UFO's and Conspiracy

[MvGulik]

... Mmmm
It seems to me its more about any (did he say "many" ?) potential (security) threats. And so far it seems limited to only UAP (... why do they always feel the need for new acronyms) reports from the military.
On the FTL subject:
A bit of a downer, but a scientifically sound conclusion.
(3 Apr 2022)
There still might be some 'potential' escape clause. ... As in: As long as you don't create any time (cause & effect) paradoxes ... you still might be able to get away with it. (quantum mechanics rules. ... *miauw* )

[Pinback]

Granted at the moment their maybe no way to go FTL but who knows in 100 or 1000 years from now, science always changes.

[MvGulik]

Sure, science evolves. But the rules nature sets don't. And that "no time (cause & effect) paradoxes" seems a solid hard rule that nature seems to protects with a vengeance.
One reason why I think 'serious' UFO/UAP research would be a good thing (other than finding out about stuff we overlooked or dismissed). Is in relation to "If we are being visited by other civilizations/(aliens)" ... how did they get here ?
I mean. If FTL is a no go, traveling between stars is a inherent slow process. Even with near light speed travel and hibernation in play, returning home might be a bit of a gamble (it might not be there anymore, as time did not slowed down for them). But ... if we are being visited/explored ... it could give us some clue's on the potential of FTL (and/or other things).
I know .. Its a bit of a long shot.
'serious' UFO research: That excludes in my view more or less all those, now a days, Discovery/History/etc channel series about related subjects.

[Cody]

Posted by: @mvgulik
Sure, science evolves. But the rules nature sets don't.

That ain't necessarily so! So far, some rules seem set in stone, but who knows...

[MvGulik]

Posted by: @cody Posted by: @mvgulik
Sure, science evolves. But the rules nature sets don't.

That ain't necessarily so! So far, some rules seem set in stone, but who knows...

Would that not fall under "science evolves" ? ie: not knowing yet what we don't know yet.
Any real change in the rules of nature (as far as we think we know them) are probably a unwelcome thing. So far I know of only one potential case where the rules would change (massively) and that would be a phase transition(phys.org 2013), ... which is of course of no use to any life in the universe.

Although the new calculations predict that a collapse is now more likely than ever before, it is actually also possible, that it will not happen at all. It is a prerequisite for the phase change that the universe consists of the elementary particles that we know today, including the Higgs particle. If the universe contains undiscovered particles, the whole basis for the prediction of phase change disappears.

[Pinback]

 
IIRC I believe their is no one theory that covers everything from the very small to the very big and if they ever do find one it may have big implication for everything we think we know.

[Cody]

Scientists have found that the mass of a sub-atomic particle is not what it should be. The measurement is the first conclusive experimental result that is at odds with one of the most important and successful theories of modern physics.

BBC article here.

[MvGulik]

Posted by: @pinback
IIRC I believe their is no one theory that covers everything from the very small to the very big and if they ever do find one it may have big implication for everything we think we know.

Correct. We have no Theory of everything yet. Which I figure is also not on the near horizon yet. Gravity, for one, being a major stumble block. (how long it will take to solve that one is anyone's guess)
No doubt that finding a unifying theory (or at least a better one) would have big implication, especially compared to what we currently think we know. But it will of course be smears out over time as we slowly discover more and more ...
Quanta Magazine plug: (2021 - 15min)

[MvGulik]

Just saw a (basic research) video about falling domino's ... and this kinda seems to have some similarities. (or is it sheep nr two following sheep nr one)
Anyway
NASA to Set Up Independent Study on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (NASA Jun 9, 2022)

NASA is commissioning a study team to start early in the fall to examine unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs) – that is, observations of events in the sky that cannot be identified as aircraft or known natural phenomena – from a scientific perspective. The study will focus on identifying available data, how best to collect future data, and how NASA can use that data to move the scientific understanding of UAPs forward.
...

The intention is nice. But will it result to anything interesting ... that has to be seen.
(Darn. One of James Webb Space telescope mirrors was hit by a, somewhat large, micro meteorite. Damage seems minimal.)

[Pinback]

Probably the same result as the other investigation into UFO/UAP nothing conclusive. 

[Pinback]

Posted by: @yam
[attach]376[/attach]
ill just leave this here

It's that 1950 Canadian built UFO again.