4 ms·

That's like saying a Apple M2 Max is mundane because you've got a CPU from the 80s. The interesting part isn't the mirror but how they made it. They're obviousl

That's like saying a Apple M2 Max is mundane because you've got a CPU from the 80s. The interesting part isn't the mirror but how they made it. They're obviously not mundane, otherwise NASA would have designed Hubble to use equivalent optics. Any actually interesting technology would be under a Secrecy Order [1] and the patents wouldn't see the light of day, perhaps ever. The few examples we know of were definitely cutting edge exotic technology at the time they were classified including the Manhattan project and the development of jet engines. Based on what little we know, the Secrecy Orders are very effective - some gaseous centrifuge technology used for enrichment in the 1940s and 1950s is still considered cutting edge and secret. Antigravity is just fantasy land. All it would take is a factor of two improvement in any number of technologies to make something exotic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act

mcpackieh 3y ago
> That's like saying a Apple M2 Max is mundane because you've got a CPU from the 80s. Yes, exactly. Give a modern Apple CPU to some chip experts in the 80s and they'd no doubt be amazed and have many questions about the details, but they would have a theoretical basis for understanding the premise of the thing. Give the same chip to Isaac Newton or Archimedes and it would be a completely different story. To them, a CPU would be truly exotic technology. Antigrav existing today would be like CPUs existing in Newton's day. You'd need completely new theories to even comprehend the most basic operating principles. Antigrav craft like those proposed by the people who don't believe Mick West's explanation of the Navy's "Go Fast" video would be further removed on a theoretical basis from the F-35 than the F-35 is from the Wright flier. > The few examples we know of were definitely cutting edge exotic technology at the time they were classified including the Manhattan project and the development of jet engines. In both of these cases, the fundamental operating principles were widely known to relevant researchers in various countries before anybody developed one that worked. Japan and Germany both had nuclear weapons programs during WW2. Nuclear fission was known to researchers in all three nations, and more as well. In the case of jet engines, you had inventors in many countries taking stabs at implementing a practical one decades before they were adopted into military service. There was never a chance of any military getting jet engines while the rest of the world was left wondering what the hell it even was. And with respect to gas centrifuges; those were considered but ultimately not employed by the Manhattan Project, which instead used gaseous diffusion. But the premise of gas centrifuges for isotope separation was first suggested in 1919, and the broader premise of any sort of centrifuge to separate things is much older. Gas centrifuges weren't exotic technology that game out of nowhere, the theoretical basis for them was clear before they were successfully created.
- akiselev 3y ago
  We've got a theoretical basis for warp drives [1]! Casimir effect-based propelentless propulsion! Nuclear engines in spaaaaace! How much more theoretical basis does your contrarianism demand? We've got a theoretical basis for almost any alien technology that comes short of violating the conservation of momentum or breaking the speed of light. Doesn't mean we're any closer to making an SSTO space ship. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    > Alcubierre drive Relies on "exotic matter" that violates known laws of physics.
    - akiselev 3y ago
      It actually doesn't violate the laws of physics. Matter with negative mass has never been observed before, making it purely theoretical. Theoretical basis! Besides, exotic matter is a shortcut to the energy required, not a necessary part of the Alcubierre drive.
      - mcpackieh 3y ago
        > Matter with negative mass has never been observed before, making it purely theoretical. It's worse than merely theoretical because the theories we use to describe reality at present don't give us any reason to believe such exotic matter must exist, and there is no empirical evidence for such matter existing. But slice it anyway you like, the Navy isn't operating these and there is no theoretical basis for explaining the sort of antigravity craft that UFOologists claim these Navy videos show. They aren't Alcubierre drives, that is simply absurd.

mcpackieh 3y ago

> That's like saying a Apple M2 Max is mundane because you've got a CPU from the 80s. Yes, exactly. Give a modern Apple CPU to some chip experts in the 80s and they'd no doubt be amazed and have many questions about the details, but they would have a theoretical basis for understanding the premise of the thing. Give the same chip to Isaac Newton or Archimedes and it would be a completely different story. To them, a CPU would be truly exotic technology. Antigrav existing today would be like CPUs existing in Newton's day. You'd need completely new theories to even comprehend the most basic operating principles. Antigrav craft like those proposed by the people who don't believe Mick West's explanation of the Navy's "Go Fast" video would be further removed on a theoretical basis from the F-35 than the F-35 is from the Wright flier. > The few examples we know of were definitely cutting edge exotic technology at the time they were classified including the Manhattan project and the development of jet engines. In both of these cases, the fundamental operating principles were widely known to relevant researchers in various countries before anybody developed one that worked. Japan and Germany both had nuclear weapons programs during WW2. Nuclear fission was known to researchers in all three nations, and more as well. In the case of jet engines, you had inventors in many countries taking stabs at implementing a practical one decades before they were adopted into military service. There was never a chance of any military getting jet engines while the rest of the world was left wondering what the hell it even was. And with respect to gas centrifuges; those were considered but ultimately not employed by the Manhattan Project, which instead used gaseous diffusion. But the premise of gas centrifuges for isotope separation was first suggested in 1919, and the broader premise of any sort of centrifuge to separate things is much older. Gas centrifuges weren't exotic technology that game out of nowhere, the theoretical basis for them was clear before they were successfully created.

akiselev 3y ago
We've got a theoretical basis for warp drives [1]! Casimir effect-based propelentless propulsion! Nuclear engines in spaaaaace! How much more theoretical basis does your contrarianism demand? We've got a theoretical basis for almost any alien technology that comes short of violating the conservation of momentum or breaking the speed of light. Doesn't mean we're any closer to making an SSTO space ship. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  > Alcubierre drive Relies on "exotic matter" that violates known laws of physics.
  - akiselev 3y ago
    It actually doesn't violate the laws of physics. Matter with negative mass has never been observed before, making it purely theoretical. Theoretical basis! Besides, exotic matter is a shortcut to the energy required, not a necessary part of the Alcubierre drive.
    - mcpackieh 3y ago
      > Matter with negative mass has never been observed before, making it purely theoretical. It's worse than merely theoretical because the theories we use to describe reality at present don't give us any reason to believe such exotic matter must exist, and there is no empirical evidence for such matter existing. But slice it anyway you like, the Navy isn't operating these and there is no theoretical basis for explaining the sort of antigravity craft that UFOologists claim these Navy videos show. They aren't Alcubierre drives, that is simply absurd.