Jump to content

Infinite timelines at present.


Recommended Posts

Note: Sorry if this has been discussed here before but there is to much to serach for.


First of all i know i am not as knowledgable as most of the members here in sciences (my spelling sucks) so ill do my best to explain what of thought of a few days ago.


While reading about paradoxes and time travel stuff i wondered about the grandfather paradox thing.


Here is what i think and ill use some key elements:


The great problem of IF you would to kill your grandpa in the past then would you exist in the future thing but you will still exist because if you your grandpa died then you die too. Ok fair but if you died because of this then who killed your grandpa if you couldnt go back to kill him?


Explanations for this ive seen is possibly its not possible to go back in time or better yet another timeline is created that is of course if more than one timeline exists.


OK cool let me work with that then.


Lets say a time traveler goes back in time like to 2000 AD and then returns to 2050.


Now lets say that his/hers (lets use his) timeline will never be the same and they return to similar timeline. He has returned to his similar timeline and so everything from his time of departure appears the same.


Kool. Lets say his original timeline was TL1 and another would be TL2


Is it possible that he (from TL1 2050) could return to his year (2050) and meet up with himself (arriving at TL2 2050) but in his the he 2050 timeline he (for whatever reason) never actually got to travel back in time or travel back at all?


Would he see himself (or someone just like him) doing something else that he himself hasnt done and be in the each other's presence?


If this is possible then that tells me something interesting.


If true then one does not have to time travel anywhere or kill any grandpas to make a timeline.


This tells me that each living thing that can make a decision or not always is constantly creating infinite timelines or universes.


Thats crazy if true, Seriously.


Then i get a picture of a human being eminating from the center of his body and infinitely outward a shining essence of infinitablity.


Hope yall could understand.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

The splitting of time lines is believed to occur on a trult microscopic scale, from wind fluctuations, to the way atoms collide, to the combination of quarks. There are probably an infinite number of universes created in an infintesimally small fraction of time.


It is best to think of these parallel universes/timelines as bubbles. Now imagine a sphere of infinite radius, i.e a continuos plane. The bubbles make up this plane the bubbles close to one another are very similar int erms of history, so much so that travel between bubbles positioned close together, that theri history may appear to a traveller to be identitical to his own timeline. Now you see that the real issue would be not how far you could travel back but getting back to your own true universe.





Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is best to think of these parallel universes/timelines as bubbles.

Exactly. This is the best model to use... not surprising to me that you are one of the people who "get" this GS.I'd go on to point out (and wonder if you'd agree, GS) that one of the most fundamental geometrodynamic parameters with respect to the (Hubble) Bubble of our shared universe is the Speed of Light. And this speed of light metric is, by its very nature, a SpaceTime metric (when you examine the units of the measure we call speed or velocity). This is the "base metric" by which Einstein and Minkowski define their 4-D SpaceTime field.If we use your bubble analogy and assign the "radius" of this Hubble Bubble to the SpaceTime metric we define as the Speed of Light ("c"), then we are beginning to examine the "shape" of the universe of Mass, SpaceTime, and Energy as Einstein analyzed it.


Keeping the bubble analogy, we consider the SURFACE AREA of any Hubble Bubble of radius "c". We know that to compute this surface area of a sphere, that the surface area will grow in proportion to "c^2". We could even write a hypothetical equation that would describe how the surface area of this Hubble Bubble varys with c^2 and some scaling parameter. Let's just say, for example, we used the following variables to define our equation:


E = m*c^2


Hmmm... if this means what I think it means, then what Einstein calls Energy is really a measure with respect to the SURFACE AREA of this Hubble Bubble which is expanding at speed "c". And this would also tell us that Matter (m) is the scaling factor for any choice of SpaceTime metric "c".


All of this tells us that the fundamental basis of ANY ONE of these Hubble Bubble universes is dependent upon its measurement of some SpaceTime metric... we have simply chosen the Speed of Light as the most important for our universe. But that makes sense (pardon the pun) for us as humans... because our highest performance physical sense is the sense of Sight (sounds like LIGHT!). Sight is the sense we use to set our flow of causality. I have often shown the analogy between this and a hypothetical being who could not see, but only hear... and thus this species orders its causality by the SpaceTime metric called the Speed of Sound.


It is my belief that all the scientific models we already know of come together and "make sense" when you treat Mass, Space, and Time as 3 virtual dimensions which are on equal footings with each other. When you model each of these dimensions as a 3-D vector, and then perform tensor calculus (diff and integral) upon them, you end up with a full 3x3=9 dimensional tensor version of Newton and Einstein.


And then you use the same equations, and extend this computational model to another metric: Information, which is at a higher fractal level over and above Energy, Forces, and Moments.


What do you say?





Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi GS,


Where's the thread on this 'Triplex Physical Matrix of Massive SpaceTime' again?

I've described it in detail across several different threads. However, I think the first one to set-out the 3x3 tensor space model for Massive SpaceTime would be the following:http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/ttiforum/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=time_travel&Number=17688&page=&view=&sb=&o=&fpart=1&vc=1The full tensor forms of the coupled system of equations I have developed for Information, Energy, and Momentum (Force/Moment) have not been shared here, nor anywhere else. But I have shared more than enough information for anyone else to derive these same equations, if you only assume that both Mass and Time are 3-D vector quantities like Space. That is the only change I believe one needs from existing models. I may be wrong, but so far I see lots of promise for describing electromagnetism (& other force field effects) as effects that comes about from the interaction of the three aspects of Massive SpaceTime. Energy flows across the three virtual-dimension boundaries can be computed, and controlled, at any level of multi-embedded systems. This describes the scientific path I am investigating (albeit as a second, or even third job!!!). I move slow but that's because I like to have fun doing other stuff.... like you.


Tomorrow is our Memorial Day holiday in the US. I plan to head out to Catalina Island for a couple of afternoon dives. Add alcohol (only AFTER diving, of course), good food, sunshine and great friends... stir vigorously. Serve chilled over ice (and more alcohol). The perfect holiday treat! :D


Enjoy man,





Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Create New...