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.

 

Dimension tunneling, heavens, UFO travel, bosons and all that jazz

page: 2
51
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   

“They were invisible to the eye, but they were there, there is no doubt about it. They had mass, they had energy and they were moving about,” he said, after showing a 15-minute video that he said the Defense Ministry gave him permission to publicize.

www.democraticunderground.com...




posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 06:22 PM
link   
In the near future, we'll be able to see back in time, but we'll never be able to travel back through time. Things will get interesting as people will be able to look back at an event and see exactly what occurred.

No more conspiracy theories and no more postulating what might have happened. You get to see exactly what happened in whatever detail you want.

Who killed JFK? Solved...

Jesus' birth/death? Confirmed...

Birth of the universe? If one can put into thought the birth of the universe, yep...

Things are going to get real honest, real quick. There's no moment in past that you can't look in on...



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by grahag
 


Your assuming that we can not send any mass back then? I agree that very soon we should be able to view the past, at least a few days in the past.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by grahag
 


Your assuming that we can not send any mass back then? I agree that very soon we should be able to view the past, at least a few days in the past.



No person will make it back. People will try and they will be lost. It will always be the holy grail, though no person will ever attain it. It's for the best anyway. It'll be relatively soon that you'll be able to look back as far as you want. (Pun intended)



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   


Keep in mind, Albert Einstein didn't have a PhD. The notion that because you can wave a degree around and be the master of knowledge is extremely wrong and is what has led us astray.


Good point. The problem with degrees these days is they often are tickets to the wrong people. If you 'accept' the academia way of seeing things, answer the questions as 'they' would like you to answer them, you will get that coveted Phd, doctorate.

Doctors are a great example. Just look at all their missing:
~Homeopathy~
The background of the video is poor, though that is not the purpose here:
Listen, with eyes wide shut. See it. Then, perhaps you can Be it.

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Perseus Apex]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperSlovak
 




“They were invisible to the eye, but they were there, there is no doubt about it. They had mass, they had energy and they were moving about,” he said, after showing a 15-minute video that he said the Defense Ministry gave him permission to publicize. [URL]http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1591437


With the Mexico "light mass" They may be terrestrial, just not visible in our spectrum. Light traveling through energy gaps is a key premise for me.


[edit on 15-2-2010 by zazzafrazz]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by grahag

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by grahag
 


Your assuming that we can not send any mass back then? I agree that very soon we should be able to view the past, at least a few days in the past.



No person will make it back. People will try and they will be lost. It will always be the holy grail, though no person will ever attain it. It's for the best anyway. It'll be relatively soon that you'll be able to look back as far as you want. (Pun intended)


From my initial post, I hypothesize that we can send 'mass', and that is already done from a higher frequency dimension, and that the time landscape is fixed so therefore you can go to any point on it.

Can we do it from here? Mass not sure, view is likey, we are limited by our degrees of freedom. But backwards is one of our degrees of freedom......Can we 'tunnel' to the other dimension then find the fixed point and tunnel back to that point? That's what I am considering

We have greater degrees of freedom there.

[edit on 15-2-2010 by zazzafrazz]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by zazzafrazz

Originally posted by grahag

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by grahag
 


Your assuming that we can not send any mass back then? I agree that very soon we should be able to view the past, at least a few days in the past.



No person will make it back. People will try and they will be lost. It will always be the holy grail, though no person will ever attain it. It's for the best anyway. It'll be relatively soon that you'll be able to look back as far as you want. (Pun intended)


From my initial post, I hypothesize that we can send 'mass' but that is already done from a higher frequency dimension, and that the time landscape is fixed so therefore you can go to any point on it.

Can we do it from here? No, we are limited by oour degrees of freedom. Can we 'tunnel' to the other dimension then find the fixed point and tunnel back to that point? That's what I am considering

We have greater degrees of freedom there.


There's a common misconception that time is a dimension or a destination. It's not a place you go to. It's more like a current that drives everything. You can't just insert yourself into it.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by grahag
 


Time is not a dimension I agree with that.
But is it fixed?
We apply time. We sense time psychologically. Physics and math sense it differently.
Time permits us to experience infinity.
We/and everything else in existence experience different aspects of infinity.
So yes time exists but not as we apply it.
Our application of time is:
of past, present and future...is this time? We imply the movement or passing of time, but flux is the movement of an object and is it a "matter" of time, or a "equation" of time. If its matter it is then a object in flux...not likely, More likely a physical equation...in order to allow the experience of infinity.


With the movement of time, Relative to what does it move? Other types of motion relate one physical process to another, the putative flow of time relates to only time itself, Posing the simple question, "how does time pass?" The Fact that time can be treated as a fourth dimension does not mean it is identical to the 3 dimensions of space. Time and Space enter into experience and physical theory in distinct ways. For example to formula for calculating space time distances is not the same as calculating spacial distances. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SPACE TIME UNDERPINS THE KEY NOTION OF CAUSALITY, STOPPING CAUSE AND EFFECT FROM BEING HOPELESSLY JUMBLED. On the other hand other physicists believe on the smallest scale of size and duration, space and time may lose their separate identities

issuu.com...


[edit on 15-2-2010 by zazzafrazz]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jinx880101
What you are explaining above is pretty similar to what they are referring to in 'what the bleep, do we know'-right? About how particles react when there is an 'observer'? They react differently when there is isn't an observer "almost like they know they are being watched" ?

(If anyone knows what I'm talking about)



Hope it's okay if I post this here....




I was actually just thinking about posting just this video... You beat me to it! It is more than OK to post it.

Oh well, yeah, if you check out this video it is pretty helpful, and you may even want to check out other videos by this guy/group.

As has been stated we can see that particles react differently when observed as opposed to when not being viewed.





posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


Time is 'Relative' to one's place in the cosmos. Time is infinite as Light and is more accurately measured by light regardless of one's place in the cosmos. Since E or energy Is everywhere in the cosmos, in one form or another, it could be the 'only' measure (light years). Light bends in space thus distorting time. Energy equals mass times the speed of light. Time on Earth is dependent on the Earth's revolution around the Sun. Time is much slower or faster on other planets for the reasons above.
Time is relative to one's 'place'.

A human's (shell time) is fleeting due in large part to the effect of Gravity of which is hyper-entropic, if there is such a word. I suppose that is why it is such an issue with one's Consciousness.

You sure like to think, that's obvious and more than can be said for most.


Quantum is one of those enlightenment words though, wow, what progress in such a short amount of time! Must have had a 'hand' or two.....somewhere along the way. Well, 2012 is near, No?

There 'does' appear to be a Reason for everything when we choose to see past the shadows of others and build.....On.....the knowledgebase to date with 'ambient' intention>>>>>Attend-tion



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Well I am guessing the conjecture of mass not being able to be maintained in a lorentzian wormhole is postulated upon Einstein-Rosen equations.

However, I don't think that is correct, as this was before the discovery of advanced quantum mechanics.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by zazzafrazz

The dimensions certainly exist. So what exists there that allows for the greater levels of freedom.

Having some fun, totally expect to be shot down by our particle scientists

[edit on 15-2-2010 by zazzafrazz]


only the first 4 dimensions certainly exist...they are the obvious and proven dimensions you see every day with your movement your vision and your time keeping

any other dimensions are deffinately UNCERTAIN...but still food for thort and nice ideas to give good debate



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Silicis n Volvo
 


The best way to describe a 'dimension' is with a ~Wave~, a frequency/+/vibration (proton/electron /+/ yin/yang [respectively]), or dualism and the following: String theory though this has 'just' got off the ground ^bud^ Is straight toward a whole lot more 'truthiness'. The Good kind.



[edit on 15-2-2010 by Perseus Apex]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silicis n Volvo

Originally posted by zazzafrazz

The dimensions certainly exist. So what exists there that allows for the greater levels of freedom.

Having some fun, totally expect to be shot down by our particle scientists

[edit on 15-2-2010 by zazzafrazz]


only the first 4 dimensions certainly exist...they are the obvious and proven dimensions you see every day with your movement your vision and your time keeping

any other dimensions are deffinately UNCERTAIN...but still food for thort and nice ideas to give good debate


Well yeah! OK i was stretching a little, but particle physicists pretty much work within the premise that the N-dimensional space is a legitimate construct. Yes its debated and explored, but N-dimensional space I would lean is there. How many would say it is definitively not.

Im not saying unequivocally that M theory 11 dimensions (7 of which are sub atomic level) are definitive. 4th yes, and heavy leanings to 5th where gravity is significantly weaker and higher frequency. I think its Hooft? who said it was the space time fabric.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


Interesting thoughts Zazz. It's evident you have put much thought into this!
I'm sad to say that particle physics isn't my strongest point and I doubt I could add much to the discussion.

I do have some misgivings though, which could be attributed to my ignorance of said subject. I worry about the ramifications of sending 'things' into places where they don't belong... and how the universe may react or interact with them... in the same way a human body will fester a splinter.

There's also the possibility of transporting oneself into a void to which there is no return... now that would be freaky... Like traveling inwards toward infinity. An entry point may not exactly equate to an exit point.

IRM


[edit on 15/2/10 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 




There's also the possibility of transporting oneself into a void to which there is no return... now that would be freaky... Like traveling inwards toward infinity. An entry point may not exactly equate to an exit point.


Hey there friend!


Explain what you mean by "void" if you would. In regards to an "entry point", there will always be an exit point, as the wave function will collapse at some point. Also, you could not leave our brane, you could travel through spacetime, both, one, or whatever, but you can not access hyperspace by this mode.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


Hello my friend!

I guess the term 'void' is a subjective one that could be imagined in many different ways. They could be pockets of nothing or imperfections in the fabric of 'creation' itself, an error in the code... an oversight so to speak. They may also be places where the physics are completely alien or unpredictable, time itself may not exist, or it could simply be a place void of any interaction at all... or places where regular matter cannot interact. It really could be a wealth of things that go way over my head. I believe 'voids' exist... at least as a thought experiment.

I guess your question could be rephrased as "what is nothing" and is nothing really a something by the simple virtue of attributing it a name. To be honest, it twists my melon!

LOL!

IRM



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 



Well, personally (as a Cosmology major) I like to think of the "void" as 'ultraspace'. Or simply the space outside of hyperspace, where in-fact there is nothing, hard to grasp, but none-the-less it should exist according to M-Theory.

Now the question is how was hyperspace made? LOL....


[edit on 2/15/2010 by jkrog08]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


Hence the premise that you create the 'gap' by the pairing/creation of group.



Cern in part are trying to measure paired Higgs Bosons. By forming a pair you create a group. Which leads me to think, can the pairing of these particles create a gap that allows dimension or time travel? A gap in the fabric of things? Can we tunnel or travel through these gaps.



[edit on 15-2-2010 by zazzafrazz]



new topics

top topics



 
51
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join