Hi All

I can see why Mr. Titor enjoys this.

You guys are pretty passionate about your beliefs. Then again, that’s what its all about.

Going over a few of the posts, and I say that they are full of the classical – “I find it hard to believe, therefore I declare it to be impossible” – types of postulates. I can see the levels you are defining, in some cases, – and I can see that they are encompassed in possibilities you are not considering

Ex.

—I find it very difficult to belive that a software tweak (hence ‘software engineers’, -software-) done to a 1975 machine could cause it to do this translation more effectively or more portably than something around even today. I find it almost impossible to believe that a tweak done by a ‘software engineer’ in 1975 could provide for you something that you could find at no other place between now and ‘your time’, and certainly without having to make a stop-over in our time to get back that far. —

Also, Ryan – I think John has provided some explanation regarding how positionings are affected by the mass and gravity of known OBJECTS. I would have to study the posts a little more carefully, though I would say that the variables used in computing projected postionings, rely heavily on detecting these known masses as opposed to trying to figure out where they would end up in space (and time).

One of the first assumptions I would discard is that physics suppositions are “either/or” proposals. My view (with a few years under my belt), is that things work more fluidly than that.

In viewing the following models take into consideration that the degrees I am talking about, are minuscule with respect to their effects on human activity – that’s why the “10%-15%” divergence over some 60 years, sounds OK to me.

If you looked at a weather system of HIGH and LOW pressures, and fronts, you would see isobaric “circles” that delineate common weather areas. Correlate these fields, as local “areas” or “eras” of time. Again the differences regarding how fast time “moves” in these “circles”, would be slight and perhaps unnoticeable. They would be enough, though, to provide “circles of common interaction” and (significantly, I believe), would also provide some sort of common playing field or “fabric” – for all the individuals within that area. Moving into other regions or circles, would be fluid transistions (as opposed to “either/or” transistions). I believe such a move would also precipitate new experiences. You might then have to deal with, what Terrence McKenna termed “DEGREES OF NOVELTY AND HABIT”. Moving into other “topographical areas”, you would also have to “shift gears” … your “sense of timing” would be a bit off, until you either found some groove of activity that you could fall into, or until you could create new ways of “being” and acting, to handle the new circumstances. The effects of novelty could be noticed in little things like misteps and mistakes, or unintended synchronicities that might seem to alter your path. The effects of falling into normal routines would soon cause your new environment to loose its “newness”.

Similarly, a geo-topological map (rings of altitudes) works the same in depicting (minor) GRAVITATIONAL fields. Again, I would think the degrees in gravitational differences, would be unnoticeably present, though present non-the-less.

Within these geographical “circles” of time, and gravitational pulls, people work out certain local and global destinies and intentions. These then cumulate into cultural topologies.

Given this model, the “degrees of separation” can only have extended effects depending on the interactivities of field compontents (you and me, or even other living things). John’s interactions on these boards probably have little effect on what’s going on in a small school room in the Ukraine, or a in hospital grieving area outside of Tokyo, at this very moment. They might have more of an effect on how you handle you’re work day after spending a morning reading posts, though. They might even have an effect on how a co-worker or fellow commuter handles their evening after they’ve been around you.

Discussions regarding such potential realities do seem to be a good way to get people to think – Its about time, after all <g>.