UFOs cannot be extrarerrestrial - SET is a waste of money

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 25 May, 03:45, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: rhw007 wrote:
:
: :Same with Faster Than
: :Light travel. Neutrinos are a 'mainstream' FTL phenomenon.
:
:Neutinos were once thought to travel at c. They are now known to have
:a small but definite mass and travel c. They have NEVER been
:envisaged to travel c
:
:The particles you may be thinking of are tachyons proposed in some
:versions of M theory. The orthodox view is that as soon as they strike
:matter they are reemitted and (in effect) pass straight through. A
:less othodox view (equally non causality violating) would be that they
:have an (infinite) Feynmann diagram and are in the ground state or
:close to it.

And all that is why I told rhw007 the following:

: Wrong.

See? You've just spent a lot of time bleating at me over my correct
answer.

:
: :Who is to
: :say that there is not SOME ETI civilization out there that has figured
: ut a way to duplicate that phenomenon with matter?
:
: Einstein.
:
:Someone has commented that the military themselves have produced a
:flying saucer.

'Someone' has commented about almost any crazy thing you care to
mention. That doesn't make it fact. After all, 'someone' commented
that large numbers of Senators were killed by anthrax when, in fact,
no Senator was even exposed to it.

:In fact ...

You're about to leave 'fact' far behind in another of your loony
screeds.

:... it did not fly very well and the military would
:have been far better employed getting a good understanding of chaos
:theory which underpins aerodynamic drag and vortex stability.
:
:Could this by any chance by part of the famous disinformation machine
:I have talked about. Is ET the cover for black flight?
:
: :Worm hole travel
: :is also proposed by Stephen Hawking and other prominent physicists.
:
: Wrong.
:
:Worm holes are a theoretical construct involving negative mass. As I
:explained warp + wormholes is very similar to inflation. Causality
:violations are the result of any FTL. It is not obvious to me that a
:wormhole would not set uf feedback lops and become inflationary
:

That's not why it doesn't work.

:
: :Just because we CURRENTLY cannot fathom even HOW such could be done
: :does not mean that it is impossible.
:
: But the fact that we understand why it's impossible is.
:
: :A little more than a hundred
: :years ago it would have been 'impossible' for humans to even fly in
: :Earth's air.
:
: Don't be silly.
:
:Wrong.
:

Do you not comprehend what "don't be silly" means?

:
:Sir George Cayley (or rather his coachman who resigned
:afterwards) flew across a Yorkshire valley in 1853. This was 50 years
:before the Wrights. The Wrights were of course the first to lift off
:with a engine. Nobody in the 19th century thought that aviation was
:impossible. FTL impossibility is based on causation violation.
:

Hence my "don't be silly".

:
:Could I make yet another dig on secrecy.
:

Could we stop you?


:
uring the Spanish American
:war of 1898 a secret weapon was proposed. An aeroplane. The people who
:worked on it, (in great secrecy) were inferior not only to the Wrights
success Nov 1903) but were also behind Sir George Cayley.
:

Wrong. They proposed (and used) balloons.

:
:http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci...740990f664ebaa
:
:This gives a summarty of the arguments. FTL involves violations of
:causality. This is clear if you understood anything about relativity.
:

You're spewing at the wrong person, nutcake. So far, you're arguing
ON MY SIDE, you silly git.

:
:Also whether travel was c/2 or c (I maintain c to be impossible) the
:arguments on the method of investigation + Radio Reloj stand.
:

Nothing wrong with faster than c travel. It's crossing from faster to
slower interaction or vice versa that are impossible.

Colour me unimpressed, Ian.


--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson