Aliens

[Kerny92 1,246]

52 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

Also, here's an interesting concept. The 'time constraint' is only really an issue because we are biological lifeforms who have finite lifetimes as a result of our biology. A life-form that has advanced to the stage of being capable of high end space exploration will quite plausibly have 'evolved' to the stage of partially or entirely being a technological life-form, a robot/android. In which case does the 'time constraint' problem of space exploration still apply? Would an intelligent species that have technological 'bodies' care about millions or even billions of years travelling?

If you believe this is the most likely scenario then in all probability it wont be little green men visiting us but little grey androids!

But by that time the androids would have figured we are nothing but an inconvenience so wouldn't matter to us anyway.

[shaaark 10,135]

3 hours ago, Born Hunter said:

40'000 years relative to the stationary observer. Potentially the travellers on the space ship would experience much less time. A ship that accelerates at 1G, to simulate Earth gravity, could in theory cross the Universe in around 12 years.

Also, there is of course the speculative fields of faster than light travel.

 

Edit: I'm talking about travelling to distance stars here, not Voyager which is going too slow to benefit from the time dilation effect I'm implying. Sorry, I confused your Voyager point with your travelling to distant stars one. My broad point is still valid though.

 

2 hours ago, Kerny92 said:

The difficulty of relativistic travel tends to be underestimated. Look at it this way. To get to the speed where time travels half as fast for the ship, you also end up doubling the mass of the spacecraft. That extra mass has to be paid for somehow. It's paid for by the energy you impart to the ship through acceleration. If you accelerated that ship by imparting energy from the outside with a perfect, 100% efficient system, you'd have to turn a kilo  of matter into pure energy with no losses for every kilo you increased the ships mass.
 And it's much worse with a self contained rocket. You also need to accelerate the fuel that you haven't used yet. 
 So, it comes down to, to accelerate to a speed where time for the ship is 10% that measured by someone standing still and slow down again once you reach your destination, you'd need the most perfect imaginable system (with today's physics) and spend 99.99% of your initial mass to do it. 
 Anything better will need more than technology. It will take different physics than we understand now. 

 

2 hours ago, Born Hunter said:

I don't think it's underestimated at all.

The point is that it's a technological challenge, not a physical impossibility. So it's not quite as improbable, that another intelligent life-form will take to galactic space exploration, as first seems. They just need a level of technological advancement to make it worth while endeavour.

Special relativity makes it possible in short periods of time but at the expense of returning to the world and society you left.

Other speculative fields, such as FTL and wormholes etc may offer options that do not have that drawback.

 

1 hour ago, mushroom said:

Physics and theoretical maths allow for faster than light travel. It's technology that has the limitations. Also energy for faster than light travel theoretically can be taken from the quantum level and beyond. String theory if proven is basically unlimited energy. Tapping into it, is theoretically just as possible as harnessing fission energy, same with fusion, It's just far more complicated and at this moment beyond our understanding. 

 

1 hour ago, Born Hunter said:

Though faster than light travel may be possible we do not yet know if it's possible to actually achieve it ourselves, physically that is, never mind technologically. What I mean is, there's not necessarily any physical limit on FTL velocities, as you point out, but light speed itself is a hard limit so it may not be possible to actually cross that limit. Effectively making FTL physically impossible. Unless we found a physical way of accelerating from stationary to FTL without actually at any point having to travel at light speed. That's be akin to accelerating your car from stationary to 100mph without at any point doing say 60mph. It's a pretty radical concept.

This is all pretty speculative though.

 

1 hour ago, mushroom said:

See this is why I studied maths and engineering 

Fascinates me. It's all actually theoretically possible, we just don't know how to. For example if we could harness gravity, create and control it, in conjunction with a unlimited power source to power propulsion.... there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to hit and surpass LS. If we are moving an entire gravity field (say around a ship) then the jump to LS shouldn't be felt and no red stains on the back wall lol

 

55 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

Also, here's an interesting concept. The 'time constraint' is only really an issue because we are biological lifeforms who have finite lifetimes as a result of our biology. A life-form that has advanced to the stage of being capable of high end space exploration will quite plausibly have 'evolved' to the stage of partially or entirely being a technological life-form, a robot/android. In which case does the 'time constraint' problem of space exploration still apply? Would an intelligent species that have technological 'bodies' care about millions or even billions of years travelling?

If you believe this is the most likely scenario then in all probability it wont be little green men visiting us but little grey androids!

All very valid and thought provoking lads. But I'm sticking with the 'infinity' theory 

[Born Hunter 17,638]

1 hour ago, mushroom said:

Who knows maybe they populate planets with gates that allow instant travel

I would die from the intellectual orgasm!

[ChrisJones 7,973]

[mushroom 12,391]

3 hours ago, shaaark said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

All very valid and thought provoking lads. But I'm sticking with the 'infinity' theory 

That means that everything said here is possible, has happened and will happen again lol total headfuck

2 hours ago, Born Hunter said:

I would die from the intellectual orgasm!

I believe I would shoot early too

[shaaark 10,135]

23 minutes ago, mushroom said:

That means that everything said here is possible, has happened and will happen again lol total headfuck

I believe I would shoot early too

We are all made of stars 

[Greyman 25,266]

24 minutes ago, shaaark said:

We are all made of stars 

Yes brown ones 

[mushroom 12,391]

9 minutes ago, Greyman said:

Yes brown ones 

Some are pinkish and then there's the bleached ones lol

[.357shooter 993]

they do not need to travel 40 light years as aliens are on the dark side of the moon

[ChrisJones 7,973]

1 minute ago, .357shooter said:

they do not need to travel 40 light years as aliens are on the dark side of the moon

Rachel, Nevada.

[Kerny92 1,246]

Does make you chuckle when you hear of crash reports. Like they're going to have the technology to travel light years to reach us for their craft to fcuk up and come crashing down in a ball of flames.......

[scothunter 12,609]

Or picking up the weirdest f****r they can find and experiment on. 

[mackem 23,800]

8 minutes ago, scothunter said:

Or picking up the weirdest f****r they can find and experiment on. 

 

[Kerny92 1,246]

 

[South hams hunter 8,837]

3 hours ago, mackem said:

 

Funny how it's the same guy who knows where the big cats live ... Own up mackem you've saved it!