Ancient Alien Astronaughts

[nailit]

After reading Theland's thread below (who or what created the universe) and the debate that developed between Naomi and others regarding ancient aliens visiting Earth, I thought that it may deserve a thread of its own.
I read von Daniken's books as a teenager and later found out that much of what he wrote was fabricated. *BUT* there have been other authors who have had the same ideas without Danikens fancies.
Myself, I'm open minded about it all, but still a fascinating subject to discuss.

[Old_Geezer]

Lies to children

Hmm this thread has taken an interesting turn ;-)

[douglas9401]

The Pythons, Naomi, from The Meaning Of Life.

[jim360]

Just by way of illustration, the article you cite also keeps talking about "the Hubble Constant". But that's also misleading, because the Hubble constant isn't necessarily constant -- it can change over time, for example. Still, for the sake of simplicity, the article keeps calling it "constant".

[Khandro]

E pur si muove as my old mate Galileo said.

[Old_Geezer]

This sort of thing ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space

[jim360]

Exactly, OG.

I'm wary of citing wikipedia directly -- not least because a lot of its references talk about "the expanding Universe", including one by the great Paul Eddington. It's not really wrong, as long as you remember that the expansion is really that of the metric, ie of space itself and how we measure it. I have used the expression myself, and will do so again.

[naomi24]

Jim, //in the interests of avoiding getting too bogged down// …if you don’t mind I’m happy with NASA’s explanations – even if they are intended for the layman.

Douglas, thanks. I’ve never heard that before. Very good.

[jim360]

I'm not saying you shouldn't be happy with them. They are normally very good. I *am* saying that getting into a technical argument with an actual physicist based on what you read in a popular science journal is, perhaps, a risky strategy. I mean, there's at least some chance that maybe actual physicists have a pretty good idea of how actual physics works, surely?

[Old_Geezer]

I'm about half way down the page, will continue. It labours this obvious Great Circle point rather too much; encourages me to daydream or start skipping, then I have to go back again. I hope it will prove relevant.

But presently I can't see why an increased distance due to space intrinsically growing answers the problem of finite --> infinite which appears when actually movement of objects cause the increase. But there again I'm not seeing how an already infinite universe can be view as being very small in the first place.

Back to the Wiki then.

[naomi24]

Jim, // I *am* saying that getting into a technical argument...//

I'm not getting into a technical argument. You are. No argument from me with the people who work with NASA and specialise in astrophysics.

[douglas9401]

Here's the whole thing (with updates).

[naomi24]

Haaaaaaa! That's brilliant!!! Thank you Douglas.

[jim360]

Start another thread if you like OG and I'll answer there, or try to.

[Old_Geezer]

May do thanks. But I've to finish the Wiki first, and I am about to be quite busy for a bit.

[dunnitall]

Love that Douglas, thanks for reminding me of what I'd forgotten lol.