Names are not knowledge. However, some scientists enjoy the illusion that they know something about things, giving them names that reflect a special interpretation.
It is surprising that I receive remuneration as an astronomer, taking into account our current level of ignorance about space. Astronomers do not know the nature of 85% of the case in the universe and relate to this called “Dark Material”. They do not know the nature of energy that drives accelerated cosmic expansion, and call it the name “Dark Energy”.
If gravity has been modified in space scales, these anomalies can be signatures of gravity behavior than the form of matter or energy. Until we establish the nature of these anomalies, the names we call them introduce prejudices and prejudices to conversation.
Similarly, astronomers do not know the origin of the objects of almost earth (neo), which show deprivation acceleration, but there is no evident comet tail. For several months ago, experts have called them “Dark comets”.
From the perspective of more competent scientists, calling these “dark” unknowns can be a trademark of the shadowy age of science.
If foreign scientists came up with the nature of shadowy matter, shadowy energy and shadowy comets, they could utilize this knowledge for better propulsion schemes. Invisible fuel consisting of shadowy matter, without the fuel of the engine based on repulsive gravity of shadowy energy or a rocket, which releases concealed gas through exhaust gas in the spirit of shadowy comets, can lead to neos, which maneuver in an anomal way.
When astronomers see anomal neo, they tend to classify them as this type of rocks “ Oumuamua. Some NEO are currently classified as empty garbage bags (ETBOS), just like the object A10bamz -who shows a strange zigzag movement around the earth. When Seti astronomers claim that in our sky there is no reliable evidence of unidentified anomal phenomena (UAP), ignore objects such as `Oumuamua or A10bamz. If the A10bamz is a broken element of a man created by a sun-pushed by sunlight-as experts suggest, why “Oumuamua cannot be a broken element of the extraterrestrial technology facility pushed by sunlight?
Alternatively, if `Oumuamua is a hydrogen or mountain mountain, why can't A10bamz be the same? Experts should be consistent in enabling the possibility that both Oumuamua and A10bamz have the same nature, as I suggested in my 2018 paper White with Shmel. This interpretation was very questioned by Seti astronomers, despite the fact that they should be involved in the search for extraterrestrial technological signatures in the sky.
Our ignorance about “known unknowns”, namely recognized anomalies in scientific data, can be supplemented by “unknown unknown”, namely additional anomalies that we do not notice in existing data. Given this background, the prospect of humility and curiosity would be much more suitable than skepticism.
The labeling of technological space objects as “shadowy comets with an concealed tail” is as inappropriate as calling koala as “monkeys without a tail”. Naming a new animal called another animal is not a new knowledge. If the emperor has no clothes, we admit it better and do not succeed in adults in the room, claiming that the clothes are invisible.
Why is common sense so controversial in the academic environment? Some academic behaviors can be explained by a tendency to avoid extraordinary claims. This argues for treating `Oumuamua as hydrogen or ice cream and nitrogen and A10bamz as an empty rubbish bag until we have unusual evidence of justification for a more consistent interpretation. Unfortunately, the act of naming these facilities, as if they were known or less consistent, encourages other scientists to ignore them. When consistent interpretations are treated as risky, most scientists decide not to differ from the whipped path.
Without investing time, effort and funds in collecting new data on unknown interstellar facilities, we would never know their nature. That is why it was necessary to collect and analyze the materials from the Fire Ming Mateor, IM1. Despite the repel, my research team has published two extensive articles on these materials (Here AND Here) and currently deals with isotopes analysis.
An academic term was established to ensure the safety of the work of scientists who want to risk examining the unknown. However, most employed scientists dance to the melody of promotion and federal committees, which are dominated by traditional echo chambers. The current academic structure suppresses the engine performance based on curiosity of the scientific discovery. As I argued in my first essay of the opinion, Published in Nature Magazine In 2010, financing agencies should assign a fraction of our resources to support risky research projects.
I optimistic that the future of science can be better than its past. To gain respect as an intelligent species, we must come up with things instead of naming them the names of friends. As a physicist Richard Feynman noticed: “Do you see this bird? It's a mold with a brown throat, but in Germany her name is Halzenfugel, and in Chinese they call it chung, and even if you know all these names, you still know nothing about the bird. You only know something about people; what they call a bird. “
When we learn about the nature of dark things in the sky, we will end the dark age of study. At this time, Seti astronomers can finally detect a radio signal, stating: “Welcome to the Club of Intelligent Scientific Civilizations!” The silence that caused Fermi's paradox: “Where is everyone?” It will be explained by our inability to properly interpret sufficient evidence for what surrounds us. Lonely people are those who do not recognize that their potential partners are just in front of them.
Image Source: Pixabay.com
