"The future ain't what it used to be."

Physics problems, G.E. displacment shell:

creedo299

Timekeeper
There is a technical problem concerning the workings of the said John Titor General Electric Time Displacement machine.

The problem lies within both the perception that One, a black hole of some sort is produced.

This was the banter project in Anomalies.net, concerning the perception that a black hole was produced, so allowing timetravel?

The correct assumption would be, that due to mechanical and electric discovery, black hole-like actions had been achieved.

Here is the problem.

Now imagine an apparatus designed within the said mini-tippler cylinder, that when under active movement, that their magnetic action, creates what is known as a pulsed width variable.

This is or would be similar to a flash of negative energy, which would divide time and space, so that a shell would be produced.This energy would separate a space and time junction, separate from say any one standard and realized space-time?

The problem with the Titor visualization said, is that there is both a double inner and outshell, that is connected by some kind of manifold mechanics, which is not fully understood as of yet.

The problem lies in how the inner and outer shell relate.

This one tenet should be open for discussion, as there is no true visualization of how a person can be a passenger within these series of inner and outer semi-black holes and still have survived?

If ridership is attained within these semi-black holes, then these said black holes, via their natures, must not be true black holes, but only approximations thereof.

Two other problems arise, since the second shell is not a single black hole and this is, that the second shell reported some eight feet out, is a double shell and not a single one.

So the feature of the second shell, is that it is a metered by mechanics shell and therefore a nonspecific locality.

These claims within said time travel mechanisms, are the crux of the said G.E. time displacement unit and can not be supposed, or argued over.
 
Time not 0.

A Naked singularity can not exist on the second shell even if the second shell is an approximation of a Kerr.

The second shell has to be a nonspecific locality, which means in the technical sense, the outer shell is never in the same place, at any one time.

Again, what I'm only after, is the relationship of the first generative shell, to the second.

There must be a double flux manifold, in order for the second shell to exist at all.
 
Have you a positive shell varients of 4.3 omps with the first shell, and a negative shell varients of 1.8 omps with the seceond shell.

Just keep justing the omps into they intertwend. And, what type of crystal are u useing.
 
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=omp&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&cop=mss&tab= pick one and define omp?

You stipulate that you know the interlace manifold of the said G.E. Time displacement unit?

So then by your say this is an interlaced manifold?

This would mean it would be an interconnected manifold?

DA said>any and ! You don't know what a omp is to a amp, if u do sent me a reply, if not keep studding.
And do u know what type of crsytal to use.

First point, you spelled studying, studding, which means I would have to have sexual intercourse with females horses........? Mmmugh' nice jesture, however human wimen are a little more in my taste to range area.

Secondly, you're now saying that the projected field, which composes the Kerr's field, is the product of a crystal emitted frequency?

What I was thinking is that it was the rapid intereaction of inlayed sections of rare Earth castings, held within a precision rotational boss, enacted upon by a set frequency current.

So this then means that both cylinders feed into a crystal?

P.s. why don't you use a word correct card and clean up your English before you post?

Seems to me, you print allot like Tom_A.
 
If I had a working set of drawings and tried to send them to you, more than likely they would be intercepted by someone in authority?

You want something for nothing and I don't think you are who you say you are.
 
Re correct syntax:If I had a working set of drawings and tried to send them to you, more than likely they would be intercepted by someone in authority?

You want something for nothing. I also think you are not, who you say you are?\

Creedo later was proven wrong.

Darkangel is a big mysterious person somewhere in Alsaka??
 
Back
Top