question is what for?

What exactly would anyone do there?

Make Mars Bars?


Cindy

I for one welcome our new Martian overlords.

No, time doesn't imply causality. But the Standard Model does. And seeing as we're all made of Standard Model particles, that means it applies to us, too.

Of course, there are some valid solutions to the Einstein field equations (GR -- see: Kerr geometry) that violate causality (in the sense of having closed time-like loops) -- but there's no proof they are stable if you perturb them (i.e., try to send matter through them -- or even light). And you'd never want to get near any object that could support a closed time-like loop -- you'd either get ripped to shreds, hit a singularity, or get fried by blue-shifted in-falling microwave background radiation. Bummer!

But what do I know?

I know you're not talking in the same universe that most of the respondents are living in.

Yeah, well, what can I say? I'm an alien.

But I was responding to your comment on page 1, so I wasn't just talking to myself.

I'm not really here.  Mentally I'm buying Naugahyde furniture in Scottsdale Arizona.

Quote from: Alyssa M. on July 14, 2010, 04:35:50 AM
No, time doesn't imply causality. But the Standard Model does. And seeing as we're all made of Standard Model particles, that means it applies to us, too.

Of course, there are some valid solutions to the Einstein field equations (GR -- see: Kerr geometry) that violate causality (in the sense of having closed time-like loops) -- but there's no proof they are stable if you perturb them (i.e., try to send matter through them -- or even light). And you'd never want to get near any object that could support a closed time-like loop -- you'd either get ripped to shreds, hit a singularity, or get fried by blue-shifted in-falling microwave background radiation. Bummer!

But what do I know?

Nothing worse than talking to a person who knows what they are talking about

Now, what was the name of the worm that made the worm holes?

Cindy
I'm not really here.  Mentally I'm buying Naugahyde furniture in Scottsdale Arizona.
[/quote]

Not buying furniture from IKEA, don't you have taste?