What the hell do you know is beyond what anyone, even NASA scientists (let alone MTB riders) can even comprehend….erm see??

No actually what I just stated is one of the corner stones of science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity#Experimental_evidence

See time dilation.

The maths is probably beyond you though.

bwaarp – Member
No, I just like winning.

Oh, ok – you ‘win’???

I also have a psychotic hatred for hippies and post-modernists.

I bet your dad told you to hate quite a lot of things. Do you know your dad?

I just get angry with people who ignorantly lambaste chemistry or physics and attempt to talk about something they do not understand.

Art? You want to know what the most pure art is… maths, physics and chemistry.

well as year is one earth orbit of the sun so they would need to be using a different scale. The time it takes to orbit is fixed*

* it varies a bit lets not get too complicated here.
Ps atomic clocks and please lets not get into relativity here

It’s like smashing your head against a brick wall.

Did the universe decide that ‘time’ in the whole universe is relative to the earth orbiting the sun, or if there is another universe, do they have an hour made up of 60 minutes etc???

Time is a concept made up by humans to fit a happening of events.

maths and physics.. con art invented by scraggly little toads who can’t get laid in attempt to make themselves look clever..

(or in this case a little bit fick)

It’s like smashing your head against a brick wall.

Did the universe decide that ‘time’ in the whole universe is relative to the earth orbiting the sun, or if there is another universe, do they have an hour made up of 60 minutes etc???

Time is a concept made up by humans to fit a happening of events.

Oh god this is **** hilarious, shall we quote wikipedia? Here’s the observable proof we understand time.

“Hafele and Keating, in 1971, flew caesium atomic clocks east and west around the Earth in commercial airliners, to compare the elapsed time against that of a clock that remained at the US Naval Observatory. Two opposite effects came into play. The clocks were expected to age more quickly (show a larger elapsed time) than the reference clock, since they were in a higher (weaker) gravitational potential for most of the trip (c.f. Pound, Rebka). But also, contrastingly, the moving clocks were expected to age more slowly because of the speed of their travel. From the actual flight paths of each trip, the theory predicted that the flying clocks, compared with reference clocks at the U.S. Naval Observatory, should have lost 40+/-23 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and should have gained 275+/-21 nanoseconds during the westward trip. Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanoseconds during the westward trip (where the error bars represent standard deviation). [15] In 2005, the National Physical Laboratory in the United Kingdom reported their limited replication of this experiment.[16] The NPL experiment differed from the original in that the caesium clocks were sent on a shorter trip (London–Washington D.C. return), but the clocks were more accurate. The reported results are within 4% of the predictions of relativity.

The Global Positioning System can be considered a continuously operating experiment in both special and general relativity. The in-orbit clocks are corrected for both special and general relativistic time dilation effects as described above, so that (as observed from the Earth’s surface) they run at the same rate as clocks on the surface of the Earth.”

bwaarp – Member
I just get angry with people who ignorantly lambaste chemistry or physics and attempt to talk about something they do not understand.

Art? You want to know what the most pure art is… maths, physics and chemistry.

I don’t lambast anything discovered and ‘proven’ by people far more intelligent than I. I do however reserve the right to question assumptions about something beyond what anybody actually ‘knows’.

bwaaarp – blah blah blah blah

wow.. now there is a point missed!!!

Well in this case, they do.

bwaarp – I’m not sure if you are intelligent and stubborn, or just stubborn.

Think outside the earth spinning round the sun.

I don’t care what clocks you fly anywhere, we created them in our decision of what time actually is.

Yes, on earth a day is a day, a year is a year is a year etc. What is time in another galaxy or universe? It certainly isn’t related in any way to us spinning round the sun.

Jeeze, is this a “what if a tree falls and no one is around to hear it” question.

Are you talking about clock time or space time….relativity is the same everywhere.

arrogant.. no wait..

troll

What is time in another galaxy or universe? It certainly isn’t related in any way to us spinning round the sun

[pedantry]you cannot have another universe as uni means one.

The time scale they use may be different from ours in the same sense as yards differ from metres…however the time will be exactly the same as ours. It is a constant but you can use various scales as you could for temperature or anything else you wish to measure

it is not man made it is real and universal

*ignores relativity

arrogant.. no wait..

troll

That’s just your human-centric viewpoint.

Ok then Junkyard – the known universe.

Time only occurs in the respect of one event/moment leading to another – it is immeasurable and we have decided to put a scale to it.

however the time will be exactly the same as ours

is your best guess.. but having never even been to the bottom of the ocean, let alone the moon or a distant galaxy.. we can only ever assume our guesses about the utter unknown to be accurate..

but what was in question was their/our perception of it.. do we even know if a tree perceives time the same way as us..?

Ok then Junkyard – the known universe.

Time only occurs in the respect of one event/moment leading to another – it is immeasurable and we have decided to put a scale to it.

That’s like saying milligrams don’t exist. Mass and weight are still there though.

You really REALLY need to think about time dilation. If you travel for 10 years in space and come back to earth 1000 years later, time exists my friend.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

is your best guess.. but having never even been to the bottom of the ocean, let alone the moon or a distant galaxy.. we can only ever assume our guesses about the utter unknown to be accurate..

but what was in question was their/our perception of it.. do we even know if a tree perceives time the same way as us..?

It doesn’t have neurone synapses, or any chemistry that remotely resembles the ability to form memory.

Try learning some biochemistry and botany.

so we’ve discovered the actual chemical existence of memory now..? when..?

that’s a new development..

I wonder what they’ll think about it all in another thousand years..?

bwaaaarp… you are a science fundamentalist.. and extremist even

osama bin labcoat

Yeah, actually it’s pretty easy to see. If memories were being processed there would be tell tale chemical cascades associated with the ability to change and hold form in response to external stimuli.

There are not.

Science can do shit you’ve never even thought about.

I’m not a fundamentalist, you are just an ignorant red neck who’s trying to argue with people on topics they are qualified in. I’m having fun batting every hilarious primary school grade scientific assumption you make down.

The sad thing is with people like you is that you end up making these nonsensical, rhetorical and circular arguments because you can’t hack the fact that scientific progress is eroding whatever religious or world view you hold.

oooh.. that is some next level shizzle fo sho 😀

Veering dangerously back on topic,

I just looked at some numbers.

The observable universe contains about 3 to 100 × 10^22 stars (30 sextillion to a septillion stars), organized in more than 80 billion galaxies.

It’s estimated that the universe is 10^23 times bigger than the observable universe. That’s 10 and 23 zeros.

That’s a lot of planets.

No life on other planets? It suddenly seems unlikely.

There’s a nice diagram here, but it’s hard to view. Best to F11 your browser. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Earth%27s_Location_in_the_Universe_SMALLER_%28JPEG%29.jpg

That’s like saying milligrams don’t exist. Mass and weight are still there though

Yeah, I am seeing your point though – maybe we’ve both been arguing at crossed purposes.

Time I suppose does exist in relation to the turning of the earth, in respect it has been a certain number of said actions since the ‘big bang’ or whatever.

Hands up, my argument is flawed – my head hurts, I’m a bit pissed and it’s time for bed.

I may well challenge you again tomorrow with a clear head though. 😕

Other life forms though – you bet! 😉

I’m not trying to argue.. and I’m not saying that you’re wrong..
I am a redneck.. I don’t even have a gcse..

you are just talking in absolutes which makes you appear not very bright.. which is a shame I think.. considering

I don’t speak in absolutes when I’m dealing with scientific matters, yours Junki are not. They are misinformed opinions lacking any common understanding of even basic science.

Had you actually been able to engage me in a debate not worthy of total derision, like some of the finer points of genetics that are not totally understood then I would have been much more reasonable.

Instead, what you should do is buy a blooody basic chemistry and physics textbook because you are obviously curious and a curious but non-reading person is a waste. Put your brain to what it was designed for Junki. Curiosity like yours is all you need and it is more important than anything else. Do not argue about this kind of thing until you understand what you are arguing about.

I’m sorry for calling you a redneck.

Junki – http://www.khanacademy.org/

Check this out mate, go through all the stuff on Physics and Chemistry. Do one at a time and make sure you understand each lecture before you move on.

If you catch yourself thinking, well how do they know this? Have they observed it? Well google is your friend!

Sorry I just get really pissed off with a lot of people (herbal medicine types, militant post-modernists, militant creationists et…. I don’t mind any of these except when they pass certain boundaries)

I hope I have not put you off trying to understand….but just try to realize it’s like being a concert pianist and having to teach 3 year olds to play chop sticks day in day out.

oh man..

I understand the basics.. I understand a fair old bit to be honest.. but this is a thread about the existence of extra terrestrials for gawds sake kiddo.. not a science versus art bun fight

so we’re playing devils advocate.. trying to initiate a bit of free thinking.. exploring the boundaries

the essential what ifs of it all Buzz Killington.. what if you’re wrong..?

which appears to have offended your delicate sensibilities somewhat..
I apologise..

Sorry I just get really pissed off with a lot of people (herbal medicine types, militant post-modernists, militant creationists et…. I don’t mind any of these except when they pass certain boundaries)

I’ve re-visited this thread for now just to add that I get really pissed off with people who make assumptions about people who disagree with their stonewalled view of our existance, call them names and don’t even have the respect to call them by their correct username, in fact manipulating it into a derisory term. Apparent intelligence (or maybe just knowledge of/ability to regurgitate ‘facts’ about a particular subject) aside doesn’t excuse you being a complete and utter tosser.

there’s other life forms even just here on this thread.. 🙂

night all…x

I’ve re-visited this thread for now just to add that I get really pissed off with people who make assumptions about people who disagree with their stonewalled view of our existance, call them names and don’t even have the respect to call them by their correct username, in fact manipulating it into a derisory term. Apparent intelligence (or maybe just knowledge of/ability to regurgitate ‘facts’ about a particular subject) aside doesn’t excuse you being a complete and utter tosser.

I just started getting annoyed when someone mentioned stars might not actually be suns because what it might be is something else, like I don’t know, windows to heaven emulating sun like bodies in spectral analysis.

And I was a **** because like Dawkins I’ve come to the conclusion that the only way to deal with people like homeopathists, animal right’s nutcases etc is to ridicule them. Because they don’t listen, ever.

“I think that life will be discovered in the solar system within my lifetime- really simple organisms on Europa or something. “

This. There is good Scientific evidence already. It’s just not quite 100% conclusive.

I have found that the only polite way to deal with dogmatic people is to not waste my breath. Because they don’t listen, ever.

Bwaaarp.. you are suffering from a severe lack of imagination.. all of the great thinkers would be utterly appalled by you..

Indeed yunki is right on some of this – and some of the absolutist statements bwaarp has made are a little too certain

I just find it a stilted way of thinking..

‘wood is for making pointy sticks..’
‘but what if we could make incredible heat and energy with it too..?’
‘no.. it’s for pointy sticks.. look.. see..?’
‘could we try rubbing it together.. maybe create some immense heat energy..?
‘no.. pointy sticks.. that’s all’
‘really..?’

‘YES YES YES REALLY..’

‘well.. ok.. I understand the pointy sticks thing.. and agree.. but is there a tiny chance that we missed something..? ‘

‘STOP IT STOP IT I’M TELLING MY DAD’

‘wow’

It’s not being narrow-minded to favour observable, testable models of how life and the universe works over loads of “yeah, but what if, man…” 6th form ramblings.

If it is then it’s narrow-minded to get on with dealing with the world we see around us rather than worrying about, say, whether hurricanes are caused by pink unicorn farts.

This is not the same as asserting that humans know all there ever will be to know about the universe, the end. It could be, for instance, that there are silicon life forms like that one in Star Trek that etched messages into the floor with acid, or places where gravity works differently or whatever. I mean ‘could be’ in the sense that you could argue you can’t rule it out until you’ve visited every single spot in the universe to check.

Put another way, there’s no point bothering with what would be massive exceptions to ‘the rules’ when there’s so much to do within those rules. If some such exception jumps up and bites us in the face then those ‘rules’ will be revised- that’s how science works.

There’s not a scientist in the world who thinks science knows everything about everything. But that’s a long way from saying every supposition should have equal weight- science just can’t work that way.

‘wood is for making pointy sticks..’
‘but what if we could make incredible heat and energy with it too..?’
‘no.. it’s for pointy sticks.. look.. see..?’
‘could we try rubbing it together.. maybe create some immense heat energy..?
‘no.. pointy sticks.. that’s all’
‘really..?’

Versus the yunki approach:

“Sticks burn. Fire is hot.”
“That’s a bit absolute isn’t it? What if not all fire is hot? I’m going to stay over here in the cold because I disagree with your arrogant science.”

I just find it a stilted way of thinking..

‘wood is for making pointy sticks..’
‘but what if we could make incredible heat and energy with it too..?’
‘no.. it’s for pointy sticks.. look.. see..?’
‘could we try rubbing it together.. maybe create some immense heat energy..?
‘no.. pointy sticks.. that’s all’
‘really..?’

Who is that you think thinks like this? No scientist I’ve ever met.
Straw men aren’t doing much to prove your point.

I’m not having a pop at science or scientists..
I am a whole-hearted subscriber to science and it’s wondrous discoveries.. I’m not a new age fantasist.. I do enjoy however discussing what may or may not be possible, the things that are as yet undiscovered..

what I am doing is having a dig at the insecure young men on this thread (which is about extra terrestrial life) who are insisting that there is absolutely nothing more anywhere or anyhow, than the science that we already know..

I’m starting to think that STWs outspoken scientific fraternity have an almighty persecution complex

i know this one’s a few pages old, but it’s a good one, and i think it’s very interesting…

colournoise – Member

Didn’t NASA find a non-carbon (phosphorus?) life-form in Mono Lake a while back, or was that discredited?

slainte rob

nearly, but not quite.

it seems that some clever scientists hypotheoteticated (guessed) that it might be possible that some life-forms could have adapted to replace phosphorous with arsenic. so they went looking for places where this might be true.

linky – bbc

(it’s perhaps not as exciting as finding silicone-based life)

I’m not a new age fantasist.

You do a very good impression of one.

what I am doing is having a dig at the insecure young men on this thread (which is about extra terrestrial life) who are insisting that there is absolutely nothing more anywhere or anyhow, than the science that we already know..

Who would that be then? I don’t see anyone insisting that. Or any “young men” for that matter!