this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
53 points (96.5% liked)

UAP - The Most Active Community Discussing UAP/UFOs

1274 readers
1 users here now

A community for civil discourse related to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. Share your sightings, experiences, news, and investigations. Everyone is welcome here, from believers to skeptics and everything in between.


New to Lemmy?

See the Getting Started Guide


Want Disclosure?

Declassify UAP offers a tool that automatically finds your representatives and sends them a prewritten message.


Community Spotlight

Featured Posts and User Investigations


Useful Links


Community Rules


Other Communities

[email protected]


If you're interested in moderating or have any suggestions for the community, feel free to contact SignullGone or HM05_Me.


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Here's a thought experiment. Let's operate under the assumption that UAPs represent extraterrestrial beings. I would assume they aren't using traditional rockets or methods we currently understand to get here. We know the speed of light is constant, but what if they aren't traversing spacetime as we understand it, from point A to point B? Perhaps there are other methods of travel we can't even comprehend.

What do you all think?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Idk, seems kinda sus. Everyone knows that computers never evolved past punch cards and vacuum tubes.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are other methods of travel, which we do comprehend.

The Alcubierre warp drive is a theoretical machine that with about a baskeball sized chunk of antimatter, could accelerate a region of space.

Incidentally, an Alcubierre warp-enabled ship could probably destroy a planet with interstellar dust picked up on the journey.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The Alcubierre warp drive is a good example. Thanks for bringing that up.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I know I don’t think they worry about money. Seth’s seen too much DS9 and Quark.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think gravity based propulsion could be a part of it. Is the speed of light constant if someone can mess with the M in E=MC²? Would a piloted craft be unbound by inertia and make impossible maneuvers, accelerate from 0-1000 mph. with no problems if it had no mass?

Gravity based propulsion would explain a few of the unexplainable things. And recent scientific discoveries surrounding gravity does more to support the possibility than disprove it.

Energy are rumored to come from zero-point energy, tech close indistinguishable it or stabilized Moscovium. Whatever it is, based on what we publicly know it's not using any propulsion system we're familiar with - So that rules out chemical rocketry from the start.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think gravity based propulsion could be a part of it. Is the speed of light constant if someone can mess with the M in E=MC²? Would a piloted craft be unbound by inertia and make impossible maneuvers, accelerate from 0-1000 mph. with no problems if it had no mass?

I'm no physicist so your guess is as good as mine.

Gravity based propulsion would explain a few of the unexplainable things. And recent scientific discoveries surrounding gravity does more to support the possibility than disprove it.

Dr. Hal Puthoff and Dr. Eric Davis have written several papers detailing this exact concept. Essentially, they posit that all the phenomena observed can be explained through gravity-based propulsion. I'd have to find them, but they are published scientific papers.

Energy are rumored to come from zero-point energy, tech close indistinguishable it or stabilized Moscovium. Whatever it is, based on what we publicly know it’s not using any propulsion system we’re familiar with - So that rules out chemical rocketry from the start.

I agree that it seems impossible that any chemical reaction could generate the amount of energy required to warp spacetime.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m no physicist so your guess is as good as mine.

Considering the theory is based on emerging physical sciences and even you refer to papers detailing the concept, would it be fair to say it's more than a guess while not proven science?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I would consider it fair unless someone else chimes in to say otherwise :)