View Full Version : Time Travel
JimmyJames
06-05-01, 11:19 PM
Jimmy
How it works?
My time machine "The Light Speed Eagle" is only capable to go to a future date and it almost completely relies on mathematics to get it there. For example if you wanted to travel four years in the future you would multiply four times the distance of a light year. (5,869,713,600,000) Just so you know a light year is the distance light travels in one year, so if light travels at 186,000 miles/second then the solution for finding the distance that light travels in one year would be…
186,000 x 60 x 60 x 24 x 365.25
This mathematical problem equals 5,869,713,600,000 or the distance traveled by light in one year. The reason you would have to know about light speed and light years is because it time equals distance so if you would travel a four year journey in 7.8 seconds (which is how long it would take you to travel four years distance at light speed) you would arrive back at earth… only the four years that you skipped would pass on earth making you four years ahead of time. But there are some other things that I did not mention, for instance in order to get back home from you light speed journey you would have to turn around at two years distance or you will go farther in time than you expect. Plus half way to each two-year distance you would have to reverse your engine or you will fly passed your stopping point. The only way I believe you can create this power is through nuclear fusion also known as nuclear energy. I first though that I would fuse hydrogen and helium like the sun does…but then I though it would take up too much space because of a reactor's gigantic size. So I decided to choose another course of action. An atomic reaction would power my massive ship into the future. In a super-strong titanium prism one piece of pure Plutonium will be forced and held together causing a controlled atomic reaction that will be released in several bursts. This will power my ship to the speed of light. The space ship will also have two R2 space engines for maneuvering at low speeds. Another problem would be navigating at light speeds, easy solution…an on board super-computer would plot a course even before the ship moves so that any navigational movement will be handled by the computer. The ship will be created in earth's atmosphere because it is harder to lunch from earth than it is from space. My ship is NOT designed to enter earth's atmosphere so an X20 or a free-fall spacecraft will descend to earth from the "Light Speed Eagle". Problems like G-force are actually no problem at because by the time the G-force multiples your journey is all ready over. If you have any questions about the "Light Speed Eagle" or time travel please ask me.
This was a project assigned in science class, we had do draw a time machine...but i went a little farther with it. Please Give me your input.
discord5
06-05-01, 11:56 PM
if you dont get an A call me and i will personally come and bitch slap your teacher !
JimmyJames
06-06-01, 05:12 PM
Actually I recieved an A plus...out of 25 points, I got 40.
i think that u can't time travel. i herd that if u put a clock on a fast plane, and the same clock on the gorund, after the plane has flown around for a long time, it comes back with differnt time as the time on the clock on the ground. the time has either slowed down or speade up either way, the person on the plane has not gone into the futre or the past but has stayed in the present.
also if u looked at the stars u would see the light as it was when the light left the star.ifu were a million light years away from the star then u would see the start as i were a million light years ago. no1 has time traveld but u could see the past.
just a lil thought
Hi,
Well actually the person in the plane WOULD have travelled in time, but the problem is that the difference is only a few thousands of a second... So you hardly notice it ;).
Bye!
Crisp
JimmyJames
06-09-01, 12:13 AM
Well...again you would have to define time...people time travel every day by crossing the international date-line or passing throughout different time zones. Lets say you take a picture of the closest galaxy...I think it is Andromeda. If Andromeda is 5,000 lightyears away then you have taken a picture of Andromeda 6.3 sec. away. The solution is one lightyear or 5,869,713,600,000
multiply by 5,000 ... then divide the answer by 186,000 or the speed of light in seconds. So knowing this you may realize that by beating light you just might beat time.
people change time zones everyday doesnt mean that they change time from everyone else.u still can see them, but u cannot see someone from the past, so u can slow time and maybe speed it up, but ur still in the same time line as everyone else.
my point is that it may have been on a thousands of a secound, but if taken 2 the extream, by flying at light speed then the differnce between ur time and the time at light speed would b noticbly, but still u havent left our time line, just a slowed down version?
JimmyJames
06-09-01, 02:52 PM
I do understand what you are saying, but to be perfectly honest I think you're wrong. Light is the fastest moving oject in the universe known to man, therefore it sets the ultimite speed limit. So if you were to go faster than light-speed then you would travel throughtout time into the future because distance equals time and time equals speed, I do think you brought up a very good point and it does question my theorys...if you would like to we can go farther into this please do.
shaman1301
06-09-01, 08:08 PM
Time and space are woven into the same fabric.If you could travel at the speed of light, there would no longer be any distance to travel. You would arrive at your destination instantaneously because of the contraction of space.
Hi Shaman1301,
The distance would shorten, but to an outside observer, it would also take you an infinite amount of time to get there due to time dilatation ;)..
Bye!
Crisp.
yes but how do we know that light is the fastest speed there is.of course it is the fastest knowon 2 man, but does that mean it is un-think-a-bul that an object could go faster?
the way i think u could go faster than light is by using an masize gavity force. for instance black holes bend light and time, so could u not use this example 2 bend the speed and time u were traving at and go faster than light?????
wouldent find going further, but i reply on here as often as i get the chance 2.
Hi ogster,
Around 1890, there was an experiment that tried to accelerate electrons as fast as possible. It was noted in this experiment that increasing the energy would at first increase the electron's speed (as expected). But the higher the energies, the less the speed increase, until at one point, the electrons seemed to have reached some sort of "maximum speed". After comparing the measured "maximum speed" it was found that it was just below light speed.
This doesn't prove that faster-than-light travel is impossible, but it does indicate that "regular matter" seems to have an upper limit to its speed.
Now, sooner or later I expect Tachyons or similar entering the discussion here: many efforts have been made to detect particles going faster than the speed of light (in vacuum). This is usually done by looking for Cherenkov radiation (from the moment a particle goes faster than the speed of light in eg. water, it starts emitting radiation to get slowed down (nature's mechanism of trying to prevent FTL travel?). This radiation can quite easily be detected -- sidenote: the speed of light in water is lower than the speed of light in vacuum, so there's no "real" FTL travel here).
Bye!
Crisp
ok.
another thought, when an electron has changed an energy level, we canot see where it goes, and at how fast it goes at. maybe the way 2 go faster is not by having more energy, but moving from 1 energy level 2 another????
Hi ogster,
It's true that we cannot exactly see the electron jump from one energylevel to another. From a theoretical point of view, you would expect the electron - or better formulated, it's spreaded wavefunction (modulus squared) - to move further away from the nucleus, but the uncertainty limit makes it a bit hard to look at.
From fluorescence experiments (when an atom absorbs light and re-emits it) you can estimate that the timescale for electron processes is typically something of 10^-15 seconds. Therefor, it is usually said that electron excitations from one energy level to another happen more or less in that timescale. This is quite a generalisation may I add ;).
And last but not least: it has been observed that elektrons can tunnel through a potential barrier. Recent experiments suggest that this tunneling effect takes place at speeds apx. 4 times the speed of light. This is just to mention that we're still not really 100% sure what the microscopic world is all about... And that knowledge could prove to be necessary if we ever want to travel at high speeds.
Bye!
Crisp
dark raven
06-14-01, 04:03 PM
from dark raven @ jimmy james,
re: 'The Light Speed Eagle'
hi jimmy, i am just asking about your school project,
in it you say that g-force is no worry, because by the time it multiples the journey is over, but even though the journy is over, wont the g-force soon catch up with you like with and aroplain, whene it breakes the sound barrer, the sound comes after it, but after the plane slows down it catches up with it again?
i hope you could anwser this question, and i would like to say v well done on it any way.
my e-mail is.......... dan74656@lycos.co.uk
hope to hear from you soon, live long and prosper, dark raven:)
well that is as far as my knowdge goes, all i can say now is that nobody knows what happens 2 electrones when they change energy levels, but i am shore that they travel faster than light, maybe even faster than time?
When travelling at an appreciable fraction of the speed of light, is one really time travelling? Or is it merely an astronomically energy-expensive form of suspended animation (albeit you're conscious)?
At least from the point of an observer anyway.
Now my question.
Supposing that time travel by humans is possible, which view of the timeline is most favoured: That of a linear timeline, or the parallel "many worlds" view?
Forgive my ignorance here but I have a question. Why do we believe that anything special would happen if we exceeded the speed of light? For example...when we increase the velocity with which we can travel on land, nothing happens other than getting from point A to B quicker. Wouldnt we just reach our spacial destination quicker than the person travelling at a speed slower than light? Why would these instances be different?
Time/02112
06-21-01, 01:24 AM
<img src="http://www.webpromotion.com/anim/stock01/white/01_21_w.gif" border="0" alt="">
Time/02112
06-21-01, 01:25 AM
TAP-TEN Research Websites...
http://Tap-Ten.org
http://server3.ezboard.com/bmagisystems
TAP-TEN Research Photo Album
More will continue to be added latter...
http://www.smartgroups.com/pictures/openalbum.cfm?GID=613794&AlbumID=810553&Layout=L
Time Travel Research Center
Interview with Dr. David Anderson@Frankfurt, Germany http://www.time-travel.com/timetech.htm
Time Travel Research Center
http://time-travel.com
TWF's & CTC's
(Time Warp Fields & Closed "Time-Like" Crves.)
Time Warped Fields & Closed Time-Like Curves go hand in hand my friend...
. Tipler first described a working "time machine" through his theory of massive rotating spheres. http://www.geocities.com:0080/Area5.../5763/time.html
Certain types of black holes also exhibit the "time travel" abilities of Tipler cylinders. Kerr was one of the first to describe the dual event horizons of a rotating black hole. As with Tipler's cylinders, it was possible to travel on a "time-like" trip through a Kerr black hole and end up in a different world line without being squished by the gravity of the singularity. http://www.physics.fsu.edu/courses/
fall98/ast1002/section4/blackholes/fig11-
13/fig11-132.htm http://qso.lanl.gov/~bromley/nu_nofun.html http://www.leonllo.freeservers.com/blackworm.html http://www.astro.ku.dk/~cramer/RelViz/text/geom_
web/node4.html
The mass and gravitational field of a microsingularity can then be manipulated by "injecting" electrons onto its surface. By rotating two electric microsigularities at high speed, it is possible to create and modify a local gravity sinusoid that replicates the affects of a Kerr black hole.
More can be viewed from this archived post at the following Link...
http://www.xone.net/tti/board/ubbhtml/Forum1/HTML/000505.html
just another brief note...
it has been discovered that there is a direct correlation between the human bio electric curcuit, and EMF/EMR and their interaction between these outside influences.
examples would be the recent scientific discoveries of remaining traces of electro-magnetic "signatures" left behind in areas once inhabited, or visited frequently, by someone whom was once at a particular place for any extended period of "Time"
Now more importantly, if you were to look deeper into particle science, and explore the correlation of these EMF signatures with Time~Travel into the past cycles of any given world-line, you might also discover that this is a key element crucial to being able to find pre existing components of any past Time-Line that once was, but no longer exhists as was in the present.
Perhaps I may be "Reaching" here, yet again if we knew hwat we were doing, it wouldn't be called research now would it? moreover without research, and probing for these answeres, we may never know without.
<img src="http://www.webpromotion.com/anim/stock01/white/01_21_w.gif" border="0" alt="">
hum......
DAZE> thats if time was linear.going back in time, may take u 2 a point that was from another time line differnt 2 ours.whos 2 say that by going forward or back in time would we b going in our time.
PABU> well for starters, when traving in a car at high accleation, u fell a slight puss on u as the car goes faster.times that by the speed of light, and u get a very big squeeze. some people belive that light is the fastest speed, and experimence that have tryed 2 move an object faster than this have been unsusful, (electrions).
hope that answers ur questions.
by the way this is just my thoughts, don't take these as true facts, have a look 4 urselfs.
Time/02112
06-25-01, 07:57 PM
I just thought you kids would enjoy this one...
Enter The "STAR CHAMBER "
Experimental Time Travel Website ...IS TIME TRAVEL POSSIBLE? Is it possible to construct a machine capable of travelling into the past?. The development of a totally new form of teleportation, called the Star Chamber, will attempt to put this theory to the test !!
http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/ftadefy
<img src="http://www.webpromotion.com/anim/stock01/white/01_21_w.gif" border="0" alt="">
heres a question 4 those of greater knowledge than i.
if a photon is relased from an electron that has changed energey levels, on perpusly relasing a photon, then using magnick fileds to fous this photon like the way the tv does it with electrons. instead of just the 1 photon meny are relesed at one time, fousing all these photons in a stright line, would u not have just made an photon gun?like an electron gun, but with photons. and as photons are packets of energy, would u not produce a future like gun?????
just a lil thought?
Hi ogster,
I don't think that would work. There are some problems with focussing photons using electromagnetic fields:
First of all, we are not yet entirely sure what photons exactly are: there are still some experiments going on trying to determine whether photons really are particle-like and that the famous interference effects are simply caused by quantum interference. The last time I heard of such an experiment was two years ago, but I never heard any results about it. It could turn out that light perhaps has a radial spreading wavecharacter (emitted by a point source) and that it manifests itself as a single entity, a photon, anywhere around the sphere of radiation. If this is the case, it could be hard to focus the entire radiation sphere to "bend" to a direction of choice. If anybody has any answers to this problem, be sure to mention them here.
Assuming photons have a particle-like character, there's a second problem of charge: photons do not have charge, and this makes it very hard for them to interact with electromagnetic radiation. But since photons have a spin magnetic dipolemoment, they will respond to electromagnetic radiation, only not in a conventional way, the photons would need a non-uniform, focussing magnetic field. Problem here is that magnetic dipole interactions are several orders of magnitude smaller than regular electromagnetic (Coulomb/Lorentz) interactions.
Also, because they move fast, it would require *large* magnetic fields to bend them just slightly, also something that is not practical.
Fortunately, somebody already invented a photongun. Today they call it a LASER ;).
Bye!
Crisp
just a little question, what determines which atom is which. is it the number of electrons which surround it, or the protons, neutrons and electrons?
Hi Ogster,
I am not quite sure I understand what you mean. If you refer to two identical atoms, then there's no way of distinguishing them (you cannot label one of the two atoms).
If you refer to the division of elements (Copper, Gold, Silver, ...) then it is the number of protons that determine the element. This is just a definition with some reasoning behind it: the number of protons is related to the number of electrons in a neutral atom (there are just as many electrons as protons). Since the basic properties of elements (as first discovered by chemicists in the 1700's) are dominated by electron-behaviour, it is reasonable to use the number of protons or electrons to distinguish the elements. The number of protons was choosen because removing electrons of atoms appearantly didn't drastically change the behaviour (if you heat up mercury to a high-temperature gas, it's still mercury, even though some electrons have been removed from the atoms).
Bye!
Crisp
leaving the subject of time speed 4 a mo, is it possible 2 change the number of protons in an artom? by doing this would u not change what the atom is (coper, iron ect..)?
Hi ogster,
Yes, it is possible to change the number of protons in a nucleus. But it is not as simple as pouring some potions together and waiting for the result (i.e. it is not a chemical reaction).
I am not entirely sure on the way they change the number of protons, but I suspect they bombard a nucleus with protons (if you want to raise the number of protons) or with neutrons (if you want to lower the number of protons by letting a neutron knock one out).
Some nuclei automatically raise their protonnumber (this is called beta-minus radioactive decay, a neutron gets converted to a proton in a nucleus). The other way around is also possible: a nucleus can change a proton into a neutron, thereby lowering the protonnumber (this is called beta-plus decay).
Bye!
Crisp
so if u were 2 change the protones and electrons in an atom strucher, would u change say a copper into a iron (gold out of lead?)
thecurly1
06-29-01, 03:11 PM
Your time travel experiment is great or paper, but in real life it will never work. You can't travel at the speed of light. A smarter, slightly more realistic way of time travel would to use two blackholes, and connect them to create a worm hole. By warping space you could travel a huge distance, and time in fact by entering one.
Space and time are interwoven, like folding a sheet of paper in half you can walk from the "top" to the "bottom" of the page quickly because the distance is smaller. Once you've got to point B, you unfold it, space and time return to normal and you end up somewhere else. Because of time-dilation in extreme gravity your trip would seem instant but to outside observers it may take years.
To modify the wormhole time machine you just make one hole in space-time, make another hole behind or near your starting point connect them and climb through. You could theoretically pop out of the second hole before you left the first one. Obviously this would take another few centuries or millennia to figure out but this is how it would be done.
Hi ogster,
To get off-topic one more time ;),
Yes, it would be possible to change lead to gold if you'd like. Unfortunately, this whole proces costs more than the actual gold, so you wouldn't really gain anything. These kind of experiments are especially interesting for the studies of exotic nuclei (like 5He, or the newly discovered elements 116, 118, ...).
Bye!
Crisp
Time/02112
06-29-01, 09:38 PM
Time~Travel can be "Tricky Busines" !!!
perhaps something here may be of pertaining, or useful information...
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0></span><br>
Many Worlds Websites:
The Everett Interpretation: Many Worlds
A good beginners guide to the "Many Worlds" Interpretation.
http://www.hedweb.com/everett/everett.htm
Many Worlds Quantum Theory: http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/ManyWorlds.html
Another good webpage on the "Many Worlds" Intrepretation and quantum theory.
New Links Found
The physics of Time Travel by Dr. Michio Kaku
Beginners guide to Time Travel at: How Stuff Works
http://mkaku.org
Scientific American: Beam Me Up!
An article on verfiying the principle of quantum teleportation. http://www.sciam.com/explorations/122297teleport
Time by Charles Muses:
http://www.cheniere.org/time/index.html
Time Twister: New Scientist
A new article on time travel that appeared in a recent issue of the New Scientist Magazine.
Science-Related Sites
Alexander V.Frolov. Faraday Lab Ltd: Alexfrolov
http://alex.frolov.narod.ru/ch-paper.htm
Clifford A. Pickover Website: Pickover
http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover/home.htm
David Deutsch's Homepage:http://www.qubit.org/people/david/David.html
Julian Barbour Website: Julianbarbour.com
Stephen Hawking's Website at: http://www.hawking.org.uk
Check out this page on the latest theories on field propulsion systems at: http://stardrive.org/Jack/puthoff1.pdf
Time-Travel Related Sites
Chernobr's Space Transportation System: Chernobrov
Chernobr's STS & Time Travel papers also at a Russian websitehttp://alexfrolov.narod.ru/chernobrov.htm
John Gribbins paper on Time Travel at: http://www.biols.susx.ac.uk/Home/John_Gribbin/time-trav.htm#time_travel
Time-Travel Websites
Steve Preston's Time Travel Website: http://freespace.virgin.net/steve.preston/Time.html
Time Travel Institute at: http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/
Time Travel Research Center at:
http://www.time-travel.com
Interview with Dr. David Anderson@Frankfurt, Germany
http://www.time-travel.com/timetech.htm
Papers & Articles on Time Travel
Backwards to the Future: New Scientist
http://www.newscientist.com
Hawking's Leature on Time Warps http://hawking.org.uk/pdf/warp.pdf
John Gribbins paper on Time Travel at: http://www.biols.susx.ac.uk/Home/John_Gribbin/time-trav.htm#time_travel
Quantum Evolution: unisci
So you think time travel is impossible, eh!: http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~teviet/timetravel.html
Time Travel Fact or Fiction: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/time_travel.html
Time Twister: New Scientist
Time Warps:
http://www.data-matrix.com/hp/tremor/twarps.html
Wormholes & Time Machines: http://www.dd.chalmers.se/~f93jojo/sidan2.htm
Quantum Teleportation
IBM Research & Quantum Teleportation: http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/
Quantum Teleportation Research at Caltech: http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~qoptics/teleport.html
<center>
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tapten/join">
<img src="http://groups.yahoo.com/img/ui/join.gif" border=0><br>
Click to subscribe to tapten</a>
</center>
<img src="http://ettracker.hypermart.net/asign.gif"></a> <a href="http://ETtracker.tripod.com"><br> Visit my associate’s website</small></B></font></a><br> <font size="-1"><small><clock></clock></small></font> </BODY> </HTML>
Remember,
You Saw it here!
<img src="/images2/sciforums/sciforums2_1.gif" width="188" height="50" border="0" alt="sciforums.com"></a></td>
wants to know
07-01-01, 04:32 PM
time travel isn't possable yet but probable and makes sence considering Einstiens theory and how light speed works. lets say you are traveling light speed toward a nieboring star to you it may seem only 20 years have passed but back home on earth its been about 200 years so it is very probable for travel into the future faster but going back is what could get very tricky going into the past may not be possable at all.
wants to know -
if like u said time travel is inpossible, then wouldent travling at the speed at light also be inpossible?if u could travel at the speed of light then u would time travel, thus 20 years here would be 200 years there, but as u said u can't time travel so i don't think ur theory would work?
crisp -
yes but once u have prfected doing it becomes less expensize, like manufacutaring a car,2 make it once would cost a lot of money but once u have a factor line,making the car becomes inexpenisive from the cost 2 start off, then after a few cars have been sold u gain a profit. would u not?
ok,last time that i get off the subject
wants to know
07-01-01, 09:07 PM
well what I mean is that would be the only way is to go at the speed of light to you 20 years past but back here at normal flow 200 years past. and I believe it because einstien was no stupid man. but going into the past I figure is not possable
Beauideal
07-02-01, 12:36 AM
inorder for anyone to time travel wouldn't it require that the future, present, and past exist at the same time? i mean, you can't travel to the future if it doesn't yet exist, can you? and likewise, in order to travel to the past it still has to be there right?
what is everyone's thoughts on this?
working on the theory that time isnt linear and that everything happens at once (quantam theory),u could go to any point in any time. kinda like a ball, and not like a stright line.
well i think thats how it works
any1 else?
Time/02112
07-02-01, 08:21 PM
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0></span><br>
The Unknown Time~Traveller
You Gotta See This! "(@^@)" http://stream.anomalies.net:8080/ramgen/ufo/jump1.rm
(Requires "Real Player")
I time travel every night. I close my eyes at night and find myself moving forward in time about 7 hours!
Some people say what is impossible today can be possible someday. Here is my question. Given all the technology in the world, can you create US dollar bills that can not be considered counterfeit? The answer is NO without US governments permission because of the serial numbers. But you can create gold out of lead or diamonds out of coal (Carbon).
I think, you can move through space but not time with respect to the observer. If you teleport yourself to a planet in Epsilon system, and have a tachyon telephone, you can call home and the time will be the same GMT (Galactic Mean Time). That means no "matter" will travel faster than light but any massless energy (information) pulse can - to make your telephone call.
This theory will hold true in this galaxy only. If you go to another Universe, all bets are off. So do not waste your time on time...work on teleportation (see the other thread on the subject...)- that is possible and useful.
Time/02112
07-13-01, 01:45 AM
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0>
You might find additional references here...
Speed Of Light (Physics)
http://www.what-is-the-speed-of-light.com
TAP-TEN Featured in upcomming film "CHRONOTRIP"
Chronotrip, the second documentary feature from Jeff Cioletti and Far Away Discourse Productions, explores the science, science-fiction, and metaphysics of time travel. The film combines the perspectives of
physicists, philosophers, psychics, and science fiction writers, actors and fans, as it seeks to answer the fundamental question: What is time?
TAP-TEN Research Foundation will be featured in this upcomming film "Chronotrip"
(We're mentioned in Jeff's "Production Diary" archived on Monday, July 9, 2001)
http://www.fadproductions.com
JimmyJames
07-19-01, 06:17 PM
I have been gone for a while so I haven't been attending to my post, but now that I am back I will reply to the many messages my post reciveved.
Okay first of all to Mr. Dark Raven now that I think about it myou are right, the g force would catch up to you, but I must say would the ng force catch up to your space craft or your body? Anyway
next post... Pabu: um... nothing special happens when you reach light speed you would simply cheat time it won't be like some galatic miracle. It would be somthing that only a computer would know if it was succesful. Next subject Mr. thecurly1...
where do I start? um now it is not possible, but does that mean it won't be fifty years from now.
Okay black holes are AT THE TIME not even truley proven to exisit, but lets say we know for sure that they do... I've said this before and I like they say in the movies "I'll say it again" to pass though a black hole you will have to go though a procees called spagatifacation (you are stretched out a lot) now I don't know how your body feels about this, but I wouldn't enjoy nor will I survive it. I think a lot about time travel I think I relized that time travel won't be used for traveling throught time, but to travel in general.
If anyone is seriosly intersted in this subject I suggest you read a breif history of time by stephen hawking...bye
Time/02112
07-21-01, 02:39 AM
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0>
JJ, as you said..."Okay black holes are AT THE TIME not even truley proven to exisit, but lets say we know for sure that they do"... Oh But they "DO" indeed! where have you been lately? moreover i sure would love to hear you explain this misnomer!
Time/02112
07-21-01, 10:23 PM
We also have a new Link up @ the "Star Chamber" website, just scroll down on the "weblinks" selection and you'll also see our banner there...
(TAP-TEN Research)
http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/ftadefy/links/weblk.htm
JimmyJames
07-22-01, 04:03 PM
Forgive me if I am wrong. Black Holes
The only way we could find out if they really do
exist then we would have do send out probes, that would analiyzse the so-called Black Hole----off the subject... I do belive that somthing of that nature (I mean black holes) does exist, but no probes have been sent out and you can't see a Black Hole, but you can see the effects of one. For example... If a group of planets or objects are orbiting empty space, you could say that this is proof of a black hole. This has occured too. But to my knowlege (which is limited along with my age) Black holes existence are based on theory. the defonition of a theory is ...an idea based on observations. An experiment is used to prove the theory is true. And I haven't heard of any experiment. I would like to note that I do belive there are black holes but they tenically haven't been proven to exist...yet.
Time/02112
07-23-01, 02:03 PM
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0>
"It would take so much energy to accomplish just a minut effect of time travel"
("I don't see how it could be done."
*Alright, I guess it's a fair assumption that it would take a great ordeal of powerful energy perhaps equatable to that of planets, or the sun perhaps, however it may be done by extracting those powerful energy bursts right from the quantum vaccum of space! How? try using Electro-Magentic Field focusing techniques for starters! believe it, or not, this is being done as I wright this message because somwhere in a quiet discussion with a PA. based research group, they are in the development stages of negotiating contractual arrangements with other private companies to jump on this conceptual module' to design, and construct actual working prototypes of this concept-to-prototype EMF conducive constrictor plasmatron infusion reactor, to produce limitless amounts of overunitized power from a single generator that can provide sufficient power to run an entire 12 story hotel, or a small home, and the generator itself may vary in size from that of something the size of a 4x4 pickup box, to the size of a shoebox.
(Kiss fossil fuel consumption to generate electricity Goodbye!)
"I believe it was Thorton that said it would take more than a hundred years of gathering potential energy from all of Earth's sources to manipulate time. I guess through future technology it might happen."
Not necessarily so! (let me explain)
the earth itself generates a combination of strong & weak subatomic particle collisions that eminate upwards from within it's core of molten metals, as they rise they gather electromagnetic current in the form of EMF radiation that spews outward, and engulfs the planet forming what is known by many physicists as the earths "Electro-Magentic Energy Grid" there are available electroencephlagraphic meter devices that work like metal detectors, or radiation geiger counters to pick up readings eminating from within this EMF grid to detect with percision, (compiled with GPS technology) to read the strongest EMF signals being transmitted which fluctuate in pulses at a rythimistic harmonic frequencies @ 12hrtz. the tricky part is synchronizing your device to chime within similarly percise variables to that of which is being transmitted from within this EMF grid, once you have succeded, you might open a hole that will increase the density without increasing in mass into an infinitive quantum dot. It is through these methods we intend to open a potal through the quantum vaccum that should also prove to have multiapplicationary functionality.
Red Devil
07-24-01, 10:25 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by JimmyJames
[B]Jimmy The Time Machine!
1. Any form of travel is better than the public transport in this damn country!
2. SOL is slightly more than 186,000mph therefore you would get lost!
3. Sorry - in one of them moods!!
]:D :D :D
bkroneger
08-01-01, 04:13 PM
I met Paco Ahlgren about six months ago. He's smart as hell. He's not crazy. I tried to ask him about it too, but he was evasive. He just smiled a lot. His eyes are peaceful -- like he knows something. It scared me, but I really liked him. He was SOOOOO nice to me. The book is scary -- especially if you've met the guy. I don't know a whole lot about physics, but when you read what he wrote, it makes it seem very real. It really made me think.
Bob Kroneger
>
> I read the book. It scared the crap out of me. I wrote to him and tried to ask him about it
> , but he won't tell anybody anything.
>
> www.ahlgren.net
> groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Discipline_Group
>
>Cheers ... Sam
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 1:48 PM
> > Subject:
> >
> >
> > I've been hearing so much about this algren person. Does somebody know
> > where I can find the stupid book? I'd at least like to read it.
> >
> > Christie
>
>
BK,
Are you sure you are in the right thread? Anyway, I am reading the novel. I do not understand, what the novel got to do with the author in the sense why he should be crazy? Smart as hell? That is a new one on me. I did not know "hell" is smart!
Welcome to sciforums
Time/02112
08-04-01, 03:48 AM
With all due respect to those who have spent countless hours in the disciplines of science & physics who cannot understand the plausibility to induce reversion of Time`Travel, let alone "Time~Travel" as in being generated artificially to accelerate the effects, I don't want to imply that their calculations are inaccurate per say, and they are just plain wrong however, it is perhaps that there are a variety of new existing quantum mechanics, as well as the math behind it to show this in theory that has been either missed, or overlooked that go well above & beyond the information that they have been applying, thus explains why others find it difficult to see how it "CAN" be done! A good example is that Einstein himself, although demonstrated his frustration towards the plausibility of Quantum mechanics, and expressed adamantly that he was against this new science which was considered "Fringe" in it's day, his own theory of general relativity laid down the very foundations for quantum mechanics to exist, and would not have had the necessary data to lead the way for this new science if not for his theories in the first place! Moreover on a comparative note, we are going through a lot of new developments to test these new bold theories relating to the inner workings of QM, many of them which are being applied are so new infact, most of this data is as recent as 1989, and are in the very beginning stages to develop these new prototype devices to demonstrate how it will work, and what it can do, very much like those who were involved in the early days of putting Einstein's theories to the test that lead to the development of nuclear fission, and a variety of other applications such as the A-Bomb & etc. we are now going through yet another paradigm shift which involves many of the same processes to test the abilities of Quantum mechanics, which will lend to the development of such things like Teleportation which IBM, and a few other private companies are involved in, as well as "Time~Travel" be-it "Reversion" or acceleration to a future that either represents one that closely resembles a version of our own future, or exploration of "parallel" or alternate versions as such. Just because these ideas are rejected by others, (whom I must say are perhaps in their own right correct with respect to their equations, and their formal educational backgrounds), with all due respect, it is my contention that they might be using equations that cannot adapt to show plausibility to these new concepts, yet it does not necessarily demonstrate any less plausibility for these new concepts to be demonstrable, let me explain...it is perhaps that much of the science that many others are applying here, perhaps was not adequately designed sufficiently enough to demonstrate the plausibility for such ideas, thus in order to resolve the conflict of such issues, we need to conduct more research that involves the application of Quantum mechanics, and apply the most recent data that has been gathered to pioneer new methods to demonstrate the plausibility of these new theories. A good example of the conflict of (related) issues involving the same processes that lead to the development of pioneering frontier technologies within our own history, let's compare Enrico Fermi, as to how his theories provided solutions to demonstrate the inner workings of neutrons back in 1933 which were painfully rejected by the journal "Nature" when it was first submitted there. The question that scientists were faced with during this era was, if neutrons are not composed of protons and electrons, and if there are no other electrons in the nucleus, then how are we to understand the fact that electrons are emitted by nuclei in beta radioactivity? This answer was provided of course in 1933, after the neutron was discovered, in a new theory of beta radioactivity that was developed in Rome (by none other than) "Enrico Fermi" (1901-1954) Most of what we are dealing with now in relation to quantum mechanics was not feasible until now with respect to the science that had to be conducted beforehand, some of which was involving our most recent probes launched by NASA to study the effects of these elements, and it's relationship to our own solar system that relied upon sophisticated technology that simply was not around then, and again I must emphasize that some oft this data gathered was as recent as 1989 by Chandra's X-Ray telescope, and to that even more recent, NASA's "Genesis" probe which was launched to study the theories of the "Big-Bang" as it is intended to gather particle emissions generated by our sun's solar winds. So you can see now that there are no limits at all as what we have potential to create with one exception, and that is only in respect to the limits we place upon ourselves!
Hi Time/02112
...it is perhaps that much of the science that many others are applying here, perhaps was not adequately designed sufficiently enough to demonstrate the plausibility for such ideas...
You made a good point here: it is true that new theories are almost certainly designed to keep the relation of "cause and effect" intact: the cause always has to take place before the effect. This imposes a lot of restrictions on ideas such as timetravel.
At the moment there doesn't seem to be any evidence that there is a violation of the relation of cause and effect. Nobody has been killed by a bullet that was fired in the future, ... you can think of thousands of these examples.
Apart from theories or science, there are also a lot of philosophical and logical arguments against timetravel, and this makes timetravel special. I'm not going over these arguments again (they have been mentioned here and elsewhere on the forum) but timetravel seems to lead to totally contra-intuitive ideas and paradoxes.
Perhaps one day timetravel will be a reality (theories such as general relativity leave an option with wormholes), but before we can truelly comprehend it, more philosophical than scientific work needs to be done.
Bye!
Crisp
Time/02112
08-04-01, 03:41 PM
What are spheromaks?
http://ve4xm.caltech.edu/Bellan_plasma_page/spheroma.htm
For those of interest in our "ccQts" Closed Circuit Time Stream
concept, which is best described in forming a "bubble" that engulfs the pod, or chamber around a Time~Traveller to keep them on a more direct World-Line, or continuous Time~Stream that closely resembles one of their own origin from whence they depart from, we need to study the effects of applied Quantum mechanisims within current technological discoveries, and how this relates to our own theories of the quantum universe we would like to refer to as the quantum "Multiverse" currently, this is just one good example to demonstrate our theories.
Spheromaks are plasmas with very large internal currents and internal magnetic fields that are aligned so as to be in a nearly force-free equilibrium, i.e., the currents are very nearly parallel to the magnetic fields. The spheromak equilibrium is a `natural' state since magnetic turbulence tends to drive magnetically dominated plasmas towards the spheromak state.
Spheromak technology:
Laboratory spheromaks involve very large currents, typically 100's of kiloamperes and high voltages, typically kilovolts. These currents and voltages are obtained using high energy capacitor banks which are switched in microseconds. The formation geometry is arranged such that magnetic flux cuts across the electrodes connected to the capacitor bank. This configurations generates helicity (twistedness)
in the flux tube going from one electrode to the other.
With enough helicity a spheromak is formed.
Making spheromaks:
Making spheromaks is analogous to blowing bubbles: the component of the magnetic stress tensor parallel to the magnetic field acts like the surface tension in the soap film while the perpendicular component acts like the air pressure inflating the bubble. When the destabilizing stress due to the perpendicular component overwhelms the stabilizing stress due to the parallel component, a detached spheromak breaks off.
http://ve4xm.caltech.edu/Bellan_plasma_page/spheroma.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Everything you know,...is Wrong!
soon we shall all discover the truth."
http://profiles.yahoo.com/vosstech
Time/02112
08-05-01, 03:00 AM
Crisp,
I was merley pointing out that many of these new cutting edge developments that "are" currently being worked on (especially Time~Travel) that apply these theories of QM, are often being hampered by the same controversial processes that were involved in many heated debates decades ago, and is rather frustrating to see so much evolutionary progression within humanity on one hand, yet very little on the other in relation to dealing with organized critics that still adamantly hold steadfast to their antiquated beliefs, and perceptions in spite of realizing that it only creates another environment in which we continue getting in our own way!
In short, it makes it even moreso difficult to aquire funding for research projects of this nature due to these continuied issues, making Time~Travel a much harder sell, let alone overunity which one would think to be more in demand, yet is seemingly met with oppression by those who would stop at nothing to ensure that such an econnomic paradigm shift of free energy would never make it to the market in the first place. (Remember what happened to Tesla!)
How can we continue to stand on the shoulders of Giants, when we are being told lies, suppressed from the truth, and lead by leaders who are only interested in our wallets?
"A country of greed, is a country in need."
Time/02112
08-08-01, 01:00 PM
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0>
In relation to Time & Quantum mechanics, we must also remind ourselves that "Gravity" itself was just one good example pertaining to a subject thought to be well understood during the earlier part of the 20th Century based on Newtonian Physics, however one must realize that althought there was an anbundant level of enthusiasim to explore the inner-workings of our uninverse on the subatomic level, in order to learn what we were dealing with in relation to new discoveries being made, Cambridge was one of the last to agree to it, yet still heald steadfast in their antiquated beliefs in spite of proven methods to show otherwise! and to this very day we have a variety of classes being taught to our students that "omitt" the corrections to the antiquated formulas that simply were not designed to work with "Quantum Mechanics"
I strongly recommend you consider reading the following books...
"Quantum Gravity"
By: Lee Smolin
Author of "The Life of The Cosmos"
ISBN# 0-465-07835-4
"Gravitation And SpaceTime"
(second eddition)
By: Hans C. Ohanian & Remo Ruffini
ISBN# 0-393-96501-5
"Subatomic Particles"
(The Discovery Of)
By: Steven Weinberg
Nobel Laureate and Author of "The First Three Minutes"
ISBN# 0-7167-2121-X
"The Search For Superstrings, Symetry, and the Theory of Everything"
By: John Gribbon
ISBN# 0-316-32975-4
These books seemingly tie into one another, and I will often review them in my library & make connections from one pahragraph in one book, where it will be explained in more functional detail in another & visea-vesa, also I am often making connections to what has been adversley rejected in the earlier part of the 20th century, and still happening today,
simply because they did'nt read these books!!! (LMAO)
*Inquiries:
http://profiles.yahoo.com/vosstech
*Additional Referrences:
Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory
http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/LIGO_web/about/factsheet.html
Catching the Gravitational Wave http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/LIGO_web/about/brochure.html
gravitational waves
http://www.ligo-la.caltech.edu/Posters/poster5.html
Electromagnetic Waves versus Gravitational Waves
http://www.ligo-la.caltech.edu/Posters/poster6.html
Beauideal
08-10-01, 10:26 PM
Time travel as we define it is the ability to move between the past, present, and future at will. Knowing this we can then determine that time travel will not be and is not possible through speed, as speed could only serve to out run time or make time appear to slow. As an example, let's assume there is a car that travels at a constant speed, a constant 60mph, this car we will call time. Now, let's say you build a car that can travel at 80mph, in effect traveling faster than the constant car (time). We now put these two cars on the open interstate highway known as the time line. As the two cars travel down the interstate you will begin to notice that the car traveling at 80mph is beginning to catch and over take the car traveling at 60mph. As you can tell by this example no time travel has or can occur. The only thing that may happen is that you would be able to out run time. That is if time travels at a constant speed. If you did out run time using speed where would you, end up? Somewhere waiting for time to catch-up? Moreover, where would that somewhere be? I do not believe it is possible to wait nowhere for time to catch-up to you. The only possible way to time travel is for the future time to already exist so that you may travel to it. If time did travel at a constant speed, what would that speed be? The speed of light? This is to assume that light in some way produces or has something to do with time. We know this isn't true cause time goes on even in the dark or in the absence of light. Therefore, this now leads us to the question of what exactly is time and what produces it. The only comparison that I can make between light and time is to say that they are both frequencies or better put they are both measured in frequencies. I can also say that time is inversely proportional to energy. The more energy you put into doing something the less time it takes to do that something. Likewise, the less energy you put into doing something the more time it takes to do that something.
please help I need answers
what exactly is time?
what produces time?
am I on the right track?
and what is everyone's thoughts about my idea
Welcome to Sciforums, Beauideal. May your posts be long and varied!
You ask the questions that endless people through the ages have asked. And still do. So far the answers escape and evade us. But we are indeed closing upon better understanding of them. Prehaps we have not learned to word our questions correctly. Oft times just changing how we ask brings up associations that result in closer answers to what we seek. But in this case I do not think that is the solution. To many have already asked and we now have to be patient and await the discoveries that will lead to the answers. You bring up interesting observations with leading thoughts. I wish you well in what you seek. May your answer be in the next curve of the road.
Hi Beauideal,
I agree with Wet1 that these are fundamental questions that scientists have been asking themselves ever since the concept of time was introduced. There's one observation I'd like to make.
You said:
If time did travel at a constant speed, what would that speed be? The speed of light? This is to assume that light in some way produces or has something to do with time. We know this isn't true cause time goes on even in the dark or in the absence of light.
I disagree, light has something to do with time. We human beings experience time as a sequence of events that happen (the sun sets, night falls, sun rises - repeat ad infinitum). The sequence in which we see events happen has to do with light: since we assume that nothing can travel faster than light, the only way for us to witness an event is to see it (and not hear it for example).
In physics, this "close" relation between time and light is expressed in the lightcone (which is a cone-shaped figure in a space-time diagram that seperates events we can witness and cannot witness at a given spacetime point).
I realise this doesn't answer the question "what is time", but perhaps it sets you on the right track for your thoughts...
Bye!
Crisp
If Crisp's post got you curious about the 'lightcone' bit, you can check out the following URL
http://www.phy.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/
It will give you a not too technical intro. to the concepts involved.
Hi Chagur,
Be sure to warn me when I get too techy ;). Thanks for the link, it looks very informative (and is one of the few sites I've ever seen on the web correctly mentioning that Galilei's principle is also a principle of relativity)
Bye!
Crisp
I've experienced that glazed, puzzled look people get too many times over the years not to want to jump in and give an assist.
Glad you don't mind. ;)
Time/02112
08-20-01, 03:40 PM
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0>
<IMG SRC=http://home.aol.com/zcphysicsms/timemet.gif/>
<IMG SRC=http://home.aol.com/zcphysicsms/tt22.gif/>
<IMG SRC=http://home.aol.com/zcphysicsms/Image11.gif/>
<IMG SRC=http://home.aol.com/zcphysicsms/kerrworm.jpg/>
01001010
08-20-01, 03:45 PM
it's all very clear now...
lol
The Special theory of relativity and the theory of simultaneity, concerning your time-travel comment.:cool:
Beauideal
08-22-01, 10:51 AM
My thoughts
Crisp
You said:
__________________________________________________ __
I disagree, light has something to do with time. We human beings experience time as a sequence of events that happen (the sun sets, night falls, sun rises - repeat ad infinitum). The sequence in which we see events happen has to do with light: since we assume that nothing can travel faster than light, the only way for us to witness an event is to see it (and not hear it for example).
__________________________________________________ __
I do not believe that we human beings necessarily experience time as a sequence of events. Rather we human beings measure that which we refer to as time using those repeating ad infinitum events. Those events in no way produced time. A person who is born blind and never able to view a single event, still experiences time and yes they can keep track of and measure time by using a repetitive sound such as tick tock tick tock. Likewise, even a person that is born both blind and deaf will also experience time and do it without any audio or visual sensory input. This leads me to believe that time is something other than just light or even the entire Electro-magnetic spectrum. Light is a photon and no matter how instantaneous light may seem it still takes time to produce light. Therefor, knowing this, we can then say, time cannot be a product of light but rather light is a product of time. I believe time and energy to be interwoven as a time-energy spectrum. I call it a spectrum because time can be an interval as vast as space itself or sliced into an interval as small as quantum mechanics wants. Simple example: we can measure time as a month, a week, a day, an hour, a minute, a second… a nanosecond and so on, the limit is only our ability to understand.
We sometimes forget that it takes time to do anything. Simple example: baking a cake, one of the most important ingredients is time, too much time and your cake is burned, too little time and your cake is still ruined. I like to define time, as the amount of energy required to do anything.
If I am wrong please show me the error in my thought process.
thanks.
Hypnogog
08-22-01, 03:38 PM
Just read the last little bit and thought I'd drop my two sense in about time.
To make it all nice and simple:
Time is the measure of the transformation of energy on a universal scale.
So long as energy is active there is time, when there is no active energy - no time.
Which is also why I've had a problem with time dialation (merely philosophical of course)
Beauideal
08-24-01, 12:02 PM
Thanks Hypnogog, that is a much nicer definition of time and fits perfectly with my personal thoughts about time. I have searched long and hard, near and far for anyone who could tell me what time is and now I believe my search is over. And now on to the process of trying to figure out how to manipulate the process of time.
Thanks
Hypnogog
08-24-01, 03:50 PM
Let me precurse this by saying I know I'm probably going to get smacked hard for this but...
I think time travel using FTL is impossible on a macroscopic scale. I'm not a math geenius but, using the simplest system (d=s*t), the only way would be to divide two positive #'s and get a negative answer.
Relative time travel may be just that, relative to the observer, but taking my definition of time the universe still "ages" regardless of how fast you go. I've always had a problem with Dialation because the only way I ever see it is that the Universe itself is the Observer.
Hi all,
Beauideal,
Therefor, knowing this, we can then say, time cannot be a product of light but rather light is a product of time.
I agree, you took the point I was trying to make one step further: but in the post you refered to I was trying to point out that there definitly is a relation between light and time.
Hypnogog:
Time is the measure of the transformation of energy on a universal scale.
Ok, this definition is unfortunately as empty as the current definition of time. How would you define "energy" ?
... using the simplest system (d=s*t), the only way would be to divide two positive #'s and get a negative answer.
Unfortunately things aren't that simple anymore. I just wish they were, but I'll have to disappoint you... The theory of special relativity has thought us that time and space are interwoven and that the simple equation x = v* t no longer is valid in this vision of the universe.
[/quote]Relative time travel may be just that, relative to the observer, but taking my definition of time the universe still "ages" regardless of how fast you go. I've always had a problem with Dialation because the only way I ever see it is that the Universe itself is the Observer.[/quote]
Time dilatation is an effect that we witness everyday. If it weren't for time dilatation, we couldn't detected muons on the surface of the earth (this is *the* textbook example on time dilation, I'm sorry that I didn't come up with a more.. interesting example but I am a bit too tired now :)). In this scenario, the two "observers" are the scientist in the lab and the muon particle.
Also, the "aging" of the universe is a concept that depends heavily on your definition of the universe: most commonly it is defined to be the fabric of space-time + all matter within. Therefor, the universe cannot "age" as time is a part of the universe. What concerns the aging of the matter within the universe: this is a different situation, as now you have one piece of matter as one observer and all the other matter as second observer, consistent with the view of special relativity on time dilatation.
Bye!
Crisp
So how exactly would YOU qualitify 'energy'? Because that would certainly solve a lot of problems. As referential to other problems - I will stay relatively lconic on the subjest, except to consolidate Crisp's statement that time & light are linked: because, (unless I have been misinformed (if an infinite amount of energy is required to propel something at c (spd of light), then time must surely be intertwined with light (if you get me?).
Peace, brothers & sisters(where exactly r the girls here?)
hacksys_brazil
08-26-01, 08:52 AM
Hi everybody,
and Hi Jimmy !
Well, Jimmy, I would like to put some ideas here, and first I would like to say that I don't believe that your space ship would ever work... As a time machine... And even if it did work, you would not be travelling 4 years in time like you said.... But a few milliseconds and I agree with Crisp on that....
Now the point for me is: Light is a " onda eletromagnetica" very pure, it is almost pure energy, it almost does not have any mass at all... So , I could say that light is a very pure, refined type of matter...
And that's why your space ship will never reach the light's speed, 300.000 Km/s, because you have all that "junk together", all that Mass, that's far from delicate, far from refined, far from pure... It's a ship it's made of steel, coarse substance.... We can build a really fast space ship, and we could use the "solar wind" as energy, so we cut off all that heavy stuff... But even, it will be far, very far from light's speed.... It will be good for travelling to further planets in our system , but not TIME !!!
TIME TRAVEL IS POSSIBLE !!! But not using a machine, a ship.... I've done it ! I've travelled in time.... Do you guys ever heard of Projeciologia ?????????.........
If you guys want to talk more about it, I'm at : canjibrinos@yahoo.com.br ....
Abraços,
To all friends all over our planet... Fighting to make it better and just...
.................................................. ...... Fab.
.................................................. ........ Brazilian friend.
:cool:
hacksys_brazil
08-26-01, 08:56 AM
Hi everybody,
and Hi Jimmy !
Well, Jimmy, I would like to put some ideas here, and first I would like to say that I don't believe that your space ship would ever work... As a time machine... And even if it did work, you would not be travelling 4 years in time like you said.... But a few milliseconds and I agree with Crisp on that....
Now the point for me is: Light is a " onda eletromagnetica" very pure, it is almost pure energy, it almost does not have any mass at all... So , I could say that light is a very pure, refined type of matter...
And that's why your space ship will never reach the light's speed, 300.000 Km/s, because you have all that "junk together", all that Mass, that's far from delicate, far from refined, far from pure... It's a ship it's made of steel, coarse substance.... We can build a really fast space ship, and we could use the "solar wind" as energy, so we cut off all that heavy stuff... But even, it will be far, very far from light's speed.... It will be good for travelling to further planets in our system , but not TIME !!!
TIME TRAVEL IS POSSIBLE !!! But not using a machine, a ship.... I've done it ! I've travelled in time.... Do you guys ever heard of Projeciologia ?????????.........
If you guys want to talk more about it, I'm at : canjibrinos@yahoo.com.br ....
Abraços,
To all friends all over our planet... Fighting to make it better and just...
.................................................. ...... Fab.
.................................................. ........ Brazilian friend.
Hi Ankit,
So how exactly would YOU qualitify 'energy'? Because that would certainly solve a lot of problems.
I should have seen that one comming :D.... (scene where Crisp scratches is forehead)... Well ehr...
I am sure there are some nice textbook definitions on what energy is, but in the end it all comes down to this: energy is a concept that is introduced to differentiate between - for example - one object and one that moves faster. You cannot touch energy, it's something that was introduced in physics to make the framework of thinking a bit easier.
Energy is also not an "absolute" quantity. Different theories in physics have different definitions for the kinetic energy of a moving object (for example: the special theory of relativity we've been talking about defines kinetic energy in a totally different way than the classical Newtonian theories - there's some correlation ofcourse, but no perfect match).
So I personnaly would classify "energy" as one of the physical buzzwords like "entropy" (does anybody really know what that is ? :)).
hacksys_brazil,
Light is a " onda eletromagnetica" very pure, it is almost pure energy, it almost does not have any mass at all...
You could even say that it has no restmass at all (m0 = 0) because otherwise light would not be able to travel... at the speed of light :). The most accepted idea on light defines it to be small packages of pure energy (so there's no mass involved).
But then there's this "so what is energy then"-question again... if I say that light is pure energy and energy is a fictional concept, then how can there be light ? To be completely honest - I don't know. Be sure to drop me a mail if you do - I guess light and energy are just a few of those physical concepts that scientists are still struggling with today.
Bye!
Crisp
All,
The best idea I’ve seen on time travel is not really time travel at all but the ability to traverse parallel universes where each universe is out of phase with the next by a minute fraction of a second. By traversing across many universes you will effectively be traveling back or forward in time.
Now the question is which concept is more fantastic, parallel universes or time travel?
Cris
I time travel frequently. It takes me exactly one hour to get 1 hour into the future.
Time/02112
08-27-01, 01:36 AM
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0>
Crisp, and others...
I would like to see some additional replies to this other Gentleman's posting at the Dr. Michio Kaku's "Science Forum" message-boards
http://mkaku.org
__________________________________________________ __
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The quantum theory is incompatible with theory of relativity,
do you disregard it claiming a lack of logic ?
Within theories themselves illogical facts abound: In classical physics the branch thermodynamics which treats heat and work as two incompatible entities, is in blatant contradiction with the same classical physics branch of kinetic interpretation of heat.
The theory of ligth as a wave, riding in absence of any media, is in blatant contradiction with the very defintion of a wave which intrinsic entity is the variation of a media.
And the spin of earth or any object in the universe, should quickly be put to an end by the fundamental first law of Newton (this simple overlooked fact is explained in details in my site, see ‘puzzling facts’ about spinning objects).
It turns out, that at least there is one approach which does put all this back together. And that is the timeless motion or ABSOLUTE MOTION theory.
With extremely simple concepts it also shows that the statistical aspect of quantum theory has a deeper explanation as Einstein thought himself (see paragraph named 'Muons').
Absolute motion, and theory of relativity surprisingly cohabit as explained in my site: TheTruthOfTheMatterIs.com.
As far as I understand things, the theory of relativity remains fully ‘logical’ it describes events in a manner the absolute motion theory, which considers only dependencies and describes nothing, will never do. At present the absolute motion theory is presented in the form of a few principles. At this time it is not backed by any mathematics, but even if that happens it will never compete on either theory of relativity nor quantum theory as far as description of physical events is concerned, because in the absolute motion theory the concept of ‘position’ of a point or of an object has no meaning. The interesting aspect of the ABSOLUTE MOTION theory is it clearly deleneates the scopes of relativity and quantum theories, rendering the whole of the construct of human mind logical !
Credits:
---"henrisalles"
Forum
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/michiokakusscienceforum
Website
http://TheTruthOfTheMatterIs.com
Hi Time/02112,
I'm going to answer here, not because I fear a possible reply from any of these guys, but simply because I don't feel like subscribing to yet another forum like there are 1000's of a kind (sciforums is quite unique, that's why I like it and why i dislike others ;)).
Anyway, here goes for the reply:
Within theories themselves illogical facts abound: In classical physics the branch thermodynamics which treats heat and work as two incompatible entities, is in blatant contradiction with the same classical physics branch of kinetic interpretation of heat.
Wrong. There's no contradiction whatsoever, there's even a connection between thermodynamics and the classical Newtonian physics, and this connection is called statistical mechanics.
Some history for the folks that don't know about this branch of physics: Newton developed his theory of mechanics in the 1600's. However, until the late 1800's, scientists were unable to describe things like "temperature" and "heat" in the Newtonian framework, so they created a new theory called "thermodynamics" to describe effects like metals expanding when heated etc etc... At that time, the two theories seemed unconnected - the reason why scientists weren't able to connect them was because the mathematics weren't advanced enough to do so.
Somewhere around the 1900's (a bit earlier really), the mathematical theory of statistics was formulated/perfected, and physicists used this theory to describe large collections of particles in a gas. It then turned out that the results for large collections of particles were related to the already known thermodynamical properties of gasses. So using statistics, the link between Newtonian mechanics and thermodynamics could be made (that's why this area of mechanics is called "statistical mechanics"). Statistical mechanics therefor links the microscopic world of particles with the macroscopic world of temperatures, heat, ... (these are all macroscopic variables). Probably one of the most famous results in statistical mechanics is the relation between the average kinetic energy of a particle in a gas and the temperature of a gas:
(1/2) * m * v^2 = (3/2) * kB * T
Here m is the mass of the particle, v the velocity, kB the Boltzmann constant and T the macroscopic temperature of the gas.
So you see, no contradiction, but a perfect match.
The theory of ligth as a wave, riding in absence of any media, is in blatant contradiction with the very defintion of a wave which intrinsic entity is the variation of a media.
This is exactly why scientists have long believed in the existence of ether: an invisible medium where light and other electromagnetic waves propagate in. However, since the Michelson-Moreley experiment the believe in ether has weakened, and nowadays most scientists differentiate between two types of waves: electromagnetic waves (that don't need a medium to propagate in, these consist of pure energy) and mechanical waves (oscillations of a medium).
Absolute motion, and theory of relativity surprisingly cohabit
Now this is funny: the most fundamental concept in the theory of relativity is that every kind of motion is relative, and not absolute ;).
At this time it is not backed by any mathematics, but even if that happens it will never compete on either theory of relativity nor quantum theory as far as description of physical events is concerned, because in the absolute motion theory the concept of ‘position’ of a point or of an object has no meaning.
... rendering the theory completely useless as a physical theory, since physicists in the end always want to know the position of an event or object! That's what all of quantummechanics, relativity, newtonian mechanics is about in essence: how can we describe the motion of a given object. And to know the motion, the position is ofcourse a requirement.
Bye!
Crisp
I must concur with my dear Crisp on this topic. The quantum theory and the theory of relativity not only don't contradict eachother, but conversely, compliment eachother. I will elaborate: intrinsically, the theory of relativity is how matter move in relation to eachother and that there isn't absolute motion, e=mc2 etc. and quantum theory describes the composition of matter...these two are inseperably linked, but actually achieve correlation. Invariably and invitably, I would prefer to prceive this philosophically rather than scientifically:D .
Reality is often our perception of it, argue many physicists and philosophers, ergo dictating that you have the power to make what you believe...which is obviously horseshit. Anyway, more relevantly, quantum theory describes composition, quanta and o on, whereas relativity rehashes cosmological physics in another sense...they compliment eachother because without Newton, there would be no Einstein (and Max Planck, who we haven't forgotten, who, ofcourse, introduced quantum theory):p .
Newton's theories were revolutionary in the sense that they improved physics infinitely (figuratively speaking). Einstein also did the same, but differently...he conquered physics, trangressing popular modern belief of Newtonian physics...let's be honest: Newton wasn't 100% correct. Einstein finished and polishd off Newton's theories...
To be continued (I'm outta breath)
hacksys_brazil
08-31-01, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by Crisp
hacksys_brazil,
You could even say that it has no restmass at all (m0 = 0) because otherwise light would not be able to travel... at the speed of light :). The most accepted idea on light defines it to be small packages of pure energy (so there's no mass involved).
Crisp [/B]
Crisp, I used to think like that.... just accepting that Light's mass == 0, but ,.... Although it is very insignificant, to our "macro" World, I think it does have mass... And that " insignificant mass" it's definitely significant when talking about "micro" universe... Why am I saying that there is mass ???... First Because I believe in it, second because I saw this laddie, a scientist at MIT, saying that she was doing research to find out exactly what's the light's mass... Is it wrong ??????...
¥ PAZ ¥
Hacksys_Brazil........:cool:
Hi hacksys_brazil,
First Because I believe in it, second because I saw this laddie, a scientist at MIT, saying that she was doing research to find out exactly what's the light's mass... Is it wrong ??????...
Okay, it depends a lot on how she phrased it.
Yes, I agree: light has a relativistic mass (wrongly called "mass" by many theoretical physicists for the ease of use). Light has a momentum and this momentum adds up to the energy - or mass, using the mass/energy equivalence - of a photon. If she is researching the origin or physical meaning of this relativistic mass, then she's doing some great work. The answer to that question probably leads to the answer of the 300 year old question "what is light?".
If she is determing whether light has a restmass (and this is not the same as relativistic mass... well, not always :)) or not, then she sure is a brave lady - that means defying the pretty well established and experimentally tested theory of special relativity.
Bye!
Crisp
Beauideal
09-05-01, 09:20 PM
It seems that the topic has moved on to what is light and I know that my reply is behind the topic but I've been too busy...
First, I would like to say to Hypnogog. I think you are on the right track. Keep at it.
Now to Crisp,
Light has no more to do with time than a pair of binoculars has to do with light, when used to view an event that occurred in the light, which occurred in time. What I mean to say is that the event occurred in the light but the light occurred in time. All light was used for was to observe time and that is the only role light is used for. Light does not in anyway create time, just as the binoculars in no way created the light in which it was used to observe. All binoculars were used for was to observe the light and that is all the binoculars were used for. Light would have to somehow be responsible for the production of time in order for the speed of light to be the key to time travel. I hope I have explained myself clearly this time but I probably haven't. However, if you think I have anyway reaffirmed your idea that the speed of light is the key to time travel, then you have really, really, really misunderstood everything that I have said and for that I am disheartened.
Now as for light being pure energy? I thought the debate was still on as to weather or not light is a particle, wave, or particle-wave. As we all know light exhibits the properties of being both a particle and a wave. Now if light is at all in anyway a particle, then we all know that no matter how minute, particles still have a mass. Moreover, if light does contain particles then that would mean that light is not pure energy. The closest thing to pure energy that I can think of would be "thought." I'm not certain that pure energy could react with anything other than another form of pure energy or the source, which creates the pure energy.
A question I have is what would happen if pure energy was to interact with mass? It's kind of like asking what would happen if an irresistible force collided with an immovable object.
I would also like to ask, for those of you who believe that the key to time travel is the speed of light and also at the same time believe that it is impossible to reach the speed of light as something other than pure energy, how do you propose to ever time travel?
Somewhere recently I read that if you create a container and pass light through it and in the process freeze light in the container so that no light escapes, then you will also freeze time in the container. The freezing or slowing down of light has been tested recently. I wonder if that will show a door to time travel...
KalvinB
09-05-01, 10:44 PM
Traveling faster than light would only allow you to see the past, not put you into the future.
When you look at a star you're seeing it's past, not it's future. You can travel "faster" than time as you approach it but once there you will see it's present in real time.
Because you can't travel a negative distance, it's not possible to time travel by light.
Ben
There is something that bothers me. How can light, if it is pure energy be affected by gravity? I understand that in traveling within a media that light can be bent. Such as a prism, or reflected, such as a mirror. But in space there is a common event called light lensing. Where light is traveling through space and encounters sufficient gravity to bend it. So that you see what is behind an object. Something you could not do with out this phenomenon happening. It has been documented may times on film.
It is easy to understand how this could be if light does indeed have that minimal amount of mass. But if it doesn't then it leaves that vague doubt that something is wrong here.
Hi all,
Beauideal,
Light has no more to do with time than a pair of binoculars has to do with light, when used to view an event that occurred in the light, which occurred in time. What I mean to say is that the event occurred in the light but the light occurred in time. All light was used for was to observe time and that is the only role light is used for.
Yes, I think I have the idea of what you mean: light only exists, it can only propagate because there is something like "time".
I believe the relation is a bit more fundamental than that. I probably mentioned this before, but if you just look at relativistic effects, which all have to do with the finite speed of light, this makes some sense. People are probably tired of me using the example, but here it goes once more: time dilatation. Clocks do not run at the same speed for observers that move with different speeds in respect to eachother. The reason behind this effect is light: in order to witness this effect, you need light to travel from point a to point b, and it is because the speed of light is the same for all observers that time runs differently for every observer.
This doesn't really have to do anything with the exact nature of light...
Now as for light being pure energy? I thought the debate was still on as to weather or not light is a particle, wave, or particle-wave. As we all know light exhibits the properties of being both a particle and a wave.
Yes, and that's the key to the answer IMHO. The debate is not really about "is light a particle or a wave" but "why does light exhibit a particle and a wave property". I think light is neither, it is because our description of light is not adequate enough that we sometimes perceive the particle behaviour of light and sometimes the wave nature.
Now if light is at all in anyway a particle, then we all know that no matter how minute, particles still have a mass.
Relativistic mass, yes. Rest mass, why should it have that ? Even in the special theory of relativity light has a (relativistic) mass, but no restmass. So there's no real problem here.
I'm not certain that pure energy could react with anything other than another form of pure energy or the source, which creates the pure energy.
I can think of a couple of examples of transfering energy (I only added "pure" in one of my previous messages to indicate that light IMHO does not consist of anything else). If you slap your hand on a table, you're transfering energy from the movement to the atoms in the table, making them jiggle about their rest positions and transfering phonons within the table atomic lattice. (Phonon = energy quantum of a vibration in a system). A more simple example is heat: heat is a form of energy that can be transfered from a source (fire) to a destination.
I would also like to ask, for those of you who believe that the key to time travel is the speed of light and also at the same time believe that it is impossible to reach the speed of light as something other than pure energy, how do you propose to ever time travel?
So you basically assume that timetravel is possible, something not everybody would agree to.
Wet1,
There is something that bothers me. How can light, if it is pure energy be affected by gravity? I understand that in traveling within a media that light can be bent.
In the theory of general relativity, which can account for the effect of gravitational lensing, light follows the curvature of spacetime. As you probably already know, spacetime is curved in the presence of mass (the most famous analogy would be the rubber sheet with a pool ball on it). It is the curvature of spacetime that bends the path of light - light always travels straight in one direction on this rubber sheet (=spacetime).
Bye!
Crisp
Time/02112
09-06-01, 02:50 PM
<IMG SRC=http://www.comteck.com/~doctor/Atom.gif BORDER=0>
"Whenever you say something is not possible," Bar-Cohen said, "someone will beat you at it."
Visit us at our new website!
******"TAP-TEN Research Foundation"******
http://www.Tap-Ten.com
Red Devil
09-07-01, 05:35 AM
Regarding an earlier mail from Crisp I believe, refering to the rubber sheet theory (incontinent factor) I was always led to believe that the rubber sheet and the ball theory was caused by gravity and not light? Taking the rubber sheet, stretching it out, placing the heavier orb within it, it finds its own "hole" and settles there, disturbing the surrounding area with its gravitational depression. Now, along comes a light, travelling in a straight line, it arrives at the dense gravitational area, bends around it and continues upon its new course. Astronomers, by this method have been able to observe stars hidden behind dense gravitational fields by virtue of the bent light. Therefore surely is it not gravity causing the disturbance, not light? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Hi Red Devil,
I was always led to believe that the rubber sheet and the ball theory was caused by gravity and not light? Taking the rubber sheet, stretching it out, placing the heavier orb within it, it finds its own "hole" and settles there, disturbing the surrounding area with its gravitational depression. Now, along comes a light, travelling in a straight line, it arrives at the dense gravitational area, bends around it and continues upon its new course. Therefore surely is it not gravity causing the disturbance, not light?
Yes, that's what I meant, I probably expressed it in a rather unfortunate way (something that happens every now and then ;)). I'm not really into general relativity, but if I am not mistaken, it is the mass that bends spacetime. The curvature of spacetime is perceived by us as gravity, and light (following a straight line inside the "dippened" rubber sheet) gets deviated from it's path in this more dimensional picture.
Bye!
Crisp
Time/02112
09-09-01, 02:33 PM
<IMG SRC=http://iasos.com/detalist/rol/FractalSquare.gif>
Sooner or latter, we shall find that many points of these theories do take on a strange twist of commonalities, yet the closer in ideology they become, the more distorted our observations of interconnetedness becomes as well, I just wish we could say the same for ego? but it is good to see as the more we begin to evolve, the more we begin to discover as the gap between science & philosophy begins to become more narrow, and our collective minds of shared expression becomes more broadend to expand our hightened awareness of the working universe we all dwell in.
"Please be patient, Time takes Time!"
Beauideal
09-11-01, 09:19 PM
Heat or slapping a table with your hand, neither of those is pure energy. They are both forms of mechanical energy involving mass and the transfer of energy from one mass to another. As I understood your definition of pure energy, it is energy without any mass at all. At least it was said that light is pure energy because, it contains no mass. Then it was changed to say that light had no mass at rest. I do understand why the claim is made that light has no mass, but until someone is able to contain light, weigh it and determine with a much greater accuracy that light has no mass, then I am going to have to keep an open mind as to the possibility that light does contain mass, however insignificant it may be. I personally believe that light does contain particles. I also believe that all particles contain mass. Who knows maybe we will some day find out that the speed of light is the max speed that any mass can reach.
Now as far as freezing light goes. If you could freeze light all you would be doing is basically taking a picture of an event, not freezing time. As an example, lets say a person runs past you and as this person passes you, you freeze the light that is bouncing off of the person, the person will keep running and experiencing time. The reason for this is because; all you did was freeze an image that was created by light. You did not freeze the event or time. So no, being able to freeze light would have no use in time travel. In my opinion freezing light would be no more significant than taking a photograph or hitting the pause button on your VCR while watching a movie.
As said before traveling at the speed of light will only allow you to see the light, which bounced off of an event in the past. This would only allow you to be an observer of past time not ever time travel. In my opinion, true time travel is the ability to not only go back or forward in time to witness an event, but to also become part of that event. Time traveling by using the speed of light to catch up to the light of a past event and view that event is equivalent to just video taping an event and watching it repeatedly. Actually, video taping an event is probably the best and only way to time travel using light.
The only thing I can say about faster than light travel is that it may, and that is a big may, get you infinitely close to time traveling and that is only because light, at least from our perspective, is infinitely close to being instantaneous. Nevertheless, as we all know something that is infinitely close, can also be considered to be infinitely far away. For example, how many numbers are there between 0 and .000000000000000001000000000000. The answer, although the number is infinitely close to 0 there is still an infinite amount of numbers between the two numbers. For example, this number is larger than 0 but yet smaller than the second number .000000000000000000999999999999 you can now see how this process could go on to infinity and beyond. Therefore, in order to truly time travel it would need to be instantaneous. If asked what is faster than light? Time is. To give an example of something that is instantaneous it would be the present. The present occurs faster than you can say the word "NOW." Light takes eight minutes to reach Earth from the sun. Time or the present, is instantaneously the same at both the sun and Earth. And yes at the same time.
More questions for those of you who believe time travel is possible through the speed of light.
How do you travel into the future and witness the future if light has not yet been produced?
How do you expect to use the same positive distance and positive speed traveled to time travel to both the past and future? My guess is you can't. It would be impossible.
How can you keep patching the wholes that are always occurring in the theory that the speed of light is the key to time travel? When do you finally realize that it is time for a new theory?
Crisp my man you are very prolific and for that I respect you and wish you and all the rest that believe that the speed of light is the key to time travel, the best of luck. And someday Crisp, when you see the true light, we could use you on our side in obtaining the true key to time travel.
This may be my last reply for a long time as I feel that I am spending too much mental energy in trying to convince you guys of something you don't want to hear. I would rather use that energy in conjunction with others who believe as I do, to develop time travel. So bye for now and good luck. I'll be watching. The race is on.
Time/02112
09-14-01, 03:19 PM
<IMG SRC=http://iasos.com/detalist/rol/FractalSquare.gif>
Ah, but you could travel through a worm hole without the deadly effects of a black hole right?
Question is, what happens when you artificialy create a wormhole to appear at the gravitational mouth of a blackhole, and observe it as it gets pulled through? better yet what if you were to travel through that wormhole that is travelling through the blackhole?
Stryder
09-15-01, 12:08 AM
I noted that the entire principle of using something like a blackhole or wormhole is similar to water going down a plug hole, it creates an area of space that water doesn't occupy, a funnel.
Of course in a Blackhole or Wormhole this would be a Vacuum, you could be sucked along and how someone on here mentioned "Spaghettified" as long as you don't touch the walls of the funnel, as moving into those walls would leave your molecules scattered between your entrance and exit point. (remember to tell your loved ones that method instead of cremation if something happens to you)
I did originally think of a wormhole without a funnel effect, but this meant that your body (well molecules) would act in accordance to the Heisenberg principle of Uncertainty, As soon as you enter, what every location your molecules are at could have an adverse effect, either some atoms might shoot electrons behind you, so when you arrrive they are missing, or your atoms might sling shot electrons infront of you, to arrive before you do, again this would scatter you through trying to travel through a wormhole without a funnel like vacuum.
Also you could mention Einstein's formula and understand two things:
1) If you travel faster than your atomic frequencies you will be converted to nothing more than energy and waveformations.
2) The energy that is necessary to continue acceleration to the speed necessary for time travel increases in the amount need due to a craft having to combat friction.
(this is why NASA was working ont he Hyper-X, as they were taking the very friction and using it to cause a more efficent drive, by forcing those frictionised particals through the prepulsion vent.)
Anyway as I mention in the "Parallels" posting, it's much easier just to send information faster than light, and send information back in time, rather than sending a craft, you never know perhaps you could use such a device to send your plans of a craft down to the beginning to build quicker.
Hypnogog
09-17-01, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by Crisp
Ok, this definition is unfortunately as empty as the current definition of time. How would you define "energy" ?
I submit that All energy transforms: Newtonian, relatavistic and quantum. From light -> heat, friction ->sound, Gravity ->Kinetic ->potential. There isn't a static form of energy (isn't that a contradiction?) If the "Universe" became inert, devoid of all energy, static.. would there still be time?
Also How would you define energy?
And, what do you mean the universe dosen't age? Don't you see things traveling in a distinct direction from past to present to future. If the universe IS all that it contains, and all it contains ages (oh... bad choice of words i guess. I should have said 'has a linear existence' or something like that) wouln't that imply a like state?
Hi Hypnogog,
I submit that All energy transforms: Newtonian, relatavistic and quantum. From light -> heat, friction ->sound, Gravity ->Kinetic ->potential. If the "Universe" became inert, devoid of all energy, static.. would there still be time?
Unfortunately you cannot define energy by its energy transformations. That's like saying "a define a circle to be a circular object". A definition cannot use the concept it defines ;). I am saying this because heat, friction, kinetic (energy) and potential (energy) are four different forms of energy.
About your question: that would again be a philosophical question, along the lines of "if a tree falls in a forest and nobody's around to hear it, does it make a sound?". If all energy is removed from the universe, then there would be no light to propagate events, so nobody would be able to perceive the progress of time. Hence: "if you cannot see time progress, is time still there?". Good argument!
Also How would you define energy?
I have absolutely no idea. The best I could do is the following: "Energy is a fictional concept that was introduced in physics to easily describe what is the driving force behind moving objects". After all, everyone is taught the definition of kinetic energy first: T = (1/2)*m*v^2. Nothing is said about the nature of this quantity, it's just defined that way. A nice consequence of this definition is that you have a quantity that describes "what an object is capable of": high energy = it travels at high speed, or has a lot of mass. Collisions with high energy: there surely is gonna be some action there.
And, what do you mean the universe dosen't age?
By definition, the word "universe" means everything in the world as we perceive it, including time. In physics, the universe is understood to be the 4-dimensional manifold of space... and time! What the universe concerns, all possible times from t = 0 (bigbang) to t = t[end] (= big crunch, or infinity if there's no end to the universe) are already included in this 4-dimensional description.
So the universe doesn't age. It's the matter within that ages.
Somebody earlier mentioned an article in Scientific American where you had this theoretical physicist say that the universe is static (I believe kmguru posted the link). I think I now understand what he means: from a theoretical point of view, time only exists for the matter inside the spacetime manifold. Spacetime itself doesn't age, it's only the matter inside that has a perception to time. This perception of time is due to a movement along the time-axis in spacetime. So I think he means that the fabric of spacetime is static, but only the matter inside has a perception of time.
Anyway, it's all tricky stuff. There still aren't indefinite arguments for one theory or another. At the moment, all our ideas are equally valuable (or worthless, for the pessimists along us ;)).
Bye!
Crisp
Hypnogog
09-18-01, 05:26 PM
Alright, if you want a singular encompassing definition of all energy I will have to venture to state...
energy is the quantitative definition of the interaction between all objects regardless of size, mass or distance.
Time then becomes the way one measures that interaction.
Also, I;ve got a little semantic quibble to put forth. In your post way back there you said (and I've heard it many times before) "The Universe is the fabric of spacetime." Now that doesn't implicitly state that it IS spacetime, as you implied. Wool is the fabric of the sweater. The fabric of spacetime is the universe. The sweater is Not wool. Spacetime is Not the universe.
Sorry, that's bin a monkey up my mineshaft for a while.
take care.
Time/02112
09-19-01, 05:14 AM
Impossibility
Some things are impossible because they are against the laws of physics. Yet we can imagine many things that are impossible. Is the impossible simply a figment of the human mind? Is everything I can think about true?
---Tormod Guldvog
Excerpt from "Alice in Wonderland" (Lewis Caroll):
“There is no use in trying,” said Alice; “one can’t believe impossible things.” “I dare say you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast”.
What is impossible?
As human beings, we consider many things to be impossible. Some things we even use as metaphors for things which may never happen - like flying pigs. But why is it that we can still imagine pigs flying around?
What is real?
We like to think that we know the truth about things, and that these truths explain what we see around us. The speed of light, for example, has been considered to be a true and eternal measure. Yet new research has shown that the speed of light may have changed during the age of the universe. And so may the expansion of the universe, which astronomers now claim may in fact be constantly increasing.
Although we can observe many things around is, we cannot know everything about what we see. We can't see beyond the edge of the universe, simply because all the light we can see comes from inside it. Or does it? How can we be sure of that?
On the other end of things, there is a limit to how small things can be in the universe. This is called a Planck length, after the physicist Max Planck. It is estimated to be 10-33 centimeters. Anything smaller than this has no meaning in the physical world.
If I can think of something, is it true?
For some philosophers, all things that can be seen, must be real. But what does this say about things like "impossible" objects depicted by artists and painters?
And what happens if I think about things which are smaller than the Planck length? The answer may be that you won't, because you can't. But is it true?
Other philosophers claim that all things which can be imagined, must be real. If you can think of flying pigs, then flying pigs are for real. But this does not necessarily mean that they exist in flesh and blood, only that the "concept" of flying pigs is a "valid" concept. Get it? It is at least a great way to think if you have problems proving a theory...
Or, as the mathematical philosopher Kurt Gödel once said, "The meaning of the world is the separation of wish and fact".
* The Unknown and the Unknowable
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/traub/traub_p1.html
This is an interview with Joseph Traub about how scientists can understand and answer impossible questions and concepts.
Review: tormod
Engineering and Technology
* Erroneous Predictions
http://www.foresight.org/News/negativeComments.html
This page has a list of predictions, mostly concerning things which at some time were considered impossible, and which later turned out to be in error.
Review: tormod Sci-Tech History
* World Of Escher Gallery
http://www.worldofescher.com/gallery/
This web site has a gallery with many of the drawings of M.C. Escher, famous for his incredible, impossible figures.
Review: tormod Geometry
* Impossible Objects Gallery
http://www.sandlotscience.com/Impossible/impos_frm.htm
This is a truly wonderful web site, with illustrations and explanations for numerous impossible objects. The impossible triangle section has a downloadable plan which helps you build your own triangle!
Review: tormod Mathematical Logic
* PuzzleSolver: Impossible Puzzle Solutions
http://www.puzzlesolver.com/impossible/index.shtml
Spoiler alert: this web site has a section which shows you how to solve impossible puzzles, like how to get big things into a bottle and other interesting stuff.
Review: tormod Gadgets
* There are really impossible things...
http://www.cut-the-knot.com/impossible/
This page lists several impossible things, and goes on to explain why they are impossible. But there is also a page about some surprising things which are actually possible.
Review: tormod Mathematical Logic
* Medieval Theories of Modality
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/modality-medieval/
This is a very long text document from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, about Medieval modal thinking, which basically means that it is concerned with stages or levels of possibility and chance that actions and thoughts might actually happen. This is for the very interested among us.
Review: tormod Sci-Tech History
* Impossible Figures in Perceptual Psychology
http://www.fink.com/papers/impossible.html
A fairly old, but none the less interesting, paper with illustrations of impossible figures.
Review: tormod Psychology
9. Possibility and Impossibility
http://www.tir.org/metapsy/jom/061_possible.html
This is a brief philosophical investigation into different kinds of possibility/impossibility conceptual pairs.
Review: tormod Mathematical Logic
* Wishes for the future?
http://www.ideafinder.com/futurama/wishlist.htm
A bit offbeat, this is a cool list of people's wishes for the future. Leave your wish here, and the impossible just might come true.
Review: tormod General science
<IMG SRC=http://paranormal.about.com/library/graphics/timetravel.jpg>
ok ill try and articulate myself as best i can here but :
what is there to tie the speed of light in with timetravel
why if i travel (for arguments sake) faster than the speed of light will i "go into the future"
I know about how when you stick a clock in the plane and travel fast it will be out of sync with a stationary clock, but what is to say that the 2nd clock is ahead in time from the 1st clock ? Isnt time just realative
Try this : if i travel away from a clock at the speed of light, the hands will have appeared to have stayed still (realativity right). But if i do this for say, 1 year straight, am i not 1 year older ? have events elsewhere not progressed by 1 year ?
By that token you havent actually travelled forward in time (or kept time standing still)
So what im trying to get at is that perhaps time isnt tied together like this and that if you travelled say 10x faster than light in a spaceship for 1 day, you would age 1 day and the rest of the universe would "age" 1 day
any thoughts ?
-pk
Hypnogog
09-19-01, 12:09 PM
I agree with you and have some further extrapolations.
The problem with the whole clock thing is that it always assumes light travelling in a singular direction and disregards all other sources. Whatever happens to all the light emanating from behind you, which you are reflecting at an increasing speed.
How about this for a Q&A.
If you travel @ c in a circle Around the clock, the hands don't change momentum at all by the time you make one complete circuit perpendicluar to the source. You've just travelled @ c without any dialation, right?
If you don't like the clock, how about a pulsating quasar.
Hi all,
Some comments and thoughts:
Hypnogog,
"Alright, if you want a singular encompassing definition of all energy I will have to venture to state...
Energy is the quantitative definition of the interaction between all objects regardless of size, mass or distance."
How about mass then ? Mass is a form of energy in the theories of relativity. From a classical, Newtonian point of view, I agree with your definitions. But in more complex theories, this definition cannot hold. The best I can do is to say: "Energy is a quantitive description of everything that resides inside the universe".
"Time then becomes the way one measures that interaction.""
Hrmmm... I agree to a certain extend, but I would not consider this to be a closed definition of time. Time is certainly a measurement instrument, but I think we're probing for the deeper meaning of time here.
"Also, I've got a little semantic quibble to put forth.
Good! Vocabulary is important in these kind of discussions, it prevents us from misunderstanding eachother.
"In your post way back there you said (and I've heard it many times before) "The Universe is the fabric of spacetime." Now that doesn't implicitly state that it IS spacetime, as you implied. Wool is the fabric of the sweater. The fabric of spacetime is the universe. The sweater is Not wool. Spacetime is Not the universe."
Ehrr.... yes, sorry about that. English is not my mother language so sometimes I am in a struggle for correct words ;). What I meant is the following: The universe, devoid of all matter and everything inside, IS spacetime. Spacetime is the stuff where all the matter resides in. A better word than fabric would probably have been "framework".
Time/02112,
Thanks, it's good to remind us from time to time (pun not intended) that the impossible could eventually happen. I suspect that your point is that eventually, the answer to the question "what is time" might be more philosophical than physical.
Pkunk,
"why if i travel (for arguments sake) faster than the speed of light will i "go into the future"
You would "travel to the past" in the sense that you will catch up with light emitted by events that happened BEFORE you departed. When you travel twice the lightspeed for one year, would stop and then look back at earth, you would see all the events that happened the past year again.
"I know about how when you stick a clock in the plane and travel fast it will be out of sync with a stationary clock, but what is to say that the 2nd clock is ahead in time from the 1st clock ? Isnt time just relative"
Time and space are relative in the sense that different observers can be lead to different conclusions on one event. Let me explain this using your example: If you fly a plane around the earth, the clock in the plane will run slower, compared to a clock on the ground. Imagine one scientist stands next to the clock in the plane and one next to the clock on the ground. The scientist on the ground will say "Hey, that clock on the plane runs slower". The scientist on the plane will say, "Hey that clock on the ground runs faster".
It's a matter of interpretation. What the theory of (special) relativity does is provide a link between all the results from different observers.
"Try this : if i travel away from a clock at the speed of light, the hands will have appeared to have stayed still (relativity right). But if i do this for say, 1 year straight, am i not 1 year older ? have events elsewhere not progressed by 1 year ?"
You forgot one thing. If you travel at light speed, you will indeed see the hands on the clock you travel away from stand still. However, the wristwatch on your hand will still tick away one year. So you would have aged one year in your frame of reference.
"So what im trying to get at is that perhaps time isnt tied together like this and that if you travelled say 10x faster than light in a spaceship for 1 day, you would age 1 day and the rest of the universe would "age" 1 day"
That's the beauty of special relativity: you would think you would have aged one day, but for the rest of the universe (assuming it all stands still relative to you) you would have aged several years. It's really not easiliy explainable in a physical way, the mathematics just works out great in this case.
Hypnogog again,
"The problem with the whole clock thing is that it always assumes light travelling in a singular direction and disregards all other sources. Whatever happens to all the light emanating from behind you, which you are reflecting at an increasing speed."
That's another story: the light originating from a point behind you is described as emited by a third observer, and different sets of rules apply to that situation:
(1) <-----------------> (2) <----------------> (3)
Special relativity describes you how to relate time and distance between observers 1 and 2, 2 and 3 and 1 and 3. But you cannot deduce anything for the relation between (2) and (3) from your knowledge of the situation between (1) and (2).
"If you travel @ c in a circle Around the clock, the hands don't change momentum at all by the time you make one complete circuit perpendicluar to the source. You've just travelled @ c without any dialation, right?"
Nope, what happens is that you bounce into the light that the clock has previously emitted, so you still see time progress on the clock. If the hands on the clock change, the light that reflects this change spreads out spherically around the clock. Every time you move a bit forward around the circle, you will meet the light that was emitted just a bit earlier by the clock. In the time you require to travel around the circle, new light has been emitted and you will see that light when you pass again at your starting point.
However, this is all very hypothetical. When you travel at lightspeed, the special theory of relativity predicts that time stops for you and that all distances become zero. If you replace "travel at lightspeed" by "traveling nearly at lightspeed" then the above will make more sense.
Bye!
Crisp
Stryder
09-21-01, 06:06 PM
Since this thread seems to follow the usual chain of thought on
What happens if we could go faster than light, or do we time travel?
I have decided to look from a slightly different perspective due
to my original perspective being:
It's not impossible just improbible. If time travel was possible then
problems could occur from people cloning with the use of time (jumping back five minutes, waiting with yourself to jump again in five minutes time, so although a person is lost from the future on X number worlds, one world is invaded by X number of people)
First of all, if you travelled faster than the speed of light, you have to decide what speed to define lightspeed. The problem is though if you define a wavelength and speed, the wavelength can be distorted by gravity, so the wave changes it's position within the spectrum.
http://chatsoba.port5.com/images/wave.gif
Namely if a number of waves are at first compressed together (A), throughout their period of travelling they can stretch out(B), which means the same number of waves exists but their dimensions like length, height and width will differ.
This I believe is especially noticable within astronomy, as distant stars will be seen as particular parts of the spectrum, as the rest of the light either hasn't reached here yet or our distance is so far that only a particular visual spectrum occurs.
This causes a problem if you speculate that you could re-enter at any given time point, in truth you would be spread throughout more than one point of time because all the light frequencies that had been heading towards you is a matrix of differing time segments, even if only milliseconds, but it's still enough to make it difficult.
This also brings up a question of "Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty"
"The more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum is known in this instant, and vice versa. "
Of course the relevance of this principle that Heisenberg made and pointed out to Schrodinger was in understanding Matrix Mechanics (Quantum Mechanics), the understanding was I believe more meaningful for the time in that respect due to the measuring equipment.
(Namely using photons to look at an atom through a lenses, like they did back then. The photons would bombard the atom and cause it instabilites within it's matrix, the abnormalities couldn't be calculated because of the uncertainty of their occurances and where future postions would be. The only cure for the ability to measure without the Uncertainty principle dictating that a measurement would be void, was/is by using wavelengths that are so small that they don't cause "as much" of an impact on the matrixing of the atom.)
Of course Heisenberg's principle is now extend to two points that you have to think of in relevance of Time travel.
http://chatsoba.port5.com/images/sling.gif
When you enter your time jump all your atoms have to be synchronised with that jump, otherwise they will lose alignment (And you'll be strewn across time in molecules as your electrons are slingshotted at higher speed than the majority of you, or slung behind you to accumilate less speed, or you could end up nothing but a pile of ash on the floor.)
http://chatsoba.port5.com/images/align.gif
(The above shows an Object where all matrices at that point intersect, and how they react as they head towards the observer)
The other is re-entry, as I mentioned all light matrices would be mis-aligned, of course they would realign at a set distance point (And particular points along route). Of course some will probably exclaim it wouldn't matter for the amount of waves, but this is a bit like a cross-section of then entire matrix stream of spectral frequencies.
Another person that placed some information to the relevance of this would be Schrodinger, through the use of his hypothetical experiment "Schrodingers Cat".
http://chatsoba.port5.com/images/schro2.gif
(Cat stolen from cover of John Gribbon's book "In search of Schrodinger's Cat", Original Illustrator David Scott)
The experiment consisted of A box large enough to hold a cat, a Geiger counter's probe was placed into the box (Inaccuracy within my diagram I placed the whole geiger counter in the box), a radioactive atom, placed within range of the geiger probe.
The geiger is connected to a hammer with a piece of string, which is suspended above a glass vial containing a poisonous toxin.
Schrodinger Hypothesised placing a cat (his guinea pig) into the box and closing the lid, while eveyone outside pondered at what was going on inside.
The idea was simple, while the cat was within the box it existed between two states, Alive and Dead. The reason was that the radioactive atom would eventually degrade to a point where the geiger counters needle would stop over the central position, at this point the cat would die from the poisonous toxin escaping from the broken vial, as the hammer falls and brakes it.
Of course while the radioactive atom was not fully degraded (but in the process of degrading) the cat would exist in a multiversal state of the geiger needle moving from one side to the other and back again, crossing the centre (flatline).
http://chatsoba.port5.com/images/schro1.gif
My "well" drawn stickmen is a representation of what could occur to schrodingers experiment. I've made the left a negative Blue stickman and the right a positive red stickman, Both of are positioned differently. The central stickman is a mixture of both left and right, while also containing it's own position, but acts like a Multiversal state. Where a singularity occurs, you see just the colour of the left or the right position (Or the centrals normal postion in black).
The purple colour is a Multiverse position where the stickmen's positions all align.
in another version of Schrodingers cat called (Wigners Experiment) there is a point where the person(substitute for cat) could die, not from gas, but by a Wavefunction collapse. It actually is a bit like passing out, the wavefunction collapse occurs when a parallel is created successfully and a particular energy (for instance a brain signal) decides which parallel to exist within and moves to a parallel while another parallel will lose its energy.
(this kind of makes me imagine how a blob of water can react in space. Of course thats becaus I saw some footage of a blob of water in space)
Of course there is an alternative where the signal exists in both, but this occurance is due to the creation of the parallel being done on perhaps another experimentee. This too can be harmful as it could reate Duel heart signals or stronger ones etc.
This occurs at the 0 of the stickman diagram, because the stickmen don't line up, and because all the parallels are different, the multiversal state suffers from a Quanta increase.
Hi Stryderunknown,
"First of all, if you travelled faster than the speed of light, you have to decide what speed to define lightspeed."
The speed of light (in vacuum) is defined to be c = 299 722 458 m/s. You can forget the "in vacuum" part if you speak about outer space since there's almost nothing there anyway.
"The problem is though if you define a wavelength and speed, the wavelength can be distorted by gravity, so the wave changes it's position within the spectrum."
Yes, but this does not affect their speed. Light will always travel at the same speed, but as you mentioned, it's frequency ( = place in the spectrum) can change through eg. the Doppler effect.
"This causes a problem if you speculate that you could re-enter at any given time point, in truth you would be spread throughout more than one point of time because all the light frequencies that had been heading towards you is a matrix of differing time segments, even if only milliseconds, but it's still enough to make it difficult."
Matrices ? What have these got to do with physical realities ? And the spreading out assumes that you would propagate as a wave, something which is not entirely true.
"When you enter your time jump all your atoms have to be synchronised with that jump, otherwise they will lose alignment (And you'll be strewn across time in molecules as your electrons are slingshotted at higher speed than the majority of you, or slung behind you to accumilate less speed, or you could end up nothing but a pile of ash on the floor.)"
Take my word for it, electrons don't slingshot forward or backward because the main structure carrying them moves - they are to tightly bound to feel anything of that effect (simply because the energy required is many factors too low for an electron to loosen).
"Wavefunction collapse. It actually is a bit like passing out, the wavefunction collapse occurs when a parallel is created successfully and a particular energy (for instance a brain signal) decides which parallel to exist within and moves to a parallel while another parallel will lose its energy.)"
???. The collapse of the wave function is a theoretical artefact that has been introduced in the 1920's to let quantummechanics agree with the theory of special relativity. The wavefunction doesn't really collapse, it is not as drastical as it sounds: it just means that the wavefunction - a mathematical description of eg. a particle - narrows down from several possible locations to one location. The interpretation you refer to is the many-worlds interpretation, and even in this scenario wave functions don't do the extraordinary things you mention.
Bye!
Crisp
Stryder
09-21-01, 07:18 PM
Crisp, I wasn't working to the assumption of a vaccum because most of the time people are on about using space.
Of course if we are going to mention corrections then I might mention your previous postings reply to:
"Try this : if i travel away from a clock at the speed of light, the hands will have appeared to have stayed still (relativity right). But if i do this for say, 1 year straight, am i not 1 year older ? have events elsewhere not progressed by 1 year ?"
Missed an error in his logic, if he travelled for 1 year at light speed he would be 1 light year away from the clock making it pretty hard to see it, but also meaning that he would also have to travel back to that clock, So his return journey would be another year. Which would totally alter the progressive answer.
Anyway back to my understanding and possible incorrect termonlogy.
You think a wave's speed isn't changed when it's stretched, but in a way it has, after all it reaches it's destination faster than it's original unstretched version.
I mentioned matrices to explain the intersecting of light frequencies to create what we see as a broadband visual interpretation of the physical world, and the frequencies the broadband have in common. (A kind of unified frame rate, where each frequency merges together with their differing frame rates and every so often they all fit at the same time)
As for electron's not sling shotting, My explaination was admittedly for such things as wormholes and "Startrek type transporter theories", Take for instance 0 to lightspeed in 0.1 seconds, is going to make your electrons dispondant to the bonds that usually define their nature.
As for Wavefunctions, perhaps I just misquoted the termonology, but that doesn't undermine my statement of energy deciding which parallel to exist within, Is preportion of the whole Schrodinger's Cat issue (That's why the cat is both dead and alive while within the Many worlds interpretation, but either dead or alive within the parallels. Of course schrodingers original was using Gas, but I think when tests on the hypothetical experiment were carried out (Wigners Assistant) they found no need for gas.
After all a wigner's assistant will either walk out of the experiment or be bagged and tagged.
Hi Stryderunknown,
"Crisp, I wasn't working to the assumption of a vacuum because most of the time people are on about using space."
Space = part of the universe devoid of any matter = vacuum.
"Missed an error in his logic, if he travelled for 1 year at light speed he would be 1 light year away from the clock making it pretty hard to see it, but also meaning that he would also have to travel back to that clock, So his return journey would be another year. Which would totally alter the progressive answer."
The whole discussion is about thought experiments, and in these issues like "will he be able to see the clock" are usually not addressed; we assume that he has some way of making sense of the few lightwaves emitted by the clock that reach the point at 1 lightyear distance. Instead of a clock we can also take a rotating galaxy, these are visible at larger distances.
"You think a wave's speed isn't changed when it's stretched, but in a way it has, after all it reaches it's destination faster than it's original unstretched version."
No it won't, the speed at which the wave propagates is unaltered. The stretching of the wave is not instantaneous either: you have to imagine that the front end of the wave moves up and down with a speed determined by its frequency, and moves forward at lightspeed. When the frequency changes (= the wave stretches or compresses) that front end simply moves up and down faster or slower, but it will still move forward at the same speed. The easiest is to take a piece of paper and perform the experiment yourself: move your hard from left to right on the paper at the same speed, and change the rate of moving the pen up- and downward. Then you'll see that the wave you draw gains the compression/stretching effect without getting to its destination faster.
"Take for instance 0 to lightspeed in 0.1 seconds, is going to make your electrons dispondant to the bonds that usually define their nature."
Ions ( = atoms with one or more electrons removed) have been accelerated in particle accelerators, to 99,99999999999% lightspeed without any electrons suddenly lagging behind. The classical "hey if I push hard enough the thing will break down" is no longer valid in the quantumworld.
"As for Wavefunctions, perhaps I just misquoted the termonology, but that doesn't undermine my statement of energy deciding which parallel to exist within."
It doesn't. It's a matter of taste whether you tend to believe the many worlds interpretation of quantummechanics or the more conventional Copenhagen interpretation.
Bye!
Crisp
Bebelina
09-29-01, 10:45 AM
You really have put some effort here to try to explain the physics....which I know NOTHING about. And reading it all just makes no sense to me....:rolleyes:
But anyway, here´s what I think:
That when you travel in time, you automatically enter another dimension and can never come back to exactly the same one, because when you go back, you must go to a dimension where the time travel took place, bacause you cannot erase the event from your memory. :o
But one thing I have yet not been able to figure out and that is whether you become the future/past self you meet or see it as a different person from yourself, any ideas? :confused:
I think that you see yourself as another person, that makes more sense...:p
Stryder
09-29-01, 11:55 AM
I'll try and make this simple so everybody can understand, my reasoning for why I percieve time travel as improbible.
Image you step through a gateway to a wormhole and suddenly all your matter is shift through time and space out of another gateway (Some will probably be thinking of "Stargate").
Every atom and molecule in your body on that journey is pulled apart, so you lose all structure, This is going to be painful in that instance of travel and will probably seem like you've burnt in a raging fire from the world you just left.
On arrival your going to feel the pain of all your atoms and molecules re-materialising, as their energy is going to be greatly increased in output, you might even suffer radiation burns caused by your own molecules.
The likelihood of surviving such a jump is very slim... I mean non existant.
Of course there could be methods of trying to combat that from occuring, like for instance. You would have to have no concious thoughts while you were travelling, namely you would have to be dead already. The likelihood here is FROZEN with Cryogenics, and hopefully your frozen state should protect you from burning up.
As for the radiation, well your body might have to have been subjected to some form of chemical that could stop that radiation from cooking you to a crisp.
As well as there is the entire point that any disturbance within that wormhole could make your atoms and molecules appear in different time frames, so you cease to exist.
Hope that doesn't scare anyone too much :D
Time/02112
10-01-01, 06:58 PM
<Img Src=http://iasos.com/detalist/rol/FractalSquare.gif>
Well, well, you can argue many points of perception, but you can only limit what is to an extent, and this one "is" just so that you cannot logicly debate in argument of factual science that will revolutionize old dogmatic views of suppression of the truthe pertaining to the quantum multiverse theories.
"Here We Go" ...........
Atom Experiment Brings Teleportation Closer to Reality
Reuters
LONDON (Sept. 26) - Physicists in Denmark have made two samples of trillions of atoms interact at a distance in an experiment which may bring Star Trek-style teleportation and rapid quantum computing closer to reality.
Eugene Polzik and his colleagues at the University of Aarhus are not about to beam anyone up to the Starship Enterprise, but their research reported in the science journal Nature on Wednesday makes the idea of instantly transporting an object from one place to another less far fetched.
It involves quantum entanglement -- a mysterious concept of entwining two or more particles without physical contact. Albert Einstein once described it as ''spooky action at a distance.''
Entangled states are needed for quantum computing and teleportation. Scientists have entangled states of a few atoms in earlier experiments but Polzik and his team have done it with very large numbers and using laser light.
''It is the first result where two macroscopic material objects have been entangled,'' Polzik explained in a telephone interview.
''We have produced entanglement at a distance which means you and me can share entangled objects which is important for quantum communication, including quantum teleportation.''
In 1998 what has been described as the first teleportation experiment was done when scientists at the California Institute of Technology teleported a beam of light across a laboratory bench.
Ignacio Cirac, a physicist at the University of Innsbruck in Austria said achievement of Polzik and his team could lead to real-life quantum communication systems, teleportation and quantum computers.
''This is the first time two different atomic samples have been entangled in this way -- using light -- even though the samples are separated by some distance,'' he said in a commentary in Nature.
Cirac believes further experiments will follow which could ''revolutionize the field of quantum information.''
Reuters 14:56 09-26-01
http://www.nature.com/nature/links/010927/010927-2.html
Quantum entanglement: Going large
Particles small enough for their behaviour to be governed by the laws of quantum mechanics can exhibit a remarkable property known as entanglement. A pair of quantum particles can exist in entangled 'superposition', a mixture of states that resolves only when some physical property such as spin or polarization is measured. Quantum entanglement is a fundamental requirement for quantum computing, but until now it has been possible only to generate entanglement between microscopic particles. Using a new method of generating entanglement, an entangled state involving two macroscopic objects, each consisting of a caesium gas sample containing about 1012 atoms, has now been created. The entangled spin state can survive for 0.5 milliseconds, a long time in this context, bringing practical applications of quantum memory and quantum teleportation a little closer.
Experimental long-lived entanglement of two macroscopic objects
BRIAN JULSGAARD, ALEXANDER KOZHEKIN & EUGENE S. POLZIK
Nature 413, 400-403 (27 September 2001)
Quantum physics: Entangled atomic samples
J. IGNACIO CIRAC
Quantum mechanics has potential applications in communication and computation. But first a quantum connection — known as entanglement — has to be created between bigger and bigger objects.
Nature 413, 375-377 (27 September 2001)
Trillion-atom triumph
27 September 2001 table of contents
__________________________________________________ _______________
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nature © Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2001 Registered No. 785998 England.
And as for your different perspectives of "Waves" pertaining to charachtaristic behavior, there seems to be somthing you must have overlooked?
<Img Src=http://www.members.tripod.com/uforeview/eylook.gif>
Time/02112
10-01-01, 07:00 PM
<Img Src=http://iasos.com/detalist/rol/FractalSquare.gif>
(word processor parameters LM=8, RM=75, TM=2, BM=2) Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501 Sponsored by Vangard Sciences PO BOX 1031 Mesquite, TX 75150 November 5, 1990 TESLA4.ASC couteously contributed to KeelyNet by David Brune --------------------------------------------------------------------
The Tesla Howitzer - by Tom Bearden
http://www.newphys.se/elektromagnum/physics/KeelyNet/energy/tesla4.asc
Before the turn of the century, Nikola Tesla had discovered and was utilizing a new type of electric wave. Tesla repeatedly stated his waves were non-Hertzian, and his wireless transmissions did not fall off as the square of the distance. His discovery was apparently so fundamental (and his intent to provide free energy to all humankind was so clear) that it was responsible for the withdrawal of his financial backing, his deliberate isolation, and the gradual removal of his name from the history books. By 1914 or so, Tesla had been successfully isolated and was already nearly a "nonperson." Thereafter Tesla lived in nearly total seclusion, occasionally surfacing (at his annual birthday party for members of the press) to announce the discovery of an enormous new source of free energy, the perfection of wireless transmission of energy without losses, fireball weapons to destroy whole armies and thousands of airplanes at hundreds of miles distance, and a weapon (the "Tesla Shield," I've dubbed it) that could provide an impenetrable defense and thus render war obsolete. In my pursuit of Tesla's secret, it gradually became apparent to me that present orthodox electromagnetic theory is seriously flawed in some fundamental respects. One of these is in the definition and use of THETA, the scalar electrostatic potential. It is this error which has hidden the long-sought Unified Field Theory from the theorists. In the theory of the scalar electrostatic potential (SEP), the idea is introduced of work accomplished on a charge brought in from a distance against the scalar field. The SEP is not a vector field, but is a scalar field. Indeed, scalar potential cannot of itself perform work on a charged mass due to the extremely high SEP of the vacuum itself. Only a differential of SEP between two spatial points can produce force or accomplish work. (Rigorously, a differential of scalar potential between two spatial points constitutes a vector. Only a vector can produce force and do work.) Also, work can only be done on a mass. Further, it takes TIME to move an electron or other charged mass between two spatial points, and so the work performed by a spatial differential of the THETA- Page 1 FIELD requires TIME. Rigorously, the delta SEP is voltage, not SEP per se, and is directly related to the voltage or "E" field. The entire voltage concept depends on the work performed in moving a mass, after that mass has moved. The idea of "voltage" always implies the existence of a steady differential of THETA between two spatial points for a finite length of time, and it also involves the assumption of a flow of actual mass having occurred. SEP, on the one hand, is always a single-point function; on the other hand, difference in potential (i.e., V) is always a two point function, as is any vector. Yet many graduate level physics and electromagnetics papers and texts erroneously confuse THETA and V in the static case! Such an interpretation is of course quite incorrect. Another common assumption in present EM theory -- that the electrostatic potential (0,O) of the normal vacuum is zero --has no legitimate basis. In fact, we know (0,O) is nonzero because the vacuum is filled with enormous amounts of fluctuating virtual state activity, including incredible charge fluctuations. And by virtue of its point definition, (0,O) must be the "instantaneous stress" on spacetime itself, and a measure of the intensity of the virtual state flux th_ough a 4-dimensional spacetime point. Potential theory was largely developed in the 1800's before the theory of relativity. Time flowrate was then regarded as immutable. Accordingly, electrostatic "intensity" was chosen as "spatial intensity," with the connotation of "spatial flux density." This assumes a constant, immutable rate of flow of time, which need not be true at all if we believe relativity. Such a spatial "point" intensity is actually a "line" in 4-space, and not a 4-dimensional "point" at all. Thus the spatial potential -- 0, 3 -- is a very special case of the real spacetime potential -- 0,4, or charge -- and electromagnetic theory today is accordingly a special case of the real 4-space electromagnetism that actually exists! Note also that charge is a 4-dimensional concept. Now mass is a spatial, 3-dimensional concept. Rigorously, mass does not exist in time -- masstime exists in time. Mass and charge are thus of differing dimensionalities! Also, according to quantum mechanics, the charge of a particle -- e.g., of an electron -- is due to the continual flux of virtual particles given off and absorbed by the observable particle of mass. Thus charge also is conceptually a measure of the virtual flux density, and directly related to THETA. Further, since the charge exists in time, it is the charge of a particle of spatial mass that gives it the property of masstime, or existing in time. Here a great confusion and fundamental error has been thrown into the present EM theory by the equating of "charge" and "charged mass." As we have seen, the two things are really very different indeed. Page 2 To speak of a spatial "amount" of charge erroneously_limitsüthe basic EM theory to a fixed time flowrate condition (which of course it was considered to be, prior to Einstein's development of relativity). Thus when the limited present theory encounters a "relativistic" case (where the time flowrate changes), all sorts of extraordinary corrections must be introduced. The real problem, of course, is with the fundamental definitions of electrostatic potential and charge. The spatial "amount" of charge (i.e., the coulomb), as we presently erroneously use the term, is actually the spatial amount of observable "charged mass." To correct the theory, one must introduce the true 4-space SEP and separate the definitions of charge and charged mass. Only when a mass is moved does one have work -- and voltage or vector fields. (The reason one has voltage and E field connected to a normal electrostatically charged object in the laboratory is because an excess of charged-particle masses are assembled on the object, and these masses are in violent motion! A true static charge would have no E field at all.) The THETA field need not involve observable mass accumulation, but only charge (virtual flowrate intensity) accumulation. Accumulated masses are like so many gallons of water; accumulated charge is like so much pressure on both the water (space) and the time in which the water is existing. Now, if one varies the SEP solely as a point function, one would have a purely scalar complex longitudinal wave, and not a vector wave at all. This is the fundamentally new electrical wave that Tesla discovered in 1899. Rigorously, all vector fields are two-point functions and thus decomposable into two scalar fields, as Whittaker showed in 1903. It follows that any vector wave can be decomposed into two scalar waves. By implication, therefore, a normal transverse EM vector wave, e.g., must simply be two coupled scalar (Tesla) waves -- and these scalars independently would be longitudinal if uncoupled. An ordinary transverse EM vector wave is thus two pair-coupled Tesla scalar longitudinal waves, and only a single special case of the much more fundamental electromagnetics discovered by Nikola Tesla. A Tesla (scalar potential) wave -- i.e., a massless wave in pure 0,O, the stress of the spacetime medium -- would have very strange characteristics indeed. For one thing, since it moves in a complex 4-space, it has many more modes of movement than does a simple wave in 3-space. And for another thing, it need not be bound at all by the speed of (vector) light. In current theory, one 0,3-field does not directly interact or couple with other existing 0,3-fields except by simple superposition. Page 3 Therefore presently the THETA-field is considered to have no drag limitation at all, hence infinite velocity. (E.g., as stated in Jackson's, (Classical Electrodynamics, 2nd edition, page 223.) Actually, a 0,4-wave can and will interact with some of the other existing 0,4- waves in the medium transversed, and this interaction can involve pair- coupling into EM vector fields and waves, an interaction not presently in the electrodynamics theory. The result of scalar pair-coupling creates a finite amount of vector "drag" on the 0,4-wave, so it then has less than infinite velocity. However, if this drag is small due to limited pair coupling, the scalar wave's velocity through the slightly dragging medium still may be far greater than the speed of vector EM waves (light) in vacuum. On the other hand, if the pair-coupling is made severe, the THETA- wave may move at a speed considerably below the speed of vector light waves in vacuum. The velocity of the 0,4-wave is thus both variable and controllable or adjustable (e.g., simply by varying its initial amplitude which through a given medium changes the percentage of pair-coupling and hence the degree of drag on the scalar wave.) The Tesla scalar wave thus can have either subluminal or superluminal velocity, in contradiction to present theory. Note that the scalar wave also violates one of Einstein's fundamental postulates -- for the speed of our "new kind of light" wave is not limited to c, and need not be the same to every observer. Thus Tesla scalar waves lead to a new "super-relativity" of which the present Einstein relativity is only a highly special case! But let us now look for some subtle but real examples of scalar waves and scalar pair-coupling in nature. As is well known, a tectonic fault zone can provide anomalous lights, sounds, etc from stresses, piezoelectrical activity, and telluric currents in the earth and through the fault zone. In examining the fault zone phenomena, I finally realized that a fault zone was literally a scalar interferometer -- i.e., if one can have scalar PHI-waves, they can interfere either constructively or destructively. Their interference, however, produces scalar pair-coupling into vector EM waves. This coupling may be at a distance from the interferometer itself, and thus the interferometer can produce energy directly at a distance, without vector transmission through the intervening space. Coupling of THETA waves with the paired scalars comprising ordinary EM vector waves can also occur. If this triplex coupling forms additional EM vector waves 180 degrees out of phase, the ordinary EM wave is diminished or extinguished. Page 4 If the scalar triplex coupling occurs so as to create vector EM waves, the amplitude of the ordinary vector wave is increased. Scalar potential waves can thus augment or diminish, or create or destroy, ordinary EM waves at a distance by pair-coupling interference under appropriate conditions, and this is in consonance with the implications of Whittaker's fundamental 1903 work. An earthquake fault zone is such a scalar interferometer. Stresses and charge pileups exist in the plates on each side adjacent to the fault, with stress relief existing in the middle in the fault fracture itself. Since the rock is locally nonlinear, the mechanical stresses and electrical currents in it are also locally nonlinear. This results in the generation of multiple frequencies of THETA-4-waves from each side of the fault interferometer, yielding two complex Fourier expansion patterns of scalar potential waves. On occasion these two Fourier-transformed scalar wave patterns couple at a distance to produce stable ordinary electromagnetic fields in a 3-dimensional spatial pattern --e.g., a stress light such as the Vestigia light covered in Part I of The Excalibur Briefing. Driven by the erratic tÿo scalar Fourier_ expansion patterns of the scalar interferometer (whose input stresses normally slowly change), an erratic, darting, hovering "spooklight" of the variety studied by Vestigia produced. As the stresses change in each side of the interferometer, the distant scalar coupling zone is affected. Thus the stresslight moves and its form changes, but it may be relatively stable in form for seconds or minutes. Since the stresses in the rock may be intense, the stress light may involve an intense pair or THETA-patterns coupling into the sphere or ball of vector EM energy. The atoms and molecules of the air in the region of the coupled stresslight ball thus become highly excited, giving off radiant energy as the excited states decay. Since much of the piezoelectric material in the stressed rocks is quartz, the features of quartz are of particular interest. Each little quartz is itself highly stressed, and has stress cracks. It is therefore a little scalar interferometer. Further, quartz is transparent to infrared and ultraviolet; and the random orientation of all the quartz scalar interferometers may also form a Prigogine system far from thermodynamic equilibrium. If so, this system can tap into highly energetic microscopic electromagnetic fluctuations to produce large-scale, ordered, relatively stable patterns of electromagnetic energy at a distance. In short, all of this lends support to the formation of relatively stable but somewhat erratic patterns of electromagnetic energy at a distance from the fault itself. Page 5 In the atmosphere, such scalar interferometers could form in clouds or even in the air or between clouds and earth. If so, such rare but occasional "weather" scalar interferometers could account for the rare phenomenon of ball lightening. The intense energy of the ball lightening, as compared to the lesser energy of an earth stress light, could well be due to the enormous electrical charges between clouds or between cloud and earth, available to fuel the scalar interferometer. Very probably it is this phenomenon which gave Tesla the clue to scalar wave interferometry. Thus such phenomena as earth stress lights, ball lightening, and the Tesla system of wireless transmission of energy at a distance with negligible lasses and at speeds exceeding the speed of light may be explained. They are complex, however, and involve fundamental changes to present electromagnetic theory. These changes include utilizing 4-space scalar electrostatic potentials, scalar waves, pair coupling, ordinary 3-dimensional Fourier expansion, the Prigogine effect, and the properties of piezoelectric materials in rocks. Since the scalar potential also stresses time, it can change the rate of flow of time itself. Thus it affects anything which exists in time -- including the mind, both of the individual and at various levels of unconsciousness. Therefore the same functions that result in earth stress lights also affect mind and thought, and are in turn affected by mind and thought. This is the missing ingredient in Persinger's theory that UFO's are correlated with, and a result of, fault zones and earth stresses. While Persinger seems to feel this is a "normal physics" explanation, it indeed involves a paranormal explanation. The time-stressing ability of the true THETA scalar wave also explains the interaction of such earth stress lights with humans and human intent, as noted by other researchers. (E.g., the lights that repeatedly seemed to react to the observers, as detailed by Dr. Harley Rutledge in his epoch-making Project Identification, Prentice-Hall, 1981.) These ideas in condensed form comprise the concepts required to violate the speed of light and produce an ordinary electromagnetic field at a distance, using scalar interferometry, without losses -- as Tesla had done in his wireless transmission system which he had tested prior to 1900 and had perfected by the 1930's. Scalar interferometry can give stable regions of EM or "light energy" at a distance without losses, particularly as detailed in the beautiful Vestigia experiments, and it is within our grasp to utilize the new effects. Indeed, any stress crack in a material can result in the scalar potential interferometer effect. Exophoton and exoelectron emission -- poorly understood but already known in fatiguing of materials -- must be at least partly due to the scalar interferometer effect. Page 6 However, one additional caution should be advanced. Normal movement of electrons allows so much "sideplay" movement of the electrons -- and there is so much such sideplay electron motion in the surrounding vicinity -- that pair coupling is almost instantaneous for small waves. Thus orbital electrons in atoms seem to absorb and emit vector EM photons. Actually they also emit some percentage of scalar waves as well. Since a scalar wave is comprised exclusively of disturbance in the virtual state, it need not obey the conservation of energy law. Further, a scalar wave of itself does not "push electrons" or other charges; hence it is nearly indetectable by present detectors. Ionization detectors such as a Geiger counter tube, e.g., are exceptions if the scalar wave encountered is fairly strong. In that case sufficient triplex coupling with the ionized gas occurs to produce additional ionization or charge, breaching the tube's cutoff threshold and producing a cascade discharge of electrons and voltage which is detected. But weak scalar waves are presently indetectable by ordinary instruments. However, these small scalar waves are detectable by sensitive interferometry techniques -- e.g., such as an electron interferometer. Since the use of such instruments is quite rare, then indeed we have been living immersed in a sea of scalar waves without knowing it. Finally, the percentage of scalar waves produced by changes in charged mass pileups can be increased by utilizing charged mass streaming. Essentially the charged masses must be moved suddenly, as quickly as possible, at or near the complete breakdown of the medium. For this reason, Tesla utilized sparkgaps in his early transmission systems, but also found that he could induce ionized media to "breakdown" in such fashion by a slow growth process. One of his early patented atmospheric wireless transmission systems is¼based on this fact. However, it was necessary to use a very high voltage, insuring extreme stress on the medium and hence some spillover stress onto time itself. In other words, THETA-3 is always an approximation; at sufficiently high spatial stress, sufficient spillover THETA-4 exists to give Tesla scalar waves. For this reason, Tesla used very high voltages and extremely sharp discharges to give "streaming" of the charged masses and thus high percentages of THETA-4 waves. This suggests that the breakdown of dielectrics is a much richer phenomenon than is presently allowed for in the conventional theory. To summarize, electrostatic potential -- THETA field --is stress on the spacetime medium at a four-dimensional point. I.e., it is a sort of pressure on the medium, but pressure on all four dimensions, not just on the three s_atial dimensions. Page 7 Thus in the new standard theory, THETA-4 may have complex values. In addition, a PHI-wave is to be interpreted as a scalar longitudinal wave in complex spacetime -- directly in THETA-0, the normal average 4-space stress itself. And charge and charged mass must be recognized as two separate concepts. This is the gist of what I finally recognized about Nikola Tesla's work and fundamental di covery. This is exciting, for it means that Tesla stress waves can affect either space or time individually, or both space and time simultaneously, or even oscillate back and forth between primarily affecting time and primarily affecting space. Tesla's waves were actually these THETA-field scalar waves. As such, they were fundamentally different from ordinary electromagnetic waves, and had entirely different characteristics, just as Tesla often stated. E.g., a Tesla wave can either move spatially, with time flowing linearly; move temporally only (sitting at a point and waxing and waning in magnitude -- but changing the rate of flow of time itself in doing so, and affecting gravitational field, fundamental constants of nature, etc.), or move in a combination of the two modes. In the latter case, the Tesla wave moves in space with a very strange motion -- it oscillates between (1) spatially standing still and flexing time, and (2) moving smoothly in space while time flows smoothly and evenly. I.e., it stands at one point (or at one columnar region), flexing for a moment; then slowly picks up spatial velocity until it is moving smoothly through space; then slows down again to a "standing column," etc. This is Tesla's fabulous "standing columnar wave. Another wild characteristic of the Tesla wave is that it can affect the rate of flow of time itself; hence it can affect or change every other field -- including the gravitational field -- that exists in time flow. It can also affect all universal constants, the mass of an object, the inertia of a body, and the mind and thoughts as well! All of these exist in the flow of time, and they are affected if the time stream in which they exist is affected. This was the awful secret that Tesla partially discovered by 1900, and which he came more and more to fully realize as he pursued it nature and its ramifications into the 1920's and 1930's. Tesla also found he could set up standing THETA-field waves through the earth. He in fact intended to do so, for he had also discovered that all charges in the highly stressed earth regions in which such a standing wave existed produced THETA-fields which would feed (kindle) energy into the standing THETA-field wave by pair coupling. Page 8 I.e., normal vector field energy would "assemble" onto the scalar matrix wave by means of pair-coupling. Thus by transmitting a scalar wave into the earth, he could easily tap the fiery scalar fields produced in the molten core of the planet itself, turning them into ordinary electromagnetic energy. In such case, a single generator would enable anyone to put up a simple antenna and extract all the free energy they desired. When Tesla's alarmed financial backers discovered this was his real intent, they considered him a dangerous madman and found it necessary to ruthlessly stop his at all costs. And so his financial support was withdrawn, he was harassed in his more subtle patent efforts (and the patents themselves were adulterated), and his name gradually was removed from all the electrical textbooks. By 1914 Tesla, who had been the greatest inventor and scientist in the world, had become essentially a nonperson. A few other persons in the early 1900's also were aware that potential and voltage are different. And some of them even learned to utilize Tesla's PHI- field, even though they only vaguely understood they were utilizing a fundamentally different kind of electromagnetic wave. For example, James Harris Rogers patented an undersea and underground communications system which Tesla later confirmed utilized Tesla waves. The U.S. secretly used the Rogers communications system in World War I to communicate with U. S. submarines underwater, and to communicate through the earth to the American Expeditionary Force Headquarters in Europe. The Rogers system was declassified after the War -- and very shortly after that, it had mysteriously been scrubbed off the face of the earth. Again, potential stress waves -- Tesla waves -- were eliminated and "buried." Probably the most brilliant inventor and researcher into Tesla's electromagnetics was T. Henry Moray of Salt Lake City, Utah. Dr. Moray actually succeeded in tapping the limitless zero-point energy of vacuum (spacetime) itself. By 1939, Dr. Moray`s amplifier contained 29 stages and its output stage produced 50 kilowatts of power from vacuum. Interestingly, another 50 kilowatts could be tapped off any other stage in the device -- which consequently could have produced almost 1.5 megawatts of electrical power! Dr. Moray`s epoch-making work was suppressed also. His device -- which represented over 20 years of heartbreaking accumulation of 29 working tubes from thousands made -- was destroyed by a Soviet agent in 1939, but not before the agent had obtained the drawing for building the tubes and the device itself. Page 9 Today the Moray amplifier is a standard component of many of the Soviet secret superweapons and Tesla weapons. In the 20`s and 30`s, Tesla announced the final perfection of his wireless transmission of energy without losses -- even to interplanetary distances. In several articles (e.g., H. Winfield Secor, "Tesla Maps Our Electrical Future," Science and Invention, Vol. XVII, No. 12, pp. 1077, 1124-1126), Tesla even revealed he used longitudinal stress waves in his wireless power transmission. Quoting from the article, "Tesla upholds the startling theory formulated by him long ago, that the radio transmitters as now used, do not emit Hertz waves, as commonly believed, but waves of sound." "He says that a Hertz wave would only be possible in a solid ether, but he has demonstrated already in 1897 that the ether is a gas, which can only transmit waves of sound; that is such as are propagated by alternate compressions and rarefactions of the medium in which transverse waves are absolutely impossible." The wily Tesla did not reveal, of course, that such scalar waves nearly always immediately pair-coupled into vector waves when produced by normal means. Tesla himself was working with longitudinal scalar waves. In the 1930`s Tesla announced other bizarre and terrible weapons: a death ray, a weapon to destroy hundreds or even thousands of aircraft at hundreds of miles range, and his ultimate weapon to end all war -- the Tesla shield, which nothing could penetrate. However, by this time no one any longer paid any real attention to the forgotten great genius. Tesla died in 1943 without ever revealing the secret of these great weapons. Unfortunately, today in 1981 the Soviet Union has long since discovered and weaponized the Tesla scalar wave effects. Here we only have time to detail the most powerful of these frightening Tesla weapons -- which Brezhnev undoubtedly was referring to in 1975 when the Soviet side at the SALT talks suddenly suggested limiting the development of new weapons "more frightening than the mind of man had imagined." One of these weapons is the Tesla Howitzer recently completed at the Saryshagan missile range and presently considered to be either a high energy laser or a particle beam weapon. (See Aviation Week & Space Technology, July 28, 1980, p. 48 for an artist's conception.) The Saryshagan howitzer actually is a huge Tesla scalar interferometer with four modes of operation. One continuous mode is the Tesla shield, which places a thin, impenetrable hemispherical shell of energy over a large defended area. The 3-dimensional shell is created by intefering two Fourier- Page 18 expansion, 3-dimensional scalar hemispherical patterns in space so they pair-couple into a dome-like shell of intense, ordinary electromagnetic energy. The air molecules and atoms in the shell are totally ionized and thus highly excited, giving off intense, glowing light Anything physical which hits the shell receives an enormous discharge of electrical energy and is instantly vaporized -- it goes pfft! like a bug hitting one of the electrical bug killers now so much in vogue. If several of these hemispherical shells are concentrically stacked, even the gamma radiation and EMP from a high altitude nuclear explosion above the stack cannot penetrate all the shells due to repetitive absorption and re-radiation, and scattering in the layered plasmas. In the continuous shield mode, the Tesla interferometer is fed by a bank of Moray free energy generators, so that enormous energy is available in the shield. A diagram of the Saryshagan-type Tesla howitzer can be seen in drawing TESLA-1. TESLA-2 shows the Tesla shield produced by the howitzer. In the pulse mode, a single intense 3-dimensional scalar Theta-field pulse form is fired, using two truncated Fourier transforms, each involving several frequencies, to provide the proper 3-dimensional shape (TESLA-3). This is why two scalar antennas separated by a baseline are required. After a time delay calculated for the particular target, a second and faster pulse form of the same shape is fired from the interferometer antennas. The second pulse overtakes the first, catching it over the target zone and pair-coupling with it to instantly form a violent EMP of ordinary vector (Hertzian) electromagnetic energy. There is thus no vector transmission loss between the howitzer and the burst. Further, the coupling time is extremely short, and the energy will appear sharply in an "electromagnetic pulse (EMP)" striking similar to the 2-pulsed EMP of a nuclear weapon. This type is what actually caused the mysterious flashes off the southwest coast of Africa, picked up in 1979 and 1980 by Vela satellites. The second flash, e.g., was in the infrared only, with no visible spectrum. Nuclear flashes do not do that, and neither does super- lightening, meteorite strikes, meteors, etc. In addition, one of the scientists at the Arecibo Ionospheric Observatory observed a gravitational wave disturbance -- signature of the truncated Fourier pattern and the time- squeezing effect of the Tesla potential wave -- traveling toward the vicinity of the explosion. Page 11 The pulse mode may be fed from either Moray generators or -- if the Moray generators have suffered their anomalous "all fail" malfunction -- ordinary explosive generators. Thus the Tesla howitzer can always function in the pulse mode, but it will be limited in power if the Moray generators fail. In the continuous mode, two continuous scalar waves are emitted -- one faster than the other -- and they pair-couple into vector energy at the region where they approach an in-phase condition. In this mode, the energy in the distant "ball" or geometric region would appear continuously and be sustained -- and this is Tesla's secret of wireless transmission of energy at a distance without losses. It is also the secret of a "continuous fireball" weapon capable of destroying hundreds of aircraft or missiles at a distance. The volume of the Tesla fireball can be vastly expanded to yield a globe which will not vaporize physical vehicles but will deliver and EMP to them to dud their electronics. A test of this mode has already been witnessed, See Gwyne Roberts, "Witness to a Super Weapon?, the London Sunday Times, 17 August 1980 for several tests of this mode at Saryshagan, seen from Afghanistan by British TV cameraman and former War Correspondent Nick Downie. If the Moray generators fail anomalously, then a continuous mode limited in power and range could conceivably be sustained by powering the interferometer from more conventional power sources such as advanced magneto-hydrodynamic generators. Typical strategic ABM uses of Tesla weapons are shown in Tesla-4. In addition, of course, smaller Tesla howitzer systems for anti- tactical ballistic missile defense of tactical troops and installations could be constituted of more conventional field missile systems using paired or triplet radars, of conventional external appearance, in a scalar interferometer mode. With Moray generators as power sources and multiply deployed reentry vehicles with scalar antennas and transmitters, ICBM reentry systems now can become long range "blasters" of the target areas, from thousands of kilometers distance (TESLA-5). Literally, "Star Wars" is liberated by the Tesla technology. And in air attack, jammers and ECM aircraft now become "Tesla blasters." With the Tesla technology, emitters become primary fighting components of stunning power. The potential peaceful implications of Tesla waves are also enormous. By utilizing the "time squeeze" effect, one can get antigravity, materialization and dematerialization, transmutation, and mind boggling medical benefits. One can also get subluminal and superluminal communication, see through the earth and through the ocean, etc. The new view of Theta-field also provides a unified field theory, higher orders of Page 12 reality, and a new super-relativity, but detailing these possibilities must wait for another book. With two cerebral brain halves, the human being also has a Tesla scalar interferometer between his ears. And since the brain and nervous system processes avalanche discharges, it can produce (and detect) scalar Tesla waves to at least a limited degree. Thus a human can sometimes produce anomalous spatio-temporal effects at a distance and through time. This provides an exact mechanism for psychokinesis, levitation, psychic healing, telepathy, precognition, postcognition, remote viewing, etc. It also provides a reason why an individual can detect a "stick" on a radionics or Hieronymus machine (which processes scalar waves), when ordinary detectors detect nothing. Unfortunately there is not room to develop the implications of this human Tesla interferometry in detail, for that must wait for yet another book, presently in its initial stages, that Hal Crawford and I are writing. At the July 1981 U.S. Psychotronics Association's Annual Conference in Dayton, Ohio, I presented the first rough paper on the Tesla secret and scalar interferometry. A videotape of the presentation was made and will shortly be available. I am also scheduled to make a special presentation at the Alternate Energy Conference in Toronto, Canada in latter October, 1981. A professional, videotaped two-hour presentation on this subject is also being prepared. Wide distribution of the material through the international underground physics and technology network has already been made. This time, God willing, Tesla's secret will not be suppresses for another 80 years! And perhaps it is not yet too late. The material has cost me (now) some 16 years of agonizing labor and nearly $100,000 of my own personal funds. No orthodox university, scientific group, foundation, or governmental agency would support such an effort, either financially or otherwise. Indeed, most ordinary journals will not even accept material on such matters. Nonetheless, the area is of overwhelming importance -- and I truly believe Tesla's lost secret will shortly affect the lives of every human being on earth. Perhaps with the free and open release of Tesla`s secret, the scientific and governmental bureaucracies will be shocked awake from their slumber, and we can develop defense before Armageddon occurs. Perhaps there is hope after all -- for even Brezhnev, in his strange July, 1975 proposal to the SALT talks, seemed to reveal a perception that a turning point in wear and weaponry may have been reached, and that human imagination is incapable of dealing with the ability to totally engineer reality itself. Page 13 Having tested the weapons, the Soviets must be aware that the ill- provoked oscillation of time flow affects the minds and thoughts -- and the very life streams and even the collective species unconsciousness -- of all life forms on earth. They must know that these weapons are two-edged swords, and that the backlash from their use can be far more terrible to the user than was the original effect to his victim. If we can avoid the Apocalypse, the fantastic secret of Nikola Tesla can be employed to cure and elevate man, not kill him. Tesla's discovery can eventually remove every conceivable external human limitation. If we humans ourselves can elevate our consciousness to properly utilize the Tesla electromagnetics, then Nikola Tesla -- who gave us the electrical twentieth century in the first place -- may yet give us a fantastic new future more shining and glorious than all the great scientists and sages have imagined. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Part II Reference Articles for Solutions to Tesla's Secrets -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Electrical Engineer - London Dec. 24, 1909, p. 893 NIKOLA TESLA`S NEW WIRELESS Mr. Nikola Tesla has announced that as the result of experiments conducted at Shoreham, Long Island, he has perfected a new system of wireless telegraphy and telephony in which the principles of transmission are the direct opposite of Hertzian wave transmission. In the latter, he says, the transmission is effected by rays akin to light, which pass through the air and cannot be transmitted through the ground, while in the former the Hertz waves are practically suppressed and the entire energy of the current is transmitted through the ground exactly as though a big wire. Mr. Tesla adds that in his experiments in Colorado it was shown that a very powerful current developed by the transmitter traversed the entire globe and returned to its origin in an interval of 84 one-thousandths of a second, this journey of 24,000 miles being effected almost without loss of energy. -------------------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK TIMES Dec. 8, 1915, p. 8, col. 3 TESLA'S NEW DEVICE LIKE BOLTS OF THOR He Seeks to Patent Wireless Engine for Destroying Navies by Pulling a Lever. To Shatter Armies Also. "Impractical," He says of Westerner's Plan to Circle Country with Electric Fire. Page 14 Nikola Tesla, the inventor, winner of the 1915 Nobel Physics Prize, has filed patent applications on the essential parts of a machine the possibilities of which test a layman's imagination and promise a parallel of Thor's shouting thunderbolts from the sky to punish those who angered the gods. Dr. Tesla insists there is nothing sensational about it, that it is but the fruition of many years of work and study. He is not yet ready to give the details of the engine which he says will render fruitless any military expedition against a country which possesses it. Suffice to say that the destructive invention will go through space with a speed of 300 miles a second, and manless airship without propelling engine or wings, sent by electricity to any desired point on the globe on its errand of destruction, if destruction its manipulator wishes to effect. Ten miles or a thousand miles, it will be all the same to the machine, the inventor says. Straight to the point, on land or on sea, it will be able to go with precision, delivering a blow that will paralyze of kill, as is desired. A man in a tower on Long Island could shield New York against ships or army by working a lever, if the inventor's anticipations become realizations. "It is not the time," said Dr. Tesla yesterday, "to go into the details of this thing. It is founded on a principle that means great things in peace, it can be used for great things in war. But I repeat, this is no time to talk of such things. "It is perfectly practicable to transmit electrical energy without wires and produce destructive effects at a distance. I have already constructed a wireless transmitter which makes this possible, and have described it in my technical publications, among which I may refer to my patent 1,119,732 recently granted. With transmitters of this kind we are enabled to project electrical energy in any amount to any distance and apply it for innumerable purposes, both in peace and war. Through the universal adoption of this system, ideal conditions for the maintenance of law and order will be realized, for then the energy necessary to the enforcement of right and justice will be normally productive, yet potential, and in any moment available, for attack and defense. The power transmitted need not be necessarily destructive, for, if existence is made to depend upon it, its withdrawal or supply will bring about the same results as those now accomplished by force of arms. Dr. Tesla then said that it would be possible with his wireless mechanism to direct an ordinary aeroplane, manless, to any point over a ship or an army, and to discharge explosives of great strength from the base of operations. Asked to express an opinion upon the announcement last Sunday of Page 15 Charles H. Harris, and electrical engineer of Los Angeles, that he would be able to surround this country with an electrical wall of fire in time of war, Dr. Tesla gave it as his opinion that Mr. Harris was not practical. "It is hard to stamp as impossible such results as those described in the press dispatches to which you refer. Granted, however, that the project is feasible, it would take more than all the motive power obtainable in the United States to throw a wall of fire around the country. In fact, even the passage of small currents at considerable distances through air consumes a great deal of energy on account of the immense pressure required. So, for instance, in lightening discharges, energy may be delivered at the rated of billions of horsepower, though the currents are of smaller volume than those developed by electrical generators in our power houses." END OF REPORT -------------------------------------------------------------------- If you have comments or other information relating to such topics as this paper covers, please upload to KeelyNet or send to the Vangard Sciences address as listed on the first page. Thank you for your consideration, interest and support. Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet -------------------------------------------------------------------- If we can be of service, you may contact Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346 --------------------------------------------------------------------
Time/02112
10-02-01, 01:32 PM
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/DL.jpg>
TT_0 Temporal Unit Insignia
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/PT1.jpg>
Photocopy of TT_0's "C204" Technical Manual
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/PT1b.jpg>
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/PT2.jpg>
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/PT3.jpg
http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/PT4.jpg>
http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/fetch5.jpg
TT_0's C204 Device "Schematics"
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/fetch6.jpg>
Detailed Cutaway of TT_0's C204 Device
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/PT5.jpg>
Real-Time Photo of TT_0's C204 Device
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/fetch.jpg>
According to TT_0, this is a photo taken in (2035) of his Instructor demonstrating the photons from his laser pointer, bending from the gravitational field produced outside their vehicle by the C204 Distortion Unit. The beam is visible through the smoke emitted from his Instructor's cigar.
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/time-m2.jpg>
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/fetch2.jpg
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/fetch3.jpg>
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/fetch4.jpg>
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/51101.jpg>
These last images are of the same model of the IBM Series 5100 that TT_0 described that he needed to take back with him.
(Thanks Pamela for these images ;))
<Img Src=http://www.anomalies.net/time_traveler/51102.jpg>
i managed not to read the entire thread, because that would require a millenium.......
however........ what the hell is all that crap above about?
time to scan report....
moosey
A dead giveaway...the typewriter fonts...Nobody uses those fonts anymore...
And those giant capacitors, must be early seventies contraption....
March 2034....Bull ....
Stryder
10-06-01, 11:03 AM
Well I looked at Time/02112 images, info and the links (Even joined their board just to try and get some collaborating evidence from the person they call STEVEN)
I realised pretty much what Kmguru came up with, that the time traveller and his so called device is just a hoax. I know that people can buy studio props after films have been made or series end, so my guess is the equipment is nothing more than a prop.
(As with most props that are suppose to do something, they do like planning on how parts work, as you never know that a plot of a film might need some replacement part while they are stuck etc, so they draw plans up. The insignia would also tie in, infact the film or series probably never made it passed the pilot episodes which does happen, so it will be sat in an archive bunker somewhere.)
Steven's info seemed more like reality, not much info was given out but I can guess the details.
College or university, doing experiments in the creation of parallels using a superconductor or quantum computer to account for the timeline manipulation.
A singular timeline has to be split enough so that any parallel that comes from it is less than 0.001% the Quanta of the original. Otherwise it would cause a wave collapse or the reverse and increase in quanta resulting in something similar to radiation burns.
(When I mention quanta it is in direct reference to the subatomic levels)
I only know about this sort of equipment, because a couple of years ago, I was in the preliminary design stages of such a system using Electromagnetics to change the speed of frequency and the use of a computer to tally it all together.
Of course I didn't move anything off of the drawing board, but only because I wanted to continue studying the reality of what would occur if I embarked, Would it be safe? What could I do? What would be hazardous to do? etc.
(My original thought was this device could see information from the future and drag it back to the here and now, I thought it could be a valuable asset if something serious occured, take for instance my thoughts was a Comet striking the earth. If you found you had 10 years until it happens, then you have to try and figure a way of dealing with it, and what the best way is, with one of theses systems you could pretty much turn 10 years of study,design and building into an infinite period. [10years x infinity]
This would mean by the time the comet was suppose to strike you would have a way that doesn't just deal with it, but you also know what occurs afterwards.)
At the end of the day it means that when the quanta becomes split, you could call it Quanta Entanglement (The subatomic levels and how they react, as apposed to Quantum Entanglement that means how atoms interact with each other.)
Also with my thoughts of Quanta Entanglement, it would mean that you could pull something completely appart and beam the energy away from it, so the comet could actually be turned into pure energy and cause no damage through having no mass.
(Of course I wouldn't suggest being living organisms to and from locatiuons, as this is transporter technology in the making for all you trekkie fanatics.)
Time/02112
10-06-01, 07:11 PM
<Img Src=http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/ftadefy/timemachine_md_blk.gif>
I apologize for not inserting a "Disclaimer" prior to posting John Tritors <aKa>"TT_0's" photos, we often get people who make claims to be Time~Travellers from the future, however this person had such a unique story, I thought by passing it on would yeild better results to gain the opinions of others, besides the neat photos that came alopng with the story, it was quite interesting none-the-less.
In spite of the many who would stoop to almost any level to comit a good hoax, we must not be so quick to dismiss the potential for a genuine Time~Traveller among us, let alone underestimate our own abilities to create a genuine Time Machine.
I have discussed Tritor's story on numerous occasions with some of our research associates and have concluded the possibility that some of his references pertaining to the future might be linked to other sources that are engadged to look forward, and vision as to the many potential outcomes may bring forth, and he may have been either associated with this group, or perhaps
may have had access to sensetive information that this group provided to those whom they are contracted with to come up with this data.
I'm not sure what the name of this organization/s is, or other details beyond this, but it is not dificult to believe in such an organization that projects world affairs, to economic futures being projected because of the sophisticated society we live in, it becomes an necessity to organize such teams of "Visionists" so that we can prepare for what is to meet us around the corners of "Time" as we progress forward to meet the destiny/ies
that await us all.
Some of the existing organizations that may be good examples of forward thinking might be something like this?
affs@affs.org
http://www.affs.org
P.O. Box FE, Los Gatos CA 95031, USA
Copyright ©2000 The Academy for Future Science
THE INSTITUTE FOR NEW ENERGY (http://www.padrak.com/ine)
The International Space Sciences Organization (http://www.isso.org)
As for the "Experts" I am not sayiong they are right or wrong
pertaining to Mr. Tritor, however it is my contentious belief to differ of opinion relating to our potential ability for Time~Travel which appears to fall short of what we might truly be capable of.
One good thing to remeber though, is that Humans are often very resoucefull, as well as unpredictable, and their potential is often far greater & underestimated by others as well as themselves! in short, I believe it is far easier to prove Time~Travel will become a success much sooner than the critics would have us all believe than to sell them on Tritor!
Hoaxers are very prevelant among us, but we must not allow this to discourage our perceptions, or beliefs that there remains a good percentage of what simple logic may not have an explanation for, so remember just like in the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" story, it does'nt mean there isin't something still out there that needs to be investigated! so remember to stay focused & keep your eyes on the prize.
<Img Src=http://www.members.tripod.com/uforeview/eylook.gif>
Those of you who hear of advanced technology whether from future or from alien beings should always look for specific design and theory behind it. Most hoaxes including those diagrams in star trek or any science fiction shows go down to a certain detail and then stop. Beyond generalities, they lack specificity and language - since they are normally an imagination from a writer.
There is always a possiblity that a hoax can be made by knowledgeable people such as EE, ME and CS majors from MIT that will be difficult to catch. For example, I could design a real tricorder, the size of a large box today using MRI, Ultrasonic and other hyperspectral technology. Here the theory is good, but we do not have the computer software to interprete the data - someday we will.
It is just a thought to keep in mind....in addition to our Time Travel adventure....
TIME02112
10-13-01, 03:10 AM
<Img Src=http://www.science-frontiers.com/rainbow.gif>
"Vision" is a precursor to Creation, but requires applied action, and demonstratable results, and I assure you that all these things are a part of our research, after all i would not be exhasting so much "Time" and Resources into something absurd, moreover if we were certain as to what we were doing, it would not be called research, and if we knew everything, there would be no reason to explore!
<Img Src=http://www.tap-ten.com/1jpg/tb.jpg>
http://www.Tap-Ten.com
Stryder
10-13-01, 01:01 PM
TIME02112,
Think of not moving Mass through time, but something like an EM wave that can fluctuate something between two time points, and then perhaps you might start to view the speed of a decent Quantum computer.
The idea is that if you had a network parallel process at theses speeds, the network can actually become in an instance an near infinite processor turn over.
This means you can ask 101 questions and get all the answers, but the problem begins when you get the answers before you ask the questions, so you don't know what question you ask.
This gives the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy "42" equation.
TIME02112
10-19-01, 03:47 PM
<Img Src=http://www.bradandsherry.com/clock.gif>
<Img Src=http://www.phy.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/pics/lightcone-sm.jpg>
Are you perhaps referring to something like the following...
Innsbruck CTTN Research Team
"Quantum Entanglement Experiment"
***Sucess!***
From: Jason Shields *(TAP-TEN Research Member Associate)
URL: http://www.learn.at/cttn
The dream of teleportation is to be able to travel by simply
reappearing at some distant location. It might appear that one could
scan the object and send the information so that the object can be
reconstructed at the destination. Yet, fundamental laws like the
Heisenberg uncertainty relation do not allow one to measure any
object to arbitrary precision. Charles H. Bennett and his co-workers
have suggested that it is possible to transfer even quantum states,
provided one does not get any information about the state. This
becomes possible by utilizing entanglement, one of the essential
features of quantum mechanics.
Here we present the first experimental verification of quantum
teleportation. By producing pairs of entangled photons by the process
of parametric down-conversion and using two-photon interferometry for
analysing the entanglement, we could transfer a quantum property (in
our case the polarization state) from one photon to another.
Quantum teleportation is featured in the April 2000 issue of
Scientific American.
This work is published in:
Dik Bouwmeester, Jian-Wei Pan, Klaus Mattle, Manfred Eibl, Harald
Weinfurter & Anton Zeilinger, Experimental Quantum Teleportation,
Nature vol.390, 11 Dec 1997, pp.575.
Text: HW Layout: MW
__________________________________________________ ____________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 10:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jason Shields spiffyboffo@yahoo.com
Subject: Broken Link and querry to the experimenters
To: harald.weinfurter@physik.uni-muenchen.de
Hello,
I have been collecting links on teleportation and
quantum physics as well as Relativity and Superstring
Theory and time travel theory from very respectable
sources at http://www.learn.at/cttn and wanted to
inform you that the link from your site at
http://www.quantum.univie.ac.at/research/teleport/index.html
is broken. The Scientific American April 2000 issue
on teleportation has been moved to
http://www.sciam.com/2000/0400issue/0400currentissue.html
but I have no idea why the article isn't featured.
I was wondering that, since the Innsbruck Experiment
involves instantaneous teleportation, does that mean
that a dual experiment in FTL time travel has also
been achieved? I've talked to Prof. Michio Kaku and
he told me that no information is able to travel FTL
through teleportation, but from what I understand
about the Innsbruck experiment has done is exactly
that. By using the polarizations as a form of FTL
information exchange that happens 20% of the time the
experiment is done. Could you please get back to me
regarding this idea, and to let me know what you think
of my home page and if you'd like to put a link to it?
Thank you,
Jason Shields
spiffyboffo@yahoo.com
***Response***
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 08:40:08 +0200
From: Harald Weinfurter
Harald.Weinfurter@physik.uni-muenchen.de
Organization: Sektion Physik, LMU Muenchen
To: Jason Shields spiffyboffo@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Broken Link and querry to the experimenters
hej Jason,
thanks for pointing at the broken link !
concerning FTL: teleportation is only accomplished when the reciever
of
the quantum state performs some unitary transformation on the quantum
state which depends on the measurement result of the sender. without
the
(classical) information from the sender and without the final unitary
transformation, the particle at the hands of Bob is as uncorrelated
with
the original state as it could be. and the classical information can
be
broadcast only with the speed of light.
in our experiment we did not perform the unitary transformation, but
here
the reciever had to wait until he received the message from the sender
that for the particular instance the photon is in the correct state
(which happened with 25% prob). in the other 75% of the cases you
would
have obtained the wrong result.
so, no FTl.
best regards.
harald
------------------
Harald Weinfurter
Sektion Physik
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet Muenchen
Schellingstr. 4/III
D-80799 Muenchen
tel.: +49-89-2180-2044
fax : +49-89-2180-5032
Another breakthrough I am focusing in on here pertains to the recent
developments at the homepage of:
"Long Distance Photonic Quantum Communication", which is project IST-
1999-100 33 of the proactive call on QIPC- Quantum Information
Processing and Communication of the Future and Emerging Technologies
Key Action in the European Community Fifth Framework Program
Information Society Technologies-IST.
Research Mission
The research at the Laboratory of Quantum Electronics and Quantum
Optics focuses on quantum mechanical phenomena. We explore the
physical limitations of electronics and optics and try to harness the
opportunities quantum systems offer in information processing.
Research Overview
As the physical dimensions of the building blocks in electronics and
optics shrink, quantum mechanical effects become increasingly
important. We explore applications of quantum systems in electronics,
optics and information technology. Some specific areas we have
researched in this respect are microlasers, fibre-optical
communication systems, optical amplifiers, quantum cryptography and
optical and atomic interferometry. In addition we try to improve our
understanding of fundamental quantum physics. Some examples of such
research include complementarity, measurement back-action,
simultaneous measurements and the physical representation of
information.
Highlights
Demonstration of antibunching from InAs quantum dots
Demonstration of an "interaction-free" measurement
Quantum cryptography over 40 km of optical fibre
Heisenberg-limited interferometry
Demonstration of quantum erasure
Microcapillary flow-velocity profiling through correlation
spectroscopy
Demonstration of Schrödinger kitten states
Projects
Quantum Interference and Entanglement
Quantum Information and Communication
Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics
Interaction Free Measurements
Single Emitters
The European IST project "Long Distance Photonic Quantum
Communication" - QuComm
The European IST project "Solid State Sources for Single Photons" -
S4P.
The European IST project "Photonic Crystal Integrated Circuits" -
PCIC.
The European IST network of excellence "Quantum Information
Processing & Communications" - QUIPROCONE
from: Quantum and Foundational Physics
the website of Prof. Zeilinger and his group. We are are doing
research in photonic entanglement and molecular optics to test the
most fundamental issues in quantum physics.
http://www.quantum.univie.ac.at
---T12 of TAP-TEN
<Img Src=http://www.tap-ten.com/1jpg/tb.jpg>
http://www.Tap-Ten.com
Beauideal
01-11-02, 01:27 PM
hi how is everyone? I hope everyone was able to travel through to the new year without any problems. I trust we havent lost anyone in a time event loop have we? if we have speak up....LOL
does anyone think that it could at all be possible to warp or bend space to the point, that a person or an object can appear to be at 2 points at the same time? then allow space to unfold or unwarp and be located at the second point. in affect appearing to have traveled instantaniously from one point to another.
example: use a sheet of paper to represent space, then put a small piece of sticky gum on one end of the paper. then fold the piece of paper so the other end of the paper is now stuck to the piece of gum. the gum is now existing at two points on the piece of paper at the same time. then open the piece of paper, having the small piece of gum sticking to the second point on the paper it will have appeared to have instantaniously traveled to the other end of the paper. (ATLEAST IF COULD HAVE OBSERVED THIS OCCURRING ON AN ATOMIC LEVEL, IT WOULD HAVE APPEARED THAT, THAT IS WHAT HAD HAPPENED)
now my question is can this be done on our level of existance? is this something that black wholes cause?:confused:
does anyone think that it could at all be possible to warp or bend space to the point, that a person or an object can appear to be at 2 points at the same time? then allow space to unfold or unwarp and be located at the second point. in affect appearing to have traveled instantaniously from one point to another.
now my question is can this be done on our level of existance? is this something that black wholes cause?
What you are talking about is called spacefolding. You can find it in science fiction, often used as an alternative to faster-than-light travel. Think about it, why bother travelling that fast, if you can simply bring two points in space close together and then step across the gap?
I think that this could be done through wormholes, which IIRC are holes in space-time. Of course, we'd have to be able to create and aim stable wormholes to do this, but...
It may be easier and less energy consuming if we can find a way to move along the 5th dimension to move from point A to point B in our 4-D world.
Just a thought. ...
Assuming that other dimensions exist, moving in them will not necessarily move you in spacetime. You can imagine this by simply looking in our 3D world. If you want to walk one meter to the left (let's call that the x direction) and you only move forward and backward (let's call this the y direction) then you won't be getting any closer to the point you desire.
Some reservations about this example: I assume that the other dimensions have an Euclidian geometry (which is such that our daily notion of "perpendicular" coïncides with the mathematical meaning). This is ofcourse not generally true - just think of spacetime with its Minkowksi (SR) or Riemann (? GR) geometry. However, the idea is still more or less valid: moving through time does not imply you move through space (eg. while you are reading this you are probably sitting in a chair - you move through spacetime only in the time direction). Moving through space does imply movement in time, but this is basically because you cannot move faster than the speed of light and hence need a finite time (and not an infinitesimal) to cross a certain distance. However, once again, we don't know if the same idea holds in other dimensions.
Ofcourse it might be possible (in the end, almost everything is ;)) but I surely wouldn't take it for granted.
Besides, who wants to move through the dimension "green" anyway :).
Bye!
Crisp
sciguy1945
06-23-05, 07:56 PM
All this talk, it hurts my head! Einstein, why did you have to make that theory!!!?????????
TheHeretic
06-23-05, 08:45 PM
Its 4 years old leave it alone
Forgive my ignorance here but I have a question. Why do we believe that anything special would happen if we exceeded the speed of light? For example...when we increase the velocity with which we can travel on land, nothing happens other than getting from point A to B quicker. Wouldnt we just reach our spacial destination quicker than the person travelling at a speed slower than light? Why would these instances be different?
Nothing special would happen, accordingto Newtonian Physics. But this is not actually so. Relativity says otherwise. And the fact is that peculiar things happen even when you are travelling at speeds below light-speed. But these are practically unnoticeable. The faster you travel, the slower your time goes, and the shorter your lengths become, according to an observer standing still. But you on the other hand would see these same efects happen to the observer, because, according to you, the observer is the one who is moving, while you are not.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.