Author Topic: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond  (Read 60906 times)

Offline Frogstar_Robot

  • Member
  • Posts: 12
  • Earth
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #120 on: 04/13/2018 02:25 PM »
A criticism of Inflation theory is that it is tweekable to fit any observable universe, and several other advanced cosmology and quantum theories have similar testability issues.

Clearly, science isn't just curve fitting, but we are not yet able to prove every theory, so I think it is fair comment. It is certainly an assumption that we are observing a pristine universe, and that may not be true.

On one hand SETI assumes that alien civilisations are abundant and should be detected easily due to their impact on the universe, on the other, cosmologists assume that everything they see is "natural" and not due to alien artifacts. Of course extraordinary claims would require extraordinary evidence, but there is ground on the middle.

Or has cosmology already proved advanced alien civs do not exist, in which case we can cancel SETI?

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3865
  • Liked: 626
  • Likes Given: 164
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #121 on: 04/13/2018 03:12 PM »
QuantumG is talking about 'dark matter' which is exactly what he described, and yes, it's a real scientific theory. Look it up :D

(edit)
Firstly, I was talking about baryonic matter. We know that dark matter did not arise from aliens converting baryonic matter to another form, because we can look into the past and see how much baryonic there was originally, and that it matches with what we can see now.

It is pointless to discuss aliens that existed for all time in all places and independent of baryonic matter for the same reason it is pointless to discuss God. Unless people specifically want to discuss angels on heads of pins it should go without saying that is not the topic.
(end edit)

Sorry it is really depressing to read these statements. Dark matter and inflation theory are the opposite of supporting that assertion. They highlight exactly that scientists do not just curve fit and then ignore the search for an underlying explanation. This is precisely why they are major topics. Only MOD conspiracy theorists think of science that way. "Oh, they just called it dark matter because they don't want to think about it any more."

Maybe you guys have just not understood the context. The context is could astrophysicists see aliens and think they are just seeing physics? Just tweek their understanding of what they expect to see and call it nature?

This misses the fantastic effort that physicists make to confirm that physics works the same everywhere, that the behaviour of stars across space and observable history matches physics that can be confirmed right here on earth.

This misses the absurdity of physicists, not only being incurious of the inconsistency with physics on earth, also being incurious of their tweeks not being uniform across space and time, but having an origin at a specific point and a specific time after the universe had produced the elements necessary for chemistry, and then radiated outward from there.

No, apart from aliens as god, existing before atoms and everywhere after, physicists absolutely would NOT observe alien anomalies and just tweek physics to accept them.

(edit2) Should we move this to some SETI thread?
« Last Edit: 04/13/2018 03:38 PM by KelvinZero »

Offline meberbs

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1856
  • Liked: 1723
  • Likes Given: 408
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #122 on: 04/13/2018 03:45 PM »
Sorry it is really depressing to read these statements. Dark matter and inflation theory are the opposite of supporting that assertion. They highlight exactly that scientists do not just curve fit and then ignore the search for an underlying explanation. This is precisely why they are major topics. Only MOD conspiracy theorists think of science that way. "Oh, they just called it dark matter because they don't want to think about it any more."
I have had discussions with "MOD conspiracy theorists" and the like in the new physics section. The people on this thread are not in any way making comments like those people. Your comparison is unfair at the minimum. Your assertions go beyond what is actually known and take current best guesses as gospel in areas where physicists who study those areas will clearly admit we aren't 100% sure what is going on.

Maybe you guys have just not understood the context. The context is could astrophysicists see aliens and think they are just seeing physics? Just tweek their understanding of what they expect to see and call it nature?

This misses the fantastic effort that physicists make to confirm that physics works the same everywhere, that the behaviour of stars across space and observable history matches physics that can be confirmed right here on earth.
You apparently don't understand the context. They have found things that vary with time that are also difficult to explain why they vary with time. That is what accelerating expansion of the universe is. You are making unsupported assumptions about what alien presence would look like, including whether it would be detectable at all. These assumptions are the most unscientific part of this entire conversation.

This misses the absurdity of physicists, not only being incurious of the inconsistency with physics on earth, also being incurious of their tweeks not being uniform across space and time, but having an origin at a specific point and a specific time after the universe had produced the elements necessary for chemistry, and then radiated outward from there.
They are quite curious about variations in things like the Hubble constant. Current measurements do not have anywhere near the resolution in space, time, or accuracy to detect the kinds of things you are describing.

No, apart from aliens as god, existing before atoms and everywhere after, physicists absolutely would NOT observe alien anomalies and just tweek physics to accept them.
Scientists are not omniscient god-like beings who magically would be able to tell natural changes in the universe from deliberate ones. They most certainly will develop models that allow for any variations they detect, and will check various models for underlying explanations. The way you talk about scientists here is simply fodder for getting twisted by conspiracy theorists.

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3865
  • Liked: 626
  • Likes Given: 164
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #123 on: 04/13/2018 04:09 PM »
Or has cosmology already proved advanced alien civs do not exist, in which case we can cancel SETI?
The start of this off-topic was what I consider a mistake by another poster, to assume that "The Dyson Dilemma" implies an assumption that aliens will not master superior power sources. Im saying that is not the meaning at all. It simply defines a lower bound of what a civilisation should AT LEAST be able to achieve. Postulating superior power sources only increases the potential of exponential expansion to make it's presence blatantly obvious, increasing the problem of the Dyson Dilemma.

So the Dyson Dilemma remains real. Does this mean we should cancel SETI? Not even do the most basic checks? No. Of course not. It means exactly what the average astronomer has already decided it means: SETI is a fairly long shot in the short term, only deserving of a fairly small fraction of scientist's attention.

Also I guess I am arguing that one of the most powerful tools for finding aliens is the non-SETI astronomer and astrophysicist community just doing its thing, comparing observation to theory. I think that if/when we spot aliens they will first appear as a "well that's odd". The first million or so of these phenomena will probably prove to not be aliens.. and then one will turn out to be aliens. SETI can really only add a few stabs in the dark beyond that, often using dubious guesses of what alien technology might specifically look like.

Offline JQP

  • Member
  • Posts: 74
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #124 on: 04/13/2018 04:29 PM »
The whole "we should be able to see type II civilizations" thing is sooooo 20th century. Even the argument for Dyson spheres seems weird when you imagine working nuclear fusion. Why bother with bottling a star if you can engineer an artificial one that is better?

Because the energy is wasted otherwise. Again, if candidate life were plentiful, some of them should be "bottling" stars. The rarer candidates become, the more explicable the observed dearth becomes.

Offline KelvinZero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3865
  • Liked: 626
  • Likes Given: 164
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #125 on: 04/13/2018 05:19 PM »
Sorry it is really depressing to read these statements. Dark matter and inflation theory are the opposite of supporting that assertion. They highlight exactly that scientists do not just curve fit and then ignore the search for an underlying explanation. This is precisely why they are major topics. Only MOD conspiracy theorists think of science that way. "Oh, they just called it dark matter because they don't want to think about it any more."
I have had discussions with "MOD conspiracy theorists" and the like in the new physics section. The people on this thread are not in any way making comments like those people. Your comparison is unfair at the minimum. Your assertions go beyond what is actually known and take current best guesses as gospel in areas where physicists who study those areas will clearly admit we aren't 100% sure what is going on.
I have been careful in my claims and explanations. You haven't given me points I can address. You have not dealt with any of my points. You are asserting the onus is on me to prove a universe full of aliens could not happen to exactly match and empty one. This implies a total lack of context.

This is the context of what I am arguing:
* The Dyson Dilemma does not rest on the assumption that solar power is likely.
* Scientists are highly unlikely to accidentally fold evidence of aliens into a tweeked physics.. and dark matter and inflation are examples of NOT dismissing unknowns, but FOCUSING on them.

I will address one point, indirectly:
You apparently don't understand the context. They have found things that vary with time that are also difficult to explain why they vary with time. That is what accelerating expansion of the universe is. You are making unsupported assumptions about what alien presence would look like, including whether it would be detectable at all. These assumptions are the most unscientific part of this entire conversation.
Im prepared to strongly argue that aliens would almost certainly vary parameters, that a universe that merely appears empty would be like rolling snake eyes 100 times in a row, but the wording here suggests you think the context is a claim that aliens can be disproven. The context is that the Dyson Dilemma is not based on the assumption of solar power.. and surely never was. That would be expecting many decently intelligent people to show zero common sense.
« Last Edit: 04/13/2018 05:20 PM by KelvinZero »

Offline meberbs

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1856
  • Liked: 1723
  • Likes Given: 408
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #126 on: 04/13/2018 06:08 PM »
Sorry it is really depressing to read these statements. Dark matter and inflation theory are the opposite of supporting that assertion. They highlight exactly that scientists do not just curve fit and then ignore the search for an underlying explanation. This is precisely why they are major topics. Only MOD conspiracy theorists think of science that way. "Oh, they just called it dark matter because they don't want to think about it any more."
I have had discussions with "MOD conspiracy theorists" and the like in the new physics section. The people on this thread are not in any way making comments like those people. Your comparison is unfair at the minimum. Your assertions go beyond what is actually known and take current best guesses as gospel in areas where physicists who study those areas will clearly admit we aren't 100% sure what is going on.
I have been careful in my claims and explanations.
No, you really haven't. For example:
Postulating superior power sources only increases the potential of exponential expansion to make it's presence blatantly obvious, increasing the problem of the Dyson Dilemma.
Stars are the most powerful energy source that we know of within the confines of modern physics.  Superior power sources would fall into the "indistinguishable from magic" category, so there is no reason to think that they would be either more or less detectable than dyson spheres.

You haven't given me points I can address. You have not dealt with any of my points. You are asserting the onus is on me to prove a universe full of aliens could not happen to exactly match and empty one. This implies a total lack of context.
Burden of proof is on the one making assertions. You are making unsupported assertions about the detectability of alien life. Burden of proof is not on me, because as you say I am not making any major points other than that your statements lack support.

This is the context of what I am arguing:
* The Dyson Dilemma does not rest on the assumption that solar power is likely.
You have only pointed out that it rests on a slightly broader assumption that anything better would somehow be more detectable.

* Scientists are highly unlikely to accidentally fold evidence of aliens into a tweeked physics.. and dark matter and inflation are examples of NOT dismissing unknowns, but FOCUSING on them.
The 2 parts of this bullet are unrelated to each other. The first part is based on unfounded assumptions about what alien life would look like. The second part is obvious, scientists try to fill in the gaps in knowledge, but that does nothing to explain why they should decide that discovery of variations in some universal parameters should be anything other than naturally occurring, when so far they have always primarily weighted "naturally occurring" as the most likely explanation.

Im prepared to strongly argue that aliens would almost certainly vary parameters, that a universe that merely appears empty would be like rolling snake eyes 100 times in a row, but the wording here suggests you think the context is a claim that aliens can be disproven.
If you are prepared to argue that, then stop making assertions, and provide some support for your claims. Before you do, I recommend you go revisit your assumptions. As I pointed out, the main claim you made about the Dyson dilemma is based on a clearly faulty assumption. Disproving aliens clearly falls into the category of "proving a negative" which isn't practically going to happen.

The context is that the Dyson Dilemma is not based on the assumption of solar power.. and surely never was. That would be expecting many decently intelligent people to show zero common sense.
Now you are making an assumption that there is a correlation between intelligence and "common sense"  :P

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3354
  • Boca Chica, Texas
  • Liked: 6001
  • Likes Given: 360
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #127 on: 04/14/2018 03:33 AM »
 Why exactly do aliens need this level of power?
 If Someone here figured out how to build a zero point energy source out of banana peels and an old toaster tomorrow, what would we do with it?
 

Online nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2381
  • Liked: 600
  • Likes Given: 237
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #128 on: 04/14/2018 04:35 AM »
Toast some banana bread?

Offline tea monster

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 338
  • Across the Universe
  • Liked: 172
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Constant Acceleration at 1G and Beyond
« Reply #129 on: 04/14/2018 08:26 AM »
Why exactly do aliens need this level of power?
 If Someone here figured out how to build a zero point energy source out of banana peels and an old toaster tomorrow, what would we do with it?

This is like asking why would someone in the 1800's need a nuclear power plant? "Thousands of megawatts of electricity, what's the point in that?" Fast forward a few centuries and suddenly it makes sense.

Tags: