UFO's and why they blink out.

Status
Not open for further replies.
DaveC426913 said:
This is the main point of refuting your OP.

- The calculations in your OP imply a solution to blinking out as a result of very high speed.
- But very high speed results in sonic booms.
- Therefore it does not resolve the issue.

As you say, one must look to other explanations. Which is why hypotheses such as extra dimensions are posited.

This is the reason why, as you say,
"nobody has bothered to do these simple calculations before."
and
"this is old news"
Because it was quickly realized that it doesn't resolve anything.
Click to expand...

But these calculations will in the end be .....eye opening.
 
river said:
But these calculations will in the end be .....eye opening.
Click to expand...
No. As you say, it's old news.

It is (and was) elementary to posit high speeds to explain the disappearance of lights. It was immediately refuted by the absence of sonic booms.
Those wishing to explain the phenom are ahead of you in their thinking. It requires more exotic explanations than mere high speed.
Come to the meetings!
 
DaveC426913 said:
No it isn't. It's about explaining "winking out" with high speed. That was established in the OP. And that's all that was established in the OP.

And it has been refuted.

If you wish to change the topic of the thread (or start a new thread) to be about advanced propulsion, that would be appropriate.

But now you're right back where you started. Resorting to exotic methods of "winking out". Do you have any suggestions less exotic than dimensonal travel?
Click to expand...

Oh my OP has been refuted but not reasonably nor logically.
 
river said:
This thread is not about what I know or don't know. About advanced propulsion
Click to expand...
Really?

You: This thread is for those who KNOW not think but KNOW.
You: we those that know better will understand what my point is.
Neither of those were about "advanced propulsion" per se, but they WERE a claim to knowledge - a knowledge you've failed to provide any evidence for let alone demonstrate.
And here:
Depends on the form of motive.
You DO claim - implicitly - knowledge of "(advanced) propulsion" as a a "reason" for dismissing exchemist's valid objections to your drivel.
YOU are the one that raised the subject of propulsion - advanced or otherwise - and have yet to provide ANY rationale as to why a sonic boom wouldn't happen.
In short, it comes down precisely to what you "know or don't know" - about the subject in general AND "advanced propulsion".
Plus, and noted, if it's not about what you specifically know (or don't) about "advanced propulsion" then it is, at best, hypocritical of you to comment that others don't have that knowledge.
Either you DO know (and you don't) but have yet to explain how it obviates sonic booms or you don't (which is the case) and you're just bulsh*tting and also claiming that your lack of knowledge somehow trumps someone else's same lack.
 
river said:
Because I have done research you have not.
Click to expand...
You have done calculations that all of us can read.
You drew a conclusion that does not resolve the problem you claim it does.

You will need to move the goalposts to continue the discussion.

Almost certainly, you will begin positing advanced forms of propulsion, which is a different discussion (because it will need to address the shock wave issue).

Which is fine, but it is not about your assertions in the OP. You are in the same boat as those whom you think you've superseded - you are looking to explain winking light by advanced forms of propulsion.
 
river said:
My OP has not been refuted ; just twisted around
Click to expand...

river said:
Plus I think this refutes this " another dimension theory ".
Click to expand...
It doesn't. No matter how you cut it, some exotic technology will be required.
Other dimensions, while implausible, are exotic, just like what you're about to propose.

river said:
The most puzzling thing about all this ; is that ; nobody has bothered to do these simple calculations before.
Click to expand...
Why do you think this? It's pretty elementary. But it does not resolve the issue. So we're no further ahead.

river said:
These simple calculations changes one's perspective.
Click to expand...
They may have changed yours. But you were unaware of the problems with it. Now you're aware like the rest of us.

That should have turned up in all that "research" you did. Maybe you shouldn't be too quick to claim you know so much more than the rest of us.
 
river said:
Oh my OP has been refuted but not reasonably nor logically.
Click to expand...
So where, exactly, did you explain why the objection I gave in post #22 is invalid? Note: simply ignoring an objection doesn't mean that it's neither reasonable nor logical).
Plus there's the slight problem that speed alone doesn't go towards supporting your claim.
Let's take a starting guess and say the the "UFO" is seen at a distance of 10 miles. At a speed of 2,000 mph it will, as you said, cover just over half a mile. But the distance covered is largely irrelevant, since the visual arc is only ~3 degrees.
This same arc applies to a 200 mph object at 1 mile, anyone who's been to an airshow knows full well that this doesn't provide "blinking out", on occasion 600+ mph at less about half a mile is seen (over 6 times the arc covered in the same time) with no "blinking out".
How about a 100+ mph car on a racetrack at a range of mere tens of yards? Do they "blink out"? Why are there no reports of that happening?
 
river said:
Oh I'm going to propose other dimensions . NOT GOING TO HAPPEN .
Click to expand...
Got it. That's where you draw the line.

Aliens coming light years to visit us from a far off star, to hover over our farmlands and violate our cows, sure, but other dimensions is too exotic for you. ;)
 
Dywyddyr said:
UFOs" - the S
Click to expand...
Dywyddyr said:
So where, exactly, did you explain why the objection I gave in post #22 is invalid? Note: simply ignoring an objection doesn't mean that it's neither reasonable nor logical).
Plus there's the slight problem that speed alone doesn't go towards supporting your claim.
Let's take a starting guess and say the the "UFO" is seen at a distance of 10 miles. At a speed of 2,000 mph it will, as you said, cover just over half a mile. But the distance covered is largely irrelevant, since the visual arc is only ~3 degrees.
This same arc applies to a 200 mph object at 1 mile, anyone who's been to an airshow knows full well that this doesn't provide "blinking out", on occasion 600+ mph at less about half a mile is seen (over 6 times the arc covered in the same time) with no "blinking out".
How about a 100+ mph car on a racetrack at a range of mere tens of yards? Do they "blink out"? Why are there no reports of that happening?
Click to expand...

The visual arc ....LOL ....I'm still LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top