3 ms·
> Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? I guess my disdain for this field's
by zeagle 2y ago
> Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures?
I guess my disdain for this field's scientific rigor shines through. When hypotheses aren't testable...
> Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field.
That is a fair point!
- ofrzeta 2y agoI don't know. There are academics, medical doctors who believe in homeopathy or worse. So academic credentials no not automatically translate in overall rationality.
- zeagle 2y agoAs a physician I fully agree! There is some crazy stuff out there (and I'm sure someone has said that about my western medicine and me too.)
- throwaway48540 2y agoThe hypothesis is testable - we've been observing and calculating the behavior of black holes and other astronomical objects for decades. This paper is looking for stuff that is physically possible but unlikely to occur naturally. What test would you like to see, short of "yep there are aliens"?
- zeagle 2y agoIs it tho? Correct me if I'm wrong but black holes, although pretty whimsical when first proposed, are an explanation for aspects of general relativity with indirectly observable phenomenon, not speculation on how aliens derive energy. It's important to recognize and push through biases and recognize there is a role for theoretical work but theoretical or particle physics is different to whatever encompasses Kardashev scales, Dyson spheres and other thought experiments. I think I'll just agree to disagree here.