Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The CIA were/are running a remote viewing section where people could project their consciousness to another place and report what they saw. There is only a very small step from this to exploring other planets. What limitations to this kind of travel are there?
The only practical limitation is that it's make-believe and not in any way true or even possible. The Men Who Stare at Goats was pretty funny, though.
Isn't this rather limiting other species to the same methods of transport as we currently have or imagine?
Information can flow faster than light as in the speed of thought, so with a few million years of evolution we are almost bound to progress past spaceships fuelled by rockets.
The CIA were/are running a remote viewing section where people could project their consciousness to another place and report what they saw. There is only a very small step from this to exploring other planets. What limitations to this kind of travel are there? Only that currently we cannot take anything with us.
I'm glad you mentioned that because it stimulates my thinker to rattle on a bit. Sure, information can travel at the speed of light. Information contained in radio waves is an example. Neutrinos might travel faster than light speed, but I don't think there's been any broad consensus about that as yet. The expansion of space of the universe appears to be faster than light speed as well. What applies to the space of the universe itself doesn't necessarily mean it applies to the stuff contained within the the space of the universe. We might well discover other features that can travel at or faster than light speed. That can't be ruled out as impossible.
I Think, Therefore I Am... (I Think)
I'm not sure that a "thought" is necessarily faster than light speed without first identifying the process involved in generating a thought. Having said that, a thought can represent examples that might be considered as faster than the speed of light. For example, thanks to the Huygens probe that landed on Saturn's moon Titan, we have a better idea about what some of its surface features look like, even though extremely limited. Because we have seen the images, we can quickly recall some of those features, meaning that our mental image is of a location that's a long distance that would require about 1 hour and 24 minutes for a transmission traveling at the speed of light to get there. And yet, our brain can create a mental recall image of it in a snap. The problem is that what we can recall, isn't precise in exact detail. Our recall gives us a rough generalization.
Time Is On OUR Side
There's another problem as well. When Huygens' captured the images, it took 1 hour and 24 minutes for its signal to reach the Earth. So the view was how it looked was how it looked in the past. That brings us up to another thing. Nothing we can observe is of the future or of what we consider to be the present or 'Now" time. There is no actual moment of Now. If anything it would be similar to a singularity that's infinitely small. There's no known point or limit unless it ends at Planck Time in which case it would then have no real meaning for us. We don't know if some form of time exists below Planck Time.
I Spy With My Mind's Eye
Although the CIA may have tried to conduct some experiments involving so-called "remote viewing", what exactly does that mean? Just because the CIA might have looked into it, doesn't mean it proved to be sucessful or useful. At best, such "viewing" would involve memory, things we're familiar with, recall, and imagination, to sort of fill in the blanks. Keep in mind that nothing we can observe is ever of the instant of now-time, or of the future. Our views of what we think of as the instant of present time is always a look at things as they were in the past. And the farther away objects are from us in space, the more distant they are in the past.
What An Entangled Web We Weave
Another phenomenon that's faster that light speed is quantum entanglement. Information from one particle can influence another particle even if separated by vast distances. Sure, it's possible that some form of intelligent life may be millions of years more advanced than we are and have found ways to use quantum entanglement to cross vast distances. But here's where the snag is. Even though two particles may have a link over great distances, they are still two individual particles. If our aliens friends are using quantum entanglement to get around, then the traveler is most likely a copy, not the original. In effect, similar to the idea of remote viewing, except perhaps as remote presence.
Big Brother, Little Brother
What I mentioned earlier about probes or machines cannot be ruled out as possible. Entertaining your example of a 'species' that may be millions of years more advanced than we are, does not mean all species have had a head start of millions of years. We still cannot factually say we know there is life elsewhere, even though the odds of it continue increasing as new discoveries are made. I agree, that's because of our own limitations in terms of experience. We can assume there are other life forms out there, which I think there probably are, but we can't yet say it's a fact. Our assumptions are still very much a matter of our own imagination.
Get Smart!
But let's assume that there are indeed other intelligent life forms, some who are millions of years more advanced than we are. It's pretty doubtful that most of those intelligent life forms are that advanced. Just a look at the Drake Equation indicates that the such highly advanced life forms would be minimal. As you go down the scale, less intelligent life forms would be more common with non-intelligent microbial life forms as the most plentiful.
Advance Of The Machines
Again, assuming that most intelligent life forms are not millions of years more advanced than we are, it's likely most may be somewhat where we are. Even those who may be thousands of years ahead of us, they might not necessarily have found ways to travel faster than the speed of light. That said, there's no reason to assume probes or robots would not be a viable alternative to send into space. It's quite possible that it's just simpler and more efficient to do. Using our own experiences as an example, we've never sent anyone yet into deep space, but we have sent out plenty of probes.
Eye Spy, Part Deux
Recognizing that we are only at the beginning of understanding what can and cannot be done in terms of the exploration of space, I'd say it might not be necessary to be able to travel at or faster than the speed of light. You mentioned "remote viewing". We already use "remote viewing" in the form of probes, rovers, landers, etc., although the transfer of information doesn't reach us instantaniously. Even so, remote viewing is not the same thing as physically traveling through space at light speed.
Shortcuts In Travel
Apparently you overlooked what I said in my post. Please read carefully before jumping to any wrong conclusions. I didn't say anything about our current technology in spacecrafts. There might be other ways to get around quickly in space without having to travel at or faster than the speed of light. You gave one possible example, namely remote viewing. Remote viewing does not mean you are the one traveling. It might also be possible to find shortcuts through spacetime. It might be possible to somehow use black holes for gravity assisted acceleration, probably still not at light speed though.
Beam Me Out Scotty
It might be possible teleportation could be a way to get around. If teleportation is feasible, it would probably involve scanning the information of every particle of the traveler and craft. That information then beamed to a specific destination. The problem is that there'd have to be a receiver at the destination to reassemble the information of the particles into a physical form again, and that would presume a trip has been previously made in order to install the receiving equipment. The solution? Send the equipment as slower moving machines.
Send In The Clones
Most of the examples, including quantum entanglement, is that you won't physically be the traveler. It would be a copy of you. I'm not sure how well that would work out. If you can send a copy of yourself somewhere else, then your copy could do the same. Pretty soon there'd be hundreds of copies of you traveling around, then thousands of you, and millions, etc., all multiplying throughout the universe. A way around that from happening might be to include information for the copy to disintegrate when the mission is completed.
Information can flow faster than light as in the speed of thought, .
Not sure what you're saying here. Light can travel from the moon to the earth in the time it takes you to decide step on the brakes in traffic. The speed of thought is limited to the excruciatingly slow speed of biological neural signaling. Which in the case of a Sponge, is several minutes for the central nervous system to be aware that the surface has been poked.
The fastest human neural signalling travels at a little over 100 meters per second, which is even subsonic by a factor of 1/3.
Not sure what you're saying here. Light can travel from the moon to the earth in the time it takes you to decide step on the brakes in traffic. The speed of thought is limited to the excruciatingly slow speed of biological neural signaling. Which in the case of a Sponge, is several minutes for the central nervous system to be aware that the surface has been poked.
The fastest human neural signalling travels at a little over 100 meters per second, which is even subsonic by a factor of 1/3.
I knew you were going to post that before it even occurred to you.
I Spy With My Mind's Eye
Although the CIA may have tried to conduct some experiments involving so-called "remote viewing", what exactly does that mean? Just because the CIA might have looked into it, doesn't mean it proved to be sucessful or useful. At best, such "viewing" would involve memory, things we're familiar with, recall, and imagination, to sort of fill in the blanks. Keep in mind that nothing we can observe is ever of the instant of now-time, or of the future. Our views of what we think of as the instant of present time is always a look at things as they were in the past. And the farther away objects are from us in space, the more distant they are in the past.
Of course such experiments involve memory and they also include all of our other senses too. As well as some which are not recognised by science. It is well known that the Russians are far more advanced than the USA in all aspects of paranormal investigation, and I have no doubt that the Israelis and other major spy networks are using this technique. There are people going around the lecture circuit who have trained CIA operatives in their remote viewing methods and they do not just imagine what they see either.
I realise that we live in a 3D world and our sciences have to base all our scientific laws on physical 3D experience. However, if we do not know all there is to know about our 3D world, it means that there are more to discover. Basically, anything the imagination can come up with, is possible after that.
Scientists are only people who have had training, and that training was given by other scientists. Everyone who has had 'training' has been taught to think along conventional lines by conventional people. It is unfortunate that the opinions of non-scientists are dismissed as not being relevant or "not scientific".
I think what I am trying to point out is that training makes us more blinkered towards what is acceptable to us and often we cannot conceive or accept anything outside of that.
NighBazaar - your long post suggests that we have to think along conventional lines and that any hypothesis HAS to fit in with current science. However, when considering the possibility of a race having millions of years of evolution, we cannot conceive how advanced they may be and in what form they may exist.
There are many occult (hidden) teachings which suggest that there is more to life than we generally accept and maybe we need to take a leaf out of their book in order to move out of our conventional thinking and scientific laws of this and that.
If you do accept that it is possible that science does not know everything about our world then these occult teachings have to be included in the 'mix' somewhere, otherwise science is just continuing to exclude things which it, itself has not had time to investigate.
The mechanics of such an operation may be understood within 100 years or so (at least mathematically) but it still may be thousands of years before such a device can be produced to make such travel physically possible.
I agree - possibly even longer than that. I'm just trying to state that, all of the rules of physics as we are discovering with our relatively new age of technology (100-200 years) does not mean that we can not find ways to break those laws in a thoursand years or so. To think otherwise is to be very closed minded - akin to going back in time and having an argument with someone in the medical profession who adamantly states that there will be no better way to cure disease and infection than by "Bloodletting" (draining blood).
Sorry, I hate incorrect statements like this. 120 years ago, they had kites and gliders didn't they? So no one with half a brain cell in the 1600's or earlier--let alone "scientists" --would tell you that heavier than air flying machines couldn't exist, only that the present-day technology could not create them.
Birds are heavier than air too. Apparently some scientists, even in this day and age, due to their arrogance believe that, if they can not conceive how a particular theorem or device would work, it therefore can not exist.
NighBazaar - your long post suggests that we have to think along conventional lines and that any hypothesis HAS to fit in with current science. However, when considering the possibility of a race having millions of years of evolution, we cannot conceive how advanced they may be and in what form they may exist.
Wrong! The post does not suggest that at all. What I'm saying is that the only real models we have to go by are based on what we actually know at the present time, which is here on this planet. An example in the search for extraterrestrial life is the idea to "follow the water". The reason is simple. We know that water is important for most of the life here on Earth, so it might be that water is important to extraterrestrial life elsewhere. We might be able to recognize such life IF it evolved in a similar ways as life on Earth. It does not rule out that life might be able to develop in very different ways that we don't know. It doesn't mean that current models or views are not subject to change in the future. Hypotheses are fine, but they are untested or unproven. Some hypotheses may prove to be correct, some might prove to be incorrect, and some might remain inconclusive. Do you see what I mean?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
