Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Designer

  1. Thanks for the response RainmanTime and Darby. RainmanTime I read the link you gave me about relativistic mass and discover how unclear this idea is. I know he theory of relativity was verified with a satellites going around the earth with GPS with respect to time. Was there ever an experiment done for relativistic mass off the top of your head with this? Thanks Designer.
  2. P.S. Oops double post. :oops: Just having an observer in this relativity experiment should not have any implication on more mass in an object. That's crazy. :confused:
  3. Problem with space-time Theory of relativity As an object come close to the speed of light the object becomes more massive. So where does the extra mass come from; this would violate the conservation of mass theory doesn't it! Where does the extra mass come from dark matter or what? Or else it will come from nothingness. Here's a link stating space and time are independent of each other might be an ideas to look into. This separation would probably prevent the event of more massiveness. Separation of space-time Thanks Designer. One last point if the object becomes more massive would this distort the integrity of the object.
  4. Creating Massiveness changes the structure of matter. How can this happen with just movement of objects at a distance. Could it just look more massive which could be ok but be more massive is another story all together. Lets say as A and B separating at near the speed of light when then (A) pops out of existence leaving (B) by itself. Does that then mean object B mass and time dilation resets back. That just spooking action at a distance. How can object (A) make object (B) heavy at a distance. Its really crazy. And counter intuitive. And note there is a complete void between them no connection to induce massiveness in object (B) from (A). And anyhow as the objects separate you would think logically that they would have less effect on each other with some kind of squares law. Designer.
  5. Sorry Darby for not responding. My Internet was off for a little more than a day. I have also have another problem with Einstein equation of E = MC^2 but I will bring it up for another day. I have been here for a while and finally came to the conclusion that the physics of today is lacking in some way in representing reality. All I can say for now is that spooky action (between objects) at a distance is required to be implemented for mass and time dilation to be determined without an observer. Designer.
  6. Let me put it another way just as a follow up. If the rest of creation existed then the moving bowling ball(B) and stationary ball(A) can be determined. The rest of creation should not matter unless you believe in spooky action at a distance with respect to creation. All I am saying now things changed if the rest of creation exists or does not exist. The reason it makes a difference is now we know weather (B) is moving away from (A) or not. Designer, Thanks.
  7. A problem with relativity. I really like doing thought experiments to prove or disprove existing scientific theories. So here is my problem with Einstein relativity. In the beginning there was only vast and at infinite ends of creation nothingness; nothing but a complete void. Then all of a sudden two bowling ball came into existence that were fairly heavy. These bowling balls are stationary with a distance of one meter apart. These are the only two things in creation along with vast nothingness. The two bowling balls are named (A) and (B) of equal weight. bowling ball (A) remain stationary but bowling ball (B) spontaneous started moving away from (A) at near the speed of light. 1. All of a sudden ball (B) got heavy and time slow down with respect to (A) due to Einstein theory. But wait, there is a real problem with this. (B) can be viewed as stationary with respect to (A) since there are only two reference points in creation (A) and (B). So now we can say (A) is moving away from (B) at close to the speed of light since there are no other reference points in creation. 2. So if (A) can be viewed with respect to (B) at moving at the speed of light then it must get heavy(A) and time will slow(A) with respect to (B). This is a complete reversal with Statement 1 since it contradict Statement 2 ! So my question then is does (A) or (B) get heavy with time slowing down. The problem is (A) relative (B) or (B) relative to (A). The result are total contradictions since weight can't be heavy and light at the same time as well as time going fast and slow on object (A) and (B) at the same time. Its a total reversal! :confused: So I'm stumped does anyone have a clear solution to this contradiction. For anything to work there must be spooky action at a distance. Thanks, Designer. PS replace weight with massiveness.
  8. Hi KerrTexas For one thing I am not that religious. My brother found this quote for me in the Protevangelion of James Chapter XIII since he knew that I am interested in time travel. Here is the link below. The Gospel Called the Protevangelion How does it relate to time travel. It proves that time can be stopped in its tracks. From this it is not a large leap to then be possible to go back in time. The time stopping event help prove that time travel is possible. People of this age only believe that time only moves in one direction from the past to the future only. But this quote proves otherwise and the rate of time can be changed if not stopped or reversed.
  9. Jesus Birth story. Time stopping event. AND leaving her and his sons in the cave, Joseph went forth to seek a Hebrew midwife in the village of Bethlehem. 2 But as I was going (said Joseph), I looked up into the air, and I saw the clouds astonished, and the fowls of the air stopping in the midst of their flight. 3 And I looked down towards the earth, and saw a table spread, and working people sitting around it, but their hands were upon the table and they did not move to eat. 4 They who had meat in their mouths did not eat. 5 They who lifted their hands up to their heads did not draw them back, 6 And they who lifted them up to their mouths did not put any thing in; 7 But all their faces were fixed upwards. 8 And I beheld the sheep dispersed, and yet the sheep stood still. 9 And the shepherd lifted up his hand to smite them, and his hand continued up. 10 And I looked unto a river, and saw the kids with their mouths close to the water, and touching it, but they did not drink.
  10. Michio Kaku (I found this quote in an article of Kaku but don't know if he said this) "There is a loophole in Einstein's equation that even Einstein realized was there. In Einstein's equation, time is a river. It speeds up, meanders, and slows down. The new wrinkle, is that it can have whirlpools and fork into two rivers. So, if the river of time can be bent into a pretzel, create whirlpools and fork into two rivers, then time travel cannot be ruled out." If there is fork in time does it not mean it is two-dimensional with one axis (X) as real and the other (Y) imaginary thus it is complex. Someone needs to rework the entire math for fun and see what comes out in the wash with time being two-dimensional versus one dimensional. Here the link quote from here :)
  11. Sorry I still don't fully understand. Regardless I still believe you got something new of importance. So this is what I mean and draw it out. Axis of 2 D time *---------------------------------- Real component of time -------------------> X | | | | Imaginary component of time | | | \/ Time Travel plot for a person that eventually goes into a time machine. (1) >>>>>>>>regular time>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Time machine>>> < (2) <-time line 1 ^Divergence-------------------------------------------------------------< |Divergence-----------------------------------------------< Divergence (Time travel) |Divergence-------------------------------------< |Divergence--------------------------< *Divergence-------------- (3) >>>out of time machine>>>>regular time>>> (4) <-time line 2 Where '>' is regular flow of time. and '<' is time travel with divergence. 1 to 2 regular passage of time 2 to 3 time travel with imaginary divergence component in it as well a real. 3 to 4 regular passage of time (time line 2) with a divergence with respect to 1 to 2 (time line 1) :)
  12. Hi Darby Designer here. I think you stumble over something new when you take the square root of a negative number. If there is all positive number there can only be one universal time line. But when you take the negative the time domain becomes a plain and thus many resulting in multiple time paths where you can take into account divergent time lines. So when you go into the past a divergence occurs and thus a new time line is created. Thus there can be no paradoxes since time is two-dimensional and impossible to get back the exact same timeline and only a similar one. In reference to Darby quote 'other time can be defined as a two dimensional coordinate space.' :confused:
  13. Is time travel now possible? :confused: Is time travel possible.
  14. (FREE WEEKLY COAST TO COAST) Hi everyone. I found a cheap way to listen to Coast To Coast on the net. Go to ksfo560 radio station. See link below. FREE COAST TO COAST http://www.ksfo560.com/article.asp?id=534876 This site has a week of mp3 archive so you have a limited time frame to listen to coast to coast starting at 11pm every day of the week. But after a full week of any time period the on line archive expires and a newer coast to coast will go in its place. Thanks. :)
  15. Just a final point If (B+C) move away from A at near the speed of light then (B+C) get heavy. But wait; it can also be viewed as A moving away from (B+C) at near the speed of light. So the question is is A heavy or (B+C) heavy? If there is an invisible connection between A and (B+C), maybe it is the pull between these two set of particle separating from each other(like a stretching rubber band) thus result in getting heavy. Could this be the result of quantum entanglement? Just having 3 object in the universe makes thing tricky doesn't it; that's the problem with thought experiments isn't it! :confused: Thanks, Designer.
  16. Is it heavy or is it light There are just three objects in the universe one stationary point(object) called A and two other objects called B and C moving away in the same directions at the speed of light minus 1 m/s with respect to A. B and C with respect to A get very heavy due to relativity since it is just travelling under the speed of light. Then point A pops out of existence. This then leave B relative to C as stationary now since A does not exist. So now B and C are very light and not heavy as before due to the theory of relativity. Thus CONTRADICTION. Do you see how difficult in resolving this light or heavy mass problem is! You need quantum entanglement between object for this to work or the theory of relativity is not valid. For this problem to be valid you need an invisible ether that everything to be relative to it so that things can reference that one point in space. :confused: Thx, Designer.
  17. Re: Schrodinger's cat In 1957, Hugh Everett formulated the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Here is wiki explanation of Hugh Everett conclusion of Schrödinger's cat. To get the full explanation and conclusion visit this link half way down to many-worlds interpretation & consistent histories in dealing with Schrödinger's cat. Link: Hugh Everett This is basically what I was trying to get across having a live and dead cat in two time line in parallel simultaneously. Have a good read. Thx.
  18. Schrodinger's cat How to create a Temporal Divergence John Titor style. Schrodinger's cat. Here is a link to Schrodinger's cat experiment. Cat Experiment Schrodinger's cat experiment has either the cat alive or dead but not both. But I disagree since it can be both; you just have to add the idea of temporal divergence as stated by John Titor. So you got one live cat in one new time line and another dead cat in the divergent time line. So in other words now you have two time lines. My problem thus far is since you now have two cats from one thus you get the conservation of mass problem again. But maybe that won't be a problem since maybe the quantum particles jump between the two cat the live one and dead one all the time since where they are is just a probability. If my theory is right and there are no real paradoxes with one cat alive and the same cat dead at the same time since it is just a matter of divergence. From this analysis if true then Quantum Mechanics make time travel possible since by doing this experiment creates two time line with a divergence.
  19. Had a bad writing day again. All I am trying to say is if quantum mechanics say a partial can be two places at once then the conservation of mass can stay true and thus mass can stay in the past as well as the present at the same time. In conclusion people can visit the pass because mass would be there to visit at any time. :)
  20. The only way time travel is possible is if one partical can be two places at one. One partical in the past and the other in present thus the conservation of mass would stay true. My question is what does Quantum Mechanics say about particals; with one partical in two places at the same time. If Quantum Mechanics say this is true; time travel is then possible, :confused:
  21. TimeLord If mass enters and exits constantly over time the only way this is possible to make an identical match(person) is though quantum entanglement. In other word you don't need to shrink as a person when mass leave your time. Quantum entanglement is the only way to preserve mass information entanglement when new mass enters a person body or else we will all turn into frogs. thx.
  22. TimeLord If there is lower energy in the past then mass is lower too so what happens is we all shrink in size. I don't think so if there is lower mass in the past there is "no past' since this would result in a loss of information in relation to mass. So in conclusion it will be impossible for anything to exist there (Past) due to loss of information.
  23. I think we are all a little to close to the math. A lot of Einstein work could have been resolve with thought experiments. A simple though experiment will resolve these problems. If mass flows with you along time there can be no grandfather paradox or the ability to see yourself in the past since you exist as a point on a time graph and not as line on a graph. Therefor time travel is impossible. If mass continually build up over time for example a non moving rock we would find that gravity would build up at that point; but in reality this never happen. But note a simple test could be conducted and prove this with an accelerometer to detect a gradual increase in gravity over time. Please remember gravity transcends space and time and over all dimensions. We would thus notice a rock gravity around it would get really strong at that one place. But note this never happens. Thx.
  • Create New...