Time Travel is Science Fiction

Go play your silly childish games elsewhere. I'm not taken by your arrogance, your childlike spitting the dummy, nor your threats.
You putting me on ignore, would be conclusive proof of your lack of intestinal fortitude.
If you disagree with my Interpretations of time travel and its possibilities [the mainstream position by the way] then again you are wrong.
This thread anyway was a "red herring" after the belting brucep and others gave you in the BH thread.

But I'll keep replying, when and if I see fit...you post nonsense, I'll refute it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

To ignore is to be partially IGNORant.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Chuckle.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yep. And no matter how many posts you make, he still has no clothes.

Of course you can. And Motordaddy can fault Einstein for his complete ignorance concerning special relativity, and VictorExpinoza can fault Newton for not knowing anything about action and reaction. There's no validity criteria for posting here.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, people are answering him, even though in the past he's admitted he's just doing it to get a rise out of people. And I must admit that his posts are sometimes amusing. Not as amusing as Victor's, admittedly.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Bingo!
Well put!!!


Delusions of grandeur is certainly rife around here.

 

Hi MD.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You and Farsight are obviously coming from totally different starting points as to the GR-related effects/consequences to 'time' and 'timing rate' and 'comparisons' of same between different motions in/through space at various gravitational field 'altitudes'. Before you respond further to Farsight's OP etc, I suggest you read my post #496 in the "Black holes may not exist!" thread.

There I point out where your meter stick (static space measure) and ticking clock (dynamic space AND motion measure) are essentially measuring just ENERGY-SPACE extents/changes, not 'time' as such. There is no 'time' TO measure by sticks and clocks, only space and motion (the stick for the static space distances, the clock for the additional dynamical information/changes between various bodies IN/THROUGH that spatial extent measured statically by meter stick).

They are both spatial dimension measures when you look closely at what is it they are doing/measuring. Then YOU overlay the 'timing info' via comparing the rates of motion from chosen clock standard cyclic/oscillatory motion of its COMPONENT MOVING PARTS across the space WITHIN THE CLOCK BODY boundaries. That's all that is happening really.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Undefined: I'm glad somebody appreciates that what we're really dealing with is space and motion. A clock features some kind of regular cyclical motion through space, which it accumulates and displays as "the time". It doesn't literally measure the flow of time. But sigh, Motor Daddy has maybe nearly got it, but the rest of them haven't, and don't want to. Sometimes I think we are living in a dark age.

paddoboy: you're on ignore.

 

I'm mortified!!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Hi paddoboy.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Mate, how much longer are you going to clutter up threads/discussions/issues with your by-now-well-known stance and links which add no value and are now actually distracting/confusing the threads/discussions with your zealous posts saying the same thing repeatedly ad nauseam without actually understanding what the subtleties of the new OP points are? Your stance boils down to:

"I believe mainstream and mainstreamers and don't believe you (whomever)...and I won't believe you (whomever) until mainstream/mainstreamers tell me to!"

Yes, mate; we get it! So how about sparing everyone here more of your same old, oft repeated and well known opinion that gains nothing from repetition; and just allowing those who DO understand the subtleties of the points being discussed GET ON WITH IT based on the scientific discussion to and fro involving their own actual math/physics/logics knowledge and not your repetitive wiki-links and stances which all can read for themselves if they were interested to know what you 'believe'.

The discussions here are questioning/reviewing the understandings which you link to/support at present; that is the whole point of these discussions; to tease out what and where improvements to those understandings can be found, and so advance from the status quo. Your insistence on full-blown peer-reviewed ideas HERE is misplaced and premature (as I pointed out to you before, remember?).

So, mate, let those who have something to say/add in DISCUSSION of NEW ideas; and who can post some matter relating DIRECTLY TO the ACTUAL NEW POINT that differs from the 'beliefs' which you may hold at present; do so without you cluttering up the place. We get it. You want to wait until you are told by others you defer to as to what to believe. No problem. That's your prerogative. But please, please, spare us any more deluge of the same old links and opinions which do/add nothing for these PRELIMINARY discussions of ORIGINAL ideas/discourse going on in some of these threads. Make distinctions between truly and obviously 'crank' threads/OPs, and those rare threads/OPs which bring new avenues of original discussion/points of view. OK?

I know that, as an Aussie, you don't have to be hit over the head too many times before you get the (friendly) message! Listen and learn from the discussions between those that have some new/original ideas to discuss, from BOTH 'sides'. Only then will you or anyone get a real sense of where things are headed for mainstream understandings in the future.

Less clutter will make the threads/discussions more readily readable/comprehendable and minimize confusion and cross-purpose exchanges. Your co-operation in this matter would help interested readers/participants a lot. Thanks in advance for your kind co-operation, mate!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

@ - Undefined

Grok'd!

 

Don't let it concern you too much undefined...It certainly doesn't worry me.
I see your little mate clinging to your coat tails again...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

My posts will continue when and where I see fit, and any refutation needed in relation to anyone that claims unsupported nonsense, will be treated the same way.


By the way, you have failed to answer the questions I put.

 

Like I said, delusions of grandeur.....[but understandable as forums are the only outlet they have]

 

Please stop with the 'personal stuff', paddo. You should be better than that if you are Aussie, and playing the ball not the person.

And it concerns me greatly because I am too busy lately to plough through all the distracting personal/repetitive stuff you post yourself and cheerlead/approve of that is posted by others.

This site is not here to be a platform for your empty/peurile posts of "ME TOO" opinions and links which anyone can find for themselves on wiki and elsewhere without your assistance. This site is for discussing the science behind new OPs and new ideas, based on the science brought by participants in their debates. You are not debating, but filling the threads/discussions with unsupported opinions based on your "perfect understanding of mainstream status quo", mingled with your personal opinions on the source of OPs new ideas being discussed.

No participant and/or member and/or casual reader here at Sciforums should be subjected to reams and reams of your irrelevant distractions and misdirections from your own misunderstandings of what's actually being said on BOTH 'sides' of many of these interesting discussions.

Continue if you will, but don't say a friendly heads up was not given you when you are reported by some others who may not be as tolerant of your anti-debate posts and tactics. OK?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Really undefined...Stop with the hypocricy...your passive aggression fools no one especially me.
Now take a rest, maybe a disprin and a good lie down will help.

 

I would take some time out undefined, and check the meaningless nature of some of your own posts, as has been noted by others, before offering criticism....
What you see as irrelevant distractions, are links from reputable quarters [which you cunningly ignore] and reminders from me, that what I'm supporting is the mainstream position, which you have strayed from.
I suppose that can be slightly disheartening for someone like you, getting advice and reminders as to accepted protocol from little old layman like me.
But if the cap fits, wear it.

 

Like I said, I would check out the nature and sensibility of your own posts first...People in glass houses ect

Secondly, I'll continue to link when and where I see fit, just as you link [and everyone] when and where you see fit....and at times that will include WIKI...

I love new ideas...I've put a few of my own...BUT I DON'T CLAIM AS OTHERS DO, THAT WHAT i HAVE WILL REVOLUTIONIZE PHYSICS.
My ideas are put as speculation. Maybe if you and others, weren't so self assured, you would recognise the arrogance in claiming to usurp incumbent theories that have stood for a 100 years or so.
As I said to another bright spark....I don't know you from a bar of soap....yet you want me to take what you say as gospel? Grow up!

And I will certainly keep posting my opinions mingled with the mainstream position....Just as I did with chinglu.
Just because my opinion aligns in most cases with the mainstream view, does not mean by some weird illusionary methodology of yours, that I shouldn't post them.

 

But some of us have been putting scientific/logical arguments/observations/evidence to support contentions. You just repeat and link without any real understanding of the subtleties involved in that which you are dismissing/disparaging out of hand because you think your "perfect understanding of mainstream status quo" qualifies you to repeat and repeat but not understand what you are "refuting" in your own "mind".

And all your mainstream-aligned stances and opinions are WELL KNOWN to ALL here; so your continuing deluge of same ad nauseam is over the top cluttering.

Take a break from it, mate. Lean back and read-only for a few weeks. Let the discussions proceed without gumming up the works with your zealous deluge of personal/irrelevant/twee stuff which we can find elsewhere if that was what we wanted.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Anyhow, good luck with your choices, paddo. Bye for now.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Seeing the nature of your last few posts, I see the above as an example of hypocrisy again.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Shame!

 

See what you like in my posts, mate; just don't miss the friendly cautions/observations about what YOU yourself have been engaging in meanwhile. Fair enough? No hard feelings.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Caution as much as you like undefined.....
But do not tell me who or what to post.
It's obvious you have an overly active built in "sense of fairness" for all and sundry re alternative ideas.
Ideas are OK...Claiming they will change incumbent theories is another kettle of fish.
That's why we have the alternative theory section and pseudoscience sections.

So you need to be careful when discussing an Idea or claiming a new model, better then any incumbent model....You understand?