Is This a CIA, Navy Seal Time Traveling Disclosure?

[Mylo.X.]

You wouldn't be taking us for a ride, would you Darby?

I took my kids for a ride in my faster-than-light spacecraft. They kept asking,

"yet there we Are?"

 

[Einstein]

Creating a gravitational red shift by swinging a room around in circle in space will do the job, rather than shooting it out like a bullet. Every object inside this heavy gravitational field room will experience time dilation.

But if you have one of the separated quantum entangled pair of photon in the room for spooky action by distance effect, let's say photon B is in the future from the photon A because of the time dilation. Now you send data through the quantum entangled photon B from the future, "in theory" you should receive the data in photon A via quantum spooky action by distance effect in the past related to photon B, or in the same way, send data from photon A in the past to photon B in the future.

I like the fact that you appear to have posted some questions that may not have answers yet. At least I've been unsuccessful in locating the answers on the net.

I do want to point out that increasing an objects rotational rate about an axis will increase its centrifugal force and centrifugal weight. But that isn't gravity. And it does raise an interesting question. Does a rotating object experience time dilation? The centrifugal force is the only known force that can actually nullify gravitational weight. It does that by creating an opposing weight vector opposite in direction to the gravitational weight vector. One could say that this is anti gravity. And since the behavior is opposite to gravity, it could indicate an opposite to time dilation as well. Perhaps time contraction takes place instead. What is interesting is that I don't seem to be able to locate any available facts to support either time dilation or contraction with the centrifugal force. Not that it doesn't exist. Just not readily available. I can definitely see some centrifuge experiments with initially synchronized clocks coming up in my future.

As for the pair of entangled photons, I do believe it isn't possible just yet to transfer information between the two. Although this could be hypothetically used to indicate ones state of time dilation. If the entangled photons are created in normal time. Then transfer one to a time dilation environment. The one in the time dilation environment would appear blue shifted. The amount of blue shifting would indicate the amount of time dilation present.

Also I wanted to point out something about time dilation. An object experiencing time dilation isn't in the future or past. It still exists in the here and now.

 

[servantx]

Also I wanted to point out something about time dilation. An object experiencing time dilation isn't in the future or past. It still exists in the here and now.

In the Twins paradox, is both twins still exists in there and now? Or one twin at now, another twin in the future?

 

[Einstein]

In the Twins paradox, is both twins still exists in there and now? Or one twin at now, another twin in the future?

Just remember the twins paradox is hypothetical. And may always remain so due to the tremendous energy requirements needed to verify. But the way I understand it is both twins exist in the here and now. But the one twin experiencing time dilation is just aging much more slowly. Thus when the time dilated twin returns, it appears as if he traveled forward in time. But cryogenic sleep would accomplish the same thing. If they ever develop the technology to revive the cryo-sleeper.

 

[Mylo.X.]

And here’s a example of a poster who has thought a problem through and come up with a good result.

Special Relativity only concerns inertial frames – motions of uniform translation, i.e. moving in a “straight line” with no accelerating forces. In that scenario all motions being considered are truly relative. No observer can unambigously state which body under observation is “really” moving and which is at rest.


What will they observe? Can, in this scenario, they fall back on Special Relativity and conclude that all motions are relative?

"Special Relativity only concerns inertial frames – motions of uniform translation, i.e. moving in a “straight line” with no accelerating forces. In that scenario all motions being considered are truly relative. No observer can unambigously state which body under observation is “really” moving and which is at rest."

It seems that modern science/pyhsics is expressing centuries old Buddhist thought in regard to how we perceive reality and how reality actually exists.

Two prevalent concepts in Buddhism, are conventional/relative truth and Ultimate Truth (Sutras, pratitya-samutpada, Dhamma etc), which can be likened to classical physics and modern physics. The complex notion of Dhamma (Pali) points the individual in the direction of an indefinable and ineffable manifestation of a reality (the Ultimate Truth) that lies beyond the borders of the physical world; a physical world accessed and interpreted by the senses everyday. Dhamma seeks to reveal the true nature of reality that lies behind the veil of the world we see around us; likewise, modern physics is doing the same thing (I must add that I have very limited knowledge of physics/science).

Modern physics, provides a more indepth evaluation of phenomena (under more extreme conditions) and from what I understand, classical physics deals with normal, everyday occurences (such as determining the speed of a plane or by utilizing Newton's law of motion etc). In the same way, Buddhist conventional/relative truth (Sammuti Sathya T.S.) deals primarily with everyday life, and what we perceive to be true with our senses and cognition etc. An example can be found in this scenario. I see what appears to be a picture of the rising sun on my computer monitor screen. That is relatively true (conventional truth), however, there is in fact no picture, only a collection of pixels (Ultimate Truth). Addtionally, conventional truth promotes the idea/illusion that we exist seperately from everything in the universe, while Ultimate Truth recognises the inter-connectedness of all. From what I can gather, modern science is "demonstrating that everything and everyone is connected as part of a continuous energy field" (Quantum entanglement?).

I can see the correlation of the Buddhist truths in regard to special relativity, i.e. the illusion of perception (conventional/ truth) in regard to motion and 2 observers in different reference points observing the same event.

Lastly, everything around us is made of matter containing particles and atoms. Objects, such as a pencil, appear to be solid (conventional/relative truth) but the Ultimate Truth is that the pencil is made up of atoms which themselves contain over 99.9% of empty space. The hand which holds the pencil is also made up of over 99.9% empty space, the book which the pencil writes in is made up mostly of empty space...etc, this particular aspect of modern science (make up of atoms) corrolates nicely with the Buddhist notion of Sunyata.

I find it fascinating, how Buddhism and modern physics/science are closely related.

 

[Darby]

Just remember the twins paradox is hypothetical. And may always remain so due to the tremendous energy requirements needed to verify. But the way I understand it is both twins exist in the here and now. But the one twin experiencing time dilation is just aging much more slowly. Thus when the time dilated twin returns, it appears as if he traveled forward in time. But cryogenic sleep would accomplish the same thing. If they ever develop the technology to revive the cryo-sleeper.

The twins paradox is not hypothetical. Every flight to the moon and every long range space probe vehicle involves a slight but measurable time dilation. It has been measured. It is a fact.

More than that, the twins paradox really isn't a paradox. It is only seen as paradoxical when given in terms of Special Relativity. SR is called "special" because it only states half of the problem. In SR things are moving at a consistent never changing velocity. How they got to that velocity isn't addressed because it isn't necessary in order to state and explain the principle of relativity. SR purposely ignores acceleration in order to build the foundation that leads to General Relativity, the post-Newtonian classical theory of gravity, accelerations in general and the principle of equivalence of gravity and acceleration.

If in the twins paradox you leave SR and look at it from GR then the seeming paradox is eliminated completely. The sibling that felt accelerating forces (speed up, turn around, slow down - all accelerations) is the person who will end up being the younger of the two. The space probe that was launched from Earth and accelerated to >>11.2 km/s is the vehicle whose clock will unsynch with the Earth base station by running slower.

 

[Mylo.X.]

I've found this forum/group very fascinating, and has reignited my interest in exploring the spiritual system of my parents and also to acquire knowledge concerning differing aspects of science/physics. In keeping with the spirit of this thread, I'm going to go off topic again....lol

One central facet of Buddhism is the principle of dependent arising (paticcasamuppada); nothing arises in the universe that is not dependent upon something else (cause & effect), nothing in life exists as a single, independent entity. This I believe is true in science/quantum physics (that there is no single entity, independent of anything). If I'm not mistaken, no particle is independent, in and of itself, and particles are in a state of change (another Buddhist concept).

I am mindful that in 100 years time, when we are all long gone, another branch of physics/science maybe utilised to further explain the reality of this world, which I'm sure would be in agreement with centuries old principles of Buddhism. Anyway, I digress slightly, I would like to ask any Science/physics enthusiast a question concerning quantum physics.

In quantum physics, is it correct to assert that an electron's precise location is not known prior to it being observed and it's location can only be probabilistically known due to Schrodingers equation? I understand that by the scientist/observer interacting with the particle, its future location/position cannot be determined, but I read somewhere online that before an electron is observed, it does not have any position/location at all; it exists nowhere yet potentially everywhere. Is this the case, or can its location be known probabilistically?

 

[PaulLev]

Note: I have an open mind about time-travel, but at this moment in time, still only believe that sometime in the future, a one way ticket forward maybe be possible, unless proved otherwise.

Just pointing out with my compliments that this is pretty clever position to have, since it is unfalsifiable. In contrast to position which allowed time travel to the past, which invokes the question of how come we then haven't seen much evidence of it.

 

[Darby]

Is this the case, or can its location be known probabilistically?

Yes. That is precisely what quantum mechanics is all about; state functions (probabilities). You can only state the probability of finding the electron somewhere within it's orbital at some given time hack.

The real problem is that you can't directly see an electron. Quantum uncertainty notwithstanding, they are just far to small to use ordinary light to "take a photo" of them. The wavelength of normal light is too long. Ordinary light has a wavelength of ~4*10^-7 m. Electron classical "size" is on the order of <10^-13 m, six orders of magnitude smaller (1 million times smaller). They can hide between the peaks and never be detected. If you reduce the wavelength of the photon you also increase its energy (momentum). If you get the light down to the smallest known wavelengths (x-ray, gamma ray, cosmic ray - 10^-11 to 10^-14 m) its still too long to "take a photo". They're almost the same size. You are, in effect, bouncing one billiard ball off another billiard ball (Compton Scattering).

 

[Mylo.X.]

Yes. That is precisely what quantum mechanics is all about; state functions (probabilities). You can only state the probability of finding the electron somewhere within it's orbital at some given time hack.

.

Thanks for your response and info (about light being broken down to its smallest component/wavelength being too long to take a measurement).

So the notion of an electron being nowhere yet potentially everywhere (before observation) is not a correct assertion.

 

[Mylo.X.]

Just pointing out with my compliments that this is pretty clever position to have, since it is unfalsifiable. In contrast to position which allowed time travel to the past, which invokes the question of how come we then haven't seen much evidence of it.

Thanks. Since taking an interest in the subject (after watching the movie 12 monkeys) the only way my mind could make sense of time-travel being one day physically possible, is by travelling forward and remaining in the future. By travelling foward, it eliminates all paradoxes to my reckoning; you will not have to contend with meeting oneself or meeting ones Grandfather, or altering history/timelines etc. Darby has pointed out that it is in fact theoretically possible to travel foward in time.

One question I've always asked myself, is this; do we walk toward "tomorrow" or does "tomorrow" walk towards us?

 

[Darby]

Thanks for your response and info (about light being broken down to its smallest component/wavelength being too long to take a measurement).

So the notion of an electron being nowhere yet potentially everywhere (before observation) is not a correct assertion.

You're welcome.

You're half correct but not really far off. It is somewhere but there is a certain probability, even if infinitesimally small, of it being anywhere in the universe.

If you graph the probability amplitude for the position of a particle it might look like this: .|. - the normal (Gaussian bell) curve is virtually straight up and down with an infinitely long left and right tail. The "|" includes several standard deviations from the norm usually covering >99% of the probability. You are very likely to find the particle in the area of where you expect it to be, +/- some constant (error bars). But those tails are still infinitely long and represent real probabilities.

The situation changes greatly if you attempt to simultaneously determine both the position and momentum of the particle. The more you discover about one the less you will know about the other. (Uncertainty Principle)

 

[Mylo.X.]

The situation changes greatly if you attempt to simultaneously determine both the position and momentum of the particle. The more you discover about one the less you will know about the other. (Uncertainty Principle)

So its impossible to determine both the position and momentum of a particle at the same time; very interesting. The key concept to keep in mind is "probabilities".

I don't know much about this "God" particle, but the idea/theory that there is a fundamental particle in the universe that has yet to be discovered/observed kinda reminds me of the ontological argument for God; that which cannot exist cannot be imagined.

 

[Designer2]

Mylo. X.

I find it fascinating, how Buddhism and modern physics/science are closely related.

The course in Miracles super seed everything that Buddhism say since it is a newer revelation. The book states the world is a dream made up of nothing. It is a hard book to understand. If you want the end game go for it. It came out in 1975 it is really thick with thin paper and small print. I was wrong on diss it since it is a holy book like the Bible. There is an easier comic book version on the Internet that will eventually read called.
1. The Universe Is a Dream: The Secrets of Existence Revealed
2. It's All Mind: The Simplified Philosophy of A Course in Miracles

The whole book as fare as I read deals with what you want Nothing and the Illusions. Buddhism believe in the repeating incarnation the rotating wheel. If you want to get out of the cycle which I think you do read the course in Miracles.
Christianity is about breaking the cycle Buddhism means continuation of the cycle. So choose where you want to go.

Sorry to be gone for a while I was changing time lines.

Designer.

 

[Darby]

So its impossible to determine both the position and momentum of a particle at the same time; very interesting. The key concept to keep in mind is "probabilities".

I don't know much about this "God" particle, but the idea/theory that there is a fundamental particle in the universe that has yet to be discovered/observed kinda reminds me of the ontological argument for God; that which cannot exist cannot be imagined.

It is the Higgs Boson, the last undiscovered particle in the Standard Model (though it may have been observed last July 4th at CERN). Physicist Leon Lederman published a pop-sci book in 1993 named "The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?" He's said that he wanted to give the Higgs the nickname the God Damned Particle because it was predicted in the mid 1960's but remained undiscovered for over 30 years (at the time of publication) and because many, many, many millions of dollars had been invested in unsuccessfully trying to detect it. His publishers, for some strange reason. wouldn't let him title the book "The God Damned Particle."

It's just a catchy pop-sci name for the Higgs Boson. There's no particular theological significance to the name any more than the names for quarks (Up, Down, Top, Bottom, Love, Charm and Strange) have anything to do with spatial orientation or emotions. Physicists have pretty much run out of Greek names for particles but they do have a sense of humor.

 

[Mylo.X.]

"The God Damned Particle."

Lol ??? He was really considering calling the elusive particle, "The God Damned Particle"? Lol! Reminds me of a joke I heard once (an unfunny joke at that).

 

[Mylo.X.]

Mylo. X.


The course in Miracles super seed everything that Buddhism say since it is a newer revelation. The book states the world is a dream made up of nothing. It is a hard book to understand. If you want the end game go for it. It came out in 1975 it is really thick with thin paper and small print. I was wrong on diss it since it is a holy book like the Bible. There is an easier comic book version on the Internet that will eventually read called.
1. The Universe Is a Dream: The Secrets of Existence Revealed
2. It's All Mind: The Simplified Philosophy of A Course in Miracles

The whole book as fare as I read deals with what you want Nothing and the Illusions. Buddhism believe in the repeating incarnation the rotating wheel. If you want to get out of the cycle which I think you do read the course in Miracles.
Christianity is about breaking the cycle Buddhism means continuation of the cycle. So choose where you want to go.

Sorry to be gone for a while I was changing time lines.

Designer.

"Buddhism believe in the repeating incarnation the rotating wheel."

Buddhism is much more complex than your analogy yet it is as simple as the analogy of the rotating wheel. Consider Buddhism as the Lotus flower. The form of the flower is simple to behold, but the flowers component makeup consists of a variety of non-flower elements; soil, nutrients, rain, the process of photosynthesis, carbon dioxide etc.

"Christianity is about breaking the cycle"

Early Christianity, in fact, taught the notion of reincarnation as well. These were known as Gnostic christians. In the book of John, Jesus tells Nicodemus that unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of heaven. In the book of Matthew, Jesus says that unless a man be perfect, he cannot enter the kingdom. There are other various verses in the bible which allude to the secret teachings of the cabala (which included the cycle of reincarnation, karma etc)

But, when I have time, I will check that book out.

"Sorry to be gone for a while I was changing time lines"

Care to elaborate?

 

[Designer2]

Mylo. X.

Christianity is about leaving the completion of the cycle graduation as it were. The proof of this is the rapture. Christians(older souls) are more superior to Buddhism(younger souls) since one leave the other stays.

Your bones on Earth will be resurrected from the grave and taken up into heaven and you go by by who knows where you go of course you do a new heaven and a new Earth. So I hope everything make sense. Since the meek inherit the Earth the younger souls.

So in other words the younger meek get the old Earth the Christians get the new Earth. Old time line old Earth new timeline new Earth. Christians get the new Earth get it does this now make all sense to you now and why you are here. You have a choice now don't you.

So now you know what I mean by sorry to be gone for a while I was changing time lines.

Christians talk about ever lasting life well we will find out if this new time line survives if it doesn't well all have to retreat to the old time line the old Earth. LOL!

There are a lot of failed worlds time line out there so don't stay on them if you can, find a new one at all costs to obtain ever lasting life. Since there is nothing living in heaven and life only exists on Earth it then must be a new Earth for ever lasting life.

So I hope we are finished with the funny stupid religious take LOL. Enough fun and games OK.

But now to be official there is only one timeline one Earth and time travel is impossible OK.

PS

You know why the power went off at the Super Bowl. Changing timelines! Since there was a winning time line and a losing time line that determined the game, divergence.

Today Canada lost there penny coincidence thing are happening. Everything written above make no sense. O well.

Designer

 

[Mylo.X.]

Mylo. X.

Christianity is about leaving the completion of the cycle graduation as it were. The proof of this is the rapture. Christians(older souls) are more superior to Buddhism(younger souls) since one leave the other stays.

Your bones on Earth will be resurrected from the grave and taken up into heaven and you go by by who knows where you go of course you do a new heaven and a new Earth. So I hope everything make sense. Since the meek inherit the Earth the younger souls.

So in other words the younger meek get the old Earth the Christians get the new Earth. Old time line old Earth new timeline new Earth. Christians get the new Earth get it does this now make all sense to you now and why you are here. You have a choice now don't you.

So now you know what I mean by sorry to be gone for a while I was changing time lines.

Christians talk about ever lasting life well we will find out if this new time line survives if it doesn't well all have to retreat to the old time line the old Earth. LOL!

There are a lot of failed worlds time line out there so don't stay on them if you can, find a new one at all costs to obtain ever lasting life. Since there is nothing living in heaven and life only exists on Earth it then must be a new Earth for ever lasting life.

So I hope we are finished with the funny stupid religious take LOL. Enough fun and games OK.

But now to be official there is only one timeline one Earth and time travel is impossible OK.

PS

You know why the power went off at the Super Bowl. Changing timelines! Since there was a winning time line and a losing time line that determined the game, divergence.

Today Canada lost there penny coincidence thing are happening. Everything written above make no sense. O well.

Designer

I throughly read your post, then re-read it a second time and a third time to make absolutely sure that I didn't understand any of it. I mean no disrespect; but what you have conveyed I have named the ceiling theory, because it's over my head!

 

[Jcpo]

I read it all... I agree with you, spirituality have to do with this in my opinion.
And as you're talking about death and after-life, I'd like to remember you that people who made a Near Death Experiment they all saw diferent things but the most remarkable narratives said that they heard celestical music and that they saw a kind of paradise and they were feeling a universal knowledge they knew it all but they knew nothing. (as Dr. Raymond Moody saw it )
Some other atheist saw geometrical shapes...
Some agnostic saw all relgions represented during the "light tunnel"...

In conclusion I think that once you're dead, you see what you want to see until you could not imagine any other thing.
Then nobody came back to tell us what happens but some cartesian spirit would fastly be in the infinitesimal vacuum.

So where do I bring you ?

If your spirit can leave your corpse why would you think that by teleporting (through time) your body you will teleport yourself ?

I think that before a Time travel you should know where and when your body go and your spirituality will led your spirit to this place & time.

But it is only my opinion.

And btw I think travelling to the past is possible but only if we proceded at some pre-establishement in the past we should place the "receptacle corpus" at the right place & time and then remember it until you teleport back to it. So when you create this receptacle you should appear into it ! But only if you succeeded preserving this corpus and remembering the place.