FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Will CERN tear apart fabric of universe to find Higgs Bosun?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The Bigger Picture
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15393
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 11:22 pm    Post subject: Will CERN tear apart fabric of universe to find Higgs Bosun? Reply with quote

The world's first time machine? Tunnel to the past could open door to future within three months, say Russians
6th February 2008

Time travel could be a reality within just three months, Russian mathematicians have claimed.

They believe an experiment nuclear scientists plan to carry out in underground tunnels in Geneva in May could create a rift in the fabric of the universe.

The European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) hopes its "atom-smashing" tests - which aim to recreate the conditions in the first billionth of a second after the "Big Bang'" created everything - will shed invaluable light on the origins of the universe..............(........................)

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/


Last edited by TonyGosling on Sun May 17, 2015 11:12 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
paul wright
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 2651
Location: Sunny Bradford, Northern Lights

PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh Torchwood made real.Primeval on tap.
Thanks scientists for making our best Tv programmes a reality

_________________
http://www.exopolitics-leeds.co.uk/introduction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
sam
Wrecker
Wrecker


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:27 pm    Post subject: Re: CERN about to tear apart fabric of the universe? Reply with quote

TonyGosling wrote:

---
They believe an experiment nuclear scientists plan to carry out in underground tunnels in Geneva in May could create a rift in the fabric of the universe.
---


You don't actually state your take on this, but I'll bet anybody here £1000 that we're all still here in June - universal fabric totally unrifted - and jogging along as usual.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You don't actually state your take on this


why would what other people think matter? or how would that have an effect on the story?

the russian mathematicians gave their opinon, and the daily mail reported it.

its that simple.

if you want to dispute it, i suggest getting on to the daily mail or the russian mathematicians.

Quote:
but I'll bet anybody here £1000 that we're all still here in June - universal fabric totally unrifted - and jogging along as usual.


well the mainstream media are not always known to be accurate or report the truth, so i'll decline that bet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mr nice
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 103
Location: In a camper

PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm how much can we trust scientists who are going to go ahead with an experiment that they themselves state "may cause a rift in the fabric of the universe" Shocked
Still ive always felt that psychotic scientists would eventually kill us all while we are distracted watching the fundamentalist religious nutters thinking they are the real threat........

_________________
Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut, that held its ground.
David Icke
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sam
Wrecker
Wrecker


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Time Travel is an impossibility.

You could travel backwards and kill everybody who might be even researching the making of a time machine.

You could even travel backwards and kill your own Grandfather at a time before you had been born, rendering your own existence impossible and therefore the murder of your Grandfather.

You could travel backwards and meet yourself, at a time and place when you didn't meet yourself.

Sorry folks, this is science-fiction. Great fun, but no more realistic than Superman or Star Wars.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chek
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sam wrote:
Time Travel is an impossibility.

You could travel backwards and kill everybody who might be even researching the making of a time machine.

You could even travel backwards and kill your own Grandfather at a time before you had been born, rendering your own existence impossible and therefore the murder of your Grandfather.

You could travel backwards and meet yourself, at a time and place when you didn't meet yourself.

Sorry folks, this is science-fiction. Great fun, but no more realistic than Superman or Star Wars.


Sorry Sam, but from what you postulate it's clear you're still living in the clockwork linear Newtonian universe.

In the chaotic superstring model universe, not only have you travelled back in time and killed your grandfather, but so has everybody else in existence - and their own as well.
Welcome to the multi-dimensioniverse where all possibilities that can occur, do occur.
Apparently it's to delay God getting bored. Eternity is, after all, a long time. Indeed, almost as long as getting your Broadband service reconnected.

What has always struck me as truly astonishing is that before the first test of the Manhattan Project, Oppenheimer considered (after the visit of a delegation from his team, possibly led by Fermi) the possibilty that once initiated, the fission reaction might not stop until the Earth (or even the universe) was unravelled. Even the madman Teller was concerned that a fusion reaction that would burn off the Earth's atmosphere was technically possible.

Luckily, common sense prevailed and General Groves took the biggest gamble any human being has ever taken.

Was he the smartest man on the planet?
Or the stupidest.

You decide.

_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.

It's them or us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sam wrote:
Time Travel is an impossibility.

You could travel backwards and kill everybody who might be even researching the making of a time machine.

You could even travel backwards and kill your own Grandfather at a time before you had been born, rendering your own existence impossible and therefore the murder of your Grandfather.

You could travel backwards and meet yourself, at a time and place when you didn't meet yourself.

Sorry folks, this is science-fiction. Great fun, but no more realistic than Superman or Star Wars.


eh? why would you go back and kill your grandad if you could travel back in time, that would'nt make sense.

and your saying the dailymail and the russian mathematicians are promoting silly theories?

do you even understand this is a mainstream media report? you seem to be trying to pin the story on people here, as though they told the story or made it up.

Quote:
Sorry folks


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_artic le_id=512733&in_page_id=1770

my personnal opinon is it is impossible to say what is impossible.

so many times have people claimed things to be impossible which later became reality, so many times have people laid down the laws of the universe only for others to later discover something which brakes those laws.

the only thing that makes things impossible is believing they are impossible, basically because you would never try, or give up trying to find ways around the problems, or because you have not discovered the needed substances/materials/ technologies yet that would suddenly make it possible.

imo anything is possible, especially with the aid of technology, the only limitation is the mind, which is caused by the laid down laws in the first place.

if everyone gave up when it was stated it was impossible to fly, we would'nt be able to fly today, obviously somebody ignored that and worked around the problem. the same will be true of anti gravity, yet it was said you car'nt brake the laws of gravity etc etc.

its impossible to break the speed of light blah blah, i doubt that will be true forever. however it will always be true if nobody trys to solve the problems.

the same will be true of time travel, it will never happen if nobody trys and its thought of as impossible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15393
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Time travel in a forward direction is a relatively simple affair.

I could go off say and come back in a few weeks to find my grandchildren in a retirement home.

I'm suprised it's not been explored by scientists because it is so easy.

Maybe there's no money or plunder in it?

Or maybe they have but kept it secret?

Sounds a bit 'other controversies' that, doesn't it?


Earth ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Moon

see also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
sam
Wrecker
Wrecker


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky 54 wrote:

eh? why would you go back and kill your grandad if you could travel back in time, that would'nt make sense.


By killing your Grandad you'd make your own future existence impossible. Therefore you couldn't have killed your Grandad. But you just have.... It's a paradox and - by definition - we can't have those actually occuring in real life. Therefore time travel into the past isn't possible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 8:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It sounds like this fabric they're going to tear is the same fabric the Emperor is wearing. Or isn't wearing if you are so inclined...
_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sam wrote:
marky 54 wrote:

eh? why would you go back and kill your grandad if you could travel back in time, that would'nt make sense.


By killing your Grandad you'd make your own future existence impossible. Therefore you couldn't have killed your Grandad. But you just have.... It's a paradox and - by definition - we can't have those actually occuring in real life. Therefore time travel into the past isn't possible.


sorry your still not making sense. why would i kill my own grandad if i travelled back in time, knowing i would'nt exsist if i did? if i could travel back in time i would'nt kill anyone.

and if someone could or does travel back in time and killed their grandad, how would you expect to know about it? should we assume all those who don't exsist did exactly that? or assume the none exsistence of certain people proves it has not been done? if time travel was possible, how would you know those who exsist in the future were the only ones who use to exsist?

if i did do it, then i would'nt exsist at all and i'd be removed from history, who would beable to prove i use to exsist? inorder to prove time travel to be possible?

i ain't saying time travel has been done, i just question your logic of proof it cannot be done.

because if you killed your grandad you would not exsist in the future, you'd be erased, so you can say without a doubt you have not time travelled, but how can you prove somebody from the future has not time travelled to our past or somebody who dos'nt exsist has not time travelled and killed their grandad? would you beable to kill your grandad if you don't exsist? which would be the case if you did, you would'nt exsist in the first place to beable to time travel to kill your grandad. but if you don't exsist to kill your grandad does that mean you will exsist again to kill him if you time travelled in the future?

i don't think your example is proof of anything, it is far more complex than you like to imagine.

the main thing is, why would you need to kill anybody if you time travelled? and if someone time travelled and effected someone elses exsistence in the past, would we know about it today? or would everything just seem normal to those who live in the future?

afterall the death took place in the past, people would know about the death and carry on living into the future. no different to what happens today. if tupac, JFK, john lennon(who were all somebodys grandad or could of been in the future if they had not died) were not killed, then maybe people would exsist that we have never seen/known and do not exsist. it would be the same if someone time travelled and killed someone, it would be no different. its stupid to assume everyone would go back and kill their own grandads. thats what dos'nt make sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Relentless Limpet Shill


Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Didn't understand a word of your writing Marky, but it was quite an
amusing read, nevertheless!

This one of yours was really funny I thought:
"Would you be able to kill your granddad if you don't exist?" Laughing

Hmmm... let me think!!! Confused

Silliness aside, and a bit more serious.

No, time-travel is of course a total impossibility in so far as the concept of
time, as we know it, never existed and never will exist in "reality".

The only thing that in this relationship exist as a total reality, is the
"sequence of events". And nothing else.

"Time" is utterly and totally relative, and is perceived differently from
people to people.
A highly advanced human being f. ex. who are occupied with a creative
or important scientific project, will experience 'time' as flying away. Four
hours can seem to him or her as if only and hours time or less has
passed by!
Whereas for the bored child, the lazy, the loafer, four hours or a day can
seem like a insufferable long time, etc. etc..

The concept of 'time' should therefore never be used in any calculations
or equations where an absolutely true and correct result is required.

And certainly never be used in any silly talk about time-travel - which
of course cannot happen.

That is not to say that 'sequence of events' cannot be put into
time-periods; but just that time-periods has nothing to do with
time-concepts!

"Time" as we know it, is merely a help to immature mankind, and
basically not much more than that!

Cheers

_________________
What IS can never die
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
This one of yours was really funny I thought:
"Would you be able to kill your granddad if you don't exist?"


yeah, cheers for qouting a small part of the point and i was making.



Quote:
No, time-travel is of course a total impossibility in so far as the concept of
time, as we know it, never existed and never will exist in "reality".


yeah, we must be precise, what would you call it then if technology exsisted that allowed one to travel to an earlier or later sequence of events?

Quote:
And certainly never be used in any silly talk about time-travel - which
of course cannot happen.


yet. it's impossible to predict the distant future. or are you under the illusion all knowledge 2,000 years from now will be the same as the knowledge we have today? the universe is vast, we have explored a tiny little fraction of it, theres still alot left to discover. just because something has'nt been discovered dos'nt mean it won't be. theres a way around everything with the correct knowledge and technology. wether man are smart enough to figure it out is another matter altogether. they are to arrogant and to sure of themselves. the only limit is in your mind and based on what will be primitive information, compared to those who come after us. im pretty sure 2,000 years ago some guy was saying the same as you, but about flying. he was right about the fact you cannot fly, he just did account for the fact they had'nt discovered the materials and technology yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sam
Wrecker
Wrecker


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky 54 wrote:
sam wrote:
marky 54 wrote:

eh? why would you go back and kill your grandad if you could travel back in time, that would'nt make sense.


By killing your Grandad you'd make your own future existence impossible. Therefore you couldn't have killed your Grandad. But you just have.... It's a paradox and - by definition - we can't have those actually occuring in real life. Therefore time travel into the past isn't possible.


sorry your still not making sense. why would i kill my own grandad if i travelled back in time, knowing i would'nt exsist if i did? if i could travel back in time i would'nt kill anyone....


Of course I'm not suggesting that you would or should shoot your Grandad, just that you could. You would then prevent your own existence. This is a paradox. Philosophers and logicians like to discuss these things for the fun of it, but the upshot is always that paradoxes cannot happen in real life.

Another example --- tonight, Sunday 10th Feb 2008, you have some dinner and watch a film with a few beers along the way. You then potter for a bit and head off to bed. A week later your mate shows you his time machine. You go back a week to the same Sunday evening and let yourself into your own house. You introduce yourself to Marky I (who is watching the film and drinking beer). This didn't happen. When you watched that film no Marky II showed up.

Events that have happened are cast in stone. And they're gone. They're history.

Science fiction films are great fun, but that's all they are. They sometimes allow characters to travel in time "until they interfere with history". This is just a mechanism used in science fiction to allow the viewer to 'get over' the various time-travel paradoxes. Simply appearing in the past in a place where you originally didn't is 'interfering with history', as per my example of Marky I watching the film ...

Hope this helps

Sam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is getting too confusing. Perhaps this video helps explain.


Link

_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sam wrote:
marky 54 wrote:
sam wrote:
marky 54 wrote:

eh? why would you go back and kill your grandad if you could travel back in time, that would'nt make sense.


By killing your Grandad you'd make your own future existence impossible. Therefore you couldn't have killed your Grandad. But you just have.... It's a paradox and - by definition - we can't have those actually occuring in real life. Therefore time travel into the past isn't possible.


sorry your still not making sense. why would i kill my own grandad if i travelled back in time, knowing i would'nt exsist if i did? if i could travel back in time i would'nt kill anyone....


Of course I'm not suggesting that you would or should shoot your Grandad, just that you could. You would then prevent your own existence. This is a paradox. Philosophers and logicians like to discuss these things for the fun of it, but the upshot is always that paradoxes cannot happen in real life.

Another example --- tonight, Sunday 10th Feb 2008, you have some dinner and watch a film with a few beers along the way. You then potter for a bit and head off to bed. A week later your mate shows you his time machine. You go back a week to the same Sunday evening and let yourself into your own house. You introduce yourself to Marky I (who is watching the film and drinking beer). This didn't happen. When you watched that film no Marky II showed up.

Events that have happened are cast in stone. And they're gone. They're history.

Science fiction films are great fun, but that's all they are. They sometimes allow characters to travel in time "until they interfere with history". This is just a mechanism used in science fiction to allow the viewer to 'get over' the various time-travel paradoxes. Simply appearing in the past in a place where you originally didn't is 'interfering with history', as per my example of Marky I watching the film ...

Hope this helps

Sam


no it dos'nt help. all it does is show how limiited you are in the thinking department. we will just have to wait and see what is possible in the future.

we could both go on and on, but your sam, the man of knowledge, therefore i feel i should just leave it and let you think within the limits of your own mind.

you say it is impossible, and because i did'nt visit myself last week that proves it.

you say history is cast in stone, yet if somebody has travelled to the past it has already happened.

you also asume if the technology was possible they would give the whole population the capability. which is something i doubt very much.

i have never travelled back to visit me or any of my family members, i know this for certain. but how does that prove nobody has ever travelled? which did'nt involve visiting themselves or their grandads.

my only stance or point, is it is impossible to say it is impossible. and the fact i have not visited myself, or my grandad proves nothing.

if somebody travelled back it has already happened and occured in the then present. for example if somebody travelled from 3001 to today, then it would happen today, and would'nt change history as we know it. it would only ever change the future. which we are unaware of.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Relentless Limpet Shill


Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

no it dos'nt help. all it does is show how limiited you are in the thinking department. we will just have to wait and see what is possible in the future.


Well Marky, you'll then have to wait a terrible long time as of course you
can never reach the future. You can only ever reach the present.
The best that you can ever hope for is that mankind matures to such an
extent, that the past becomes the future and the future becomes the past
- in the present. That is how simple it all really is!

Quote:

we could both go on and on, but your sam, the man of knowledge, therefore i feel i should just leave it and let you think within the limits of your own mind.


What???

Quote:

you say it is impossible, and because i did'nt visit myself last week that proves it.


It's not impossible, if by meeting yourself last week means that all you did
was looking at yourself in the mirror, or visited yourself in a funny dream!

Quote:

my only stance or point, is it is impossible to say it is impossible. and the fact i have not visited myself, or my grandad proves nothing.


I would rather claim that it is impossible for somebody to say that it is
impossible to say it is impossible, as there are many things that is
impossible!
And no. You cannot visit yourself, and that proves everything.
Suspect that you have seen too many episodes of a UK TV series called
"Life On Mars", where the 'hero' sees himself as a boy, but only from the
back! Am I close?

Quote:

if somebody travelled back it has already happened and occured in the then present. for example if somebody travelled from 3001 to today, then it would happen today, and would'nt change history as we know it. it would only ever change the future. which we are unaware of.


If you honestly believe that somebody can exist in an era that has not yet
come into existence, then I honestly believe that you can believe
everything impossible that man can think up, and I must therefore give in
here.

It's not for me to "shatter" your dreams and your imaginations, so by all
means dream on and imagine to your hearts delight, old boy!

Cheers

PS!
Are there any reason in your mind, for why not your year 3001 could also
be year 30001 or year 300001 for that matter, or even further away?
Have you got a limit of years in mind, or are you talking "infinity"
perhaps?

_________________
What IS can never die
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sam
Wrecker
Wrecker


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky 54 wrote:

i have never travelled back to visit me or any of my family members, i know this for certain. but how does that prove nobody has ever travelled? which did'nt involve visiting themselves or their grandads.


Because it would involve creating an event which didn't happen.

Incidentally, my examples about your Grandad and you watching the film are just to illustrate the time-travel paradox.

So - to repeat - no time-traveller from the future visited Marky while he was watching the film. It is, therefore, impossible for a 'future person' to do so, because it didn't happen. So - what is there to stop it happening? The only answer is the very impossibility of time-travel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

im reluctent to say anything is impossible. the universe is infinity, in which anything is possible. is it within the capabilities of man, i'd say no, judging by posts.

who would dare explore it? when others who think they have it all worked out and know better, think everyone should think like them? its only impossible if you think its impossible, because you'd never try.

its intresting forum posters consider themselves more knowing than russian scientists.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_artic le_id=512733&in_page_id=1770

this is intresting, and are NOT my words. please tell me if these people say its possbile who the **** are you to say its not? im not saying it will happen or has happened only that it is impossible to say it won't or has'nt already, however you think because it has'nt happened to you that means it is impossible and cannot be done. something which i am reluctent to say.


anyway have a read..............

IS TIME TRAVEL POSSIBLE?
by Michio Kaku


In H.G. Wells’ novel, THE TIME MACHINE, our protagonist jumped into a special chair with blinking lights, spun a few dials, and found himself catapulted several hundred thousand years into the future, where England has long disappeared and is now inhabited by two groups of strange creatures, the Morlocks and the Eloi.


That may have made great fiction, but physicists have always scoffed at the idea of time travel, considering it to be the realm of cranks, mystics, and charlatans, and with good reason. However, rather remarkable advances in quantum gravity are reviving the theory; time travel has now become fair game for theoretical physicists writing in the pages of PHYSICAL REVIEW magazine.

One stubborn problem with time travel is that it is riddled with several types of paradoxes. For example, there is the paradox of the man with no parents: What happens when you go back in time and kill your parents before you are born? If your parents died before you were born, then how could you have been born to kill them in the first place?

There is also the paradox of the man with no past. For example, let’s say that a young inventor is trying futilely to build a time machine in his garage. Suddenly, an elderly man appears from nowhere and gives the youth the secret of building a time machine. The young man then becomes enormously rich playing the stock market, race tracks, and sporting events because he knows the future. Then, as an old man, he decides to make his final trip back to the past and give the secret of time travel to his youthful self. Where did the idea of the time machine come from?

There is also the paradox of the man who is his own mother. (My apologies to science fiction writer Robert Heinlein.) “Jane” is left at an orphanage as a foundling. When “Jane” is a teenager, she falls in love with a drifter, who abandons her but leaves her pregnant. Then disaster strikes. She almost dies giving birth to a baby girl, who is then mysteriously kidnapped. The doctors find that Jane is bleeding badly, but, oddly enough, has both sex organs. So, to save her life, the doctors convert “Jane” to “Jim.”

“Jim” subsequently becomes a roaring drunk, until he meets a friendly bartender (actually a time traveler in disguise) who wisks “Jim” way back into the past. “Jim” meets a beautiful teenage girl, then accidentally gets her pregnant with a baby girl. Out of guilt, he kidnaps the baby girl and drops her off at the orphanage. Later, “Jim” joins the time travelers corps, leads a distinguished life, and has one last dream: to disguise himself as a bartender to meet a certain drunk named “Jim” in the past. So, who is “Jane’s” mother, father, brother, sister, grandfather, grandmother, and grandchild?



Not surprisingly, time travel has always been considered impossible. After all, Newton believed that time was like an arrow; once fired, it soared in a straight, undeviating line. One second on the earth was one second on Mars. Clocks scattered throughout the universe beat at the same rate.




Einstein gave us a much more radical picture. According to Einstein, time was more like a river, which meandered around stars and galaxies, speeding up and slowing down as it passed around massive bodies. One second on the earth was NOT one second on Mars. Clocks scattered throughout the universe beat to their own drummer.

However, before Einstein died, he was faced with an embarrassing problem. Einstein’s neighbor at Princeton, Kurt Gödel, perhaps the greatest mathematical logician of the past 500 years, found a new solution to Einstein’s own equations which allowed for time travel!

The “river of time” now had whirlpools in which time could wrap itself into a circle. Gödel’s solution was quite ingenious: It postulated a universe filled with time that flowed like a rotating fluid. Anyone walking along the direction of rotation would find oneself back at the starting point, but backwards in time!

In his memoirs, Einstein wrote that he was disturbed that his equations contained solutions that allowed for time travel. But he finally concluded that the universe does not rotate, it expands (as in the Big Bang theory) and hence Gödel’s solution could be thrown out for “physical reasons.” (Apparently, if the Big Bang was rotating, then time travel would be possible throughout the universe!)


Then in 1963, Roy Kerr, a New Zealand mathematician, found a solution of Einstein’s equations for a rotating black hole, which had bizarre properties. The black hole would not collapse to a point (as previously thought) but into a spinning ring (of neutrons). The ring would be circulating so rapidly that centrifugal force would keep the ring from collapsing under gravity.

The ring, in turn, acts like Alice’s Looking Glass. Anyone walking through the ring would not die, but could pass through the ring into an alternate universe. Since then, hundreds of other “wormhole” solutions have been found to Einstein’s equations. These wormholes connect not only two regions of space (hence the name) but also two regions of time as well. In principle, they can be used as time machines.



Recently, attempts to add the quantum theory to gravity (and hence create a “theory of everything”) have given us some insight into the paradox problem.

In the quantum theory, we can have multiple states of any object. For example, an electron can exist simultaneously in different orbits (a fact which is responsible for giving us the laws of chemistry). Similarly, Schrödinger’s famous cat can exist simultaneously in two possible states: dead and alive. So by going back in time and altering the past, we merely create a parallel universe. So we are changing someone ELSE’s past by saving, for example, Abraham Lincoln from being assassinated at the Ford Theater, but our Lincoln is still dead. In this way, the river of time forks into two separate rivers.

But does this mean that we will be able to jump into H.G. Wells’ machine, spin a dial, and soar several hundred thousand years into a future of some England?

No, or at least, not right now. There are a number of difficult hurdles to overcome. First, the main problem is one of energy. In the same way that a car needs gasoline, a time machine needs to have fabulous amounts of energy. One either has to harness the power of a star, or to find something called “exotic” matter (which falls up, rather than down) or find a source of negative energy. (Physicists once thought that negative energy was impossible. But tiny amounts of negative energy have been experimentally verified for something called the Casimir effect, i.e. the energy created by two parallel plates.) All of these are exceedingly difficult to obtain in large quantities, at least for several more centuries!

Then there is the problem of stability. Kerr’s rotating black hole, for example, may be unstable if one falls through it. Similarly, quantum effects may build up and destroy the wormhole before you enter it. Unfortunately, our mathematics is not powerful enough to answer the question of stability because you need a “theory of everything” which combines both quantum forces and gravity. At present, superstring theory is the leading candidate for such a theory. (Actually, it is the ONLY candidate; it really has no rivals at all.) But superstring theory, which happens to be my specialty, is still too difficult to solve completely. The theory is well-defined, but no one on earth is smart enough to solve it.



Interestingly enough, Stephen Hawking once opposed the idea of time travel. He even claimed he had “empirical” evidence against it. If time travel existed, he said, then we would have been visited by tourists from the future. Yet we see no tourists from the future. Ergo: time travel is not possible.

Because of the enormous amount of work done by theoretical physicists within the last five years or so, Hawking has since changed his mind, and now believes that time travel is possible (although not necessarily practical). Furthermore, perhaps we are simply not very interesting to these tourists from the future. Anyone who can harness the power of a star would consider us to be very primitive. Imagine your friends coming across an ant hill. Would they bend down to the ants and give them trinkets, books, medicine, and power? Or would some of your friends have the strange urge to step on a few of them?

In conclusion, don’t turn someone away who knocks at your door one day and claims to be your future great-great-great-granddaughter. She may be right.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/mysteries/html/kaku1-1.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15393
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Going back in time has to be impossible for us mere mortals. Has there been any exploration of forward time travel?


Earth ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Moon

_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
marky 54
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Einstein proved we can travel forward by moving near light speed. Backward requires a wormhole, cosmic string and a lot of luck
By J. RICHARD GOTT III

We can travel through the three dimensions of space pretty much at will — moving forward or back, left or right, up or down — without even thinking about it. When it comes to the fourth dimension, though, we appear to be stuck. Time flows on in one direction only, and we flow with it like corks bobbing helplessly in a river. So the idea of traveling through time, as opposed to with time, is immensely seductive. Who wouldn't want to know what technology will look like in the year 3000, or witness the assassination of Julius Caesar?

Not only does such a thing seem extremely difficult, but it could also be a little risky. What if you prevented Caesar's assassination and changed history? What if you accidentally killed someone who happened to be your own ancestor? Then you wouldn't have been born, and couldn't have killed your ancestor, so you could be born after all to go back and ... well, you get the idea.

We physicists are mindful of all these difficulties, of course. But we can't resist exploring the notion of time travel — not necessarily for practical reasons, but to understand the limits of our theories.

Do the laws of physics permit time travel, even in principle? They may in the subatomic world. A positron (the antiparticle associated with the electron) can be considered to be an electron going backward in time. Thus, if we create an electron-positron pair and the positron later annihilates in a collision with another, different electron, we could view this as a single electron executing a zigzag, N-shaped path through time: forward in time as an electron, then backward in time as a positron, then forward in time again as an electron.

The probability of a macroscopic object — like a human — doing this trick is infinitesimal. But thanks to Albert Einstein we know that time travel of a different sort does happen in the macroscopic world. As he showed back in 1905 with his special theory of relativity, time slows down for objects moving close to the speed of light, at least from the viewpoint of a stationary observer. You want to visit the earth 1,000 years from now? Just travel to a star 500 light-years away and return, going both ways at 99.995% the speed of light. When you return, the earth will be 1,000 years older, but you'll have aged only 10 years. I already know a time traveler. My friend, astronaut Story Musgrave, who helped repair the Hubble Space Telescope, spent 53.4 days in orbit. He is thus more than a millisecond younger than he would have been if he had stayed home. The effect is small, because he traveled very slowly relative to the speed of light, but it's real.

With more money, we could do better in the next century — but only a little. If we sent an astronaut to the planet Mercury and she lived there for 30 years before returning, she would be about 22 seconds younger than if she had stayed on Earth. Clocks on Mercury tick more slowly than those on Earth because Mercury circles the sun at a faster speed (and also because Mercury is deeper in the sun's gravitational field; gravity affects clocks much as velocity does). Astronauts traveling away from Earth to a distance of 0.1 light years and returning at 1% the speed of light would arrive back 8.8 hours younger than if they hadn't gone.

The downside of traveling into the future this way is that you might be stuck there. Is there any way of going backward in time? Once again, Einstein may have provided the answer. His 1915 theory of general relativity showed that space and time are curved, and that the curvature can be large in the neighborhood of very massive objects. If an object is dense enough, the curvature can become nearly infinite, perhaps opening a tunnel that connects distant regions of space-time as though they were next door. Physicists call this tunnel a wormhole, in an analogy to the shortcut a worm eats from one side of a curved apple to the other.

In 1988, Kip Thorne, a physicist at Caltech, and several colleagues suggested that you could use such a wormhole to travel into the past. Here's how you do it: move one mouth of the wormhole through space at nearly the speed of light while leaving the other one fixed. Then jump in through the moving end. Like a moving astronaut, this end ages less, so it connects back to an earlier time on the fixed end. When you pop out through the fixed end an instant later, you'll find that you've emerged in your own past.

MORE>>




http://www.time.com/time/reports/v21/science/time.html

i only ever hear, difficulties, and problems. i never hear impossible. it seems scientist think it is possible. forward travel seems the most likely or the easiest of the two to achieve.

however some would have you believe the likes of hawking and einstein and other well known scientist etc, are silly for even thinking it is possible.

i don't think it will be something that happened in our lifetime if it is cracked, maybe not for centurys.

How to Build a Time Machine
It wouldn't be easy, but it might be possible

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0004226A-F77D-1D4A-90FB809E C5880000
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1846
Location: Currently Andover

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sam wrote:
Time Travel is an impossibility.

You could travel backwards and kill everybody who might be even researching the making of a time machine.

You could even travel backwards and kill your own Grandfather at a time before you had been born, rendering your own existence impossible and therefore the murder of your Grandfather.

You could travel backwards and meet yourself, at a time and place when you didn't meet yourself.

Sorry folks, this is science-fiction. Great fun, but no more realistic than Superman or Star Wars.


"The Terminator" illustrated the paradox of time travel. If Arnie hadn't gone back in time, then neither would "whats-is-name" so John would not have been born.

That whole film was a waste of time!

Anyway, if time travel is possible why has no one from the future come back to visit (even with peaceful intentions)?

_________________
Currently working on a new website
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Relentless Limpet Shill


Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

marky 54 wrote:
Einstein proved we can travel forward by moving near light speed. Backward requires a wormhole, cosmic string and a lot of luck
By J. RICHARD GOTT III


Somebody should tell Einstein, Gott III and Davies that "time" does not
exist as REALITY - then we could all be spared this endless silly and
immature talk about time-travel.

It is really amazing that these people cannot yet understand that the
bisection of a period into units (as f. ex. a year is bisected into units of
months, weeks, days, hours, minutes and seconds), has nothing to do
with "time", but simply remains as unit parts no matter what!
Arbitrary periods of units cannot slow down, obviously.

Quote:

The probability of a macroscopic object — like a human — doing this trick is infinitesimal. But thanks to Albert Einstein we know that time travel of a different sort does happen in the macroscopic world. As he showed back in 1905 with his special theory of relativity, time slows down for objects moving close to the speed of light, at least from the viewpoint of a stationary observer. You want to visit the earth 1,000 years from now? Just travel to a star 500 light-years away and return, going both ways at 99.995% the speed of light. When you return, the earth will be 1,000 years older, but you'll have aged only 10 years. I already know a time traveler. My friend, astronaut Story Musgrave, who helped repair the Hubble Space Telescope, spent 53.4 days in orbit. He is thus more than a millisecond younger than he would have been if he had stayed home. The effect is small, because he traveled very slowly relative to the speed of light, but it's real.


Again, really really silly and immature talk.
Speed or velocity has nothing to do with anything.
No matter how fast you travel (and this applies even if you travel at the
highest speed possible of zero 'time' between two points), your existence
is dependent exclusively upon rhythm (pulse, vibration) and cycle -
nothing else.

This means that a person who embarks on a travel, no matter with what
speed or at what destination, will discover that the rhythm of his
heartbeat and the rhythm of his breathing in and out of air, or his intake
of food, exactly will correspond to the heartbeat and the breathing and
the intake of food with every person back on the planet Earth.
The "time" that has transpired both for the traveller and for the person
remaining on earth will always be the same. No more and no less.

Quote:

The downside of traveling into the future this way is that you might be stuck there. Is there any way of going backward in time? Once again, Einstein may have provided the answer. His 1915 theory of general relativity showed that space and time are curved, and that the curvature can be large in the neighborhood of very massive objects. If an object is dense enough, the curvature can become nearly infinite, perhaps opening a tunnel that connects distant regions of space-time as though they were next door. Physicists call this tunnel a wormhole, in an analogy to the shortcut a worm eats from one side of a curved apple to the other.


There is no such thing as 'curved time' or 'space time' or 'space/time
continuum', as 'time' do not exist in REALITY!

I shall gladly keep repeating this until it is fully understood, or sink in to
all the stubborn and recalcitrant 'so-called' physicists!

Quote:

In 1988, Kip Thorne, a physicist at Caltech, and several colleagues suggested that you could use such a wormhole to travel into the past. Here's how you do it: move one mouth of the wormhole through space at nearly the speed of light while leaving the other one fixed. Then jump in through the moving end. Like a moving astronaut, this end ages less, so it connects back to an earlier time on the fixed end. When you pop out through the fixed end an instant later, you'll find that you've emerged in your own past.


'Expanding universe', 'black holes', 'big bangs', are results of sexually
charged very silly imaginations from certain sections of the male scientific
community, and should be treated by all intelligent people who can think
for themselves with the humor and amusements it fully deserves.
Let us by all means also include the damn 'wormholes'... indeed,why not!

The law of gravity does not stand alone. The law of gravity exist
solely because other laws precedes it.

Without the laws of the centrifugal force and the laws of the centripetal
force balancing with zero, and without the laws of the force of adhesions
and the laws of the force of cohesions balancing with zero, as well as
these two dual forces balancing with zero to each others pair, gravity
could never exist. It simply could not.

Neither physicists nor scientists in general have ever dealt with these
dual forces of total balance, which are the absolute fundamentals to
human existence.
That means that we will be much better off leaving these people behind
and go our own ways. (As we should also do with politicians and other
warmongers).

Let us go where the simple and the clear and the pure leads us. Lets go
where reason, logic and common sense leads us. Lets go where balance,
truth, love and understanding leads us - indeed, why not!

Cheers

_________________
What IS can never die
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chek
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tamborine man wrote:
Somebody should tell Einstein, Gott III and Davies that "time" does not exist as REALITY - then we could all be spared this endless silly and immature talk about time-travel.


Hmmm, well 'reality' is a matter of perception and time is one of those perceptions. Denying its existence is the equivalent of denying length, or breadth or height. In the same way that a radio can only receive that portion of the entire electromagnetic spectrum that it's built to tune into, so one of the 'channels' our senses are able to pick up is the passage of time. It may not be the entire spectrum of 'reality', but it's one of the limited aspects we're equipped to perceive. The sun was there, now it's over there. It (appeared to) move through space over 'time'.

Tamborine man wrote:
It is really amazing that these people cannot yet understand that the bisection of a period into units (as f. ex. a year is bisected into units of months, weeks, days, hours, minutes and seconds), has nothing to do with "time", but simply remains as unit parts no matter what! Arbitrary periods of units cannot slow down, obviously.
Again, really really silly and immature talk.
Speed or velocity has nothing to do with anything.


This is incorrect. Relativity tells us (and has been demonstrated) that what seems 'fixed' in one place is not the same as what seems fixed in another.
Hence the miniscule but real differences of measured units of time displayed by synchronised atomic clocks where one is left 'stationary' and the other has travelled at high speed. Observers at both locations notice no difference, yet when the clocks are brought together again relatively (i.e. when they're both stationary) and both readings of elapsed time are compared, there is a measurable difference.

Tamborine man wrote:
No matter how fast you travel (and this applies even if you travel at the highest speed possible of zero 'time' between two points), your existence is dependent exclusively upon rhythm (pulse, vibration) and cycle - nothing else.


As any musician can tell you, rhythm is a matter of dividing up time. Pulses, cycles and frequencies are also entirely time dependent - that's fundamental to their very definition. And those time periods are elastic as relativity shows us.

Tamborine man wrote:
This means that a person who embarks on a travel, no matter with what speed or at what destination, will discover that the rhythm of his heartbeat and the rhythm of his breathing in and out of air, or his intake of food, exactly will correspond to the heartbeat and the breathing and the intake of food with every person back on the planet Earth. The "time" that has transpired both for the traveller and for the person remaining on earth will always be the same. No more and no less.


Not so, and has been proved to be not so, due to observed relativity.

Tamborine man wrote:
There is no such thing as 'curved time' or 'space time' or 'space/time continuum', as 'time' do not exist in REALITY!


Oh dear, you're having to make dogmatic belief-based statements about theoretical terms used by physicists, that may sound strange to the layman, devised to account for their observations. Claiming an UPPER CASE understanding of 'reality' doesn't impress anyone, in reality.

Tamborine man wrote:
I shall gladly keep repeating this until it is fully understood, or sink in to all the stubborn and recalcitrant 'so-called' physicists!


In that case, I'm reasonably certain boredom will be the primary effect before anyone changes their mind, no matter how often you repeat your beliefs. Repetition does not equal 'truth' no matter what advertisers might say.

Tamborine man wrote:
'Expanding universe', 'black holes', 'big bangs', are results of sexually charged very silly imaginations from certain sections of the male scientific community, and should be treated by all intelligent people who can think for themselves with the humor and amusements it fully deserves. Let us by all means also include the damn 'wormholes'... indeed,why not!


I tend to think these interpretations are more related to your sub-Freudian mindset rather than any great scientific understanding of the processes being described by way of explaining current understanding of observations.

Tamborine man wrote:
The law of gravity does not stand alone. The law of gravity exist solely because other laws precedes it.


The Law of Attraction to Really Big Mass?
You'll have to enlighten me as to what these other precedents might be.

Tamborine man wrote:
Without the laws of the centrifugal force and the laws of the centripetal force balancing with zero, and without the laws of the force of adhesions and the laws of the force of cohesions balancing with zero, as well as these two dual forces balancing with zero to each others pair, gravity could never exist. It simply could not.
Neither physicists nor scientists in general have ever dealt with these
dual forces of total balance, which are the absolute fundamentals to
human existence.


Ummmm.... I think your making these 'laws' up now (adhesion? cohesion?? wtf??), as Newton already covered your described inertial forces fairly adequately for most purposes.

Tamborine man wrote:
That means that we will be much better off leaving these people behind and go our own ways. (As we should also do with politicians and other warmongers).
Let us go where the simple and the clear and the pure leads us. Lets go
where reason, logic and common sense leads us. Lets go where balance,
truth, love and understanding leads us - indeed, why not!
Cheers


Well quite.
But perhaps just not where the idea of common sense, logic (huh?) and understanding based on rhetorical, meaningless, verbiage will likely take us. At a guess, I'd reckon your waffle goes down well with dropped out liberal arts types who last used a calculator at age 16.

At a further guess I'd also wager you're a no planer who's convinced because the planes "broke the laws of physics"?

_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.

It's them or us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Relentless Limpet Shill


Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia

PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

Hmmm, well 'reality' is a matter of perception and time is one of those perceptions. Denying its existence is the equivalent of denying length, or breadth or height.


Nobody is denying its existence.
Here is what I wrote in an earlier post:

"No, time-travel is of course a total impossibility in so far as the concept
of time, as we know it, never existed and never will exist in "reality".

The only thing that in this relationship exist as a total reality, is the
"sequence of events". And nothing else.

"Time" is utterly and totally relative, and is perceived differently from
people to people.
A highly advanced human being f. ex. who are occupied with a creative
or important scientific project, will experience 'time' as flying away. Four
hours can seem to him or her as if only and hours time or less has
passed by!
Whereas for the bored child, the lazy, the loafer, four hours or a day can
seem like a insufferable long time, etc. etc..

The concept of 'time' should therefore never be used in any calculations
or equations where an absolutely true and correct result is required."

It should be obvious that these opposing perceptions of the flow of time
can be extended indefinitely in both directions, such that "time"
virtually looses its importance and the concept of it - that we have come
to be so used to.

Tamborine man wrote:
It is really amazing that these people cannot yet understand that the bisection of a period into units (as f. ex. a year is bisected into units of months, weeks, days, hours, minutes and seconds), has nothing to do with "time", but simply remains as unit parts no matter what! Arbitrary periods of units cannot slow down, obviously.


Quote:

This is incorrect.


No, this of course is not incorrect.
Arbitrary periods of units is just that, and has nothing to do with the
"perception" of time, just as one rotation by the Earth in its orbit around
the sun neither has anything to do with 'time'. Again, a years duration is
perceived very differently from person to person.

Tamborine man wrote:
No matter how fast you travel (and this applies even if you travel at the highest speed possible of zero 'time' between two points), your existence is dependent exclusively upon rhythm (pulse, vibration) and cycle - nothing else.


Quote:

As any musician can tell you, rhythm is a matter of dividing up time. Pulses, cycles and frequencies are also entirely time dependent - that's fundamental to their very definition. And those time periods are elastic as relativity shows us.


Sheer nonsense.
Neither music nor rhythms nor beats nor vibrations, oscillations or
wavelengths etc. have anything to do with 'time'. Any musician can tell
you this. Its the "speed" of vibrations or pulses that is the determinant
factor.
One can of course separate vibrations into 'time-intervals', or measure
the length of a symphony in minutes and seconds, but that is not what
this talk is about.

Tamborine man wrote:
This means that a person who embarks on a travel, no matter with what speed or at what destination, will discover that the rhythm of his heartbeat and the rhythm of his breathing in and out of air, or his intake of food, exactly will correspond to the heartbeat and the breathing and the intake of food with every person back on the planet Earth. The "time" that has transpired both for the traveller and for the person remaining on earth will always be the same. No more and no less.


Quote:

Not so, and has been proved to be not so, due to observed relativity.


No such thing has ever been proved and, relativity or no relativity, never
will it be.

Tamborine man wrote:
There is no such thing as 'curved time' or 'space time' or 'space/time continuum', as 'time' do not exist in REALITY!


Quote:

Oh dear, you're having to make dogmatic belief-based statements about theoretical terms used by physicists, that may sound strange to the layman, devised to account for their observations. Claiming an UPPER CASE understanding of 'reality' doesn't impress anyone, in reality.


The upper case REALITY was not to impress anybody, but merely to
emphasize the absolute importance this word plays in understanding
the 'concept of time'.

Tamborine man wrote:
I shall gladly keep repeating this until it is fully understood, or sink in to all the stubborn and recalcitrant 'so-called' physicists!


Quote:

In that case, I'm reasonably certain boredom will be the primary effect before anyone changes their mind, no matter how often you repeat your beliefs. Repetition does not equal 'truth' no matter what advertisers might say.


True. Bad choice of words. Hereby withdraw them. Know full well only
would have wasted much time, effort and energy for virtually no gain!

Tamborine man wrote:
'Expanding universe', 'black holes', 'big bangs', are results of sexually charged very silly imaginations from certain sections of the male scientific community, and should be treated by all intelligent people who can think for themselves with the humor and amusements it fully deserves. Let us by all means also include the damn 'wormholes'... indeed,why not!


Quote:

I tend to think these interpretations are more related to your sub-Freudian mindset rather than any great scientific understanding of the processes being described by way of explaining current understanding of observations.


No. My interpretation of why these absurd concepts ever found their way
into the minds of supposedly sane people, relates exclusively to the (using
your own words), 'sub-freudian sexual mindset' displayed by the
originators of these banal theories!

Tamborine man wrote:
The law of gravity does not stand alone. The law of gravity exist solely because other laws precedes it.


Tamborine man wrote:
Without the laws of the centrifugal force and the laws of the centripetal force balancing with zero, and without the laws of the force of adhesions and the laws of the force of cohesions balancing with zero, as well as these two dual forces balancing with zero to each others pair, gravity could never exist. It simply could not.
Neither physicists nor scientists in general have ever dealt with these
dual forces of total balance, which are the absolute fundamentals to
human existence.


Quote:

Ummmm.... I think your making these 'laws' up now (adhesion? cohesion?? wtf??), as Newton already covered your described inertial forces fairly adequately for most purposes.


No, Newton has never covered these laws or their mutual relationships,
nor the absolute significance and importance of these forces to the
existence of our solar system and to Earth and her inhabitants in
particular.

Tamborine man wrote:
That means that we will be much better off leaving these people behind and go our own ways. (As we should also do with politicians and other warmongers).
Let us go where the simple and the clear and the pure leads us. Lets go
where reason, logic and common sense leads us. Lets go where balance,
truth, love and understanding leads us - indeed, why not!
Cheers


Quote:

Well quite.
But perhaps just not where the idea of common sense, logic (huh?) and understanding based on rhetorical, meaningless, verbiage will likely take us. At a guess, I'd reckon your waffle goes down well with dropped out liberal arts types who last used a calculator at age 16.


Obviously, my understanding of the significance of logic, reason and
common sense do not really coalesce with your own, and the same can
obviously be said concerning my perception to the concept of time versus
yours, and there's not much that can be done about this fact, really!
Lets just try to live with it as best we can!

Quote:

At a further guess I'd also wager you're a no planer who's convinced because the planes "broke the laws of physics"?


How on earth did you manage to bring NPL into a thread about
time-travel, and what on earth is the point to this??
But by all means, here is a little friendly advise: Don't wager, as you are
rather bad at guessing-games it seems!

Cheers

_________________
What IS can never die
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chek
Mega Poster
Mega Poster


Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tamborine man wrote:
"Time" is utterly and totally relative, and is perceived differently from people to people.
A highly advanced human being f. ex. who are occupied with a creative
or important scientific project, will experience 'time' as flying away. Four
hours can seem to him or her as if only and hours time or less has
passed by! Whereas for the bored child, the lazy, the loafer, four hours or a day can seem like a insufferable long time, etc. etc..
The concept of 'time' should therefore never be used in any calculations
or equations where an absolutely true and correct result is required."

So you don't think that creative people can get bored? How quaint.
In any case what you are describing is subjective experience, which is fine ... as long as you're autistic ,or otherwise not interacting in the world of shared experience.
Tamborine man wrote:
No, this of course is not incorrect.
Arbitrary periods of units is just that, and has nothing to do with the
"perception" of time, just as one rotation by the Earth in its orbit around
the sun neither has anything to do with 'time'. Again, a years duration is
perceived very differently from person to person.

You seem to be confusing the imposition of units of time (which are an arbitrary invented human device) with time itself, which exists without any input whatsoever from the human race (disregarding the observer effect for the moment).
Tamborine man wrote:
Sheer nonsense.
Neither music nor rhythms nor beats nor vibrations, oscillations or
wavelengths etc. have anything to do with 'time'. Any musician can tell
you this. Its the "speed" of vibrations or pulses that is the determinant
factor. One can of course separate vibrations into 'time-intervals', or measure the length of a symphony in minutes and seconds, but that is not what this talk is about.

A note of 440 cycles is entirely dependent on time for its very form. Over one rotation of the Earth round the sun it would be sub aural. Over a period of one second it's the note 'A'. All the things you mention are time dependent in order to exist at all, whether units of time were invented or not. 'Speed' is entirely a function of time.
Tamborine man wrote:
No such thing has ever been proved and, relativity or no relativity, never will it be.

Your inability to accept the idea has nothing to do with the real observations that show the relative effect of speed upon time is a proven fact.
Tamborine man wrote:
No. My interpretation of why these absurd concepts ever found their way into the minds of supposedly sane people, relates exclusively to the (using your own words), 'sub-freudian sexual mindset' displayed by the originators of these banal theories!

Using descriptors such as 'absurd' and 'banal' doesn't really advance your alternate if so far insubstantial theory of cosmology one iota.
Tamborine man wrote:
No, Newton has never covered these laws or their mutual relationships, nor the absolute significance and importance of these forces to the existence of our solar system and to Earth and her inhabitants in particular.

I think you'll find actually he did. There's more to his seminal work Principia than the everyday story of country folk getting hit on the head by apples.
Tamborine man wrote:
Obviously, my understanding of the significance of logic, reason and common sense do not really coalesce with your own, and the same can obviously be said concerning my perception to the concept of time versus yours,

That's an understatement.
Tamborine man wrote:
and there's not much that can be done about this fact, really! Lets just try to live with it as best we can!

Right.
Tamborine man wrote:
How on earth did you manage to bring NPL into a thread about time-travel, and what on earth is the point to this??
But by all means, here is a little friendly advise: Don't wager, as you are
rather bad at guessing-games it seems! Cheers


Something to do with your Humpty Dumpty approach to the flexible definition of words might have had something to do with it.
Still - if that's not the case, maybe there's some hope!

_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.

It's them or us.


Last edited by chek on Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:03 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15393
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks Marky most instructive


marky 54 wrote:
Einstein proved we can travel forward by moving near light speed. Backward requires a wormhole, cosmic string and a lot of luck
By J. RICHARD GOTT III

http://www.time.com/time/reports/v21/science/time.html


_________________
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.l911t.com
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Tamborine man
Relentless Limpet Shill
Relentless Limpet Shill


Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Posts: 74
Location: Qld. Australia

PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 3:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tamborine man wrote:
"Time" is utterly and totally relative, and is perceived differently from people to people.
A highly advanced human being f. ex. who are occupied with a creative
or important scientific project, will experience 'time' as flying away. Four
hours can seem to him or her as if only and hours time or less has
passed by! Whereas for the bored child, the lazy, the loafer, four hours or a day can seem like a insufferable long time, etc. etc..
The concept of 'time' should therefore never be used in any calculations
or equations where an absolutely true and correct result is required."


Quote:

So you don't think that creative people can get bored? How quaint.


Senseless comment?? Or based on willful ignorance??
Either way, I detect ominous vapour oozing from the hands of sender!
So sad and so unintelligent.

Tamborine man wrote:
No, this of course is not incorrect.
Arbitrary periods of units is just that, and has nothing to do with the
"perception" of time, just as one rotation by the Earth in its orbit around
the sun neither has anything to do with 'time'. Again, a years duration is
perceived very differently from person to person.


Quote:

You seem to be confusing the imposition of units of time (which are an arbitrary invented human device) with time itself, which exists without any input whatsoever from the human race (disregarding the observer effect for the moment).


You still don't get it.
Why is it so impossible for you to understand that "time" at all times must
be considered totally relative, and as such can be perceived as going
exceedingly fast, or exceedingly slow as the case may be! That "time"
is not a fixed concept, but rather exist in the realm of the abstract more
than anything else!
What could possibly be so difficult to understand about this?
Children can understand it, but you cannot?? And yet you talk
condescendingly to all and sundry you consider beneath your gloriously
self-appointed superior intellect!! What folly. What transparent deceit.

Tamborine man wrote:
Sheer nonsense.
Neither music nor rhythms nor beats nor vibrations, oscillations or
wavelengths etc. have anything to do with 'time'. Any musician can tell
you this. Its the "speed" of vibrations or pulses that is the determinant
factor. One can of course separate vibrations into 'time-intervals', or measure the length of a symphony in minutes and seconds, but that is not what this talk is about.


Quote:

A note of 440 cycles is entirely dependent on time for its very form. Over one rotation of the Earth round the sun it would be sub aural. Over a period of one second it's the note 'A'. All the things you mention are time dependent in order to exist at all, whether units of time were invented or
not. 'Speed' is entirely a function of time.


A note is a note is a note and not dependent on anything, least of all upon
relative 'time'.
Nothing is time dependent.
Speed has never been and never will be a function of 'time'.
Again you're talking nonsense.

Tamborine man wrote:
No such thing has ever been proved and, relativity or no relativity, never will it be.


Quote:

Your inability to accept the idea has nothing to do with the real observations that show the relative effect of speed upon time is a proven fact.


See above.

Tamborine man wrote:
No. My interpretation of why these absurd concepts ever found their way into the minds of supposedly sane people, relates exclusively to the (using your own words), 'sub-freudian sexual mindset' displayed by the originators of these banal theories!


Quote:

Using descriptors such as 'absurd' and 'banal' doesn't really advance your alternate if so far insubstantial theory of cosmology one iota.


The theories in question are absurd and banal. Cannot come up with any
other way that as adequately would describe the situation, so the words
stand as they're written.

Tamborine man wrote:
No, Newton has never covered these laws or their mutual relationships, nor the absolute significance and importance of these forces to the existence of our solar system and to Earth and her inhabitants in particular.


Quote:

I think you'll find actually he did. There's more to his seminal work Principia than the everyday story of country folk getting hit on the head by apples.


I think you'll find that he actually didn't. Apples or no apples. And that's
enough of that!

Tamborine man wrote:
Obviously, my understanding of the significance of logic, reason and common sense do not really coalesce with your own, and the same can obviously be said concerning my perception to the concept of time versus yours,


Quote:

That's an understatement.


Could very well be, but certainly not to your advantage it seems.
To talk sense, whether it be of the common or the more advanced kind,
is and art-form you obviously are not very attracted to!


Tamborine man wrote:
How on earth did you manage to bring NPL into a thread about time-travel, and what on earth is the point to this??
But by all means, here is a little friendly advise: Don't wager, as you are
rather bad at guessing-games it seems! Cheers


Quote:

Something to do with your Humpty Dumpty approach to the flexible definition of words might have had something to do with it.
Still - if that's not the case, maybe there's some hope!


Somebody told me that my accent is much worse than my writing.
I therefore take comfort in the fact you cannot hear that one, which, if
you could, undoubtedly would have resulted in a couple of more lines of
your amazing vitriol to the above comment of yours!

cheers

_________________
What IS can never die
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sam
Wrecker
Wrecker


Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tamborine man wrote:

A note is a note is a note and not dependent on anything, least of all upon
relative 'time'.
Nothing is time dependent.
Speed has never been and never will be a function of 'time'.


THis is plainly wrong.

Please define a note without referring to the time function.

Please define speed without the time function.

There are no doubt many thousands of precise scientific formulae that depend on the function t .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The Bigger Picture All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group