Darby
Timekeeper
|
| |||||||
Hi everyone, I have been reading the posts by Timetravel_0 with great interest. Most of his posts sound very plausible, but I'm too sceptic to believe that he actually is a timetraveler. However, I have too little knowledge to disprove his story. Besides, it's not my intention to disprove anything. I have been thinking about the concept of the parallel universe theory and I came up with the following question: If parallel universes do exist, did they all start simultaneously? I mean, let's assume that the universe originated from a singularity. Were there any parallel universes at that point? That would not be very logical and it would also imply that there is a parallel universe in which our universe never existed. In my opinion, parallel universes can only exist if they are not really parallel to oneanother. The way I see it, our time line is like a branch on an enormous tree that originated from one single point. With every posible outcome of an event, a new branch is created. Assuming that this is true, traveling back in time would not take you to another timeline but back along your own "branch". The only danger of timetravel in that case would be traveling back to the future, because there is a chance that you take a "wrong turn" and end up in another future. I also think timetravel does affect the future in the specific "branch" that you are in. Then again, there would always be another branch that branched off BEFORE the point to which you traveled back. And that branch would be almost identical, except for the fact that your timetravel never took place. Perhaps it's better if I'd draw a diagram. I guess it's difficult to visualize just by reading this post. It all seems logical to me. As I already said, I do not have enough knowledge of quantum physics and timetravel to support my theory, so any comments are more than welcome. Greetings from rainy Amsterdam, Roel | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Hi Roel, This statement made by timetraveler_0 has really interested me and i have asked him to explain it a little further. "Yes, this is true. If I go forward on this world line, the future will not be my future. I get home by going back to 1975 before I arrived and then going forward to 2036." I have written him a letter, and forwarded another guys letter to him. But I have not heard from him since dec. 13th I am getting a little concerned about it. Im hoping he is just busy.He was just busy last time I had not heard from him for awhile.but I do think about his safety. I dont know why but I had to read that statement over and over and over to myself. he goes back before he arrived....before he arrived.... there is something about that statement. I hope he explains what he meant to me soon. sincerely, pamela | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Roel, A very interesting visual you painted; however don't forget that if you look at trees, branches brush against each other constantly. I visualize hundreds of springs like inside of a well made chair or couch that also brush against each other while moving tight then loose. Each one a seperate dimension but they brush each other. Also each spring a timeline that touches when compressed. I honestly believe that some human disappearances are related to these moments of future touching past or one dimension touching another. Then again I really don't know anything. I just theorize. P.S. Hi Pamela! You are the hub of the wheel and hold all us spokes together. what ever happened to Time 02112? Is he still around? I saw another name as discussion lion tamer. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
("@^@") | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Hi, I was pleasantly surprised by the quick reply. Thank you! I thought Timetravel_0 had already returned to the future (for as far as this applies, because I'm still not convinced). But I guess I must have misinterpreted some of his words, because I just read a post that was dated 21st of december. I personally don't think that timelines "brush" against eachother. To be honest, I can't think of an event that would confirm your theory. Can you be more specific about what you mean? Greetings from cold and rainy Amsterdam... Roel van Houten | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Roel, Don't ask. Yes it can happen but without a mathematical formula to make all these hard nose scientists happy there's no point in discussing it. It's like seeing a UFO, unless everyone you know, and everyone you'll ever meet sees it with you, don't even try to talk about it. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
The statement: "Yes, this is true. If I go forward on this world line, the future will not be my future. I get home by going back to 1975 before I arrived and then going forward to 2036." is interesting to me, as well. I think it refers to a time line/time branch reference point used for the return trip. He arrived in 1975 from 2036 ("The first 'leg' of my trip was from 2036 to 1975." and "I was sent back to 1975 to get a computer system and take it back to 2036.") From 1975, he then came forward to our time. In order to get back to his correct time, he has to retrace his path: from now to 1975 to 2036. Apparently, our time line (branch) does not touch his time line (branch) after 1975, therefore, he has to go back on our branch in order to go forward on his branch. Then he came forward | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Sort of makes you dizzy. Like I mentioned before, when we put someone's face on a milk carton, (missing person) we have to distribute them in every dimension and throughout timelines. I'll bet there are some unwilling travelers in insane assylums. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
mmmmh, perhaps they should start putting faces on milkcartons in other countries first, before they start putting it on milkcartons in other timelines... we don't have those milkcartons with missing people on them over here in Holland. ;-) I get your point. Personally I have my doubts about someone ending up in another timeline just like that. How would something like that happen? The only way someone could end up in another timeline would be an abduction by a timetraveler. That WOULD explain two phenomena: 1) alien abductions, it's been said before that ufo's and aliens could very well be travelers from the future. In that case alien abductions could be explained as people being taken to another time or timeline... 2) Often people see doubles, look-a-likes, of someone they know, while that person is somewhere else at that moment. Perhaps these doubles are in fact people from another timeline? I remain sceptic about the possibility of timetravel and the existance of parallel universes, however it is an interesting subject and I like discussing it. Greetings, from cold, freezing and rainy Amsterdam  | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Yes, aliens could be our decendants, a thousand years from now. However I still believe doorways or rifts, ripples or what ever you want to call them, open doorways on occasion and some poor unsuspecting jerk walks through without ever seeing it. Poof, missing person. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Years ago, I read that events can result from future actions, or the cause can happen before the result. I'm beginning to accept that possibility. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Correction: "...or the result can happen "before' the cause." | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Hi NoTime, Could you elaborate on that? From my point of view causes in the future cannot have a result in the present. I also believe that the future is not yet determined... That would somehow rule out the possibility of timetravelers from the future entering our present. My guess is that all possible futures have already "branched out". It's only a matter of choice whether certain events take place or not. I wish I was able to utilize the idle 70% of my brain. This matter is reaching over my head! Anyway, I'll give it another thought. Greetings from Amsterdam Roel | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
If you were to enter a time machine right now and travel back to 1900, the people of that time may say you could'nt be from the future because you have'nt even been born yet. Their perspective is the same as yours. They are living out their time as if the future is open and empty space not yet used. And yet here we are. Possibly 100 years from now there is someone that has traveled "back" to observe US. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Roel Alien abductions. Missing persons. Every immaginable statistic is watched these days. Some where somebody knows how many cups of coffee were consumed between 9 and 10 AM for each day of the week. Somebody keeps track of the daily number of dog bites in NYC. So you can bet that who goes missing, when and where is all on disk somewhere. But like cold weather at the beach, nobody likes to talk about it. I've never seen a single book or article on the subject and I read just about everything. We could say that the journalism on the subject is as missing as the supposed "non-victims". So whats my point? I dunno. It gives me the same feeling you'd get when your oil light keeps flashing at odd intervals but your engine checks out "ok". Dopplegangers are in a way the opposite of missing persons. I've seen other people that look, act move and sound so much like myself it's litterally made my hair stand on end. Many times over the years I had people say they have seen me places where I know I have never been. As for parallel worlds all I can say is "believe it !" | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Shadow, You crack me up! You have a great dry sence of humor. I've never thought of doppelgangers as the opposite of missing persons-that's really funny. I hope your a stand up comic, it would be a shame to waste your cleverness on just us. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Morkie Logic is serial. Humor is parallel. Comic relief is never wasted. It is the acknowledgement of waste itself. We laugh we cry tis but the essence of that gone by. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Roel: I suppose that a future action might cause a result in the present if time is not serial in the sense that we are used to thinking it is. Also, if we eventually learn to manipulate time like we manipulate so many other things, then we can probably change events in the past. That would be the same principle as a future action causing a result in the present. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Good Point there NoTime! you can add my vote to that one! | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. I've tried to visualize time as something non-linear, but I find it difficult to grasp. In my opinion events take place in a certain order and events in the past, present and future do not exist parallel to oneanother. But I'm not sure if that's what you meant...? Roel | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
I often visualize 'time' as a very large, intricate Tree...as our perception moves up a major trunk...and off on any given smaller branch (kinda like an inch worm traveling up a tree)our perception of the whole changes yet the Tree remains. With that as an analogy...needing to return to a point in the past and retrace one's steps ..to be sure one ends up on the correct future branch...makes sense...as does parallel universes...and the past changing from a future perspective. Be safe and dream sweetly all. Light and Love in the comming year to each. WS | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
If, as some believe, everything exists in one spacious present (or one NOW), then the "past", "present", and "future" all coexist at once in that timeless realm. Maybe the larger part of ourselves resides in that realm and a part of ourselves exists as physical humans in what we call our lifetimes. Our physical selves that live in the 3 dimensional universe are subject the laws and conditions that make up the physical universe, such as the natural sciences (physics, chemistry, etc.), emotions (joy, sorrow, etc.), human interaction, -- and TIME. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Greetings and happy holidays everyone. I am very surprised and delighted to see the conversation going in the direction it has on this thread. Unknowingly, you all have stepped into the real mystery of time travel that remains speculative in 2036. Based on a couple of questions I see here, I will try my hardest to describe what we in 2036 think space-time looks like and how it behaves. Please keep in mind that I realize how easy it is to dismiss what I say. First, I’m trying to do this from memory. Imagine you are back in 1911 trying to explain a jet engine to the Wright brothers. However, there are some very basic properties of quantum theory that support this model today. I appreciate the fact that you are reading this with an open mind. (If parallel universes do exist, did they all start simultaneously? I mean, let's assume that the universe originated from a singularity. Were there any parallel universes at that point? That would not be very logical and it would also imply that there is a parallel universe in which our universe never existed.) It is thought that the event called the “Big Bang” was the start of not only this worldline or universe but all worldlines and all universes that make up the superuniverse. It is also thought that the superuniverse can be imagined as an expanding sphere with the big bang in the center. Individual worldliness (or timelines as you call them) can be imagined as lines originating at the center and “trending” toward spiraling around the sphere until they reach the edge. The individual worldlines expand in length and widen as you follow them from the center. Each individual “moment” or “event” on a world line has infinite possibilities or outcomes. Imagine this as a single point with infinite lines shooting away from it, which in turn are made up of points with their own possibilities and outcomes. Now, remember, these individual worldliness with all these points and possibilities are defined by their ability to hold there inhabitants to timelike trips only (no faster than light travel). Now consider the reality of a spinning or electrified black hole (Kerr). Penrose diagrams of these oddities show mathematically that you can make simulated spacelike trips (faster than light) through the singularity without being destroyed. In order to do this without wiping out most modern physical laws, you must travel to an alternate worldline or universe. Therefore, if multiple worldlines exist, infinite worldlines exist. In trying to imagine a superuniverse with infinite possibilities and worldlines, I think of a room with mirrors on all the walls. You are aware of your captivity but as you look in the distance, you see an infinite number of “yours” in an infinite number of mirrored rooms. The gravity distortion machine allows you to “step” out of your room and into another next to you. The closer you are to your original room, the closer it looks like yours, the farther away, the stranger it looks to you. (…If I go forward on this world line, the future will not be my future. I get home by going back to 1975 before I arrived and then going forward to 2036.") A few people have asked me about this statement so I will try to clarify it. On my worldline (A) in 2036, I was given a mission in 1975. I turn my machine on and jump to another worldline (B) in 1975 with about a 2% divergence from (A). From the very point I turn my machine off on (B), I create a new worldline just because I’m there. This line can be described as © and started when I got to (B). I am now doing my mission on line © in 1975 when I discover a very a good reason to go forward on © and see what happened. I turn my machine on and go forward on © to the year 2000. When I turn it off, I start another line called (D). So from my perspective, here we are on line (D) in the year 2000. In order to go home to line (A) I must turn my machine on and go back on (D) until I reach © which in turn would take me back to (B) which in turn takes me to a point before I arrived on (B) then I go forward from the point I arrived on (B) back to (A). If all this isn’t enough to get your head spinning…here are some issues we’re dealing with in 2036. 1. Did your worldline (D) exist at all before I got here from ©? (personally I don’t see how it couldn’t) 2. What happens at the end of a worldine at the edge of the superuniverse? 3. If there are infinite worldlines and infinite possibilities and an edge to the superuniverse, doesn’t that mean occurring events on worldliness are staggered as they reach the edge? (time could end at any moment without warning). Happy new year everyone! | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Hi Timetravel_0. Your first question seems quite easy to answer. If I understand you correctly you traveled from 1975 (B) to 2000 © which started a new worldline (D) because you arrived there. This worldline (D) would not have existed if you didn't arrive here. We would have continued our lives in worldline © or any other given worldline that originated from ©. Your second question is similar to the question people are asking themselves right now. What happens at the end of our (conventional) universe. I can't answer that one for you. You'd have to travel to the future to find that out. The same applies fot the third question. Please understand and respect that I do not believe you to be a timetraveler. Why? Lack of evidence! I also understand that if you were indeed a timetraveler, you'd have no interest in sharing evidence with us. Furthermore I think the story about the IBM 5100 is very odd. We don't rely on old technology to solve our new problems now, so why would that be any different in the future? You also said that you were in fact able to travel into the future. If you travel 60 years ahead, don't they know the answers to your questions there? Or have you forgotten them once you return in your own worldline? Once again, please respect my sceptisism! I do appreciate your posts and I learned a great deal from them, as you obviously gained a lot of knowledge about timetravel. Greetings from Amsterdam. Rainy in the past, rainy in the present and probably rainy in the future. Hapy New Worldline to all! | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
To: Roel van Houten Thank you for trying to answer those questions but I really do not expect that anyone can. I thought I would share with you things we wonder about. Your logic about me is quite correct but again I must state that I am not trying to get you or anyone else to believe or buy anything. As far as evidence goes…I have however decided to try an experiment with you that may be more convincing. It involves the travel of information at faster than light. In fact, I have dropped at least three little gems like this that no one else has picked up on. You said you are confused by the 5100 story. I will explain further. In 2036, it was discovered (or at least known after testing) that the 5100 computer was capable of reading and changing all of the legacy code written by IBM before the release of that system and still be able to create new code in APL and basic. That is the reason we need it in 2036. However, that information was never published by IBM because it would have probably destroyed a large part of their business infrastructure in the early 70s. In fact, I would bet the engineers were probably told to keep their mouth’s shut. Therefore, if I were not here now telling you this, that information would not be discovered for another 36 years. Yet, I would bet there is someone out there who can do the research and discover I am telling the truth. There must be an old IBM engineer out there someplace that worked on the 5100. They just might not have ever asked if I hadn’t pointed it out. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Well, Happy New Year(s) to you too TT_O! (Did worldline D exist before I got here?) I think there is a common misconception reguarding the many worlds interpretation of quantum physics. It is believed that at each decision branch point an entire new copy of reality is made that includes and accomidates that change. Branch after branch add infinitum is said to be added creating eventually an infinite number of self contained worlds. Branch points are sometimes called "collapse of the wave function". By design or accident the word "collapse" might give us hint as to what really happens. Using Websters definition #4, collapse means to fold up into a compact unit. I'm saying simply that the branch points, eleminate or condense into one, all the alternate possibilities that DON'T happen. The advance of time is not the addition of worldlines but the elemination (by passage or condensation) of worldlines. Quantum potential grows like weeds when no one is observing, but upon observation-realization the harvest is made and a bushel of possibilities turns into a single kernel of actuality. World lines may be quite sparce given the enormity of the universe. According to this you might say that line C has been eleminated and replaced with an identical copy ( D ) that adds and accomidates you. This is very much like pulling up a copy of an Excel spredsheet, changing a few numbers, hitting the recalc button and saving back to disk. Getting to the end of time there will be fewer stagged ends that need tidying up. Whadda think? | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Tap-tap-tap-tap click-clickbuzzzzzzzzz click hmmm click*click bzzzzzzzzzzzzzclick | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Mr. TT_O, I realize that you said you are not a physicist, but I was curious if you are from the future: What is the current status of string theory? I would imagine that if string theory is the true theory of everything that the answer to all questions which deal with the nature of time would reside bundled in that theory. Since strings as the building blocks of everything would in fact be the building blocks of space and time as well. Actually, the way you described time is similar to the way I have viewed it myself. I was thinking of how point particles interact. One picture of the interaction deals with advanced and retarded potentials. Since there are two solutions to Maxwell's equations: retarded potentials propagte at the speed of light whereas the advanced potential travels faster than light. Picture two particles in free space, one particle emits a "signal" to the other via the retarded potential. Both particles are moving forward in time. After some time passes the second particle detects the "signal" of the other particle and "decides" to "meet" with the other particle, it sends a subsequent signal back in time to the other particle via the advanced potential that the two should "meet" in the past particle's future. The other particle in the past receives the "signal" and the two particles "meet". The picture of time that I have thought about is time being an infinite number of points (i.e. all possible events) interconnected via retarded and advanced potentials since everything is made of particles. I believe it would be impossible to create a paradox in such a theory just as it is impossible to generate a paradox in the multiverse interpretation of quantum mechanics. Likewise, one could picture time in this theory as not really having the meaning which we normally picture it having with the divisions between past,present, and future. In other words, it is like your life history is a wall of cubby holes representing the events of your life from birth to death and you are given a flashlight and asked to shine the light in each hole in order for that event to take place. You could start in the middle and move forward or start at the last cubby hole and move backward with the flashlight shining in each hole. But as long as you shine the light in at each hole every event in your life takes place. I suppose that there would be a subset within this infinite set of all possible events in which the connections between events where such that the timeline would look like the universe never came into existence since nothingness must also be a possible event. There is something about this idea that I find pleasing. I guess it is because it seems to incorporate everything and at the same time nothing =). I suppose it is not really correct to call this a theory since theories must inevitable be testable, I guess I should just call it an idea of one possible picture of time for I do not see how one could ever test this idea. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
((I realize that you said you are not a physicist, but I was curious if you are from the future: What is the current status of string theory?)) Who doesn’t love string theory? Please forgive the next few comments, I’m trying to be cryptic and jump starting my memory at the same time. In 2036, string theory still dominates physics due to its continued “effect” of encompassing other physical properties from unrelated fields. A great deal of the theoretical mathematics behind time travel was discovered by testing various ideas in string theory and eliminating the anomalies. As I recall, it was this original work that led to the final proof that six dimensions do indeed curl up to give us our observable universe. This in turn supported more of the theoretical math behind time travel…etc. It’s ironic that the beauty of string theory gives future engineers the confidence to create the distortion unit even though the final proof is still unknown. You’re a physics student, have you ever heard the Princeton String Quartet play? | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
TT_0: I belive you, i dont know why but i belive you, but i think the other guys need a real clue for belive you, so, i think you can take a photo of your clothes and post it, or your credencial, because if you work for the goberment, you need to had a credential of the gob in the future, and of curse you need to have clothes from the future, or you travel nude? And what about the social system in the future, its so like socialism, only there one thing wrong, on socialism theres no religion, so please tell me, in the future the church stop to steal money, and manipulate people, or how works the structure of the church in the future? I had just another question, what happen in the future whit mexico and the latinamericans. Atte: a fan of you, TT_1. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Mr. TT_0, I am familiar with the Princeton String Quartet. They are physicist who are working on string theory at the Advanced Institute of Physics at Princeton University in New Jersey. You mentioned a divergence from time lines. How is it possible to measure such a divergence? I would assume that it would be impossible to calculate how causes of one single event would propagte into the future. Does not chaos theory make such determinations impossible? Even if I gave you the exact position and velocity of all objects in the universe (which is impossible(I can not even give you the exact position and velocity of a single object due to the Heisenberg Uncertainity Principle)) you could not tell me what the future holds. Of course this results from the fact that the objects do not represent individual closed systems but in fact can interact. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
P.S. You said 6 curled up dimensions. The current theory suggests that there should be at least 7 curled up dimensions. It was discovered by Ed Witten that if you added an additional dimension that the 5 slightly different versions of string theory would combine into a single theory, which is often called M-theory. I think it would be interesting if one of these extra dimensions was timelike. There are very few people investigating this possibility. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Trott:]"I think it would be interesting if one of these extra dimensions was timelike. There are very few people investigating this possibility" But of course there is Trott! Dr. David Anderson%"Time Travel Research Center" subscribes to this, and calls it a "CTC" (Closed Time-Like Curve" and it is based on some known principles that other physicists(like Tippler) have attempted to prove in support of this theory. http://time-travel.com/ | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Although I don't have enough knowledge to define and completely understand the physics of timetravel, I do have one question. What happens to your anti-matter (anti-particles, or whatever) when you timetravel? My sincere appologies if this is a stupid question Greetings from rainy Amsterdam! | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Dear TT-0 Imagine if you will a pair of parallel lines seperated by a constant gap of one foot from infinity to your left to infinity to your right along the parallel lines. Now imagine a third parallel line intersecting both lines at right angles forming a semi rectangle. Let the top parallel line that extends to infinity both to the right and left be labeled x1 and let the other line that is parallel to x1 be labeled x2. Let the third line that intersects parallel lines x1 and x2 perpendicularly be labeled y1. Now if line y1 intersects lines x1 and x2 and right angles then the angle between y1 and both parallel lines x1 and x2 is 90 degrees. If one one pivots line y1 45 degrees to the right the angle between y1 and both x1 and x2 will diminish to 45 degrees. If we decrease the angle between y1 and both parallel lines x1 and x2 again by an additional 22.5 degrees the angle between y1 and both parallel lines x1 and x2 will diminish to 22.5 degrees. Now if we were to decrease the angle between y1 and both parallel lines x1 and x2 an additional 22.5 degrees the angle between y1 and both parallel lines x1 and x2 will diminish to zero and therefore merge into one single straight line. Thus at an infinite distance all parallel lines merge into a single straight line. Now imagine that we place a basket ball between the two parallel lines that extend to infinity so that the top and bottom tangent of the spherical basket ball are inline with the two parallel lines that are seperated by a foot of space. We accelerate the basket ball along the path of the parallel lines using the parallel lines to guide the basketball along the trajectory of the parallel lines keeping the ball within the confines of the parallel lines. We will accelerate the ball so that in exactly two hours we will accelerate the ball to an infinite speed. In the first half hour we accelerate the ball from 0mph to 100mph. In the following half of an hour we accelerate the ball to 200 mph. We are now at 1 and 1/2 hours and we have reached a speed of 200mph. Now in the next fifteen minutes we accelerate the ball from 200mph to 300mph. We are now at 1 and 3/4 hours and have attained a speed of 300mph. Now in the next 7 and 1/2 minutes we accelerate the ball to 400mph. We are 7 and 1/2 minutes away from two hours and have attained a speed of 400 mph. If we continue 100mph to the ball every in half the time up to two hours at the two hour mark we will have attained a speed of infinity and will have reached the end of the parallel lines. Since we have already showed that all parallel lines merge at infinity the ball will have compressed to an infinitely small point upon attaining the infinite velocity. Now the infinite velocity that we speak of here is not infinity mph but the velocity if light. Light being the maximum velocity of the present to infinite future portion of the universe light may be considered an infinite speed because any velocity greater then light is beyond the largest numerical finite velocity within the present to infinite future. Thus any velocity greater then light is beyond finite and therefore transfinite.(there is a difference between the actual definition of infinity and the definition of transfinite but in this posting for simplicities sake I use both terms interchangeably). Since all parallel lines merge at infinity and at infinity the space between the parallel lines is in the form of an infinitely small point all points along all parallel lines from infinity in the left to infinity to the right coexist within that infinitly that infinitlly small omnipresent point that marks every point within the four dimensional expance of the present to future infinite space. If you want to return to your own world line with a zero divergence my suggestion is to focus whatever you energy source is to an infinetly small piont. This will bring your ship in phase to every point in all universes by bringing your ship in phase to the omnipresent point. Your world line represents just one of the parallel lines that make up the entire universe. It is however unbreakable and still connects you to your world line. By compressing the field to a singularity you bring your worldline inphase with your original world line automatically enabling you to freely navigate your worlds history with a zero divergence factor. Good luck --happy sailing. sincerly, Edwin G. Schasteen | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
What do you mean what happens to your anti-particles? You like most matter we are familiar with are made of regular particles, primarily up, down quarks and electrons. That is all. It is interesting to note that some people interpret anti-particles as regular particles going back in time. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
A Question for TT_O; The artificial singularity you travel with, you say it forms a local gravity field. Does it physically reduce the size of nearby objects during opperation? And if so by how much? If the electron injection system alters the shape of the field, would that not force the unit to accelerate through space as well as time? | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
If there was one question that you could ask to distinguish a "time traveler", what would that one question be, and the answer thereof? What is the only question that a "timetraveler" could answer correctly. You say forecast a future event? No. A true psychic could do that or just someone gifted in history. The question is define "time". If you are a traveler you will know the answer correctly and be able to explain it correctly. But if you know the answer to compare to the participant's answer then you must be a traveler as well. You will know that the future of this dimension has not been written yet. But you have seen shadows of other worlds mimicing our history. Thus, you forecast your own in relation to the shadow. But then you find other realities following identicial histories with your own to a point, then enacting a random event unforseen which offsets the history of that dimension from your own. You sit back, disturbed by what you have seen, and wonder which was actual the future of your reality. Discovery arises. The answer became simple. None of the shadows were your own, and your perception of time has changed completely! You feel like you have started all over again. What is the definition of "time"? ------------------ ...~The Doctor~... "There is no time to waste, only time to change"..."The sum of all knowledge is that you and your reality do not exist; only thought and imagination are real, and therefore...I am."~ Magi Systems Forums~ | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Doctor, Sounds like a temporal version of Plato's allegory of the cave. It seems an agreeable position, really. I must confess, however, to being a little confused. According to your argument, someone would have to travel through time in order to be able to understand time to such an extent as to sufficiently define it? I understand that, in order for someone to understand a concept, that person must have lived in a time in which it is understandable. If you take the position that we currently live in a time in which time is not understandable, then anyone who can adequately define time is indeed a time traveler. However, it can also be argued that we exist on the cusp of such understanding and the concept is indeed understandable, but the technology is not quite widely accessible. Similar to DaVinci, who had a rudimentary understanding or aeronautics, but no airplane technology, or a person living in the early 1900's who could understand horseless transportation or even the workings of the internal combustion engine without the luxury of ever having ridden in a car, we may be able to define time without directly experiencing it's travel. Or maybe I just misunderstood! Whew! I really rambled on that one! Thaks for your sustained attention! ------------------ Theo | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
RGRUNT: Thank you for considering the problem of returning home. You seem to have stumbled on an intuitive proof of some of the physics of time travel. You are correct, getting back to the worldline of origin is easier than picking an exact destination on a different worldline. I wrote down the graphic you outlined. If y1 starts perpendicular to x1 and x2 and is rotated, where is the center of rotation? I imagined it between x1 and x2. If this is so, wouldn’t y1 end up parallel between x1 and x2 with each one being 6 inches away from y1 on either side? SHADOW: ((The artificial singularity you travel with, you say it forms a local gravity field. Does it physically reduce the size of nearby objects during operation? And if so by how much? )) Actually, there are 2 singularities in the unit. The gravity field is manipulated by three factors that affect it in distinct ways. Adding electric charge to the singularities increases the diameter of the inner event horizons. Adding mass to the singularities increases the area of gravitational influence around the singularities. Rotating and positioning the polar axis of the singularities affects and alters the gravity sinusoid. The effects of the gravity produced by the unit do not have enough time to significantly alter physical objects within a reasonable distance from the outside of the sinusoid. No, things do not get smaller. ((If the electron injection system alters the shape of the field, would that not force the unit to accelerate through space as well as time?)) There is no relative movement in space due to three main factors. Large, kinetic energy inducing effects of the gravity field are compensated for by the interaction of the singularities. The mass of the unit and any objects inside the sinusoid do not exhibit any huge increases on the departure worldline during travel. The observed path of the traveler is obtained by changing the gravity, not by moving the vehicle. The black hole comes to you. ((The question is define "time")) To me, time has two definitions. I see time as a mathematical component of a 10 dimensional super universe. It is a variable I use to define my location and existence. I also see time as a metaphysical compromise our senses use to define the area of collective existence God has placed us in. When I can measure and sense time, I know I am not with God. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Dear TT-0, I apologize for the confusion. I am still in the process of honing my descriptive writing skills. The center of rotation is where y1 intersects x2, not in the center of x1 and x2. In truth it does not matter but I find that it is easier to visualize the results if you allow the piviting point or fulcrum of y1 to be located at the intersection of x2 which is the bottom of the two parallel lines x1 and x2. (y1 being a vertical line.) If you know draw it out one can see graphically that the angular decrease of the angle between y1 and the parallel lines x1 and x2 are still symetrical. By rotating the perpindicular line y1 90 degrees in a clockwise direction the angle between y1 and x2 will diminish to zero. This can be seen graphically if one draws this representation on paper. One will also notice that the angular decrease between line y1 and parallel line x1(which is the top parallel line that is parallel to the bottom parallel line x2) is always simultaneous to the angular decrease between the same y1 and x2. We can assume that there will always be an intersection between line y1 and parallel lines x1 and x2 and so long as line y1 is straight those angles will always be equal. So if line y1 is pivoted 45 degrees to the right then at the intersections of (y1,x1) and (y1,x2) the angle will be 45 degrees. When you are drawing this out remember that the pivot point of y1 is at the intersection (y1,x2). Thus the intersection y1 and x2 remains fixed at you location and the intersection of (y1,x1) accelerate to your right such that the intersection (y1,x1) travel an infinite distance to the right along parallel line x1 arriving at an infinite distance at the instant that y1 has pivoted ninety degrees to the right. In the model you drew out the pivot point was between lines x1 and x2 at six inches. That would result in the intersection (y1,x2) accelerating to an infinite distance to the left along parallel line x2 while intersection (y1,x1) speed off to an infinite distance to the right along parallel line x1. Still the intersection angles between lines (y1,x1) and (y1,x2) diminish to zero at 90 degrees rotation of line y1 in a clockwise manner. (If you pivot line y1 in a counter-clockwise manner the same will result but instead intersection (y1,x1) will acelerate to the left instead of the right.)According to the above model the aceleration of the intersection (y1,x1) to the right accelerates exponentially to an infinite velocity and distance as line y1 rotates 90 degrees at a fixed velocity (or constant velocity). That means that 90 degrees of constant rotary acceleration is equal to infinite exponential linear acceleration. Thus for every revolution of a spinning mass there are four periods of infinite exponential linear acceleration. If we use the spinning minute hand of a clock and allow the 12 O'clock to represent the starting point of our measurement then we will have our first exponential infinite acceleration in fifteen minutes as the minute hand reaches 12:15. The second will be reached at 12:30 and the third at 12:45 and finally the fourth at 1:00 O'clock. If we can devise a way to convert constant rotary acceleration into linear aceleration without losing any energy we can enable a mass to accelerate to an infinite velocity or put out an infinite kenetic potential. If rotating electric fields or magnetic fields can be rotated at a fixed velocity at one full revolution per second and if we can convert this rotary motion of electric fields into linear motion in the form of electrical output then we will have an electrical ourput of infinity four times each second. That means if we were to take an oscilliscope and measure the electrical sine wave of our linear electrical output that the sign wave will reach a peak amplitude of infinity four times a second so long as our electric field makes a full revolution once every second. What does everyone think? Agian this is based on allot of assumptions and I could be wrong so fill free to tear it apart and find the flaws. But be sure to post them otherwise I won't learn anything. I need your help and input to assist me in finding out more accurate info. So long as you all place your oppinions of my models on the forum I will continue to put my ideas out here. You scratch my back,and I'll scratch yours. sincerely, Edwin G. Schasteen e-mail addresses are [email protected] and [email protected] | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Now I know why they didn't used to let you out of highschool if you flunked English. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
With all do respect I graduated highest with the highest grades in my school. I went through a year of college before joining the United States Marine Corps where I now serve in the most prestigious technical field the Corps has to offer--the Airwing. The marines that go into the airwing are the top ten percent of the american population when it comes to intelligence. I however do appologize for my bad spelling and grammar for as usual I am on a timer and have an average of anywhere from ten minutes to one hour to type in this information and hit the 'submit reply' button before I lose all that I have typed and have to start all over again. So I ask that you overlook any spelling errors for the time being and take into consideration the information that is being transmitted. If you were offered gold in a beat up box would you reject the gold because it was delivered in an ugly box. Or could you care less what the container looks like in that the gold within that container will make you a rich man? What I am delivering is either golg or fools gold. If I am right in my theories then the gold is pure and worth something. If I am wrong then the gold is fools gold and worth much less but still something in that you can learn from my mistakes. sincerely, Edwin G. Schasteen | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Hi, I get the funny feeling that my question about anti-particles and antimatter was indeed a stupid question I already mentioned that I'm not very familiar with physics, let alone the physics concerning timetravel. However, I was under the assumption that there is a theory that claims that every single particle has its anti-particle. I remember reading an article or a post that compared matter in a particular timeframe with an ocean. If matter from another timeframe came into this timeframe, the "ocean" would flood. I realize that this sounds very stupid, but please bare with me. Physics is not my league and English is not my native tongue Anyone care to elaborate on this subject? Thanks. Greetings from rainy Amsterdam | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
It is assumed true that every particle has a corresponding antiparticle. Actually, some particles are their own antiparticle. There is very little physics knowledge of time travel. It is true that their are a number of various situations in general relativity which allow for time travel, but very few people completly understand it. I am not exactly sure what you are refering to with the over flowing? Conservation of energy can be violated for short times. To be truthful conservation of energy only applies to closed systems. If wormholes do exist and connect between parallel universes then our universe is not in fact a closed system and there should be no violation, I am not sure if this is what you are refering to. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Mr. Schasteen, As long as you can get your main point accross, your grammer and spelling do not bother me. The poeple who are going to pick on how the message looks instead of its concept may not be worth responding to. If don't understand what you are reading, ask. You will be answered. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Thanks Mr. Jay, (I don't know your last name). I will try to be as clear as possible. A lot of the times I post things for people who are involved with my project. I sometimes use the forum to transmit bits and peices of technical information as a way to transfer data to my counterparts in different parts of the globe. I don't work with too many professors so I donnot worry about grammar(except when I post to a professor). It is much cheaper a method o communicating data then making a long distance telephone call. And calls are taken more seriously then postings on the internet. Thusly the internet is a low profile means of communication. Hushmail and transmissions of this nature are the most likely routes that would be scanned for information pertaining to national security but I still use that means of transmitting personally discovered information that is too sensitive to be posted over the public forum. There are few messages that I send over the hushmail that I do not send accross the regular forum. My philosophy is that theory is not dangerous if persons don't know how to apply the theory. Some theories can be extremely dangerous if persons know how to apply it, especially if those persons do not know how to apply that theory safely. This is why I usually don't work on my own projects. I merely do the thinking and provide the self made schematics of my devices. I provide explainations to the developer and let them do their job. They have the engineers and software to do all the complex designs. And they are located on the other side of the country so if I did by mistake give the designs to a device that puts out a little too much power I will have time to hit the deck. (that last line was just a joke.) My devices are pretty safe. At most I believe that the limitations in the material will not allow the production of too much electrical energy, for the materials in the generator will melt down at around 3,000 volts at less then 100 amps. This is just a guess so don't quote me. sincerely, Edwin G. Schasteen | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Thanks Mr. Jay, (I don't know your last name). I will try to be as clear as possible. A lot of the times I post things for people who are involved with my project. I sometimes use the forum to transmit bits and peices of technical information as a way to transfer data to my counterparts in different parts of the globe. I don't work with too many professors so I donnot worry about grammar(except when I post to a professor). It is much cheaper a method o communicating data then making a long distance telephone call. And calls are taken more seriously then postings on the internet. Thusly the internet is a low profile means of communication. Hushmail and transmissions of this nature are the most likely routes that would be scanned for information pertaining to national security but I still use that means of transmitting personally discovered information that is too sensitive to be posted over the public forum. There are few messages that I send over the hushmail that I do not send accross the regular forum. My philosophy is that theory is not dangerous if persons don't know how to apply the theory. Some theories can be extremely dangerous if persons know how to apply it, especially if those persons do not know how to apply that theory safely. This is why I usually don't work on my own projects. I merely do the thinking and provide the self made schematics of my devices. I provide explainations to the developer and let them do their job. They have the engineers and software to do all the complex designs. And they are located on the other side of the country so if I did by mistake give the designs to a device that puts out a little too much power I will have time to hit the deck. (that last line was just a joke.) My devices are pretty safe. At most I believe that the limitations in the material will not allow the production of too much electrical energy, for the materials in the generator will melt down at around 3,000 volts at less then 100 amps. This is just a guess so don't quote me. sincerely, Edwin G. Schasteen | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Hey I believe that you are right with your tree theory. Though that was a vast understatement. For it has been theorized that whenever it is possible for an atom to take more than one course of action a parralel dimension can must and will form to make sure all possible roads are traveled. So in theory as I am typing there are hundreds of different universes being formed from the multitude of different possibilities of the millions of atoms in the rooms actions. Its an interesting thought to think that somewhere in one of the uncountable dimensions you could be dead or worse while you live in this one reading my message. (chew on that for a while) | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
I am a firm believer that everything is perfect and that nothing in our Universe could possibly be any different. In other words, every thing that is is the result of everything that was. I believe that by changing the past we change its memory and the memory of the present. The time traveler's memory would not have changed, and he would have no one to substantiate his claims that he changed anything. I believe that some of the things John said were false. His mentioning that his worldline would not change as a result of anything he did, for example. I believe that may have been the *theory* when he left, but I believe that was merely because things that changed could not be substantiated by anyone else. If no one mentioned any changes then I'd keep the fact to myself as well (as opposed to being accused of changing the future for the worse). The confidence level that John mentioned sounded very accurate to my impression of reality, and effects of the degree of variance that he described sounded very plausable. However, the past that he traveled to, in my opinion, was indeed his past and he was indeed changing his future and the future of everyone involved. I also believe that the confidence varience only indicated the difference between his present and the future of our present because of the changes he would be making in the reality he would be returning to. It may also be possible that because of the changes he made that his machine no longer had an accurate reading of the quantity of effect his presence would have. In addition, he may have caused other problems such as the site of his departure being moved and therefore the substance of his return location not being as it was when he left. | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
Profile for TimeTravel_0 Name: TimeTravel_0 Title stranger Total Posts 1 Registered on 03/21/04 10:40 PM Hmm....how can a post made from 2000 be made on a member who joined 2 months ago? | ||||||||
|
| |||||||
also why are all members after a certain date have the "REGed" field in their sidebars. This is too strange, speaking from someone like myself who runs and modifies forum software for public web forums. |
|
