Organization: FidoNet node 1:107/816 - The Wrong Num, Jersey City NJ
Lines: 21
In a message to All <21 Nov 91 12:09> Jon Noring wrote:
JN> Anyway, let me know what you feel about the creation of the newsgroup,
JN> the proposed name of alt.physics, and what other subjects could be talked
JN> about. If nothing else, it should be very interesting: the proponents
JN> can have a forum to introduce their new
JN> theories, and the skeptics can have
JN> a good laugh!
Hi Jon. I'm very much in favor of alt.physics as you propose it! Fido & PODnet Alt. Tech echos are very slow, and my BBS's private Alt Tech area is moribund, too. This is certainly the forum for it, and I would expect lively, high-level interest.
Best,
Clark
PS -- BTW, what do you think about the Herzfeld equations?
In article <1991Dec5.204349.21016@news.nd.edu>, fdeck@dumpster.helios.nd.edu (francis deck) writes...
>Yes... it's possible. Read up on the "twin paradox." We travel
>in time whenever we move through space, though the nanoseconds we
>gain or lose don't amount to much. If the speed of light were 55
>MPH (65 in the country), we'd all be quite accustomed to time
>travel.
>
>Is it possible to violate the "first signal principle," i.e.
>to travel faster than light? No. Is it possible to revisit
>the past? No. Is it possible to visit the future? What
>do you mean by "travel in time?"
I always enjoy how "sure" physicists can be about theories until they are proven wrong. Let us say that based upon current theory we know of no way of traveling faster than light. Or for that matter how to traverse time.
Organization: FidoNet node 1:107/816 - The Wrong Num, Jersey City NJ
Lines: 19
In a message to All <05 Dec 91 12:11> Terenas S D M wrote:
TSDM> All I'd like to know is if it possible to travel in time. I heard a story
TSDM> about reflection using mirrors and the
TSDM> time that light takes to travel from
TSDM> a place to another and that seems it
TSDM> possible to travel in time but one needs
TSDM> MANY mirros, is this true ?
Hi Sergio. Are you perhaps thinking of the Aspect Experiment? It doesn't really confirm Time Travel, but it seems to confirm faster-than-light effects between coupled photons.
Organization: FidoNet node 1:107/816 - The Wrong Num, Jersey City NJ
Lines: 31
In a message to All <05 Dec 91 18:02> cciolori wrote:
cc> From: cciolori@faatcrl.UUCP (cciolori)
cc> Date: 5 Dec 91 16:02:38 GMT
cc> Organization: FAA Technical Center, Atlantic City NJ
cc> Message-ID: <2170@faatcrl.UUCP>
cc> Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
cc> Yeah, OK. I don't know of a
cc> single person at the FAA who has anything
cc> even remotely to do with UFO
cc> investigations. The FAA in a very large
cc> organization...maybe they do that stuff in FAA Washington.
Hi! Perhaps the FAA in DC is more involved with tracking and record-keeping of UFO related stuff, but I wonder if you could help us in another way.
FAA has guidelines for employees to follow in responding to local UFO queries. I understand there's a telephone script that everyone familiarized with -- could you share information about it with us?
It's just a couple of sentences, so it's probably not kept by people's telephones. I think it's just something they learn in training.
Organization: FidoNet node 1:107/816 - The Wrong Num, Jersey City NJ
Lines: 26
In a message to All <25 Nov 91 12:20> rodger@ac.dal.ca wrote:
ro> From: rodger@ac.dal.ca
ro> Date: 25 Nov 91 00:15:19 GMT
ro> Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
ro> Message-ID: <1991Nov24.201519.2180@ac.dal.ca>
ro> Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
ro> We're looking for some videos on UFO's. So far we've seen:
Hello Roger! Wonderful to hear from someone in good old Halifax!
I have never seen one of the landmark UFO films: _UFOs: Past, Present and Future_. It was produced and directed by Robert Emmenegger in the 1970s, based on his book of the same name.
I've heard the film is/was quite good, but I've been completely unable to obtain a screening, let alone a videocassette.
Good luck in your quest, and please let me know if you locate the Emmenegger film on videocassette!
DG> I have just heard some GREAT NEWS (hopefully I won't be let down) from
DG> the upcoming UFO Conference to be held in Las Vegas next month:
DG> SOMETHING VERY BIG WILL BE ANNOUNCED THERE. SOMETHING THAT WILL
DG> UNEQUIVOCALLY PROVE THAT THERE IS A UFO COVER-UP ON THE PART OF
DG> THE U.S. GOVERNMENT.
Dusty, sorry for the late reply to your post -- but maybe it worked out for the best.
What was the GREAT NEWS! that came out of the L.V. UFOcon? I haven't heard a peep (I'm still getting caught up on 2 weeks of ParaNet/FidoNet/UFINET and now Internet mail). Did it fulfill expectations?
Organization: FidoNet node 1:107/816 - The Wrong Num, Jersey City NJ
Lines: 22
In a message to All <25 Nov 91 17:59> David Harwood wrote:
DH> From: harwood@umiacs.umd.edu (David Harwood)
DH> Date: 25 Nov 91 17:10:40 GMT
DH> Organization: University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
DH> Message-ID: <43637@mimsy.umd.edu>
DH> Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
DH> By the way, did anyone see the UFO-proponent on Larry King who claimed
DH> that the Soviets have deep-space satellite photos of a huge cylindrical
DH> UFO? More fun ;-)
Hello David. The UFO proponent was Don Ecker of UFO magazine, and I believe he showed the actual final image from the Phobos probe before the probe disappeared.
DW> In the referenced article noring@netcom.COM (Jon Noring) writes:
DW> #I'd like feedback on the possible
DW> creation of an alt.* newsgroup to discuss
DW> #alternative physics theories that do not fit mainstream views. It will
DW> #be a forum where both the proponents and
DW> the skeptics can interact (hopefully
DW> #in a civilized manner :^) ) to discuss these theories.
DW> In the discussion of this idea, nobody in alt.config seems to have
DW> remembered that there IS a group for such discussions, even though Jon
DW> included it in his Newsgroups list -
DW> sci.skeptic. What's wrong with using
Hello David. I think the tag sci.skeptic is a little off-putting for many of us who have the daily challenge of responding to professional or pathological skeptics/cynics/debunkers. The quality of the "skeptical" discussions found in most "skeptical" forums seems to be extremely low.
Too many discussions there seem to come straight out of Monty Python's Arguement Clinic: bitterly adversarial, take-no-prisoners gangbangs where arguements are often badly reasoned, sometimes completely false, and often comprised of automatic gainsaying of anything unexplained or unconventional. It seems to me to be the exact converse of the "moonbeam" discussions of committed UFO cultists, and therefore completely without value.
Perhaps we could compromise on alt.cavilling.nits or alt.arguement.clinic?
DW> It's time to give grants to people who are critical thinkers and those who
DW> have a regard for Occam's Razor instead of going around in circles and
DW> perpetuating such mish mash.
Hi Dale. I agree, wholeheartedly, 110%. I'm annoyed that what little grant money that exists for UFO research consistently circulates around a small circle of self-promoters who do not publish, or who treat their work as proprietary.
Personally, I would not financially support UFO study groups that award such sweetheart grants.
DW> Again Mike, tangible - read my lips - T A N G I B L E P R O O F is what
DW> is required. Something that I can hold in my hand that Phil Klass can't
DW> explain.
Well, I think that Klass's job is twofold:
1. Publically "explaining" anything and everything offered as proof of UFO existence regardless of the facts, and
2. Evaluating, discrediting, and informing his bosses about anyone who may possess such proof (or apparently genuine US gov't UFO research, records, COMINT, or just interesting ideas)
So I'm prepared to settle for a "bird" in the hand and a sock in Phil's mouth (and a tap on my phone).