4 ms·
This is a comparison that really doesn’t work. It takes month in a sailing ship to cross the ocean. It would take thousands of years at the very least to cross
by trestenhortz 6y ago
This is a comparison that really doesn’t work.
It takes month in a sailing ship to cross the ocean. It would take thousands of years at the very least to cross space.
- King-Aaron 6y agoSo this wouldn't be an issue if you solved the ageing problem - a problem which we are presently working on solving ourselves. I don't see why it's out of the question that a civilization that's hypothetically a hundred thousand years ahead of us wouldn't have worked out how to suspend themselves, preserve themselves or negate their ageing. Or for that matter, work out how to sidestep the distance argument though some other exotic method that we're yet to discover (i.e. wormholes or some such). I'm not exactly a proponent for little green men visiting us, but I do think that arguing about distance or physical limits of speed/travel based on our current frame of reference is an incorrect position to take.
- trestenhortz 6y agoTo put it in perspective, if the furthest distance man has travelled from the earth is the moon, and we represent that as 1 inch, then the closest star is about 200km / 125 miles away. In such a scale, Voyager has travelled 80 feet.
- King-Aaron 6y agoThe distances aren't lost on me by any stretch - However I don't feel that the argument about distance would be as relevant to a hypothetical "class 3" civilisation.
- trestenhortz 6y agoI’m talking current capabilities rather than possible future technological capabilities.
- King-Aaron 6y agoOh yeah, I get that. I guess my point is that people like to dismiss the idea of extra terrestrials being able to trave the vastness of space based on our own frame of technological reference, even though another race may not be bound to the same physical constraints that we are.