that's true, but any alien arrival other than intentionally stealth arrivals, would mostlikely hit the headlines pretty quickly, and as for why nasa can't find any signals, space is big, plus there was the wow signal

Can't draw extraordinary conclusions from the Wow signal.

Yeah i heard about it but i think it was an hello signal,or whatever... as for signals im not sure if a planet from another solar system that would like to send a message to another one im sure they wouldnt use standard equipement,as for that signal that was been heard that might be a ship to ship transmit :)

By the time a radio transmission reached us from another habitable planet, it would just be squishy background noise.

You've jumped from "brief narrow band radio spike of unknown origin" to "intercepted alien spacecraft communication!" with nothing in between.

Oh. Well, I'll just be off then.

Not you. Scraby.

It's not always about you, STM. Though I notice that it quite often is, so I see where you made your mistake.

Ah good, I because I re-read the post and couldn't quite spot my mistake. Makes a nice change that for once I'm not radicalising.

Oh and by the way I did a little research on that image Scraby put up and SETI denounced it as a big fat hoax.

Sorry for double post but:

LIQUID WATER ON MARS!

any one else heard about this amazing news? http://sierramadre.patch.com/article...-water-on-mars is just one of the news sites showing it.

Except it's not confirmed.

It is confirmed. It's all over the god-damn news.

They believe the liquid flow only occurs on the warm months of Mars' climate.

So everyone grab your swimming trunks!

It's all really salty as well and the pictures they found are probably of really muddy water as well and that's why the streaks are so dark.

if the universe is expanding than could the space time fabric be getting thinner as a result?

if this is so than it would be becoming easier to bend or fold or whatever, and as gravity folds or bends space time gravity would be increasing in streanth as time progresses, so has there been any indication of gravity being weaker in the past?

also I think time dialation would effect light that we see, as light leaves the gravity of the source and leaves the field of time dialition from said gravity the light ahead would be going faster in time than the light behind and thus would get extra scattered, and when entering the gravity and timedialation of our solarsystem and or galaxy the light ahead would be moving slower through time than the light behind making the light get compacted, any time dialation inbetween would get fixed as it leaves, so it would depend on the differences in time speed for the source and destination (us) on how much the light is altered, if it comes from a gravity source stronger than us than it would be more scattered than normal and if it comes from a gravity source weaker than us than it would be more compressed than normal.

just a few things I've been thinking about.

No, no and not really. Space doesn't stretch thin like matter does, it's a dimension. It is the room in which things might spread. There is no indication of the force of gravity changing or its effects being the result of anything but mass and the proximity of masses to one another.

Light is both a wave and a particle, but its weirdness does not stop there. It already travels at the speed of light, so if time actually affects it it is already stopped. As a wave it exits in the medium of electromagnetic fields, as a particle it is a massless boson that mediates the electromagnetic force. Time dilation doesn't really affect it, and nor does relative speed: even if you are travelling at the speed of light, all light reaches you and is emitted by you at the speed of light relative to you. And relative to everything else. Don't worry that relativity and quantum physics doesn't compute, your brain genuinely lacks the operating system necessary to run this data.

What gravity does do to light is bend it. Light is affected by gravity so its path is curved by curved space-time. One effect of this is gravitational lensing: some distant stars and other objects appear greatly distorted and even duplicate and multiplied due to the light being bent around galaxies and black holes.

Is that not also the reason why start appear to twinkle in the night sky? (Stellar scintillation for BM) Or is that more to do with a thick atmosphere? I can't remember if it's both or one of the two.

so light is completely unaffected by time dialation? so if time was at a complete stop the light would still be able to move through it? and how do they tell the difference between two objects or one object that has been duplicated with bent light?

The Annunaki aren't coming back.

That's all atmospheric refraction. If it were lensing, there would have to be galaxies jumping back and forth by thousands of lightyears every twinkle. That's quite a bit faster than the universal speed limit.

They can tell the difference because they look the same. Stars and galaxies are all different.

If time was at a stop, light would also be at a stop, there being only one moment to exist in means there is no movement. That is not the same as time dilation.

It's complicated.

You're getting left behind.

I'll save him, he can hide with the bees.

By no means. I'm going with a different group.

The anuki? The simpler version.

This is the only picture that comes up under a search for Anuki that isn't ANIME RELATED

http://s45.radikal.ru/i108/0905/c9/c4166b65bd89.jpg

How is this relevant to the discussion?

Anunaki....Anuki...

i have found an interesting video about a diamond planet orbiting a pulsar,the site is in croatian but the vid is in english http://www.znanost.com/clanak/otkriv...icine-jupitera

i have also read about a star that has a temperature as a human body.

http://www.znanost.com/clanak/snimlj...judskog-tijela

I also heard about that diamond planet, the Daily Mail explained that it was once a star but cooled down into a 100% diamond planet. I believe we had a debate earlier involving a purely hypothetical diamond dead sun, hypothetical because BM dismissed the idea as an impossibility. So...I suppose the scoreboard is BM:100 Irrationality:1

We can check. That conversation was in this very thread. My conclusion was thus:
A star like our own will fuse Helium into Carbon during its red giant phase, in the core where the pressure is sufficient (and clearly sufficient for diamond formation). The stellar evolution cycles I know for this size always go to white dwarf, I'm not sure where diamond star comes into it. I'd suggest a cooled white dwarf, ie a black dwarf, but I don't think the universe is old enough to yet contain any such objects. There's probably something else I don't know about. I recall also writing this:

Oh well in that case it's BM: 101 Irrationality: 0

how long would a black hole with the mass of a reletively earth sized planet last assuming it doesn't consume very much matter

I believe your black hole has fallen at the first hurdle there.

That hurdle being 'Having enough matter to be a black hole'.

Second hurdle being the concept that black holes consume matter, thus depleting a limited resource and burn out.


EDIT: That's cruel. I'll explain.

Black holes can theoretically be any size, as long as the mass is compressed small enough. In practice, only stars that are above a certain size will ever have enough mass to compress down to black hole status. Once this has occured though, black holes don't 'feed' on matter. Anything caught within the gravitational pull that is unable to get away will be sucked in to it and added to its existing mass. The black hole will thus get bigger and its gravitational pull stronger.

If no mass is sucked in to the black hole in a very long time, it won't burn out, it will simply remain the same size with the same gravitational pull.

Although it is now understood that a black hole does not suck in all matter but in fact some matter saps the strength of a black hole, that and Hawking's Radiation convey the plausibility of a period after the black hole era.

Some matter saps the strength of a black hole? What the heck are you on about?

Yes, I was aware of Hawking Radiation. I was giving the simple explanation, appropriate to LDG519's current level of understanding. I assumed that it would be sufficient, what with Hawking Radiation currently being an unobserved theory and all.

You know, Kryptonite.

i just saw some wierd things on an science site,they say that there is a star that shouldnt exist and its old as the universe is,and it still didnt go into red giant to white dwarf phase,also i read about some guys finding ancient batteries in egypt and a baghdad battery.wery wierd.

I think that you need to revisit the way you define 'science site'. People who claim such things are not really operating in the world of real science.

I will try and find you proof as soon as possible but I'm swamped right now and can't get the site/ video.

no its actually a site where our scientists and informers give info and post it on the site,i know a guy from there who is a scientist...

http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_11.htm

'The Baghdad Battery' is actually understood to be likely some sort of electrical power device. Who knows?

I should also mention that "I'm a scientist" doesn't count as a credential. "I'm a scientist and here is my evidence" does. "I'm a scientist and here is my evidence and this is actually my field of expertise" is even better.