Saturns signal?

[IglooDame]

Yo mah man, much respeck [/fistbump] But that aint no obvious hypothesis. Some sort of spinning stuff is interacting with some sort of force?

Hey, give me a break. My degree is in political science - "some sort of spinning interacting with some other force" is practically a mathematical theorem, compared to what these guys come up with.

 

[Mise]

Ok lets see if Ive got it straight. Since only humans can make geometric symbols, and there are no humans around Saturn, therefore, the geometric formation is a natural phenomenon. You need an emergency trepanning!

I dunno what a trepanning is. But:

(a) I never said "therefore", I said that it was a "safe bet", nor did I suggest that only humans can make them.
(b) Scientific method dictates that, when faced with a new phenomenon, one applies the known laws of nature to it, to determine how the phenomenon works. Where's the problem?

I know, thats why I dont assume aliens. All Ive been talking about is the importance of not making any assumptions, entertaining new possibilities.

New possibilities are entertained when they are not explained by the old, well-established, scientific ones.

 

[warpus]

Instead of studying everything like a natural phenomenon, why not study something like this as a phenomenon? Why is it necessary to begin the investigation with an assumption?

There is no assumption. To assume that it could have been created by an intelligent agent would be the assumption. You are simply not assuming anything when you claim it's natural. You start with a blank slate.

At no point is the possibility even entertained that it could conceivably have been created by intelligent life of some kind, as a signal. When you stop ruling it out, just because, suddenly a giant impossible hexagon in the atmosphere of a gas giant seems like a pretty obvious way to send a signal. So lets go completely nuts now: if you were a Giant Saturnian Gasbag and wanted to signal your presence in some way, what better way would there be than to create a geometric symbol in Saturns upper atmosphere? Dont we look for math in radio signals, when looking for ET civs? Why ignore similar signals when we see them etched into a planets atmosphere?

So I presume you would have suggested the same sort of thing when we first saw the "face on Mars" ?

Perhaps it's just me, but that's a Pentagon, not a Hexagon.

Ya, but what does that change?

 

[Perfection]

Unknown. Only way to figure out how it was dione is to entertain the possibility. You dont determine whether things are true or not, by ruling them out from the word go.

You have to. In science you cannot entertain every idea, you don't have the time, money, or equipment. You have to make an educated guess and work out from there.

You mean, why dont they send a message some other way, like radio or something? Dont know. Wild guess? I think a life form that evolved in the atmosphere of a gas giant would have difficulty building a radio.

Building a radio the size of say an apartment building is all you need, compare that with a weather controller

Who knows how these creatures would percieve and interact with their environment, how their technology would develop? Or maybe the ability to manipulate the clouds is a natural ability of some kind Maybe the hexagon is their equivelant of a city

That sound extrememely unlikely. It would be like fish effecting ocean currents. They just don't have the power needed.

My money would be on them being from Saturn. Living in Saturns atmosphere doesnt seem like it could be an acquired taste.

Evolution in a hydrogen atmophere isn't easy...

If all scientists had that attitude, right now we wouldnt have complicated crazy stuff like vessels that we built travelling all over the solar system sending us back images of giant geometric patterns on other worlds.

Sure we would. The intellectual contributions of hackneyed, uneducated folk who base thier ideas of 5 minutes of thinking while on the John is relatively minimal.

But it does mean that since its an unexplained mystery, its important not to make any assumptions.

Of course you do. You don't invalidate everyting you know because something doesn't fit. You use previous knowledge to guide you. Science is a progressive system.

That would be the view of a mathematician. If you scroll up a little you can see the opinion of an atmospheric expert about how likely it is.

Hell, I'm surprised too. Despite his surprise, I don't think he'd disagree with my statement. Surprises happen in space all the time, but the scientists don't rely on crackpottery to solve them.

 

[Mise]

Incidentally, I find it FAR more fascinating that phenomena like this can occur in nature, than if it were purely a product of intelligent design (lower case). Hardly "mundane" by any stretch.

 

[Sparta]

Perhaps it's just me, but that's a Pentagon, not a Hexagon.

You're definitely right about the images shown, of course. The researchers do claim that they were able to create a hexagon though, by spinning the bucket at the highest speeds they tested.

FWIW, here is the article about the creation of geometric shapes in swirling media, in case anyone is interested.

The researchers found that once the plate was spinning so fast that the water span out to the sides, creating a hole of air in the middle, the dry patch wasn't circular as might be expected. Instead it evolved, as the bucket's spin sped up, from an ellipse to a three-sided star, to a square, a pentagon, and, at the highest speeds investigated, a hexagon.

(Rumor has it had they continued on to a slightly higher speed than was 'investigated', the hole in the center would have disappeared completely and begun evolving into a large standing obelisk.)

daaa ...

Daaaaaa ...

Daaaaaaaaa ...

DAAA DAAAAA!!

 

[Perfection]

Incidentally, I find it FAR more fascinating that phenomena like this can occur in nature, than if it were purely a product of intelligent design (lower case). Hardly "mundane" by any stretch.

Indeed, Cassinni has made so damn many cool discoveries of Saturn it's just wild!

 

[Sparta]

Indeed, Cassinni has made so damn many cool discoveries of Saturn it's just wild!

Hyperion

10

 

[Perfection]

Hyperion

Enceladus

Cryovulcanism FTW!

 

[nihilistic]

Indeed, there it is, nonetheless. So, while hexagons can form naturally in crystals, and artificially in spinning buckets, theyve never been seen on any other planet, and the expert states that Saturns atmosphere is the last place youd expect to see a six sided figure. So theres nothing natural, expected, predictable or mundane about a permanent hexagon appearing in the atmosphere of Saturn, because the only option which is being considered is a natural one.

For the record we haven't surveyed the surface of all that many planets (8 or less, to be precise). All the planets that we know of that are outside the solar system we only inferred its existence from the star it is orbiting. Furthermore, within those 8 that we could possibly observe, only 2 are classic gas giants: Saturn and Jupiter. We don't exactly have a wealth of information about this to confidently "expect" much of anything.

If we begin knowing for a fact that everything we encounter in the cosmos is a product of natural processes, as opposed to intelligent beings (who may look, be, and think so very differently from us that they resemble no living thing we've ever laid eyes on, or imagined) then we may never discover intelligent life in the universe, even though all along, we were surrounded by it.

Instead of studying everything like a natural phenomenon, why not study something like this as a phenomenon? Why is it necessary to begin the investigation with an assumption? At no point is the possibility even entertained that it could conceivably have been created by intelligent life of some kind, as a signal. When you stop ruling it out, just because, suddenly a giant impossible hexagon in the atmosphere of a gas giant seems like a pretty obvious way to send a signal. So lets go completely nuts now: if you were a Giant Saturnian Gasbag and wanted to signal your presence in some way, what better way would there be than to create a geometric symbol in Saturns upper atmosphere? Dont we look for math in radio signals, when looking for ET civs? Why ignore similar signals when we see them etched into a planets atmosphere?

That's really bullfeathers. Even with SETI the assumption is that all the data received is natural and is checked against for irregularities. The reason for looking for a natural phenomenon is that the probability of an artificial one is very low. When we exhausted the probability of it being natural, then we look for artificial stuff. As posted by other posters here, there are indeed numerous examples of natural phenomenons forming shapes that are from the first look not very intuitive. Do you freak out every time you look at a snowflake too?

 

[Serutan]

Frozen water microcrystals

I saw even more interesting pictures of a hexagon forming in a bucket of spinning water, but I can't find it right now.

Either way, this is a bit odd, but there is nothing to suggest that this isn't entirely natural.

That's probably why the hex appears in Saturn's atmosphere. Most of it is dense enough to behave more like a liquid than a gas.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Ya, but what does that change?

It's quite obviously part of Perfection's master plan then

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

"Why is everything when we don't know what it is called a thing?" - Bones.

 

[Perfection]

That's probably why the hex appears in Saturn's atmosphere. Most of it is dense enough to behave more like a liquid than a gas.

Nah, snowflakes are solid, and a solid with such strength and size wouldn't form in Saturn's atmophere. I'd put money on it being standing wave driven by some natural phenomenon, as to what though I'd be clueless.

 

[Winner]

Send Cassini on suicide mission into this phenomenon. I am telling you, there is a monolith

(let's see if it replicates itself in order to change Saturn to a minisun )

 

[Perfection]

Send Cassini on suicide mission into this phenomenon. I am telling you, there is a monolith

It would actually be very difficult to do that (like they did with Galileo into Jupiter). It would likely get battered by the rings and lose control before reaching Saturn's atmosphere.

 

[Winner]

It would actually be very difficult to do that (like they did with Galileo into Jupiter). It would likely get battered by the rings and lose control before reaching Saturn's atmosphere.

I know, it probably doesn't even have enough fuel to change its orbit so dramatically.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

There is no assumption. To assume that it could have been created by an intelligent agent would be the assumption.

I agree, thats why I dont assume anything. All Im saying is that since we know virtually nothing about the symbol or whats causing it, and very little about whats going on in Saturns atmosphere, we really dont know its natural. Its an assumption that it is. Probably a very safe one, but its still an assumption. Why thats so difficult for people to understand, I have no idea.

You are simply not assuming anything when you claim it's natural. You start with a blank slate.

Thats a very smart approach here on Earth, but not as we begin to explore new worlds. If we're really going to understand whats happening underground on Mars, or under the ice on Europa, or on Titan, Saturns atmosphere (which is suddenly very interesting, because of the enormous friggin geometric symbol carved into its upper atmosphere) or anywhere else, we're going to have to identify and try to eliminate our assumptions about whats likely, possible, natural, artificial. We cant even agree about the sentience of our fellow creatures here on Earth because we're so blinded with assumptions.

So I presume you would have suggested the same sort of thing when we first saw the "face on Mars" ?

When we first saw it, or when I first heard of it, my first reaction was that we should go take another look. They did, and it looked even less like a face than the first time. Im alot more interested in those Martian 'trees' Ive seen photos of. I made a thread about them once, maybe you remember.

You have to. In science you cannot entertain every idea, you don't have the time, money, or equipment. You have to make an educated guess and work out from there.

As I said to Warpus, when just beginning to explore a new world, I think its smart to not make an assumption that theres no life there. Especially when the planet has a big permanent geometric symbol carved into its atmosphere.

Building a radio the size of say an apartment building is all you need, compare that with a weather controller

Lets start with the basics of building a radio. What will your workbench be resting on? Youre floating around in the atmosphere of a gas giant.

That sound extrememely unlikely.

Why? Because no creature on Earth is able to do it?

It would be like fish effecting ocean currents. They just don't have the power needed.

Very true, but we arent talking about Earth fish.

Evolution in a hydrogen atmophere isn't easy...

Oh, theres another assumption. How do we know that? Because a hydrogen atmosphere is very different from Earths?

Sure we would. The intellectual contributions of hackneyed, uneducated folk who base thier ideas of 5 minutes of thinking while on the John is relatively minimal.

This is what I dont understand, why the champions of rationality and reason, who have all the facts, and know whats possible and whats not, always resort to snobby intellectual class warfare. And for the record, I wasnt on the john.

Of course you do. You don't invalidate everyting you know because something doesn't fit. You use previous knowledge to guide you. Science is a progressive system.

Youre exploring a brand new world, youre building the knowledge base that others will refer to in the future. So since all you know about life and evolution is based on one world only, why not go crazy and say ' I dont know if theres life here. There may be. I cant rule it out.'

Hell, I'm surprised too. Despite his surprise, I don't think he'd disagree with my statement. Surprises happen in space all the time, but the scientists don't rely on crackpottery to solve them.

Yeah I know, in the Age of Science, 'crackpottery' or words like it are the equivalent of 'heresy'. Its crackpottery to suggest we keep an open mind?


@nihilist, I'll reply later.

 

[warpus]

I agree, thats why I dont assume anything. All Im saying is that since we know virtually nothing about the symbol or whats causing it, and very little about whats going on in Saturns atmosphere, we really dont know its natural. Its an assumption that it is. Probably a very safe one, but its still an assumption. Why thats so difficult for people to understand, I have no idea.

You assume it's natural unless there's evidence to the contrary. It's not much of assumption, really.. it's like assuming that time will flow forwards. Then if it doesn't, you re-visit your initial assumption. Same thing should be done here.

Thats a very smart approach here on Earth, but not as we begin to explore new worlds. If we're really going to understand whats happening underground on Mars, or under the ice on Europa, or on Titan, Saturns atmosphere (which is suddenly very interesting, because of the enormous friggin geometric symbol carved into its upper atmosphere) or anywhere else, we're going to have to identify and try to eliminate our assumptions about whats likely, possible, natural, artificial. We cant even agree about the sentience of our fellow creatures here on Earth because we're so blinded with assumptions.

Yes, and "OMG Aliens!" is the worst possible assumption you could make.

When we first saw it, or when I first heard of it, my first reaction was that we should go take another look. They did, and it looked even less like a face than the first time. Im alot more interested in those Martian 'trees' Ive seen photos of. I made a thread about them once, maybe you remember.

Yes, you didn't make an assumption about aliens until we collected more evidence that it wasn't. Why not do the same here?

Youre exploring a brand new world, youre building the knowledge base that others will refer to in the future. So since all you know about life and evolution is based on one world only, why not go crazy and say ' I dont know if theres life here. There may be. I cant rule it out.'

Do we have any evidence that there is life on Saturn? No. We aren't ruling it out, but there isn't any evidence that there might be life, so to assume that there is life would be pretty silly.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

For the record we haven't surveyed the surface of all that many planets (8 or less, to be precise). All the planets that we know of that are outside the solar system we only inferred its existence from the star it is orbiting. Furthermore, within those 8 that we could possibly observe, only 2 are classic gas giants: Saturn and Jupiter. We don't exactly have a wealth of information about this to confidently "expect" much of anything.

Precisely what Ive been arguing all along.

That's really bullfeathers. Even with SETI the assumption is that all the data received is natural and is checked against for irregularities. The reason for looking for a natural phenomenon is that the probability of an artificial one is very low.

While you guys look for natural explanations, would it be ok IYO if some other people looked for artificial explanations, in bizarre cases like this? Or would that just be craziness?

When we exhausted the probability of it being natural, then we look for artificial stuff. As posted by other posters here, there are indeed numerous examples of natural phenomenons forming shapes that are from the first look not very intuitive.

Arent you the one who said:

For the record we haven't surveyed the surface of all that many planets (8 or less, to be precise). All the planets that we know of that are outside the solar system we only inferred its existence from the star it is orbiting. Furthermore, within those 8 that we could possibly observe, only 2 are classic gas giants: Saturn and Jupiter. We don't exactly have a wealth of information about this to confidently "expect" much of anything.

Now youre saying we have enough information to conclude its a natural phenomenon. Did you change your mind?

Do you freak out every time you look at a snowflake too?

No, not every time.


Warpus, I think we've gotten to the point where we're just repeating the same things to each other. Our two positions boil down to this (its the same thing the God threads boil down to):

In your view, if theres no evidence for something, it doesnt exist. My view is that even things we know nothing about and have no evidence of may still exist and be real regardless. Its strange to me that your view is the prevailing one in science, because to the best of my knowledge the history of science is entirely about individuals who didnt buy into the orthodoxy of the moment and struck out on there own, with nothing but a belief that a certain thing might be possible, even if there was no evidence for it, yet.