Hoofbite;3376930 said:I'm not even sure how close I am to this. Probably not close at all, I don't know about this stuff.
From what I think I remember, time "slows down" as you approach the speed of light. So relative to us here on earth, the aliens in the space ship would experience time much shorter than what we would experience.
So, going fast enough the aliens in the spaceship would experience a relatively short amount of time (say like 1 year) when compared to us (maybe 200 years).
I think a light year is actually intended to be a measure of distance, not time.
Really confusing stuff and I'm probably nowhere close on the idea.
But, if I kind of have the right idea I think this is the biggest problem with space travel. If you go on a trip of any significant distance, you return to your home in a year way later than when you left.
HoleInTheRoof;3377763 said:Seriously though . . . even if they came . . . all we would have to do is spill water on them.
ScipioCowboy;3376807 said:Here's a very rough estimate for determining alien invasion potential:
1) Determine the length of time (in years) humans have been capable of sending radio signals. This number is T.
2) Determine the distance (in light years) between Earth and the nearest planet capable of supporting life. This number is D.
3) Work the following equation:
D * 2 - T = the minimum number of years before any potential alien invasion
burmafrd;3377879 said:Actually any world that has the capability to travel FTL will of course look at the systems closest to it. Then work its way outwards.
Jon88;3377109 said:I think it's been denied in this thread.
vta;3377914 said:I mean outside of this forum; if there have been crash sites why would anyone discovering this make it ambiguous? Nothing concrete has ever been said by anyone with the exception of people who manage to take the worst possible video in the world in regard to sightings.
A crash site would be live coverage and unambiguous revelations. It seems 'Government Conspiracy' is the only excuse something concrete isn't offered as evidence. That seems a bit too simple a cop-out.
If anyone visited this planet, I'm thinking it's visit has been unrecognizable.
Temo;3377924 said:Any criminal investigator will tell you that the worst and most unreliable experience is unrecorded eyewitness accounts.
Jon88;3377923 said:There have been many eyewitness accounts in the 40's and 50's of crashes where the military rushes right in, picks things up, and threatens people not to say a word. I've read a little bit about it and believe the eyewitnesses.
vta;3377957 said:Well my question really is, what does the military/gov gain by doing such a thing? What are the advantages? It would seem the storyteller has more to gain than the scapegoat. You get some attention then blame whomever for not allowing you 'really' tell your story, which in and of itself is specious.
It's too convenient.
Cajuncowboy;3377972 said:Can't believe this thread is over 50 posts. :laugh2:
Jon88;3377965 said:The military wants to get the technology and doesn't think we're ready to handle the truth.
vta;3377979 said:Aliens are a hot commodity.
Cajuncowboy;3378004 said:Not in Arizona.