Friday, December 30, 2022

Anthropocentric Parochialism Defines SETI Scientist Seth Shostak's Skepticism Over Aliens & UAP

 

                          UFO captured by Navy pilots in one 2017 encounter.

                                  Shostak: Disputes that any aliens are visiting Earth
Carl Sagan: Finally admitted UFOs were real To J. Allen Hynek


"I remember when Carl Sagan was asked if UFOs were a sign that we were being visited by an extraterrestrial civilization (“The UFO Crowd Wants an Alien Invasion for Christmas” by Holman Jenkins, Jr., Business World, Dec. 24). He responded, if I remember correctly, that if a civilization advanced enough to apply interstellar travel came to Earth, human beings would no more be capable of perceiving and understanding its presence than an ant is capable of perceiving and understanding ours."  - 'UFOs?  Don't Flatter Yourselves, WSJ,' WSJ Letter writer, Dec. 28th


SETI scientist Seth Shostak writes  in a recent WSJ op-ed (Could the Government Really CoverUp UFOs?, p. C3, December 17-18): 

"For the millions of Americans who think that Earth is being visited by aliens, the strange objects are important for a different reason. They could be the best evidence yet for something people have been claiming for more than 70 years: that the government is aware of extraterrestrial craft in our airspace and is keeping the news hidden to forestall massive civil unrest."


Shostak, however, misses the point, and by a country mile. Indeed, while it is true that for decades the "coverup" trope was in vogue, a 2014 paper by Alexander Wendt and Raymond Duvall  in the Journal Political Theory finally replaced that with a superior explanation. E.g.

Sovereignty and the UFO - Alexander Wendt, Raymond Duvall, 2008

 Therein they note the phenomenon of the UFO tends to be rejected as real - by government sources, as well as the military and the media - because it comes up against the human concept of state sovereignty.  The basic  takeaway: Humans, particularly in the top echelons of government, military, can't handle the concept of competition with any kind of more advanced exterior (to Earth) civilization. So, it has nothing to do with protecting a fragile public from ET contacts, but rather protecting a fragile government and security state from taking seriously an exterior threat or alien existence.  Even Shostak admits as much in his next paragraph,     

"A September poll by YouGov found that roughly half of the American public believes that space aliens exist, and approximately a quarter say that they have seen a UFO. Of course, this makes it hard to credit the claim that the government is hiding evidence of aliens simply because the public couldn’t handle the news. "

In his third paragraph he also admits the idea of actual alien visitors is not ruled out by science, i.e.


"The idea of alien visitors to our planet is not ruled out by science. The Milky Way galaxy houses approximately a trillion planets, of which tens of millions are likely to enjoy environmental conditions roughly similar to those on Earth. Few scientists would dispute the hypothesis that we have a lot of cosmic company."

Which is good, given the late Carl Sagan  - once a debunker of the idea -  did finally come around to accepting the validity in a one-on-one with Northwestern University astronomer J. Allen Hynek, e.g.

https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=76926

Excerpt:  "The pillar of modern space science Dr. Carl Sagan revealed to Dr. J. Allen Hynek, that he knew UFOs were real but could not talk publicly about the matter and possibly risk the loss of academic funding."


So it is difficult to reconcile that with Shostak's next claim:

"But while the aliens might be out there, it would be difficult for them to come here. Consider what would be required for them to pay a house call, even if the nearest extraterrestrials were a mere 10 light years away, a trivial distance by astronomical standards. To reach Earth in 50 years, a spacecraft the size of a small house would need an energy source able to pump out as many kilowatt-hours as the entire U.S. burns in a year, a requirement independent of the technology of the rocket."

Which, incredibly, is based on a more or less conventional "spacecraft" - albeit invoking a "requirement independent of the technology" of the typical earthling chemical rocket. This in itself telegraphs a monumental failure of imagination as well as abstract (theoretical) reasoning. Or, as I've noted before, when faced with evidence of a much more advanced technology humans  - like Shostak- are in much the same position as a Neandertal hunter trying to make sense of an F-117 Nighthawk,


 Am I comparing Shostak to a Neandertal?  Well yes, in a manner of speaking at least as regards his 'spacecraft' analogy for explaining UAP. It simply doesn't hold water, or even air.  By comparison, physicist Jack Sarfatti, in a 2001 paper ('The World Crystal Lattice Quantum Vacuum' ) fared much better than Shostak by at least getting into the remote 'ballpark'.  Basically, Sarfatti proposed a means of altering the local inertial frame metric,


To a non-inertial one, via use of zero point energy.  That transformation in curvilinear coordinates, would then enable an acceleration, e.g.  

a     <=>   m  ( a)

dx= Ö(hab  d x a d x b ) =   Ö mn  d x m d x n 

 So for any null 4-vector ( k m ) vacuum transition:

mn  (ZPF) k  kn > 0

Where mn  (ZPF)  denotes the zero-point tensor frame.

This is what Sarfatti compared to achieving an "anti-gravity" effect. Any kind of a craft employing this ZPM mode of transport would not suffer the limitations of the more conventional "spacecraft" transport invoked by Shostak.  Is the basis as understandable as Seth's example?  Of course not! But why should it be?  If we are in the relative position of say, Neandertals, trying to make sense of an F-117.  The most we can do is hypothesize daring but 'cartoon' configurations that can at least theoretically achieve the result of transporting any alien species - no matter how distant - to our humble little planet.  While acknowledging, as Shostak does, it must be independent of the concept of rockets as earthlings know them.

In a previous post (July 18) I also offered my own version of a conveyance entity able to make use of branes. I suggested the use of networked D2 branes e,g.


manipulated so the physical parameters exactly matched a distant region of space-time.  In this depiction, each D2 brane panel has the capability of extracting zero-point energy via   instantonic   D(-1) branes to access a higher dimensional D5 brane.  This would then comport with the late physicist David Bohm's hypothesis (Wholeness and the Implicate Order, pp. 233- 242) that a higher dimensional implicate order can be accessed to enable transition to another coordinate region in 4D space -time.  

In effect, this 'brane' craft uses no fuel (chemical or nuclear) as such, but a collection of malleable branes that alter their local properties (electric, magnetic, gravimetric) to that of a distant target region.  When the complete synchronization of the properties is effected an instantaneous linkage is forged so the localized brane hole expands and then detaches in the distant space-time, e.g.

X(B) ->  X(B')   and represented:


This makes much more sense than trying to use chemical or nuclear fuel rockets to achieve interstellar travel, though I admit most conventional thinkers will dismiss it or try to debunk it. The same way a Neandertal might dismiss a distant F-117 soaring high above him as just a new kind of bird- as opposed to an incomprehensible entity outside his ken. 

 Shostak's  human chauvinism and parochialism also shows in his next remark:


"Aside from the Navy reports, what proof can we offer? It’s hard to believe that these cosmic visitors would have made the long journey just for the chance to tease our military aviators."

But this assumes first the 'reports' are not proof.  But in fact they are proof (indeed, video evidence e.g.

 https://youtu.be/Ce6ZevfbIK0 

of an observational kind, as much as the UFO I observed over north Miami 60 years ago.  Indeed, moreso because multiple sets of instruments recorded these objects and they could not all have been "glitches" as Neil deGrasse Tyson once claimed. So they are proof of something not within humankind's ability to imitate technologically- or likely even contemplate conceptually -  especially given the incident (reported on '60 Minutes' 2 yrs. ago) of a craft diving into the ocean at supersonic- plus velocities and emerging again.   

Failing to accept the UAP as proof, however, Shostak has little choice other than to assume he can get inside the minds of any such visitors     and extract their motives, then demean them.  No surprise the best his limited human brain can come up with is they might be just "teasing our military aviators".  But why assume this?  What if they are in fact probing to detect any hostile responses?  Perhaps, and this is conjecture, they are playing a long game of targeted encounters, probes to see how or if we respond with hostility before more openly revealing themselves. 

 Shostak's next comment is equally lacking in intellectual heft, especially for a supposed SETI research scientist. He writes:

"For other types of evidence, the pickings are equally slim. There are approximately 8,000 active satellites in orbit around the Earth, many of them continuously imaging our planet. This nonstop reconnaissance has failed to find any alien craft."

Well, let's see. First of all, even 8,000 satellites around Earth cannot possibly see or access every single acre of territory - land and sea- at every possible moment.   Even if they could Seth has somehow missed the aspect that the UAP just might be able to employ stealth visual technology to avoid detection.  I mean, hell, if they can master brane craft intricacies or ZPM (anti-gravity) transport they can surely master visual stealth capability.  So his next question about whether some 80 satellite launching governments are keeping their UFO findings under wraps is simply fatuous.  No surprise he then jumps to the next non-sequitur,

"According to the International Astronomical Union, there are about one million amateur astronomers worldwide. If our skies host even a few alien craft, you’d expect frequent sightings by these amateurs, who are well practiced in recognizing things on high."

But again he assumes too much. Amateur astronomers, when they do take to the skies to observe, are generally not 'star-gazing' but directing their attention at specific astronomical objects, whether M31 in Andromeda, easily resolvable double stars, or variable stars. Given the focus on one location it is unlikely they'd spot a UFO -UAP in their exact region of interest. And if the object is moving as fast as the one I saw in Miami 60 years ago, chances are they either miss it entirely or simply dismiss it as a man-made craft, maybe a jet or commercial aircraft.  Only the very rare amateur would pursue it.  So he's correct, "amateurs aren't seeing any alien spacecraft" because that's not what they are looking for!  They are more likely focused on external galaxies, nebulae (like M42 in Orion), variable stars, or planets -

like Mars (left) and Jupiter.  

Shostak next acknowledges that if the UAP-UFOs do indeed mark alien visitations it would be "the biggest news story of all time, proving Earth is not the only home of intelligent life".  Then writing:

"But it would also imply that another society somehow knows about us and is willing to spend the considerable time and expense of paying a visit— all the while managing to keep themselves largely out of sight."

Again, he's making human assumptions based on human motives.  Thus, if only the aliens were like us they'd not be hiding themselves, oh no! They'd come right out and show themselves, never mind all the slaughter they've observed with the Russian obliteration of Ukraine, as well as smaller conflicts worldwide, the sheer violence of one group of humans against other, including the tortures of women in Iran, the gun violence in the U.S., the depredation and destruction of the Amazon (under Bolsanaro) in Brazil.  Gosh gee! Why on Earth would they remain largely out of sight, given our most welcoming and insightful species? 

 But his question begging doesn't stop there. Nope, he's on a roll, e.g.

"they could give us a more complete understanding of physics—knowledge that would permit our species to leap ahead into a more expansive technological future and deal with problems like climate change."

Yes, righto! And of course they've already seen first hand how much we can be entrusted with such specialist knowledge - with our 18,000 standing ICBMs laden nukes in 3 major nations' arsenals, our hypersonic rockets, etc.  Predictably he then goes to the opposite pole imagining hostile aliens and how they'd flatten our cities.  But then offering this comeback:


?But such scenarios are relevant only if extraterrestrial hardware is truly hanging out above our heads. And despite the fervent hopes of many, I doubt that the impending Pentagon report will endorse that idea. The unclassified version of the 2021 report never mentioned the possibility that any of the incidents it investigated could be attributed to alien visitors. The new report will surely make the same conclusion."

But as I showed, using much more advanced conceptual bases than Seth's rockets, it is possible for such hardware to be here. It's just that thinking at the level of a Neandertal (confronted by an F-117 ) doesn't move the ball forward in grasping the feasibility.   But he is correct the Pentagon report wouldn't endorse the idea of visiting aliens anyway, since as I already pointed out it violates the prevalent (and myopic) human concept of state sovereignty, i.e. that we are at the top of the cosmic food chains and there ain't no aliens to worry about knocking us off our cosmic perch. This is our cosmos and until they show themselves we are the bosses.

 I will correct one last Shostak claim, that none of the 2021 report's claims mentioned alien visitors.  True, but it did leave the possibility open in trying to account for a core of unidentified encounters.(This defined the 'other' category that included all the footage from over a dozen inexplicable cases which the military had already confirmed as being authentic.)  From the Preliminary Assessment Report  e.g.

Preliminary Assessment: Unidentified Aerial Phenomena

We have:

"144 reports originated from USG sources. Of these, 80 reports involved observation with multiple sensors. o Most reports described UAP as objects that interrupted pre-planned training or other military activity.

One can say then that Seth Shostak suffers from an anthropocentric parochialism: judging any potential, external intelligent life only by human standards and capabilities. A trait characteristic of too many scientists, but unforgiveable in one involved in SETI.


See Also:

Even if You Think Discussing Aliens Is Ridiculous, Just Hear Me Out     

How would contact with U.F.O.s and other civilizations change ours?

And:

Transient Optical Phenomena of the Atmosphere - a Case Study    

And:

Physics Today Book Reviewer Kate Dorsch Is As Clueless About UFOs As Neil DeGrasse Tyson 

And:




Thursday, December 29, 2022

Cold Weather Triggers Another Suncor Pollution Event - Just Before The Holidays

The Suncor refinery at the heart of state pollution issues

 For many Coloradans Suncor refinery is a place best shut down and the sooner the better, given numerous pollution incidents, e.g.  

The Suncor Energy Saga Continues In Colorado With More Litigation Following Devastating Climate Effects

 But let's be clear that isn't going to happen anytime soon, maybe not until massive new solar energy operations arrive, or nuclear fusion.  Though I would not hold my breath waiting for the latter, i.e.

Media Overhypes Nuclear Fusion Laser Experiment 

The reason for forbearance is simple: Suncor is the only oil and gas refinery in Colorado and processes 98,000 barrels of oil a day - a key economic support. It also manufactures most of the asphalt used to pave Colorado's hundreds of miles of roads, highways.    

Which is why the most recent event, last Wednesday, was also guaranteed to bring out the anti-fossil fuel lobby.  This event - or events - occurred in the aftermath of a shutdown triggered by extreme cold across the refinery's operations. Tons of harmful pollutants were spewed into the atmosphere.  These included, according to a Denver Post report: hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, as well as visible emissions with high opacity. (Which Suncor refers to as an "Opacity event".)  In one of the last such major events, in 2020, ash fall was seen and covered cars in Adams County, and we learned:  

"Suncor reported 34 malfunctions  and 111 pollution spikes lasting from a few minutes to several days."

So the people in Colorado, and especially living in Commerce City, have grown more pollutant wary over the years.  In the meantime, according to the Post, "state officials are now assessing the potential public health risks as Suncor provides more information." But we do know the sources of the specific pollutants appear to have come from different Plants (e.g. 1,2, and 3) on the premises as well as at least onc incinerator.  For example, the SO2 emissions came mainly from the Plant 1 Sulfur incinerator.  

The state's Air Pollution Control Division is now monitoring the data provided by Suncor, as well as another oversight local nonprofit  (Cultivando) that servies as a watchdog group.

The shutdown itself started at 8 p.m. last Wednesday when the cold weather caused Suncor's hydrogen plant to trip. As a result, community members affected had to be put on alert - as with previous incidents. (The shutdown and effluent was still going on by 1 p.m. Friday)

The Denver Post noted that Suncor is required to report any additional changes to the Colorado Dept. of Public Health as long as the effects lasted.  One hopes this will be the last for a while, but I would not bet the farm on it.

See Also:

What's polluting Colorado's air? 125 million tons a year of heat ...

And:


Planetary Motion Demonstrated With Simple Spin Model

The construction and use of a simple centripetal force model turned out to be one of the most successful elements of the CXC astronomy course taught in the Caribbean. Students were to use a simple straw or glass tubing and insert a string through it with a mass  m (e.g. rubber ball or other) at one end and one or more weights at the other.  This is shown below:


The CXC astronomy Centripetal Force Apparatus

 In the experiment, the students were to carry out several trials, altering the weights each time and the length of the free string undergoing revolution. They were to note these quantities (the weights, defined in newtons (N), were designated the tension T) and also time the complete rotations made in 20 cycles – thereby obtaining the time for one. The view from above with the tension T labeled (which the students were also required to do) is shown here:

                                      The Tension force in the string and Fc.

We expected the students to be able to somehow infer that the force providing the centripetal force was the tension T in the string (created by the suspended weights) in the same way the centripetal force associated with a given planet was provided by its own centripetal force arising from the gravitational force of attraction of the Sun. Most students never made the connection, though it was often cited!

Realizing the content would be difficult, Janice and I wrote a special ‘Discovering the Stars’ column (in The Barbados Advocate) timed to coincide with the teaching of the section. It included the diagram below:

                                 Diagram used to describe centripetal force in more detail.

Of course, even this was overly simplified since to grasp what’s really happening one needed a more detailed force diagram quantitatively showing the v-vectors at the tangents and their changes:

 

From this diagram, the key aspect students needed to grasp is that if the motion is uniform then the only way that the centripetal acceleration (ac = v2/ r) arises is via the change in direction of the velocity vector, v. Thus, the acceleration is: D v/r   or:  (vv)/ r, but the magnitude of each vector is: |v| = rq/ t = r w. By similar triangles one would obtain:

D v/v  = s/ r  and   D v = v(s/r)  but s = (rq)/ t

So: D v = v(q/ t) = vw

And since: w = v/r then:

a c = D v/ r = vw/ r = = v2/ r

And: GMm/ r 2   =    m v2/ r

The gravitational force of attraction is equal to the centripetal force. Students were at least partially able to apply this to the case of the planets. In other words, they used their models to reason qualitatively that the Sun provided what the weights did in their model: the force that attracts the planets with an acceleration toward the center of their orbits.  

See Also:

Selected Questions - Answers From All Experts Astronomy Forum (Abolish Kepler's 2nd Law?)

And:

Selected Questions -Answers From All Experts Astronomy Forum (Model Planet And Moon Orbits)

Tuesday, December 27, 2022

GOP- MAGA Fraudster Santos Should Be Forced To Resign After Snatching House Seat Via Lies & Misrepresentation

            George Santos admits deceit. His election should be rescinded
 

"As the story played out I realized Mr. Santos is Sam Bankman-Fried. He is Elizabeth Holmes. He is a 21st-century state-of-the-art fraudster—a stone cold liar who effectively committed election fraud...Santos will be the focus of investigations from day one and will be used to pummel the GOP each day for looking past his fraud. They can’t afford to keep him. He is a bridge too far.,"- Peggy Noonan, 'Why George Santos Lies Matter',  WSJ, p. A13, 12/30

"As a lifelong Republican, I am appalled that George Santos lied to voters about material facts regarding his background yet intends to assume the office he defrauded voters into hiring him for. The Republican Party should be the first in line to demand that Santos not take office. Failure to do so impugns the character and integrity of the entire party and, in my view, makes the party and its elected officials complicit in the fraud."-  Denver Post letter writer


Given the critical nature of U.S. politics now, and the extremely narrow margin of the denier- laden, caustic, pro-insurrectionist GOP House, it is unconscionable a Democratic House seat could have been stolen by fraud. But evidently, as revelations rolled out Monday, this is what happened. 

George Santos, a Long Island Republican has now confirmed he won a pivotal U.S. House race in November under false pretenses.  The thousands of district votes that went to this lying maggot - away from Democrat Robert Zimmerman- enabled the MAGAs to steal a seat for Kevin McCarthy. Santos acknowledged Monday night that he lied about his biography, seeking to explain his actions by saying in a radio interview that “a lot of people overstate in their résumés.”  

Oh no!  There is a world of difference between outright laying a la Trump and "overstating one's résumé.".  Let's get that clear. How egregious are this guy's lies? Well:

He never graduated from Baruch College or any college as he claimed.

He never worked for Goldman Sachs or for Citigroup as he claimed. (Spokesmen for both companies confirmed to The Washington Post that they had no record of his employment.)

He claimed he was an "unobservant Jew" but then admitted being raised Catholic.

He clearly did this in order to snatch the Jewish vote via fake sympathy - invoking the Holocaust and his ancestors. This was before The Forward, a Jewish publication, pointed out that he misled voters about his account of his Jewish ancestry, including that his maternal grandparents were born in Europe and emigrated to Brazil during the Holocaust.

 Santos has played down the harm done with his bogus claims, first raised in a New York Times story last week, but every major news course has now caught up with him.  Alas, a tad too late to prevent his theft of a House seat. Monday he also did briefly address how his wealth has skyrocketed in the past several years to enable him to lend hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaign. 

He told City and State NY that after different jobs, he opened his own firm and “it just worked because I had the relationships and I started making a lot of money. And I fundamentally starting building wealth.” 


Adding:


“I decided I’d invest in my race for Congress. There’s nothing wrong with that.


But there's plenty wrong if the dough came in from the Trump cabal, or from Trump himself.  Why surmise a Trump connection? Well, as noted in a recent Vanity Fair piece (Dec. 21, by Abigail Tracy):


"Santos clung to his MAGA bona fides during the campaign: He touted that he attended Trump’s January 6 speech at the Ellipse; he says he footed some of the legal bills for a number of insurrectionists; he regularly echoed claims that  Joe Biden stole the 2020 election."


In other words, this slimy rat is a pro-Trump MAGA insurrectionist at heart who stole a Democratic seat under false pretenses.  Yet, Santos is set to be sworn into the House of Representative for New York’s Third Congressional District in less than a month. Which all begs the question: How is all this getting attention now, after the election?  Well, because the media dropped the ball and didn't do the hard core investigation into his past in sufficient rigor.   


 But that's not the worst of it, because it's now come out (ibid.) just how vile this slime ball really is, i.e.


"Among his greatest controversial hits was his comparison of abortion—a “barbaric” practice, in his words—to slavery. Another: his assertion that Ukraine is “a totalitarian regime” and that the country “welcomed the Russians into their provinces,

Ukraine welcomed the Russians??  I surmise if voters had known about these remarks and his pro-insurrectionist background beforehand, he'd have been dumped and dissed as surely as Pennsylvanians dumped Doug Mastriano.


In an interview with New York’s WABC radio, Santos said,


 “If I disappointed anyone by résumé embellishment, I’m sorry. I will be sworn in. I will take office.”


Well, you should not be sworn in but have your election rescinded under relevant fraud laws, and using false pretenses. This nation's future is too damned important to be handed over to a party of pro-insurrectionists now made stronger by the fraudulent election of another election denier and pro-insurrectionist.


Santos also gave an interview on Monday to the New York Post, which ran a headline calling him a “liar” and quoted him as saying “I am not a criminal.” Remember the NY Post is also - with the WSJ- a Murdoch-owned paper. Speaking of which the WSJ found this rat did forge checks to the tune of $1,300 in Brazil in 2008.  The case was dropped after Santos fled the country to try new scams in the U.S. 


He confessed in that NY Post interview that, contrary to his touted campaign biography, “I didn’t graduate from any institution of higher learning.”


So you are a despicable mega-maggot, Sparky, who deceived the voters of your Long Island House district to vote for you. And if you had a grain of honor and decency you'd acknowledge that, admit your crimes and cede your House seat to your Democratic opponent, Zimmerman - along with at least a dozen mea culpas.


See Also:

District attorney in New York opens investigation into Rep.-elect George Santos


And:

And:

by Amanda Marcotte | December 29, 2022 - 7:46am | permalink

— from Salon

Excerpt:

One thing was dead certain within moments of the New York Times publishing its exposé on the many lies of George Santos: There was zero chance that this brand new Republican congressman-elect from New York would be shamed into giving up his seat. Perhaps that didn't seem obvious to everyone at first, especially those with lingering memories of the pre-Trump era, when we all pretended to believe that Republican voters cared about hypocrisy, lying, overt racism, sexual abuse or any of the other personal or professional scandals that used to take politicians down routinely. But I never doubted for a moment that Santos would move onward toward being seated and that the incoming Republican House majority would allow it.


And:

by Joan McCarter | December 30, 2022 - 7:16am | permalink


And:

by Jaime O’Neill | December 28, 2022 - 7:46am | permalink

Excerpt:

Ok, in case you didn't recognize the name George Santos, he's another Republican who made his way to the heights by faking his credentials, lying about his past, exaggerating his accomplishments, and constructing a narrative that presented him as a far more accomplished guy that he really was, or is. That's him atop or alongside this blog. Study that face. Does he look like a guy you'd trust? With your wife? Your young son? With your loose change? With your loose talk in a bar? Or with his protestations of innocence?

He won election to represent a district in New York almost entirely on falsity. Forget that Honest Abe horse shit. If you want to be a Republican these days, post-Trump, you'd better be prepared to lie your ass off. And young George surely did just that.


And:


New York Democrats probably should have looked into George Santos more - The Washington Post