I observed something I couldn't account for yesterday, when my computer crashed. It could have been alien technology, but I think there are simpler explanations.
Idiotic comparison. You may not know why it crashed. but a suitably skilled person could trace through the memory dump generated when your computer crashed and figure out why it happened.
Nobody appears to know what the heck is going on with these UAPs, and their behaviour appears to suggest our understanding of physics is much more limited than we thought.
That the UAPs aren't doing what people think they are, and it's faked video, an optical illusion or similar, is far more plausible than that the laws of physics aren't being obeyed.
Not that there’s any point trying to persuade you but the ultra performance is explainable within the bounds of our physics even if requires magic from an engineering perspective.
It would require a gravity well to be formed around the craft, bending spacetime. While moving at speeds closer to light requires ever more inordinate and unrealistic amounts of energy the closer you get to c, there’s actually nothing in our understanding of physics that says that spacetime cannot expand faster than light. In fact we think in many places it is doing so.
This would explain several features, notably the transmedium performance, the lack of obvious propulsion means, the acceleration capabilities without causing sonic booms or combustion of atmospheric N2. And the strange visual blurring reported by military eye witnesses, that might also explain why the photos are never crystal clear. It would also presumably mean the time dilation effects from very fast speeds would not occur.
This is without delving into our physics being utterly incomplete. The lack of compatibility between the Standard Model of QM and Relativity, even though both have excellent empirical support. Matter making up only 5% of the gravitational effects we can measure, with 27% dark matter and dark energy the rest. What is dark matter and where is it? We dunno. What is dark energy? We know less about that than dark matter.
No doubt Philip Thompson can explain it all and hence tell us why the US defense and intelligence establishment is totally wrong with what now appears to be its leading hypothesis for these phenomena.
Wait, what? Creating a gravity well and twisting space-time wouldn't avoid interactions with the medium. It would, though, have all sorts of repercussions. Colossal gravity waves, for a start, and we do have sensors for that. A gravity well like that would have big repercussions in all sorts of areas, from distorting orbits overhead through to ripping items off the ground and massive* issues caused in weather** It wouldn't avoid N2 combustion, or sonic booms (the air is still there and still has to go somewhere)
* Pun intended ** Hey, @Leon - we've got a weather link for you!
I observed something I couldn't account for yesterday, when my computer crashed. It could have been alien technology, but I think there are simpler explanations.
Idiotic comparison. You may not know why it crashed. but a suitably skilled person could trace through the memory dump generated when your computer crashed and figure out why it happened.
Nobody appears to know what the heck is going on with these UAPs, and their behaviour appears to suggest our understanding of physics is much more limited than we thought.
That the UAPs aren't doing what people think they are, and it's faked video, an optical illusion or similar, is far more plausible than that the laws of physics aren't being obeyed.
Not that there’s any point trying to persuade you but the ultra performance is explainable within the bounds of our physics even if requires magic from an engineering perspective.
It would require a gravity well to be formed around the craft, bending spacetime. While moving at speeds closer to light requires ever more inordinate and unrealistic amounts of energy the closer you get to c, there’s actually nothing in our understanding of physics that says that spacetime cannot expand faster than light. In fact we think in many places it is doing so.
This would explain several features, notably the transmedium performance, the lack of obvious propulsion means, the acceleration capabilities without causing sonic booms or combustion of atmospheric N2. And the strange visual blurring reported by military eye witnesses, that might also explain why the photos are never crystal clear. It would also presumably mean the time dilation effects from very fast speeds would not occur.
This is without delving into our physics being utterly incomplete. The lack of compatibility between the Standard Model of QM and Relativity, even though both have excellent empirical support. Matter making up only 5% of the gravitational effects we can measure, with 27% dark matter and dark energy the rest. What is dark matter and where is it? We dunno. What is dark energy? We know less about that than dark matter.
No doubt Philip Thompson can explain it all and hence tell us why the US defense and intelligence establishment is totally wrong with what now appears to be its leading hypothesis for these phenomena.
Wait, what? Creating a gravity well and twisting space-time wouldn't avoid interactions with the medium. It would, though, have all sorts of repercussions. Colossal gravity waves, for a start, and we do have sensors for that. A gravity well like that would have big repercussions in all sorts of areas, from distorting orbits overhead through to ripping items off the ground and massive* issues caused in weather** It wouldn't avoid N2 combustion, or sonic booms (the air is still there and still has to go somewhere)
* Pun intended ** Hey, @Leon - we've got a weather link for you!
This site gets ever more bizarre. If you click on Leon’s name, you find an ode to Mark Drakeford.
Phil Thompson's vision of the future really is quite chilling - England as a high-density housing estate where everyone has to live on imported frozen kangaroo burgers.
England already is a high density housing estate.
Just some people want nice spacious detached homes surrounded by countryside while the plebs are piled high in tower blocks in the city even if they can afford to buy land in elsewhere.
It is not an unreasonable aspiration to own a nice home.
Agreed.
So why do NIMBYs wish to deny that aspiration to others?
Its when green belt is taken that problems arise. There is any amount of brownfield sites to be developed. The requisite infrastructure promised by developers surgery etc schools etc rarely happens so the existing infrastructure is overwhelmed.
There aren't any number of brownfield sites. That's the problem.
Population has increased by a sixth in recent years but housing hasn't and there aren't brownfield sites to cover the gap. Because whatever was on a brownfield site has a tendency to be replaced.
If more infrastructure is needed then construct that too. On greenfield too.
And if you don't want fields being developed then what is stopping you from buying the fields then refusing permission to build on them? Since you own them, you decide.
Why has population increased when the UK birthrate is only 1.68 ie below replacement level? Immigration.
So if the government reduce immigration via the new points system then the demand for new housing should fall too anyway
The biggest impact is smaller household units - divorces, delays in partnering up, children moving out sooner etc
If a population lives in 40 million houses and the occupancy changed from 2.1 to 2.0 you need nearly a million more houses for a reason which is invisible to the naked eye.
And as you need most of them where pressure is already high and the NIMBYs most active it is a political and practical problem.
Yes, lots of us have, over the past 30 years, vastly increased the amount of square footage of house we occupy - largely through the process described above. A family of four who bought their house in the 90s and lived in it perfectly happily is now a retired couple of two, living in the same house, plus two children each living in a small two bed flat. This process has happened over and over and over again. The result has been that those least able to afford a house are now sleeping on their Mum's sofa in her one bed flat.
This has been the result of nothing more malign than demographic change.
I was manning a consultation relating to a large greenfield housing development a couple of years back. Lots and lots and lots of people angry that their bit of countryside was going to be built on and that their roads would be busier. In amongst which, a cleaner at the community centre came to have a look. "Please," she said to me under her breath, "just build them. I don't care what they look like. I don't care about newts. I've got two grown up sons living in my living room because they can't get a house. Just build them." But, I suspect she didn't fill in the response form, while the middle-class* hordes who lived adjacent to the green belt in question did.
*I don't use this pejoratively. I'm middle classs. It's a good thing to be. But we need to recognise that our views aren't necessarily those of everyone.
This is an incredibly insightful post, and also demonstrates one of the massive problems of stamp duty: it's a frickin' tax on trading down.
The tax system should encourage the efficient allocation of resources. Stamp duty does the opposite.
Comments
Creating a gravity well and twisting space-time wouldn't avoid interactions with the medium.
It would, though, have all sorts of repercussions. Colossal gravity waves, for a start, and we do have sensors for that. A gravity well like that would have big repercussions in all sorts of areas, from distorting orbits overhead through to ripping items off the ground and massive* issues caused in weather**
It wouldn't avoid N2 combustion, or sonic booms (the air is still there and still has to go somewhere)
* Pun intended
** Hey, @Leon - we've got a weather link for you!