> > We don't know the laws of physics. We know what we know. We have
> > rules from experimental data which is often unverifiable. We hope that
> > ideas are close (many are, but many still need to be tried and tested by
> > implementing technologies using such science - this is particularly true
> > astrophysics - it's all theory.) but they are almost definitely not spot
> But they are not wildly different from the truth,
So, you have the truth by which to make this distance comparison ? NO! Aaaaaggh! Am I the only one here able to rationalise with massive logical errors?
> > Secondly, and more importantly (this is central to my argument) you
> > say from what persepective an alien intelligence might view the
> universe. We
> > look up at night and see absence of photons, speckled with photon
> > because we detect photons. But what about things we don't detect, things
> > have not yet discovered, or have misunderstood. These things will
> > the differences between civilisations. For all you know the universe
> > be saturated with "slorgopo energy" which many creatures detect for some
> > purpose or another, but we don't, it has no observable effect upon our
> > systems and so we haven't noticed it, and evolution hasn't utilised it.
> if the solar system were saturated with 'slorgopo energy' it would be
> reproducable in any particle accelerator on any planet in the universe,
> and its effects would be observable via astronomy.
No, no, no and more no's......I'm not quibbling with facts on any of this stuff - I don't know all about science and math, I'm pointing out logical fallacies in the statements you're making. You assume yet again - this time that slorgopo energy is detectable by the tools of astronomy - well, I made it up, and I say it ain't. Hundreds of years ago if I had proposed electomagnetic radiation, undetectable by human senses, I'd have done an afternoon on the barbeque. "Human senses see all, as God has blessed....blah blah..." they'd rant as I go up in flames. Just as you are assuming that astronomy tools see all. I think not.
> Photons are among the most abundant, and are the easiest to detect by any
> means using matter.
>From OUR perspective, from OUR technological standpoint.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.