It doesn't take a science degree to find holes in an arguement... anymore than I would blindly believe someone just because they have a science degree. This person, regardless of his credentials, brings up valid points against his theory. You Alberto however chose to attack his credentials instead of his ideas.

Maybe someone wonders why you chose to attack this persons credentials instead of his points. Usually it's because you can't attack his points and thus are only left with attacking a person. Is this the case here?

Otherwise, how about you address his and my points instead of our credentials, ok?



If that is what Mr. Bjork said then there are obvious flaws to his arguements since mass doesn't grow exponentially with speed. Traveling at .5 c, the gamma factor is 1.1; at .9 c, the gamma factor is 2.2.

It grows large. Don't get me wrong, I take your meaning. But if this is the basis of his reasoning for choosing 10%, then there is no physical reason why it couldn't be 50%, 70%, or 90% c as well. Hence there is nothing physically special about 10%.

I've addressed your points, how do you address one of mine? -- > Are my choices of parameters that change a 10 B year exploration down to 2.5 M years physically reasonable and why not if not?

"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" -- Salvor Hardin, "Foundation" by Isaac Asimov




You go out as you came in: being wrong on all counts.
There is no "if" about your ban and your message will be deleted.

In fact, in a weeks time nobody will remember "why_do" or anything he said.
It will be, for all intensive purposes, as if he never existed on these boards... and the boards are none the worse for it.

So take care of yourself and that temper, why_do.
For if this is the way you act and express yourself in real life, then things must be pretty rotten around you.
Good luck again...

why did those bjork simulations only consider one other alien life-form? what if there are millions of different alien species, and a thousand of them have enough technology to do what bjork's simulation described. wouldn't that reduce the time-frame from 10bn to only 10million?

why don't those probes plant themselves on various planets, mining/harvesting common resources, constructing more of themselves as well as probes built just to search, and churn them out until they can no longer sustain themselves? or is that too absurd?

i think it would be pretty groovy.

julz

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_probe#Von_Neumann_probes

once again: groovy.

"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent"

This are the statements people who FEAR violence make , because they are cowards , and fear to fight , but at the same time , want to run their mouth , and not be held responsible for what they say , so they hide with their words.

Don't think I don't see the homosexual behavior being exibited left and right by today's males , all afraid too fight , all cowards.

A man who is afraid of violence , is a man who has no say.

Hell yeah! Allowing Von Neumann Machines (VNM) would significantly skew the results towards shorter time frames. And, one could argue, the simple shapes and non-contact of purported Alien UFO's would be consistent with a machine that is only entasked with a singular mission and constructed from a simply replicated design.

Bjork v2.0 ought to be very cool if all these other variables are taken into account!

This is the Enrico Fermi's simulation or paradox , if you prefer

If our galaxi is crowded with civilized aliens colonies than the ether should be polluted of radio comunications

SETI radio telescope have been scanning the sky for many years
Not even one signal from the space has been ever received

This is the reason why mr Bjork and myself , went for a " mere scouting simulation "
rather than a more realistic " Colonization" strategy

Some scouts could be difficult to find
Colonies or outposts , relativly closed to our earth, definitly not

right, but if you quote someone to support your opinion than he must have credentials
He can not be a "who ist it ? " guy

However I would be curious to see an article or a simulation made by a qualified scientist demostrating that aliens might have visited our earth
I am speaking seriously , I am not ironic

Just to avoid misunderstanding

Tha vast majority of scientists , as far as I know , do not beleive that aliens visited our earth for the reason explained

However many scientists beleive that aliens exist, not necessary super civilizations
The reason being ;

a) Evolution is a deterministic theory
It needs a great deal of chance, of course, but it is deterministic

b) The huge number od planets in the universe

Whoa! Absolutely not!

While I admit that I will go to a person with credentials as a first order of business when studying something new, that is not the same as saying that I will dismiss someone without credentials on the same topic.

My opinions and research are based on facts and research and that is not the exclusive right, privilege, or honor or someone with "credentials".



Well, this is an interesting point. Given that we have never met aliens and that the scientific community does not acknowledge their existence, what exactly would "qualify" someone to comment on Aliens? You get my point? There is no "Exobiology" credentials... and if they are, you really have to wonder exactly what qualifies someone to comment on alien presence on earth.

My point therefore is that on the subject of Aliens (like religion), credentials mean nothing since anyone can make as convincing (and provable!) an argument as some of the best mathematicians and physicists out there.



Exactly. I would argue that ALL scientist have to accept that the evidence does not prove anything about Alien Visitation. That same person may have an opinion or belief on the subject, but the scientist in that person has to admit that the evidence simply is not there to make a solid statement on this subject.

By your own words, your statement in bold shows why you deleted your comment.

Besides, why bother when Phemox and I have your comments quoted?

LOL , I deleted it because the Mods would Ban me permanently , something they shouldn't do , but thats the feminine atmosphere that plagues this forum . And again , you twist things around to change their meaning.