How in God's name is that a question? How is it even an intelligible thought? Are you totally deranged? Please stop posting nonsense!

Please stop posting childing nonsense on the site. You are ruining it for those of us that want to have an intelligent adult discussion about science.

You already know how to use the internet, so learn about it on your own time. Here's a hint that doesn't involve equivocation or semantical gibberish:

"3 a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural science" -mw

How many scientist do you really think are in this forum?

Relatively,any one else in this forum,has the same rights as you to express their opinion as they see fit.
If yuo are a scientist you should be more persuading and also more patient.
I sugest, you first check the essential meaning for the word scientist,before you start making demands in its behalf.

As a scientist you must know that any force exsist with its counter-force,any act with its counteract.
For a scientist there is not only one side of the story or only one side of the argument, as definitely the valid one, I think.
Hope you do not take this as an insult.None meant.

cheers

Again, this is a misrepresentation of scientific work. When you find out new things, don't just trust one source. You need to do more work and find out if it is reproduceable experimentation and the DETAILS of the work. But if you go about this with an agenda in mind (like what new scientific thing can I look up that supports my FEELING that science is all wrong), then you'll get no where.

If you bothered to research the details, you would have discovered that this has nothing to do with whether or not c is a constant. c is the speed of light IN A VACUUM and it is not the speed of light in other mediums as these are always LESS THAN c. So what makes this useful is that they are able to slow down light in mediums (other than vacuum). This can potentially be used for optical signaling, etc.

Again, this does nothing but reinforce that c is a constant not to mention the other nonsense you mentioned about the particle accelerators.

It is not a matter of how many scientists there may be in this forum but rather a matter of someone trying to pass off grossly inaccurate and untruthful statements (and sometimes gibberish) as science.

I am not responsible for persuading but I have tried many a times in the posts, using factual data. Your point about 2-sides to every story is fine when they are BOTH credible scientific points, but not when one is NOT.

No insult taken.

BTW, not all things have a distinct opposite to them.

Of course astronomy is a real science; I explained that to you in a previous post. You seem to be confusing astrology with it so that is why I mentioned it. Now that you realize that you are in error, you have flip-flopped.

Again, my contention is and ALWAYS has been that time is NOT something that you travel. But it is obvious to me that you do NOT read things through thoroughly and that is why you seem to miss the really important stuff. Remember the saying: the devil is in the details.

"To presume time travel can be illustrated in the actual realm of reality is neither academic nor real, it's delusional speculation, capable of people whose spirit has departed them , leaving their minds exposed to the illumination of reality without protection the spirit provides." Apart from your terrible syntax and poor command of the King's language, your comments reek of religion/mysticism & not science; akin to astrology and not astronomy.

"Lose your habitual life of reading, listening to, and reading the media, filled with half truths and outright lies, similar to academia, which you must first study to discover this unfortunate fact, Don't sacrifice your principles for someone elses ideals. become the spiritual entiety necessary to discover both the spirit of truth and to become his weapon of truth, to which there is no weapon powerful enough to hide or destroy it, because it is a reality, something we must discover first, before we can go beyond, which we must, if we are to survive." In other words, disregard the empirical evidence or facts that we all can observe and reproduce and instead trust your feelings. What you feel is more real than empirical evidence or facts. Who am I going to believe you or my lying eyes? Oh yes. Very scientific of you. This is EXACTLY the opposite of science.

"It saddens me you are unable to understand this level of IT technology, and become confrontational as a personal defense, I will pray/meditate for your deliverance from your realm of literary hypnosis." Yes. That's how we determine scientific principles, by praying.

It appears you and I, are, after all on the same page, and are both aware we do not believe in time travel, because of the same reasons. I may have read some of the others statements and my input was misplaced, replying to other inputs. However as regards the particle acellerators, and their newfound data, combined with the bow-wave of electrons flowing around the earth, observable by the hubble and other astronomical instrumentation, I was reading an article that the new classification of elemental data may indeed point to an aetherlike substance that in fact does exist. Its not that I am anti-Einstein, or anti-preliterate scribe, or anything, but, perhaps a bit critical of outlandish statements like outer space is a vacumn, and the electronoc spectrum which must have matter to propegate through, which was indeed the subject matter marconi, edison, bell, hertz, ohms, were all considering when they made their still very valid discoveries, plus the very idea of space-time continium, and virtually all einsteinian data as stated was incorrect, yet even now academia still gives credibility to this ancient theory of relativity

My opinion is that backwards time travel is not possible but forwards time travel is. Time and time again, time dilation according to relativity is observed through experimentation. This is not speculation this is observable FACT. As far as aether goes, this is a completely outdated ancient concept that has NEVER been shown true experimentally. "...no evidence of the sort sought by these individuals has ever passed the tests of modern scientific standards. Today the majority of physicists hold that there is NO need to imagine that an aether (as a medium for light propagation) exists. They believe that neither Einstein's general theory of relativity nor quantum mechanics have need for positing its existence, that there is no evidence for its existence, and that the assumption of its existence is an unnecessary theory violating the principle of Occam's razor."- wiki

Also, relativity is not ancient; it is from 1905 so it's barely over 100 years old whereas aether is originally 1000s of years old. Many aspects of Relativity have been experimentally verified time & time again. Well, I hope that clear things up.

Cheers

A sensible argument, but you are mistaken.
The law of conservation of energy states that in a CLOSED system, energy is conserved.

But, if time travel becomes commonplace it will become very difficult to find a closed system.

I will make one last reply. Your smug answers are irritating when in reality you do not understand anything.

We do not use YOUR definition of time. We use what einstein used to derive his equations and if scientists think that definition allows for time travel via wormholes then time travel is theoretically possible.
The fact you claimed time travel 'very very highly unlikely' means you don't believe it to be impossible.
I know entanglement cannot be used to TRANSMIT information but IT CAN STILL help you find the state of an electron which is miles away immediately.

Let me explain past + x = present equation that you didn't understand.

You go the past. AFTER you go to the past the change you cause(x) actually leads to the present. You should note that x is negligibly small.
It like the incident in harrypotter(i know thats magic)

On shooting your grandfather at pointblank range, you should get IN THAT RANGE IN THE FIRST PLACE. GFP is called a thought experiment for a reason. If it proved time travel to be impossible it would be called a proof.

Every action has a cause or reason, an action can create a reason; in other words every action is determined by a previous action. Your personality, which decides your action, is determined by your experience which is a result of past actions. In other words all your actions are predetermined. I hope you can wrap your mind around the two sentences.

On your fascination with quantum uncertainity, the link you provided has nothing do with anything macroscopic.
Give a sharpshooter a rifle, and he can shoot bullseye each time. He is not going to miss one and blame quantum uncertanity.

On your use of chaos theory, please look it up first.
Here i have done it for you:
"Chaos theory is an area of inquiry in mathematics, physics, and philosophy which studies the behavior of certain dynamical systems that are HIGHLY SENSITIVE TO INITIAL CONDITIONS."
I think in reply to your statement 'Have you ever heard of chaos theory?", I should reply "Have you?"
Again,you use your limited understanding of the subject to distort the facts.

The Universe is a closed system, so I am not mistaken.

"One of the basic postulates of general relativity is that there is no preferred frame.
So, the fact that you appear to go back in time from a particular frame implies that you did, infact, go back in time." (copypasted from previous reply. Do you have short term memory loss?)



Idiot!
Your statement:"When we look through a telescope at an object 100 light years away we are seeing what that object looked like 100 years ago: it "appears" as if we have gone back in time but we really have not."

It doesnt appear as if we have gone back in time because from our frame of reference the star is only as old as it looks.
You are clearly. out. of. your. depth.

If the universe allows for time travel, it won't be a closed system(that is the universe at a time A will not be closed as it is susceptible to input from the other times) as energy from the future can enter the present as pointed out.
What do you mean YOU weren't mistaken? That comment was for fractal. You really do have short term memory loss.

It is not I that is smug, it is you. You are the one hurling insults and getting angry, not I. I am discussing it logically and calmly.

We do not use "Einstein's" definition of time, we use an operational definition of time. This too is constantly changing as we improve our methods of measure. However, my definition of time is not excluded by science.

Scientists, especially theoretical physicists, "think" many things: some view time one way, others view it another. Some things they concoct are more possible than others; some are less likely. Some have views that disallow for certain possibilities. Apparently you don't realize these things.

"I know entanglement cannot be used to TRANSMIT information but IT CAN STILL help you find the state of an electron which is miles away immediately." And what in your infinite wisdom do you think that means? Absolutely nothing! I have 2 identical boxes into which I can place a quarter in one or a nickel in the other, always with the rule that if there is a quarter in one the other will have a nickel. I jumble the boxes & give you one & I keep the other. Now you fly to China, both of us never looking inside. You arrive in China and you open your box to discover a quarter! And now you instantly know that I have a nickel in my box! Wow! What a big deal! Incredible! Or maybe not.

I understand your "time equation," but as I stated to you before, it does not work with my definition of time. The reason is that "he change you cause(x)" = forwards time travel, so you are only further into the future. Anyways, even if we were to allow for this and say you did go to the past, you then state "you should note that x is negligibly small." You should learn about Chaos theory. A negligibly small action can lead to catastrophic changes in the system later on.

Then you state "On shooting your grandfather at pointblank range, you should get IN THAT RANGE IN THE FIRST PLACE. GFP is called a thought experiment for a reason. If it proved time travel to be impossible it would be called a proof."
I wish I can understand broken English but I cannot. I guess your saying that because it is a thought experiment (a thought about an action that can be possibly taken) and not an actual experiment, then it's no good & we can ignore it? No. I don't think so. You can think to do something & then do it or not. That IS reality & how things work. BTW, you are probably unaware, but I am an excellent marksman but according to you, if I go back in time, I will magically miss my grandpa, right? Rubbish.

You say, "in other words every action is determined by a previous action" which I assume you mean causality (cause & effect.) Thus, every effect is preceded by a cause. I agree this to be true, up until the initial cause which was NOT precede by anything as there was no time before then; otherwise known as the initial state of the Big Bang. Then you go on about how reality is predestined. Sorry, but according to QM, it's not. Even given the EXACT same conditions, the same outcome CANNOT be guaranteed. If YOU bothered to learn about what kind of systems are highly sensitive to initial conditions, you'd have realized that it applies very well to the things being discussed here.

"One of the basic postulates of general relativity is that there is no preferred frame. So, the fact that you appear to go back in time from a particular frame implies that you did, infact, go back in time."

In this case, YOU are using the OBSERVER's frame of reference as the preferred. Who's the idiot now? Again, you are implying that looking through a telescope at objects that are light years away is time traveling? Again, who's the idiot now?

I stated earlier, that you were more than welcome to accept a more orthodox definition of time which would allow for the possibility of time travel. Yet you foolishly insist on challenging me about it, even though all logic shows otherwise. This is a good example of idiocy.

All things considered, on a scale from 1 to 10 (10 being the most likely & 1 being the least likely) backwards time travel is about 1.

You said: "If the universe allows for time travel, it won't be a closed system(that is the universe at a time A will not be closed as it is susceptible to input from the other times) as energy from the future can enter the present as pointed out. What do you mean YOU weren't mistaken? That comment was for fractal. You really do have short term memory loss."

No. It's not IF the Universe is a closed system, it IS a closed system and the fact that it IS a closed system, means that time travel to the past is NOT possible.

Don't blame my memory for your failure to understand a concept.

GOD damn it! you are a fool.

The UNIVERSE AT TIME A is not closed as as it can get energy from UNIVERSE AT TIME B.

'Again, you are implying that looking through a telescope at objects that are light years away is time traveling? Again, who's the idiot now? '



I didn't imply that. That was your damned statement. I was attacking that. Look at your previous posts



I am getting angry because you smugly state the same thing again and again about your own stupid definition. We should use einsteins definition because he FRAMED the god damned theory. If his definition is wrong, his theory is wrong.

The Universe at ALL times IS a closed system. What is so hard to understand. It's not if it's a closed system IT IS!

You continue to insult...this is the mark of an inferior intellect.

You are attacking it then? So then, you are attacking the argument FOR backwards time travel, which is my side of the argument. So you changed your mind? Or maybe you don't know what you're talking about?

It is the failure to understand that is the mark of inferior intellect. You heard somewhere that the universe is a closed system. I agree, if time travel was impossible it is closed.

But, if time travel is possible, energy from the future can enter here(try to imagine for a second that time travel is possible). So, that makes it an open system. Call the universe at this time A and the universe at a future time B. A is open to B.

What is so hard to understand?

To the poor short term memory loss guy:

Me:"...
One of the basic postulates of general relativity is that there is no preferred frame.

So, the fact that you appear to go back in time from a particular frame implies that you did, infact, go back in time."

YOU:" "So, the fact that you appear to go back in time from a particular frame implies that you did, in fact, go back in time." No it doesn't; that's ludicrous! By that rationale, every time we look at the sky or through a telescope we are really traveling through time. Rubbish.
When we look through a telescope at an object 100 light years away we are seeing what that object looked like 100 years ago: it "appears" as if we have gone back in time but we really have not."

You said: "It is the failure to understand that is the mark of inferior intellect. You heard somewhere that the universe is a closed system. I agree..."

You read a few things and think you know everything. It is YOU that does not understand the VERY things YOU bring up. This question has to do with entropy, which by the way is further proof of time's arrow.

Let me explain: the Universe is an open system IF it is affected by something outside of it. The Universe is all that is; there is nothing outside the Universe. Therefore, the Universe IS a closed system.

You are making the mistake of assuming that there is a question about whether the Universe might or might not be a closed system when in FACT, there IS NO question. This is because it is NOT an open system. And because it is a CLOSED system, time travel is NOT possible.

What's so hard to understand about that?

And do you understand what's being discussed in the quote? Apparently not. I'll break it down for you in your style:

YOU:
"...the fact that you appear to go back in time from a particular frame implies that you did, in fact, go back in time."

This (as well as all discussions in this forum) is in the context of time travel to the past. That being said, what YOU are implying here is that by looking through a telescope at an object 100 light years away, you are going back in time 100 years. If you are not implying that, then what is your point? Do you even have one?

You must have read somewhere that there is no preferred frame of reference, and so you stated it. Now, apart from that being true, what does it have to do with what's being discussed here? Nothing. None of these things support backwards time travel or disprove anything that I have said.

The fact of non-preferential frames simply blurs the concept of simultaneity; it has nothing to do with time travel to the past. So events that may "appear" to be simultaneous in one frame might NOT be in another; and, might even have a reverse order in yet another frame. But these are NOT in casual contact so they CANNOT interact with each other.


So, let me break it down again for you:

IF you were to instantly travel 100 light years away from the earth and look back at it, you would SEE the earth from 100 years ago. However, because you are NOT in casual contact with the earth, you CANNOT interact with it; it's just an image. This is why I used the phrase "the appearance of going back in time" as opposed to "actually going back in time" (i.e. being able to interact.)

Additionally, why anyone would even expect to interact with an "image" rather than the "real thing", is really beyond me; however, that's another topic altogether.

In a CLOSED SYSTEM that spans and fans through and to the infinity,every thing or act it is possible, I think.
At least as long as properly defined and named as a concept.
But maybe I could be thinking it wrong.
It is a very thin line separating the ilusion from creativity,I think.

This closed system is infinite in the sense that it contains all that is but not necessarily that it has an unlimited number of things.

In physics, it is assumed that no measurable quantity could have an infinite value. It is, for example, presumed impossible for any body to have infinite mass or infinite energy. There exists the concept of infinite entities such as an infinite plane wave, infinite number line (i.e. ideas or abstractions) but there are no means to generate such things in the physical world.

potentially, the speed of sight, can be an interesting variable. some claim the eye to be a receiver only and that stars take light years to reach our vision, within their immediate realm, however, with the new optical observatories, evidence is growing of a reduction in magnitudes of the " GRB's " (gamma ray bursts) that reach earth from Novas, thought to be many many light years away, there are too many instances of massive solar energy (gamma rays) that reach the earths satalites, those above the protective atmosphere of the earth, a few days or weeks after the super novas. When we look at stars it is believed the energy reaching the human eye is energy from a long time ago. Were this the case then the gamma ray bursts would reach earth at the same time, yet it doesn't. It can be considered. the eye may well see the event, when it occurs, and that all our theories are wrong, the distances are closer than we thought. and the eye is much more than a receiver. beyond a valid description afforded by our primative letter and numbering system. All the math models I see of the universe are crude sketches and drawings, made-up from the photos we receive from a reduced 2 dimensional array, limited by the pixels array of what we see through the hubble-like lens, all the farout photos are retouched artists renditions of whatever they interpret from the diagonal 2 dimension arrays !------------------is time travel possible ?--------------------------------------based on Lorentz's formula that stated if you traveled faster than the speed of light, that you could go back in time. I say no. An independent observer started his stopwatch when the subject of study left the earth traveling 1,000,000 miles per second-the subject traveled 100,000,000 miles into space, then returned to earth at the same speed, more than 3 times faster than the speed of light. According to einsteins (lorentzs') theory of relativity, the subject would have arrived back on earth some 40 seconds before he left, since he was traveling three times the speed of light, and would have arrived 40 seconds before the suns rays would have reached the earth had he not left. The guy with the stop watch who stopped the watch when the subject arrived back on earth clearly shows the trip took 100 seconds, and the subject did not, in fact, go back in time. The equation, made up by the french math guy Lorentz who discarded the equation, Einstein used this equation and merely added a few more quasi math assumptions, stated there were probably only a handful of people in the world who could understand his construct of time and space. He confused the world for 100 years, his concept of space-time still being taught, using a unit of measure, the speed of light as a variable, calling it a constant, which it is not, there are other variables that affect the speed of light. But, the most obvious may well be the independent observer, the time study guy. Whatever?

worm holes are a blotched attempt to explain away our inferior math to determine the actual distances to the stars, using calculus, whom libenitz developed attempting to calculate the range of cannon fire, given the several variables involved. Eventually, whenever the big boys, with the purse strings, playing pottylitics in washintin bc, grant the funding to actual scientists and engineers to send out space craft to setup a series of space stations leading us to the stars, I predict we will be amazed at how close the stars are, in reality, compared to the theoretical distances we now toy with at the academic ventures, with their subjective analysis-vs-objective analysis (studies of discovery, unsubjected to predisposing believed transgenic truths (lies). I am not a crackpot, I am propelled through life by the great spirit of truth---yeah right. whatever

what logic, Logic may be analogized to truth, the absense of a lie, in reality there is room for only truth, all else will perish to time, truth, will survive. This entire discussion chain, based on theoretical physics. Fiction is fun to read, however its still fiction. Logic is another word for truth. Ethics is a word that states man has the right of the route of access to the truth. The mind of man, limited to his instrumentation is rapidly advancing is growing inmagnitudes because of our instrumentation, which is what defines us, without it, we would be similar to a dog, only one with a rotating tongue and the flexible hand. I don't use the B-i-t-c-h word. man/woman or more appropriately woman/man are a species, who use the mans name-etc, but the womans egg, along with sense of responsibility, double immune system, patience, love etc etc etc. man is whatever he is, we would be no different from each other had we lived one anothers life. I don't believe in einsteins plaugarism that was able to fool the boards of directors of the education boys. and it was not an interest in it that led me to its discovery, the opposite. this entire forum lends credibility to his lies, and may well be just another PR stunt, to cloak the one brand capitalism (slavery) we live under.

we are spinning around the sun at 79,000 mph, the sun around the galaxy at 200 meters per second (mps), the galaxy travels at 600 mps, in relation to the other galaxies, and so on and on. In time, when we discover there are actual spaces beyond our instrumentation to observe, then, we may well discover we are already traveling faster than the speed of light, in our world, we have already captured light in a light tunnel by a colder temperature, stopping it, then cooling off the atmosphere in the tunnel, allowing it to continue. The guy walking around the light tunnel was traveling faster. You can reduce the speed of light with a laser to a few feet per second. Light has become an intangible word, scientifically. Its because of the other variables that have an effect upon it, causing us to rethink the entire electromagnetic spectrum, whose independent wave lengths, are thusly affected by a host of variables. It as if the closer we can see and the farther we can look, creates more questions than answers. a new language is developing, as we speak. what an exciting time we live in

you have a fantastic sense of humor-------ALL Hail Tboone !!!

now you have me talking to myself, so I say to myself " Self " you are commenting on others posts and someone other than whose post you commented on posts a post, you almost need a posthole digger for that one.

Thanks. But it was only my frustration showing.

I have a link for tboone:
http://www.sfu.ca/philosophy/swartz/time_travel1.htm

A discussion between REAL philosophers. And please read the whole article, your highness.

I hope this will help you understand.
ALL HAIL tboone (the king of the losers)

"In physics, it is assumed that no measurable quantity could have an infinite value..."

I agree. How could anyone measure infinity you loser.
But i get what you mean.

And you are wrong. Physicists make no such assumption.
The universe was thought to be infinite.

A circle has infinite number of points. Infact, a line segement has infinite number of points. Ofcourse, by the meaning of infinity, you can't measure it.
Infinite and infinitesimal quantities are the basis for calculus you dolt. Calculus, ofcourse, is used everywhere in physics.

I recommend that you use your superior marksmanship to shoot yourself.

optical infinity, the symbol of an elongated 8 turned sideways, is the distance a 6" diameter circle disappears to normal human vision, around 990 yards, by making lens arrays this infinity can be extended.infinity is a word which varies within context.1 History of infinity
1.1 Early Indian views of infinity
1.2 Early Greek views of infinity
2 Infinity in mathematics and logic
2.1 The infinity symbol
2.2 Calculus
2.2.1 Real analysis
2.2.2 Complex analysis
2.3 Nonstandard analysis
2.4 Set theory
2.4.1 Cardinality of the continuum
2.5 Geometry and topology
2.6 Fractals
2.7 Mathematics without infinity
2.8 Infinity in logic
3 Infinity in physics
3.1 Theoretical applications of physical infinity
3.2 Infinity in cosmology
4 Infinity in computing
5 Infinity in the arts

we are saddled with a letter and numbering system where anything can be proven or disproven, depending upon the clients wishes and contribution to the required study to have it a certain way for a certain purpose-----I am a good marksman, and do time study of any subject, realm, or company also, its an interesting world, yet still we lack the ability to describe even the simpilest of realities, yet onto infinity we go, I view infinity as areality, one day we are not there, yet, the next day, or whatever, we get a little closer. further, there is no crime if you can't describe it (in a court of law) given the will of a lawyer/judge team, the prince and his king. Our justice system resides in infinity, blinking in and out of infinity, depending upon the monetary resources, clout, or ability to execute

i dont think time travel is possible

Hello jackiecox.

It seams like you changed your mind about Einstein.
Starting to sound and think in enstein. :) :)

That measurement of speeds 3X faster than speed of light it is a bit to much for me to understand, let alone,then, comprehending it!!

To be honest have no clue who that Lorenz is or was.
Hope I will learn some thing soon about him!
Am not a student of sciences or a scientist.
Like to express my thoughts, that is all.
Also it helps my English.
hope am not upseting any one here.

I totally agree with you when you say:

" there is no crime if you cant describe it........."

Do not know about you,but my self still suport the argument:

" if not properly defined and described conceptually,it still remains an illusion..."

Am not sure how this argument applyes to "time travel"!

But that is me,anyway.
The main purpose,of this reply, is simply to ask you:
"What, you,do think about it,is it possible?"
You are not obliged to answer.

cheers
whiten

In truth Time is just a word to describe the moment, which has no past, no present, and no future. Time is a word that can be used in virtually any context, therefore it is intangible, without a definite description, the idea of time travel is fictional, yet it inspires the imagination, which can lead to creativity. Without valid premise we discuss nothing of real value, academia is in the business to sell data in the realm of our letter and number system, a imperfect entiety, to be sure, I can't understand why they don't sell data aquisition technology, like speed reading 1, 2, 3, 4, Time and motion study, materials, what exists in the first 3 inches of the ground on which we walk, and begin to create the first generation computer language whereby we program and communicate verbally with the data bases, and if on a conservative board, with virtually any computer embedded devise, lets merge with our instrumentation, and really go forward into the future, faster than we do now, in a world with one brand capitalism, which has abandoned nature, replaced it with fashion and law, ruled by men fueled by lust and greed, their spirits have abandoned them, they denature the earth. Let the world join as one in the one book, the internet, in the search for real truth, and government------time travel, into a better future than one ruled by the firstborn son, returning to nobility concealing slavery with new words. The real revolution is on, its an information revolution. If we were all on the same book, we could develop a one world government with liberty for all and enjoy the right of the route of the access to the truth. How can one man own a piece of the earth, to destroy at will, fueled by the demon of ignorance. We are all equal and all the land is holy land. The children of today will do it anyway, and really time travel, into a better world. Universal education, health, welfare. education creates smaller families, if the women are free to choose, and not owned by the demons of ignorance. One Child at the time, smarter, healthier, greater spirits, scientists, all of us can be. Instead of hirelings slaving for some drug lord who own the shares and land of this good earth. Corruption must end, Truth and respect must grow and prosper

" john claude keeley " carnagie and others destroyed all his labratory and his 10 HP centerless electromagnetic motor, as defined by " Tesla " believed aether was the media in which the electromagnetic spectrum propagates, and was composed of elemental substance beyond our abilities to either understand , or identify. His goal was to develope a motor using aether as the energy source, there were many many witnesses to his prototype, yet he bogged down on production, he was a discoverer, not a manufacturer, existing in the industrial art era of our times, the late 1800's. The concept of space-time continium is a contradiction, the experimentation to gain tenure by agreeing with einsteinian theory using subjective study, is endlessly flawed. his plaugarism will not stand the test of time, other than to illustrate just how flawed academia is, was, but will not be. The one book has essentially destroyed academic ventures as they now exist, they were are and have always been the tail wagging the dog, the dog, industry, has more creative management from the ranks of the blue collar part than the well-heeled wanna-be's. The partical acellerator discoveries of more than 100 other particles which is still in the stages of development, gives credibility to " Aether " and will soon replace the periodic table of elements, which are not more than compounds, lacking proper description, they are to become in the transgenic truth stage of humanities scientific discoveries, that will lead us into a future with compounds that will allow us to go to places unimaginable at this moment in time, which we will never bear witnesses again, other than in imperfect memory, with our primitive communication modes operanda of 2010

solar energy does, in fact appear out of thin air ( Aether ) or thin water ( Aether ), stick an electrode into water and brown gas bubbles up, a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen, combustable enough to create magnitudes of energy greater than the frequency and amplitude that created it. English, the newest usable language in the world, discounting the never ending software, is what we are presently saddled with, 15 to 20 million words and growing as science and information double every few years broken anglais ? closed universe ? how far can you see ?

Time travel may not be possible. But it is certainly not impossible.

What do you mean solar energy appears out of thin air? It comes from the sun.

The brown gas(whatever that is) which is combustible(which means oxidation) gives out energy on combustion like any other exothermic reaction. Energy is conserved in a closed(artificial or natural) system.

I didn't get what your rest of the paragraph means.

Are you saying that predicting the future is time travel? And since that it is difficult time travel is impossible?
I will have to disagree then.

About closed universe. The universe is only the result of the big bang. Since the mass created after the big bang was finite, the universe is finite. So, unless the universe can interact with another universe(MWI) or with another instance of itself(by time travel), it is closed.

For all practical purposes, regardless of the possibility of time travel and MWI, the universe is closed.

And tboone. You do realise that if the universe is closed is a LAW, then even the multi world interpretation(which you like) fails.

Fortunately for hundreds of science fiction writers, there is no such law.

Dear whiten, punch into your keyboard-" chronological historical timeline of mathmatics "- which will illustrate the men of old who discovered time study was a scientific method of measurement permitting the establishment of standards, they called these standards "laws" and they became embedded into our academic structure as simple units of measure. Hertz, ohms, watts, are examples. You will discover the simplicity of math, complicated by pseudo laws. Calculus, calculated from cannon fire, to determine tables of prediction for gunners was developed by time study of cannon fire by libnetz, some famous royalty guy from england who suffered from delusions of grandure laid claim to the development of calculus, copying libnetz results. Lorentz came up with the calculation, that states if you can go faster than speed of light, then you could leave and arrive back on earth before the suns rays would arrive on earth, had you stayed on earth. He tossed the formula. Einstein, reused the formula adding gibberish for assumptions of the math platform, and declared it valid, stating there may be one or two others on earth who could understand his verbage. Academic ventures are like industry, saddled with presidents, directors, etc etc. They weren't too bright, not having access to the variables, they believed the worlds most significant fraud of academia, einstein, who further stated outer space is a vacumn, and theree is no media for the electromagnetic spectrum to send out the various wave resonant frequencies. He predicted time travel etc etc, bla bla bla, get a degree in theoretical physics and create your own fiction, since statements without valid premise are OK. a child can come up with a better theory than einstein, say like calling each variable a dimension, and cubing everything, you could say the world consists of 6 dimensions, if viewed within a cube, or matrixed. You have to look outside the box, put the so-called enclosed universe in a box and deny, or defy infinity as it could be used to define the confines of the universe. whatever, tbone started an interesting discussion pertaining to einsteinian garble time travel

Big bang theory, like trying to determine the center of the sun, without going there. Consider the lastest studies of earth sea bottom sedimentation, revealing the earth goes through cycles of mostly cooling, lasting for 100's of millions of years followed by a few dozen million years of warming, the back to the long cold periods, this cycle occuring visably 5 or 6 time before the sedimentation becomes unreadable, illustrating once again the more we know the more questions arise, deleting most possible scenarios now considered at academia. Closed universe, the farther our optics instrumentation reveals the distance the bigger our universe becomes. declaring the universe is closed is in the same realm of considering the earth is flat, square, and the center of the universe. Our ability to see into the distance reveals our inability to make a decision about such data, given the information we have.

8=====D

There are evidences for expanding universe(like red shift and CMB radiation). Big bang theory is universally accepted. If you want to prove it is wrong, publish papers why it is wrong. This is not the forum for such posts. Your use of analogies is flat and wrong. You should read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady_state_universe#Problems

If you are saying that wormholes,etc. are just relics of bad maths, you may or may not be true. But, relativity continues to make correct predictions about every possible scenario thrown at it and relativistic computations are used in day to day life without problems. It would thus be reasonable to suppose it to be correct.

Aether doesn't exist. Light has been proven to travel at the same speed in any frame.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson-Morley_experiment

I should also add that scientists with possible exception of environmentalists do not have any agenda. You should wake up from your delusion.

Tboone to Jackiefox:
"Yes. There is some giant conspiracy out there. I'm glad that you have discovered it Neo. Remember, you're the One; only you can save us!

Or, maybe you should post your barely-understandable gibberish on some other forums that deal with your nonsense! Grow up."

I say amen!
(to tboone:this is only sensible comment you ever posted here with possible exception of "8=====D". did you read my previous posts?)

A link for you:
http://www.sfu.ca/philosophy/swartz/time_travel1.htm

extract:(but read the whole article too)
"...To be sure, there are ways of telling time travel stories (your way immediately above) that are self-contradictory. But to prove impossibility, it is not sufficient to tell one story in which there is a self-contradiction, one must show something far stronger, viz. that every story in which there is time travel harbors a contradiction. You have not done this. Heinlein and many others have offered stories in which there are no contradictions. And all it takes to demonstrate possibility is one story free of contradiction..."

Your entire argument , like your pretended belief in unfounded suppositions ( suppose these theories are right ) never ceases to amaze me. How on earth can you believe statements that are without valid premise ? Einsteins theories and your belief in similar scenarios only gives credibililty of your unwillingness to study things through, from a timeline historical basis. You sacrifice what should be your principles for someone elses ideals. Its like believing in some primative tribes god that believes the earth is square, the center of the universe, and demons cause mental illness, And its ok to have slaves, servants, hirelings, nobility, or the firstborn son is the will of this god, or that women are halflings along with all the other tribes, or the earth is 8,000 or so years old, or that all the children are unequal or only parts of the earth are to be respected. I can't condemn or judge you, If I had lived your life, then I would probably think as you do, however, I don't feel it appropriate to permit you to babble on about actual supersticion being treated as fact without bringing it to your attention, and while Neo is a word you use in my matrix extrapolated into a somewhat fictional future. I am inclined to agree with his approach on the idea of a matrix not being closed, the entire story exposes that there are no boundries to science or anything else, once you get to the realm of true spiritualism, in this case a scenario of extending gaming and its demand> software/hardware computing power is predicted to be the ultimate route into spirituality, whereby the human spirits depart the body, left behind to power the program power demands. Minerals,( the machines ) however you assemble them, is hard to take as having original thought, without merging biological phenomena. I like these types of movies, as do you. The best one I saw was " Chronicals of Riddick ". I hope they make another. the matrix exposed in this movie was all about the other side of the box, or closed universe--whatever-- good luck to the both of you and have a happy holliday--and don't be so serious, we are yet primative beings, searching for truths unfound, an honorable endeavor, to be sure, theoretical or actually defined correctly