Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #610879 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-30 11:19 -0800 |
| Last post | 2017-01-05 16:05 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 127 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-30 11:19 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 11:22 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-30 11:47 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 12:01 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-12-30 12:25 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-12-30 18:06 -0500
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Peter <Poakfield@msn.com> - 2017-01-05 07:55 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible HGW <hw@....> - 2016-12-31 07:54 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Tiffany Wuest <eesio@esufsi.info> - 2016-12-30 21:03 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-30 13:13 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Peter <Poakfield@msn.com> - 2017-01-05 07:54 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-30 13:20 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> - 2016-12-30 21:30 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 15:24 -0700
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-30 20:25 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-30 20:28 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible tomkratman@gmail.com - 2017-01-05 15:50 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "chwilozof" <nieznajome@att.com> - 2016-12-30 16:33 -0500
just kidding noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 16:00 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-31 13:03 +1100
How to travel in time Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> - 2016-12-31 02:38 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-30 20:21 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-31 15:32 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-30 23:05 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-12-31 19:07 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-31 10:51 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-01 11:44 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-31 17:26 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-01 13:10 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2017-01-01 11:18 -0600
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-01 16:48 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-02 12:03 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-01 21:07 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-02 16:25 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-02 10:19 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-03 14:54 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-03 21:18 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-04 16:45 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-03 21:53 -0800
_the tetrahedron & how to use it_, copyr.'958, Oklahoma u.presS noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-04 11:43 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-05 11:38 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 12:35 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-06 11:18 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 16:45 -0700
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-05 17:50 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-06 13:29 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-06 09:13 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-07 11:57 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 15:30 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-01-07 17:20 -0800
no train,. no timetable noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-09 16:09 -0800
Re: no train,. no timetable Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-10 11:33 +1100
no watch, Miss traiN noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 15:18 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-10 11:34 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-10 09:14 -0800
Re: Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 17:12 -0500
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-11 22:40 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2017-01-06 00:37 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-06 09:06 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 09:18 -0700
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-06 09:24 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:00 -0700
Gutless whining (was Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2017-01-06 09:50 -0800
Re: Gutless whining (was Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 10:00 -0700
Re: Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2017-01-07 21:43 -0500
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 16:44 -0700
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Tiffany Wuest <eesio@esufsi.info> - 2016-12-31 07:23 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2016-12-31 12:56 -0500
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "Michael R N Dolbear" <me@privacy.net> - 2017-01-01 15:07 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Tiffany Wuest <eesio@esufsi.info> - 2017-01-01 15:47 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2017-01-01 09:52 -0600
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-01 16:52 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2017-01-01 11:16 -0600
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-01 21:19 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-01 16:52 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-01 16:50 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Peter <Poakfield@msn.com> - 2017-01-05 07:52 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-31 11:21 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2017-01-01 19:15 -0500
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-01 16:56 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-02 12:14 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Winona Bellard <erli@aeni.no> - 2017-01-02 23:02 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Kadaitcha Man <nospam.nospam.nospam@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 23:05 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Winona Bellard <erli@aeni.no> - 2017-01-02 23:17 +0000
Winona Bellard, urine good-time girl whore Winona Bellard <erli@aeni.no.deer> - 2017-01-02 23:21 +0000
Re: Winona Bellard, urine good-time girl whore Olinda Metcalfe <efacf@ecMlcn.org> - 2017-01-02 23:33 +0000
Guilt without sex Winona Bellard <erli@aeni.no.pipe> - 2017-01-02 23:22 +0000
Re: Guilt without sex benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-01-02 18:49 -0500
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-03 14:58 +1100
time of arrow'd noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 13:01 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-01-03 18:03 -0500
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sharilyn Vore <inolr@nryowno.an> - 2017-01-09 21:20 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-10 16:53 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-10 06:07 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-10 19:18 +1100
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-10 13:47 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-11 23:21 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-12 15:11 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-12 08:55 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-12 22:09 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-13 10:39 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-13 22:37 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-13 22:41 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-13 23:00 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-14 15:25 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-14 10:16 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-01-14 21:28 +0000
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible thugstyle103@gmail.com - 2017-01-14 14:59 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-13 23:44 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible thugstyle103@gmail.com - 2017-01-13 18:42 -0800
wave at the clown noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 10:46 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-01-10 09:29 -0800
Re: Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2017-01-10 14:04 -0500
Re: Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 11:19 -0700
Re: Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2017-01-01 20:45 -0500
travel taketh time ... usually noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-03 16:54 -0800
Re: travel taketh time ... usually noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 14:18 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 14:19 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-01-05 14:28 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 14:23 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-01-05 14:26 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-01-05 18:13 -0500
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-01-06 13:08 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-01-06 13:30 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-01-07 15:27 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-01-05 15:25 -0800
Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-01-05 16:05 -0800
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Don Kuenz <g@crcomp.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-31 02:38 +0000 |
| Subject | How to travel in time |
| Message-ID | <20161230b@crcomp.net> |
| In reply to | #610971 |
Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
>> lets say
>> you travel back in time
>> in a time machine and your
>> time machine lands on your
>> grandfather and kills him...
>>
>>
>> Time Travel Is Not Possible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would be...absurd answers.
>>
>>
>>
>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in unproven paralell universes
>> where your father and grandfather still exist...
>>
>>
>>
>> i don't want to hear it!
>>
>
> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a particular
> form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to a circular argument.
> Maybe the universe does have such a form, and time travel really is
> impossible, but you have no proof of that.
"The Theory and Practice of Time Travel" (Niven) posits that you can not
change the past. That depends.
Changing the objective past, as various theories of history see it, is a
tough nut to crack. But you can still take software/data back to an
objective past state and introduce a change to it.
In regards to the subjective past, people can suppress/repress memories
to effectively change their own past. They can even use No Contact [1]
if necessary (it works even if their grandfather isn't a narcissist)
along with suppression/repression to kill their own grandfather in their
own mind.
How to travel into the future:
* Arrow of Time
"Every second of every day I travel one second into the future."
- Ed Lake
* Asymmetric travel enables you to enter a state of suspended animation
and travel into the future at an accelerated rate. (Niven talks about
this.)
How to travel into the past:
* The further out you look out into firmament the further back you see.
"seeing into the past without the ability to change it." - HGW
* Software offers many methods to travel to a past state: Windows system
recovery, database rollbacks, git/cvs rollbacks.
* Organic memory allows you to travel back into your past to relive
sensory input.
* Repression/suppression allows you to change your subjective past.
* History allows people to travel back into the past to experience
limited sensory input (eg the sight and sounds of the past).
Note.
1. http://www.thenarcissisticpersonality.com/no-contact-rule/
Thank you,
--
Don Kuenz KB7RPU
Had we world enough, and time,
This coyness, lady, were no crime.
- Andrew Marvell
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-30 20:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <58673243.3914@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #610971 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > > lets say > > you travel back in time > > in a time machine and your > > time machine lands on your > > grandfather and kills him... > > > > > > Time Travel Is Not Possible. > > > > > > > > Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would be...absurd answers. > > > > > > > > i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in unproven paralell universes > > where your father and grandfather still exist... > > > > > > > > i don't want to hear it! > > > > Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a particular > form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to a circular argument. > Maybe the universe does have such a form, and time travel really is > impossible, but you have no proof of that. > > Sylvia. I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here now...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-31 15:32 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ecoqnjFu4jgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #610986 |
On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>> lets say >>> you travel back in time >>> in a time machine and your >>> time machine lands on your >>> grandfather and kills him... >>> >>> >>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. >>> >>> >>> >>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would be...absurd answers. >>> >>> >>> >>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in unproven paralell universes >>> where your father and grandfather still exist... >>> >>> >>> >>> i don't want to hear it! >>> >> >> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a particular >> form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to a circular argument. >> Maybe the universe does have such a form, and time travel really is >> impossible, but you have no proof of that. >> >> Sylvia. > > > I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here now... > That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller from the far future has come here is that there is no far future from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become extinct due to natural disaster, etc. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-30 23:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <586758A0.1F74@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #610990 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> > >> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>> lets say > >>> you travel back in time > >>> in a time machine and your > >>> time machine lands on your > >>> grandfather and kills him... > >>> > >>> > >>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would be...absurd answers. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in unproven paralell universes > >>> where your father and grandfather still exist... > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> i don't want to hear it! > >>> > >> > >> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a particular > >> form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to a circular argument. > >> Maybe the universe does have such a form, and time travel really is > >> impossible, but you have no proof of that. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > > > I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here now... > > > > That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller from > the far future has come here is that there is no far future from which > to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become extinct due to > natural disaster, etc. > > Sylvia. Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball??
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-31 19:07 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ecp79bF28hbU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611006 |
On 31/12/2016 6:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> >>>> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>> lets say you travel back in time in a time machine and your >>>>> time machine lands on your grandfather and kills him... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would >>>>> be...absurd answers. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in >>>>> unproven paralell universes where your father and grandfather >>>>> still exist... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> i don't want to hear it! >>>>> >>>> >>>> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a >>>> particular form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to >>>> a circular argument. Maybe the universe does have such a form, >>>> and time travel really is impossible, but you have no proof of >>>> that. >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> >>> I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here >>> now... >>> >> >> That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller >> from the far future has come here is that there is no far future >> from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become >> extinct due to natural disaster, etc. >> >> Sylvia. > > Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and > "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball?? > They're merely possibilities. Since they are possible, you cannot use the non-existence of time travellers from the future as proof that time travel is impossible. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-31 10:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5867FE37.723@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #611011 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 31/12/2016 6:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> > >> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>>>> lets say you travel back in time in a time machine and your > >>>>> time machine lands on your grandfather and kills him... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would > >>>>> be...absurd answers. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in > >>>>> unproven paralell universes where your father and grandfather > >>>>> still exist... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> i don't want to hear it! > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a > >>>> particular form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to > >>>> a circular argument. Maybe the universe does have such a form, > >>>> and time travel really is impossible, but you have no proof of > >>>> that. > >>>> > >>>> Sylvia. > >>> > >>> > >>> I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here > >>> now... > >>> > >> > >> That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller > >> from the far future has come here is that there is no far future > >> from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become > >> extinct due to natural disaster, etc. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and > > "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball?? > > > > They're merely possibilities. Since they are possible, you cannot use > the non-existence of time travellers from the future as proof that time > travel is impossible. > > Sylvia. So, you actually believe that it is possible that a whole "civilisation" can be wiped out?? How??? Can you give an example? Also, I don't see any signs of 'humans becoming extint', ...what signs do you see, Mrs Else?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-01 11:44 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ecr1odFg7paU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611047 |
On 1/01/2017 5:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 31/12/2016 6:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> >>>> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>> lets say you travel back in time in a time machine and your >>>>>>> time machine lands on your grandfather and kills him... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would >>>>>>> be...absurd answers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in >>>>>>> unproven paralell universes where your father and grandfather >>>>>>> still exist... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i don't want to hear it! >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a >>>>>> particular form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to >>>>>> a circular argument. Maybe the universe does have such a form, >>>>>> and time travel really is impossible, but you have no proof of >>>>>> that. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here >>>>> now... >>>>> >>>> >>>> That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller >>>> from the far future has come here is that there is no far future >>>> from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become >>>> extinct due to natural disaster, etc. >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and >>> "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball?? >>> >> >> They're merely possibilities. Since they are possible, you cannot use >> the non-existence of time travellers from the future as proof that time >> travel is impossible. >> >> Sylvia. > > So, you actually believe that it is possible that a whole "civilisation" can be wiped out?? How??? Can you give an example? Nearby supernova, collision between black-holes somewhere in the galactic neighbourhood, large comet collision with Earth, worldwide nuclear war, biological weapons, runaway global warming, return to ice-ball Earth. The list of possibilities is endless. > > Also, I don't see any signs of 'humans becoming extint', ...what signs do you see, Mrs Else? > Well, for the most part there wouldn't be any signs, because it wouldn't be a gradual process. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-31 17:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <58685AA8.4AAB@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #611147 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 1/01/2017 5:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> > >> On 31/12/2016 6:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>>>>>> lets say you travel back in time in a time machine and your > >>>>>>> time machine lands on your grandfather and kills him... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would > >>>>>>> be...absurd answers. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in > >>>>>>> unproven paralell universes where your father and grandfather > >>>>>>> still exist... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> i don't want to hear it! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a > >>>>>> particular form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to > >>>>>> a circular argument. Maybe the universe does have such a form, > >>>>>> and time travel really is impossible, but you have no proof of > >>>>>> that. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sylvia. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here > >>>>> now... > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller > >>>> from the far future has come here is that there is no far future > >>>> from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become > >>>> extinct due to natural disaster, etc. > >>>> > >>>> Sylvia. > >>> > >>> Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and > >>> "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball?? > >>> > >> > >> They're merely possibilities. Since they are possible, you cannot use > >> the non-existence of time travellers from the future as proof that time > >> travel is impossible. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > So, you actually believe that it is possible that a whole "civilisation" can be wiped out?? How??? Can you give an example? > > Nearby supernova, collision between black-holes somewhere in the > galactic neighbourhood, large comet collision with Earth, worldwide > nuclear war, biological weapons, runaway global warming, return to > ice-ball Earth. The list of possibilities is endless. > > > > > Also, I don't see any signs of 'humans becoming extint', ...what signs do you see, Mrs Else? > > > > Well, for the most part there wouldn't be any signs, because it wouldn't > be a gradual process. > > Sylvia. Most girls don't even think like you do...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-01 13:10 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ecr6opFh936U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611153 |
On 1/01/2017 12:26 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 1/01/2017 5:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> >>>> On 31/12/2016 6:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>> lets say you travel back in time in a time machine and your >>>>>>>>> time machine lands on your grandfather and kills him... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would >>>>>>>>> be...absurd answers. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in >>>>>>>>> unproven paralell universes where your father and grandfather >>>>>>>>> still exist... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> i don't want to hear it! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a >>>>>>>> particular form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to >>>>>>>> a circular argument. Maybe the universe does have such a form, >>>>>>>> and time travel really is impossible, but you have no proof of >>>>>>>> that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here >>>>>>> now... >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller >>>>>> from the far future has come here is that there is no far future >>>>>> from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become >>>>>> extinct due to natural disaster, etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>> >>>>> Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and >>>>> "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball?? >>>>> >>>> >>>> They're merely possibilities. Since they are possible, you cannot use >>>> the non-existence of time travellers from the future as proof that time >>>> travel is impossible. >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> So, you actually believe that it is possible that a whole "civilisation" can be wiped out?? How??? Can you give an example? >> >> Nearby supernova, collision between black-holes somewhere in the >> galactic neighbourhood, large comet collision with Earth, worldwide >> nuclear war, biological weapons, runaway global warming, return to >> ice-ball Earth. The list of possibilities is endless. >> >>> >>> Also, I don't see any signs of 'humans becoming extint', ...what signs do you see, Mrs Else? >>> >> >> Well, for the most part there wouldn't be any signs, because it wouldn't >> be a gradual process. >> >> Sylvia. > > > Most girls don't even think like you do... > Most people don't. It's a cross I have to bear. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Yuri Kretin <invlaid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-01 11:18 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <o4bdl9$nts$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #611160 |
On 12/31/2016 8:10 PM, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 1/01/2017 12:26 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >> Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> >> Most girls don't even think like you do... >> > > Most people don't. It's a cross I have to bear. > > Sylvia. Starfarter does'nt know how he thinks at all, much less "most girls" for sure.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-01 16:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5869A346.1C8@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #611153 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > > > > On 1/01/2017 5:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > > > Sylvia Else wrote: > > >> > > >> On 31/12/2016 6:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > >>> Sylvia Else wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > >>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > > >>>>>>> lets say you travel back in time in a time machine and your > > >>>>>>> time machine lands on your grandfather and kills him... > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would > > >>>>>>> be...absurd answers. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in > > >>>>>>> unproven paralell universes where your father and grandfather > > >>>>>>> still exist... > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> i don't want to hear it! > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a > > >>>>>> particular form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to > > >>>>>> a circular argument. Maybe the universe does have such a form, > > >>>>>> and time travel really is impossible, but you have no proof of > > >>>>>> that. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Sylvia. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here > > >>>>> now... > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller > > >>>> from the far future has come here is that there is no far future > > >>>> from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become > > >>>> extinct due to natural disaster, etc. > > >>>> > > >>>> Sylvia. > > >>> > > >>> Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and > > >>> "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball?? > > >>> > > >> > > >> They're merely possibilities. Since they are possible, you cannot use > > >> the non-existence of time travellers from the future as proof that time > > >> travel is impossible. > > >> > > >> Sylvia. > > > > > > So, you actually believe that it is possible that a whole "civilisation" can be wiped out?? How??? Can you give an example? > > > > Nearby supernova, collision between black-holes somewhere in the > > galactic neighbourhood, large comet collision with Earth, worldwide > > nuclear war, biological weapons, runaway global warming, return to > > ice-ball Earth. The list of possibilities is endless. > > > > > > > > Also, I don't see any signs of 'humans becoming extint', ...what signs do you see, Mrs Else? > > > > > > > Well, for the most part there wouldn't be any signs, because it wouldn't > > be a gradual process. > > > > Sylvia. > > Most girls don't even think like you do... I wrote "an example" not 'examples'... lets take one of your examples: "large comet collision with Earth". It has never in the past happen to wipe out a whole cilivization, maybe a few ants...it's speculation, I DON'T WANT TO HEAR SPECULATION. Your so-called theories are useless today. They are nothing more than science fiction ideas.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-02 12:03 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ectn6aF5bmlU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611248 |
On 2/01/2017 11:48 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > The Starmaker wrote: >> >> Sylvia Else wrote: >>> >>> On 1/01/2017 5:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 31/12/2016 6:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>>>>>>> lets say you travel back in time in a time machine and your >>>>>>>>>> time machine lands on your grandfather and kills him... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would >>>>>>>>>> be...absurd answers. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in >>>>>>>>>> unproven paralell universes where your father and grandfather >>>>>>>>>> still exist... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> i don't want to hear it! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a >>>>>>>>> particular form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to >>>>>>>>> a circular argument. Maybe the universe does have such a form, >>>>>>>>> and time travel really is impossible, but you have no proof of >>>>>>>>> that. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here >>>>>>>> now... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller >>>>>>> from the far future has come here is that there is no far future >>>>>>> from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become >>>>>>> extinct due to natural disaster, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>>> >>>>>> Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and >>>>>> "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball?? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> They're merely possibilities. Since they are possible, you cannot use >>>>> the non-existence of time travellers from the future as proof that time >>>>> travel is impossible. >>>>> >>>>> Sylvia. >>>> >>>> So, you actually believe that it is possible that a whole "civilisation" can be wiped out?? How??? Can you give an example? >>> >>> Nearby supernova, collision between black-holes somewhere in the >>> galactic neighbourhood, large comet collision with Earth, worldwide >>> nuclear war, biological weapons, runaway global warming, return to >>> ice-ball Earth. The list of possibilities is endless. >>> >>>> >>>> Also, I don't see any signs of 'humans becoming extint', ...what signs do you see, Mrs Else? >>>> >>> >>> Well, for the most part there wouldn't be any signs, because it wouldn't >>> be a gradual process. >>> >>> Sylvia. >> >> Most girls don't even think like you do... > > > I wrote "an example" not 'examples'... Really, you wanted just one example? > > lets take one of your examples: "large comet collision with Earth". > > It has never in the past happen to wipe out a whole cilivization, maybe > a few ants...it's speculation, I DON'T WANT TO HEAR SPECULATION. Your > so-called > theories are useless today. They are nothing more than science fiction > ideas. > Of course human civilisation has never been wiped out - if it had been, then we'd not be here to discuss it (a variation of the anthropic principle). That means that we have no idea of the probability of its happening. Perhaps it's quite likely, and we've just been very lucky. The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass extinctions. It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing could happen again, and be severe enough to wipe out the human race. You've sought to characterise the absence of visitors from the future as proof that time travel is impossible. "Proof" is a strong word. To prove something you need to exclude not just likely counter-examples, but all possible counter-examples. You're nowhere near being able to do that. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-01 21:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <5869E028.3FF1@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #611253 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 2/01/2017 11:48 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > >> > >> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>> > >>> On 1/01/2017 5:51 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On 31/12/2016 6:05 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>>>>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On 31/12/2016 6:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> lets say you travel back in time in a time machine and your > >>>>>>>>>> time machine lands on your grandfather and kills him... > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Time Travel Is Not Possible. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Any answers you give saying time travel is possible would > >>>>>>>>>> be...absurd answers. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> i don't want to hear absurd answers like you come back in > >>>>>>>>>> unproven paralell universes where your father and grandfather > >>>>>>>>>> still exist... > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> i don't want to hear it! > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Why not? You're effectively saying that the Universe has a > >>>>>>>>> particular form, one in which your proof works. That's akin to > >>>>>>>>> a circular argument. Maybe the universe does have such a form, > >>>>>>>>> and time travel really is impossible, but you have no proof of > >>>>>>>>> that. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Sylvia. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I would say by now somebody in the far future would be here > >>>>>>>> now... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> That's a different argument. But maybe the reason no time traveller > >>>>>>> from the far future has come here is that there is no far future > >>>>>>> from which to come - civilisation wipes itself out - humans become > >>>>>>> extinct due to natural disaster, etc. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Sylvia. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Where did you get this idea "civilisation wipes itself out", and > >>>>>> "humans become extinct"? a crystal ball?? > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> They're merely possibilities. Since they are possible, you cannot use > >>>>> the non-existence of time travellers from the future as proof that time > >>>>> travel is impossible. > >>>>> > >>>>> Sylvia. > >>>> > >>>> So, you actually believe that it is possible that a whole "civilisation" can be wiped out?? How??? Can you give an example? > >>> > >>> Nearby supernova, collision between black-holes somewhere in the > >>> galactic neighbourhood, large comet collision with Earth, worldwide > >>> nuclear war, biological weapons, runaway global warming, return to > >>> ice-ball Earth. The list of possibilities is endless. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Also, I don't see any signs of 'humans becoming extint', ...what signs do you see, Mrs Else? > >>>> > >>> > >>> Well, for the most part there wouldn't be any signs, because it wouldn't > >>> be a gradual process. > >>> > >>> Sylvia. > >> > >> Most girls don't even think like you do... > > > > > > I wrote "an example" not 'examples'... > > Really, you wanted just one example? > > > > > lets take one of your examples: "large comet collision with Earth". > > > > It has never in the past happen to wipe out a whole cilivization, maybe > > a few ants...it's speculation, I DON'T WANT TO HEAR SPECULATION. Your > > so-called > > theories are useless today. They are nothing more than science fiction > > ideas. > > > > Of course human civilisation has never been wiped out - if it had been, > then we'd not be here to discuss it (a variation of the anthropic > principle). That means that we have no idea of the probability of its > happening. Perhaps it's quite likely, and we've just been very lucky. Wrong. If you list all the "we've just been very lucky"...it will turn out it's not Luck. > > The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass > extinctions. Oh oh, here comes the "What happen to the dinosaurs?" theories...i thought you had more intelligence thab that...i guess I over estimated you...you are a girl. >It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing > could happen again, and be severe enough to wipe out the human race. every single person, right? > > You've sought to characterise the absence of visitors from the future as > proof that time travel is impossible. "Proof" is a strong word. To prove > something you need to exclude not just likely counter-examples, but all > possible counter-examples. You're nowhere near being able to do that. > > Sylvia. Yes, "Proof" is a strong word...not inside the vocalubulary of the 'scientific community'. "Maybe" is the word they worship.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-02 16:25 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ecu6j8F8is2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611273 |
On 2/01/2017 4:07 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >> The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass >> extinctions. > > Oh oh, here comes the "What happen to the dinosaurs?" theories...i thought you had more > intelligence thab that...i guess I over estimated you...you are a girl. > > > > > >> It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing >> could happen again, and be severe enough to wipe out the human race. > > every single person, right? Why not? > > >> >> You've sought to characterise the absence of visitors from the future as >> proof that time travel is impossible. "Proof" is a strong word. To prove >> something you need to exclude not just likely counter-examples, but all >> possible counter-examples. You're nowhere near being able to do that. >> >> Sylvia. > > > Yes, "Proof" is a strong word...not inside the vocalubulary of the 'scientific community'. "Maybe" is the word they worship. > If you're content with may be impossible, or even probably impossible, then that's fine. Just don't claim to have proved that it's impossible, when you haven't. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-02 10:19 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <586A99A4.792E@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #611275 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 2/01/2017 4:07 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > >> The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass > >> extinctions. > > > > Oh oh, here comes the "What happen to the dinosaurs?" theories...i thought you had more > > intelligence thab that...i guess I over estimated you...you are a girl. > > > > > > > > > > > >> It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing > >> could happen again, and be severe enough to wipe out the human race. > > > > every single person, right? > > Why not? You never heard of...survive? > > > > > > >> > >> You've sought to characterise the absence of visitors from the future as > >> proof that time travel is impossible. "Proof" is a strong word. To prove > >> something you need to exclude not just likely counter-examples, but all > >> possible counter-examples. You're nowhere near being able to do that. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > > > Yes, "Proof" is a strong word...not inside the vocalubulary of the 'scientific community'. "Maybe" is the word they worship. > > > > If you're content with may be impossible, or even probably impossible, > then that's fine. Just don't claim to have proved that it's impossible, > when you haven't. > > Sylvia. I understand...yous people in the 'scientific community' are not allowed to Think of the "not possible", or "impossible". It just makes yous sound smarter to say all the possibilities...that's called 'ad hoc theories'. Like, "of course there are time travellers, they are just in another universe!" But i never read a science fiction book, i leave in a real world...only one earth, only one universe. I'm also not a doom and gloomer...that's yous department. Your logic says there are no time travlers because the comet killed them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-03 14:54 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ed0lj2Fr7t8U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611331 |
On 3/01/2017 5:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 2/01/2017 4:07 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >> >>>> The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass >>>> extinctions. >>> >>> Oh oh, here comes the "What happen to the dinosaurs?" theories...i thought you had more >>> intelligence thab that...i guess I over estimated you...you are a girl. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing >>>> could happen again, and be severe enough to wipe out the human race. >>> >>> every single person, right? >> >> Why not? > > > You never heard of...survive? In an episode of "Dinosaurs" a school teacher explained that there will always be more of an endangered animal species, because that's what "more" means. Is that your manner of thinking here? > > > Your logic says there are no time travlers because the comet killed > them. > No it's doesn't, and I'm having a hard time understanding why you've got this so muddled. The point at issue is not whether there are no time travellers for this reason, nor even whether time travel is possible. The focus is on whether your purported proof of the absence of time travel is valid. I'm offering alternative scenarios that explain the absence of time travellers even if time travel is possible. These possible, even if unlikely, scenarios invalidate your proof which depends on the impossibility of time travel being the only possible explanation for the absence of time travellers. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-03 21:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <586C858B.4A@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #611429 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 3/01/2017 5:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> > >> On 2/01/2017 4:07 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > >> > >>>> The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass > >>>> extinctions. > >>> > >>> Oh oh, here comes the "What happen to the dinosaurs?" theories...i thought you had more > >>> intelligence thab that...i guess I over estimated you...you are a girl. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing > >>>> could happen again, and be severe enough to wipe out the human race. > >>> > >>> every single person, right? > >> > >> Why not? > > > > > > You never heard of...survive? > > In an episode of "Dinosaurs" a school teacher explained that there will > always be more of an endangered animal species, because that's what > "more" means. > > Is that your manner of thinking here? > > > > > > > Your logic says there are no time travlers because the comet killed > > them. > > > > No it's doesn't, and I'm having a hard time understanding why you've got > this so muddled. > > The point at issue is not whether there are no time travellers for this > reason, nor even whether time travel is possible. The focus is on > whether your purported proof of the absence of time travel is valid. > > I'm offering alternative scenarios that explain the absence of time > travellers even if time travel is possible. These possible, even if > unlikely, scenarios invalidate your proof which depends on the > impossibility of time travel being the only possible explanation for the > absence of time travellers. > > Sylvia. Maybe your problem is...with the words..."not possible", and you use...'it is possible'. Your "alternative scenarios" are based on...probability. And, "probability" is a math term, and math is not science. Math is not reality. I'm not interested in...probabilities.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 16:45 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ed3gfnFi1dhU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #611620 |
On 4/01/2017 4:18 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 3/01/2017 5:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2/01/2017 4:07 PM, The Starmaker wrote: >>>> >>>>>> The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass >>>>>> extinctions. >>>>> >>>>> Oh oh, here comes the "What happen to the dinosaurs?" theories...i thought you had more >>>>> intelligence thab that...i guess I over estimated you...you are a girl. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing >>>>>> could happen again, and be severe enough to wipe out the human race. >>>>> >>>>> every single person, right? >>>> >>>> Why not? >>> >>> >>> You never heard of...survive? >> >> In an episode of "Dinosaurs" a school teacher explained that there will >> always be more of an endangered animal species, because that's what >> "more" means. >> >> Is that your manner of thinking here? >> >>> >>> >>> Your logic says there are no time travlers because the comet killed >>> them. >>> >> >> No it's doesn't, and I'm having a hard time understanding why you've got >> this so muddled. >> >> The point at issue is not whether there are no time travellers for this >> reason, nor even whether time travel is possible. The focus is on >> whether your purported proof of the absence of time travel is valid. >> >> I'm offering alternative scenarios that explain the absence of time >> travellers even if time travel is possible. These possible, even if >> unlikely, scenarios invalidate your proof which depends on the >> impossibility of time travel being the only possible explanation for the >> absence of time travellers. >> >> Sylvia. > > > Maybe your problem is...with the words..."not possible", and you use...'it is possible'. > > > Your "alternative scenarios" are based on...probability. And, "probability" is a math term, and math is not science. > > Math is not reality. > > I'm not interested in...probabilities. > I think you just don't want to concede that your proof doesn't work. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-03 21:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <586C8DC4.2DF3@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #611625 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 4/01/2017 4:18 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> > >> On 3/01/2017 5:19 AM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 2/01/2017 4:07 PM, The Starmaker wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>> The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass > >>>>>> extinctions. > >>>>> > >>>>> Oh oh, here comes the "What happen to the dinosaurs?" theories...i thought you had more > >>>>> intelligence thab that...i guess I over estimated you...you are a girl. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that such a thing > >>>>>> could happen again, and be severe enough to wipe out the human race. > >>>>> > >>>>> every single person, right? > >>>> > >>>> Why not? > >>> > >>> > >>> You never heard of...survive? > >> > >> In an episode of "Dinosaurs" a school teacher explained that there will > >> always be more of an endangered animal species, because that's what > >> "more" means. > >> > >> Is that your manner of thinking here? > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> Your logic says there are no time travlers because the comet killed > >>> them. > >>> > >> > >> No it's doesn't, and I'm having a hard time understanding why you've got > >> this so muddled. > >> > >> The point at issue is not whether there are no time travellers for this > >> reason, nor even whether time travel is possible. The focus is on > >> whether your purported proof of the absence of time travel is valid. > >> > >> I'm offering alternative scenarios that explain the absence of time > >> travellers even if time travel is possible. These possible, even if > >> unlikely, scenarios invalidate your proof which depends on the > >> impossibility of time travel being the only possible explanation for the > >> absence of time travellers. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > > > Maybe your problem is...with the words..."not possible", and you use...'it is possible'. > > > > > > Your "alternative scenarios" are based on...probability. And, "probability" is a math term, and math is not science. > > > > Math is not reality. > > > > I'm not interested in...probabilities. > > > > I think you just don't want to concede that your proof doesn't work. > > Sylvia. Let me explain why a comet will never wipe out cilivatization... Probability is the possibility that an event will occur, as expressed by the ratio of the number of actual occurrences to the total number of possible occurrences. Since a comet has never wiped out civilization on earth, there is no actual occurrence by ratio, no two amounts, or even one amount. It is "an improbable event". A comet will never wipe out civilatization because it is impossible. Therefore, any time travelers in the future would be here now buying lottery tickets and betting at the racetrack. Time Travel Is Not Possible and it's Impossible. That is not how the world and the universe works. Nature is not going to go to all this trouble and then wipe out civilazation with a comet. It's not in the works..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-04 11:43 -0800 |
| Subject | _the tetrahedron & how to use it_, copyr.'958, Oklahoma u.presS |
| Message-ID | <7600439e-d6db-418c-bb34-e7ee5a31c2b0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #611626 |
of course, it is only a misnomer, along with the usual apperception of four-arity; dimensionally, it is just coordination that is homogenous, that is tetrahedral, and it is certainly quite useful in that way (i.e, what is the volume of a truncated tetrahedron (4 hexagonal and 4 trigonal facets > > >>>>>> The Earth has been hit by large objects in the past, causing mass > > >>>>> Oh oh, here comes the "What happen to the dinosaurs?" theories...i > > >>> Your logic says there are no time travlers because the comet killed > > >> whether your purported proof of the absence of time travel is valid. > > >> > > >> I'm offering alternative scenarios that explain the absence of time > > >> travellers even if time travel is possible. These possible, even if > > >> unlikely, scenarios invalidate your proof which depends on the > > >> impossibility of time travel being the only possible explanation for the > > >> absence of time travellers. > Therefore, any time travelers in the future would be here now buying lottery tickets and betting at the racetrack.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web