My wife says I’m a glass half empty kinda guy while she prefers to see the glass half full.
To illustrate, someone recently asked me to answer to the question “What would our life be like after we move to a new planet?” to which I replied:
“Life would be alien in the sense that we cannot survive on another planet within reach (AKA our solar system) without never going out of doors and breathing the air. We’d be depressed because we’d never see the light of the sun and breathe the air.”
Although I’m convinced this is the correct view, my wife says I’m just like my father was – a pessimist. I admit to it proudly if not pessimistically.
When we completely destroy our planet’s environment then and only then space conization would become our “main ideology.”
Sadly, however, even space colonization leads to the same question – will we destroy the next planet just like this one?
Light is held back by Einstein, simply put. He theorized that if light was a constant, no matter who observed it, going at any velocity whatsoever, then time and space are variables.
As it happens, Einstein theories have proven correct time and time again.
We can’t prove it. We can always suspect it is something different than what we think is in fact real. This image might help illustrate our dilemma.
We could be just brains in a jar. However, calculations are that it would take more energy than presently exists in the entire universe to maintain such an illusion, so it’s likely that what we see is real and there is no “matrix” hiding from us.
What a weird question. It’s been “investigated” and proven wrong a gazillion ways, but you will not accept any of the ways, so what’s the point of you asking the question?