Jump to content

They got it all wrong!


Time02112
 Share

Recommended Posts

You shouldnt falsely accuse people.

 

Those David Trott posts do not feel like Javier's signature. Ask the web master. All of your IP numbers are logged and find out for certain who it was.

 

David Trott-and Tyme Master(1A) -it would help if you registered. it would be hard for someone to use your name then because your profile would be attached to it,and your password.

 

<This message has been edited by pamela (edited 11 June 2000).>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

http://www.time-travel.com/anderson.htm

 

This is the page with a brief biography of Dr. Anderson. It actually doesn't even say he has any education in physics.

 

Actually, I think the site itself is very well done; I've heard of all the theories before, through more mainstream channels. They're the standard time-travel physicist's fare: either requiring too much energy, or exotic forms of matter/energy, so that it's not feasible for us to create them right now. But interesting thoughts for our progeny, a few thousand years from now.

 

Just a thought: maybe we don't see any time travellers because the development of the technology is such a huge project, infeasible for the individual to undertake. Or maybe it takes an exponentially increasing amount of energy or danger, the further back one would want to travel. Then, assuming the technology is developed far enough in the future, it's possible no-one would want to come back, or succeed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.time-travel.com/anderson.htm

 

This is the page with a brief biography of Dr. Anderson. It actually doesn't even say he has any education in physics.

 

Actually, I think the site itself is very well done; I've heard of all the theories before, through more mainstream channels. They're the standard time-travel physicist's fare: either requiring too much energy, or exotic forms of matter/energy, so that it's not feasible for us to create them right now. But interesting thoughts for our progeny, a few thousand years from now.

 

Just a thought: maybe we don't see any time travellers because the development of the technology is such a huge project, infeasible for the individual to undertake. Or maybe it takes an exponentially increasing amount of energy or danger, the further back one would want to travel. Then, assuming the technology is developed far enough in the future, it's possible no-one would want to come back, or succeed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Abyss of Time: Romantic Geology of the Earth and the Mind

 

By Heather I. Sullivan, Trinity University

 

Questions about time fill contemporary science fiction films and novels, indeed, they raise startling questions about the age of the universe, time's relativity as described by Einstein, the possibility of travel through galactic space and even through time itself. At the end of the twentieth and beginning of the twenty-first century, there appears an overwhelming interest in our culture in pondering what time is, its progress--if one can speak of it in such terms--and its implications for human history, our future and even our minds. Yet we are the not first century to grapple with problems of time's vastness and its ephemeral quality that leaves us hardly able to define what it really is, all the while realizing that the perception of time passing dominates our every waking moment. It was Immanuel Kant in the 18th-century Enlightenment who said that time is a necessary aspect of our ability to have any perceptions at all. And it is this era to which I would like to turn in order to explore the implications of the abyss of time both in terms of earth history and the human mind, for it is this era when a major yet relatively underappreciated scientific revolution was beginning: the recognition based on empirical evidence that our earth is far, far older than the biblical 6,000 years.

 

In this talk, I present texts of early geology from the romantic era at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th century, as scientists begin to describe an expanded sense of time, in relation to several literary texts that portray provacative issues of time. In the first part, I discuss the so-called "Father of Geology," James Hutton and his 1795 Theory of the Earth, in which he describes time as an endless series of cycles with "no vestige of a beginning,--no prospect of an end" as well as more theologically-minded scientists who interpret the physical evidence of changes to the surface of the earth as being primarily caused by the one great Deluge that marks the short yet linear progress of time. Each of these two sides bases its argument on cerain assumptions about the age of the earth, whether mere thousands or rather hundreds of thousands or even millions of years. In the second part, I think about these geologists' suggestions for the shape of time, whether it is, as Stephen J. Gould puts it. "Time's Arrow," or "Time's Cycle", and how these notions of time play themselves out in debates about biblical time as well as in literary analyses of the time-boundedness of human consciousness. Finally, in the third part, I look at several well-known German romantic novellas and novels from Ludwig Tieck, Novalis, Friedrich von Eichendorff and E.T.A. Hoffmann, in which there are what I call "slippages of time." These slippages are very close to modern science fiction stories where entrance into a certain spatial realm allows, or results in, alterations in the passage of time. I close with speculations on how these early reactions to what we now term "deep time" resonate in our contemporary contemplations of our place in the universe.

 

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

 

"Everything you know,...is Wrong!

 

soon we shall all discover the truth."

 

p)'i4q4

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Abyss of Time: Romantic Geology of the Earth and the Mind

 

By Heather I. Sullivan, Trinity University

 

Questions about time fill contemporary science fiction films and novels, indeed, they raise startling questions about the age of the universe, time's relativity as described by Einstein, the possibility of travel through galactic space and even through time itself. At the end of the twentieth and beginning of the twenty-first century, there appears an overwhelming interest in our culture in pondering what time is, its progress--if one can speak of it in such terms--and its implications for human history, our future and even our minds. Yet we are the not first century to grapple with problems of time's vastness and its ephemeral quality that leaves us hardly able to define what it really is, all the while realizing that the perception of time passing dominates our every waking moment. It was Immanuel Kant in the 18th-century Enlightenment who said that time is a necessary aspect of our ability to have any perceptions at all. And it is this era to which I would like to turn in order to explore the implications of the abyss of time both in terms of earth history and the human mind, for it is this era when a major yet relatively underappreciated scientific revolution was beginning: the recognition based on empirical evidence that our earth is far, far older than the biblical 6,000 years.

 

In this talk, I present texts of early geology from the romantic era at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th century, as scientists begin to describe an expanded sense of time, in relation to several literary texts that portray provacative issues of time. In the first part, I discuss the so-called "Father of Geology," James Hutton and his 1795 Theory of the Earth, in which he describes time as an endless series of cycles with "no vestige of a beginning,--no prospect of an end" as well as more theologically-minded scientists who interpret the physical evidence of changes to the surface of the earth as being primarily caused by the one great Deluge that marks the short yet linear progress of time. Each of these two sides bases its argument on cerain assumptions about the age of the earth, whether mere thousands or rather hundreds of thousands or even millions of years. In the second part, I think about these geologists' suggestions for the shape of time, whether it is, as Stephen J. Gould puts it. "Time's Arrow," or "Time's Cycle", and how these notions of time play themselves out in debates about biblical time as well as in literary analyses of the time-boundedness of human consciousness. Finally, in the third part, I look at several well-known German romantic novellas and novels from Ludwig Tieck, Novalis, Friedrich von Eichendorff and E.T.A. Hoffmann, in which there are what I call "slippages of time." These slippages are very close to modern science fiction stories where entrance into a certain spatial realm allows, or results in, alterations in the passage of time. I close with speculations on how these early reactions to what we now term "deep time" resonate in our contemporary contemplations of our place in the universe.

 

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

 

"Everything you know,...is Wrong!

 

soon we shall all discover the truth."

 

p)'i4q4

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to the site Janus mentioned on the brief biography of Dr. Anderson and this part is what i found interesting:

 

"he focused his study and research developing new perspectives on the

 

connection between science and

 

spirituality, including their

 

intricate relationship to our basic

 

concepts of time and reality itself."

 

I think those who are sticking to only science theories and science formulas only will never find the answer to timetravel you have to look deeper into quantum physics,other realities and dimensions and spiritual levels, sounds like he is on the right track to me. :)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went to the site Janus mentioned on the brief biography of Dr. Anderson and this part is what i found interesting:

 

"he focused his study and research developing new perspectives on the

 

connection between science and

 

spirituality, including their

 

intricate relationship to our basic

 

concepts of time and reality itself."

 

I think those who are sticking to only science theories and science formulas only will never find the answer to timetravel you have to look deeper into quantum physics,other realities and dimensions and spiritual levels, sounds like he is on the right track to me. :)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right track to what!?!?!?

 

What do you get when you have the capacity to Time Travel, and the thrive for spirituality? Give up? It's actually pretty simple. Just add 1+1, you'll bond to figure it out sooner or later. If you haven't yet, maybe once I say what the answer is, you'll understand.

 

OK I'll tell you. Exploitation is what you get. Try and figure a way out of having Spirituality and a Time Machine out of it. As you can very well see, they both go and come hand in hand... With that said, are we then to allow such a thing?

 

For when you live your entire life by the rules and manipulation of someone in the future, you will see that we are nothing but a pitiful species with no freewill of your own. Puppets more like it... Thinking we're not.

 

I'm still asking my self this question... "Why did you people sell out... what did they offer you in return?

 

I hope it's worth it, cause you brought down some innocent people along with your "progress." It wasn't our fault you doomed us. We were just trying to see things from all possible angles. You didn't...

 

-Javier C.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right track to what!?!?!?

 

What do you get when you have the capacity to Time Travel, and the thrive for spirituality? Give up? It's actually pretty simple. Just add 1+1, you'll bond to figure it out sooner or later. If you haven't yet, maybe once I say what the answer is, you'll understand.

 

OK I'll tell you. Exploitation is what you get. Try and figure a way out of having Spirituality and a Time Machine out of it. As you can very well see, they both go and come hand in hand... With that said, are we then to allow such a thing?

 

For when you live your entire life by the rules and manipulation of someone in the future, you will see that we are nothing but a pitiful species with no freewill of your own. Puppets more like it... Thinking we're not.

 

I'm still asking my self this question... "Why did you people sell out... what did they offer you in return?

 

I hope it's worth it, cause you brought down some innocent people along with your "progress." It wasn't our fault you doomed us. We were just trying to see things from all possible angles. You didn't...

 

-Javier C.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at topic "Anti-Time Travel", and a posting in the first page by me called: "Enlightenment." That should answer your questions.

 

If you were to eat a cactus and think you were eating a cheese burger. It doesn't make it a cheese burger, no mater how hard you believe it to be. So just because you think

 

you have free-will doesn't mean you do. Not when that free-will is orchestrated in some way.

 

-Javier C.

 

P.S. If I don't answer, that's because I'm at work and I can't get to any replies soon.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at topic "Anti-Time Travel", and a posting in the first page by me called: "Enlightenment." That should answer your questions.

 

If you were to eat a cactus and think you were eating a cheese burger. It doesn't make it a cheese burger, no mater how hard you believe it to be. So just because you think

 

you have free-will doesn't mean you do. Not when that free-will is orchestrated in some way.

 

-Javier C.

 

P.S. If I don't answer, that's because I'm at work and I can't get to any replies soon.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this whole free will bit. What exactly is it?

 

Read a biogrophy on someone who's long dead. There's her/his life, written down and documented. It might as well be set in stone.

 

Looking at it from the future, it seems like predestination.

 

Say you had a time machine. You could take that book back with you, and follow that person through his life. You'd know about all those important decisions he would make, and how it would all pan out for him.

 

For the person who's living this life however, it seems like he has free will. It's all relative.

 

Alot of people don't like the idea of destiny, because if you take away free will, what are you? You might as well be a robot. And all that crappy stuff that happens to me...are you saying it's meant to be that way? I don't like it either, but it's a possibility we can't ignore.

 

(This part has been added a little bit later)

 

I just thought of something. What if after you travel back you were to kill the person? (who the biography is about)

 

If there is destiny, than you won't be able to, but if you succeeded, what would that mean?

 

I was thinking about parallel universe, in which there are infinite possibilities. What if the decisions we make somehow transfer us to another universe?

 

Like in this universe, say when I'm 70, I will be broke and penniless. Maybe. But suppose I decide to go out and play the stock market right now?

 

I could be transfered (Not bodily, but perhaps mentaly...Spirituly?) to a universe where I'll be a millionaire when i'm 70.

 

A cross between free will and destiny.

 

<This message has been edited by Jack D (edited 12 June 2000).>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this whole free will bit. What exactly is it?

 

Read a biogrophy on someone who's long dead. There's her/his life, written down and documented. It might as well be set in stone.

 

Looking at it from the future, it seems like predestination.

 

Say you had a time machine. You could take that book back with you, and follow that person through his life. You'd know about all those important decisions he would make, and how it would all pan out for him.

 

For the person who's living this life however, it seems like he has free will. It's all relative.

 

Alot of people don't like the idea of destiny, because if you take away free will, what are you? You might as well be a robot. And all that crappy stuff that happens to me...are you saying it's meant to be that way? I don't like it either, but it's a possibility we can't ignore.

 

(This part has been added a little bit later)

 

I just thought of something. What if after you travel back you were to kill the person? (who the biography is about)

 

If there is destiny, than you won't be able to, but if you succeeded, what would that mean?

 

I was thinking about parallel universe, in which there are infinite possibilities. What if the decisions we make somehow transfer us to another universe?

 

Like in this universe, say when I'm 70, I will be broke and penniless. Maybe. But suppose I decide to go out and play the stock market right now?

 

I could be transfered (Not bodily, but perhaps mentaly...Spirituly?) to a universe where I'll be a millionaire when i'm 70.

 

A cross between free will and destiny.

 

<This message has been edited by Jack D (edited 12 June 2000).>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooh a philosophical debate... I love these...

 

So what you're saying, TTA, is that there's something beyond our senses which serves as an ultimate judge as to whether we have free will or not. I disagree. To me (philosophically), personal experience is the only reality. If I live my entire life thinking that the cactus I ate was a cheeseburger, I'm in exactly the same (mental) state as if I'd actually eaten a cheeseburger. Since to me the ultimate truth of my history and state rely solely on my personal experiences, what I experience is, to me, the same as reality. What else could it be? So if I believe, for my entire life, that I have free will, and I act accordingly, as if I had free will, in effect I have free will. Some outside observer may, in his subjective reality, observe that I don't have free will, and am in fact being manipulated, but to me my actions and beliefs are the same as reality.

 

This is of course a deeply philosophical question, and one which does not effectively change the workings of the physical sciences - in effect, there are certain physical laws which all of our subjective realities have in common, and this is the basis of science, from the philosophical point of view. Hmm... quantum observers?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooh a philosophical debate... I love these...

 

So what you're saying, TTA, is that there's something beyond our senses which serves as an ultimate judge as to whether we have free will or not. I disagree. To me (philosophically), personal experience is the only reality. If I live my entire life thinking that the cactus I ate was a cheeseburger, I'm in exactly the same (mental) state as if I'd actually eaten a cheeseburger. Since to me the ultimate truth of my history and state rely solely on my personal experiences, what I experience is, to me, the same as reality. What else could it be? So if I believe, for my entire life, that I have free will, and I act accordingly, as if I had free will, in effect I have free will. Some outside observer may, in his subjective reality, observe that I don't have free will, and am in fact being manipulated, but to me my actions and beliefs are the same as reality.

 

This is of course a deeply philosophical question, and one which does not effectively change the workings of the physical sciences - in effect, there are certain physical laws which all of our subjective realities have in common, and this is the basis of science, from the philosophical point of view. Hmm... quantum observers?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You missed the entire point Janus. As usual...

 

Just because it's in your mind and it's a firm believe you have about it. It doesn't make it true unless it's proven and accepted by society. We choose to call a cheese burger a cheese burger. We gave it that name, to know what that specific food is. You think that you can change and re-designate the being of something? Fine, be delusional. Your no better then a Time Traveler changing people's lives without them knowing.

 

But the fact of the matter is, if it's real and it's happening, you can't say it's not. Same if it's a cactus, you can't call it a cheese burger. For obvious reasons, a cheese burger doesn't have thorns.

 

You think you know it all Janus? You don't know anything... You hide behind your words, and are passively arrogant and hostile to everyone in your posts. Squashing and attacking everyone's ideas, with your superior intellect every time someone says something new and interesting. What are you hoping to get from this superior attitude you protray all the time Janus? Why not be more open? Your so ready to prove everyone wrong, why? Or are you just an A-hole? Why am I even wasting my time with you... You don't even think Time Travel is real now.

 

-Javier C.

 

<This message has been edited by TimeTravelActivist (edited 12 June 2000).>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You missed the entire point Janus. As usual...

 

Just because it's in your mind and it's a firm believe you have about it. It doesn't make it true unless it's proven and accepted by society. We choose to call a cheese burger a cheese burger. We gave it that name, to know what that specific food is. You think that you can change and re-designate the being of something? Fine, be delusional. Your no better then a Time Traveler changing people's lives without them knowing.

 

But the fact of the matter is, if it's real and it's happening, you can't say it's not. Same if it's a cactus, you can't call it a cheese burger. For obvious reasons, a cheese burger doesn't have thorns.

 

You think you know it all Janus? You don't know anything... You hide behind your words, and are passively arrogant and hostile to everyone in your posts. Squashing and attacking everyone's ideas, with your superior intellect every time someone says something new and interesting. What are you hoping to get from this superior attitude you protray all the time Janus? Why not be more open? Your so ready to prove everyone wrong, why? Or are you just an A-hole? Why am I even wasting my time with you... You don't even think Time Travel is real now.

 

-Javier C.

 

<This message has been edited by TimeTravelActivist (edited 12 June 2000).>

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TTA: This is philosophy. In philosophy, there are no absolute answers. One view can be as valid as any other, even if they are mutually contradictory. Maybe you should ask good 'ole Dr. Anderson about it...

 

What's the nature of reality? As I said before, you believe that there is a standard beyond the mind of the individual by which to judge the validity of our thoughts and observations - society as a whole. I was stating a different viewpoint, in which one can't be sure of anything beyond one's own thoughts. How do I know that what I see is not all one vast illusion? And what's the difference to me if it is, but I don't know?

 

At any rate, it's philosophy. Not physics. Nothing to get so worked up about. And besides, I haven't been 'passively arrogant and hostile' to anyone but you and Time02112, for the simple reason that you take so much offense at my statements, and so blatantly denounce me. Am I not supposed to take offence at your early, blatant insults to me?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TTA: This is philosophy. In philosophy, there are no absolute answers. One view can be as valid as any other, even if they are mutually contradictory. Maybe you should ask good 'ole Dr. Anderson about it...

 

What's the nature of reality? As I said before, you believe that there is a standard beyond the mind of the individual by which to judge the validity of our thoughts and observations - society as a whole. I was stating a different viewpoint, in which one can't be sure of anything beyond one's own thoughts. How do I know that what I see is not all one vast illusion? And what's the difference to me if it is, but I don't know?

 

At any rate, it's philosophy. Not physics. Nothing to get so worked up about. And besides, I haven't been 'passively arrogant and hostile' to anyone but you and Time02112, for the simple reason that you take so much offense at my statements, and so blatantly denounce me. Am I not supposed to take offence at your early, blatant insults to me?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- just came surfing in here with the hope of reading some enlightening ideas about time-travel. But what do I see? The predictable flame-war antics found of any given message board. Supposedly mature people reduced to bickering and snapping over differences in opinion. Pointless exchanges. Toys all over the floor....

 

How dull.

 

I really hope that you lot don't represent the state of the time-travel research community, otherwise we might as well give up.

 

BTW Don't bother replying to this or including me in your little arguments - I won't be here to read them.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- just came surfing in here with the hope of reading some enlightening ideas about time-travel. But what do I see? The predictable flame-war antics found of any given message board. Supposedly mature people reduced to bickering and snapping over differences in opinion. Pointless exchanges. Toys all over the floor....

 

How dull.

 

I really hope that you lot don't represent the state of the time-travel research community, otherwise we might as well give up.

 

BTW Don't bother replying to this or including me in your little arguments - I won't be here to read them.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...