[email protected]

January 25, 2001 6:52 am
Post Count

Deviper: I believe that I read that quote from revelation, but I respect your beliefs and yor right to have them. I am not here to convince anyone that God exists. I am only here to speak the truth as I know it.

I am just a vessel and god hardens whom he wants to harden and softens the hearts of whom he wants to soften. As for the qoute, it was stating that what ever God has done, said, or created can not be added to or taken away from.

A similar conspeptual logic exists in science as well, the law of conservation of energy,mass,and momentum. Even in the case where energy is borrowed from the vacuum of space there is no vialation of this in that the source of energy was gained from an existant source…space. If energy is gained from nothing; then this law is vialated.

Edwin G. Schasteen

Everyone:

I appologize for not double spacing, I was in a hurry. I also got that screen and that is why I have three of the same posts. Hmmm.

[email protected]

January 24, 2001 12:25 pm
Post Count

Borgus,

I am not at all convinced that the universe is expanding. I was in such a hurry to post due to time constraints that I was not able to post my views accurately. I appologize for the confusion. I am more convinced that the universed is fixed and not expanding. I believe God when he says that nothing can be added and nothing taken away. But at the same time I am not fully convinced that the universe is entirely a closed system either. I believe that energy can be formed at an area where no energy is present by drawing energy from beyond the center of a measured region. I call the area beyond the centermass of every particle and field subpoint space because it is an area that exists beyond the centermass. This is my theory and it is not even a theory yet. It is truelly a hypothesis. In a littly while I may be able to produce evidence to support or deny my hypothesis. As soon as I have confirmed the viability of my claims or lack there of, I might post the results. The conscept I was trying to describe above is more related the how energy and space interact. The theory you proposed also sounds like a viable alternative to the current model. I believe that there are limits to every field and that at some distance from a given grouping of mass there is zero gravity. For example, if you quantize space and allow for a device pump space into a given container such as cup that has an internal temperature of 91degrees farhenheit, then the temperature in that cup will decrease more as the numerical quantity of thermal photons occupy a greater volume of space. Basically as an electromagnetic field occupies a greater volume of space the density and strength of that field decreases. Now if one were to vacuum out the space from the cup that is 91 degrees farhenheit, then the temperature within that cup will increase significantly as the numerical quantity of the thermal photons within that space occupy a lesser volume of space. Basically, as an electromagnetic field(or any other photon mediated field) contracts to occupy a lesser volume of space, the strength and density of that field will increase. This goes right along with your own theory about areas outside the galaxies. For an area with zero densityand infinity energy density the velocity the vacuum velocity of light will increase without bounds. If one decreases the energy density within a given region to zero then the space-time density within that region will increase to infinity and the light speed velocity in that region will decrease to zero absolute velocity.

regards,

Edwin G. Schasteen

[email protected]

January 24, 2001 12:24 pm
Post Count

Borgus,

I am not at all convinced that the universe is expanding. I was in such a hurry to post due to time constraints that I was not able to post my views accurately. I appologize for the confusion. I am more convinced that the universed is fixed and not expanding. I believe God when he says that nothing can be added and nothing taken away. But at the same time I am not fully convinced that the universe is entirely a closed system either. I believe that energy can be formed at an area where no energy is present by drawing energy from beyond the center of a measured region. I call the area beyond the centermass of every particle and field subpoint space because it is an area that exists beyond the centermass. This is my theory and it is not even a theory yet. It is truelly a hypothesis. In a littly while I may be able to produce evidence to support or deny my hypothesis. As soon as I have confirmed the viability of my claims or lack there of, I might post the results. The conscept I was trying to describe above is more related the how energy and space interact. The theory you proposed also sounds like a viable alternative to the current model. I believe that there are limits to every field and that at some distance from a given grouping of mass there is zero gravity. For example, if you quantize space and allow for a device pump space into a given container such as cup that has an internal temperature of 91degrees farhenheit, then the temperature in that cup will decrease more as the numerical quantity of thermal photons occupy a greater volume of space. Basically as an electromagnetic field occupies a greater volume of space the density and strength of that field decreases. Now if one were to vacuum out the space from the cup that is 91 degrees farhenheit, then the temperature within that cup will increase significantly as the numerical quantity of the thermal photons within that space occupy a lesser volume of space. Basically, as an electromagnetic field(or any other photon mediated field) contracts to occupy a lesser volume of space, the strength and density of that field will increase. This goes right along with your own theory about areas outside the galaxies. For an area with zero densityand infinity energy density the velocity the vacuum velocity of light will increase without bounds. If one decreases the energy density within a given region to zero then the space-time density within that region will increase to infinity and the light speed velocity in that region will decrease to zero absolute velocity.

regards,

Edwin G. Schasteen

[email protected]

January 24, 2001 7:00 am
Post Count

Dear Everyone,

I was thinking yesterday and came up with an addition to a conscept I stumbled into last week while thinking.

I was reading a book on astronomy that states that the universe is expanding. Now as the unverse expands the temperature of the universe decreases. The author that wrote the book stated that scientist now believe that micro seconds after the big bang there was one super force composed of strong force, weak force, and electromagnetic force. Gravity was seperate from these forces at that time as it is today…so they say. As the universe expanded and cooled this super force broke up into three seperate forces; strong, weak, and electromagnetic. This is what I propose. I believe that space is confined to a fixed shpere of a fixed size and more space is added so that the pressure of the space begins to build up and the density of space begins to increase. One would normally think that compressing space would result in an increase in the temperature of space as a result of the compression of energy that is confined to that region of space. However I believe the opposite is true. To compress space by increasing the volume of space is to confine the energy within that region of compressed space to a greater volume of space. This results in a decrease to the density of energy. If one doubles the volume of space that a quantity of energy occupies, the energy density of that energy will be equall to the inverted square of the density of the new density of space. (S=1/e^2) where s=new density of space, and e=the density of energy occupying that space. Further more, I believe that energy is also expanding at the same rate as space. One might say, if this is so then why does the energy density of space decrease as space expands? If the increase of energy is proportionate to the increase of space, then shouldn’t the space-time temperature remain constant? The answer, quite counterintuitively, is no. The reason is that even if a quantity of space doubles and the energy in that space also doubles, the new energy and space must form around the old energy and space because the new energy and space cannot occupy the same region. This of course does not explain the differential in energy density from space density. The reason that energy density deacreases is because to quanta of energy that are closer to one another gain extra density. This manifested in a magnetic field for as the photons increase there distance as they stray from each other the density of the field and strength of the field decreases. The oldest energy is closer then the new energy. The increase in density decreases the density of space in the old energies region and increases the density of space in the new energies region. This creates the warping of the space-time continuum that is present in a dense grouping of energy. Got to goe

[email protected]

January 20, 2001 1:32 pm
Post Count

Draco2,

Yes that is the same book I read. I thought it was a pretty good book. What about you?

inquisitively,

Edwin G. Schasteen

[email protected]

January 13, 2001 12:20 pm
Post Count

Fast,
the first part of the letter was to the general audience of the forum. The second is to certain persons who I confer with to add to their knowlege conscerning a project that we are involved with. The last part of the letter is part of a much larger technical conscept only those who work closest with me would be able to decipher, understand, or utilze that knowlege. In short I somtimes use this to relay knowlege to my coherts. Even some of them will not fully understand this knowlege until I am able to break it down and expain what I mean. For this is merely to transfer the knowlege while giving away as littly usable technical detail as possible. I will reword the first part of the paragraph:
I simply mean to state that most of the population does not believe in UFO’s despite the numerous sightings. And that if the majority will not accept the existance of UFO’s the majority will not accept the existance of time travel either.

cheers,

Edwin G. Schasteen

[email protected]

January 8, 2001 6:26 pm
Post Count

I noticed last week that time was dragging nearly taking up nearly twice the time then normal for a given day. I also noticed that it was sunny and the humidity level was low and thermal properties high. Today is monday and I and the rest of the people I worked with noticed that the day went by dramatically faster then normal…taking up nearly a quarter the time for a day then any given day last week took. I also noticed that there was a large increase in humidity and it even rained today harder then it had in the whole year. As temperature within water decreases within water the molecules slow down and time also slows down for that object on acount that time is a measurement of a number of events accurring per given instant multiplied by the velocity of those events squared. (If those events have a velocity of light) and the number of events accuring per given instant multiplied by the velocity of events.(if the velocity is subluminal) I could be wrong in that time may be the number of events times the square of the velocity regardless of the velocity with respect to the velocity of light.) So as water increased in the atmosphere the energy perunit volume expanded by occupying the water molecules in our area resulting in a decrease in the velocity at which time traveled within our given region which is why my day went much faster today.

sincerely,
Edwin G. Schasteen

[email protected]

January 8, 2001 6:14 pm
Post Count

Good evening, morning , or afternoon everybody,

For a year or two I have started to pay attention to a phenomenon that most people including myself had noticed but taken for granted. The phenomenon is that some days appear to be longer then others. I cannot count the number of times that I felt it was 5:30 pm in the afternoon then go to check the clock and notice that it is only 2:00 pm, merely an hour after I had last checked. Also, I cannot count the number of times that I have thought that it was 2:00 pm in the afternoon and go to check the clock only to find out that it is 5:30 pm. One or two years ago I began to suspect that time itself was indeed fluctuating. So on days that felt longer I asked others if the day was going by fast to them. To my surprize the answer was unanimous. Everyone also felt that the day was going by slower then usual, too. I was looking at an astronomy book last week and noted that space-time is expanding. At the begining of the universe the temperatures of the universe was extremely high and decreased as space expanded. Now I questioned whether there would be any difference if the actual size of the universe were getting bigger as the universe expanded keeping space uniform in density or whether the size of the uniform were fixed and the addition of new space-time resulted in an everincreasing space-time density. I reasoned that the results would be the same for energy occupies space. If the quantity of energy is kept constant and more and more space is crammed into the quantity energy ones first intuition is to assume that the energy per unit volume will increase as a result of the increased compression of space. But this is wrong in fact the energy per unit volume will decrease as a result of compressed space. The reason is that when one compresses a greater quantity of space-time into a constant quantity of energy the energy occupies a greater volume of space. As energy occupies more space the density of the energy decreases as a result of expansion of the energy which is defined as energy occupying greater volumes of space. Now If mass occupies a greater quantity of energy: the energy(that is not mass) will expand and decrease in density. Also energy is generated by friction as the mass is crushed to a smaller volume. This extra energy is neglected in the former statement in that it is the free energy in the form of heat/light that we are interested in not the energy created by the crushing of the mass nor the energy added by the exertion of kenetic force to crush the mass to a smaller volume. As mass increases the energy expands. As energy increases mass expands decreasing in density which is the principle behind the function of hot air baloons. As space increases exponentially and as the number of points increases exponentially the density of space is increased. As the density of space is increased the temperature of space is decreased as the constant thermal energy constant occupies more space. If space increased from all pionts no energy will be created by friction since no space is forced to move into tighter quantities on acount that the number of points is increased symetrically to the increase in volume of space. Now as energy is increased per unit volume time becomes accelerated for that volume as is manifested in a heated object as the molecules of a heated object is sped up relative molecules in cooler masses outside that object.

Edwin G. Schasteen

[email protected]

December 27, 2000 2:00 pm
Post Count

Sorry I have been out for a while. Does anyone no whether the forces exerted by a universal flooding could produce the force needed to seperate all the continents in in a period of a couple of months. Given the amount of water on the earth now if the land masses were but one land mass and there was one huge earth quake that cause all the land masses to spread at a constant velocity to their present location in a period of three months or so would the kenetic force mediated through the water cause universal flooding by generating huge waves of water covering the land. How fast would a land mass have to travel accross the earth for there in order to cause the ocean in the direction of travel flow up and over the entire continent of the united states from east coast to west coast? How hi would the wall of water be? Does the needed velocity match the biblical time period for the flood? If the continents were to have traveled at the nessecary velocity to cause the water to wave over from the pacific ocean to the atlantic ocean for period of time that Noah’s flood was stated to have lasted in the bible could the continents have reached their present location from the pangea in that period of time at the calculated velocity. If not how far could the continents have traveled. How much heat would have been generated by the friction of the water over the continents surface if the water flowed over the earth. Would it have been enough to produce steem at the calculated pressure? If all the above proves true then is it possible find evidence in the soil for such events? If anyone is motivated enough to run a computer simulation and plug in all the variables in order to calculate the above hypothesis I would appreciate it. I donnot have enough computer knowlege to run the simulation. Whoever comes up with the answers to the questions above has the write to the discovery naturally so have at it.

God bless you all and Peace,
sincerely,
Edwin G. Schasteen

[email protected]

December 13, 2000 7:07 pm
Post Count

Dear timetravel-0,
Do you believe in the lord Jesus Christ as your personal saviour? Would it be safe to assume that the substance of time itself might be classified as the sum of two equal opposite forces acting in direct canscelation? If the person or persons responcible for the development of time travel technologies were posting on this sight would you let them know that they were or are responsible. If so would you do so directly or would you hint it only. Or would you use a third option that is to be careful not to say anything that would point out the person or persons responsible neither to the persons responsible themselves nor to the other persons that are on this forum? In short will you say something a coded message that the person or persons responsible only will be able to pick up on or recognize to know that they are the ones responsible for the development of the technologies. It can be anything that the person or persons will recognize as indisputable evidence not as your being valid but as them being the ones responcible for the development? If you are not willing to answer this please just be straight forward about this and answer that you are unwilling to let the persons no who they are. If you have any questions as to my identity ask pamela for she knows who I am and is free to oblige you the information. If you wish to answer this privately even if the answer is no fill free to e-mail me at [email protected] . I believe that is all the questions I have for know please have a good trip back and thanks for visiting our time line it has been an honor. On behalf of us all I welcome you to return any time you wish. Goodluck and Godspeed. Live long and live well.

sincerely,

Lcpl Edwin Gary Schasteen U.S.M.C. Active