Metallic spheres found on Pacific floor are interstellar in origin, Harvard professor finds

[Jayhawker Soule]

Though an inveterate UAP skeptic, I'm rather pleased that there are groups like The Galileo Project attracting folks like Loeb who are not (despite what is, perhaps, well-founded criticism).

 

[Brickjectivity]

As for the metal marbles..... Yeah? So?
Rain droplets are not in the classic tear-drop shape as they fall from the sky; they are spherical. So a meteorite melts as it enters our atmosphere, and the falling droplets of molten metal likely take on a spherical shape as they plummet to Earth. But if they strike water and "freeze" back into their solid state....... Ta Daahhh!! Metal marbles.

Ba boyoyoing!

I should sell staffs with bits of meteor at the ends. Some people might be able to use them to sense the universe and such, and I could probably rake in a decent amount of cash for my efforts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ba boyoyoing!

I should sell staffs with bits of meteor at the ends. Some people might be able to use them to sense the universe and such, and I could probably rake in a decent amount of cash for my efforts.

I would suggest an acid bath for them followed by a healthy application of a blow torch.

 

[Windwalker]

Interstellar travel simply is not possible.

That's what we used to say about the basic air travel we do every day of the week now, or wireless communications, or horseless chariots, or.......

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's what we used to say about the basic air travel we do every day of the week now, or wireless communications, or horseless chariots, or.......

None of those required a complete change in the science of physics. It would take a super-revolutionary change in the laws of physics to make interstellar space travel possible. One that there is not even a hint of right now.

 

[We Never Know]

None of those required a complete change in the science of physics. It would take a super-revolutionary change in the laws of physics to make interstellar space travel possible. One that there is not even a hint of right now.

How many hints were there 1000 years ago that we wouldn't fly across the globe or travel to the moon? Yet once we understood more, they happened.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How many hints were there 1000 years ago that we wouldn't fly across the globe or travel to the moon? Yet once we understood more, they happened.

Windwalker appeared to be talking of claims that were much closer to the Wright brother's accomplishment. Context matters.

But even so, this would take a change orders of magnitude above that. Here is the problem. If we are not terribly wrong about physics interstellar travel by humans would be impossible. Could we be terribly wrong? Yes. And it would be amazing if we could accomplish such a feat. But right now the answer is no with no sign of changing.

 

[We Never Know]

Windwalker appeared to be talking of claims that were much closer to the Wright brother's accomplishment. Context matters.

But even so, this would take a change orders of magnitude above that. Here is the problem. If we are not terribly wrong about physics interstellar travel by humans would be impossible. Could we be terribly wrong? Yes. And it would be amazing if we could accomplish such a feat. But right now the answer is no with no sign of changing.

And 1000 years ago we had no thought we would ever get to the moon.
You nor I nor anyone knows what will be possible in 1000 more years.

Just because something isn't possible now doesn't make it impossible. If it did then we would have never reached the moon because it was impossible 1000 years ago.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And 1000 years ago we had no thought we would ever get to the moon.
You nor I nor anyone knows what will be possible in 1000 more years.

Just because something isn't possible now doesn't make it impossible. If it did then we would have never reached the moon because it was impossible 1000 years ago.

You are still ignoring context and ignoring the fact that it would take a much bigger change than that. It is really not that simple.

 

[RestlessSoul]

All the elements of which our world is composed, including the carbon and oxygen etc which make life possible, are interstellar in origin.

 

[Heyo]

None of those required a complete change in the science of physics. It would take a super-revolutionary change in the laws of physics to make interstellar space travel possible. One that there is not even a hint of right now.

And by "travel" you mean to get to the destination in a comparable time you could get to any place on Earth (or someone in the past could have got there), don't you?
If so, I agree.
But there is nothing in the laws of physics that prevents us from travelling to other stars on a different time scale. In fact we are technically able to travel to the next stars in a lifetime except for one little invention from which we know that it is within the confines of the laws of nature.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And by "travel" you mean to get to the destination in a comparable time you could get to any place on Earth (or someone in the past could have got there), don't you?
If so, I agree.
But there is nothing in the laws of physics that prevents us from travelling to other stars on a different time scale. In fact we are technically able to travel to the next stars in a lifetime except for one little invention from which we know that it is within the confines of the laws of nature.

Even if one froze one's body somehow that does not appear to be a possible journey. One would have to contend with both cosmic rays and internal damage done by radioactivity. Potassium is mildly radioactive. But if a person is frozen for hundreds of years that would not stop radioactive decay and all of that damage would show up in effect instantaneously rather than spread over a lifetime.

 

[Heyo]

Even if one froze one's body somehow that does not appear to be a possible journey. One would have to contend with both cosmic rays and internal damage done by radioactivity. Potassium is mildly radioactive. But if a person is frozen for hundreds of years that would not stop radioactive decay and all of that damage would show up in effect instantaneously rather than spread over a lifetime.

I'm not talking about hundreds of years, more like decades. You need a propulsion system that can bring you to an average speed of 10% c to reach proxima centauri in about 50 years. Once we have managed fusion, we have that propulsion system.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Even if one froze one's body somehow that does not appear to be a possible journey. One would have to contend with both cosmic rays and internal damage done by radioactivity. Potassium is mildly radioactive. But if a person is frozen for hundreds of years that would not stop radioactive decay and all of that damage would show up in effect instantaneously rather than spread over a lifetime.

A good reason for probes that arguably can be much faster and proficient than sending humans.

 

[Windwalker]

None of those required a complete change in the science of physics.

Do you not believe those have happened? What about Quantum mechanics? That revolutionized our understanding of the science of physics. Why can't something else be discovered in time that revolutionizes it again?

It would take a super-revolutionary change in the laws of physics to make interstellar space travel possible.

I think what you mean to say is it would take a super-revolutionary change in our understanding of the laws of physics to make that possible. Correct? The way you worded it places our understanding as the actual limits of the laws of physics, doesn't it? It says, we have it all figured it out not.

Quantum mechanics came along and changed that understanding. Why isn't it possible something is left yet to be discovered in science?

ne that there is not even a hint of right now.

There wasn't a hint of anything else other than Newtonian physics for several hundred years. Many likewise did not want to accept there was anything else that changed our understanding of physics.

While there may not be hint on the near horizon now, does that mean we're done and we've placed the universe into our current box of understanding, declaring, "this far, and no further"? That sounds suspiciously like religion to me.

I like my quote below to fit in here, "Our intelligence has fallen under the bewitchment of language and we have deceived ourselves into thinking we know what we are talking about."

That language in this instance, is the language of Newtonian physics, as if that defines all possibility, known and unknown. All in all, I prefer to say, it may be possible at some point in the future if and when we understand more than we currently do.

That will be quite revolutionary to our understanding of reality, in the way Quantum mechanics revolutionized both our understanding, and the actual world we live it through that understanding. Imagine what the future may yet hold, if we survive the likes of Trump.

 

[Shaul]

All the elements of which our world is composed, including the carbon and oxygen etc which make life possible, are interstellar in origin.

We are stardust.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not talking about hundreds of years, more like decades. You need a propulsion system that can bring you to an average speed of 10% c to reach proxima centauri in about 50 years. Once we have managed fusion, we have that propulsion system.

Would we? I doubt it. That is like saying that we should have nuclear fission powered cars right now. Nuclear fission is far simpler to accomplish but shielding issues force us to have a minimum size for objects. We know that fuel problems make interstellar travel impossible with nuclear fission as a power source. The same would probably apply to fusion. Right now the fusion we have "accomplished" uses a combination of tritium and deuterium. The tritium issue alone makes it impossible as an interstellar fuel. Your fuel would have decayed to worthless helium 3 before you got to your goal. And deuterium deuterium fusion is out too since you would need enough fuel for a round trip with that. I do not think that one could make a ship small enough. We are talking city sized craft at the least in all probability. Okay, let me take back my claim on tritium based fusion. If you had a city sized craft you could have a small nuclear reactor on it that made more tritium. Do you think that a city sized craft if feasible?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

OK that’s fine as an interesting observation. Let’s see what others have to say about this composition. I tried looking for a peer reviewed paper on the findings but have not had any luck.

That's the first thing I start doing when a new name appears with extraordinary claims. If the literature is empty, it is very likely that the claims are too.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you not believe those have happened? What about Quantum mechanics? That revolutionized our understanding of the science of physics. Why can't something else be discovered in time that revolutionizes it again?

Those are refinements based upon what we had already observed. There is no hint of going faster than the speed of light. That is what you need for any sort of practical interstellar travel.

I think what you mean to say is it would take a super-revolutionary change in our understanding of the laws of physics to make that possible. Correct? The way you worded it places our understanding as the actual limits of the laws of physics, doesn't it? It says, we have it all figured it out not.

That should have been obvious from context.

Quantum mechanics came along and changed that understanding. Why isn't it possible something is left yet to be discovered in science?

There wasn't a hint of anything else other than Newtonian physics for several hundred years. Many likewise did not want to accept there was anything else that changed our understanding of physics.

Yes, it took advances in optics and astronomy to show that Newton was not correct. The problems with his theory were first observed in 1859.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212686421000650#:~:text=This%20is%20the%20famous%20anomalous,important%20astronomical%20problem%20%5B1%5D.

But I do not think that you realize the sort of change that we need.

While there may not be hint on the near horizon now, does that mean we're done and we've placed the universe into our current box of understanding, declaring, "this far, and no further"? That sounds suspiciously like religion to me.

I like my quote below to fit in here, "Our intelligence has fallen under the bewitchment of language and we have deceived ourselves into thinking we know what we are talking about."

That language in this instance, is the language of Newtonian physics, as if that defines all possibility, known and unknown. All in all, I prefer to say, it may be possible at some point in the future if and when we understand more than we currently do.

That will be quite revolutionary to our understanding of reality, in the way Quantum mechanics revolutionized both our understanding, and the actual world we live it through that understanding. Imagine what the future may yet hold, if we survive the likes of Trump.

It could happen. But right now it does not appear to be possible. Until we have at least an indication that one can cheat space it will remain unfeasible.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's the first thing I start doing when a new name appears with extraordinary claims. If the literature is empty, it is very likely that the claims are too.

This story reminds me of the article that I linked about the latest "room temperature superconductor" that I linked a month or two ago. The article that I linked was from a Science article I believe. The article itself was not peer reviewed, they were reporting on a claimed discovery by a researcher. They noted the problems with his work and said that implied rather strongly he was mistaken. It took very little time for others to repeat and refute his work. That was because this is an area of pretty intense research. It may take longer for a claim like this to be refuted, not everyone can replicate the methods used. Nor is there the same level of interest in this research. It right now only merits an:

"That is interesting. I wonder if further research will bear this out?"

Until that happens we might as well treat it as if it is false, or at best never happened since this is not enough to base a reasonable belief on.