Endy0816

Victory!

We are a primarily diurnal species. Crepuscular or nocturnal intelligent life would likely have a different view.

I think LET is dead in the water without an Aether that differs from the background. It might be there, but how and in what ways does it impact the math? I really don't like discussing articles of faith, anyone else have some debate points?

I just chose to turn on a light, thus I refute thee.

For one thing synthetic genomics is not the same as genetic engineering. That's just a scare tactic. The title of the actual scientific report cited by this article's source: Deep-Sea Oil Plume Enriches Indigenous Oil-Degrading Bacteria Somehow a local beneficial bacterium has become an evil GM Bacterium...

Optical Clocks and Relativity

The speed really wouldn't enable your natural lifespan to be any longer. More to the point a journey into a black hole is an end to you, if not the matter you are composed of. It also probably doesn't leave the Universe so much as reappear at a much later point. Not sure the effective difference is meaningful but it is there. I almost read the Yuga cycle as a breakdown of advanced medical technology. Need an expert on the subject, but the parallel could be made. Each successive loss resulting in an ever shorter lifespan. Several of the losses resulting in "diseases" that would

Maybe Gravitational Waves, not sure what moving relative to them would entail and what would be transferred though. They are still theoretical and would be/are weak relative to EM waves.

Muons forming in the upper atmosphere are the best example. From our perspective they shouldn't have enough time to reach the surface before most of them decay. From their perspective they have plenty of time. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/muon.html Helps to think of time as a mountain. Two people going down it at different rates. They each see themselves as going at their "normal" rate, but they see the other person as going at a different rate. No paradox, their experience is simply relative to their own frame of reference.

Devoidwind, if you honestly feel strongly about it then just buy the thing, try it out and tell us your findings. For a number of reasons it simply isn't logical. Infinite lifeforms populating the Universe, black-holes everywhere, etc. There might be a hundred snake oil salesmen but that doesn't mean they are selling something you should buy. More practical than a free energy device, would be to find a novel way to tap into a large existing source. Assorted planetary magnetic fields and geothermal sources would be our best bet. Plenty of more hypothetical sources out there t

There's programming, which I think most would agree, is reasonably identical to a determined drive. Where Robots lack is in their ability to try new things and learn from them. Possibly if you hooked a physical robot body up to a good AI with a simulator built in, it would be more capable. Real world processing power limitations and lack of safeguards(injury/damage) are the main issues involved.