The Paranormal, UFO's, and Mysteries of the Unknown

There are no hieroglyphs in the pyramids, only graffiti.

Void Ok Debbie Downer. Let’s play your game. If we seriously are the only advanced species here, then how long would it be before we have the tech to perform such tasks? Our current level of fiber optic/quantum computing is 40 years old. With our only real advances happening in the last 5 years for the quantum computing side. That realistically puts us in the possibility of having a better understanding of intergalactic travel. But if I were to believe you, there is absolutely zero possibility of interplanetary contact.

That would mean life is meaningless. That we shouldn’t try and advance our society anymore. That all we should do is fuck. Doesn’t that sound depressing? Are you depressed?

H.A. Monkey said:

Void Ok Debbie Downer. Let’s play your game. If we seriously are the only advanced species here, then how long would it be before we have the tech to perform such tasks? Our current level of fiber optic/quantum computing is 40 years old. With our only real advances happening in the last 5 years for the quantum computing side. That realistically puts us in the possibility of having a better understanding of intergalactic travel. But if I were to believe you, there is absolutely zero possibility of interplanetary contact.

That would mean life is meaningless. That we shouldn’t try and advance our society anymore. That all we should do is fuck. Doesn’t that sound depressing? Are you depressed?

Click to expand...

there arent enough resources on this entire planet to fuel even one lightspeed space craft. once you settle that fact, everything else becomes easy.

Anyone posted Armoured Skeptic yet? His ancient civ videos are pretty interesting, like the Mud Floods and giants and stuff.

Chukzombi said:

there arent enough resources on this entire planet to fuel even one lightspeed space craft. once you settle that fact, everything else becomes easy.

Click to expand...

Then expand on that idea and provide evidence that light speed travel needs that much energy right now. Dark matter has been debunked. The missing mass that people theorized dark matter on has been shown to exist as gaseous/dust masses floating in-between galaxies. Since you’re pretty fucking sure of yourself here, why are you applying our current technological stantards to the future and our progression? Wouldn’t that put you in the same depressed camp as Void? Pointless to live

Falxy-US said:

Not arguing, but please explain. Considering lightspeed craft don't exist, what resources are you talking about?

Click to expand...

He has no source material that’s relevant. Only thing he has is the shit he produces daily and is crazy enough to interpret the lines on said shit as prophecy.

H.A. Monkey said:

Then expand on that idea and provide evidence that light speed travel needs that much energy right now. Dark matter has been debunked. The missing mass that people theorized dark matter on has been shown to exist as gaseous/dust masses floating in-between galaxies. Since you’re pretty fucking sure of yourself here, why are you applying our current technological stantards to the future and our progression? Wouldn’t that put you in the same depressed camp as Void? Pointless to live



He has no source material that’s relevant. Only thing he has is the shit he produces daily and is crazy enough to interpret the lines on said shit as prophecy.

Click to expand...

Dark matter may not actually exist – and our alternative theory can be put to the test
Dark Matter has not been "debunked" as you claim, there are simply other hypothesis. Both are valid neither one "debunks" the other

Falxy-US said:

Not arguing, but please explain. Considering lightspeed craft don't exist, what resources are you talking about?

Click to expand...

Im talking about all the energy the earth can produce, would not be able to propel a single craft into light speed. Of course if we discover a new form of energy then that changes things. But lets say we have that energy now, now you just need a ship that can withstand such unimaginable velocity. Woops back to the drawing board. Then when you're done with that, we can discuss how many lightyears it would take to visit the closest solar system like ours.

Sevens said:

Dark matter may not actually exist – and our alternative theory can be put to the test
Dark Matter has not been "debunked" as you claim, there are simply other hypothesis. Both are valid neither one "debunks" the other

Click to expand...

The article in question basically said that a star became obscured , and the methods used to determine whether that was a planet or not determined it wasn’t. When they ran more tests, and field of view measurements, they determined there was a mysterious mass in between that galaxy and ours. With no light source coming from it, and other observations made. Calculations got made, and a slight assumption, and they determined that not only was it a significant amount of mass to be able to obscure the way it did. Once they did that, a general theory was put forth based on that observation. Dark matter does not exist. The missing mass of the universe wasn’t some mysterious type of matter. We just weren’t looking in the right place.

This is part of a did at Chuck too. We didn’t bother looking in-between galaxies because our theories led us to make a certain type of instrument. Once our instruments got better, we are now able to see what we once couldn’t see. It’s one of those ideas/things. We knew were missing something, but we never looked in the right spot for it. That entertains the idea that lightspeed tech, and the associated anti-gravity ideas, are relatively easy to make. We’re just not looking in the right spot. and we won’t know until someone just stumbles upon it.

Chukzombi said:

Im talking about all the energy the earth can produce, would not be able to propel a single craft into light speed. Of course if we discover a new form of energy then that changes things. But lets say we have that energy now, now you just need a ship that can withstand such unimaginable velocity. Woops back to the drawing board. Then when you're done with that, we can discuss how many lightyears it would take to visit the closest solar system like ours.

Click to expand...

Let’s get you corrected upon a few facts. Even a small acceleration will propel anything in space to the speed of light eventually. Well not quite speed of light, but close enough for arguments sake. You’re confusing the aspect of accelerating at the speed of light, with the act of accelerating to the speed of light. Light does indeed have a mass to it. So your idea here is continually getting riddle with holes.

We have obviously gone through many transitions through history of energy usage. You’re too dismissive of the ideas that we are progressing into the future. Too shut in to allow yourself to believe that before you die, we will discover much better technologies. Please, if all you can say for an argument is ‘it’s plainly obviously” then the only obvious thing here is your shit attitude. You’re completely incapable of providing evidence at all. Worthless, shit tier, trolling poster.

H.A. Monkey said:

The article in question basically said that a star became obscured , and the methods used to determine whether that was a planet or not determined it wasn’t. When they ran more tests, and field of view measurements, they determined there was a mysterious mass in between that galaxy and ours. With no light source coming from it, and other observations made. Calculations got made, and a slight assumption, and they determined that not only was it a significant amount of mass to be able to obscure the way it did. Once they did that, a general theory was put forth based on that observation. Dark matter does not exist. The missing mass of the universe wasn’t some mysterious type of matter. We just weren’t looking in the right place.

This is part of a did at Chuck too. We didn’t bother looking in-between galaxies because our theories led us to make a certain type of instrument. Once our instruments got better, we are now able to see what we once couldn’t see. It’s one of those ideas/things. We knew were missing something, but we never looked in the right spot for it. That entertains the idea that lightspeed tech, and the associated anti-gravity ideas, are relatively easy to make. We’re just not looking in the right spot. and we won’t know until someone just stumbles upon it.




Let’s get you corrected upon a few facts. Even a small acceleration will propel anything in space to the speed of light eventually. Well not quite speed of light, but close enough for arguments sake. You’re confusing the aspect of accelerating at the speed of light, with the act of accelerating to the speed of light. Light does indeed have a mass to it. So your idea here is continually getting riddle with holes.

We have obviously gone through many transitions through history of energy usage. You’re too dismissive of the ideas that we are progressing into the future. Too shut in to allow yourself to believe that before you die, we will discover much better technologies. Please, if all you can say for an argument is ‘it’s plainly obviously” then the only obvious thing here is your shit attitude. You’re completely incapable of providing evidence at all. Worthless, shit tier, trolling poster.

Click to expand...

My point was and is, Dark matter has NOT been debunked...all that has happened is another hypothesis has been presented to explain the "missing" mass with neither being accepted as theory (the scientific use of the word not the laymans use). Im not saying you are wrong, just that claiming dark matter has been debunked is a bit presumptuous is all.


And you are dead wrong about light speed acceleration, Star Wars: TLJ taught us that if a star ship runs out of fuel it stops.

Intergalactic dust is also not a new theory. The reason that I'm aware of for it not being favored is the the gravitational influence it exerts on galaxies is too strong for it to just be gas or mass ejections.

It would take too much dust. That dust would be collapsing on itself. We would not observe relative voids between galaxies but instead nebulae.I

Doesn't mean there's none at all though, and there is quite possibly more than we think. But it can't account for all the missing mass.

80% of the universe's mass is not tied up in dust clouds between galaxies unless our understanding of cosmological /astronomical forces is astonishingly wrong. Wrong on the level of f=ma is not universal.

And if that's true science don't work.

Essentially what Chuk is saying is that the amount of energy needed to accelerate a craft to near light speed is more than we can produce using all the energy generation that we currently have on Earth.

It is certainly an issue; the best we can do right now can barely manage to go orbit one asteroid, deorbit and then go orbit another asteroid. The total acceleration over time required to go to lightspeed is orders of magnitude more.

iannis said:

Intergalactic dust is also not a new theory. The reason that I'm aware of for it not being favored is the the gravitational influence it exerts on galaxies is too strong for it to just be gas or mass ejections.

It would take too much dust. That dust would be collapsing on itself. We would not observe relative voids between galaxies but instead nebulae.I

Doesn't mean there's none at all though, and there is quite possibly more than we think. But it can't account for all the missing mass.

80% of the universe's mass is not tied up in dust clouds between galaxies unless our understanding of cosmological /astronomical forces is astonishingly wrong. Wrong on the level of f=ma is not universal.

And if that's true science don't work.

Click to expand...

Theories are just that, a theory. There is no evidence to support a theory. It’s just an idea based off currently collected evidence. Their evidence was simply ‘where’s all this missing mass?’ If they theorized ‘well there must be something else out there’ then we all know what that leads too. I really wish I could find this article, but basically because they found one intergalactic mass. It pretty much debunked any dark matter talk. They found missing mass. It’s as simple as that. And since our field of view on these things is so distant, and our current tech isn’t built to look for dust in between galaxies. Progress is slow to find it. We can’t use current methods of planet recognizing to identify middle of nowhere dust. We simply got lucky to discover it. And no to mention the obvious, but we simply do not know where the dust came from/how long its been there. Current ideas say that it should form into a mass. But that’s from near earth experiments. Where gravity can affect crap still. What’s it like literally thousands of light years in the middle of nowhere though?

Mudcrush Durtfeet said:

Essentially what Chuk is saying is that the amount of energy needed to accelerate a craft to near light speed is more than we can produce using all the energy generation that we currently have on Earth.

It is certainly an issue; the best we can do right now can barely manage to go orbit one asteroid, deorbit and then go orbit another asteroid. The total acceleration over time required to go to lightspeed is orders of magnitude more.

Click to expand...

Two major flaws with chuk’s thinking though. He’s making an assumption on how much energy it really takes to accelerate to lightspeed. A current theory is that a solar sail could eventually propel a craft to lightspeed. He’s making the assumption that if we are capable to accelerating to lightspeed speed, we don’t have anymore advanced tech than we do now.

Yes, right now we are totally incapable of getting to lightspeed. Our current understandings regarding energy production is not conductive to any sort of interstellar travel. One-hundred years ago, people would have never thought we could do what we are doing now. Micro-controlling electricity for computers. In another 100 years, they will have energy standards that will just blow your mind. To say we don’t have the energy on earth is a shallow, depressed line of thinking. You and chuk are both so shut in on the idea that we won’t advance our tech it’s hilarious.

No dude, it's not as simple as that. lol. Not in any way.

They found missing mass, that's fine. I'm glad they did. There's a lot to find. They really did not -find- it, what they've been doing is refining estimates. I can tell you it's either that or the article that you read is complete bullshit.

They didn't find 80% of the estimated mass in the universe.

It in no way debunks the idea of dark matter, you realize? Since the matter they found... is... dark. It accounts for a portion. The entire point is that that estimate has already been made and it is simply not mathematically possible for what you're saying to be true.

WIMPS are only one part of the general dark matter theory. Maybe that's what you're thinking of. And while we do expect that they probably exist there has been no direct observation to support that existence. So yeah, if that's what you're talking about being just a theory you are correct. Things like WIMPS are still at the just a theory stage and may not ever move beyond that. It's best guess territory. There are multiple best guesses, all of them based on observation which cannot be explained through other means. Some of them conflict with each other, and no doubt some, many, or potentially all of them will be abandoned as an unlikely fiction in the absence of any direct evidence. Observationally you can't prove that something cannot exist. that requires theory. and the closer that theory matches observation the better.

But you'll never be able to prove that there is actually NOT a leprechaun that drinks milk out of your fridge and then puts it back whenever you're not looking.

Either 1 of 2 things is true. Either our understanding of gravity is completely wrong. not just a little bit wrong, we're talking completely wrong, and dark matter is a myth which can be explained by diffuse intergalactic matter Or our understanding of gravity is mostly correct and there's a lot of unobserved mass (dark) influencing objects that we can observe (light). This isn't a mad lib mix and match game here. It's not both or maybe the truth is somewhere in the middle. There actually is a right answer even if we don't know it yet. "intergalactic particulate matter" is simply not it. Was that article published in 1985 or something?

I beginning to think you guys have misunderstood what dark matter was really theorized to be.

There's an important point about accelerating an object to relativistic speeds you'll want to consider as well. As you get appreciably close to the speed of light, the energy required to continue accelerating changes non-linearly (asymptotically approaching infinity, i.e. you could never actually make or break the speed of light). To take something like the shuttle, which I would argue is actually on the small side for interstellar travel but it at least does carry people off the planet, weighing in at 165,000 lbs. At 0.9c it would have 15x more kinetic energy than the world produces. At 0.99c this jumps to 72x and 830x at 0.9999c. The closest we have gotten, and with huge gravitational assists, was to get a 1,500 lb probe up to ~0.0006c.

I absolutely agree that anything we come up with to even approach these speeds will be quite exotic from the tech we use today. Conceptually the only things that half-way seem plausible would be via spacetime distortion (where you kind of cheat the universal speed limit). Mathematically it makes sense, but no clue how to even start considering what tech like that would even look like.