DaViper

January 28, 2001 12:58 pm
Post Count

Hmmm.

Maybe we ought to get a “Paradoxes Continued…” thread going.

It looks like the message board software is starting to honk up over the length of this one.

The last post I made never showed up tho the board said it WAS posted. The one before that posted twice tho I didn’t do that.

DaViper

January 27, 2001 3:18 pm
Post Count

rgrunt:

By all means please understand that I likewise respect YOUR views. Whether i agree with all of them or not. I was just rambling on about my musings on religion and would not intend to offend anyone.

I like your “conservation” law analogy.

Peace.

Borgus:

Yup. I’d say we’re pretty close here. The “Frame Dragging” experiment being readied by NASA goes directly to this “gravity relativity to time” issues. Particularly as it pertains to a spinning body, in this case the Earth itself.

From what I understand so far on this, the gravitational effect on time would have the opposite (or possibly counteracting) effect of Time Dilation. For instance, the Space Shuttle’s clocks run slower, but the Shuttle’s position of being less influenced by gravity than an Earth bound object SHOULD make the shuttle’s clocks run FASTER! Somehow, the Time Dilation effect is “winning” it’s battle with gravity’s (or the diminished amount of it) counteractive effect.

I don’t fully understand it yet, but then I’m not sure anyone FULLY understands it. Otherwise it could be explaind precisely and predictably. So far, it can’t.

I’m eager to see what develops.

Time02112:

Yes I’m familiar with the sites and the work in that area and certainly do not claim to be an expert in any of this. But…

I’m not sure what your references have to do with “multiverse” theory. Could we be comparing apples and oranges here?

Thanx for the informative tips toward them tho.

DaViper

January 27, 2001 3:08 pm
Post Count

rgrunt:

By all means please understand that I likewise respect YOUR views. Whether i agree with all of them or not. I was just rambling on about my musings on religion and would not intend to offend anyone.

I like your “conservation” law analogy.

Peace.

Borgus:

Yup. I’d say we’re pretty close here. The “Frame Dragging” experiment being readied by NASA goes directly to this “gravity relativity to time” issues. Particularly as it pertains to a spinning body, in this case the Earth itself.

From what I understand so far on this, the gravitational effect on time would have the opposite (or possibly counteracting) effect of Time Dilation. For instance, the Space Shuttle’s clocks run slower, but the Shuttle’s position of being less influenced by gravity than an Earth bound object SHOULD make the shuttle’s clocks run FASTER! Somehow, the Time Dilation effect is “winning” it’s battle with gravity’s (or the diminished amount of it) counteractive effect.

I don’t fully understand it yet, but then I’m not sure anyone FULLY understands it. Otherwise it could be explaind precisely and predictably. So far, it can’t.

I’m eager to see what develops.

Time02112:

Yes I’m familiar with the sites and the work in that area and certainly do not claim to be an expert in any of this. But…

I’m not sure what your references have to do with “multiverse” theory. Could we be comparing apples and oranges here?

Thanx for the informative tips toward them tho.

DaViper

January 25, 2001 1:06 am
Post Count

Hey Moderator.

I DID NOT post that last post twice. I did get a 505 Internal Server error on the first one tho.

I got one last night also, but it did not result in two identical postings.

(Just FYI)

DaViper

January 25, 2001 1:00 am
Post Count

rgrunt:

You had me going in your first post. I thought it was well thought out. Well reasoned, and stimulating. Whether it is correct or not I cannot say. Maybe, maybe not.

But then you lost me again in your subsequent post(s) by bringing what you say you believe “God Says” into it.

Not sure just where “God Says” this. It ain’t in the Bible anyway.

Besides, in contemplating the very existence of God one is left to ask “Who Created God”? Then if the answer is “God always was”, it begs the further question, “If God COULD always have been, why not the Universe itself without the need for a God to ‘create’ it”?

Not that I’m Atheistic, merely Agnostic. If God exists, so be it. If not, so be it. Only one thing is for sure…Whether one BELIEVES in a God or not, has no effect whatsoever on whether there truly is or is NOT one.

Besides, I’ve never been one to let others make descisions for me. I can do that quite well by myself thank you. I won’t dismiss God, but I’m really not sure why I need him.

Borgus:

Yes, I’ve heard views similar to yours before, and no offense intended, but they don’t answer my question. For instance, if we extrapolate just a tad further, I could ask that if infinite universes exist, and I have no free will control over my own fate in any of them, why not just commit suicide. I’ll go on in another universe, since “all things are so”. I could just keep commiting suicide until I finally arrive at a life timeline where I consider EVERYTHING to be SO perfect that I stick around for a while.

But then, this line of reasoning is really pretty silly isn’t it.

Naw, Multiverse is a nice cute theory that, like I said, crops up over time to explain certain paradoxes, but it has never been resolved to be provable by any evidence. Besides, as such, I see it as a cop out for side stepping the issue of Time Travel.

If Time Travel is to be solved, we have to begin to think beyond the old easy trains of thought and try to grasp that which we do not yet even understand the concept of.

We need to re-examine our old concept of what we refer to as “Time” itself.

We’ve exhausted the old theories. They don’t work. There are no Time Machines. And PROBABLY no “parallel” Universes. Other Universes perhaps, but not Parallel Ones we have “counterparts” existing in. Can’t buy it.

New thought is what is called for.

I may not be capable of it, but those who are need to focus ahead into new territory. Not hack away at the old.

Peace.

DaViper

January 25, 2001 1:00 am
Post Count

rgrunt:

You had me going in your first post. I thought it was well thought out. Well reasoned, and stimulating. Whether it is correct or not I cannot say. Maybe, maybe not.

But then you lost me again in your subsequent post(s) by bringing what you say you believe “God Says” into it.

Not sure just where “God Says” this. It ain’t in the Bible anyway.

Besides, in contemplating the very existence of God one is left to ask “Who Created God”? Then if the answer is “God always was”, it begs the further question, “If God COULD always have been, why not the Universe itself without the need for a God to ‘create’ it”?

Not that I’m Atheistic, merely Agnostic. If God exists, so be it. If not, so be it. Only one thing is for sure…Whether one BELIEVES in a God or not, has no effect whatsoever on whether there truly is or is NOT one.

Besides, I’ve never been one to let others make descisions for me. I can do that quite well by myself thank you. I won’t dismiss God, but I’m really not sure why I need him.

Borgus:

Yes, I’ve heard views similar to yours before, and no offense intended, but they don’t answer my question. For instance, if we extrapolate just a tad further, I could ask that if infinite universes exist, and I have no free will control over my own fate in any of them, why not just commit suicide. I’ll go on in another universe, since “all things are so”. I could just keep commiting suicide until I finally arrive at a life timeline where I consider EVERYTHING to be SO perfect that I stick around for a while.

But then, this line of reasoning is really pretty silly isn’t it.

Naw, Multiverse is a nice cute theory that, like I said, crops up over time to explain certain paradoxes, but it has never been resolved to be provable by any evidence. Besides, as such, I see it as a cop out for side stepping the issue of Time Travel.

If Time Travel is to be solved, we have to begin to think beyond the old easy trains of thought and try to grasp that which we do not yet even understand the concept of.

We need to re-examine our old concept of what we refer to as “Time” itself.

We’ve exhausted the old theories. They don’t work. There are no Time Machines. And PROBABLY no “parallel” Universes. Other Universes perhaps, but not Parallel Ones we have “counterparts” existing in. Can’t buy it.

New thought is what is called for.

I may not be capable of it, but those who are need to focus ahead into new territory. Not hack away at the old.

Peace.

DaViper

January 24, 2001 12:03 am
Post Count

There is really only one thing I don’t understand the “Theory” of. (Relative to the topic of this board that is.) Or why it is even a Theory at all.

That is of “Parallel Universes” or “Alternative Timelines”. It remains a Paradox for me.

Someone correct me where I’m wrong here but as I understand it, these Parallel Universes or Alternative Timelines are “created” by events in our own, (timelines) or even in others.

What events? For instance…

I prevent Lee Harvey Oswald from assassinating JFK? OK. This one is easy to follow. But…

What “authority” or controlling force determines just what “events” qualify for the creation of a new timeline or universe?

God? Is this then just another Religious theory?

Or perhaps ALL events create new timelines and universes. Like the collision of two snowflakes during a snowstorm. How about the collision of the outer molecules of the snowflake with the molecules of the atmosphere? Each collision as it falls? Each snowflake? Each storm? Each molecule? WOW!

There must be a lotta Timelines out there and alternative Universes huh. Infinitely so even.

If infinite, then why am I possesed with the gift of individual thought, free will and the choice to make my own descisions since nothing I think matters anyway in view of all the possibilities that are all true anyway. Given these infinite timelines.

Hmmm.

This seems a bit foolish to me but I can’t DIS-prove it. But then in science, dis-proving something, should be easy. Except a negative which is a folly in logic.

It would seem to me that “infinite” universes and timelines is totally contrary to the principle of Occam’s razor. But then Occam’s razor is not an axiom, merely a postulate. Although it has worked really well so far.

Actually, in science, “Multiverse” theory is something that has NEVER been proven. For lack of evidence. It crops up from time to time as a way to explain certain SEEMING paradoxes like the EPR double slit experiment with polarized light. But then, just because it can be used to explain something doesn’t mean it is so.

Tiny invisible rubber bands could explain gravity if it weren’t for the fact that it simply isn’t true.

Multiverse Theory is not automatically true because it “explains” some things. Lot’s of things explain “some” things. Most of them are NOT true.

So help me here. Where did multiverse come from as a theory? Where is the observable evidence of it’s existence and the experiments to back it up that can be duplicated with certainty and repitition?

Like the speed of light for example. Or Time Dilation which is so easy to demonstrate now it’s considered commonplace. (It occurs on every single filght of the Space Shuttle.) At least science is TRYING to prove “Frame Dragging” which IS an experiment under way.

But “Multiverse”? Who can demonstrate this with integrity?

Thank you.

DaViper

January 24, 2001 12:02 am
Post Count

There is really only one thing I don’t understand the “Theory” of. (Relative to the topic of this board that is.) Or why it is even a Theory at all.

That is of “Parallel Universes” or “Alternative Timelines”. It remains a Paradox for me.

Someone correct me where I’m wrong here but as I understand it, these Parallel Universes or Alternative Timelines are “created” by events in our own, (timelines) or even in others.

What events? For instance…

I prevent Lee Harvey Oswald from assassinating JFK? OK. This one is easy to follow. But…

What “authority” or controlling force determines just what “events” qualify for the creation of a new timeline or universe?

God? Is this then just another Religious theory?

Or perhaps ALL events create new timelines and universes. Like the collision of two snowflakes during a snowstorm. How about the collision of the outer molecules of the snowflake with the molecules of the atmosphere? Each collision as it falls? Each snowflake? Each storm? Each molecule? WOW!

There must be a lotta Timelines out there and alternative Universes huh. Infinitely so even.

If infinite, then why am I possesed with the gift of individual thought, free will and the choice to make my own descisions since nothing I think matters anyway in view of all the possibilities that are all true anyway. Given these infinite timelines.

Hmmm.

This seems a bit foolish to me but I can’t DIS-prove it. But then in science, dis-proving something, should be easy. Except a negative which is a folly in logic.

It would seem to me that “infinite” universes and timelines is totally contrary to the principle of Occam’s razor. But then Occam’s razor is not an axiom, merely a postulate. Although it has worked really well so far.

Actually, in science, “Multiverse” theory is something that has NEVER been proven. For lack of evidence. It crops up from time to time as a way to explain certain SEEMING paradoxes like the EPR double slit experiment with polarized light. But then, just because it can be used to explain something doesn’t mean it is so.

Tiny invisible rubber bands could explain gravity if it weren’t for the fact that it simply isn’t true.

Multiverse Theory is not automatically true because it “explains” some things. Lot’s of things explain “some” things. Most of them are NOT true.

So help me here. Where did multiverse come from as a theory? Where is the observable evidence of it’s existence and the experiments to back it up that can be duplicated with certainty and repitition?

Like the speed of light for example. Or Time Dilation which is so easy to demonstrate now it’s considered commonplace. (It occurs on every single filght of the Space Shuttle.) At least science is TRYING to prove “Frame Dragging” which IS an experiment under way.

But “Multiverse”? Who can demonstrate this with integrity?

Thank you.

DaViper

January 22, 2001 11:15 pm
Post Count

Aye.

And been to his site as long ago as two and a half years.

Or was it only yesterday? 🙂

DaViper

January 18, 2001 1:50 am
Post Count

Yeah TT_0, OK.

I’ll go ahead and run with the way you want to tell it.

You are obviously a thinker on social issues, a contemplator of paradox, and hypothesizer of possibilities.

Correct me if I’m wrong here but I see you as a Libertarian who expounds on the need for humanity to get back to certain basics. Like the issues defined by the Constitution and your comments earlier on firearms tend to make me believe you are a Gun Rights activist.

So, no critisism intended here but…
(and you know I see your scenario as pure fiction on your part), could you give us your thoughts on how us “less enlightened” ones here in this worldline of the here/now can solve the technical problems of time travel so that we may be able to enjoy the same first hand knowledge you have that gives you these social insights?

I mean, EVERYBODY hates a tease right?

🙂