 |
|
In the 2nd century BC Greek astronomer Erastosthenes accurately measured the distance around the earth at about 40,000 km (24,860 miles) - but nobody believed him. |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
We received 33097796 page views since February 2005 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Prof Michio Kaku on the science behind UFOs and time travel
Posted on Saturday, March 22, 2008 (CDT) by Thoth
In 1600, the former Dominican monk and philosopher Giordano Bruno was burnt alive in the streets of Rome. To humiliate him, the Church first hung him upside down and stripped him naked. What made the teachings of Bruno so dangerous? He had asked a simple question: is there life in outer space? Rather than entertain the possibility of billions of saints, popes, churches, and Jesus Christs in outer space, it was more convenient for the Church simply to burn him.
For 400 years the memory of Bruno has haunted the historians of science. But Bruno has his revenge every few weeks: about twice a month a new extrasolar planet is discovered orbiting a star: more than 250 such planets have now been documented. Bruno's prediction of extrasolar planets has been vindicated. But one question lingers. Although the Milky Way may be teaming with extrasolar planets, how many of them can support life? And if intelligent life does exist, what can science say about it?
Some people claim that extraterrestrials have already visited Earth in the form of UFOs. Scientists usually dismiss the possibility of UFOs because the distances between stars are so vast. But last year the French government released a report by the French National Centre for Space Studies, which included 1,600 UFO sightings spanning 50 years, including 100,000 pages of eyewitness accounts, films and audiotapes. The French government stated that nine per cent of these sightings could be fully explained, that 33 per cent had likely explanations, but that it was unable to follow up on the rest.
The most
credible cases of UFOs involve a) multiple sightings by independent,
credible eyewitnesses and b) evidence from multiple sources, such as
eyesight and radar. For example, in 1986 there was a sighting of a UFO
by JAL flight 1628 over Alaska, which was investigated by the Federal
Aviation Administration. The UFO was seen by the passengers of the JAL
flight and was also tracked by ground radar. Similarly, there were mass
radar sightings of black triangles over Belgium in 1989-90 that were
tracked by Nato radar and jet interceptors. In 1976, there was a
sighting over Tehran, that resulted in multiple systems failures in an
F-4 jet interceptor. But what is frustrating to scientists is that, of
the thousands of recorded sightings, none has produced hard physical
evidence that can lead to reproducible results in the laboratory. No
alien DNA, alien computer chip or physical evidence of a landing has
ever been retrieved.
We might ask ourselves what
kind of spacecraft they would be. Here are some of the characteristics
that have been recorded by observers.
a) They are known to zig-zag in midair;
b) They have been known to stop car ignitions and disrupt electrical power;
c) They hover silently.
None of these
characteristics fits the description of the rockets we have developed
on Earth. For example, all known rockets depend on Newton's third law
of motion (for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction);
yet the UFOs cited do not seem to have any exhaust. And the g-forces
created by zig-zagging flying saucers would exceed 100 times the
gravitational force on Earth - the g-forces would be enough to flatten
any creature on Earth.
Can such UFO
characteristics be explained using modern science? In movies it is
always assumed that alien beings pilot these craft. More likely,
however, if such craft exist, they are unmanned (or are manned by a
being that is part organic and part mechanical). This would explain how
the craft could execute patterns generating g-forces that would
normally crush a living being.
Any alien civilisation
advanced enough to send starships throughout the universe has certainly
mastered nanotechnology. This would mean that their starships do not
have to be very large; they could be sent by the millions to explore
inhabited planets. Desolate moons would perhaps be the best bases for
such nanoships. If so, then perhaps our own moon has been visited in
the past by a civilisation similar to the scenario depicted in the
movie 2001: A Space Odyssey, which is perhaps the most realistic
depiction of an encounter with an extraterrestrial civilisation.
Some scientists have
scoffed at UFOs because they don't fit any of the gigantic propulsion
designs being considered by engineers today, such as ramjet fusion
engines, huge laser-powered sails and nuclear pulsed engines, which
might be miles across. But UFOs can be as small as a jet aeroplane, and
can refuel from a nearby moon base. So sightings may correspond to
unmanned reconnaissance ships.
Time is one of the great
mysteries of the universe. We are all swept up in the river of time
against our will. Around AD400, Saint Augustine wrote extensively about
the paradoxical nature of time: 'How can the past and future be, when
the past no longer is, and the future is not yet? As for the present,
if it were always present and never moved on to become the past, it
would not be time, but eternity.' If we take Saint Augustine's logic
further, we see that time is not possible, since the past is gone, the
future does not exist, and the present exists only for an instant.
In 1990, Stephen Hawking
read papers of his colleagues proposing their version of a time
machine, and he was sceptical. His intuition told him that time travel
was not possible because there were no tourists from the future. If
time travel were as common as taking a Sunday picnic in the park, then
time travellers from the future should be pestering us with their
cameras. There ought to be a law, he proclaimed, making time travel
impossible. He proposed a 'Chronology Protection Conjecture' to ban
time travel from the laws of physics in order to 'make history safe for
historians'.
The embarrassing thing,
however, was that no matter how hard physicists tried, they could not
find a law to prevent time travel. Apparently, time travel seems to be
consistent with the known laws of physics. Unable to find any physical
law that makes time travel impossible, Hawking recently changed his
mind. He made headlines when he said, 'Time travel may be possible, but
it is not practical.'
Time travel to the future
is possible and has been experimentally verified millions of times. If
an astronaut were to travel near the speed of light, it might take him,
say, one minute to reach the nearest stars. Four years would have
elapsed on Earth, but for him only one minute would have passed,
because time would have slowed down inside the rocket ship. Hence he
would have travelled four years into the future, as experienced here on
Earth. (Our astronauts actually take a short trip into the future every
time they go into outer space. As they travel at 18,000 miles per hour
above the Earth, their clocks beat a tiny bit slower than clocks on
Earth. The world record for travelling into the future is held by the
Russian cosmonaut Sergei Avdeyev, who orbited for 748 days and was
hence hurled .02 seconds into the future.) So a time machine that can
take us into the future is consistent with Einstein's special theory of
relativity. But what about going backwards in time?
If we could journey back
into the past, history would be impossible to write. As soon as a
historian recorded the history of the past, someone could go back into
the past and rewrite it. Not only would time machines put historians
out of business, but they would enable us to alter the course of time
at will. If, for example, we were to go back to the era of the
dinosaurs and accidentally step on a mammal that happened to be our
ancestor, perhaps we would accidentally wipe out the entire human race.
History would become an unending, madcap Monty Python episode, as
tourists from the future trampled over historic events while trying to
get the best camera angle.
But perhaps the thorniest
problems are the logical paradoxes raised by time travel. For example,
what happens if we kill our parents before we are born? This is a
logical impossibility. It is sometimes called the 'grandfather paradox'.
There are three ways to
resolve these paradoxes. First, perhaps you simply repeat past history
when you go back in time, therefore fulfilling the past. In this case,
you have no free will. You are forced to complete the past as it was
written. Thus, if you go back into the past to give the secret of time
travel to your younger self, then it was meant to happen that way. The
secret of time travel came from the future. It was destiny. (But this
does not tell us where the original idea came from.)
Second, you have free will,
so you can change the past, but within limits. Your free will is not
allowed to create a time paradox. Whenever you try to kill your parents
before you are born, a mysterious force prevents you from pulling the
trigger. This position has been advocated by the Russian physicist Igor
Novikov. He argues that there is a law preventing us from walking on
the ceiling, although we might want to. Hence, there might be a law
preventing us from killing our parents before we are born.
Third, the universe splits
into two. On one timeline the people whom you killed look just like
your parents, but they are different, because you are now in a parallel
universe. This latter possibility seems to be the one consistent with
the quantum theory.
The film Back to the Future
explored the third possibility. Doc Emmett Brown (Christopher Lloyd)
invents a plutonium-fired DeLorean car, which is actually a
time-machine for travelling to the past. Marty McFly (Michael J. Fox)
enters the machine and goes back and meets his teenage mother, who then
falls in love with him. This poses a sticky problem. If Marty's teenage
mother spurns his future father, then they never would have married,
and he would never have been born.
The problem is clarified a
bit by Doc Brown. He goes to the blackboard and draws a horizontal
line, representing the timeline of our universe. Then he draws a second
line, which branches off the first line, representing a parallel
universe that opens up when you change the past. Thus, whenever we go
back into the river of time, the river forks into two, and one timeline
becomes two timelines, or what is called the 'many worlds' approach.
This means that all
time-travel paradoxes can be solved. If you have killed your parents
before you were born, it simply means you have killed some people who
are genetically identical to your parents, with the same memories and
personalities, but they are not your true parents.
Extracted from 'Physics of the Impossible' by Michio Kaku (Allen Lane).
Copyright: Telegraph
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| | The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Re: Prof Michio Kaku on the science behind UFOs and time travel by Rishi on Saturday, March 22, 2008 (CDT) (User Info | Send a Message | Journal) | | There are aliens and sapceships that can shift from one dimension to another. Have we also forgot about t holograms and their extensive use in the dimension shifts? Our time frames are human and therefore, limited in intellectual and measurable scope. All time, past, present and future co-exist.. Everything is materialized within a certain frequency. 3D has it's frequency, 4D has it's frequency, as do all others. There are twin universes that have exactly the same qualities and dimensions. I cannot help but think of a huge black hole that sucks up all the matter around it and once all the matter is transformed down to its' smallest units, it goes on to create another universe? All the energy in the universe is conserved there is no wasting or destruction. The different dimensions are what gives the various stages of energy a flexibilty to combine and create.(parallel/perpendicular worlds) lines that fork off. What facinates me the most is the actual diversity in the Universe(s). I do love and respect science, yet, I love and respect science fiction more, because it is the human unlimited creative medium that can explore the many wild and unheard of options, without denigration from academia and it aslo lends itself to the many discoveries and wonders that nature has put before us. |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Re: Prof Michio Kaku on the science behind UFOs and time travel by Curlybird on Sunday, March 23, 2008 (CDT) (User Info | Send a Message) | I have enjoyed several of Professor Kaku's books and presentations over the years. He always stimulates thought about what he is proposing.
I find that what he says in relation to science and UFOs is quite understated in that he simply mentions the possibility that many scientists dismiss UFOs as impossible as travel between different points in the Galaxy and the Universe is literally impossible because the distances are so great.
However, this is based upon the propulsion systems known today and our current understand of physics. I think we have come a long way in our understanding, but there is still so much more to understand. Let's face it, using the action-reaction principle for thrust propulsion works in the context of our Earth, but there are forces that are currently outside our comprehension.
I think that just because science cannot explain a phenomenon does not mean that it cannot be, it simply means that science has not learned to explain it or find a context for it within their current paradigm or scope of knowledge. Remember, the Earth used to be flat and the center of the Universe. :D
CB |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |