Speed Of Light ... <IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0> You might find additional references here... Speed Of Light (Physics) http://www.what-is-the-speed-of-light.com TAP-TEN Featured in upcomming film "CHRONOTRIP" Chronotrip, the second documentary feature from Jeff Cioletti and Far Away Discourse Productions, explores the science, science-fiction, and metaphysics of time travel. The film combines the perspectives of physicists, philosophers, psychics, and science fiction writers, actors and fans, as it seeks to answer the fundamental question: What is time? TAP-TEN Research Foundation will be featured in this upcomming film "Chronotrip" (We're mentioned in Jeff's "Production Diary" archived on Monday, July 9, 2001) http://www.fadproductions.com
Hello I have been gone for a while so I haven't been attending to my post, but now that I am back I will reply to the many messages my post reciveved. Okay first of all to Mr. Dark Raven now that I think about it myou are right, the g force would catch up to you, but I must say would the ng force catch up to your space craft or your body? Anyway next post... Pabu: um... nothing special happens when you reach light speed you would simply cheat time it won't be like some galatic miracle. It would be somthing that only a computer would know if it was succesful. Next subject Mr. thecurly1... where do I start? um now it is not possible, but does that mean it won't be fifty years from now. Okay black holes are AT THE TIME not even truley proven to exisit, but lets say we know for sure that they do... I've said this before and I like they say in the movies "I'll say it again" to pass though a black hole you will have to go though a procees called spagatifacation (you are stretched out a lot) now I don't know how your body feels about this, but I wouldn't enjoy nor will I survive it. I think a lot about time travel I think I relized that time travel won't be used for traveling throught time, but to travel in general. If anyone is seriosly intersted in this subject I suggest you read a breif history of time by stephen hawking...bye
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0> JJ, as you said..."Okay black holes are AT THE TIME not even truley proven to exisit, but lets say we know for sure that they do"... Oh But they "DO" indeed! where have you been lately? moreover i sure would love to hear you explain this misnomer!
We also have a new Link up @ the "Star Chamber" website, just scroll down on the "weblinks" selection and you'll also see our banner there... (TAP-TEN Research) http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/ftadefy/links/weblk.htm
Black Holes Forgive me if I am wrong. Black Holes The only way we could find out if they really do exist then we would have do send out probes, that would analiyzse the so-called Black Hole----off the subject... I do belive that somthing of that nature (I mean black holes) does exist, but no probes have been sent out and you can't see a Black Hole, but you can see the effects of one. For example... If a group of planets or objects are orbiting empty space, you could say that this is proof of a black hole. This has occured too. But to my knowlege (which is limited along with my age) Black holes existence are based on theory. the defonition of a theory is ...an idea based on observations. An experiment is used to prove the theory is true. And I haven't heard of any experiment. I would like to note that I do belive there are black holes but they tenically haven't been proven to exist...yet.
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0> "It would take so much energy to accomplish just a minut effect of time travel" ("I don't see how it could be done." *Alright, I guess it's a fair assumption that it would take a great ordeal of powerful energy perhaps equatable to that of planets, or the sun perhaps, however it may be done by extracting those powerful energy bursts right from the quantum vaccum of space! How? try using Electro-Magentic Field focusing techniques for starters! believe it, or not, this is being done as I wright this message because somwhere in a quiet discussion with a PA. based research group, they are in the development stages of negotiating contractual arrangements with other private companies to jump on this conceptual module' to design, and construct actual working prototypes of this concept-to-prototype EMF conducive constrictor plasmatron infusion reactor, to produce limitless amounts of overunitized power from a single generator that can provide sufficient power to run an entire 12 story hotel, or a small home, and the generator itself may vary in size from that of something the size of a 4x4 pickup box, to the size of a shoebox. (Kiss fossil fuel consumption to generate electricity Goodbye!) "I believe it was Thorton that said it would take more than a hundred years of gathering potential energy from all of Earth's sources to manipulate time. I guess through future technology it might happen." Not necessarily so! (let me explain) the earth itself generates a combination of strong & weak subatomic particle collisions that eminate upwards from within it's core of molten metals, as they rise they gather electromagnetic current in the form of EMF radiation that spews outward, and engulfs the planet forming what is known by many physicists as the earths "Electro-Magentic Energy Grid" there are available electroencephlagraphic meter devices that work like metal detectors, or radiation geiger counters to pick up readings eminating from within this EMF grid to detect with percision, (compiled with GPS technology) to read the strongest EMF signals being transmitted which fluctuate in pulses at a rythimistic harmonic frequencies @ 12hrtz. the tricky part is synchronizing your device to chime within similarly percise variables to that of which is being transmitted from within this EMF grid, once you have succeded, you might open a hole that will increase the density without increasing in mass into an infinitive quantum dot. It is through these methods we intend to open a potal through the quantum vaccum that should also prove to have multiapplicationary functionality.
I met Paco Ahlgren about six months ago. He's smart as hell. He's not crazy. I tried to ask him about it too, but he was evasive. He just smiled a lot. His eyes are peaceful -- like he knows something. It scared me, but I really liked him. He was SOOOOO nice to me. The book is scary -- especially if you've met the guy. I don't know a whole lot about physics, but when you read what he wrote, it makes it seem very real. It really made me think. Bob Kroneger > > I read the book. It scared the crap out of me. I wrote to him and tried to ask him about it > , but he won't tell anybody anything. > > www.ahlgren.net > groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Discipline_Group > >Cheers ... Sam > > > -----Original Message----- > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 1:48 PM > > Subject: > > > > > > I've been hearing so much about this algren person. Does somebody know > > where I can find the stupid book? I'd at least like to read it. > > > > Christie > >
BK, Are you sure you are in the right thread? Anyway, I am reading the novel. I do not understand, what the novel got to do with the author in the sense why he should be crazy? Smart as hell? That is a new one on me. I did not know "hell" is smart! Welcome to sciforums
With all due respect to those who have spent countless hours in the disciplines of science & physics who cannot understand the plausibility to induce reversion of Time`Travel, let alone "Time~Travel" as in being generated artificially to accelerate the effects, I don't want to imply that their calculations are inaccurate per say, and they are just plain wrong however, it is perhaps that there are a variety of new existing quantum mechanics, as well as the math behind it to show this in theory that has been either missed, or overlooked that go well above & beyond the information that they have been applying, thus explains why others find it difficult to see how it "CAN" be done! A good example is that Einstein himself, although demonstrated his frustration towards the plausibility of Quantum mechanics, and expressed adamantly that he was against this new science which was considered "Fringe" in it's day, his own theory of general relativity laid down the very foundations for quantum mechanics to exist, and would not have had the necessary data to lead the way for this new science if not for his theories in the first place! Moreover on a comparative note, we are going through a lot of new developments to test these new bold theories relating to the inner workings of QM, many of them which are being applied are so new infact, most of this data is as recent as 1989, and are in the very beginning stages to develop these new prototype devices to demonstrate how it will work, and what it can do, very much like those who were involved in the early days of putting Einstein's theories to the test that lead to the development of nuclear fission, and a variety of other applications such as the A-Bomb & etc. we are now going through yet another paradigm shift which involves many of the same processes to test the abilities of Quantum mechanics, which will lend to the development of such things like Teleportation which IBM, and a few other private companies are involved in, as well as "Time~Travel" be-it "Reversion" or acceleration to a future that either represents one that closely resembles a version of our own future, or exploration of "parallel" or alternate versions as such. Just because these ideas are rejected by others, (whom I must say are perhaps in their own right correct with respect to their equations, and their formal educational backgrounds), with all due respect, it is my contention that they might be using equations that cannot adapt to show plausibility to these new concepts, yet it does not necessarily demonstrate any less plausibility for these new concepts to be demonstrable, let me explain...it is perhaps that much of the science that many others are applying here, perhaps was not adequately designed sufficiently enough to demonstrate the plausibility for such ideas, thus in order to resolve the conflict of such issues, we need to conduct more research that involves the application of Quantum mechanics, and apply the most recent data that has been gathered to pioneer new methods to demonstrate the plausibility of these new theories. A good example of the conflict of (related) issues involving the same processes that lead to the development of pioneering frontier technologies within our own history, let's compare Enrico Fermi, as to how his theories provided solutions to demonstrate the inner workings of neutrons back in 1933 which were painfully rejected by the journal "Nature" when it was first submitted there. The question that scientists were faced with during this era was, if neutrons are not composed of protons and electrons, and if there are no other electrons in the nucleus, then how are we to understand the fact that electrons are emitted by nuclei in beta radioactivity? This answer was provided of course in 1933, after the neutron was discovered, in a new theory of beta radioactivity that was developed in Rome (by none other than) "Enrico Fermi" (1901-1954) Most of what we are dealing with now in relation to quantum mechanics was not feasible until now with respect to the science that had to be conducted beforehand, some of which was involving our most recent probes launched by NASA to study the effects of these elements, and it's relationship to our own solar system that relied upon sophisticated technology that simply was not around then, and again I must emphasize that some oft this data gathered was as recent as 1989 by Chandra's X-Ray telescope, and to that even more recent, NASA's "Genesis" probe which was launched to study the theories of the "Big-Bang" as it is intended to gather particle emissions generated by our sun's solar winds. So you can see now that there are no limits at all as what we have potential to create with one exception, and that is only in respect to the limits we place upon ourselves!
Hi Time/02112 You made a good point here: it is true that new theories are almost certainly designed to keep the relation of "cause and effect" intact: the cause always has to take place before the effect. This imposes a lot of restrictions on ideas such as timetravel. At the moment there doesn't seem to be any evidence that there is a violation of the relation of cause and effect. Nobody has been killed by a bullet that was fired in the future, ... you can think of thousands of these examples. Apart from theories or science, there are also a lot of philosophical and logical arguments against timetravel, and this makes timetravel special. I'm not going over these arguments again (they have been mentioned here and elsewhere on the forum) but timetravel seems to lead to totally contra-intuitive ideas and paradoxes. Perhaps one day timetravel will be a reality (theories such as general relativity leave an option with wormholes), but before we can truelly comprehend it, more philosophical than scientific work needs to be done. Bye! Crisp
What are spheromaks? http://ve4xm.caltech.edu/Bellan_plasma_page/spheroma.htm For those of interest in our "ccQts" Closed Circuit Time Stream concept, which is best described in forming a "bubble" that engulfs the pod, or chamber around a Time~Traveller to keep them on a more direct World-Line, or continuous Time~Stream that closely resembles one of their own origin from whence they depart from, we need to study the effects of applied Quantum mechanisims within current technological discoveries, and how this relates to our own theories of the quantum universe we would like to refer to as the quantum "Multiverse" currently, this is just one good example to demonstrate our theories. Spheromaks are plasmas with very large internal currents and internal magnetic fields that are aligned so as to be in a nearly force-free equilibrium, i.e., the currents are very nearly parallel to the magnetic fields. The spheromak equilibrium is a `natural' state since magnetic turbulence tends to drive magnetically dominated plasmas towards the spheromak state. Spheromak technology: Laboratory spheromaks involve very large currents, typically 100's of kiloamperes and high voltages, typically kilovolts. These currents and voltages are obtained using high energy capacitor banks which are switched in microseconds. The formation geometry is arranged such that magnetic flux cuts across the electrodes connected to the capacitor bank. This configurations generates helicity (twistedness) in the flux tube going from one electrode to the other. With enough helicity a spheromak is formed. Making spheromaks: Making spheromaks is analogous to blowing bubbles: the component of the magnetic stress tensor parallel to the magnetic field acts like the surface tension in the soap film while the perpendicular component acts like the air pressure inflating the bubble. When the destabilizing stress due to the perpendicular component overwhelms the stabilizing stress due to the parallel component, a detached spheromak breaks off. http://ve4xm.caltech.edu/Bellan_plasma_page/spheroma.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Everything you know,...is Wrong! soon we shall all discover the truth." http://profiles.yahoo.com/vosstech
Crisp, I was merley pointing out that many of these new cutting edge developments that "are" currently being worked on (especially Time~Travel) that apply these theories of QM, are often being hampered by the same controversial processes that were involved in many heated debates decades ago, and is rather frustrating to see so much evolutionary progression within humanity on one hand, yet very little on the other in relation to dealing with organized critics that still adamantly hold steadfast to their antiquated beliefs, and perceptions in spite of realizing that it only creates another environment in which we continue getting in our own way! In short, it makes it even moreso difficult to aquire funding for research projects of this nature due to these continuied issues, making Time~Travel a much harder sell, let alone overunity which one would think to be more in demand, yet is seemingly met with oppression by those who would stop at nothing to ensure that such an econnomic paradigm shift of free energy would never make it to the market in the first place. (Remember what happened to Tesla!) How can we continue to stand on the shoulders of Giants, when we are being told lies, suppressed from the truth, and lead by leaders who are only interested in our wallets? "A country of greed, is a country in need."
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0> In relation to Time & Quantum mechanics, we must also remind ourselves that "Gravity" itself was just one good example pertaining to a subject thought to be well understood during the earlier part of the 20th Century based on Newtonian Physics, however one must realize that althought there was an anbundant level of enthusiasim to explore the inner-workings of our uninverse on the subatomic level, in order to learn what we were dealing with in relation to new discoveries being made, Cambridge was one of the last to agree to it, yet still heald steadfast in their antiquated beliefs in spite of proven methods to show otherwise! and to this very day we have a variety of classes being taught to our students that "omitt" the corrections to the antiquated formulas that simply were not designed to work with "Quantum Mechanics" I strongly recommend you consider reading the following books... "Quantum Gravity" By: Lee Smolin Author of "The Life of The Cosmos" ISBN# 0-465-07835-4 "Gravitation And SpaceTime" (second eddition) By: Hans C. Ohanian & Remo Ruffini ISBN# 0-393-96501-5 "Subatomic Particles" (The Discovery Of) By: Steven Weinberg Nobel Laureate and Author of "The First Three Minutes" ISBN# 0-7167-2121-X "The Search For Superstrings, Symetry, and the Theory of Everything" By: John Gribbon ISBN# 0-316-32975-4 These books seemingly tie into one another, and I will often review them in my library & make connections from one pahragraph in one book, where it will be explained in more functional detail in another & visea-vesa, also I am often making connections to what has been adversley rejected in the earlier part of the 20th century, and still happening today, simply because they did'nt read these books!!! (LMAO) *Inquiries: http://profiles.yahoo.com/vosstech *Additional Referrences: Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/LIGO_web/about/factsheet.html Catching the Gravitational Wave http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/LIGO_web/about/brochure.html gravitational waves http://www.ligo-la.caltech.edu/Posters/poster5.html Electromagnetic Waves versus Gravitational Waves http://www.ligo-la.caltech.edu/Posters/poster6.html
what exactly is time Time travel as we define it is the ability to move between the past, present, and future at will. Knowing this we can then determine that time travel will not be and is not possible through speed, as speed could only serve to out run time or make time appear to slow. As an example, let's assume there is a car that travels at a constant speed, a constant 60mph, this car we will call time. Now, let's say you build a car that can travel at 80mph, in effect traveling faster than the constant car (time). We now put these two cars on the open interstate highway known as the time line. As the two cars travel down the interstate you will begin to notice that the car traveling at 80mph is beginning to catch and over take the car traveling at 60mph. As you can tell by this example no time travel has or can occur. The only thing that may happen is that you would be able to out run time. That is if time travels at a constant speed. If you did out run time using speed where would you, end up? Somewhere waiting for time to catch-up? Moreover, where would that somewhere be? I do not believe it is possible to wait nowhere for time to catch-up to you. The only possible way to time travel is for the future time to already exist so that you may travel to it. If time did travel at a constant speed, what would that speed be? The speed of light? This is to assume that light in some way produces or has something to do with time. We know this isn't true cause time goes on even in the dark or in the absence of light. Therefore, this now leads us to the question of what exactly is time and what produces it. The only comparison that I can make between light and time is to say that they are both frequencies or better put they are both measured in frequencies. I can also say that time is inversely proportional to energy. The more energy you put into doing something the less time it takes to do that something. Likewise, the less energy you put into doing something the more time it takes to do that something. please help I need answers what exactly is time? what produces time? am I on the right track? and what is everyone's thoughts about my idea
Welcome to Sciforums, Beauideal. May your posts be long and varied! You ask the questions that endless people through the ages have asked. And still do. So far the answers escape and evade us. But we are indeed closing upon better understanding of them. Prehaps we have not learned to word our questions correctly. Oft times just changing how we ask brings up associations that result in closer answers to what we seek. But in this case I do not think that is the solution. To many have already asked and we now have to be patient and await the discoveries that will lead to the answers. You bring up interesting observations with leading thoughts. I wish you well in what you seek. May your answer be in the next curve of the road.
Hrmm... the speed of light Hi Beauideal, I agree with Wet1 that these are fundamental questions that scientists have been asking themselves ever since the concept of time was introduced. There's one observation I'd like to make. You said: I disagree, light has something to do with time. We human beings experience time as a sequence of events that happen (the sun sets, night falls, sun rises - repeat ad infinitum). The sequence in which we see events happen has to do with light: since we assume that nothing can travel faster than light, the only way for us to witness an event is to see it (and not hear it for example). In physics, this "close" relation between time and light is expressed in the lightcone (which is a cone-shaped figure in a space-time diagram that seperates events we can witness and cannot witness at a given spacetime point). I realise this doesn't answer the question "what is time", but perhaps it sets you on the right track for your thoughts... Bye! Crisp
Hi, Beauideal ... If Crisp's post got you curious about the 'lightcone' bit, you can check out the following URL http://www.phy.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/ It will give you a not too technical intro. to the concepts involved.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Hi Chagur, Be sure to warn me when I get too techy Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!. Thanks for the link, it looks very informative (and is one of the few sites I've ever seen on the web correctly mentioning that Galilei's principle is also a principle of relativity) Bye! Crisp
You're welcome, Crisp ... I've experienced that glazed, puzzled look people get too many times over the years not to want to jump in and give an assist. Glad you don't mind. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
