![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Aliens=20had=20nothing=20to=20do=20with=20pyramids =20!
WHY=20? Because=20interstellar=20distances=20are=20FAR=20t oo=20great,=20as= =20to=20preclude=20any=20possibility=20of=20alien= 20=20contact,=20= even=20if=20they=20could=20travel=20at=20near=20li ght=20speed. Distance=20=3d=20Speed=20x=20Time Do=20the=20simple=20math=20! It=20just=20can't=20happen=20! BTW,=20this=20is=20why=20we've=20never=20been=20vi sited=20by=20ali= ens,=20and=20never=20will=20be. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Also note that as a simple matter of physics, that as the speed of matter gets anywhere near light speed, the kinetic energy of the matter goes to infinity. Just another reason why it can never happen.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() =20As=20we=20know=20the=20speed=20of=20light=20is =20broken=20all= =20the=20time. Not=20by=20any=20moving=20matter. =20Shadows=20and=20spots=20of=20light=20can=20mov e=20faster=20tha= n=20the=20speed=20of=20light. Specified=20locations=20don't=20count.=20Nothing=2 0phusical=20goes= =20faster=20than=20light,=20even=20particles=20in= 20a=20collider= =20etc. =20Even=20the=20edge=20of=20the=20univrese=20has= 20moved=20faster= =20than=20the=20speed=20of=20light =20and=20for=20all=20we=20know=20(we=20dont=20fin d=20out=20for=20= another=2050=20bn=20years) =20continues=20to=20do=20so. The=20universe=20is=20infinite=20and=20as=20such=2 0has=20no=20boun= ds,=20limits=20or=20edges=20of=20any=20kind. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
casag... wrote in message ...
Aliens had nothing to do with pyramids ! That's your opinion. WHY ? Because interstellar distances are FAR too great, as to preclude any possibility of alien contact, even if they could travel at near light speed. ETs have been here before we humans were. They helped terraform this world before it was even fully solid. Distance = Speed x Time Do the simple math ! It just can't happen ! Speed restrictions only exist in the 3rd dimension. When you go higher there is no restriction because there are different laws. Tachyons and other particles go faster than light. BTW, this is why we've never been visited by aliens, and never will be. There are many people around the world who are communicating with them, have met them and have even been aboard their craft, but you're entitled to your opinion. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"R Kym Horsell" wrote in message ...
"Cars will never moves faster than a horse because people will not be able to breathe". Haha. That one made me laugh. Thanks. They're all good quotes from the dark ages. Unfortunately some old school blockheads are still making similar ones now. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
casag... wrote in message ...
As we know the speed of light is broken all the time. Not by any moving matter. Everything is made of energy, including matter, and can change its state. Modern scientists have already done it. They have teleported particles. Shadows and spots of light can move faster than the speed of light. Specified locations don't count. Nothing physical goes faster than light, even particles in a collider etc. In higher dimensions there is no locality. Even the edge of the univrese has moved faster than the speed of light and for all we know (we dont find out for another 50 bn years) continues to do so. The universe is infinite and as such has no bounds, limits or edges of any kind. And no specific locality. If you admit that the universe is infinite then you're already half way there with higher understandings. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andrew W wrote:
casag... wrote in message ... As we know the speed of light is broken all the time. Not by any moving matter. Everything is made of energy, including matter, and can change its state. Modern scientists have already done it. They have teleported particles. .... You are safer sticking with some kind of wormhole. They are at least theoretically possible and "guarantee" you might get from A to B much faster than light going around the long way. The latest thinking is very skinny wormholes -- another solution of the General Relativity field equations -- might allow photons and even electrons to get through without collapsing. I.e. information from the future may be all around us, if we have the wit to find it. ~ ~ ~ The great thing about positing something is possible (no matter what) -- you are on the side of the angels. Proving a negative is well-known from grade school to be at best fraut and most likely in most circustances "impossible". "You can't prove a negative" says the old saw. For good reason. For this reason science sticks with saying what is possible, not trying to prove what is impossible. As some of scientist said one time "if someone looks at the evidence and says X is possible they may be right; if someone looks at the evidence and says X is impossible they are probably wrong". Hard to believe, I know, but psychology predicts certain personality types are "attracted" to statements about the impossible or things not being true. "I am not a crook" said some old guy. Immediately anyone with a working knowlege of how people operate would realize that guy COULD have said "I am honest" (it's even shorter and a better PR soundbite!) and would suspect there is some internal conflict going on there. Maybe the guy WAS a crook and trying to lie without appearing to lie because he had a history of being caught at it. If you say things in a certain way it's possible when what you said is later shown to be false you can allays claim it was a big mistake and noone can prove nuthin! I notie if you look around (what's left of ![]() hang their whole online personality as being "not X". Straight away the sign in the back of your head marked "shill" or "dishonest" should be popping up. ![]() Of course, being generous, we can also ascibe people stuck in allays trying to demonstrate/argue/prove negatives as hillbillies that jus don no eny better. If you want to be generous... -- [Thinkers:] It's been said scientists fall into 2 broad categories -- "extroverted thinkers" (so-called "ET"'s) and "introverted thinkers" (you guessed it -- "IT"s). Psychology sees "thinking types" as people that value reason over emotions and sensory impressions, "extroverts" as mostly concerned with the external world, while "introverts" are more interested in their own thoughts. The distinction colors the work and career of scientists. ET's like Gauss and Thomson/Kelvin are undoubtedly brilliant. But they proceed based on what they learned in the early stages of their career and then appear to "burn out" and are not able to learn anything much new after the age of 40. If their work was brilliant enough they rise to prominence where, unfortunately, then tend to become an impediment to further scientific development because they disallow anything that is not consistent with their learned world view. E.g. Gauss blocked ideas in what was then non-standard mathematics, and Kelvin was notorious for loudly disbelieving in "modern technology". ET's that work in academia are well-known as having short tempers and being unable to work with others, especially students. The prototypical "mad scientist" or "Dr Frankenstein" is another example of an ET. OTOH the introverted thinking is concerned about the "essence" of things rather than their surface appearance. They want to know how things "really" work rather than how they simply appear to work. IT's typically gravitate toward philosophy or psychology rather than physics and chemistry. But there are many notable exceptions. E.g. Einstein was an IT and valued imagination over knowledge any time. A prototypical IT is the reputedly mad recluse that lives in a cave in the woods and cobbles together crazy inventions. The career danger for IT's is becoming so involved in the inner workings of their own ideas they become irrelevant. Their work tends to become more and more abstract and complex over time and they can end up working on things of little interest to anyone but themselves and/or unrelated to the universe the rest of us live in. Interestingly, Einstein was unable to accept many of the basic ideas from Quantum Theory because it clashed with his preconceived ideas about how the universe "should" work. A touch of the ET in there. ![]() But unlike a full-blown ET Einstein's gentle and reasoned objections only spurred on new developments in the area. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andrew W wrote:
casag... wrote in message ... Aliens had nothing to do with pyramids ! That's your opinion. WHY ? Because interstellar distances are FAR too great, as to preclude any possibility of alien contact, even if they could travel at near light speed. ETs have been here before we humans were. They helped terraform this world before it was even fully solid. Distance = Speed x Time Do the simple math ! It just can't happen ! Speed restrictions only exist in the 3rd dimension. When you go higher there is no restriction because there are different laws. Tachyons and other particles go faster than light. BTW, this is why we've never been visited by aliens, and never will be. There are many people around the world who are communicating with them, have met them and have even been aboard their craft, but you're entitled to your opinion. There is finally some action in accepting that "something has been going on" for at least the last 100 years. But it's so far quite hard to even "show" some of the paranormal phenomena are connected with anything other than native wildlife. I've been making a study of this for the past year or so. OK, after "seeing something" myself. No sooner did I get serious than even the US intel and military establishment started dropping hints they've known all along there is some hi-tech group hanging around that can do things no known tech can do. But dont expect full disclosure for a while. Even though we "know" something is going on, the data that's easy to objectively look at (e.g. all the sat data and there's TB of it) only shows something is moving around our planet. They seem to hang around at the poles but make side trips here and there. They seem to have various interesting capabilities like going into volcanoes, diving into the deepest parts of the ocean, flying in the atm at very high speeds without disturbing the air, and even getting directly into space. (Trans media). If you correlate e.g. UFO sightings against the position of the planets some show up as highly correlated with sightings. But not the ones we might think. Saturn is not particularly correlated. People who report UFO's seem to know saturn and venus have been common explanations for little lights in the sky. So they seem to avoid reporting Saturn or Venus these days. The planets that *do* correlate are not even very visible from earth -- Neptune, Uranus and even Pluto. You can even correlate the positions of these outer planets with UFO sightings to get an estimate of "trip time". And it turns out -- not FTL. By a lot. ![]() There are many more things that drop out of the numbers and quite a bit of it seems to indicate they have been around a while and still use a 360-day calendar for instance. Doesn't prove they are human. Doesnt prove they are non-humans. Don't prove they "come" from Nepture. Doesnt prove they dont. Doesnt prove they come from other star. But so far they dont show any great turn of speed that might show they do. The "big report" is due in June sometime. But from the noises various officials are making it sounds like all we'll get is a list of sightings that until now were classified secret so noone would worry and the stock market would tank. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HOW THE PYRAMIDS WERE REALLY, REALLY BUILT | Ed Conrad[_21_] | Misc | 19 | January 30th 15 04:54 PM |
HOW EGYPT'S PYRAMIDS WERE REALLY BUILT | tadchem[_1_] | Astronomy Misc | 5 | July 7th 10 02:31 AM |
HOW EGYPT'S PYRAMIDS WERE REALLY BUILT | Horace Oglesbee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | July 5th 10 02:51 AM |
HOW EGYPT'S PYRAMIDS WERE REALLY BUILT | Helios[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | June 23rd 10 10:28 PM |
How the PYRAMIDS were Really Built -- The "Toy" That Helped ColumbusDiscover America | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | June 29th 08 09:44 PM |