6 ms·
Not extraterrestrial, but how about… Extradimensional? Seems easier to live in a higher dimension than to break the speed of light anyway.
by cammikebrown 3y ago
Not extraterrestrial, but how about… Extradimensional? Seems easier to live in a higher dimension than to break the speed of light anyway.
- paulrouget 3y agoExtra dimensions are just scifi stuff. Physics would break appart if there were any "big enough" dimensions. Gravity & electromagnetism would not behave the way they behave (inverse square laws).
- isityouyesitsme 3y agoIt is also possible that everything humans understand is simply a vignette into a much larger reality, and all of those things would fall apart because they aren't true, they're merely the laws we've discovered with the limited information we have available to us.
- maxbond 3y agoMaybe. Is that a good explanation for some grainy footage? Is it a better explanation than, "the drone technology most of us are familiar with is a vignette of a much larger space of technological possibility; without the need to accommodate human frailty, strange and wonderful configurations of aircraft are possible, so much so that they may baffle even experienced airman? And like any strange and wonderful technology in this world, it's first used to spy, and in a decade will be used to serve ads."
- isityouyesitsme 3y agoPlease cote the spot where I suggested anything that even remotely looks like I took a position. All I mean to say is that circular logic based on upholding one's views of reality do not bring any clarity to the situation. The same situation seems to happen countless times in the history of empirical science and mathematics. There are incontrovertible facts, until some new information controverts them.
- maxbond 3y agoThat's fine, but you asked a question and I responded to it. Whether you hold a position, that's not really my business, I believe you when you say you don't.
- maxbond 3y agoI'm seeing now that it was a proposition not a question (I read it as "Is it" rather than "It is"), my mistake there. But I would've responded in the same way regardless, so substitute this with, "you proposed something and I responded to it."
- paulrouget 3y agoThen a "dimension" would not be a dimension as defined by math and physics.
- isityouyesitsme 3y agoThrow-away comment: that's essentially the point.
- kevinmchugh 3y agoIs there any way to falsify this idea?
- isityouyesitsme 3y agoI don't think that there is. An obvious comparison is religious thought. Unlike most religious thought, you do actually learn when the consensus has been utterly wrong. What you don't know is when that will happen.
- anon1199022 3y agoor maybe it might takes as few hundred more years to understand them? Our understanding of things evolve very slowly compared to age of universe.
- paulrouget 3y agoDimensions have a strict definition. Under those strict definitions we can draw conclusions that are 100% true. Math tell us things that can't be invalidated in the future. If it turns out there is "something else", it would not be a dimension as defined by math and physics.
- oefrha 3y agoSpeaking as a former theoretical high energy physicist who has studied string theory and other BSM theories (including “extra dimensions”) quite extensively and black hole information theory to a reasonable extent, the higher dimensions talked about in any close-to-mainstream physics really has nothing to do with sci-fi “inter-dimensional travel”. It’s quite amusing to read the sentence “Seems easier to live in a higher dimension than to break the speed of light”. The latter is well established, very precise physics, the former is a very vague, so far fictional concept with little to do with our current understanding of physics (and actually very much goes against it), yet somehow one is “easier” than another. Of course we can’t rule anything out, including “extra dimensions” in some scifi-esque sense that’s not currently understood, but these two don’t belong in the same sentence. (Btw, I enjoy sci-fi about traveling between alternate universes.)
- tomohelix 3y agoThe way I understand the extra "dimension" here is like me viewing a bacteria on a cover slide. To the bacteria, that 2D flat plane is all that matters. Sure, technically it is 3D, but the 3rd dimension is compressed so much it is basically nonexistent and the bacteria can't really be bothered anyway. They can't even comprehend the concept of dimensions. But to me, I am fully in 3D. I am literally an extradimensional being to the bacteria. And I am so far above it (no pun intended) I am incomprehensible to anything that lives on that 2D slide. Even if I assume the bacteria has some really good teachers and can build stuff (they actually do, they make biofilms that are pretty complex "superstructures"), the kind of thing they can do in their limited plane of existence is nothing compared to what a human can. So while I don't believe anything that was released so far points conclusively to real aliens, I don't find the concept of extradimensional beings too far fetch.
- helpfulContrib 3y agoHow about .. just terrestrial? In other words, we are not the most technologically advanced species on the planet. Merely bystanders to other, older, perhaps far more advanced civilizations that merely tolerate our presence on their planets surface. I mean, this tracks.
- tptacek 3y agoNow you're talking like David Grusch; if you just include the Vatican in your theory, you'll be on the same page as him.
- david-gpu 3y agoHas cammikebrown held a high position within the intelligence community? Has he been tasked as part of his official duties with finding any possible legacy reverse-engineering projects? Did he interview forty witnesses, including people who report being part of these programs currently? Did he collect evidence of wrongdoing and report it to the ICIG through the officially-sanctioned whistleblower process? Did the ICIG interview other witnesses and find his claims significant enough to forward them to Congress? Did cammikebrown eventually testify under oath in front of Congress, in both classified and non-classifief sessions? Well, if all that is true then I think we should pay a little attention to what cammikebrown is saying and demand that his claims are investigated, because either cammikebrown is full of shit and needs to end with his bones in jail, or he is not and there is some serious corruption that needs to be addressed within the DoD.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tptacek 3y agoVirtually none of this is true of Grusch.
- david-gpu 3y agoPlease be specific. I'm on mobile, but at least you can start here [0]. [0] https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-retrieved-non-human-craft/ https://thedebrief.org/intelligence-officials-say-u-s-has-re...
- tptacek 3y agoYou should listen to Ezra Klein's interview with Leslie Kean, the author of that story. It's pretty comical.
- maxbond 3y agoDoes it seem easier? We have no indication that higher dimensions are a place you could "travel" to. This is the kind of ad-hoc hypothesis Occam cautioned against - multiplying entities unnecessarily. "UFOs are spycraft, hoaxes, and surprising atmospheric phenomena" is a perfectly serviceable alternative to the hypothesis "UFOs are alien spacecraft." Why are we introducing a new entity (extradimenional travel) which we have no other evidence for, when we don't need to?
- rqtwteye 3y ago"Higher dimensions" sounds kind of appealing but what does it really mean?
- Ziggy_Zaggy 3y agoThere R&D in this field is very early but yes there's already tons of literature on this topic to process/consider in the physics field(s).
- duozerk 3y agoNo there isn't (beyond occasional papers badly misinterpreted by mainstream press) There's tons of literature on this topic to process/consider in science fiction.
- Ziggy_Zaggy 3y agoThanks for pointing out this often-overlooked aspect of the conversation.
- AltruisticGapHN 3y agoLook into Donald Hoffmann. Space time is not fundamental.
- havnagiggle 3y agoI'd suggest calling it the big foot dimension.
- aergoibqer 3y ago[flagged]