Time02112

January 25, 2001 2:31 pm
Post Count

DA Viper,
as you said earlier…”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?”
_____________________________________________
———————————————
Perhaps the following might lend some additional clues, as to “shed some light on the subject.”

When engaging upon a string quartet of talented musicians, there are only two types of designations,

*Those who participate.
*Those who observe.

_____________________________________________
———————————————
NOTE:> The following posts were extracted from “Autodynamics” *Egroups Forum.
< http://www.egroups.com/group/autodynamics>

Scientists Bring Light to Full Stop, Hold It, Then Send It on Its Way

In today’s New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com
(You have to register at the site to read the article).

From: Bill Slawson
Date: Sun Jan 21, 2001 12:02pm
Subject: AutoDynamics ?

Douglas Scott 01/21/01
[email protected]

From: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap001230.html

During the last coupla years, I have been looking at SAA, AutoDynamics in general, and the formulations of Ricardo Carezani. Sometime in 1999, I began thinking about the possible degradation of photonic energy by the theoretical picograviton. The “tired photon” hypotheses, to explain the smooth redshift variation with respect to distance/time, have a number of (surmountable) problems. But, the generally accepted solution for this smooth variation, (namely: BigBang), also has many problems.

If you would, could you supply me with your short list, in links or references, describing why you may or may not support this tired photon thinking?

Anisotropy of CMB:
In the image of the above link, I can see that there is a calico feature to the CMB. The dark patches are limited by the resolution of the scale. I wonder how far off the scale are the depths of the dark patches? Is there data available to recalibrate the image to a different, (lower), central “zero value”? Further, if one were to gather multiple images of the same patch of sky, would the calico pattern remain strictly identical? Over what period of time? The careful comparison of differing images could reveal the changes as being instrumental artifacts or actual sky change.

I wildly wonder if there may be a nominal “rest state” for photonic radiation? If, after a looong journey through “space”, the photonic energies are “wound down” by being bent hither and thither through the gravitational wedges of the intergalactic medium – – then, is the result that the background has a rather even “look” to it? Is this “even” appearance some kind of undulating dispersion of photonic energies around and about the nominal “rest state” average value? Or can the true “rest state” be an equilibrium point whereby photonic energies are hardly affected and mostly unaffected by the “picograviton density fluctuations”?

Everything is natural

Bill Slawson
1621 Grand
Spencer, IA
51301-3433
712-262-1111
[email protected]

(C) Copyright 2000 usual rights, usual rates

Slight reference:
AutoDynamics: http://www.flic.net/~saa/

The boundary of the “observable” universe may be only limited by the distance it takes for “most” photonic radiation to wind down to the equilibrium rest state of the microwave background radiation energy. If we can develop “graviton” apertures and detection instruments, the “observable” horizon could be extended way far.

– – p n Jones

Time02112

January 22, 2001 6:36 pm
Post Count

TT_0 Please read this, ang provide us with your comments…
(How many of the others here, have read this yet?)

(POLL) say AYE if you have, NAY if not,
“Not Yet” but plan to do so latter.

Time Travel Research Center : Interview with Dr. David [email protected], Germany http://www.time-travel.com/timetech.htm

Time02112

January 9, 2001 7:37 pm
Post Count

I too have made referrence to this (QED) Book, matter of fact I just lent it out of the TAP-TEN Library to Gary Schasteen on his last visit to my house!

I am suprised that this was overlooked?
Oh well, I am also a very talented musician.

Time02112

January 9, 2001 2:42 am
Post Count

BTW TT_0
Care to elaborate any further info on the “Other” Time~Travelers from “Your” World-Line”???

*What are the other TT’s worldline destinations, and missions?

*Are any of them, besides yourself, on our current worldline that you are aware of?

*Are you in contact by some special means with any other TT’s? (if so, How is this done?)

*How is it possible to send a message through Time?

(Please Review my earlier Questions)

Time02112

January 6, 2001 4:51 pm
Post Count

TT_0 thanks for the reply RE: sharing future technological reports, or publications…

You have expressed an inability to provide them now, for lack of having any with you, before you arrived in our “Worldline”

Could you please make a note, to remind yourself to bring them with you on your “Next Visit” here?
(Providing there will be another “Visit”)

Meanwhile, why not use your memory to paint us a more “Specific” picture of your worldline, by providing us with some more “Detailed” information that would provide to those who may be more skeptical? in the least by accepting this challange (instead of avoiding it) what harm would it possibly bring? if you keep out any information that may not be acceptably permissable in order to prevent any clandestine repercussions of the future outcome of a series of events which are crucial to our future to come, so that they may play out their roles, as they were intended, I can only see that there are still many variable details that you “CAN” Disclose to us that would not be this detrimental, and only “Add” to your Credability.

One good example of such, I would like to ask you to disclose the names of these “Five Presidents” that you mentioned earlier.

*Who:> Who are they?
and who are those involved with breathing life into this supposed NWO, that many people in our current world-line are so afraid of?

*What:> A.)What are their primary, and post secondary functions within the New GVT?

B.) What is the extent of their Authoritive positions of power?

C.) What is our New GVT like, compared to our worldline’s current GVT?
(is it anything Like the Dreded NWO as predicted?, or did this dictatorial NWO rise to power as prohecised, and suddenly get defeated?*(was this what you implyed by your earlier comment represented by the nuber of those slain, that attempted to “control” the free citizens?)

*Where:> Where do they reside?

*When:> When do each of them officialy acquire their respective positions of Authority?

Why:> Why did the New GVT suddenly enlist five Presidents?

(Anyone else care to jump on this & add more questions pertaing?)

Time02112

January 1, 2001 3:25 pm
Post Count

TT_0
What could you surmise, as to what might happen, as a result if you provided us with copies of various news articles in relation to “Technology Reports” published a year in our future, or any “Time” after (Such as in your “Worldline” as you so describe?

*Could You?
*Would You?

And please explain your reasons for why you would, or would not do something like this for us?

Time02112

January 1, 2001 2:36 pm
Post Count

TT_0,
I appreciate your comments here, and I thought I would provide you with an example of just how appreciated you are.
(You’re sincerely welcome my Friend!…any”Time”

Below is a copy of a recent email from p3n:>
From: “Webmaster”
To:
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 17:34:13 -0800
Subject: Re: The “Z” Machine

Hi Gary,

I posted a link to the “Z” machine story yesterday, the second I saw it.

Thanks for sending the “Proclaimed” Time Traveler story. It was one of the
best things that has come into P3N and with the help of links from other
websites it has been one of the most visited pages. It was also very thought
provoking. Please feel free to submit more writings or links to good stories
when you find them.

Thanks again,
Rick Reed
Webmaster P3N
————————–

Pamela, I am very familiar with this “Waverider” I listened to his info. on the former “Art Bell Show” known today, as the current “Coast To Coast AM” program.
since “Premier Radio Networks” purchased Art Bell’s Legacy for a sumisable amount. http://coasttocoastam.com
you can listen to pre-recorded programs, up to 30 days, in the “Past Shows” selection, on their website. Anything beyond 30 days, you will need to purchase a tape.

I believe that this “Waverider” information & faxes, are still available in text & jpg formats on the coast to coast website.

[This message has been edited by Time02112 (edited 01 January 2001).]

Time02112

December 22, 2000 9:06 am
Post Count

Anyone ever heard of “Pangia”
it referrs to when the earth, or “Gia” was once pne singl large body of land.

when I find more info on this latter, I will edit this post, and include the links. meanwile if anyone else wishes to make any additional comments about pangia, and how the water vovered the remaining 3/4 of the land mass around the geosphere, please by all means, share with us what you have to offer.

What do you suppose would happen during the next “Great Flood” now that the former Pangia is broken into the current continetal land structures of today’s earth?
~just a thought~

Time02112

December 17, 2000 2:21 pm
Post Count

What ever happened to “Exentuate The Positive” ??
Frankly, I’ve heard enough negativity as to what we “Cannot” do, or what others have “Failed” to do. Why not discuss what we “Can” do, or what we can attempt to do that may lead to success in spite of all these failures?

Time02112

December 13, 2000 3:19 pm
Post Count

BTW TT_0, whatever you can arrange would be appreciated, if you cannot get access to an aircraft, you “DO” have access to remote Sattalight imagery, so either way, you must be capable of this permitting you have the free will to leave & return as you wish.