Kepler-22b

[ScaterGater]

From what I understand about K22b...
If there is life on there and that life form is close to humanoid, due to the size and density, the inhabitants would be more (let's just say) stout than earthlings

SO
If there is life on K22b and they are at all close to humanoid and they are reading this post

wanna play some 1 on 1 basketball?

[Furrr]

I was going to ignore this thread but....


Firstly, everyone is presuming that life can only be water based, this is wrong. The chances of finding life that is actually based on other elements with similar characteristics to water are just as plausible. In fact, on jupiters moon (or saturns, i can't remember, it doesn't really matter whose moon it is anyway) Titan, there is methane in solid, liquid and gas form, just like water is to us. It has methaneburgs, methaneoceans, it even snows bloody methane; yet we've detected atmospheric changes (it has a pretty tasty atmosphere, nice and thick) on Titan which suggest some form of respiration on this moon, gases that shouldn't be there (just like how oxygen shouldn't be in our atmosphere).

Secondly, you wouldn't be able to talk to them over the internet... You'd have to wait 600 years for your message to get through, since it uses radiowaves, which travel at the speed of light, there would probably some interference too, so may be a bit longer than 600 years...

Thirdly, they aren't multi-dimensional beings, this is dumb, well, they are, but by multi-dimensional they are just 3D like we are, which really isn't very exciting. If you wish to find something more interesting, going into a different universal dimension would be required.

Fourthly, photons travel at the speed of light because they have "no resting mass"; Neutrino's do, although it is very small.
I still really, really think there is something else that clouded the results in some way, or some other occult happening.
Regardless of what did happen in the experiment, neutrino's only recorded to have travelled a tiny tiny tiny tiny bit faster than light... (Yeah, I be bothered to go and get figures).
But even more regardless of this, I honestly can see no way in which you could harness neutrino's into a spacecraft (ignoring the fact that we'd explode and the aircraft would be pretty much destroyed on the journey by passing atoms) because neutrino's are so small that its not even in numbers, its simply "negligible".. A space craft is pretty big. It is impossible for anything that has resting mass to travel at the speed of light.

Also, wormholes are a perfectly plausible idea for travel, if they were to work similar to black holes, their infinite gravity would.. oh.. I'll just show some pictures.


Blackhole, infinite gravity, so essentially its "tube" goes on until it hits the other end of spacetime (since it curves and stuff)


Notice the similarity with a wormhole. (Yes, this image has scaled down dimensions. Our universe is three dimensional, curving 4 dimensionally, with spacetime bending for gravity, also in a 4 dimensional direction.)

Sadly, getting anywhere near a blackhole will cause you to be destroyed from the ridiculous amount of radiation, let alone once you actually are absorbed by it. I'm pretty sure travelling in 4 dimensions would be pretty awkward too.

But perhaps there is some way of creating something or something oh I don't know.. But I honestly do think that wormholes are the most realistic(lol) method on long distance space travel, I wouldn't be surprised if other advanced beings used them.

Like Alu, I am pretending to know things.
Also, I like writing essays.
Also, did you know that isaac newton invented the cat flap?

[GreyWind]

that would be saturn

[Alusair]

Also, wormholes are a perfectly plausible idea for travel, if they were to work similar to black holes, their infinite gravity would.. oh.. I'll just show some pictures.


Blackhole, infinite gravity, so essentially its "tube" goes on until it hits the other end of spacetime (since it curves and stuff)


Notice the similarity with a wormhole. (Yes, this image has scaled down dimensions. Our universe is three dimensional, curving 4 dimensionally, with spacetime bending for gravity, also in a 4 dimensional direction.)

Sadly, getting anywhere near a blackhole will cause you to be destroyed from the ridiculous amount of radiation, let alone once you actually are absorbed by it. I'm pretty sure travelling in 4 dimensions would be pretty awkward too.

But perhaps there is some way of creating something or something oh I don't know.. But I honestly do think that wormholes are the most realistic(lol) method on long distance space travel, I wouldn't be surprised if other advanced beings used them.

Until we actually find a wormhole and prove that they work as we theorize that they do, saying "dudes just use wormholes" is silly. Like I said, we could argue the same about quantum teleportation, since it's likewise theoretically supported without actually being proven or utilized yet.

I'm not saying there's no possibility that wormholes could exist, but until we actually find one and study it to see if it works the way we think it does, treating them as a casual commodity of human space travel is far stretched.

[rasterbee]

You must be joking

Hell no, hi I'm raster.

A proof of this is that particles such as mesons survive 'long' trips when they should have disintegrated coz its longer than their lifetime. But they DO arrive, confirmng that even people travelling at high speeds can reach long distances in shorter times. Of course if they try cming back , they see Earth Very old. Remember the twins paradox ??

Michio Kaku is good too for reading

You either didn't read or understand what I wrote. I said nothing to contradict how time changes. You're arguing against ideas and points you only think I made. Reread my posts. I don't mince words and plainly state the message.

I point out your flaws, your poor word choice and subpar half assed attempts at explanations. Which I did, and you didn't do anything to reply to that, jumping at what you thought was an error in my opinion, one I do not hold nor did I state.

There's a good way to explain it written by Douglas Adams about monks on some giant planet that live on poles high high above the ground so they live an extra couple seconds longer than the ground dwellers.

[Furrr]

treating them as a casual commodity of human space travel is far stretched.

Treating anything as a casual commodity of human space travel is far stretched.

[rasterbee]

Furr, when I talked about finding life in water I wasn't ruling out finding life not dependent on water. There is life on Earth that exists this way so um yeah no I wasn't saying what you thought I did. And the internet communication is a half joke, I'm imagining that we find some super faster than light form of communication and I'm just calling it the internet because it's easy to understand. Third, it's miza. You can't ....nevermind. I don't have a fourth, that's pretty much it.

[Oss Spy]

I'm afraid that we'll never make contact with any extraterrestrial life, at least in our lifetimes. Light just simply hasn't had enough time to travel from their first broadcast to today.


EDIT: People need to stop bringing up higher dimensional geometry...they often have no idea what they're talking about when they mention alternate universes and "the fourth dimension".

EDIT2: I may as well define "theory" and "law" since people say it without knowing what they're saying *looking at Alusair*

A LAW describes a phenomenon without explaining it.

Ex.: What goes up must come down (gravity).

A THEORY is a peer reviewed, scientifically studied, calculations backed up by observations, and COMPLETE description of a law. In other words, a THEORY is a correct prediction/description of a known scientific phenomenon. You can't use the old "It's a theory, not a law" argument because you're not using the terms correctly.

HOWEVER, if you were to replace the word "theory" with the word "hypothesis", you would be correct.


I hope people will learn from my post instead of flaming me for it.

[Alusair]

EDIT2: I may as well define "theory" and "law" since people say it without knowing what they're saying *looking at Alusair*

A LAW describes a phenomenon without explaining it.

Ex.: What goes up must come down (gravity).

A THEORY is a peer reviewed, scientifically studied, calculations backed up by observations, and COMPLETE description of a law. In other words, a THEORY is a correct prediction/description of a known scientific phenomenon. You can't use the old "It's a theory, not a law" argument because you're not using the terms correctly.

HOWEVER, if you were to replace the word "theory" with the word "hypothesis", you would be correct.

I was purposely being erroneous to goad Victoria into actually backing her(?) claims about wormholes being proven as viable space travel instead of trying to use blanket theories or random trivia as an exemption to an explanation. As well as backing the "most basic law" claim, since I've never heard of those theories being called simple.

[Oss Spy]

I was purposely being erroneous to goad Victoria into actually backing her(?) claims about wormholes being proven as viable space travel instead of trying to use blanket theories or random trivia as an exemption to an explanation. As well as backing the "most basic law" claim, since I've never heard of those theories being called simple.

I see then. You should have a warning sign so people like me can figure it out


I think I'm going to tackle her post about wormholes...



@Victoria

Since I'm lazy and I don't feel like looking through ten pages of posts, can you summarize exactly what your stance is? I wasn't here from the beginning so you should catch me up to speed on things