It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


What Britain Really Thinks About UFO’s...

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 11:17 AM
reply to post by wemadetheworld

Interesting point you have there definitely. Bending time. But I think there's plenty of evidence to suggest it's (phenomena) been around prior to 1940, to the point it could even predate man. Can it be bent? Also we cannot assume that our current time (ie 17:06) is actually "current time". For example if we think about a hundred years behind us (certain type of craft) that's going on our own timeline, not necessarily the one with time bending capabilities as part of it
I can't explain...

Time would presumably have whole other meanings and lengths on any other planet and that could adversely affect knowledge about it perhaps? If you live two "krakton" or some sci-fi year name (let's call it the period of 35875 days) you might be more persistent about finding a way to live three. Yet we have 60 mins in an hour, days in a week, weeks in a year, to chill us the hell out
Our life expectancy is by no means unfair, etc etc. I can't quite explain that part either, but...

I think you have a fun and interesting point, It'll get me thinking. How can it cater for some of the earliest stuff, that makes it all seem timeless. Take into the account ancient alien theories and sightings from the earliest of times. It was bound to be spotted when air travel (and some proper exploration of the skies) became possible. I'm not sure there's any noticeable evolution of it or UFO craft BUT as I say your point is interesting and time and evolution of the phenomena could be linked and answer some questions. woot!

posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 03:19 PM
Yeah I guess there must be some limitation on how many people can travel back in time because, if time travel is physically possible, then we should be overrun with people coming back from the year 2100, 3100, 4100 up to infinity.

Maybe that limitation is resource-based, like the scarcity of anti-matter, or maybe its an ethical constraint, like machines or dare I say it, humans behaving more responsibly in the future. Or maybe it's due to an escalating risk factor.

If I understand relativity right, every object in the universe is constantly travelling at the speed of light through spacetime. In normal situations, like us here on earth, most of our velocity is through time, because we are going very slow through space. As you go faster through space, you slow down in time so that your overall velocity through spacetime remains exactly c - the speed of light.

As you speed up, time slows down until you reach the speed of light at which point you are going 1c through space and zero through time. When you pass the speed of light barrier, then time begins speeding up again but is now running backwards. As your velocity increases, time runs backwards faster and faster until you reach 2c at which point you are going 1c backwards through time and 2c through space.

So when travelling at 2c, time would run backwards at the same rate that it's currently running forwards. If you wanted to go back in time by one century then it would take one century of your life when travelling at 2c.

You could speed up even more to 4c and then it would take 50 years of your life to go back one century. Clearly there is a limitation on how far back in time a human can travel before he expires due to old age.

Speeding up even more to 100c and it would take only two years to go back one century but I wonder, at what point does it become too risky to send humans at such high speeds, and we send robots instead?

posted on Jul, 1 2013 @ 03:26 PM
reply to post by Liberal1984

Speaking of the UK and Timothy Good....I have wondered how a Brit gets all this access to american UFO information while for years the US "government" has been threatening its own into silence on many UFO cases.

new topics
<< 1   >>

log in