It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

time travels impossible

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by StarChild

Originally posted by sanctum
Come on members, we are being 'had' here. Deliberate bad
spelling and posted 2am'ish on a Monday...


It depends on where you are located. Where I am at it is currently 1547.


Mr. M


He/she is in L.A. I see your point though

I still reckon somethings not right
S.




posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 08:51 AM
link   
True, true indeed. However, I'd like to refer you to the thread I started, titled, "I have a recommendation". What is your opinion on this?

Mr. M



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Well, saying you're 10 probably isn't the best idea here.. Let's just look at your posts and ideas, ok? Save Deus Ex conversation for BTS (Below Top Secret) in the game forum, and tv shows likewise please...

Ok, now back on topic...

How do we even know "time" itself gives a damn what we change? What if we go back, change something, and then return to our present...??? Does "time" itself somehow "know"...??? We've already proven that time can be relative to perception (i.e. theory of relativity). I think if we haven't done it already, we're likely close, but I can't even fathom what the ins and outs of it would be....



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by StarChild
True, true indeed. However, I'd like to refer you to the thread I started, titled, "I have a recommendation". What is your opinion on this?

Mr. M

Link please



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Sorry, but I don't know how to do that. Just look in the recent posts. It's up there with the latest.

Mr. M



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Well, saying you're 10 probably isn't the best idea here.. Let's just look at your posts and ideas, ok? Save Deus Ex conversation for BTS (Below Top Secret) in the game forum, and tv shows likewise please...

Ok, now back on topic...

How do we even know "time" itself gives a damn what we change? What if we go back, change something, and then return to our present...??? Does "time" itself somehow "know"...??? We've already proven that time can be relative to perception (i.e. theory of relativity). I think if we haven't done it already, we're likely close, but I can't even fathom what the ins and outs of it would be....


You're right on, man. The whole theory has too many variables. The only thing that I can say halfway confidently is that if one were to go back in time, change something, and return, everything would be different, because that action would change the course of events dramatically. Wait, that sounds like something from TimeCop!


Mr. M



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by StarChild
Sorry, but I don't know how to do that. Just look in the recent posts. It's up there with the latest.

Mr. M

I'll have a look now, StarChild. Get back to you soon,
S.



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by StarChild
Sorry, but I don't know how to do that. Just look in the recent posts. It's up there with the latest.

Mr. M

Found it. Sorry, i don't agree. First of all it's prob', impossible
and 2nd, the Mod's will take care of it. Plus, most members
can see something 'suss', very quickly.
S.



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 09:10 AM
link   
I don't know. I just think that little kids shouldn't be posting on here, that's all. Granted there might be some out there who have some really good stuff to share. But the majority of them are just pranksters. Whatever, forget it. Who wants a beer? Nope your too young, maybe when your older.


Mr. M



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by StarChild
I don't know. I just think that little kids shouldn't be posting on here, that's all. Granted there might be some out there who have some really good stuff to share. But the majority of them are just pranksters. Whatever, forget it. Who wants a beer? Nope your too young, maybe when your older.


Mr. M

Peace StarC,... I just noticed your avatar and it looks like you
would 'suss' something out...Very quickly

S.



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 09:26 AM
link   
I had the oddest dream last night and I thought that I might share it. Now this is basicly all the same as the "Twins" experiment (one traveling close to the speed of light and one going about their normal speed on Earth), but I just think that my understanding of it went to a different level even though I can't seem to put in in the best wording.

I had always believed that the past, present and future existed in time at the same location and that it is only our perception of events that seperated them. Now I could never really figure out any sort of logical theory on this so I didn't rant about it much. First let me tell you what I remember of the dream:

Basicly I was moving faster then everything around me. I wasn't really moving as much as vibrating so even though I was always in the same spacial location my time seemed to be sped up as everything around me was slowed down. Now since the molicules of my body were 'shifting' faster, the eyes (or interpretation of what one sees) of those around me could not witness what was moving along at a drasticly different speed as themselves even though they were technicly in the same 'time' as me. I however could see them just fine.

So what the hell does this mean? Here is an interesting idea: What if alot of the things that we see as unexplainable are just things that we normally can not see because they are moving at a faster 'time' in the same 'space' as us? What if these things could slow down for short periods of time to a degree that we would see a flash of something that we label as ghost, angel or alien? Something that exists in the same space and 'time location', but at a different wave frequency or something of the like.

Be easy, I haven't had my coffee yet.


oba

posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Star Child
I am ex-military, now independant contractor. I specialize in terrorism threat assessments, physical security, executive protection services, clandestine operations, and other skills, too numerable to mention here. I am overseas right now, at an undisclosed location. Mr. M

that wouldn't be DynCorp would it, just wondering ...

1 & .. 2 .. & .. 3 .. .. & .. 4 ... ..& . I admit these articles get extreme but the mil outsource business has always been about the dirtiest trade there is bar none. (I've met a couple of ex-merc's and it wasn't pleasant ...)

anyways, the time travel thing.
it's high science.
Montauk is the start of the journey.
also read Preston Nichols and a few others.
not for the feint of physics.

PEACE

[Edited on 15-3-2004 by oba]



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 09:39 AM
link   
I believe that this is only the first time that we have gone through time. so our future self doesn;t exist


oba

posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 09:43 AM
link   
your future self doesn't exist, but a future time line in which your consciousness might be able to be an observer (to actually observe, albeit passively, the goings on ..) is what might exist.

this is the theory anyway.
the notion of interactivity is where most of the theory seems to stumble.

observation is not good enough, they say, give us interactivity. talk about greed.

[Edited on 15-3-2004 by oba]



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by templersstorms1312
I believe that this is only the first time that we have gone through time. so our future self doesn;t exist


You are missing the point completely. What is time? That is the big question. What if it is not what we label it as but instead has something to do with the subatomic speed (rotations, revolutions, etc) of that which exists in space? In this way two objects could exist in the same space and time (as per our definition of time), but at different frequencies/vibrations as to not interact with one another. This would mean that our current definition of time is completely wrong.....or would this be considered a different dimension?



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jonna

Originally posted by templersstorms1312
I believe that this is only the first time that we have gone through time. so our future self doesn;t exist


You are missing the point completely. What is time? That is the big question. What if it is not what we label it as but instead has something to do with the subatomic speed (rotations, revolutions, etc) of that which exists in space? In this way two objects could exist in the same space and time (as per our definition of time), but at different frequencies/vibrations as to not interact with one another. This would mean that our current definition of time is completely wrong.....or would this be considered a different dimension?


A great question.
re, (as per our definition of time), who else can we ask

I found this, make of it what you will.
S.

66.102.7.104...:blCPGCA1f40J:www.acq.osd.mil/bmdo/bmdolink/pdf/45_SPR03.pdf+bullet+speed/vacuum&hl=en&ie=UTF-8


oba

posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 10:22 AM
link   
one view is that there is 2 kinds of time.

one is Horizontal time (HT) which is the usual linear sort of time that most people identify with, past to present to future and so on, the arrow in a straight line etc.

the other kind of time would be (VT) - vertical time. and here, all moments are stacked up one on top of the other, like pancakes, and the striations that occur (the layers in the stack) have to do with significant energy events .

this is not so easy to explain because it views linear time as a a series of energy events, and the importasnt energy events (great changes in history) are where causal energy piles up. the notion of though producing effect is a core part of this, as consciousness affects quantum particles on a micro scale, and social thought effects larger scale events.

that is sort of sketching the outlineby what is meant by 2 kinds oftime, the HT and the VT, and how they might be different.

the latter being a measure of energy that precedes events and changes.

(when people's words are alljoinedtogether (and the space bar isn't working) someone's been playing ONLINE games with the keyboard as a firing device HA HA )

[Edited on 15-3-2004 by oba]



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Hi Oba,
This subject is way beyond me, but i remember
a doco', years ago that proved it was impossible
to create two perfectly parallel lines. At some
point, they will intersect.
S.



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   
im saying that there are multipel dimensions of time. so if it had existed in the future my future self would be in kindergarden( its my dream no homework and no work)
[Edited on 15-3-2004 by mirello]

[Edited on 15-3-2004 by mirello]



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 11:57 AM
link   

You're right on, man. The whole theory has too many variables. The only thing that I can say halfway confidently is that if one were to go back in time, change something, and return, everything would be different, because that action would change the course of events dramatically. Wait, that sounds like something from TimeCop!


I'm not so sure...

Let's take the idea of existing parallel time lines...

Let's then say I go back and kill my grandfather before he has my dad. Ok, then I return to my own time. One of a few things could happen, perhaps.

1. I cease to exist, as I also in effect killed my father before my birth.

2. I only cease to exist on THAT timeline's future. If I return to my own timeline, nothing has changed.

3. I don't cease to exist, I simply have different parents, maybe even a different name, race, etc. who knows?

or any other of a myriad of possibilities...

Most simply ASSUME that changing an event in the past would affect the future...we can't know that. We don't even know if we can theorize if we would even be able to interact with that timeline at all.... We don't know enough about it to make even educated guesses. Quantum physics....ain't it fun???




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join