HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy)
Subject: Re: UFO's
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 21:45:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

hall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert J. Hall) writes:


>anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy) writes:

>[stuff deleted]

> > The analogy of the "light barrier" to the "sound barrier" is erroneous
> > because the speed of light in a vacuum is considered a fundamental limit
> > of space-time.  It's *not* an engineering issue; it's a matter of  basic
> > physics.

>While I'm certainly no physics expert, I have heard of recent theoretical work
>on the creation of a 'quantum vacuum'(?) between two parallel plates held very
>close together. (On the order of atomic dimensions.) Supposedly the plates
>reduce the number of possible quantum events that can occur in the intervening
>gap, creating a quantum vacuum. When a photon passed between the plates (in a
>direction perpendicular to the surfaces), it actually travels faster because it
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>does not 'interact' with as many possible quantum fluctuations.

I think you meant to say "parallel" here, no?

>I may have interpreted the work incorrectly, so please correct me if I am
>wrong. However, if this result is true, then it may be possible for light to
>exceed the 'speed of light' in a vacuum. Perhaps the speed of light barrier
>is not as immutable as most of us have been taught to believe, and a
>sufficiently advanced civilization may be able to use this result to travel
>'FTL' between the stars. Then again, the hypothesis could be completely bogus
>and I'm just blowing smoke.

What is more likely is that the "light barrier" will be revised to be the
speed of light in a *quantum* vacuum (assuming the experimental results
are verified).
-- 

Anson Kennedy                                                   anson@netcom.com
Secretary of the Georgia Skeptics (but don't even THINK I speak for them!)

"If you don't watch the violence,    \           "If I had been the Virgin Mary,
you'll never get desensitized to it."  \                I would have said 'No.'"
-Bart Simpson                            \  -Margaret "Stevie" Smith (1902-1971)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
From: ae553@yfn.ysu.edu (David Jameson)
Subject: Re: UFO's
Reply-To: ae553@yfn.ysu.edu (David Jameson)
Organization: Youngstown State University/Youngstown Free-Net
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 09:23:02 GMT

m>
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH

In a previous article, WJS112@psuvm.psu.edu () says:

>Modern science does not argue that there is no other life in the universe.
>Science does argue the point of how these ufo's traveled lightyears to get
>here. The nearest star is around 4.3 light years away.  There is no
>proof of life on the +9 odd planets that we have in our solar system. The
>ufo's would have to travel at light speed, which would still take a long time,
>and then, because they are traveling at light speed, they would have to have
>some means to re-arrange their particles back to their old state, since they
>would be pure energy.  I do not doubt that one or two forms of other life
>have played around on the earth for awhile, i'm just wondering how they got
>here.  That is all for now, gooday
>                                  Gersha
>
>                                        Smitty.
>

You don't need to travel _at_ the speed of light just to travel a few light
years!  What's wrong with simply travelling at 99.9999% of the speed of light?
Whenever you travel very close to the speed of light (but not _at_ the speed
of light, which is impossible), subjective time starts to slow down i.e. if
someone on the earth thinks your journey to another star and back again
took 5 years, you might think it only took a few hours if you were travelling
very close to the speed of light.  In fact, it's very likely that within the
next hundred years or so, humans will be able to travel to the nearest stars
(or at least send probes there).

Of course, just because it's possible that aliens from other stars are
arriving on earth it doesn't mean that it's actually happening!

Dave.
-- 
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
From: anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy)
Subject: Re: UFO's
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 21:39:46 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

cherkaue@zomma.cs.wisc.edu (Kevin J. Cherkauer) writes:

[Description of recent experiment which shows the problem of treating
subatomic "wavicles" as particles only deleted]

Not being an expert, I can only speculate (but, hey, *that* should be normal
here, right? ;-) : It seems to me that this experiment and the _Newsweek_
reporting of it illustrates the conceptual problem of dealing with things
which behave both as a wave and as a particle.  Whether the work results
in revising the accepted value of the speed of light or not isn't really
the issue here, anyway.  It just means that earlier measurements didn't
take into account factors this experiment does, not that the "light barrier"
has been broken. 

>  I am not saying this experiment (and forgive the layman description -- it's
>the only one I've heard) supports or refutes the idea of an absolute maximum
>speed, but I think one must not lose sight of the *fact* that relativity is a
>*theory* and therefore not necessarily a fact.

Without writing a dissertation, I think you may have a bit of a
misconception about the use of the word "theory" in science.  A theory
is as close to a "fact" that you can get in science.  Theories are, I
think, seldom completely overturned.  For example, Newton's theory of
gravitation was not proven "false" by Einstein.  Rather, it was shown
to be a special case of relativity.  It is only when a theory shows
an inability to explain certain observed phenomena that it is "revised."
In the case of Newton, if I remember correctly, it was certain pertubations
in the motion of the planet Mercury which Newtonian physics couldn't
explain but which relativity could.

Saying that something is "only a theory" in an attempt to justify a belief
in something (as yet not proven to even exist) is stretching matters a
bit.
-- 

Anson Kennedy                                                   anson@netcom.com
Secretary of the Georgia Skeptics (but don't even THINK I speak for them!)

"If you don't watch the violence,    \           "If I had been the Virgin Mary,
you'll never get desensitized to it."  \                I would have said 'No.'"
-Bart Simpson                            \  -Margaret "Stevie" Smith (1902-1971)
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: Experiments Wanted
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:53:47 GMT
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science

In article <kdawson.25.715616477@AFIT.AF.MIL>, kdawson@AFIT.AF.MIL (KEVIN D. DAWSON) writes:
|> Hello "ALL"
|> 
|>       I'm proposing a night out for my group over Halloween that would 
|> include a trip to a cemetery. Once there I would like to set up some 
|> experiments that would be evaluated the next day. 
|> 
|>     Some ideas are...
|>       Camera (iris open) in a light box.
|>       Camera Long -exposure iris down.
|>       Tape recorder, no mics or inputs.
|>       
|> Any other suggestions?
|> 
|> Kevin Dawson
Experiments to do what?  Generally an experiment is supposed to have
a goal, not just apparatus.  What are you looking for?

And by the way, does "Tape recorder, no mics or inputs." mean a tape 
recorder left turned on but with no input device?  If so, what in the 
world is that supposed to accomplish?

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
From: anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: UFO's
Date: 1 Sep 92 21:31:56 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

stinerkt@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Kevin T Stiner) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>Of course, this is all theory.........
>We had the same feeling about the sound barrier before we broke it.
>My answer to the question, "Can we travel faster than light?" is....
>THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE POSSIBILITY OF A DEFINITE MAYBE!!!!!
>Of course, everything is relative.......

I often see the "light barrier" compared to the "sound barrier."  The
problem is, before we "broke" the so-called sound barrier, scientists
were in agreement that exceeding the speed of sound *was* physically
possible.  They had plenty of examples, such as bullets and the cracking
of a whip (I'm not sure when the whip crack was found to be a mini-sonic
boom, it may have been *after* the flight of the X-1).

The issue was an engineering one; namely, could an aircraft be built which
would safely carry a pilot beyond Mach 1?

The analogy of the "light barrier" to the "sound barrier" is erroneous
because the speed of light in a vacuum is considered a fundamental limit
of space-time.  It's *not* an engineering issue; it's a matter of  basic
physics.
-- 

Anson Kennedy                                                   anson@netcom.com
Secretary of the Georgia Skeptics (but don't even THINK I speak for them!)

"If you don't watch the violence,    \           "If I had been the Virgin Mary,
you'll never get desensitized to it."  \                I would have said 'No.'"
-Bart Simpson                            \  -Margaret "Stevie" Smith (1902-1971)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Subject: Re: Universities and the Paranormal
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:26:38 GMT

In article <christ.715615607@crash>, christ@crash.cts.com (Chris Trichel) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> Question: Are there, and if so where, any universities that offer parapsychology
|> or related areas as part of their curriculum?
|> 
|> Question: Who/What are the organizations that conduct psychic/paranormal research?
|> 
|> Question: How does one go about getting involved in paranormal research?
|> 
|> Answers woudl really be appreciated...
|> 
|> -Chris Trichel

What do you mean by "involved" and what do you mean by "research".  If
you want to become a professional parapsychologist,  there are a few
programs (the quality of which I couldn't speculate on).  Any library 
should be able to help you find accredited college programs in this field,
just as they can help you find accredited programs in any field of
study.

However, I recommend doing a degree in ordinary psychology anyway, 
to accumulate much of the necessary background in non-para-psychology.  
I strongly recommend studying physiological, perceptual, and cognitive 
psychology, and something about the complexities (and ethics) of 
experimentation with humans.  All these are to be found in any good 
psychology program.

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
From: tzf@csl.biosci.arizona.edu (Theron Friedman)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:11:52 GMT
Reply-To: tzf@csl.biosci.arizona.edu
Organization: U of Arizona, CS Dept, Tucson

In article <1992Aug26.170130.28756@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath) writes:

|> 
|> Could you explain how it is that, with all their sophistacation and 
|> desire for secrecy, the abductors allow someone as unsophisticated 
|> and technologically backward as Budd Hopkins to trumpet their secrets 
|> to the world and to organize resistance?
|> 
	This is obviously an example of their sophistication: extremely
subtle media manipulation. Just in case the technological blackout slips,
they have already pre-discredited anyone who reveals their secrets by having
them first trumpeted by idiots. Machiavellian!
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 20:44:13 EDT
From: <WJS112@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: UFO's

Modern science does not argue that there is no other life in the universe.
Science does argue the point of how these ufo's traveled lightyears to get
here. The nearest star is around 4.3 light years away.  There is no
proof of life on the +9 odd planets that we have in our solar system. The
ufo's would have to travel at light speed, which would still take a long time,
and then, because they are traveling at light speed, they would have to have
some means to re-arrange their particles back to their old state, since they
would be pure energy.  I do not doubt that one or two forms of other life
have played around on the earth for awhile, i'm just wondering how they got
here.  That is all for now, gooday
                                  Gersha

                                        Smitty.
From: tzf@csl.biosci.arizona.edu (Theron Friedman)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: UFO's
Date: 2 Sep 92 22:56:37 GMT
Reply-To: tzf@csl.biosci.arizona.edu
Organization: U of Arizona, CS Dept, Tucson

In article <b4kn25d.anson@netcom.com>, anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy) writes:
|> hall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert J. Hall) writes:
..... [ deleted stuff ]
|> 
|> What is more likely is that the "light barrier" will be revised to be the
|> speed of light in a *quantum* vacuum (assuming the experimental results
|> are verified).

Doubtful that the change would be as trivial as this. As you point out in
another post, theories are seldom wholly thrown out; they become special
cases. The reason for this is often the large mass of data that fit the
old theory.

The experiments supporting relativity, and many of the other experiments
in modern physics, use a certain value of "C". Change that value and you
have to redo all the computations. That those experiments have worked so far
basically means that the value of "C" was correct.

In which case, if the quantum experiment did indeed have light in a quantum
vacuum moving faster than "C" for an ordinary vacuum, there is going to
be a discreprancy for the theorists to patch over. And perhaps a
loophole through which future engineers can slip FTL travel or
communications.

(This is actually not an earth-shattering revelation. Fitting quantum mechanics
and relativity into the same theoretical universe has been one of the
ongoing problems of modern physics. That the new framework turns both of them
into special cases is just par for the process.)

Terry Friedman
- Skeptical of skeptics -
From: szucheng@cheng.Eng.Sun.COM (Szu-Cheng Sun)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: what a joke!
Date: 31 Aug 1992 19:26:25 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: szucheng@cheng.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: cheng

In article 78653@ut-emx.uucp, giskard@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Daneel Olivaw) writes:

>>A few years ago, one of my friend had shown me a paper which he got from so called
>>"Iron Abacus" (translation) fortune-teller about 20 years ago. Everything happened 
>>to him in the pass 20 years is just like what had been written down on that paper. 
>>Don't misunderstand that everything happened to him was written on that paper, 
>>however, most of the major events were.


>Yea, but how concrete were those predictions.  I bet they were such loose 
>statements that they could have been interpreted in a number of ways. I.E.
>"you will be with someone very special and ...."--- most people do get 
>married, or "good fortune will come your way" ---- that is bound to happen
>to everybody sometime or another.  Stuff like those type of statements are
>treal corny, because the chances are very likely to happen.


Let me answer this with a different example (but still iron abacus). Before go 
any further, a little background should be given here. I'll try to keep this simple.
Chinese has an animal as a kind of symbol associate with each year. There are 12 of
these kinds of animals. A person belong to an animal base on his birth-year.

On that sheet of paper, which wrote down what animal his wife was (he did not marry 
20+ years ago). And, it was correct. So, the possibility is 1/12. If you still think 
that too easy to guess, that paper also wrote which animal his father was and his 
mother was and also his brother was. Of course, this fortune-teller did not know my 
friend personally (sure this kinds of information is not too hard to find but ....). 
Now the possibility is 1/12**4 (which is 1/20,736). By the way, that paper also 
predicted his children and which were also correct.

If you still clam that one out of twenty thousand is something likely to happen, I 
don't think I can provide more information at this moment.


Szu-Cheng
From: bill@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Re: what a joke!
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 12:21:29 GMT

In article <Btn8xD.FF1@wpi.WPI.EDU>, drwho@rajeesh.WPI.EDU (Eric Ant Von Laudermann) writes:
> In article <1992Aug25.190301.5111@nntp.uoregon.edu> johnm@cajal.uoregon.edu (John Martin) writes:
>>In article <78253@ut-emx.uucp>, giskard@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Daneel Olivaw) writes:
>>
>>>I was merely trying

[...]

>>No, that's not at all what you were trying to do. .....

> Of all the people on the net, you are, of course, the authority on the
> subject of Daneel Olivaw's mind.  Thank you *so* much for telling him
> exactly what his intentions were.  You know them so much better than
> he does.

Doesn't Daneel Olivaw have a positronic brain? 
Shouldn't his name have an "R" in front of it?
Too bad Isaac Asimov croaked - he could give us the
right answer as to what is on R Daneel Olivaw's mind,
after all, he invented him.

> 
> --E.V.L. (drwho@wpi.wpi.edu)        # Ignorance is evil.
> Disclaimer: "It's all absolutely    # Knowledge is good.
> devastatingly true, except the bits # But knowledge is not intelligence,
> that are lies."  --Douglas Adams    # and ignorance is not stupidity.
-- 
|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
| If we had an index file, we could    | "In fact, except for protecting  |
| look it up in the index file under   |  individual rights, no valid     |
| "Index File".                        |  reason for government exists."  |
|           -- Teegan in "Castrovalva" |       ... Dr. Frank Wallace      |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Bill Garland = bill@kean.ucs.mun.ca  | Commercial : Send me your money. |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
From: tzf@csl.biosci.arizona.edu (Theron Friedman)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Scientific Theory (was: Re: UFO's
Date: 3 Sep 92 20:31:36 GMT
Reply-To: tzf@csl.biosci.arizona.edu
Organization: U of Arizona, CS Dept, Tucson

In article <1992Sep3.051211.4460@uwm.edu>, spice@convex.csd.uwm.edu (James G Spice) writes:

|> Second, no test of any hypothesis can ever *prove*, or *verify* that
|> hypothesis.  Corroberation is a more appropriate word.  On the other
|> hand, one test result contrary to the hypothesis falsifies it (if
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> we assume the testing technique is accurate).  This then is the goal
|> of science -- to falsify hypotheses produced by the paradigmatic 
|> theories of our time.  In this way, theories can be readjusted and
|> fine tuned and progress experienced.
|> 

Amusingly, this is the _theory_ about how science works. I heard tell of a
study recently in which experimenters presented scientists with a bunch
of examples of theories, predictions & negative results, and asked if the
subjects thought that the results falsified the theories. In the majority
of cases the reply was negative; they thought that the theory just needed
some tuning!
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal,sci.skeptic,alt.astrology
From: casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE)
Subject: Re: Did Nostradamus predict the end of communism?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:20:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.142519.21745@cs.ucf.edu>, long@next1.acme.ucf.edu (Richard Long) writes...
>When did communism collapse, exactly?

Last I checked, it was still alive and well in China, Cuba and North Korea.

June 1991 was not a particularly important moment in the collapse of Soviet
Communism.  The failed coup was in August, and the USSR was disbanded in
December.

Dave
From: gunnarh@dhhalden.no (GUNNAR HORRIGMO)
Subject: Re: UFO's
Organization: Ostfold College
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 21:25:14 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.081408.16434@hplb.hpl.hp.com> rik@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Richard Beckett) writes:

>       How can anyone say UFO's don't exist ?

Easy, UFO means Unidentified Flying Object.
If you see something flying and you don't know what it is, you say: It's a 
UFO. Now you *KNOW* what it is, ergo it's not a UFO!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Gunnar Horrigmo                     "How long, Lord? Shall we be angry    *
*                                      forever? Shall we jealously burn     *
*                                      like fire? Shall we keep on fucking  *
* gunnarh@sofus.dhhalden.no            and piss in eachother's face?"       *
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any opinions stated hereign are the ones of ODH......NOT!
They are mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine,mine.
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Subject: Re: Ghosts
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:03:41 GMT

In article <185of1INN14v@network.ucsd.edu>, philipm@papillon.ucsd.edu (The Philster) writes in part:

|> There are so many questions left unanswered...why doubt?

Huh?

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
From: anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: Universities and the Paranormal
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:07:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

christ@crash.cts.com (Chris Trichel) writes:

>Question: Are there, and if so where, any universities that offer parapsychology
>or related areas as part of their curriculum?

West Georgia College.
-- 

Anson Kennedy                                                   anson@netcom.com
Secretary of the Georgia Skeptics (but don't even THINK I speak for them!)

"If you don't watch the violence,    \           "If I had been the Virgin Mary,
you'll never get desensitized to it."  \                I would have said 'No.'"
-Bart Simpson                            \  -Margaret "Stevie" Smith (1902-1971)