3 ms·
The presumption among all of this skepticism is that the speed of light is the ultimate limitation. The problem with this stance for literally the past 20 year
by pmarreck 3y ago
The presumption among all of this skepticism is that the speed of light is the ultimate limitation.
The problem with this stance for literally the past 20 years is that the Alcubierre drive, which has yet to be disproven in concept (despite requiring exotic matter and high amounts of energy) has been known about since the 90’s, and at least makes FTL travel, theoretically possible.
This is why I am skeptical about modern-day skeptics: Have they simply all collectively not read the Alcubierre paper, or the expert physicist responses to it, despite having had 20 years now to do so? Do they really think that simply not knowing how to implement it is an argument against it? How nearsighted would you have to be to assume that we’ve discovered all the loopholes already?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/star-treks-warp-drive-leads-to-new-physics/?amp=true https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/star-treks-warp-d...
- krapp 3y agoThe most obvious argument against the validity of the Alcubierre drive (besides the exotic matter and energy requirements, and spacetime not working that way as far as we know, all of which which are substantial issues despite your handwaving them away) is the Fermi Paradox. If, as you seem to be confidently asserting, the Alcubierre drive is feasible, has been built, and is what aliens are using to visit Earth, then given that even low estimates of the number of habitable planets in our galaxy runs into the millions (and there are more than trillions of galaxies in our observable universe) we must assume FTL travel is relatively commonplace. Even if only one species built a warp drive, they should have been able to colonize the entire observable universe by now. If one species has figured it out, it stands to reason that many more would have. So where is the evidence? The Alcubierre Drive as theorized would give off an easily detectable signature. Where are these signatures? They should be everywhere. If the aliens visiting Earth are using Alcubierre drives, they should be particularly noticeable. But, of course, there is no sign of the effect of FTL travel anywhere in the observable universe, and even on Earth, the best anyone can come up with is conjecture and blurry photos. Also, your mention of "expert physicist responses to it" fails to take into account the amount of criticism of the premise by the scientific community. You write as if the Alcubierre drive is proven science accepted by consensus and only engineering prevents us from building one, but of course that isn't remotely the case. As far as actual science is concerned, the Alcubierre might as well run on unicorn farts. You're literally just taking one thing that doesn't exist, and "proving it" with another thing that doesn't exist. An argument that weak really doesn't merit the confidence you're putting out here. "But muh Alcubierre Drive" is not the slam dunk you seem to think it is.
- pmarreck 3y ago> as far as we know Therein lies the rub. "As far as we know." Human knowledge only goes back, what, 2000 years? Industrialization started, what, only 150 years ago? The printing press is, eh, 500 years old? Ubiquitous computers began... literally an instant ago in cosmic timescales. So while my argument might be summarized as "this one thing may be real because this other thing may be real but just 20 years ago wasn't even hypothetically conceived", your argument is basically "there's no way this one thing is real because this other thing is only distantly hypothetically real and still has flaws and besides, the whole concept is preposterous because there should either be aliens literally everywhere already or nowhere, because that makes about as much sense (maybe they're leaving our "incubator" mostly alone?), and because we simply don't understand how it's possible, despite the fact that we are basically 5 day old babies (and apparently VERY cocky ones) as far as science and human knowledge is concerned at cosmic timescales." LOL
- tsimionescu 3y agoFirst of all, the Alcubierre drive only works if several things that have never been confirmed to exist do in fact exist. Secondly, even if it turns out that exotic matter and such exist somewhere in the universe, the Alcubierre drive only works in their presence. So, it can't be used to travel FTL to a place where they don't exist, such as the Earth.
- zikzak 3y agoWhen von Neumann probes were proposed, we did not have working AI or 3D printers. They were merely concepts with some proof of concept systems in various states. We now have those technologies. It is trivial to extrapolate how effective they will be in say 10,000 years if we avoid blowing ourselves up. By then maybe we'll even have a sustainable Fusion reactor, general AI, and atomic matter deposition. Do you accept that von Neumann probes are a realistic proposition and that they could have easily blanketed the galaxy by now? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_spacecraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_spacecraft > It has been theorized[3] that a self-replicating starship utilizing relatively conventional theoretical methods of interstellar travel (i.e., no exotic faster-than-light propulsion, and speeds limited to an "average cruising speed" of 0.1c.) could spread throughout a galaxy the size of the Milky Way in as little as half a million years. Half a million years. How long is that, really, in the grand scheme of things. And how close would we have to be to a civilization who released not one but millions of self-replicating probes for one to have visited us by now. I am not saying this happened, but please consider it could have, it might have, and what if it did. What if we are seeing these right now?
- krapp 3y agoObviously Von Neumann probes haven't blanketed the galaxy as if they had, it would be obvious. Not to belabor a point I made in another comment, but the Fermi Paradox is a harsh taskmaster. So this leaves a few possibilities: 1) No intelligent, technologically advanced civilization exists in the universe other than ourselves, because any such civilization would have developed Von Neumann probes, which would mean the galaxy should be covered by them. 2) No intelligent, technologically advanced civilization has yet developed Von Neumann probes. 3) Von Neumann probes exist, but they haven't blanketed the galaxy. Since the math says it should be easy for them to do so, either they were developed relatively recently and simply haven't had the chance to do so, or else confounding factors exist which make the process of unbounded exponential growth more difficult than the math would suggest. None of these possibilities lead to the conclusion that UFOs (assuming the narrative presented by Grusch and other UFO believers) as described are more likely to be Von Neumann probes than not. Any nearby civilization that released millions of self-replicating probes should be noticeable. We've studied nearby stars, there's no evidence of any of the telltale signs of energy usage or heat that should accompany something on that scale. Also, there's no evidence of replication on the part of these objects within the UFO narrative. What are they feeding on? Where? Exponential replication means if they're here they should have stripped our solar system clean by now. Why haven't they? All of the behavior described resembles conventional, piloted craft rather than the expected behavior of swarms of Von Neumann probes.