People slipping through time.

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by GaiaGirl95, Jan 21, 2014.

Page 2 of 5
  1. Huynh Phu Dat

    Huynh Phu Dat Registered Member

    Messages:
    23
    Perhaps in the future we can have time travel because in the past , none of us think we can fly .
     
    Huynh Phu Dat, Jan 21, 2014
    #21

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Read-Only

    Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Possibly. But the person I'm working with thinks it's possible now.
     
    Read-Only, Jan 21, 2014
    #22

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. exchemist

    exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,538
    Read Only, I'd stop if I were you.

    This person wastes time on numerous forums under names such as LadyGaia, Markga95, Cobalt6 etc and has now been banned from most of them.

    The modus operandi seems to be the same as that of River, namely to fine-tune exactly how stupid an argument they can advance, and still get a rise out of the scientists on the forum, without being banned. You can tell by the topics chosen and the manner in which the "argument" is then conducted. I don't think he (and I'm sure it is a he) is mad exactly, but just gets a kick out of annoying people - maybe hated science at school or something. But at this point I admit I'm speculating.

    If I were a Mod I've have banned this individual by now, but they are a tolerant lot here, on the whole, Kwhilborn's fate notwithstanding.
     
    exchemist, Jan 21, 2014
    #23

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    Why exactly is this allowed to stay in the science section? All of the threads started by this individual have been essentially pseudoscience. The topics this person starts are clearly topics that should be located in the heart of the fringe section.
     
    origin, Jan 21, 2014
    #24
  8. spidergoat

    spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    On the other hand, mental illness is very common.
     
    spidergoat, Jan 21, 2014
    #25
  9. Fraggle Rocker

    Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    This is a common misconception. The universe is still "nothing" in the sense that there is an exact balance of matter and antimatter, and everything else and anti-everything else. Its total mass and energy is zero.

    When the Big Bang occurred, there was no sudden creation of "stuff" that wasn't there a yoctosecond earlier (one septillionth of a second, the smallest unit of time that we've bothered to invent a name for). There was merely an increase in organization. What was previously "nothing" was suddenly a structure of quarks, leptons and bosons that had an impressive organization, but nonetheless balanced each other out exactly--a highly organized bunch of "nothing," as it were.

    The Second Law of Thermodynamics allows for this. It does not state that entropy increases steadily, merely that entropy tends to increase, but that spatially and temporally local reversals of entropy are possible. It doesn't even place a limit on the magnitude of those reversals, so the sudden appearance of a universe does not violate entropy, so long as its long-term prognosis is to cool down into a state of zero organization once again. Which is exactly what it's doing. Fortunately we came along early in the universe's lifespan so there's still plenty of organization for us to play with. Like air to breathe, water to form the basis of all of our tissues, and photosynthesis to provide us with a tasty food chain.

    To recap: the reason that it is not a paradox for the universe to "come from nothing" is that it is still, in aggregate, nothing.

    The Laws of Nature have not been violated.
     
    Fraggle Rocker, Jan 21, 2014
    #26
  10. Fraggle Rocker

    Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    We tend to allow a thread based on a preposterous assertion to continue if the assertion generates an interesting and scientifically proper discussion. We get a lot of really young people here and it's educational for them to see how the scientific method can be so easily invoked to prove that bullshit is really bullshit.

    Of course, the person who makes the assertion has to abide by the scientific method if she wants to remain a member. This means that if evidence or reasoning is offered that falsifies the assertion, she has three choices: 1. rebut the falsification; 2. call a time-out while searching for more evidence or reasoning to support a rebuttal; or 3. admit defeat and never repeat the assertion on SciForums.

    In order for this to happen, someone must actually present a rebuttal. Otherwise this is not a discussion, merely a playground scuffle with noogies and name-calling. We hate these kinds of threads and are unlikely to spring to the defense of either side--because we don't want to waste our time reading them!

    As you noticed, I provided a rebuttal to one of her more cogent assertions. Why don't we all return to the scientific method and make this thread about science rather than personalities? If this turns into a proper scientific discussion and Gaia Girl continues to post unscientific nonsense, then that will be a textbook case of trolling and the moderators can intervene.

    Fraggle Rocker
    Moderator
    Linguistics
    Arts & Culture
     
    Fraggle Rocker, Jan 21, 2014
    #27
  11. Motor Daddy

    Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    You didn't loop through time. Time elapsed as usual, and you existed for that time, so you existed for an elapsed time. Imagine starting a stop watch and then going about your day. You eat, sleep, drive, and shop. Those actions required your attention on the action, hence you failed to observe the stop watch as the time elapsed at a constant rate. If you are such a good time observer and can tell when you've slipped through time, how much time is on the stop watch when you stop it, and how much time should the stop watch read according to your slipping time syndrome?
     
    Motor Daddy, Jan 21, 2014
    #28
  12. kx000

    kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,136
    The universe must have come from something. Apparently something godly.
     
    kx000, Jan 21, 2014
    #29
  13. Dinosaur

    Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,885
    A person believing that they can do SciFi time Travel is a harmless delusion.

    I hope that person does not believe they can fly & tries to prove it by jumping from balcony 100 feet off the ground.
     
    Dinosaur, Jan 21, 2014
    #30
  14. GaiaGirl95

    GaiaGirl95 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    115
    Did you know that hundreds of years ago, the concept of heavier-than-air aircraft that could fly was considered pseudoscience.

    We won't jump off a 100ft balcony because we know that flying without wings is impossible. We have not experienced this but we have experienced a time slip much like experiencing the beach for the first time, so we know that time slips are indeed possible.

    You have not provided any reasons as to why this cannot be true, other than just a statement. Many scientists are actually researching into ways to travel FTL or time-travel,because they are open to new ideas and aren't afraid to explore them. You can never say 100% a hat contains no ticket with your name if you don't evaluate it firsthand.
     
    GaiaGirl95, Jan 21, 2014
    #31
  15. GaiaGirl95

    GaiaGirl95 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    115
    Time did not elapse, it skipped back 30 minutes, and we re-lived that moment when we suddenly became conscious we were in a time loop, and we both said ''whoa, what the hell happened?'' to each other. I was in one place, then I was walking to the house a second or so later, and in the 30 minutes the exact same commercials came on and we noticed the clock went back too.
     
    GaiaGirl95, Jan 21, 2014
    #32
  16. GaiaGirl95

    GaiaGirl95 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    115
    Neither of us are mentally ill. We are two normal people. Implying we are mentally ill is a faulty rationalization.
    If all of us are mentally ill maybe you should explain why this mental illness occurred at the exact second, and why both of us confirmed we went 30 minutes back in time, noting the commercials, and the clock going back.
     
    GaiaGirl95, Jan 21, 2014
    #33
  17. Motor Daddy

    Motor Daddy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,425
    What time was it at the point in time that you "skipped back 30 minutes?" You say you skipped back 30 minutes in time, so for instance, say at the point in time that your time skip began it was 1 PM. You are claiming that at 1:00 you went back 30 minutes and relived exactly what you did from 12:30-1:00, and that presumably took 30 minutes of reliving (from 12:30-1:00), which the time is then 1:00 at the point in time you finish reliving the 12:30-1:00 exactly as it occurred the first time. So the first time stop watch read 1:00, but then you relived for 30 minutes, so the first time is 1:30 when you finish reliving at 1:00, so how did you ultimately make back up the 30 minutes that you used to relive 12:30-1:00 an additional time? According to my calculations you are still 30 minutes behind unless you skipped ahead 30 minutes after you skipped back 30 minutes and are keeping that a secret? Did you skip ahead 30 minutes too?
     
    Motor Daddy, Jan 21, 2014
    #34
  18. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    Are you sure that you didn't drop about 250 micrograms of LSD while you were watching Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban and get confused about who exactly had the time turner?
     
    origin, Jan 21, 2014
    #35
  19. billvon

    billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,646
    Correct! Neither is Santa Claus, or secret societies of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, or that we are all living in a machine a la the Matrix. However, the odds are against it.

    Things come from nothing all the time. Google "casimir effect."
     
    billvon, Jan 21, 2014
    #36
  20. Fraggle Rocker

    Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Please re-read my earlier post. I explained how the universe "came from nothing," without violating the Second Law of Thermodynamics. There is no need to postulate an incredible creature who lives in an invisible, illogical supernatural universe--a hypothesis that raises more questions than it answers.

    The concept of science as we know it did not even exist in those days. They just thought it was impossible.

    And it was impossible, using the technology of that era. Technology is one of the greatest drivers of science. Einstein used electronic equipment that hadn't been invented in Newton's time, to make his relativistic adjustments to Newton's Laws of Motion. If you've got some cool new technology we can use to determine whether your recollection of backsliding in time was true, we'll be happy to use it.

    There's no way that a heavier-than-air craft could fly without an internal combustion engine. Even if somebody thought of it hundreds of years ago, they didn't have the technology to build it. That had to wait for the Industrial Revolution.

    I'll grant you the FTL, but it isn't really FTL because they intend to use wormholes, which are shortcuts between two points through another dimension--a dimension whose existence has not been proven.

    As for the time travel, please name three respected scientists who are doing that research? Surely you're familiar with the "going back in time and killing your own grandfather" paradox. Going forward in time invokes the same paradox: you can't help bringing something back--if only knowledge--that will change the present so the future won't be the same one you visited.

    You seem to be unfamiliar with the Rule of Laplace, or "Sagan's Law" as most American's know it since the "Cosmos" series on PBS.

    Extraordinary assertions must be supported by extraordinary evidence before we are obliged to treat them with respect.​

    The resources of science are finite so we have to allocate them sensibly. Doing research into something that defies common sense AND has no supporting evidence looks like a perfect way to squander resources that we could be using instead to cure cancer, establish a colony on Mars, or build giant orbiting solar collectors that would solve our energy problem without spoiling the environment.

    No one is saying that just because you've got no evidence for your alleged time loop, it is therefore incontrovertibly false. We're just saying that until you present some shred of evidence that we can investigate, we simply can't afford to put that project very high on the Academy's agenda.

    And no, you saying it happened does NOT count as evidence. Sorry. Of course you are honest, but there are lots of people who would lie about that just to be on the cover of Der Spiegel.
     
    Fraggle Rocker, Jan 21, 2014
    #37
  21. Read-Only

    Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Yes, I'd say you are correct. I've wasted more than enough effort on this worthless individual.

    I will make one final comment about Kwhilborn in passing: For reasons of his own, he actually requested a permaban so I don't see any intolerance at work in his case.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Read-Only, Jan 21, 2014
    #38
  22. cornel

    cornel Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    137
    @gaiagirl95:

    Time is only an agreement, since all speed is relative, we took one speed, called it time, and considered all other speeds relative to this time.
    The idea of putting all speed except a few humans in reverse, then putting the speed in normal again after adding the humans is a bit farfetched.
    Was there anything different you remember from the first time ? (matrix)

    If not, i suppose your brain just told you that your memory already contained the memory of the last thirty minutes,
    which seems less farfetched since thirty minutes is a long time if you 're going to contain the memory
    (Unless you actually remember something that is going to happen, and then it happens.)

    Now, i don't know what exactly happened to you and your friend, something seems to have affected you both in a similar way,
    maybe something in the air, maybe a shared experience, maybe something only you could identificate if you looked for it

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    cornel, Jan 22, 2014
    #39
  23. GaiaGirl95

    GaiaGirl95 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    115
    For the final time, we were not doing any drugs, and we felt normal.
     
    GaiaGirl95, Jan 22, 2014
    #40
Page 2 of 5

Share This Page