Jump to content

WORDS FOR THE FUTURE, by John Titor


jmpet
 Share

Recommended Posts

jmpet,

 

Re: Provisionality vs science. Science is provisional, not falsifiable.

 

Re: Philosophy vs science. Science is nothing more than math, period.

I don't want any part of the "argument" - that's between you and Rainman. But I think that I have to respond to the above - because they are wrong.

 

Science is falsifiable. In fact that is a basic premise of the Scientific Method. The hypothesis and then the theory must be so stated as to be falsifiable. A valid scientific theory has to leave room for it to be disproved. If the theory is shown to be false in just one instance then the theory is falsified, wrong and has to either be tossed out completely or modified.

 

Example: Newtonian Mechanics. It works wonderfully but along came Maxwell, Lorentz, Poincare and Einstein. Newton was wrong and a small correction had to be added (sqrt (1-v^2/c^2)) to his system of mechanics.

 

Newton left room for falsification. He was falsified and then corrected. Good science.

 

The other statement: Science is nothing more than math. That's absolutely incorrect. It just so happens that the language of mathematics can be most elegantly utilized to describe scientific facts. But it is a very common and basic mistake to equate them. Science is science. Math is the language used by scientists to concisely describe the science.

 

Mathematicians usually miss the boat in physics because all they see is the math. They don't have a feel for what the math is saying to them about some set of real world properties.

 

A physicist sees the picture that the math paints...even if he s/he doesn't actually solve the math problem.

 

 

Just another damned cowboy with a college education.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

">Titor himself said he was here on a SECONDARY MISSION that he never detailed in full. So his very presence was admittedly a secret agenda.<

 

His primary mission was to fix the Y2K glitch. "

 

jm, if you can gather all those posts about titor together then you should be able to find quickly the part about the reason he was posting on the internet. He said it was a secondary mission that all time travelers had. I don't want to keep a dialog going on this otherwise I will begin to suspect you have an agenda.

 

The timing still uses a crystal as far as I know.

 

 

---
1 + 1 & 1 + 0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you can gather all those posts about titor together then you should be able to find quickly the part about the reason he was posting on the internet.

John,s last words on 03-24-2001(after Hercules emulator was complete with 64-bit architecture):

 

My interaction with you was not a direct mission parameter but it was a secondary mission protocol based on standing orders given to all temporal drivers. That secondary objective is basically to gather as much information about a worldline based on a set of observable variables when we first arrive. Your worldline met those conditions. What amazes me is why no one here wonders why Y2K didn't hit them at all?

 

Bring a gas can with you when the car dies on the side of the road.

 

Farewell.

 

John

I think John would share his experiences in detail in 2036. They might do an analysis on how the people react to Time Travel in the past, and how much 'threat' they pose to Time Travelers which could be useful for future missions.

 

His last words were direct reference to Y2K. I noticed his posts, he was gradually giving out information on the IBM 5100 and Y2K. Still no one picked up on it while he was here.

 

At one point he even said, 'I believe the 5100 is unique in its ability to run assembler language on the 360-machine platform and still be portable'.

 

If Titor was real, I suggest if someone tried to buy the IBM 5100 on e-bay, can instead download the Hercules emulator. It's free. It wouldn't do any good, but it could be a great memory of Time Travel, an item involving both the past and the future. The emulator that was hidden in 5100's ROM, that was ripped off after April 1998, after being 'tweaked' by Titor's grandfather in 1975, and taken to 2036 from 2001.

 

 

Desires arise because of the delusion that the individual jeeva is independent and powerful; If this delusion did not exist, the jeeva would be in a state of bliss, there would be no hankerings and frustrations
.
-Jyoutisha Siddhanta Sara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Science is falsifiable. In fact that is a basic premise of the Scientific Method. The hypothesis and then the theory must be so stated as to be falsifiable. A valid scientific theory has to leave room for it to be disproved. If the theory is shown to be false in just one instance then the theory is falsified, wrong and has to either be tossed out completely or modified.<

 

Okay, then how do I put this into words? You need solid science to base a theory upon, once you have a theory the process of falsification begins. You can't presume atoms are really pumpkin pies and base a theory on that because that is not science.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said I believe John Titor either! And I don't! I will go as far as say I believe John Titor 90% of his words, the other 10% of the information he gave is simply illogical. For example, I find it hard to believe that in post-apocolyptic world with five large communities instead of 50 states and a decentralized government whose economy is based on agriculture they decided to spend one billion dollars to make a time machine that would work but never return the time traveller. Closest John Titor came to addressing that was him saying something like "I will be returning to one of many futures that needs the 5100." I just don't buy that. But once again, the message is important.

I feel the same way. I don't believe Titor was an actual time traveler, he was merely someone who appears to have had a good sense of what is coming and decided to get the message out in a rather creative way.

 

I still think the message is important. Overall good post jmpet.

 

RainmanTime, I'm new here, but so far I find your messages annoying like Viagra spam in my inbox. Your messages are unconstructive and it seems they are only intended to provoke people into arguing with you, so that you can boost your ego by harrasing them.

 

Yes you can say what you want, freedom of speech bla bla bla etc etc. But that still doesn't mean you're not an obvious a s s h o l e.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I'll come down off my high horse a little.

Cool. I'll try to temper my rhetoric as well. And I hope you realize that this is all in fun, jmpet. Just because I don't agree with your thought processes does not mean I hold you any ill will. As Darby pointed out, I will always stay "in character", and I will go toe-to-toe with anyone who adopts a certain rhetoric of their own. This is a free and open forum, and the way it is set up, no one can dominate another.

 

Re: Tensors. I don't know what they mean, no one knows what they mean. That means it's your job to educate us so we know what you're talking about. It's quite simple- if you're introducing new concepts you need to at least explain them in plain words. I have no compulsion to read up just to grasp the fundamental principles you're referring to. I am willing to learn however if you're willing to teach, but I ain't taking a night class just to participate on a TT board!

There are many who know what tensors mean, and understand how to manipulate this form of math to uncover physical truths. But this is where I would gently suggest to you that a good deal of formal schooling is generally necessary to understand complex mathematics and, specifically, how they DO reflect the physical world around us. You are not the only person who thinks that the entirety of physical phenomenon should be readily understandable to us in simple terms. I wish it were so also, but there is a LOT more going on in the physical universe than can be reported to us by our simple senses.

Honestly, jmpet, if I could teach the fundamentals of vectors (a necessary precursor to tensors) and the fundamentals of tensors on a text-based internet forum, the establishments of universities around our globe would have fallen under the pretext of "simplicity" long ago. There are people who have their BS degrees in engineering and science who still do not have a grasp on tensors, and barely have a grasp on vectors. I can apologize for the fact that vector and tensor calculus is difficult, but I cannot change that fact, nor can I "simplify" it to a 10 minute, 500 word essay on the internet.

 

Re: Wind power. I don't understand why I have to overstate the simple logic that windmills work. They simply work. You put them up, they spin in the wind and make electricity. I also think that considering you wrote about the positive benefits of wind power days before I joined this forum (which I just read recently), you should be at least a little "in my corner" on the issue.

Oh, but I am. But just "a little in your corner". IOW, I do not support you when the things you claim exceeds the boundaries of what science tells us is possible. Certainly, windmills "work", but at what economy? That is why I have continually pointed you to the equations. No amount of your fanciful thoughts can ever change the simple fact that wind power varys with the cube of wind velocity. Furthermore, there are physical losses that are a fact of nature when you try to harness that power and convert it into electricity. I have attempted to get you to recognize these limiting factors by pointing you to the established math and physics that limit how much windmills can be scaled-up to be a viable solution in low velocity winds. And yet you have ignored or otherwise resisted my call to realistic science. Leaving behind the equations I have pointed out for ideal and real wind power extraction, let's examine your other claim that these devices "run themselves" for 30 years:

There is a single "achilles heel" that any piece of rotating machinery possesses that drives the reliability (lifetime) of any such device. These are the ball bearings. The smoother and the more uniform the ball bearings in any rotating piece of machinery, the more efficient the machine they are part of. But... even if every single ball bearing in a wind turbine was machined to ultra-smoothness and each was machined to great precision with respect to each other, there is still the problem of how those bearings wear-down over their lifetime. As the generator continues to rotate, the ball bearings wear down and develop very small pits. Those pits increase rolling friction, and that increase in rolling friction has very deterimental effects to the efficiency by which the generator can convert mechanical energy into electrical energy. These little, innocuous componets are the biggest contributor to the simple fact that no wind turbine could be built that would be able to operate for 30 years without maintenance of their ball bearings and/or the ball bearing raceways.

 

Now, given that I have a lot of experience with motors in my profession as a flight control engineer, let me show you the simple math that governs current state-of-the-art for reliability of DC brushless motors (same sort of mechanical device that would be used as a generator). We measure reliability in Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) in terms of total operating hours. Currently, if you can get a DC brushless motor/generator that has a MTBF of 30,000 hours before it requires bearing maintenance, you've got yourself a good product. If you do the math and convert 30,000 continuous operating hours into years of continuous operation, you get about 3.4 years. That is an entire order of magnitude LESS than what you have claimed. I am only showing you the reality (physical and mathematical) surrounding your idea. There are hurdles to be overcome, and while you are either not aware of them or you wish to ignore them, I wish to point them out so that you and others can learn that science and engineering are not as "easy" as you would like to think they are.

 

I would love nothing more than one of these windmill companies to develop a "windmill in a box" system. Then they'd go town to town like travelling salesmen speaking to small town mayors selling free energy. Here's how it would go-

 

A one million dollar windmill produces enough energy for 500 homes. This is $2,000 per home. If you can sign up 500 homes in your town that want free electricity forever for only $2,000, I will bring this technology to your town. I bet you dollars to doughnuts there's be a lot of windmills everywhere.

I would also love nothing more than for this to be possible. But I implore you to exmaine the problems that I have only begun to outline above. If it really were as easy as you seem to make it, don't you think companies would be doing it (and profiting from it) on a massively large scale already?

 

Re: Provisionality vs science. Science is provisional, not falsifiable. Your scientific approach of first developing theories then finding the science behind it is flawed because the first time someone finds fault with one of your basic principles, the whole thing falls apart. And on a personal note, provisionality is just plain annoying- the provisional approach ignores facts and looks for flaws. If I used the falsifiable approach to your theory, it would fall right apart.

I don't quite understand all the points you are making here, but I will let Darby's treatment of this stand, as he has (once again) outlined the precepts of "good science". If you can falsify my math, I welcome you to do so. And you are correct, if it can be falsified in even one case, then it is not "truth". But so far, there are ONLY TWO extensions beyond existing science that my theories utilize (Mass and Time as vectors), and as yet I do not see how anyone has been able to falsify them.

Re: Philosophy vs science. Science is nothing more than math, period.

Again, I do not have anything to add to this beyond what Darby has stated. Math is the language of science, but they are NOT equivalent.

My approach is to assume it already exists then "look at that McGuffin" and think backwards, then I have a discovery.

IMO, you would be better to look at the Titor story for its agenda, and understand that the "time travel" part of the story WAS Titor's McGuffin that was attempting to make you believe the story. I am confident that "it is all about information and the manipulation thereof." You will not be able to shake my belief in this, as I have worked out the math that convinces me that Information is a higher dimensional metric over Energy.

You can never force someone to agree with you, it's impossible.

And nor do I try to do this. In fact, you should be able to see that I continually implore people to FALSIFY my work (not simply agree with me). If you CAN show me where it is wrong, then please do. But I must also say that it is not sufficient to use "words" as a means to falsify it. Since I frame my theories in math, then they must be falsified either in math or with actual, physical, experimental data.

Enjoy the long weekend!

 

RMT

 

 

corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

Link to comment
Share on other sites

swear,

 

RainmanTime, I'm new here, but so far I find your messages annoying like Viagra spam in my inbox.

There is a major difference: Unlike viagra spam in your mailbox, you WILLFULLY come to this forum and WILLFULLY read my posts. No one is forcing you to do that at all.

Your messages are unconstructive

People who do not understand, nor adhere to, the precepts of science would often claim this. However, if I am pointing out where certain things (including Titor's story) do not adhere to accepted science, then this would not necessarily be unconstructive. Indeed, anyone who would tend to agree with poorly formed thoughts that defy accepted science would be closer to being unconstructive.

Yes you can say what you want, freedom of speech bla bla bla etc etc. But that still doesn't mean you're not an obvious a s s h o l e.

Hugs and kisses right back atcha! :P

There is a whole thread available if you wish to bash me. Have at it! Doesn't hurt me in the least. You sound like someone who got to the Thanksgiving table a little late yesterday, and didn't get any gravy! :)

 

RMT

 

 

corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me point something out in your argument, jmpet:

 

You need solid science to base a theory upon, once you have a theory the process of falsification begins. You can't presume atoms are really pumpkin pies and base a theory on that because that is not science.

You state the above, and I agree. It is not good to presume or even assume, without evidence, as the basis of a theory. But now, here is something else you stated in a reply to me:

My approach is to assume it already exists then "look at that McGuffin" and think backwards, then I have a discovery.

So then you must agree that since your approach "assumes a time machine already exists" that it cannot be good science?

I don't enjoy using your own words against you in the same way that I think you have enjoyed trying to use my words against me. I am just trying to get to a sound, scientific methodology. As such, I agree with your first statements above, but do not agree with your "assume it exists" philosophy in the second quote. It would be just as silly to say "Assume a free energy device that defies the 2nd law of thermodynamics already exists." To assume that something exists that violates known physical conservations laws would NOT be good science.

 

RMT

 

 

corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WILLFULLY read my posts.

Ummm ... not really no. Actually, like spam, I took a look at a few of the first messages, and then decided just to ignore the rest of the crap you proudly post.

 

There is a whole thread available if you wish to bash me. Have at it! Doesn't hurt me in the least. You sound like someone who got to the Thanksgiving table a little late yesterday, and didn't get any gravy!

No I'm not here to bash you, just wanted to point out some obvious undeniable facts.

 

I don't live in America sorry, we don't have "Thanksgiving" here.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi jmpet,

 

Here's another way to put it. You write your theory, it's proven right, it becomes the new norm. At some point, someone has to make it understandable to teach it to nine year olds. I want that information first. Pique my interest then get complicated.

Your challenge has reinvigorated me. And especially your point you made about "number", although I do not think the Qur'an has a stranglehold on number theory.

My website has been dead for a couple years now. But your challenged caused me to begin to resurrect it. Now, you are not going to find explanations of my tensor theory there. But what you WILL find (on the "science" side of the site) are explanations of how the progression of natural numbers (from 0 through 10) shape all of the major elements of our existence. So, if you want some editorials and "lessons" that are significantly simpler than tensor math, I suggest you:

 

1) Go to My Website.

 

2) Follow the "Science" side of the main page.

 

3) Read the editorials and associations of numbers, beginning with zero on upwards.

 

It is not complete yet, and there is much work left to be done in adding and sprucing things up. But it will certainly give you a lot to read while I continue to resurrect the site. And if you like to cook, you might find some good recipes there too! :) I'll be working over the next week or so to get all the content back up there that I currently have stored here at home.

 

Kind Regards,

 

RMT

 

 

corruptissima re publica plurimae leges

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Your challenge has reinvigorated me. And especially your point you made about "number", although I do not think the Qur'an has a stranglehold on number theory.<

 

This is what I was referring to:

 

http://www.answers.com/topic/muqatta-at

 

While there has been some speculation on the meaning of these letters, the consensus of Muslim scholars is that these letters' full meaning is beyond our understanding (Ibn Kathir, for instance, describes them as "among those things whose knowledge Allah has kept only for Himself".)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahhhh…the back and forth of the believers and the skeptics…music to my ears.

 

I have been following JT since he started this trip, the end point is, to some is a few days away, to others it is still years. For Me?...it has already come and gone, I do believe in JT, I also think that there is percentage difference between our TL and his. Do I believe that what he says is going to happen? A lot of it has already, but most people don't want to hear that. Especially about the good OL' US of A. I wonder who could tell me how the civil war started?(the one in the 1800's ;0))..and how the folks felt about it then?.did they really think that is was starting or did they just wonder until the first troops fought? I am not a scientist or even know that much about it. I do know that if you get past all of that, and this is where most folks blow the gaskets, it rings true. It might not have then, but is sure does now. Being that I was a soldier, and have lived with out power and running water, in a smaller community, I guess it is just the way he described things that rang true. If you lived all of you life with power and water, you might not see it that way. I hope that the 2% percent or so he talked about will be enough to head us another way. I guess in 2008 and we all need bike tires we can say for sure. Here is one for the fuel too..take a look at Wi-FI…look into how the HotSpots work..Oregon is a great place to start.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re; Colbrezharly's say on:

 

Oregon in past eras, along the coast, was a prime area for advanced computer technology.

 

The Tektronix Corporation, was one of the very best, cream of the crop organizations, providing test, measurement capabilities, within a combination sea coast combined area.

 

Tektronix, was one of the most innovative companies, as this company, "I can say" , produced beautiful; electronics.

 

Oregon was and always will be a very special place, in said eras of technical developments, as a key-note, for centuries to come.

 

 

Creedo 299

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a reply- and not especially to Creedo either!

 

Your Ancient Mother may actually have been from Africa!

 

How does that make you feel?

 

Especially concerning Titor?

 

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

 

http://www.asu.edu/clas/iho/lucy.html

 

On the Origin of Humans?

 

The Ethiopian and American scientists also concluded that the onset of the Ice Ages about 950,000 years ago likely split the Homo erectus populations and led to their divergent evolutions. The African population of Homo erectus probably gave rise to modern Homo sapiens, the European branch perhaps became the Neanderthals, or Homo neanderthalensis, while the Asian population became extinct.

 

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2002/03/20_orig.html

 

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

 

Six to Seven million years ago on a continent far, far away!

 

How do you think your Ancient Mother thinks about all of this?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

colbrezyharly,

 

I wonder who could tell me how the civil war started?(the one in the 1800's ;0)).

I believe that you'll find your answer in Federalist #42 and in The Great Compromise as it related to "something" about the year 1808. (Article I, Section 9 U.S. Constitution)

 

"Twenty years will produce all the mischief that can be apprehended from the liberty to import slaves. So long a term will be more dishonorable to the National character than to say nothing about it in the Constitution."

 

James Madison, "Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787"

 

And "hey hey" to you too, my brother. ;)

 

 

Just another damned cowboy with a college education.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there was debate about Ancient Mama back then in 1974 about that also.

 

Perhaps, Ancient Mama made the first railway subway system, riding the lions and tigers along the animal routes and ancient tree-stops, jumping off and on, going vast distances across the plains!

 

But in a sense, Lucy is a time-traveller!

 

Whoa there big Puddycat!

 

(Like a locomotive!)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Creedo 299

 

I guess the point I was making, or trying to make about the Wi-Fi, was what they are, and how they worked.

 

Darby

 

I would take that as the Civil war started first as a disagreement on how things should be, and went from there. I would put it to you that what everybody is looking for is right in front of there face. When folks talk about "Waco like events" and civil unrest, I think they are talking about the same things. The taking away of the rights. So, when JT said that we would see the events taking place, 2004/5, he was stating that they were just starting, and we not have a doubt about it by 2008. That is my view, but then again, it is a gut feeling and not any science to it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would take that as the Civil war started first as a disagreement on how things should be, and went from there. I would put it to you that what everybody is looking for is right in front of there face. When folks talk about "Waco like events" and civil unrest, I think they are talking about the same things. The taking away of the rights. So, when JT said that we would see the events taking place, 2004/5, he was stating that they were just starting, and we not have a doubt about it by 2008. That is my view, but then again, it is a gut feeling and not any science to it.

I sort of agree, I doubt many others here will.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Large furry mamoids

 

Why go on, why not dig a hole, crawl in it and die?

 

In the year 2036 there is a giant asteroid that smashes into Earth killing millions.

 

What world war three did not wipe away in the 2012s, this grouping of giant meteors certainly did.

 

There is at that time, little or no reason for mankind to go on.\

 

This is really Rainman Times fault.

 

He hindered the growth of superline shuttles which would have come out of a more mindful vigilance, out of the rescue of the American shuttle program.

 

He did nothing and in this interview from Las Vegas you can hear Rain trying to get out of it.

 

Reporter, Excuse me Rainman, you said that you are against low cost air fare for the country of Silesia.

 

Raiman, I cant comment on that right now.But I want to say, that Brad and I both put millions into the country, by grants and applications to this government.

 

Reporter, Is it true that you are for parody of Canadian workers, who at one time thought they were aquatic aliens from space.

 

Rainman, Again, I only want to say, that these attempt by others such as infamous Creedo 299, are meant to defame honest attempt, by those such as myself, you want to see fruity Canadian progress.

 

Creedo has always said that the shuttle fleet could do better, however you don't see him patenting his product of a better hold system for those shuttle tiles?

 

 

Creedo 299

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...