Serious question from a skeptic - practical realities of taking clearvideo/stills of UFO's?

On Feb 20, 3:18*pm, "Dudley Hanks" wrote:

If the military actually said, "Hey, isn't that neat! *You folks saw a UFO
over Vegas last night. *Cool!" *Wouldn't that lead to a bit of anxiety on
the part of Vegas residents? *Wouldn't the people of that fair city then be
saying: *"So, with all the money in your budget you missed it? *Are you also
going to miss a missile coming in over the Atlantic or Pacific?"


That was one of the reasons it seemed clear it was nothing. AFAIK
there was no attempt to engage the "visitors" - presumably the
military already knew what it was.

"Marvin" wrote in message
news:YO_uj.11709$N95.4744@trnddc03...
Doc wrote:
snip
Or do I have a mistaken notion of how powerful the available optics
are? The News stations show clear, distinct shots of the fast-moving
Space Shuttle when it's well into its trajectory on launch days, I
would guess from at least as far if not farther than these objects are
from the cameras. The above link is an incident that occurred over a
major city and apparently caused quite a buzz. *Nobody* there had good
gear they could whip out to take some pics?

I would think a major city has astronomy buffs and universities who
have fairly sophisticated gear already set up to photograph distant
objects. Wouldn't capturing something at airliner altitude be quite
possible?

Thanks

The pix of the shuttle soon after takeoff are made through a special
telescope, made by Perkin Elmer, as I recall. It allows the ground crews
to monitor the takeoff closely, with the extra use - a plus for the
image-concisions NASA - of providing dramatic shots for TV.
----------

Every day here on earth -
People transmit messages
To outer space!
The beings out there
are listening - but!
How dare they answer -?
When earth is such a disgrace.
--------

"N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" wrote in message
...
Dear William Graham:

"William Graham" wrote in message
. ..
...
"Impossible" can mean many things to many people.
In theory, anything might be possible, especially to a
pure mathematician.

Be a little careful with "in theory". Theory presumes some experimental
underpinnings. I think you mean "imagination", rather than "theory".

But realistically, if you are going to bother to even
consider (and discuss) any problem, then you must consider the laws of
physics as we know
them to be today.

Such as the quantum realm, where neither space nor time have any meaning?
Where all particle-particle interactions travel all possible paths at all
possible speeds (not limited to c)? Did you mean those *known* laws of
physics? What we don't know is *why* it all seems to "pace" the way
classical mechanics describes. Quantum mechanics is not keeping our butts
on the planet.

And, in the light of those laws, it is extremely
unlikely that any object here on earth came
here from some other star system.

Absolutely *no* correlation between what you understand of physics
(today), and what a possible civilization that could be older than ours
might be able to do. Hell, it does not limit "ETs" from being Earthling
visitors from the future, ala the "Philadelphia experiment" or "Sphere".
Only classical physics provides these limits. We already know physics
that has no such limitations.

I have no objection to "flights of fantacy"
speculation, but just understand that when you
indulge it these, you are leaving the realm of
rational thought, and entering the realm of science fiction fantacy.

Said about H.G. Wells, and a number of other folks. Seems like their
flights act to guide us... either towards or away from any given path.

IOW, when I look up in the sky, and see
something that I do not understand, I will be
willing to believe almost anything about it
rather than speculate on it's origin being
outside of our own solar system.

To each his / her own. Funny that you do not allow for physics that you
do not yet know.

This is simply a practical matter based on all
the laws of physics that I have known (and
used) during my whole lifetime. I spent about
30 years working at a high energy physics
laboratory chock full of people with PhD's in
physics. We used relativistic mechanics on a
daily basis to solve real problems involved with
the machines we built and used to investigate the make up of matter. I
can assure you that
these equations were reliable, and enabled us
to do our jobs well. We built and used
machines that cost the taxpayers over 100
million dollars using them, and they worked as
expected when completed. So, I am forced to
go with that technology unless and until I am
shown some other technology and had it
explained mathematically to me, and
demonstrated to me as well.

Acknowledged.

So your take is, they cannot take pictures of something that *cannot*
exist? (Trying to drag this back to the thread topic.)

David A. Smith

Apparently you did not understand me. I am talking about physics that is
known, proved, and demonstrated. There are many theories. And some of them
might be true. But unless and until they are demonstrated by experiment, the
world of classical physics does not accept them as established fact. The lab
I worked at was there just for that purpose. The theory department would
hatch up some outlandish idea, and they would discuss its merits, together
with the expense of testing it experimentally, and if it was feasible, they
would build and do the experiment. If the experiment costs too much, they
wouldn't. The superconducting super collider of the 80's is an example of
one that would cost too much to build, (30 billion dollars) so congress
turned them down.
The idea that beings from outer space can get here by jumping into a
parallel universe, walking across their street, and then step back into
ours, all in less time than it takes me to tell you about it is one of those
zany ideas that, while perhaps theoretically possible, is impossible to
prove experimentally, so it is in the realm of fantasy. Therefore, I am not
going to believe it. When it is demonstrated by experiment, then I will
accept it as established fact. This is not the exhibition of a closed mind.
On the contrary, it is just the practical application of the scientific
method. But hey! - You are free to speculate on the possibility of anything
you want. Perhaps the reason why I don't want to play is because I know that
there are thousands of such speculations going on all the time, and it takes
a lot of money to test even a very few of them. I spent thirty years of my
working life observing just how much money, and just how few of them could
be tested as a result.

But realistically, if you are going to bother to even
consider (and discuss) any problem, then you must consider the laws of
physics as we know
them to be today.

Somehow, I'm glad the scientific establishment doesn't have the authority to
imprison / torture people for scientific herassy.

What is that I hear? Is it a body or two (or three) rolling over in their
famous tombs?

Can't help feeling like I've somehow slipped backwards in time a few hundred
years,
Dudley

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:BBuvj.39513$w57.28279@edtnps90...
But realistically, if you are going to bother to even
consider (and discuss) any problem, then you must consider the laws of
physics as we know
them to be today.

Somehow, I'm glad the scientific establishment doesn't have the authority
to imprison / torture people for scientific herassy.

What is that I hear? Is it a body or two (or three) rolling over in their
famous tombs?

Can't help feeling like I've somehow slipped backwards in time a few
hundred years,
Dudley



Yes. - Well, when you can give an unlimited supply of money to the
scientific establishment, so they can build and operate an experiment to
test every zany idea that the Sci Fi boys can come up with, then you can
complain about the stogy "scientific establishment." Unfortunately, today,
it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to build machines that are capable
of testing even the most simple theories of how this universe is
constructed. As a matter of fact, the modern physics teacher is hesitant
about telling his students that they should go into high energy physics at
all......Perhaps they would be better off writing science fiction.......

.... The theory department would
hatch up some outlandish idea,

"theory department" ? Give me a break.

Hasn't this gotten sufficiently OT yet?

"Rick Merrill" wrote in message
. ..
... The theory department would
hatch up some outlandish idea,

"theory department" ? Give me a break.

Hasn't this gotten sufficiently OT yet?



I have a theory about that ........................

"SteveB" meagain@rockvilleUSA wrote in message
...

"Rick Merrill" wrote in message
. ..
... The theory department would
hatch up some outlandish idea,

"theory department" ? Give me a break.

Hasn't this gotten sufficiently OT yet?



I have a theory about that ........................

Now, Steve, are you sure it's not a fantasy?

"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message
news:7UFvj.39853$w57.1130@edtnps90...

"SteveB" meagain@rockvilleUSA wrote in message
...

"Rick Merrill" wrote in message
. ..
... The theory department would
hatch up some outlandish idea,

"theory department" ? Give me a break.

Hasn't this gotten sufficiently OT yet?



I have a theory about that ........................

Now, Steve, are you sure it's not a fantasy?

I'm positive. It involves no nude females or small farm animals.

"Rick Merrill" wrote in message
. ..
... The theory department would
hatch up some outlandish idea,

"theory department" ? Give me a break.

What break? - They called it the theory group.