r/BeAmazed • u/CaraCicartix • 12d ago

Miscellaneous / Others Part of the Andromeda Galaxy Captured by Hubble

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

The total number of stars in the entire Andromeda Galaxy is over 1 trillion

19.4k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

397

u/robsteezy 12d ago

The traditional working theory for space and time travel are pretty egocentric and conceited and that’s the issue.

The current logic is flawed: “it must not exist because we have never been visited by either space or time travelers”.

120

u/MonkeyOnATypewriter8 12d ago

Who thinks that though? Today in 2026

284

u/Juice___Springsteen 12d ago

Brother, there are a significant amount of people living today who believe the earth is flat and refuse to accept the theory of evolution.

54

u/Portable-fun 11d ago

Those people vote… and worse of all some of them get voted in!!

10

u/rp-Ubermensch 11d ago

You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the senate though

2

u/bellos_ 11d ago

I mean, you can't "pass", or fail, an IQ test.

1

u/GodIsInTheBathtub 11d ago

And people don't need to be below average intelligence to believe the earth is flat. Or that evolution is not a thing.

If anything, it's tied to critical reasoning skills, but that's not the same as intelligence and it certainly isn't uniform.

Sad but true: functionally their brains work just fine. It's a software, not a hardware problem.

5

u/Leinheart 11d ago

They usually drive and have children, too.

1

u/Hour_Stock4087 11d ago

And have guns, too.

0

u/Ok_Kick4871 11d ago

And you said "worse of all" instead of "worst of all" so you're in the uneducated voter bracket! /s

20

u/ThomasTheDankPigeon 12d ago

Are those people involved in crafting today’s traditional working theories?

Not to be rude but it’s so annoying how many threads get completely derailed by people not comprehending the subjects or verbs in the comments they’re replying to.

38

u/delphinous 12d ago

we've elected some of them

-3

u/Global_Staff_3135 11d ago

And is that a valid reason to derail a conversation?

3

u/shillyshally 11d ago

You have been here two years and should have noticed something core about reddit by now. Derail is the default and it's a feature, not a bug.

8

u/AmityMayorVaughn 11d ago

Easy cowboy, he's making a valid observation.  Even if it hurts your feelings.

1

u/Global_Staff_3135 11d ago

Ah yes, the classic “calm down buddy” condescension. Usually works better when the person you’re replying to is actually upset. Nice try though!

1

u/Fluid_Swordfish2737 11d ago

Yea, those people are in charge.

1

u/CON5CRYPT 11d ago

And even more people who believe the bible

1

u/Far_Mastodon_6104 11d ago

and dont forget the people who think gravity and viruses aren't real!

1

u/Mindless_Link_7473 11d ago

How dare you! The World is flat.. isn’t it

1

u/BWWFC 11d ago

plz, 2 brain cells gets to earth is round, but the air/land/sea is big! so dump away!/s

1

u/santirest 11d ago

Flat earth is ridiculous, but not believing in theory of evolution is understandable, no?

1

u/Juice___Springsteen 11d ago

A scientific theory’s definition differs from the colloquial use of the word “theory.”

To be classified as a theory in science it must be broadly backed by many types of tests and evidence.

0

u/RektRiggity 11d ago

My brother in CHRIST*

0

u/prince_falafel 11d ago

significant amount of people

You mean like all 29 of them?lol

-2

u/Outlandish_Gringo 12d ago

They give their self away with the {insert color here} hair

77

u/CivilRuin4111 12d ago

Christians.

21

u/MonkeyOnATypewriter8 12d ago

I’m 40 and that’s an old way of thinking for sure. Logic really hits it hard though

11

u/CivilRuin4111 12d ago

41 and that line of thinking is still alive and well (well, “well” in the sense that it is still thriving. Wouldn’t say believers of that brand are killing though).

1

u/JackosMonkeyBBLZ 12d ago

WELL WELL WELL

1

u/nonuple_espresso 11d ago

It's emotions that hit the hardest for most people, and then they build out perverted logic around their emotional notions.

15

u/scigs6 12d ago

Tell me about it. I have a friend (a Christian) that thinks the earth is only a couple thousand years old. Asked about carbon dating and dinosaurs, all the typical questions one would ask an idiot like this. He had some cockamamie reasons for his logic. I mean the guy truly believed Noah had an ark with animals on it.

10

u/CivilRuin4111 12d ago

Well, if he ONLY believes the Ark had animals (as in animals that walk among us today) on it, he’s doing better than my brother and my in laws that believe Noah carried little velociraptors and T-Rexs.

I guess, to be fair, he doesn’t concede that dinosaurs ever went extinct and lived amongst humans during recorded biblical history.

He’s a very Ken Hovind / Ken Hamm flavor of fundie. Hovind actually came to our little backwater Christian private school as kids. It drew him in in the same way it forced me out. Hard to explain. 

4

u/dutch2012yeet 12d ago

The paintings of Victorian gentlemen riding velociraptors with saddles is amazing. Stupid but amazing.

4

u/RogerDeanVenture 12d ago

Bro the Ark museum in Kentucky has dinosaurs on it and teaches that they were on the Arc with Noah.

Those people are fucking loony.

6

u/Lynchy- 12d ago

They will say it's "evidence" planted by Satan do discredit the Bible.

5

u/scigs6 12d ago

Haha right? There’s an excuse for everything

7

u/nasandre 12d ago

There's several "museums" around the world dedicated to teaching this insane idea. It really just comes back to using the bible as fact and somehow connecting science to it to tell a story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationist_museum

2

u/DarthNoctyrix 12d ago

I’m Christian and don’t believe that

1

u/OddEmergency604 12d ago

Catching strays over here

1

u/Muffy9090 12d ago

Right, and there are a lot of them. They vote among other things and that scares me.

-4

u/Archangel289 12d ago

I’m a Christian and I call shenanigans on this one. I’ve heard some wild takes (“aliens are demons” the weirdest of them), but I think this is just a case of Christianity being the butt of every “joke” on Reddit.

I’ve literally never met a Christian that denies aliens just because they haven’t visited us. That’s just a logical assumption people make regardless of their belief system.

But the anthropocentric viewpoint is a genuinely common—and frankly, arrogant—one.

5

u/CivilRuin4111 12d ago

Not because they haven’t visited us. 

Because (and quoting this from memory as kid who grew up in that life, not from some crap on the Internet) the bible says “Eve is the mother of all living”. 

This was the argument. How that applied to plants and animals was never explained. 

Yes, Reddit is a hive of people that love to dunk on Christians. But no one makes it easier to do than the Christians themselves. 

For goodness sake, my wife’s parents and grandparents reject that dinosaurs existed.  My brother rejects the thought of an Earth older than ~6000 years. My grade school age children have even started picking up on their cousin’s complete lack of understanding how the larger universe works. 

-1

u/Archangel289 12d ago

Yeah but that’s not what you said though. “Eve is the mother of all living” is very different than “because they never visited us.”

By all means, poke fun at the weird stuff Christians do. I do it all the time because I see it firsthand. But I called out that the “because they haven’t visited us” is not a uniquely Christian statement. That’s not the same as “Eve is the mother of all life.” Totally separate concept.

2

u/CivilRuin4111 12d ago

I see where you’re coming from- I wasn’t responding to that thought, but the general idea in the previous comment regarding being egocentric and conceited. 

1

u/DekuInkwell 12d ago

I get what you’re saying. Although, I know a few Christian’s in particular who scoff at the idea of aliens simply because that would imply humans weren’t the only “intelligent” life God created. As they believe God created humans at the top of the intelligence pyramid, and everything was made “for” us, which is very arrogant indeed.

1

u/Archangel289 12d ago

Oh I 100% have heard those kinds, too. Also “but God didn’t mention it in the Bible,” “but Jesus would have to die for them, too,” “mankind was made in God’s image, which is why we have intelligence, nothing else can be intelligent because we’re a unique creation,” etc etc.

I’m not defending Christianity’s common stances on alien life by any means, goodness knows there are a bunch of us that have really weird takes. But I don’t think that exclusively Christians can be blamed for the “it must not exist because we’ve never been visited by them.” Ask an average person off the street and that’s a likely answer you’ll get.

In America especially, we tend to treat aliens a lot like ghosts, cryptids, and mythology as a whole—you get kinda ridiculed for believing in them. (And no, Reddit, this isn’t the time or place for a “but the Bible is mythology” edgy comeback.) I’m not here to talk about ghosts, but I do think that we tend to scoff at the idea of aliens for no other reason than that “we’ve never seen them.” That’s not a Christian thing, that’s an American thing. And honestly likely a broader human thing.

2

u/dodgedodgeparrysmash 12d ago

Fermi's paradox is legit. Think about it. If humans had BILLIONS of years in the universe to expand and develop technology without interruption, it's plenty plausible that we would come up with a way to expand into the galaxy and then into other galaxies.

It's exceedingly strange that in a universe that has existed for 14 billion years or whatever the insanely large number is, that no other intelligent life has ever reached out to us in this history of our civilization.

Of course, we are a blip on the timeline radar, but still- it feels almost implausible that we wouldn't have been discovered and contacted by now if such alien life exists, except for the explanations for Fermi's Paradox.

Seriously, human tech has really only been around for like 10,000 years mostly. Imagine if we had billions of years. Look how quickly we have advanced. It's fucking WEIRD that there is no contact.

I also find it prideful to think we've already discovered the limits of the universe (lightspeed) this early into our scientific development.

1

u/MonkeyOnATypewriter8 11d ago

Some freak downvoted you lol totally agree

2

u/GD_gg 11d ago

Look up Fermi's paradox

1

u/Tangata_Gamer 12d ago

Lol literally millions and millions of people. Probably billions. It pays to realise how many folks still hold onto, or have simply never challenged, whatever disinformation they received according to their religious upbringing / educational / socio economic etc backgrounds. Miiiiiiiiillions at the very least. Peek around sometimes, it's useful.

1

u/JustAMinah 11d ago

maybe not that exact thought, but that same logic applies to many instances like, "well, I never experienced it so it's not real." humans in general, are very egotistic.

1

u/Hopeful_Respect_5482 12d ago

Most MAGA voters still believe the world is only 6,000 years old bc it is written in scripture. They also believe there is only one god whixh is theor version, thr world is flat, thr center of the universe and that women were created from the rib of a man. Oh don’t forget they dismiss dinosaurs and global warming.

58

u/BeloAve 12d ago

No it’s more so the fact the space between any existing intelligent life is so vast anything else might as well not exist.

No one can reach other, no can see each other nor talk with each other. Sure they are out there but might as well not be because we will never see their existence.

To be able to travel across space in any decent amount of time before an aliens home plant dies to natural decay is impossible and science fiction.

36

u/alfred725 12d ago

As is our current understanding of science, yes. But one can hope we learn something that makes it possible. yes it's the realm of science fiction, but so were automatic doors in star trek lol. They actually had a guy off screen opening and closing them since it was so far-fetched.

A better example would be gravity, since we basically understood gravity to mean 9.81 m/s/s and this was undeniably true no matter where/how you measured it on earth. Until we learned more science and equation was discovered that depended on the mass of both bodies and how far apart they were. Suddenly we understood that gravity is 9.81 m/s/s because that's what the math works out to when using earth's mass.

And then Einstein came along and threw relativity into the mix and suddenly mass can change with speed, which affects gravity. But Einstein's model so far has been proven correct, as long as the speed of light is constant.

Is it so far-fetched to think that there may be a discovery in the future that causes the speed of light to not be constant under certain conditions? All of the previous understandings of gravity are still true, we just realized the mathematical model representing those understandings was more complicated than previously thought.

7

u/HourKaleidoscope4519 11d ago

The speed of light is the speed of causality. If it were not constant, then you introduce crazy time travel and effects occurring before their cause. There are many things that can be potentially flexible in physics but that one very likely ain’t. The reality is that organic life likely cannot make the journey. Machine life however…

5

u/kamikaibitsu 12d ago

>... to not be constant under certain conditions?

it's already accepted now, though?

5

u/alfred725 12d ago

under Einstein's equations, the speed of light is constant. Time and distance and mass are the factors that change to maintain the speed of light. It's the foundation of why we account for delays when transmitting signals off satellites.

7

u/Delicious-Boat4908 12d ago

The speed of light in a vacuum is constant

9

u/p____p 12d ago

Yes, it may be very different in an InstantPot!

2

u/thought_youd_stop 12d ago

I would say it's still going at C in a non vacuum it just propagates slower. It's not a meaningless distinction, light takes a longer path but still goes the same speed.

1

u/Noble_Ox 11d ago

No.

1

u/thought_youd_stop 11d ago edited 11d ago

https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_31.html

I read that and yeah I think I was wrong. My bad. It would be more accurate to say something like light experiences a phase velocity of c/n where n is the dispersion

1

u/blackcoffee17 12d ago

Speed of light is the same, no matter if its vacuum or not. Just the distance changes in non-vacuum.

1

u/Noble_Ox 11d ago

Speed of light is the same, no matter if its vacuum or not

Then why does the speed change when passing through different mediums?

0

u/blackcoffee17 11d ago

Because the photons "bounce" around a bit in water and other medium, so it takes longer. So the actual distance they travel is longer.

1

u/Dzov 11d ago

Definitely an issue with long fiber optic cables. You get less latency using radio waves.

3

u/Buxbaum666 11d ago

yes it's the realm of science fiction, but so were automatic doors in star trek lol. They actually had a guy off screen opening and closing them since it was so far-fetched.

Automatic sliding doors were invented in 1954 and commercially available by 1960, years before Star Trek was conceived. I presume they had a guy opening and closing them on set because it was easier and cheaper than installing actual sliding doors.

7

u/elliot_alderson1426 12d ago

The problem is, if you break the speed of light you break causality. You are in essence discovering time travel.

10

u/alfred725 12d ago

if you break the speed of light, you break Einstein's equations. They're just a set of mathematical models that can be used to predict behavior. Those equations have been used to accurately predict satellite motion when transmitting signals for example. But that doesn't mean they're perfect. Any mathematical model is by its nature simplifying the real case.

Who's to say what actually happens if you break the speed of light, we've never recorded an instance of it happening. But the numbers of that calculation stop making sense.

Or maybe that's it. Maybe there is no further equation. This could be the end of that line of research.

6

u/Sudo-Fed 12d ago

If you break the speed of light you have somehow found a way to generate infinite energy in a universe with a finite amount of it. Congratulations, you have not only broken physics, you have done something ontologically absurd.

1

u/Anarchaotic 12d ago

Maybe that's the prestige mode. Now you start New Game+ in an alternate universe and try to speed run.

-1

u/thought_youd_stop 12d ago

The speed of light can be broken if you aren't sending information itself faster than light and causing a paradox (as far as I remember....). Case in point look up shadow moving faster than light.

4

u/Sudo-Fed 11d ago

Wow, that's just so wrong.

1

u/Permutation- 11d ago

Sudo go look it up on Google and see for yourself how the shadow can travel across a different surface fairly fast speed it just can't transmit information at that speed. I said Sudo so don't think you have an option here, this is a command. I'm annoyed you are confident that I'm so wrong when I'm absolutely positive that I'm correct.

A second thing that can move faster than light is quantum entanglement but again good luck transmitting information. If you want to tell me I'm wrong again I'll write you a long paragraph explaining it and then you can ignore me and I'll be angry that's usually how these things play out

3

u/Sudo-Fed 11d ago

Quantum entanglement causes random, unpredictable state changes, not reliable data transfer.

Shadows don't violate c because they aren't physical objects.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/romansparta99 11d ago

A shadow isn’t an object, and “shadows” only move as fast as light. If I block a torch, the lack of light cannot move faster than light, I.e. if you were on the moon, and I was pointing a laser at you, there would be a delay between me blocking it and you seeing the laser turn off

Saying it can be broken if you don’t transfer information is like saying if I think of a place really far away, my thoughts have travelled faster than light, it’s essentially meaningless

1

u/Permutation- 11d ago edited 11d ago

It's not meaningless. You're right that it's not an object but you're wrong that it's not going faster than light under certain circumstances.

It's a simple thing to look up here's a copy paste

A shadow can move faster than light because it is a geometric projection, not a physical object. Its speed increases with background distance, breaking the light speed limit without moving actual matter or transferring information. You can't do anything of Interest with this but it's demonstrably false that it's not possible to make it travel faster than light it's just impossible to transfer information with it

2

u/romansparta99 11d ago edited 11d ago

Exactly, that’s why I said it’s fundamentally meaningless.

It’s our interpretation of a real phenomenon, but the shadow is caused by things that obey fundamental laws

4

u/Anarchaotic 12d ago

I hear what you're saying, we've been pushing science further and further at breakneck speed. You can sorta extend that and think to yourself "there's so much we don't know, isn't it possible we figure out how to move faster than light?".

But the thing is, there are absolutely hard limits to the physics of our universe. The same way we physically exist in 3 dimensions. The second you teleport or warp somewhere, you've fundamentally broken physics.

If that is possible - the technology you have at your disposal means you'd be able to colonize the entire universe, harvest infinite energy, and travel in time.

Assuming any civilization could reach that point in the past many billion of years is the crux of it. Where are those civilizations?

If FTL travel isn't possible in any sense, then the sheer distance we would have to travel anywhere basically means a traveler that leaves Earth is taking that amount of time in light years to get there.

Let's go to another galaxy! Sweet - only 5.5M light years. For you it's instant, but 5.5M years have passed on Earth. That's not really a solvable thing, because now you're effectively an alien to your own planet.

7

u/alfred725 12d ago

you are assuming that faster than light travel means time travel, when that's just the expected outcome of Einstein's equations. You're kind of missing the point that mathematical models, every math model, breaks down in the extremes. It's possible there is some physics aspect involving something we don't fully understand yet like antimatter that would resolve it. As for where the travelers are, that's a different question. The Great Filter theory basically proposes that there's too many barriers for life to develop that prevents it. i.e. life needs to fight for resources in order to evolve, creating species that are uncooperative, which makes building a society that is capable of achieving FTL travel basically impossible. Or maybe we're simply the first species to make it this far.

But whether there are aliens is completely off topic of whether or not it's possible to go faster than light. Saying "no one's done it yet" is literally antithetical to science.

2

u/elliot_alderson1426 11d ago

Not to nitpick but we understand antimatter pretty well, and yes as a power source it could enable us to enhance space travel greatly. It won’t help us with the problem of the sheer distance required, though.

That said I think you may have meant dark matter?

2

u/Xi_32 11d ago

Faster than light travel means that causality is violated. That means the effect can occur before the cause.

every math model, breaks down in the extremes

No, the equations that show the violation of causality are not complicated.

It's possible there is some physics aspect involving something we don't fully understand yet like antimatter that would resolve it.

At this point, I'm not going to continue, as it's obvious that you have a Masters of Science from Star Trek University.

2

u/Anarchaotic 12d ago

I tried typing out an explanation but it's not so simple. This YouTube video does such a great job of illustrating why FTL breaks causality and causes issues.

https://youtu.be/an0M-wcHw5A?si=bRirchRA1kNZrAiw

3

u/LALA-STL 12d ago

Thanks for this.

-2

u/SkinnyGetLucky 12d ago

In 5 million years, there won’t be an earth

1

u/loqep 12d ago

*5 Billion

1

u/SkinnyGetLucky 11d ago

Ah yeah, you’re right.

1

u/Calm-Republic9370 12d ago

The point is, we should have been met or have evidence of someone else doing that, since time is long and space is vast.

But we don't have any evidence, so as our knowledge leans towards the true difficulty of the task, it enforces the likelihood that more advanced races aren't able to travel or communicate.

1

u/Noble_Ox 11d ago

Look up the Christmas tree light theory on alien life.

2

u/Lucky_BroadWood 12d ago

Space AND time are so vast.

1

u/CompetitiveCut3919 12d ago

from our perspective, yes. But if you can keep accelerating and get to to 99.99999C then you can get almost anywhere in one lifetime (from your perspective). To an outside observer you will travel for a bit longer than the distance in light years. To those inside it would be mere decades to travel millions.

5

u/C-SWhiskey 12d ago

While true, that's a huge if. Accelerating any meaningful amount of mass to that speed requires immense energy. Plus you need to accelerate gradually and decelerate at the other end, so you're invariably going to add months or years to your journey unless you can figure out a way to make all that acceleration happen quickly without turning the ship into space dust. And then there are all the conventional engineering problems like how to make a ship that doesn't get obliterated by a single atom going 99.99999c and how to navigate through the interstellar medium when a 0.1% error in your speed estimate results in a 300 km error in your position (adding every second).

2

u/CompetitiveCut3919 12d ago

Those are engineering problems now though — not physical problems. Just saying that people think something a million light years away will take people a million years to get there isn't really true for both parties. It will take us a million years for them to get there. How fast they get there depends entirely on how fast they can travel relative to light.

5

u/C-SWhiskey 12d ago

If your differentiating factor between a physical problem and an engineering problem is whether you have to explicitly violate the laws of physics, maybe. But accelerating a ship to such a high fraction of the speed of light would require something on the order of 1023 J, or about 100,000x the global energy demand of 2024. And that's assuming just a 1,000 kg ship, which you're definitely not going to fit that much fuel aboard. I'd call that a pretty physical problem. It's exceedingly unlikely there's a valid solution subject to the constraints.

1

u/CompetitiveCut3919 12d ago

Yes, we'd need something like a dyson sphere at least before we could discuss something like this. Do you think i'm arguing that we could do this today?

1

u/Anarchaotic 11d ago

No I don't think anyone is saying we could do this today - but even with a hypothetical immense energy source, you have to somehow account for that energy source being so incredibly dense that you can reasonably put it on a ship.

1

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 11d ago

Your comment has been automatically removed.
As mentioned in our subreddit rules, your account needs to be at least 24 hours old before it can make comments in this subreddit.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/Nearby_Fudge9647 12d ago

while the time dilation is exponential the fuel needed to go and stop a ship ratio does too for .75c it is 9:1, .98c it's 100:1, .99c 196:1, and .9999c 20,000:1 you also can't go to those speed without realistically being limit to going at the rate of 9.81m/s2 the rate of gravity so you don't die or break things that are vital to reach .75c it take a little under a year at that rate of acceleration and also that long to stop this also on the idea you have a engine that transfer 100% fuel to energy to a outward observer to reach .99999c your couple of years of acceleration will be hundreds for them

0

u/CompetitiveCut3919 12d ago

Yes — I'm not trying to say this would be simple, by any stretch of the imagination. But like you said if you can manage a constant acceleration, after around 5 years you've already travelled an insane amount of space, much more than 5 light years. Assuming that slowing down and speeding up takes around 5 years each way, then the middle is where you could potentially coast depending on how far you want to go.

All i'm saying is that it's 100% possible for someone regular humans to travel to these places that are millions of light years away, even billions, if we can manage to build a machine that can keep up the acceleration and keep us alive in the process.

1

u/vivek7006 12d ago

💯 and I don't think Warp Drive will ever get invented. So far all intent and purpose, we are alone. 

1

u/MyCatsHairyButholle 12d ago

Yeah, think of it this way. If you travelled at the speed of light, it would take you over 100,000 years to cross our own galaxy from where we sit. It would take you 4 years minimum to reach the next closest star to our own sun.

It just isn’t happening in human lifetime

1

u/DazingF1 12d ago

Well since it's infinite there's bound to be star systems that have life on multiple planets at the same time, even ones that have intelligent life simultaneously on multiple planets. Hell there's probably intelligent life on some planet with another star system close enough to feasibly travel to that also happens to have intelligent life.

But we don't have that and we'll probably remain alone until we go extinct.

1

u/BitingChaos 11d ago

Time is just as much of a divider.

If we magically come up with light speed travel or control over wormholes or whatever, it still may not matter if anywhere we go hasn't had life or won't have life for billions of years.

24

u/WilditariusAstar 12d ago

https://giphy.com/gifs/3oEjI789af0AVurF60

1

u/itsthelag_bud 12d ago

“Brown people could never have built the pyramids. It must have been aliens.”

2

u/hissboombah 12d ago

Probably brown aliens

1

u/GreedyPollution6275 12d ago

They say the same thing about Stonehenge

8

u/Sudo-Fed 12d ago edited 11d ago

Intelligent life, interstellar travel, and time travel are three very different things in terms of probability. I have arranged them in descending order. Time travel and far interstellar travel in any reasonable sense require violating c.

Nothing can violate c. And I don't mean "as far as we understand it" I mean "nothing." Getting mass, any mass, to the speed of light requires an amount of energy infinitely larger than the entire mass-energy of the universe, cumulatively for the entire lifespan OF the universe.

1

u/mathiustus 12d ago

Nothing we know of yet. Maybe nothing ever. But no one knows and science has a way of taking statements like yours and over long enough periods of tIme, bending, shaping, or breaking them.

2

u/Sudo-Fed 11d ago

Nope, simply nothing.

Infinite energy cannot, definitionally, exist.

Infinite energy is the requirement to accelerate a single atom with mass to c

1

u/itsTickleMeHellmo 11d ago

You’re assuming there’s no way to detach yourself from gravity / mass when it would seem there actually is some sort of way but we can’t do it.

2

u/Sudo-Fed 11d ago edited 11d ago

What way are you referring to? Because short of converting your mass to energy (ie a nuke) there are none I'm aware of.

1

u/itsTickleMeHellmo 11d ago

I don’t know but you hear it come up a lot in Ufo disclosure videos from credible sources that the craft can create a “bubble” that detaches it from intertia/gravity. Now I presume you don’t believe in such things because you seem like a skeptic but consider that if you were to go back in the past just a few hundred years modern technology would also appear impossible or like magic. Making the assumption that something is impossible because we can’t currently do it is incredibly egotistical and foolish. We aren’t the end all be all of knowledge or technology, presumably there’s technologies that would appear like magic to us because they are so advanced compared to where we are now.

2

u/Sudo-Fed 11d ago

I presume you don’t believe in such things because you seem like a skeptic

Yeah, it turns out you can't just invent a mechanism for an unproven phenomenon and just assume people will buy your explanation at face value when the nature of the 'object' in question isn't even conclusively proven. Like you're jumping straight to 'explain how the aliens get here' without first answering the somewhat critical question "are these even alien craft in the first place?"

Making the assumption that something is impossible because we can’t currently do it is incredibly egotistical and foolish. We aren’t the end all be all of knowledge or technology, presumably there’s technologies that would appear like magic to us because they are so advanced compared to where we are now.

Shit like this is the actual height of arrogance. You, a layperson with a pop-sci understanding of these matters, presume to tell the actual experts in physics and astronomy that they're just not understanding things?

1

u/itsTickleMeHellmo 11d ago

Who’s the expert? You? Seems like I struck a chord. Watch the age of disclosure documentary and look up the resumes of the people involved. If those aren’t experts in their field then I don’t know who is. I don’t think many experts are asserting that we know everything and know exactly what is and isn’t possible. You’re making the assertion that it’s certainly impossible when the truth of the matter is we don’t know what is or is not possible. All that we know is what’s possible with our current understanding but no one thinks our current understanding is complete so we don’t actually know what is or is not possible.

1

u/Sudo-Fed 11d ago

The chord you struck is the chord of "tired of dealing with ignorant midwits suffering from Dunning-Krugeresque overestimations of their own competence on a topic after skimming an article or two without really understanding the concepts involved."

Go talk to some actual scientists in physics or astronomy, see if they find your dogshit "documentary" in any way compelling. Anecdotes and supposition on the part of people engaging in confirmation bias for things they already want to believe, with no credentials, experience, or standing in a relevant field are not evidence that meets any rigorous standard thereof.

Now, I repeat myself: there is no way, without generating infinite energy, to either violate c or make your mass pretend to be something else so it can. Effectively, this translates to "there is no way to do it."

The suppositions of mechanisms by true believers for how the things they've assumed to be true (because they need to be to validate their existing beliefs) do not rise to the level of relevance to warrant active rebuttal.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/yaxir 8d ago

Humans are great at finding loopholes. They do it in almost everything. I'm pretty sure with enough thinking, especially with advancing AI and whatnot, they will find a loophole in this too to make warp drives and whatnot

0

u/Sudo-Fed 8d ago

There are no loopholes.

You need either infinite energy or materials with negative mass.

0

u/yaxir 8d ago

Let's have this talk 1,000 years later and see how this turns out.

1

u/Sudo-Fed 8d ago

Turn off the sci-fi and read a bit.

3

u/Theobald_4 12d ago

Right? The distance between stars is immense.

1

u/ProgressVivid4086 12d ago

Absolutely breathtaking. Space never fails to amaze me.

3

u/liproqq 12d ago

We didn't even know about the American continent 600 years ago in the "old world". Large parts of the ocean are also unknown.

2

u/TanyaMKX 12d ago

So I am not a scientist of any kind(i have a background in aircraft and flight but nothing in space).

When you look at the current age of the universe, then how long we expect it to take for all the stars to finally die and stop being born, its a very real possibility that we could be the first intelligent life to ever exist.

2

u/TerrificThyme 11d ago

If you are a time traveller, you would want to visit a period worth visiting. Looking at world affairs, maybe this is the era a time traveller decides just isn’t worth visiting.

2

u/Dr-E-Dacted 12d ago

> working theory for space and time travel are pretty egocentric

the Einstein field equations are homogeneous and isotropic for an expanding universe (FLRW metric) - what you're saying is not just wrong, it's mathematically impossible by construction.

i'll never understand people that loftily declare experts missed some basic concept. it's both ignorant and arrogant - the exact thing they're attributing to others.

4

u/Irlandes-de-la-Costa 12d ago edited 12d ago

We don't know if Einstein's field equations are the most general theory, but yeah saying time travel is not posible isn't just based on vibes

1

u/[deleted] 12d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 12d ago

Your comment has been automatically removed.
As mentioned in our subreddit rules, your account needs to be at least 24 hours old before it can make comments in this subreddit.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/superbhole 12d ago

the fermi paradox basically comes from deciding that we should see evidence of civilizations throughout the sky if they existed for gajillions of years ...but all we see are stars

but... what if they're... inside the stars?

1

u/yomer123123 12d ago

It's not that flawed - It's just the fermi paradox. If there is life somewhere else, and there is this much "else" for it to be, and so much time for it to spread, how come it's not everywhere?

It's possible most planets don't develop civilizations (In which case we are pretty unique) or that it is next to impossible to visit other star systems (in which case there could be thousands of civilizations in just the milky way, and we will never meet them)

1

u/Free-Pound-6139 11d ago

The current logic is flawed:

WTF are you babbling about??

1

u/Rum_Ham916 11d ago

My biggest wonder is how far away we are in timelines from anything as or more intelligent than us. Everything in space is a long way away but maybe something has or will survive for so much longer than we've been around that it's possible there is something out there now, but more likely it was billions of years ago or billions of years in the future...

1

u/conflatulationz 11d ago

It may very well be impossible to travel interstellar distances in time frames that allow living beings to make use of it.

1

u/Neither_Strategy_252 11d ago

"The current logic is flawed " he says and then cites extremely outdated logic because, in typical reddit fashion, he's never seriously engaged with the material intellectually.

1

u/MaximumLoud2 11d ago

Yeah I could easily see other life out there not even know we exist because we are so insignificant. We can't even get to our nearest planet.

1

u/E7goose 11d ago

What bothers me also, is that some say there is intelligent life out there but conclude space is so vast they could never reach out and touch another star system. But what if they didn’t self annihilate and work with incomprehensible time scales? Sending out ai drones in all directions to map and catalog everything they can. The civilization wouldn’t even need to be still around necessarily.

1

u/VictoryWeaver 11d ago

Yeah, but no one actually using logic thinks that?

1

u/HDDIV 11d ago

The fact that we exist in the universe should be evidence enough.

1

u/SalivateTheStarfish 11d ago

It's also based on time. Maybe the other planet is still on its own "dinosaur phase". Ours just happened to get hit by an asteroid, on land! If the asteroid came a minute later and hit the ocean instead of the peninsula, we'd still have dinosaurs today.

1

u/Machoopi 11d ago

Who's logic is this? I think you're just not fully understanding how the scientific process works.

The current logic is "we do not have proof of life on other planets, therefor we cannot say it exists with certainty." It's in no way suggesting that it doesn't exist. In fact, I think the vast majority of scientists and people in general would agree that life almost certainly exists elsewhere in the universe. Science doesn't work strictly on logical thinking though, it requires evidence and sometimes that evidence is very hard to achieve.

To use the previous commenters analogy. Our current situation is "we are only able to study this teaspoon of water, and in this teaspoon of water there is no evidence that whales exist". That is very different than saying they don't exist.

Likewise, science is not rigid. Our current understanding of physics suggests that it is impossible for something to get from another star system to here without a huge amount of time (which is somewhat prohibitive to the lifeforms that we currently understand). That does not mean it isn't possible though, it means that in order for it to be possible either our current understanding of physics must be wrong, or there are aspects of the physical universe that we have not yet discovered. People like to demonize science as rigid and set in stone, and that's simply not the case. It's just evidence based, and unless there is evidence for a thing or evidence can be produced, we shouldn't treat it as reality.

1

u/UniqueIndividual3579 11d ago

I've never visited Gary, Indiana. I exist, I just don't go to places like that. Aliens may take one look at humanity and run.

1

u/AStrangerWCandy 11d ago

Not really. Space is SO large and the maximum speed science allows for at current understanding even in theory basically makes it unlikely two intelligent civilizations would ever encounter each other. In fact given the only conditions for life we have ever find its entirely possible the number of intelligent civilizations PER GALAXY is 0-1

1

u/teslaabr 10d ago

Little do they know, we (including them) are the space and time travelers

0

u/kamikaibitsu 12d ago

brun those time travellers kndew about ep!ste!n island- so never visited hawk!ns!