((First, where does your interest in the (our) U.S. Constitution stem from? Why do you think it is so vital for us to read and understand it?))

After the war, the United States had split into five separate regions based on the various factors and military objectives they each had. There was a great deal of anger directed toward the Federal government and a revival of states rights was becoming paramount. However, in their attempt to create an economic form of government, the political and military leaders at the time decided to hold one last Constitutional Congress in order to present a psychological cohesion from the old system. During this Congress, the leaders discovered and decided that coming up with a new and better form of government was nearly impossible. The original Constitution itself was not the problem it was the ignorance of the people that lived under it.

((Second, do you not like your "new" Constitution? Or feel that it is not as effective as the original?))

From my viewpoint, it’s very effective. I am a very strong believer in local or state’s rights.

((Third, you keep saying that you will be going back to your worldline soon, how soon will this be?))

There are certain windows I must wait for in order to leave. There will be two this year. The first one opens this spring.

((Is it physically possible for you to get back to THIS time line once you leave?))

Not with the machine I have now.

((If all 7 Billion of us here each had our own time machine do you think that would we would end up trashing the rest of the local worldlines?))

Since everything is already happening and possible on different worldlines, the answer is yes….and no.

((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.))

I suppose from your vantage point that’s a fair assessment. I would call myself more of a centrist. Although I understand the “gun rights” issue here, I cannot relate to it all and it is a common point of argument with my mother. I keep saying her tune will change in about ten years and she’ll be cleaning shotguns in her sleep but it doesn’t help. If it makes you feel any better, I never shot anyone who wasn’t trying to kill me.

((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?))

When you say “us”, what do you mean? Do you mean “you”? Where would you go if you had my machine? How do you think the rest of the world would react to the U.S. having a time machine and they didn’t?

((You said that you traveled back in time from 2036 to 1975 with a ~1-2% divergence. You also mentioned that in your time frame a 0% divergence is sort of a myth, i.e technologically improbable.))

Yes, a “ZD” is thought to be impossible. However, consider that an exact entry point “may” not be necessary to get home. The important factor is the path, not the destination. Under multiple world theory, there are an infinite number of “homes” that I could return to that don’t have me there. The divergence for that window is somewhere near .0002377%.

((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.))

Parallel universes exist independently of each other and only interact to avoid the collapse of the wave function for any given particle or event that you are looking at. I like to imagine it as a series of parallel lines crossed by a wavy wave. Each point on the wavy line where a straight line crosses it represents an alternate outcome. The multiple “yous” on each worldline record a different result for the activity of the particle.

((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.))

I agree with you that an explanation doesn’t make it so. However you can build a model to describe physical behavior. Even if the model is not complete, its “truth” can be measured by how well it predicts the behavior it describes.

((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?))

I believe the closest non-related evidence for multiple universes right now comes from the physics (derived from special relativity) of rotating (Kerr) black holes. If you examine a typical Penrose map, science agrees that you can travel to “other universes” through these cosmic oddities. They can’t be different places in your own universe (worldline) because you would have to violate the speed of light limit to get there.

If I understand TT_0 properly (which, I'm afraid, may be debatable)and if I may be so presumptuous as to risk an idea based on Trott's question to test my understanding:

If the potential divergens is approximately .00024%, then the difference between "adjacent" worldlines has the highest probability to be negligible.

Assuming that, then a TT_0 from "the next worldline over" is likely to have left to go on a similar mission and will return to "the original" TT_0's worldline.

That is, the TT_0 we've obviously found so stimulating will return to a different worldline, surely, but it would be so similar to his own, it might as well be his original.

Similarly, a TT_0 ("not ours") will return from a worldline similar to our own to "our TT_0's" worldline and be such a perfect doppleganger that the "originating" worldline recieves the IBM, and his Mom never knows the difference.

Am I even close, TT_0?

The reality of infinite possibilities is rather difficult to get a grip on and if it were not for the math, I would delegate it to the realm of religion. I like to think of it as standing in a room with mirrors on all the walls. I can look to my right and left and see many “mes” all doing exactly the same thing. If we all took a step to our right and passed through a dimensional doorway to the next mirrored room, it would be very difficult to tell if anything had changed. In that sense, there are an infinite number of worldlines waiting for me to return with the computer. If I can get to one of them, I have completed my mission.

((Similarly, a TT_0 ("not ours") will return from a worldline similar to our own to "our TT_0's" worldline and be such a perfect doppleganger that the "originating" worldline recieves the IBM, and his Mom never knows the difference.))

Shadow
unregistered posted 26 January 2001 12:55
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What happened to Pamala and TT_O? They both dropped off the board at the same time.
PC crash, hanky panky?

maybe the Mighty Moderators will check into it. Mop will get to the bottom of it. he'll be able to tell us what is happening to mysterious page 11!
TTO- check your email I sent you something!
-pamela

That is interesting what you said about parallel universes having a time delay. Infact just a couple of days ago I came up with a very similar conclusion.

I believe that all mass quantities have both a linear fourth dimensional past and a transverse fourth dimensional past. The parallel masses are masses existant in the parallel time frames.

I believe that an instant of time in the parallel universe a 'transverse' instant that is in phase with any given instant in this universe is exactly or approxametly one instant in the past with respect to the instant in this universe and would appear (and I could be wrong about this assumption) to exist within the same given space as negative one instant in this world line one 'linear' instant in the past.

However if we were viewing the travsverse instant from the position of the linear instant--that is--if we were to view the parallel instant from one instant back in time, then the transverse instant would not appear to coexist in the same space as our the instant that we occupy but, instead,
would apear to propagate perpindicalar-or-would be perpindicular to our position. This is all hypthetical not theoretical.

I leave you with this graghical model for review. if one were to trace all linear instants along their past world lines to the bigbang, and if one were to trace all transverse time instants back to the big bang, and then gragh these events, one would discover that all transverse time instants are ninety degrees out of phase with the linear time instants.

I believe that one would also discover that these time instants travel outward in the form of temperal waves and that the bandwidth of these of both the transverse time instants and linear parallel time instant's bandwidth streches as time accelerates into the future as though time were exploding into an expance.

I believe that the rate at which transverse and linears instant's bandwidth increases simultaneous and equal so that the phase differencial between all linear instants and thier parallel counterparts the transverse instants has always been constant from the big bang till now. At the big bang all linear instants and all transverse instants merge.

Think or write the following graph to replicate the mathematical logic behind this phenomenon. Get a pieve of paper and draw a right triangle. Make it so that the horizontal line points to 3 O'clock and the vertical line points to 12 O'clock. Now take the ruler or what ever straight object you used to draw the triangle and draw a diagonal line from the intersection of the vertical line and horizontal line to 2 O'clock. Now I want you to measure the length of the vertical line and then divide the length into quarters and place a small mark on the vertical lines at each of the quarters. Now I want you to draw four parallel lines through the four marks on the vertical line, such that there is one line through each one of the four marks on the vertical line of our triangle. Make sure that the four lines are horizontal with respect to the line that marks the base of our right triangle. Now I want you to goe back and make sure that the diagonal line that you drew is long enough to intersect each of the four parallel lines you drew. Now the parallel lines on the graph are time instants 1-4. The vertical and horizontal line is a the measure of a mass in three dimensional space. Now you will notice that each of the four vertical lines instants 1-4 intersect the diagonal line at the 1/3 mark so that each parallel time line 1-4 is always divided at the 2/3rds mark.

Yet if one looks closely enough one will notice that the vertical line of our triangle, the diagonal that we drew, and the base of our triangle all intersect at a point.

Thus 2/3rds and 1/3rd are equal quantities at an infinitely small point. If the parallel time instants follows after this mathematical topology then the transverse instants and thier parallel counterparts all exist out of phase thoughout history accept at the exact instant of the big bang.

Thus if one can triangulate the temperal location of the big bang while in time warp the ship could travel through temperal space to into the big bang and use the big bang to as sort of an infinite amplifier to solidify the and or isolate the location of ones exact world line and thus travel through time with zero divergance.

Does any of this sound correct TT0?

Inquisitively,

There are some who believe that memory is some sort of information transfer or communication with the “yous” in the past, across worldlines or universes. Although this is seemingly quite ridiculous, if you think that could be true, than physics tells us that the same information transfer from our future selves on other worldlines is not only possible but certain.))))

If you could occassionally communicate with the you's from different world lines (day ahead)(day behind) would this explain the common dejavu people seem to have at times?
the definition of dejavu is as follows "which is described as the illusion of having previously experienced something actually being encountered for the first time"
hmmm...this is very interesting indeed.
If this be true it could explain alot of other things as well such as an unexplained bad feeling or fear of not getting on a plane that you find out later crashes.
Is it possible to recieve messages from other world lines? if so how is it done?
how do you pick up on such a thing? or is this something all together different. we have all heard the stories of things like this happening but often times there are no explainations.

I sit down at the kitchen table and slide my coffee cup to the left one foot. A second world line is created that is exactly the same as the first ......except the cup is in a different spot. Both lines are so similar and close in time and space that the miraculous event goes un-noticed and un-applauded.

Every event and object of a parallel world that does NOT differ from our present one IS the present one and is shared over time and space, with all the alternates. Only the differences would be detectable and those differences would be by definition elsewhere. We could have "parallel" worlds by the zillions glued so tight together as to be "too close to see".

Your idea certainly seems to be a plausible hypothesis.

I may be oversimplifying the matter (or have missed a major point entirely), but I can't help but wondering about the physical ramifications of being even temporally present at the big bang.

That is, wouldn't being there at the time of the mother of all explosions be a little difficult to survive?

Let me change gears in this post to present a slightly oddball idea:

I truly like the idea of slight temporal differences between worldlines. If we take this concept a step further, and looked further across (as opposed to "down") the worldlines, we may see greater differences in time. That is one worldline at our reference time 2:00pm would be at 3:00pm at another worldline further across this array of worldlines. The further across, the greater the temporal difference.

That being said, we can state that all times exist simultaneously. Therefore, time travel need not be a linear event, but rather a "skipping over" of worldlines. Of course, it can be agued that this would not be a genuine form of time travel, merely an illusory one.

So...how could this be accomplished, folks? Any ideas?

I'm guessing a singularity of some sort may still be required. However, I think Pamela and others may have really hit upon something with their ideas of deja-vu and other phenomenon. Maybe it's a bit easier than I've been thinking.

I created a theory for this phenomena, which I called “Temporal Networking and its Mechanics.” However, it wasn’t to my satisfaction, so I decided on taking it down from my website. It’s hard for me to describe what I am feeling, and even more since I am not a scientist. However, I feel like each day that passes, I come closer to understanding this feeling, and my place in this world.

I still don’t buy your story though, just the whole way you’ve come forward with it, just doesn’t feel right to me. And you never showed us a picture of your machine or your uniform. Let’s see your credentials, something we can bring out in the open. That way, you can free everyone from doubt, and everyone will believe your story.

Seems only fair, and you’d have everyone’s unconditional attention. Which is, what I’m sure it’s what you want. You said it your self, you want to be interesting…

And since where bringing up things said in the past, why haven’t you commented on what you said about not caring about your worldline? I know someone made the mistake of answering for you, but I don’t think that will happen again.

So come on, share with us?

((And you never showed us a picture of your machine or your uniform.))

Actually, there are numerous places I have posted pictures. I believe the links are still on the board.

((why haven’t you commented on what you said about not caring about your worldline? I know someone made the mistake of answering for you, but I don’t think that will happen again.))

cannot do a direct link so use the above and click on the topic- Timelord's anonymous
and then click on -anonymous gravity/time device pictures. you will find all the pictures there.

sincerely,
pamela

(((Just to add to the recent theory on Déjà vu. I have about on an average day 5 deja vu experiences. Accompanied by visions, and manifestations. Wherever I go, I know in my mind that I have been there before. Whoever I meet, I know that I have met them before somewhere, or some time. Although as a child they were much more frequent, the intensity has since gone up from the last 2 years.)))

Trott has made a very good point there. If you leave your worldline, some of your friends and familymembers will never see you again on that worldline. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that would be a very immoral thing to do.

Besides what's the point of fixing the Unix problem if there's an infinite number of worldlines where this problem doesn't even exist or has been fixed. After all your own worldline doesn't get the IBM 5100 anyway, so the people that sent you on this mission are still having that problem.

Also, you stated that "to the people on your worldline you'd only be gone for a split second". This can't be true, because to them you'll go away and never return.

Please elaborate. :-)

Greetings from euh...rainy Amsterdam

Timetravel_0 stated clearly that returning to your own worldline is thought to be impossible. Besides if something like that were to happen, it's very improbable that it would happen to the worldline that Timetravel_0 originated from.

Consequently, Timetravel_0's friends and family are left alone and will never see Timetravel_0 again, which sounds very cruel to me. I hope you said goodbye to them Timetravel_0. At least you won't notice.

Greetings

Roel

(If you leave your worldline, some of your friends and family members will never see you again on that worldline. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that would be a very immoral thing to do.)

I’m not sure why you think it would be immoral. Don’t soldiers today go on duties they may not return from?

It depends on how you define what the real “me” is. If you consider the mirror example again, as all of the “mes” step one room to the right, the family and friends in that room (and the time traveler for that matter) would not be able to tell the difference. The probability of us noticing a difference is based on the divergence of the trip. If all events and outcomes are certain, there are worldlines where I do return for every worldline I don’t return to. All the “moral” events would then balance out to zero. Again, it’s hard to judge good and bad outcomes…only good and bad decisions.

((Besides what's the point of fixing the Unix problem if there's an infinite number of worldlines where this problem doesn't even exist or has been fixed. After all your own worldline doesn't get the IBM 5100 anyway, so the people that sent you on this mission are still having that problem.))

Our actions and decisions are based on the knowledge we have in our own worldline. Yes, the bell shaped curve is a useful tool but if we are capable of change for the better than we feel we should at least try.
Even if “I” don’t return to my exact worldline, a similar “me” probably will. Besides, I just look at it as helping a worldline where their time traveling me didn’t show up but I did.

((Also, you stated that "to the people on your worldline you'd only be gone for a split second". This can't be true, because to them you'll go away and never return.))

Again, I refer to the mirror example.

((Oh, I seem to have missed another statement by Trott saying that another "Timetravel_0" will return to the worldline, but that sounds virtually impossible!))

I’m not sure I said another time traveler “will” return, I think I said they “could” return. The location/gravity “map” I have of my path getting here could be duplicated with a fairly high degree of accuracy. It’s just that my machine was not designed to do that.

I think it’s a mistake to rely on the concept of the impossible when dealing with the reality of multiple worlds. Keep in mind there are an infinite number of “yous” on infinite worldlines having completely different experiences with “me”.

((Timetravel_0 stated clearly that returning to your own worldline is thought to be impossible.))

Again, I do not have enough knowledge to completely understand all the consequences of multiple worldlines. And it is not my intention to prove or disprove that you're a timetraveler, I just enjoy exploring all the possiblilties.

I see your point now. Another "you" that traveled back in time from another worldline, might end up going back to the worldline of which you originated, because of the divergance. However there's still a big chance that Copy_of_Timetravel_0 will not return to your ZD worldline and thus leaving your friends and family without a copy of you.

You mentioned that the same goes for soldiers in our worldline. Yes, true. But do you not disaprove of war, just like me? I think it's immoral so I stand with my previous statement.

Also, wanting to make things better is not a bad thing, but what's the use of bringing back an IBM 5100 to a slightly different worldline, knowing that there are just as many or even more worldlines in which no-one returns to bring back the IBM 5100. It sounds a bit like charity in favour of other worldlines.

Greetings from (hey it's dry) Amsterdam

Yeah I'd CERTAINLY agree with you that there is no evidence to support the idea that multiple universes CANNOT be so, just as there is evidence that they COULD be so, but as yet are unproved.

The problem they present for me is purly logical, not based on anything I can prove either way.

Just as Time02112 has stated (if I interpret correctly,) my reference to free will is irrespective of whether I accept it or not. Point taken. But, I'm still left with having to ask "why"?

Physics to me is perfectly logical in all things we know and understand so far. Multiverse Theory violates this logic in MY mind. It's an "Occam's Razor" thing.

But hey... If Multiple Universes exist, so be it. As yet, I don't see it and need more evidence before I can buy into it whole heartedly.

The "memory" idea is interesting tho.

By the way.....

To ALL...

I started another thread on the topic before I noticed this one was rolling. Sorry. Maybe the moderator can delete it or throw my post I made on it into this one.

rgrunt, borgus and Time02112 please catch the post I made there and then we can pick it up here if you all prefer.

I used to play with stuff like this when I was 1 year old, so maybe that's why it looks familiar to me.

Nevertheless, there is no way, that that device could have gotten you here from almost 40 years into the future. That's just to rich... =) Lol.

You came to this board claiming to be a Time Traveler. No one should go unquestioned of their motives if say they are. You can be as articulate with your words as much as you want. And it may convince some that you are who you claim to be. However, the fact of the matter still remains, all I did was ask the questions no one was asking. So please forgive me for being a Time Travel Activist with morals.

A fighter for Truth and Freedom, till the end,

Probably because of the confusion of the board, you have not yet commented to my post directed toward you. I'm very interested in your further comments on the greed of humanity during this time, and perhaps still in your time.

<[having lived through the self destruction of the human race, what sort of future do you imagine after 2036? Will humans colonolize and expand through the solar system? Or will we be forever bound to our inward existance, measuring the past, fearfull of the future.>]

You're unique perspective of humanity at this point (2001 and 2036) is valuable. Please share as much thoughts as you can.

Also, can you record a quick voice message for us before you leave?

What I like about TT_0 is his adherence to "character". Meaning that this is first and foremost a board devoted to Time Travel which at this point in our human history is pure fiction.

Even the moderators and creators of this board are careful to point that out right on the home page at the bottom. Lest we forget.

So... having said that, I must admit TT_0 has woven a personna that is rather well crafted in my opinion. In other words, I take him as he prefers to be referenced to. It's a "camp" thing. A Tongue-in-cheek kinda process.

I find his philosphical dissertations to be interesting, and for the most part, reflective of an idealism that indicate what shape he would LIKE to see the world BE in in 40 years. With a dose of caution thrown in for what he sees as possible threats to further enlightenment, and the erosion of personal freedoms that are occuring around us on an almost daily basis. Actually quite creative on his part if we take it all with the grain of salt that is apropos to the situation.

In the end, if Time Travel is to be solved, is it not goung to take creative thought to do it?

We've beaten the old concepts to death on this board for a few years now.

I merely suggest that ANY approach to the problem that deviates from these old concepts is a creative and therefore productive one.

If TT_0 wants to assume the role of futirist-as-time-traveller, I say OK. But then I'm a pragmatic sort of guy who is into the sceptism of "show me the money" mentality.

Is it possible to show how some of his mechanics cannot possibly be true? Of Course.

But is it possible to show how his philosophical approach is flawed? Well, that becomes another problem entirely. Not one so easy to dismiss.

Why is it that every time someone posts questions or remarks for TT_0, someone always answers for him? Why is this? Some sort of conspiracy to back him up or something? Geesh…

As a result of the many conflicts, no, there were no official Olympics after 2004. However, it appears they may be revived in in 2040.

((would it not be possible to use that recording to back track to your original starting point without any divergence at all? It seems that all it would take it is a couple lines of programming in the computer-controlled system))

Perhaps it’s better to say it’s so highly improbable as to be considered impossible. A good example is the concept of trying to get closer to something by cutting the distance in half for every step you take. Since the computer is basically making calculations from an imperfect model of reality, there are no absolutes. I also believe there is a theory that states you would have to violate the speed of light limit to have a perfect ZD.

((Have you ever read the book Six Nightmares by Anthony Lake? Why only two windows of opportunity for you to start your time machine? Would this have something to do with the weather?))

I haven’t read that book but I will try to find it if you recommend it. The weather isn’t a factor as much as gravitational tidal forces are at the point of arrival.

((You mentioned that the same goes for soldiers in our worldline. Yes, true. But do you not disaprove of war, just like me? I think it's immoral so I stand with my previous statement.))

I disapprove of murder. Man as a species is incapable of changing his nature through will alone and war is a tool of biology. The ability for war sleeps in each one of us and we must decide what we will do before the beast awakens. As for morality, again I point to the “universal” balance of good and evil. For every worldline where there is peace, there is a worldline that has destroyed itself.

((what's the use of bringing back an IBM 5100 to a slightly different worldline, knowing that there are just as many or even more worldlines in which no-one returns to bring back the IBM 5100. It sounds a bit like charity in favour of other worldlines.))

The decisions and actions we take as individuals can only help those who we have direct interaction with. I believe it is wrong to be capable of helping and do nothing. My struggle is in the irony that if everyone just “did nothing”, on every worldline, there would be no action and thus no immorality or evil (no good either).

((I'm very interested in your further comments on the greed of humanity during this time, and perhaps still in your time. You're unique perspective of humanity at this point (2001 and 2036) is valuable. Please share as much thoughts as you can.))

Please feel free to ask anything you like.

((Also, can you record a quick voice message for us before you leave?))

Yes. I am considering trying to videotape my departure and having my parents post it after I leave. That should keep you all busy for a while.

((having lived through the self destruction of the human race, what sort of future do you imagine after 2036? Will humans colonolize and expand through the solar system? Or will we be forever bound to our inward existance, measuring the past, fearfull of the future.))

Right... Why not give us your location, so we can all see your departure take place in person? For all we know, you may make some visual special effects and pass it off as the real thing.

-J.C.

Your answers made perfect sense. However, I found another glitch in your "defence".

It's true, if you're able to help someone, you should. By going back to 1975, an infinite number of other worldlines emerge, just because of you coming to 1975. At least half of them undoubtly has "a happy ending", but the other half doesn't. So while helping people on certain worldlines, you're probably making the lifes of people on other worldlines miserable. Just a thought!

Greetings from dry Amsterdam

Roel van Houten

P.S. TimeTravelActivist, you seem to suffer from some form of paranoia. Snap out of it. No offense.

Is a Police officer not concerned about being shot when he goes to work?

Is walking home late at night through a dark alley safe?

Does danger not exist?

So what if we react to them, and decide to take caution.

Anyway's, you know what they say about those that are paranoid. They are offten right .

But no, I am not paranoid, just cautious.

-J.C.

*What kind of generators are being used to produce your energy?

*How do they work?

*Is there perhaps, any relation of interconnectedness, to our current energy problems being faced on our world-line right now that gave way to pioneer the use of the independant generators being used on your current world-line?

Please read the following, and give us your comments pertaining, and how this makes a connection to the way your world-line operates on.

I would like to point out, that the response met by the power companies in the midst of our current energy crisis in the form of "Rolling Black-Outs" is nothing short, than an act of "Capitalistic Terrorism"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You Should Hear, What I Really Think"!!

...Meanwhile, you might wish to review my recent press release.
http://www.onlinepressreleases.com/cgi-bin/secure/category.pl?L=142lst

"TAP-TEN Research Foundation To Produce Next Generation Independent Power Generators!"

Conservative approaches by reducing our usage of energy by use of other alternatives such as "Wind, Solar, or other forms of more effective insulation, is very effective, and reduces a customers electric costs, but it again places much financial burdens upon the customer, and is not a consideration to tenants who rent from building owners, that refuse to spend their profits for these upgrades, or those who simply cannot afford these much needed upgrades. Again this process will take many years before it is as common as an ordinary housould appliance.

although conservative use of our demands for power, may teach us to become more resourceful with our energy, it is no "Magic Bullet" in relation to put a stop to the ongoing energy crisis at hand.

Perhaps if our Nation's Hindsight was at best from the beginning, we would have no need for this conversation, but you must not loose sight of what a society that continues to sponsor leaders that support their own interests in the name of economic GREED! (Sorry) but it's much to late in the game to expect this to become the most effective resolution to solve our current(no pun intended) energy crisis, within a given time-frame that would put a stop to this.

In order to put an end to this ongoing problem, you must go directly to the root of the source, or "Sources" that continue to contribute to delaying any actions that would resolve these issues, and one of the most important issues that gives good reason to fight for, that any true Patriot would agree to, is in relation to my "Prior" comments on changing Legislative regulations that quite frankly, "Get in our own way" & "Prohibit" any Alternative energy efficient devices that are non-detrimental to our environment!

The following example below, represents just one, of many examples of "Available" technology that demonstrates an alternative no-detrimental to our Environment to provide us with efficient, non invasive, independent "Power Producing" alternative energy devices.

The Home Of Primordial Energy http://www.depalma.pair.com
Website of the Late Mr. Bruce Depalma
(Scroll down, and click on the "Audio" icon, to listen to a pre-recorded "Interview" from 1997 while Bruce Depalma was alive & well, as he goes into elaborated details, describing his overunity, N-1

" Homopolar electrostatic Generator."

Mr. Bruce Depalma has received a series of International Patent Awards for this Incredible Invention based on Faraday's principles of extracting electricity direct from rotating doughnut shaped magnets counter-rotating with opposing polarity.

Welcome to "FREE ENERGY " : Don't take MY word for it. Take it from the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office! http://newebmasters.com/freeenergy

...or you may wish to examine various others out there who have been attempting for several years to bring "Alternative" Energy Devices to market through their research. Again, it is not the lack thereof for reasonably sound methods to "REPLACE" our need for fossil fuels, however before any of them can become a reality, we must go direct to the source & attempt to "REPLACE" the ambitious intentions by those leaders whom are fueled by greed, & will stop at nothing to blockade anything that detracts from their kingdoms of centralized power, depending on the oil cartels!
--------------------------------------------------
__________________________________________________

NOTE:] All of the following links can be found at the following website of Alternative Sciences http://www.thwww.com/mrwizard/aspage1.htm

ZERO-POINT FIELD-information on Dr. Haisch's theoretical research into the Zero-Point Field.

FREE ENERGY- Theory- Devices and Progess, A review by Patrick G. Bailey, Ph. D.

REVIEW OF FREE ENERGY EXPERIMENTS--summary review is presented of the experiments and demonstrations that have been reported in the past few years to produce near-unity or over-unity operation.

STIRLING ENGINE-The Stirling engine was invented in 1816 and can use any type of fuel, as well as solar energy.

GEET Releases Technology For FREE! - Paul Pantone founder of Global Environmental Energy Technology recently announced that he would release their "Small Engine Plans" (< 20 HP) for FREE! Plans are now available online. [P>COLD FUSION-a list of links to sources of cold fusion info available on the net.

COLD FUSION TECHNOLOGY-See what the newest research is yielding, and learn the intriguing possibilities of what the future might hold.

ENERGY INFORMATION-Automobiles achieved between 171(1936) and 376(1973) mpg. Yet, government, industry, media and 'environmental groups' say that to achieve 40 mpg an automobile must be downsized.

ELECTRIFYING TIMES-breakthroughs in electric car design are making this mode of transportation more of a feasible reality.

PERFECT SCIENCE AD-has developed a formula to aid in the purification of hydrocarbons. This formula succeeded in breaking the hydrocarbon chain, transforming it into fatty and amino acids. A MUST VISIT SITE.

THREE EXPERIMENTS ON FREE ENERGY-an open letter written to the Space Energy Association, from Harold Aspden.

INSTITUTE FOR NEW ENERGY-Advanced Energy Conversion, New Energy, Free Energy, Zero-Point-Energy, Rotational-Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, and more.

POLLUTION-FREE Energy Generator -a claim that a perpetual motion device that does not break the first and second laws of thermodynamics has been designed.

FREE ENERGY PAGE-Free Energy Antigravity website by Rick Todish

GYROSCOPIC INERTIAL THRUSTER-This website is a detailed description of a tested and proven "reactionless" inertial propulsion device.

JOSEF HASSLBERGER WEB SITE-an attempt to catalyse energies for change. The economy, physics and technology are in dire need of renewal!

IARC-Ionically Assisted Reaction Cell-a unique fuel cell that could answer our electrical supply problems.

MORE BEARDEN-The Files in this area are produced by T. E. Bearden. The Directories include: The Final Secret of Free Energy with Comment, plus many others.

TESLA COIL-Tesla’s best-known invention
LOST INVENTIONS OF TESLA-links to numerous Tesla sites.
TESLA COILS- How they work, with excellent photos.
TESLA'S ELECTRIC CAR!!!-very interesting article from KeelyNet.
TESLA'S Free Energy Receiver-patented in 1901 as An Apparatus for the Utilization of Radiant Energy.

Dear Time02112,

Thank you for your kind words of support. I have just updated my
alternate web site, and another update will come later. You should
visit: . You may want to bookmark our web site
and watch for updates. We have seven more busts to donate, two of
which are going to the University of Wisconsin and Purdue University.
Also, we are negotiating with Columbia University now. After paying
for these busts our coffer is bare, so we are planning to resume our
T-shirt sales later to earn money for additional busts. We are not
selling them now. Perhaps later you will want to support us by
buying a T-shirt. We hope so because we can use all the help we can
get. Our quest has not been an easy one.

Did you happen to see the PBS documentary on Tesla December 12? If
not, you should watch your TV guide for possible reruns. Stacy
Keach, the Hollywood actor, narrates the voice of Tesla. I recently
received a letter from Stacy who also congratulates us on our work.

See:

The documentary is based on Margaret Cheney's latest book, TESLA,
MASTER OF LIGHTNING. She cites our work in preserving Tesla's memory
three times in this book. It is available from Barnes and Noble at
the following URL:
http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?title=Tesla+-+Master+of+Lightning&match=exact&options=and&userid=5RPR2R5XA7&srefer=

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to write me.

Regards,

John W. Wagner
Ann Arbor, MI http://www.concentric.net/~jwwagner

We welcome you & your associates to join us, and share your talents to work for our common goal to provide free energy to the world, "In Honour of the Memory of Mr. Nicola Tesla"
--- Time02112
TAP-TEN Research Foundation http://Tap-Ten.org

Your use of the english language is, for the lack of a better word "bland". It is very good english, smooth well paced and perhaps more meaningfull and accurate, than I am used to hearing. Better than I can wright myself, in fact. There isn't enough "color" there to make me think your are a professional wrighter, but maybe you could be.

My point is that I don't detect anything in your language use that is "futuristic" or that would peg you down to any particular time or place of up-bringing. I'm far from an expert on the subject, but I'll bet a linguist would have a field day with it.

Question: would your introduction of future language terms, if you used them, have any undesireable effects? Perhaps causing time feed back loops?

In short, you are just too damned logical. We don't get much of that these days.

Thanx again for the links.

You are the purveyor of reference material around here.

I wish I had "Time" to be as thorough about it as you.

(Perhaps I do in another Universe and just don't know it.)

It is my contention that there is, and has always been some form of inter-connectedness between the emperical perceptions of Science & Physics, and the Etherical/Esoterical & Religious fields of study in relation to our earliest accounts of human history, dating back to the cradle of civilization in Sumeria & Babylon (which is the oldest known records of earth's human history.)

and it's continued connection to why it is every 3600 yrs that we seem to have mysteriously jumped by quantum leaps into evolution & technological advanvements?

have you heard of the tensor coil?
ive heard it can be used for time travel in a certain configuration..

Makes 2012 and the time in and 'round there something for us all to look forward to...

Creativity and attention to detail becomes...vital. *smiling* I was glad to see your posting. Challenging boundaries.

Be safe and dream sweetly when you do.

I'd say on the philosophical level I certainly agree with you.

What's odd, is that on the philosophical level I agree with TT_0 also.

Go figure!

For me, It's really about how we can apply creative thought to solving the problems that have plagued the human race since it's inception.

If we are ever to solve the question of "Time Travel" or any other of the newly aware concepts we face now since we have come technologically this far, it will be through throwing off the old prejudices of the past, having the FAITH in ourselves to do so, and give up the antogonistic ways we have lived by for so many generations.

Frankly, to me, the only "clan" left on Earth is the Human Race. WE ARE IT. And it is time we start viewing ourselves as "Earthlings" instead of Frenchmen, or Americans, or Jews, or Hindus, or White Guys, or Negroes, or Trailer Trash, or Kings.

Hey, WE are the inhabitants of Earth. And it's time for us to start thinking like it.

In the end, we ALL have something to say.

And it behooves ALL of us to at least listen.

Next subject. That giant sucking sound you hear? Its the electric grid sucking the life out of the economy. You see y2k didn't work, so now they have to SHUT our power off the hard way.

(PS) what ever you do don't try hiding in the Bushes..... hate to hit and run butttttttttttttttttttttt

*little smile* NOT of the spiritual persuasion per se... more science.

Once again, challenges traditional thought.
www.eurekalert.org/releases/ns-wim013101.html

Be safe and dream sweetly.

Nice article.

Thanx.

I hope rgrunt sees this. I think it's along the same lines he's hypothesizing. At least his "energy density" idea anyway.

This results in a higher energy density to the quarks and a smaller space-time density in the quarks. If my theory is correct one can calculate the difference between the density of a quark and an electron by finding out how far one would have to pry a strong force apart before the strong force would equal an infinite density.

That radius corresponds to the energy density of an electron compressed to a piont. Thus to increase the radius of a strong force gluon is to increase the energy density of the quarks.

This energy density increase of the quarks results in a space-time density within the quarks equal to 1/e^2. Now the energy density of an electron is measured by the density of the gluons that mediate the strongforce between the quarks within the electron.

Since quarks increase in energy density as they are pryed a part the space time density will decrease as the quarks increase and the gravitational forces exerted by an electron will increase as the electron is split apart.

This is because one of the unique properties of strong force is that strong force increases in strength as the strong force is pryed apart. The space-time density within the quarks is much less then the space-time density within the electron itself. This is because the gluon is much less dense energy wise then the quarks themselves.

When one measures the energy mass of an electron one is actually measureing the lattice of energy that surrounds the quarks which is an intertwining of strong force glouns. Since the gloun force is surounds the electrons quark mass like a field and since the space-time density within the eletrons inner quark mass is much less then the space-time density within the strong force gloun that surounds the electron, the strength of the gravitational pull of the electron increases more then likely to infinity as one approaches the center mass of an electron as a result of the decrease in space-time density to zero at the centermass of the electron at which the energy density is infinite.

This means that the outermost energy force field is less massive then the inner parts of the electron as is supported by the 'confusing' experiments.

There are two reasons that an electron does not crush as a result of infinite gravitational force at the center of the electron. First it requires a greater then infinite force to crush a mass to beyond the center mass of the object. And second, Time becomes reversed beyond the center mass of eletron. Thus the mass beyond the centermass of an electron is superluminal and mediated by tachyons.

Thus when a greater then infinite force is applied to crush the electron; once that force travels beyond the center mass of the electron the direction of the work being done by the force reverses. This causes an Greater then infinite force deflecting back through the force as a result of the negative time component causing the electron to assume it's possitive mass form.

sincerely,

I even heard from Dr. Michio Kaku the other night, on the radio, he spoke of this, and mentioned that it is a "Misnomer" to say that it is "Nothing" in the space between electrons & atoms, that in fact "Something" is actualy there! (electrons from the quantum vaccum of space.) again we must first get by this, and try to understand it more, as in relation to what is happening here, and how we can use this to our advantage, and then perhaps we will better understand the plausability factors for free energy, overunity, anti-gravity, Time~Travel, and the abundunt power of space needed for propulsion & power to make these things work.

Very interesting.

Your depictions of Quantum Particle Thoery are indeed formidible. You are proving to be someone who has descriptive abilities beyond what you have been given credit thus far it seems. (It appears you are a person who "holds back" a bit to see what develops in the exchange of dialog. I like that.)

I follow you on the hypothesis you offer except for one thing, but it is merely a matter of semantic definition I'm sure.

Could you elaborate on the term "space-time density". I know I questioned what you meant by "energy density" earlier, but now I do see what YOU mean by that. Your explanation was informative.

Also, when you say:

"This results in a higher energy density to the quarks and a smaller space-time density in the quarks. If my theory is correct one can calculate the difference between the density of a quark and an electron by finding out how far one would have to pry a strong force apart before the strong force would equal an infinite density."

I assume you mean counteract the strong force by prying the quarks apart, but why would not the strong force at some measurable distance reach a "breaking point" if you will, thru the action of this "prying", rather than approach an infinite density?

Would we not instead have a condition of "Free-quarks" available to establish the existence of other protons or neutrons say, providing other free quarks can be found in a similar state? Since it only takes three quarks to constitute a proton or neutron, (depending on quark color combination of course), this should be easy to do. No?

And thanks for the discourse.

Thankyou for the knowlege. Is the electron composed or held together by strong force glouns? In other words, are electrons made up of strong force? Are electrons known to be single entities not made up of any smaller partcles(accept glouns if composed of strong force)? If the electron is not made up of any strong forces then is electrons made up of weak force? I based my ussumption that electrons were composed and bound by quarks bound togetherby strong force glouns but based on you last transmission I am assuming that electrons are made up of strong force glouns(since electrons are known to be indivisible). Is my ussumption about the electron's composition correct?

Deviper,

When I speak of space-time density I am assuming that energy occupying space is the same as space being occupied by energy and also space occupying energy. I assume that space-time is a tangable substance. I see space asa quantized closed entity. I allow that space can be open but for the most part it is as closed system. By doubling the volume of space in a given region the density of space in that region will be squared( I think) just like if one were to double the volume of energy in a given region the density of that energy would be squared(I think) No I believe that they woud be cubed for we are measuring energy per unit volume and not per unit square....
To double the volume of space time in a given region is to double the volume to which the energy in that region is occupying. Thus by doubling the volume of space the same volume of energy occupying a greater volume of space results in a decrease in the energies density. Now this can be reversed to say that if one doubles the volume of energy in a given space the space in that region of space will decrease in density as a result of less area of space occupying the same region of energy. Since the density of energy is uniform the density of space relative to the density of energy will also be uniform. Thus the space decreases density uniformly as energy increases density uniformly within the closed region.

I have to go I will right more later.

you have met TT0 in the person?

have you seen the time machine?

im not paranoid(not too paranoid) but i think it was a terrible idea for TT0(if his story is true) to have told us anything about it.

question for TT_0 on the event of his return,

what affects the probability when traversing through time?

and have you heard of the Time Vector Field Chronicles?

One thing I think he is hoping to convey on the message board is the philosophical concept that once man is able to travel in time, there is no more absolute truth.

sincerely,
pamela

"electrons aren't made of quarks. they're leptons, and only hadrons like protons or neutrons are made of quarks."

Yes of course. My response to rgrunt is along the lines of his speculation that "prying apart quarks" could result in the strong force approaching an infinite density, which frankly I can't see. Hence my counter speculation of free quarks available to form new hadrons like protons etc.

As rgrunt has discovered about me, I'm happy to speculate to the limits of human knowledge as long as we don't base speculation on the assumption of anything that has already proven to NOT be so.

rgrunt:

Again, thank you for the clarification of what YOU mean by "space-time density". It's easier to follow someone else's speculations about something when you understand what THEY mean by something.

Semantics!.....:-)

Please allow youe skepticism to bring you all the way to the simple conclusion that TT_0 is in fact NOT a time traveler.

I do not say this as a detriment to his words, (since I'm already on record as considering him to be a creative and intelligent person who has a lot to say philosophically), but merely that his declarations on being a time traveler are based on quantum theories that have already been clearly proven to NOT be so.

In other words, he CAN'T be.

But I still like him anyway.

Let him play out his fantasy. It's a good vehicle for his philosophical musings which are right on in many cases.

(See post above to Bob.)

Yes According to modern theory as far as I know that it would take an infinite amount of energy to pry apart a hadron. Of course the way that this is stated is that it is impossible to pry apart hadrons.

This is speculative in that the scientists assume that no infinite amount of energy could be generated. However I beg to differ. The way my device will work is a fluke of the machanical setup.

By torqueing the field one compressed the field at a perpendicular angle and stretches the field at the parallel angle. By stretching the field in a vertical direction while simultaneously compressing the field in a horizontal angle the kenetic forces applied allow for the compression to be countered by the stretching such that the distribution of the field that propogates parallel is redistributed to propagate perpindicular while simultaneously the portion of the magnetic field that propagates perpendicular is redistributed to propagate parallel.

This creates a shearing force that reaches a critcal stage at the point that the field is constriced to bear the topology of an hourglass at 180 degrees of torque. Torqueing beyond this will pry a gap in the field because greater then infinite(or the upper limit) energy is applied in a given instant at a given point allotting the necesary work ( in watts I think) to pry apart the hadrons thus causing the splitting of hadrons or better yet fission of energy releasing ungodly amounts of energy.

Think of it like this when one splits a mass at the molecular level a small explosion accurs. When one splitts a mass at the nuclear level a very large explossion accurs. When one splitts mass at the energy level an even larger amount of energy will be released.

I DO follow you here, and I like the fact that you are willing to challenge the conventional wisdom of Quantum Theory.

(To me, challenging "Conventional Wisdom" on ANYTHING is the path to discovery.)

Now I'm left with another question tho.

When you say:

"By stretching the field in a vertical direction while simultaneously compressing the field in a horizontal angle the kenetic forces applied allow for the compression to be countered by the stretching such that the distribution of the field that propogates parallel is redistributed to propagate perpindicular while simultaneously the portion of the magnetic field that propagates perpendicular is redistributed to propagate parallel."

...I have to ask,

Isn't this trying to apply conventional (macrocosmic) physics to the microcosmic world? Haven't we seen that such applications are not to be relied upon when dealing with Quanta?

I would not suggest that what YOU suggest can't be done, merely that the very ability to apply such principles at such a level does itself break down due to the inability to even measure the accuracy of microcosmic events with macrocosmic technology. Is this not the very foundation of why the Heisenberg Principle renders such applications even unmeasurable, let alone do-able?

It seems to me that the laws of physics as we know them to be at the macrocosmic level only ever will allow us to construct devices that can only ever react with the macrocosmic world.

The microcosmic world requires methods that are not necessarily applicable on the larger scale, and vice versa.

In short, I'm not sure the principles of "perpendicular" and "parallel" have any real meaning at the quantum level.

Thoughts?

Just a few words to you TT_0 if we don't hear from you again. I just want you to know this; you will not escape the truth that underneath all your numerous cleverly thought out, well crafted explaining of bailing your self out of stating to be a Time Traveler from the year 2036 (is that right?), that you are indeed a man with a hidden agenda. I can sense it, maybe others can too, but I’m hardly ever wrong about this. That’s just the way I feel you come off as.

So what could your hidden agenda be? Well I don’t sense you’re that inclined to want to fight our world problems. It seems all you like to do is hear your self-talk. And the more you do, it sounds more like your claims are more of a self proclamation you have, once done you can then acknowledge to your self that you managed to con a whole bunch of people to believe and follow you.

But you forgot to take in to consideration 1 thing when you came to this board. The human factor. That a few (close to maybe 2 or 3 people) in this message board would see beyond your well rehearsed (well written in speech and grammar) works of scientific explanation, and shut you up with plain basic truths of Right and Wrong.

Nevertheless, I hypothesize your out of material, and can no longer support your claims. Which is why you haven’t posted in over 2 weeks. The questions have been asked, and you answered most of them accurately (since they were all mostly questions about science).

So it is my conclusion that you are now probably home contemplating of what you learned from a race of humans your generation looks down on hehe. Or you can probably end up posting soon after everyone began calling up for your attention again.

What a coincidence that would be wouldn’t it? That your busy schedule suddenly opened up.

Either way, it sure would be interesting to hear what kinds of stories you’d share with us next. I know I’m anxious to hear them. How about you?

-Javier C.

now i believe TT_0's time machine is a fraud.

when the real questions popup he is as silent as a man with no tougue.

I tested him by first saying i was a writer of science fiction. Notice how he chose to ignore my comments and questions. I asked him again to tell us more about his observations of society... which he blatantly avoided by saying "ask me questions".

Since he has such a deep-seeded hate and despair for this time period (we caused the war he grew up with) it would seem that he would be more outspoken about it (which he was before). Now he is running out of new things to say, hoping that we will spark something new to finish off his novel.

Explain these points:

-he suddenly does not want to talk about society.

-he had time to learn how to write perfect english while he was growing up fighting war and now running his farm just to survive.

-before the election was decided, he said that the florida votes would never be counted. They were counted. (don't tell me that his landing in the 1970's caused the election to change)

-his use of "Gosub" as a metaphore for something. During his time period he would never have learned BASIC and the langauge. Even if his grandfather taught him about it he would still not be so familiar with it that he would use "Gosub" in a sentence not related to programming. Much more likely he grew up during the 1970's and is now in his mid 40's contemplating his life.

The point remains. His details are well thought out, but he doesn't have anything to prove to us. He won't respond to making a sound clip for us, which shows that he's not really interested in changing our timeline... a point which he has flipped back and forth on.

I see you’re all asking yourselves questions about who I really am, what I want and why I’m here. Frankly, I really can’t blame you but perhaps it’s a bit easier now to understand why I not only didn’t expect you to believe me but I didn’t want you to. As far as my credibility, I thought we had reached some sort of happy medium and we could call each other friend.

I see however that may not be the case and I must admit I’m a bit disappointed. It seems that unless I follow your expectations of what a time traveler should be doing thinking or feeling than I must be a fraud. Or is it just safer to keep telling yourself that?

((im not paranoid(not too paranoid) but i think it was a terrible idea for TT0(if his story is true) to have told us anything about it.))

Where was this setiment and concern for my safety as I was telling my “story”?

((TT_0 was always saying he has nothing to prove to us..then WHY..WHY come to a TIME TRAVEL forum(and numerous others) to spout off your achievements..))

Is it really that hard to believe that plain old human interaction has it’s own merits?

((I do not say this as a detriment to his words, (since I'm already on record as considering him to be a creative and intelligent person who has a lot to say philosophically), but merely that his declarations on being a time traveler are based on quantum theories that have already been clearly proven to NOT be so.))

Which quantum theories are you talking about? Please forgive me but If I missed a question or if there was something else to go into I would have been happy to do so.

((Either way, it sure would be interesting to hear what kinds of stories you’d share with us next. I know I’m anxious to hear them. How about you?))

TTA wants to hear more from me? Now there’s a turn of events.

Yes, I can verify this.

I think just because he couldnot get to this site for awhile was no excuse to attack him for not answering your questions.

I have been over to Art Bells board and really don't see any thing there that goes against what he said here. seems the same to me with some extra things.

Being skeptical is one thing... blaming and accusing is another.

I wouldnt blame him if he didnt want to post here anymore.

Borgus-you say he is uninterested in us. but he did supply a bunch of questions to us that only THREE people out of this whole board even answered! he wanted to know very much how you felt about these things but none of you answered him. yet.. you expected him to continue to answer YOUR questions.
thats not give and take..thats just all take.
and THAT my friend, is selfish.

I don't know if he is really a Time traveler or not. I have seen more and know more than all of you about this. which makes my decision harder.

I have considered all things... I am skeptical but I am also keeping all things in mind.Alot of good points were brought up on both sides.
I have decided skeptism is healthy for everyone.

I do know one thing though....he is a human being. And everyone deserves to be treated with respect as a human being. timetraveler or not.

By the way, I will be gone for about a week and will have no computer access where I am going. I just wanted to mention that so if anybody asks me a question and I don't answer... you will know why and I won't be unneccesarily attacked by anyone.

1. I was right about you coming back just in time. How convenient.

2. You can't spot when someone makes a sarcastic comment.

You truly do intend to move things to your side of things don't you? Just look at the way you speak.

Hey I saw "Left Behind" the movie. You seem to be pulling the same trick the Anti-Christ pulled at the end.

I won't tell the ending, but it's a great movie, you should all watch it.

By the way TT_0, you know what a "Machiavilli" is and does?

Here's a hint, just what your doing.

-Javier C.

I see that some of us can't take criticism as well as others

This is quite possible. However I am basing my physics on the apparent nature of light as focused through a convex lense.

The focusing light through a convex lense we increase the number of thermal photons at a given space of focus thus increasing the temperature.

It is unconventional to try to focus sun light to a singularity which would increase the temperature to infinity on account that it would require on infinitly large convex lense.

However a magnetic field if focused to a singularity would increases to infinity as the energy density of the field increases to infinite as the field is focused to a singularity.

This enables an infinite electrical output.

My basis is that by compressing one part of the magnetic field the other part stretches like the magnetic field were a fabric.

This is all macro-physical in nature but built of micro-physical entities.

By stretching molecular entities or atomic entities horizontally one decreases the energy density vertically by increasing the space-time density horizontally. This results in the compression of space on a horizontal level and a decompression of energy on the horizontal line.

The energy density on the vertical level remaining the same gravitates to occupy the space-time within horizontal line which is why when one stretches a rubber band the molucules along the horizontal axis expands to the left and right while the molecules that are along the vertical axis of the rubber band gravitate toward the center of the band thus making the rubber band thinner.

There is more to this mathematically. For the density to space-time ratio for vertical measure is unchanged by the expansion of the rubber band along the horizontal axis.

The expansion of the band along the horizontal axis results in the relative increase of the density of space which reestablishes the definition of the borders of the quantity of rubber along the horizontal axis which changes the numbers in the equation S=1/e^2 for the horizontal axis in such a manner as to acentuate the decrease in relative size of the length of the band vertically by the increase in length of the rubber band.

So although the density of the rubber band along the vertical axis does not change,that is, the overall density ratio S=1/e^2 for the vertical length of the band does not change but is lesser when campared with the density ratio S=1/e^2 for the horizontal plane.

This explains why the density of a rubber band or any quantum material does not increase along the vertical length when stretched along the horizontal length. Sh=1/e^2, h=2 for horizontal. Sv=1/e^2, v=2 for vertical. (this is the mathematical representation for a circle using my new theory).

I appologize I will have to finish this later on acount that I have run out of time.

Take care,

Ahhh.

It appears you are coming around to the classic "Double Slit" experiment. (Please correct me if I am wrong.)

In the original, the patterns produced on a projection surface originating from a single light source and subsequently passed through two verticle slits produces an interference pattern on that same projection surface that was not easy to explain to the first observers if this phenomena.

It became even more seemingly paradoxical when polarized lenses were applied in 90 degree out of phase configuration much in the same manner we use the same configuration to resolve 3-D images on the motion picture screen. (But of course 3-D film is constructed this way in the first place so we can use this method to resolve it. (Eqrly-mid 20th century Technology, circa 1939 or so.)

Again, please correct me if I'm wrong.

So....

If what you say could poissibly work out, I'd say you're on the path to solving the infamous EPR Paradox.

I must say, you have an uncanny effect on some of the people on this board. For instances one individual who backs you up, who’s at your disposal when you call upon her. Mighty impressive.

I’ve been reading over some of this threds past posts. And combined them with the pattern you use to speak in past posts. And what appears to be some sort of helpless character you have, that it reflects in your writings that people can’t help but believe you.

By that I mean, you always being well mannered. Acknowledging your flaws and mistakes. Turning up the charm. Sorta like the thing a double O 7 would do. But it’s all well covert, and I can tell you drilled these exercises to perfection.

I have been one of the only ones in this board who you’ve backed off on answering questions and comments. And you have tired to use the sympathy routine to butter your self up with me before. Didn’t work. And you thought others loved you when you left.

All this that you do, your character, your claims, the way you discus it with us. It’s suspect.

You do not sound genuine. Your personality is not perfect, if that was the goal you wanted to portray to people of this forum.

Though you wish to perfect it, by saying sorry and sugar coating your humanity. I am aware enough to see right through you. And soon, others will be too.

-Javier C.

P.S. I have a prediction in how you might answer this post.

I know, something about insulting the way I write, and the way I use the English language. Well before you do, here’s my answer to you. I’m Spanish.

I promise to try and be more insulting.

Actually, it's sort of a good feeling knowing you're out there keeping me honest.

I haven't been following your previous exchanges too closely, but it seems that you two don't get on. Whether it has been in an argument over a theory or someone has insulted someone, we have had these incidents before and we won't stand for them. If you can't all play nicely, someone's gonna get themselvea banned. There is no reason to dislike a person on this board. Our aim is to grow a community that is a family of friends. If we start trying to win little insult and vengence battles in posts we will become nothing short of an immature faliure.

Feel free to argue with ideas, but please, keep personal feelings to yourself (hostile ones anyway). If you really want to slag someone off or have a personal argument, EMAIL them. Don't waste other people's and my time by using the board.

It's obvious we were going to get people posting on the board claiming to be "time travellers" or claiming to have esoteric knowledge and not being prepared to tell anyone else.

It's nice to think a pioneer of time travel would grace our board, and who knows - maybe he/she has.

But one thing for sure. The typicality of coming on here and saying: "I'm a time traveller", "I know something you don't know" bla bla bla - is the thing a genuine time traveller would do.

In my opinion, time trave would be used for tactical and extremely classified research, possibly in lots of different forms, and revealing oneself would probably cause destruction of the research aims.

Anyway, as to TTA/Enforcer and TT_0, you two obviously have some civil dispute - please keep it away from the board. I don't exactly see why you are arguing with TT_0, he doesn't seem to be being aggressive?

-Admin

Please take some time and answer these new questions.

1.) What weapons did you use to protect yourself throughout your life? Do you have a weapon with you now, just in case?

2.) What is your favourite food? (whether you had access to it or not)

3.) Your enemy was in the cities. Was the President in 2005 also on the enemy side? was the President in 2009 on the enemy side? How did you feel personally about these Presidents?

4.) While you were in the 1970's what did you think of Nixon as President?

5.) Do you plan to do any more time traveling when you return to 2036?

6.) Do you have any doubts about this time travel experience and the computer mission that you are on?

7.) What have you leared the most from the people of this board?

8.) Where did you learn the use of "Gosub" and which computer language?

9.) Where did you learn to write perfect English? How much time did it take?

10.) Was China your enemy?

11.) Do they have Pac Man or Donkey Kong in 2036?

12.) Does China have a manned space program between 2001 and 2036?

13.) Do you have any problems with the number thirteen?

14.) If the worldlines are changed by everyone's choices, this means we are all manevering through timelines as we make these choices. Since everyone is making different choices, why do we still meet people that coincide with our previous worldline?

15.) In your opinion, would timelines be better represented as an inflated ballon, or a layered Rubix cube with interchanging and overlapping interactions?

16.) Does your group have a television in 2036?

17.) Does your group have a flashlight in 2036? If so, what type of batteries does it use?

18.) How is electricity generated in 2036?

19.) Does the sun look any different in 2036 than it does now?

20.) What sort of clothing do you wear in 2036? Is there strong attention payed to what people wear in the group?

21.) Where were you born?

I'm sorry that the list is so long, but I hope that you will enjoy answering them, and we will all learn from them.

TimeTravel_0 if you have any more questions you would like to know about us, please post them.

I have heard of the EPR paradox before. But I am not sure if my memory serves. Is the EPR paradox the paradox that seems to insist that particles are both waves and particals? Does the EPR paradox suggest partical wave duality. If the EPR paradox is partical wave duality then yes I believe that I may be on the track to solving this phenomenon or on the track to making a big scientific error. Either case will provide knowlege for future theorists to guide them unto more accurate truth. So if I am right then great but if not then perhaps someone else can take my knowlege and correct it and discover the truth. I believe that I will be able to provide alot more accurate knowlege through experimentation and measurement. Perhaps this will be done by physisists using my device or by myself in a lab of myown should I be lucky enough to abtain this. I believe that the conscept will help describe the partical both as a wave and as a partical in that it describes the mathematical relation of the partical in terms of space and energy density. An electron of low energy would appear to look like a clowd as a result of the energy occupying a greater density of space (which appears to have more volume) and an electron of high energy interactions would appear to be pointlike as a result of the energy occupying a lower density of space( which appears to have less volume).

Does this sound like a possible solution to the EPR paradox?

Regards,

I just have 1 word to describe your last post to me. Arrogant.

Mr. Moderator,

A person doesn't have to be aggressive to be a @&^$#%. As you can tell, he's been using his superior intellect, to manipulate and control his agenda here. Or am I the only one who can see that?

Oh and just one more thing TT_0. I don't like arrogant people, phony people, people that exploit others. Do you fall under those requirements? Of course you do. You’re an opportunist, and it's sickening to me.

So to directly answer your question, NO! I don’t like you.

Do you not wish to acknowledge what you have accomplished here? The people you have ready to back you up and to defend you? You have power, status. And you know it.

But then again, when the Anti-Christ comes into power, he won’t acknowledge his power and control of things just yet. He has an agenda, just like you do TT_0.

Left behind was a really good movie. Anybody here seen it?

By the way, what’s your religion TT_0?

-Javier C.

------------------
"For what was, for what is, and for what will be. I will fight for it's preservation."

Yes I think originally the wave vs. particle dispute was fueld by this seeming "paradox" but if memory serves me correctly, it has now become an issue of our inability to determined the time interval between cause and effect. i.e. the so called inability we suffer from to be able to measure acurately at the quantum level. The Heisenberg Principle if you will. The polarized double slit experiment produces results that for a while led some to speculate that events were occurring SIMULTANEOUSLY in two places at once.

This led to Wave Collapse Theory which Einstein called a "Spooky force at a distance" and never really bought into it as I recall.

It sounds to me a lot like you are headed in the direction of trying to tackle this problem. I'd say, "Good luck". Especially if you can pull it off.

When you say:
"...I believe that I may be on the track to solving this phenomenon or on the track to making a big scientific error."

My response is...

"Aren't we all my friend. Aren't we all".

(Smile)

admin:

Thank you for the recent post.

I too see this as a place of speculation and discovery. That's why I come here.

For what's it worth, I personally have never seen a problem with TT_0's posts since it's quite obvious that he is a fantasizer of fictional possibilities and quite a good one at that.

He seems polite to me, and I can't for one see what all the fuss is about. He does have creative ideas.

It's nice to remember to not take oneself TOO seriously here, but as rgrunt has pointed out, (in so many words), even being wrong is itself an educational experience.

Peace to all.

This is supposed to be a fun board. Lets have fun.

Besides, we're ALL amateurs here and we all know it.

Professional Quantum Theorists don't hang out on boards like this.

A profssional quantun theorist will have his head full of too much crap to even start understanding anything like time travel.

And would you please talk about your secret agenda?

I would have thought that issue was one of measurement due to technological limitations... If measuring wave ..unable to simultaneously measure particle and vice versa.. is this the paradox of which you are conversing on DaViper and rgrunt?

...and each must learn to laugh at oneself before truly understaning how to laugh with another...

Be safe and dream sweetly.

Is there a problem in answering?

Please let me know.... I await you.

-Javier C.

However to me the energy density verses space-time density is merely a simple coscept of one kind of energy occupying energy in the form of a container(space). A simple visual aid to help assist in visualizing the conscept that I am suggesting is to take a single piece of string and tie the ends together so that you have a loop. Now take the loop of string and make a one-half twist so that you have a figure eight.

Now hold the figure eight out in front of you so that the figure eight looks like the infinity symbal. Let the loop that is pointing to your right represent energy and it's density, let the loop that is pointing to the your left represent the density and quantity of space-time that is occupied by the energy.

Now if you increase the radius of the right loop-which symbolizes the energy the left loop will decrease in size and density. If you make the right loop twice it's original size the left loop representing space will shrink to half it's size.

This is the conscept that I am suggesting is accuring with electrons and all energy and mass. Energy occupies space such that when you increase the density of energy the partical absorbs energy from the space that it occupies thus decreasing the density and space that the partical of energy occupies through displacement.

This results in a decrease in the radius of the partical as a result that the particle has more quatity gained from the vacuum of space and has a smaller radius and thus a greater density.

I would say that the the majority and most likely all the extra density gained by and electron of high energy interaction would be absorbed solely from the space-time that the energy occupies resulting in a low space-time pressure intertial hole in the within the quantum matter making up the electrons energy.

I would say that there would be a low pressure region of space-time around the electron itself caused by the space-time of high density surrounding the electron gravitating towards the intertial hole created by the displacement of space-time quantity into electron density.

So I believe that the electron does not absorb energy from the surounding space-time quantity to create the gravitational field surrounding the electron but absorbs the space-time quantity from into energy to add density to the electron during high energy interactions only from the space-time that the electron occupies and that the gravitational field surrounding the electron is caused by the space around the electron to gravitate towards the intertial hole or low space-time pressure within the area that the electron is localized.

This, in my oppinion, is a static system and that the space-time does not flow into the electron from outside the electron but creates a static flow into the electron.

An easy visual aid to observe this kind of phenomenon is to observe the spinning candy cain pole at your local barber shop. Notice that the red and white spirals(helixes) do not actually move up to the top of the cylindrical cain but the rotation of the cylinder makes it appear as though the red and white spirals move toward the top of the candy cain pole.

The helix of the spinning candy pole can represent the space-time in the form of helixical waves spiraling towards the electron mass of low space-time density as a result of the centripital(or centrifical) forces(I am always getting these two confused) at work within the electron.

It is sort of like the whirl wind created in a blender. The water does not flow through the bottom of the blender but all the blobs of chocolate mix is carried by the water toward the blades of the blender. The low pressure created by the spinning blades combined with the torque of the blades creates the static whirl wind affect which is quite similar to the dynamic whirl wind affect created by the water draining in your toilet when you flush it.

The space time quantity is laiden with all kinds of waves fields of space-time quantity but when the low pressure space-time is created by the presence of dense energy the space-time waves of high pressure gravitate towards the space-time of low pressure creating the spin affect of the space-time waves and fields. This process creates a dynamical flow of energy in the form of energy or mass(not space) toward the region of low space-time density in the same way that the nestles quik is carried on the milk that is spinning in the blender toward the low pressure milk at the surface of the blender blades.

What I mean by "the energy and mass are dynamic and space is not" is merely that the chocalate coco moves toward the blades of the blender but the milk itself as a whole does moves very little towards the blades of the blender if at all.

What does everyone think? Does any of this make sense?

Inquisitively,

Excellent visual analogy rgrunt. You described it perfectly to enable a vision to be built. Thank you.

Be safe and dream sweetly.

It would be very interesting to discover that you are indeed correct if you are.

Your depiction of how you see it working is an excellent one.

I suspect you have some background in Quantum Physics but as our moderator has pointed out, perhaps your mind is not "...full of too much crap" to keep you from speculating in areas where other more professional theorists wouldn't even dare go.

I like that.

Well I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions on both forums TT_0.

You left just when the answering part was getting good.

This must be a real big problem for a TimeTraveler to log on to the internet in this timeline. Considering how it's free and all www.netzero.com & www.bluelight.com

Hope to hear from you soon. And to hear your well crafted answers.

I used a shotgun in the war. Yes, I think it’s prudent to be prepared for anything.

((2.) What is your favourite food? (whether you had access to it or not))

Oranges, I love them.

((3.) Your enemy was in the cities. Was the President in 2005 also on the enemy side? was the President in 2009 on the enemy side? How did you feel personally about these Presidents?))

The President or “leader” in 2005 I believe tried desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together but many of their policies drove a larger wedge into the Bill of Rights. The President in 2009 was interested only in keeping his/her power base.

((4.) While you were in the 1970's what did you think of Nixon as President?))

To tell you the truth, I was more fascinated by the different standards Presidents are held to.

((5.) Do you plan to do any more time traveling when you return to 2036? ))

I don’t know if I will be chosen for a another mission. If I do, most likely, I will fly as an advisor or historical consultant.

((6.) Do you have any doubts about this time travel experience and the computer mission that you are on? ))

Absolutely. I have to believe there is an easier way to do this.

((7.) What have you leered the most from the people of this board? ))

There is a fire of intelligence and expression out there in the people who are criticized for their open-mindedness. I fear it will only be uncovered in the rest of the population through conflict. I was under the impression that most people were sleeping in this period but I suppose that generalization is too broad for any time period.

((8.) Where did you learn the use of "Gosub" and which computer language? ))

Gosub / Return. In one form or another, isn’t that a pretty standard function in most computer languages?

((9.) Where did you learn to write perfect English? How much time did it take? ))

I’m not so sure I write perfect English. I do read a great deal more than I see most people doing here.

((10.) Was China your enemy? ))

Not my enemy? I never fought any Chinese but their ability to hit Western cities with missiles made a lot of people unhappy.

((11.) Do they have Pac Man or Donkey Kong in 2036? ))

I am aware they are video games but I have not come across them.

((12.) Does China have a manned space program between 2001 and 2036? ))

I believe they are pretty close to putting a man in orbit. It shouldn’t surprise you if they do that soon.

((13.) Do you have any problems with the number thirteen? ))

Not personally.

((14.) If the worldlines are changed by everyone's choices, this means we are all manevering through timelines as we make these choices. Since everyone is making different choices, why do we still meet people that coincide with our previous worldline? ))

Your worldline takes form as the choices unfold. People do not disappear because you must follow the same physical laws that hold you here. (i.e. Information cannot travel faster than light on a worldline.)

((15.) In your opinion, would timelines be better represented as an inflated balloon, or a layered Rubix cube with interchanging and overlapping interactions? ))

Balloon in balloon in balloon. A Rubix cube as in the toy, right?

((16.) Does your group have a television in 2036? ))

Information does arrive on video but cathode ray tubes are out and crystal or plasm is in. Distribution is over the net, not broadcast.

((17.) Does your group have a flashlight in 2036? If so, what type of batteries does it use? ))

Yes, we have flashlights and we use similar batteries for most things. We do recharge a great deal. Have you ever seen those wind-up radios? They’re pretty interesting I think.

((18.) How is electricity generated in 2036? ))

“Most” publicly generated power is through very efficient solar cells. On a local or household level, there is steam, hydro and inversion generation. There is a debate on using a singularity to generate power.

((19.) Does the sun look any different in 2036 than it does now? ))

When you can see it through the high level smoke and haze, not that I’m aware of.

((20.) What sort of clothing do you wear in 2036? Is there strong attention paid to what people wear in the group? ))

Clothing is much more functional. I’m not sure what group you’re talking about.

((21.) Where were you born? ))

I was born in Florida.

((I'm sorry that the list is so long, but I hope that you will enjoy answering them, and we will all learn from them. ))

No Problem.

((TimeTravel_0 if you have any more questions you would like to know about us, please post them. ))

Thanks.

And that's what I believe you have been doing on this forum all along. You said your self, I keep you honest. So don't mind me for doing my job.

If you choose to just answer specific questions, and with that take days to carefully prepare them to make them presentable. Then your actions just speak for them selves. I don’t believe anyone here is dumb enough to not take that into account about you. Well maybe some.

Sure it was only a matter of time till this message board would be greeted by someone claiming to be from the future. But if you think about it, you’re not the only one who’s thorough in this. If you were to count the hundreds of Time Travel websites, you would see that any one of them could be used to study and use as your story here.

Well to make a long story short, I still await your answers. They must be pretty hard to answer, considering how I asked them first then others you’ve already answered. Anyone think that’s pretty suspicious?

-Javier C.

P.S. Hey TT_0, so you’re from Florida huh? Is that were you live too? I plan on visiting Florida this Spring; if you live there I’d like to see your machine .

One thing all fiction writers in the SF genre run into is making the scenario seem plausable without stepping on known scientific fact, or even tripping oneself up with one's own words.

Larry Niven recieved criticism from the scientific community for his original Ringworld in that the ring would eventually become unstable. He corrected this in the sequel Ringworld Engineers with the addition of Bussard Ramjets.

In your statement -- "The President in 2009 was interested only in keeping his/her power base." ---

You forgot (while trying to remain politically correct no doubt), that if you were ever in 2009, or had "past" knowledge of it, you would KNOW whether the President was a him or a her.

But,... for the most part I still consider your overall long running scenario well crafted and just generally evasive enough to keep you from being backed into a corner.

As far as the President in 2005, remember you're talking 4 years from now. It'll either be a re-elected G.W. Bush or someone we already know.

(I take it it must be the latter since G.W. would have a heck of a time trying to fill Abe Lincoln's shoes.)

But anyway, when that time comes, (soon now), and passes, will you stick to the same depictions of the period in your scenario, or will you revise it?

After all Orwell's 1984 still works as a literary piece even if it didn't come about the way he predicted.

((Clothing is much more functional. I’m not sure what group you’re talking about.))

Describe what you mean by functional. After all, what are the functions assigned to clothes rather than protection from environment. Do you wear light colors, dark colors, loose, tight fitting? What materials are used for the clothing?

((When you can see it through the high level smoke and haze, not that I’m aware of. ))

How does this smoke and haze allow for solar cells to be efficient?

((I’m not so sure I write perfect English. I do read a great deal more than I see most people doing here. ))

Where did you learn to write and how old were you? How long did it take you? Did you learn before, during, or after the fighting. What do you attrubute to your learning to type fast?

((Gosub / Return. In one form or another, isn’t that a pretty standard function in most computer languages?))

No.

((I don’t know if I will be chosen for a another mission. If I do, most likely, I will fly as an advisor or historical consultant.))

Did you have a historical consultant or advisor to help you?

((Yes, we have flashlights and we use similar batteries for most things. We do recharge a great deal. ))

What do you call these batteries?

((A Rubix cube as in the toy, right?))

It’s what I live for although I can’t help but feel you’re not exactly asking these questions for their own sake.

((Describe what you mean by functional. After all, what are the functions assigned to clothes rather than protection from environment. Do you wear light colors, dark colors, loose, tight fitting? What materials are used for the clothing?))

Seems a bit obscure to have a discssion about. Do we wear radiation suits? No. Do we use pockets a lot, Yes.

((How does this smoke and haze allow for solar cells to be efficient?))

Do you have any idea how effiient solar cells are today? Sometimes it’s sunny and sometimes it rains. Sometimes large dust clouds high in the atmosphere pass overhead. I don’t understasnd the point you want to make. The sun looks the same.

((Where did you learn to write and how old were you? How long did it take you? Did you learn before, during, or after the fighting. What do you attrubute to your learning to type fast?))

I was home schooled and I spend a lot of time typing.

((((Gosub / Return. In one form or another, isn’t that a pretty standard function in most computer languages?)) No. ))

I beg to differ on this point. I may not be a computer programmer but I do know that going away to preform one function and returning to the original function is basic to all software. Perhaps it may be called something else in various languages.

((Did you have a historical consultant or advisor to help you?))

No, fairly easy job.

((What do you call these batteries?))

Good and bad…same as you.

(((A Rubix cube as in the toy, right?)) Rubix cube a toy. Where'd you get that idea?))

I see that you are upset by my questions. If you don't want to talk about your clothes that's ok.

Did I mention I will be in Florida this Spring?

You seem almost offended in answering our questions. We're curious... Isn't that your reason for coming to this board too? So why not allow us to be curious about you, and quiz you of what you know.

No harm in that, is there ?

It's "GoTo" thats become passe and no longer used.

The equalivent "verb" or "control" statement to Gosub in COBOL is "Perform".

xBased languages use "Do" in calling a closed subroutine.

In Java and C++ which are Objected Oriented Development platforms, the term or it's equilavent is moot since the very technique itself is superceded by invoking instances of Classes.

But at the pure machine code level after it's been compiled, the action is controlled by the the same concept.

Object orientation is a conceptual paradigm, at the source code level, just as "Top Down Modular" was when "Gosub" was a common practice.

GoTo was merely the first control statement that was used for branching. As computers themselves became more sophisticated and powerful, automatic return linkage was built into the source code languages that forced the compiler to automatically return to the next statement after Gosub when the subroutine had completed firing.

Thus eliminating the "spaghetti" logic of "goto" code.

But all the dicipline of Object Oriented Programming (OOP) still doesn't keep some people from writing really crummy code.

Thanks again for your responses. The reason I'm asking details such as clothing and sunlight is because my film company is in the process of making a movie of your story and we just wanted to get some visual ideas.

But seeing that you are shy about the subject, we'll just have to be creative.

I just wanted to ask if you know anyone in the future who is important who has the initials J.W....and if so perhaps you could name them? or him?...
heh, i made a riddle once...what clock is a clock that tells time only twice a day?

Besides doing the tape, will you be having spectators?

If you do, I'd like to see your machine. I will be in Florida visiting a loved one this Spring.

Where in Florida do you live?

Let me know.

Thankyou for the high marks but I have no formal education in quantum physics. To tell you the truth I have not even read a full book on any technical subject. I often go through electronics books and physics books of various topics and skim them for knowlege that I have not gained. I am truelly as much an ametuer as anyone else here.

I have read a little on the subject of quantum physics but there is a lot that I do not know.

This is why I come here humbly to share my hypothesesis with others on this forum. I also consult formally educated physisists.

One reason I like confering on this forum is the fact that it is filled with all manners of peoples of different backgrounds and various points of views. Most of us are open minded in some respects and others are closed in some reaspects. All of this is valuable I believe if these traits are put together properly.

I have noted that Einstein came up with his theories in 1901 and 1905 this is before he went to college, Am I correct on this?

One other point to make is that many of the cool gadjets and theories that were created were done by those who were not formally educated which might have been one reason they were open minded.

Einstein was both a closed and open minded person it seems. And many open minds had to single handedly accomplished a great deal for technology during thier lives over a hundred years ago do to the fact that comunications between long distances was not as practical then as it is today.

Here on this forum I see there are hundreds of posts from many people with open minds able to comunicate with the whole world with nothing more then a key board, a telephone jack, and a computer. The point being that we can more then likely accomplish leaps and bounds more then the open minds a hundred years ago because comunication for us is much more palitable; not because we are any smarter then they were back then.

What does everyone think?

I think Einstein went to school first.

I think an open mind is an empty mind.

I think we should master fith grade science before positing a grand unified field theory.

I think an ounce of fact is worth ton of speculation.

I think it is hard to know everything without knowing anything first.

I think you get the point.

One of the bane's of formal education is cementing ways of thinking...although initially it can expand...
I find less tolerance for thinking out of the box in *highly educated* people rather than what I fondly call independent thinkers *little smile* If I were stuck on an island and had to choose *educated* vs. *independent* No brainer to be sure :-)

Keep thinking out of the box rgrunt !! *applauding loudly*

Be safe and dream sweetly.

If rgrunt wants that to be his name, then that is his choice. He does sign his name if you care to look.

A Lot can gained with an once of fact and it can be helpful to speculate. That is where ideas come from.

Those ideas are the basis for inventions that make all we have now possible.

please respond to my previously posted post?

Let's say I go back to 1980. This is the original timeline:

---1980-----------2000

When I go back, a new timeline is created...

---1980-----------2000
\
\
\
\----------2000

...and the old one disappears. I still exist because the instant I appear in the past, I am in the new timeline.

---1980
\
\
\
\----------2000

I don't believe the theory that time-travelers fulfill their destined role in the past. If an old man tells me how to build a time machine, and I do, and when I get old, I tell my younger self how to build a time machine, where does the time machine come from?

"Even if you are in a minority of one, the truth is still the truth"

--Mahatma Gandhi

"If a time-traveler somehow got stranded in the past, he might have descendants. If this were the case with a lot of time-travelers, that would make our species appear older than it is."

I've often thought of this as a matter of fact.

Here is one for you....
What if a lonely time traveler got stuck way in the past something went wrong with his machine and it blew up after he managed to get out. lonely and depressed he knew he was never going to get back home.
Millions of years in the past he looked out over his horizon the closest thing he had to relate to were the apes nearby...

And I think you were suggesting there may be a time line where the dinosaurs never got destroyed but evolved and developed into a higher species. and then developed time travel.and then visited different world lines.??

you could probably take that a step further and try to imagine what a species would look like if you combined the DNA from different worldlines.

it seems like the further a species evolves they will eventually get into DNA manipulation and altering. creating new species to their own liking and after their own images.

I enjoyed reading all the info you have on your sight. especially the archaeological
pictures. I didnt get to read all of it I will have to go back to it later.

pamela

--Mahatma Gandhi

While it does indeed seem that the velociraptor was quite intelligent, (as evidenced by it's proportionately sized brain cavity found in the fossil remains,) I would want to consult a serious paleo-biologist before I would speculate elevating to the level of the chimpoanzee. Do you possibly have a reputable source that can speculate this with impunity? I'd appreciate your sharing it.

As to the 5 million years "from there" in the "present timeline", I'd have to say you are off by about 55 or 60 million years.

The Chimpanzee is not radically older in evolutionary time than is man. The Great Apes are not our ancestors, just a separate branch of evolution that came from the same source as we did about 3-5 million years ago.

(Or maybe I misunderstood you and that IS what you meant?)

Hello - and hello to Pamela and Javier.

We do get around. As John Titor on another site, I ask you if your name was an anagram for "I John Trot", aka Clown, Clodpole, Clodpate. I accidentally arrived at this site tonight and found Trott conversing with you on the thread.

Have I nailed the anagram or is this a very strange considence?

I thought we went over that to your satisfaction? Doesn't everyone know after looking at a Perrose for a Kerr singularity that you have to travel faster than light to get to the "exact" same worldline?

1) I saw on another page of this board that you are from 2036, and still use batteries and solar cells. why do you still use batteries, when such great men (thats my faith talking) such as Tom Bearden and the former Floyd Sweet and Bruce Depalma, have possibly made great strides in the areas of free energy. What happened to limit the success, and widespread distribution and developement of these discoveries?

2) have your scientists found a link between consciousness and reality?

3) Is light speed as you understand it simply the capacitive reactance of our spacetime/quantum vacuum?

4) I'm gonna throw my idea of how a time machine works out there, and it would be cool if you could key me in on how far I am from your truth:

A time machine in my book, is slightly like a teleportation device. It zeroes in on a specified pattern of quantum states (like the quantum states of the particles involved during a significant event) and then reconstructs the coinciding reality. This is because reality is possibly a hologram, related to the wave interactions at the virtual (fundamental) particle/wave level, and if you look at a small portion of a holographic plate the entire image will be on that section as well as the whole plate, just with a lower intensity. The quantum patterns duplicated by the time machine will be interpolated to form a complete reality. Now, the time machine records and impresses your quantum imprint on the resulting reality, causing virtual particle/wave interactions to form your resulting physical body. The virtual state of a particle, is possibly just the period in its life where it does not interact with the surrounding environment. A virtual particle does not exist in time, which is the reason it can become virtual in the first place. A virtual entity lends itself to the creation of time however, in that its interactions with other particles gives rise to the property of time. When one virtual particle exchanges its information with another virtual particle, a real particle results (one that is measurable - actually the mere process of measurement creates a real particle because of the unescapable exchange of info between what is assumed to exist (the virtual particle that will soon become half of the observed entity), and the virtual particles that confirm that asumption by interacting with the inferred particle). The concept that a fundmental particle has a virtual state is where the possibility of time travel comes into play. Actually, what is actually happening is inter-reality travel. There are an infinite amount of virtual particles (because they can not be observed) so they constitute the realm of possibility. Any and every potential transfer of energy takes place out of the virtual particle flux, because of its zero/infinite existence in time. Therefore, when one decision/observation is made, a whole new universe is started. This happens in jumps, due to the interactions of virtual particles. At any given instant, however, consciousness (the mediator/observer of particle interaction) can only see/exist in its own universe, but the potential for its existence in others as a parallel entity is infinite. I'm starting to run out of time, so I'll quickly sum it up. We now have the mehanism for time travel and teleportation - they are extremely similar, but instead of materializing something in its own time, another time is chosen. each time a travel is made, you make a reality jump to a different "world line". You would not be able to return to your exact world line, but to one so close, it could still be considered your world line. You would have left in a time machine in that world line (your parallel you), and Upon your expected arrival, the first "you" that left would be replaced by "you", on time, as expected.

What do think about the following theory that I posted to expain how gravity might work? Having a doctorate degree would you do me a favor and quickly read over this theory and tell me if it sounds like the theory might have any grounds(that is if the theory might have some accuracy to it).

If you find flaws in the theory would you mind jotting them down real quick (if it won't be too inconvenient for you, I know you are probably busy and I appreciate you taking the time to look in on this forum from time to time.)

I look forward to learning from your next reply. I might add..will you do me a favor and even if you think the theory might be correct will you prove it wrong for me. If you prove it wrong I will be able to have a much deeper grasp on the conscepts that I am theorizing on because you will be hitting on point's that I have neglected or overlooked which will give me more knowlege to correct my theory( actually everone's theory who works on it).
I really appreciate it.

If you want to send lot's of technical information please fill free to do so. I ask that you write in what ever manner you are used to and not to worry about trying to explain it in terms that I would not understand.

If I get confused I will look up words, phrases, or conscepts that you jott down that I do not understand and will learn about them. This will help me develop a stronger vocabulary with which to comunicate more intelligably to the scientific comunity. Thankyou for your time.

Regards,

Edwin G. Schasteen U.S.M.C. Active

here is the post:

I am aware of the limitations of our measuring technology and it is a good question as to wheather or not it is the measuring equipment that produces the affect(paradox) or if the particle is truelly in the form of a wave and sometimes in the form of a particle.

However to me, it seems that the energy density verses space-time density is merely a simple coscept of one kind of energy occupying energy in the form of a container(space). A simple visual aid to help assist in visualizing the conscept that I am suggesting is to take a single piece of string and tie the ends together so that you have a loop. Now take the loop of string and make a one-half twist so that you have a figure eight.

Now hold the figure eight out in front of you so that the figure eight looks like the infinity symbal. Let the loop that is pointing to your right represent energy and it's density, let the loop that is pointing to the your left represent the density and quantity of space-time that is occupied by the energy.

Now if you increase the radius of the right loop-which symbolizes the energy the left loop will decrease in size and density. If you make the right loop twice it's original size the left loop representing space will shrink to half it's size.

This is the conscept that I am suggesting is accuring with electrons and all energy and mass. Energy occupies space such that when you increase the density of energy the partical absorbs energy from the space that it occupies thus decreasing the density and space that the partical of energy occupies through displacement.

This results in a decrease in the radius of the partical as a result that the particle has more quatity gained from the vacuum of space and has a smaller radius and thus a greater density.

I would say that the the majority and most likely all the extra density gained by and electron of high energy interaction would be absorbed solely from the space-time that the energy occupies resulting in a low space-time pressure intertial hole in the within the quantum matter making up the electrons energy.

I would say that there would be a low pressure region of space-time around the electron itself caused by the space-time of high density surrounding the electron gravitating towards the intertial hole created by the displacement of space-time quantity into electron density.

So I believe that the electron does not absorb energy from the surounding space-time quantity to create the gravitational field surrounding the electron but absorbs the space-time quantity from into energy to add density to the electron during high energy interactions only from the space-time that the electron occupies and that the gravitational field surrounding the electron is caused by the space around the electron to gravitate towards the intertial hole or low space-time pressure within the area that the electron is localized.

This, in my oppinion, is a static system and that the space-time does not flow into the electron from outside the electron but creates a static flow into the electron.

An easy visual aid to observe this kind of phenomenon is to observe the spinning candy cain pole at your local barber shop. Notice that the red and white spirals(helixes) do not actually move up to the top of the cylindrical cain but the rotation of the cylinder makes it appear as though the red and white spirals move toward the top of the candy cain pole.

The helix of the spinning candy pole can represent the space-time in the form of helixical waves spiraling towards the electron mass of low space-time density as a result of the centripital(or centrifical) forces(I am always getting these two confused) at work within the electron.

It is sort of like the whirl wind created in a blender. The water does not flow through the bottom of the blender but all the blobs of chocolate mix is carried by the water toward the blades of the blender. The low pressure created by the spinning blades combined with the torque of the blades creates the static whirl wind affect which is quite similar to the dynamic whirl wind affect created by the water draining in your toilet when you flush it.

The space time quantity is laiden with all kinds of waves fields of space-time quantity but when the low pressure space-time is created by the presence of dense energy the space-time waves of high pressure gravitate towards the space-time of low pressure creating the spin affect of the space-time waves and fields. This process creates a dynamical flow of energy in the form of energy or mass(not space) toward the region of low space-time density in the same way that the nestles quik is carried on the milk that is spinning in the blender toward the low pressure milk at the surface of the blender blades.

What I mean by "the energy and mass are dynamic and space is not" is merely that the chocalate coco moves toward the blades of the blender but the milk itself as a whole does moves very little towards the blades of the blender if at all.

What does everyone think? Does any of this make sense?

Inquisitively,

Edwin G. Schasteen

As you are aware, approaching a rotating singularity can be done quite easily without experiencing the negative side effects of a massive gravitational field and it’s very possible to “pass” through the center of the ring. Besides, if you did need a naked singularity, all you would have to do is increase the rotation or electric charge so the inner even horizon equals the diameter of the outer event horizon.