Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #610879 > unrolled thread

Time Travel Is Not Possible

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  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 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7  Next page →

#611945

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> 
> Alan Baker:
> 
> Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
> during the protests over Trump's election?
> 
> *One* answer, not
> 
> yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
> /yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
> o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
> no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/
> 
> like you've been doing.
> 
> We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
> with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
> prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
> And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.
> 
> Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
> interacting with the world around you any more.
> 
> --
> Terry Austin
> 
> Vacation photos from Iceland:
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
> 
> "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
>     -- David Bilek
> 
> Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

I don't allow 'internet bullies' on my threads. 


Go to Canada...with the rest of the sissies.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611958

The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:586FD2BD.2771@ix.netcom.com: 

> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>> 
>> Alan Baker:
>> 
>> Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of
>> arrests, during the protests over Trump's election?
>> 
>> *One* answer, not
>> 
>> yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/y
>> es/no 
>> /yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/
>> yes/n 
>> o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
>> /yes/ no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/
>> 
>> like you've been doing.
>> 
>> We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and
>> stick with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are
>> far more prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or
>> Obama haters." And you *can't* accept that, due to your
>> illness. 
>> 
>> Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
>> interacting with the world around you any more.
>> 
>> --
>> Terry Austin
>> 
>> Vacation photos from Iceland:
>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
>> 
>> "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
>>     -- David Bilek
>> 
>> Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
> 
> I don't allow 'internet bullies' on my threads. 

Good thing this isn't your thread, nor is any other, and that 
you're a helpless pussy (though not as mentally ill as Alan).
> 
> 
> Go to Canada...with the rest of the sissies.
> 
Make me, pussy.

-- 
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland: 
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
    -- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611952 — Gutless whining (was Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible

On 2017-01-06 8:18 AM, Gutless whined

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611959 — Re: Gutless whining (was Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible

Alan Baker:

Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests, 
during the protests over Trump's election?

*One* answer, not 

yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/

like you've been doing.

We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick 
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more 
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters." 
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.

Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.




-- 
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland: 
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
    -- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#612149

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:18:18 +1100, Sylvia Else
<sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

>On 6/01/2017 6:38 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
>
>>
>> how about the time traveler goes back a day and buys a lottery ticket
>> that pays 500 million dollars, goes back to the future and deposits
>> the money, goes back again, plays the same numbers, goes back and
>> deposits another 500 million,  goes back again, plays the same
>> numbers, goes back and deposits another 500 million,
>>

One way to make it consistent is to notice that when he goes back the
second time, there will be two of him coming for the lottery payout
(from his first and second trips back). Like Sylvia said, he is by
definition, in a different "timeline." Most solvent lotteries won't
pay the same guy twice - lol.

If, on his second trip back (second self), he's first at the payout
window and moves the $500 mil to the future, then his first self
got/gets "stiffed" (doesn't  get paid). His second self arrives back
in the future with the second $500 mil but there is no $500 mil from
his first self's previous trip (because he has stiffed his first self
back in the past). The only thing I don't like is that it requires the
original $500 mil to disappear when he arrives back from the second
trip back. But I can argue the two trips back are to two different
"timelines" and the present is also a different "timeline."

Previously, my philosophy/theory has always been that changes made in
the past cannot affect the future but I did not cover the case where
you take an object from the past and introduce it into the present. I
can argue that the object (e.g. $500 mil) added to your present bank
account is a change made in the present and not in the past. It may
now  affect the present. The addition of the $500 mil to the present
affects the present, but the removal of the $500 mil from the past
will only affect the past if you stay in the past. It doesn't affect
the present once you return.

This a problem with time travel backward. If it can affect the
present, that requires things in the present to move around quickly to
accomplish said changes prior to your arrival back in the present. In
the limit of a quick time travel trip (actual time spent traveling and
not the duration of your stay in the past) when you return to the
present, any changes you expect could require massive objects to move
much faster than light.

Regardless of how long it takes you to travel to the past (and back),
requiring changes you make in the past to take effect in the present
could easily require massive objects in the present to move much
faster than light in order to meet this requirement.

Possibly a sort of "Time Quake" (ala the movie "Millennium") could
spread the required changes in the present over more time and reduce
the velocity requirement to below light speed. you would arrive back
in the present and have to wait a while for the changes to fully take
effect.


Mike

See you at the show trials - lol.
---------------------------------------------------
Michael J. Strickland			Reston, VA
---------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611868

The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:586EA0AD.16BE@ix.netcom.com: 

> The Starmaker wrote:
>> 
>> 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.. 
> 
> 
> 
> okay, maybe the time traveler killing his grandfather is a
> little too much.. 
> 
> how about the time traveler goes back a day and buys a lottery
> ticket that pays 500 million dollars, goes back to the future
> and deposits the money, goes back again, plays the same numbers,
> goes back and deposits another 500 million,  goes back again,
> plays the same numbers, goes back and deposits another 500
> million, 
> 
> 
> i'm having trouble figuring out where is all this money coming
> from... are the serial numbers the same? are the lottery
> officals wondering why are there all these paid checks made out
> to the same person shows paid over billion dollars but only 500
> million paid out.. 
> 
> something is wrong with your 'possible time travel senerios'.
> 
> Nature doesn't work this way.

Neither do lotteries, since the payout is divided amongst all the 
winning tickest.

How fucking pathetic do you have to be to not understand that?

Retard.

-- 
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland: 
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
    -- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611010

Sylvia Else wrote:

> 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.

Completely untrue. No need of natural disasters and etc. The ability of 
survival for species is inverse proportional with that particular specie's 
intelligence based on brain. Hence the most successful species are the 
microbial which can adapt and survive without a brain.

A specie with brain life span is about one hundred thousands years. Make 
it two, since you insist.

I can  tell you why. The reality is so brutal, forcing a species to 
develop a brain. A brain which is nothing more than a lie machine. The 
lies are indispensable, strictly required. That's why you have politics, 
churches, movies, etc etc, and even music. Actually the Musics conclude 
our little discussion. Music is nothing more than a vibration of air 
molecules. The lying brain translate it in something else, which 
definitely can be not. It's a lie.

Fully consistent with my Divergent Matter Model, btw.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611035

In article <ecoqnjFu4jgU1@mid.individual.net>,
Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> said:

> On 31/12/2016 3:21 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>
>> 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.

Or, even for them time travel has a resource cost which becomes,
let's say, exponentially prohibitive the farther back you want to
go.  If it's the year 5000 and you want to go to 4900, okay, we got
the budget for that. Back to the year 4000? This better be *real*
important. The year 2000? Yeah, right, let me know when we can tap
the full energy of twenty-six galaxies in one Planck second.

(There's also of course the two-ends-of-a-wormhole model of time
travel that uses a permanent, stationary-in-space installation, and
by definition you can only go as far back as the moment that the
system was first brought online. If nobody's built and activated
one of those yet, there's no way they can get back in time to us.)

-- wds

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611194

"Sylvia Else"  wrote

>> 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.

Or if time travel can only occur through 'time tunnels' constructed 
forwards, there can be no travel to an earlier date than the first tunnel.

-- 
Mike D 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611200

Michael R N Dolbear wrote:


> "Sylvia Else"  wrote
> 
>>> 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.
> 
> Or if time travel can only occur through 'time tunnels' constructed
> forwards, there can be no travel to an earlier date than the first
> tunnel. --Mike D

Absolutely incorrect, Mike D. The obvious reason is my Divergent Matter 
Model, DMM. Time travel is totally nonsense. It also comes implicitly from 
Einsine, since he also realized at the end of his carrier, that Time does 
not really exists. Then now, hearing you people discussing "time travel", 
leads me to congruent thoughts, as "moon landings". No offence.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611202

On 1/1/2017 9:47 AM, Tiffany Wuest wrote:
> Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
>
>
>> "Sylvia Else"  wrote
>>
>>>> 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.
>>
>> Or if time travel can only occur through 'time tunnels' constructed
>> forwards, there can be no travel to an earlier date than the first
>> tunnel. --Mike D
>
> Absolutely incorrect, Mike D. The obvious reason is my Divergent Matter
> Model, DMM. Time travel is totally nonsense. It also comes implicitly from
> Einsine, since he also realized at the end of his carrier, that Time does
> not really exists.

if Time dosent exist, what makes the second hand on a clock go round ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611210

Yuri Kretin wrote:
> Tiffany Wuest wrote:
> > Michael R N Dolbear wrote:

----snip----

> > > Or if time travel can only occur through 'time tunnels'
> > > constructed forwards, there can be no travel to an earlier
> > > date than the first tunnel. --Mike D
> >
> > Absolutely incorrect, Mike D. The obvious reason is my Divergent
> > Matter Model, DMM. Time travel is totally nonsense. It also comes
> > implicitly from Einsine, since he also realized at the end of
> > his carrier,

Dunno about that.

> > that Time does not really exist.

Actually it does. But it's not a phenomenon, like space; it's a
noumenon, like number.

> if Time dosent exist,

It does.

> what makes the second hand on a clock go round ?

The spring.

You weren't thinking that time actually *does* stuff, were you?

Geeeeeezuz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611212

On 1/1/2017 10:52 AM, Ned Latham wrote:
> Yuri Kretin wrote:
>> Tiffany Wuest wrote:
>>> Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
>

>
>> what makes the second hand on a clock go round ?
>
> The spring.
>
> You weren't thinking that time actually *does* stuff, were you?
>
> Geeeeeezuz
>

yes,

it takes "Time" for you to type those letters, doesnt it ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611231

Yuri Kretin wrote:
> Ned Latham wrote:
> > Yuri Kretin wrote:

----whoo-oo-oosh----

> > > what makes the second hand on a clock go round ?
> >
> > The spring.
> >
> > You weren't thinking that time actually *does* stuff, were you?
> >
> > Geeeeeezuz
>
> yes,

Trying to live up to your name, Yuri?

> it takes "Time" for you to type those letters, doesnt it ?

That's ne doing stiff. not time doing stuff. Read what you snipped.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611250

Yuri Kretin wrote:
> 
> On 1/1/2017 10:52 AM, Ned Latham wrote:
> > Yuri Kretin wrote:
> >> Tiffany Wuest wrote:
> >>> Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> >
> 
> >
> >> what makes the second hand on a clock go round ?
> >
> > The spring.
> >
> > You weren't thinking that time actually *does* stuff, were you?
> >
> > Geeeeeezuz
> >
> 
> yes,
> 
> it takes "Time" for you to type those letters, doesnt it ?


There are lots of keyboards around and i don't see "Time" typing any
letters on it...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611249

Yuri Kretin wrote:
> 
> On 1/1/2017 9:47 AM, Tiffany Wuest wrote:
> > Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
> >
> >
> >> "Sylvia Else"  wrote
> >>
> >>>> 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.
> >>
> >> Or if time travel can only occur through 'time tunnels' constructed
> >> forwards, there can be no travel to an earlier date than the first
> >> tunnel. --Mike D
> >
> > Absolutely incorrect, Mike D. The obvious reason is my Divergent Matter
> > Model, DMM. Time travel is totally nonsense. It also comes implicitly from
> > Einsine, since he also realized at the end of his carrier, that Time does
> > not really exists.
> 
> if Time dosent exist, what makes the second hand on a clock go round ?

That's like asking what makes the shadow go round on a sunclock..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611751

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 11:32:55 PM UTC-5, 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.
> abcdef
> Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611056

"The Starmaker"  wrote in message news:5866B352.6F63@ix.netcom.com... 

lets say
you travel back in time
in a time machine and your
time machine lands on your
grandfather and kills him...

>>> snip <<<


*** I want to travel back in time, so that I can
get back my girlfriend, my dog and my pickem-up
truck ...

noTroll's mother also wants to take that trip back
to that critical juncture where this time she would
administer a BJ ... though disgusting as that
alternative may be.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611244

On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 11:19:46 -0800, The Starmaker
<starmaker@ix.netcom.com> 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.

And...?

I don't claim (or know) if "time travel" back in time is possible, I'm
just pointing out that your evidence/argument does not preclude it.

Your old "grandfather/father/? paradox" is easily disposed of but
there are some other difficulties which have to be overcome if you
travel to the past and then return to the present.

In your example, if your grandfather is alive in the present before
you leave for the past, the grandfather you fall on in the past dies
but that doesn't affect the grandfather you have when you return to
the present. He is a separate entity. He is just as you left him
(alive). Obviously he could have coincidentally died while you were
"neglecting/relieving" him by traveling in time (lol) but it would
have nothing to do with anything you did in the past to his earlier
entity.

Say you "go" back in time 20 years. This probably requires non-zero
time. Two versions of your grandfather (entities) must exist (a
present and a past version) while you are in transit. Any changes made
in the past normally propagate forward in time at the speed of time (1
second per second). They would normally take 20 years to arrive at
(affect) the present you left.

I believe the only way to experience changes made in the past is to
remain in that past. The present you start from is a different part of
the timeline. The past is also a different part of the timeline. These
two separate timeline segments do not normally interact directly. Btw,
"my" timeline is infinite in both directions. 

As I replied about 20 years ago (in sci.physics) to a similar
statement/question, one way of looking at it is to assign every object
in the universe a location in space (x, y, z). Btw, "my" universe is
an  x, y, z coordinate grid of infinite size (volume). Each location
is specified by a location in space (x, y, z) along with a location in
time (t, s). "s", the second time coordinate, describes its "shift" or
distance from you on the timeline. At s = -20 years on the timeline,
you find the universe as it was 20 years ago. Your "time machine" must
also change x, y, & z (spatial location) since these usually change
with time for anything that's moving (like a planet and everything on
it). The "s" gives your time machine's "time shift" from its start
time (present) and the t gives its current location (in time).

Also, the fact that you are going into the past implies you are going
into a different past (one with a different "s") because, let's face
it, in the original past, no one popped in with a time machine, now
did they.

So when you go back 20 years into the past, your coordinates change
from (x, y, z, t, s) to (x, y, z, t', s'). Normally, when not time
traveling, "s" remains constant and "t" increases at the normal "speed
of time" which is 1 second per second as we are currently traveling
inexorably into the future at 1 second per second.

I've tried to give you a "theory" without resorting to what you said
you didn't want to hear. Your welcome.

P.S. Killing your grandfather won't help - lol.

Mike
See you at the show trials - lol.
---------------------------------------------------
Michael J. Strickland			Reston, VA
---------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#611252

Michael J. Strickland wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 11:19:46 -0800, The Starmaker
> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> 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.
> 
> And...?
> 
> I don't claim (or know) if "time travel" back in time is possible, I'm
> just pointing out that your evidence/argument does not preclude it.
> 
> Your old "grandfather/father/? paradox" is easily disposed of but
> there are some other difficulties which have to be overcome if you
> travel to the past and then return to the present.
> 
> In your example, if your grandfather is alive in the present before
> you leave for the past, the grandfather you fall on in the past dies
> but that doesn't affect the grandfather you have when you return to
> the present. He is a separate entity. He is just as you left him
> (alive). Obviously he could have coincidentally died while you were
> "neglecting/relieving" him by traveling in time (lol) but it would
> have nothing to do with anything you did in the past to his earlier
> entity.

THAT IS THE MOST RIDICULOUS THING I EVER HEARD! 


I guess it gets more ridiculous if i continue reading..(if you follow
the second law)



> 
> Say you "go" back in time 20 years. This probably requires non-zero
> time. Two versions of your grandfather (entities) must exist (a
> present and a past version) while you are in transit. Any changes made
> in the past normally propagate forward in time at the speed of time (1
> second per second). They would normally take 20 years to arrive at
> (affect) the present you left.
> 
> I believe the only way to experience changes made in the past is to
> remain in that past. The present you start from is a different part of
> the timeline. The past is also a different part of the timeline. These
> two separate timeline segments do not normally interact directly. Btw,
> "my" timeline is infinite in both directions.
> 
> As I replied about 20 years ago (in sci.physics) to a similar
> statement/question, one way of looking at it is to assign every object
> in the universe a location in space (x, y, z). Btw, "my" universe is
> an  x, y, z coordinate grid of infinite size (volume). Each location
> is specified by a location in space (x, y, z) along with a location in
> time (t, s). "s", the second time coordinate, describes its "shift" or
> distance from you on the timeline. At s = -20 years on the timeline,
> you find the universe as it was 20 years ago. Your "time machine" must
> also change x, y, & z (spatial location) since these usually change
> with time for anything that's moving (like a planet and everything on
> it). The "s" gives your time machine's "time shift" from its start
> time (present) and the t gives its current location (in time).
> 
> Also, the fact that you are going into the past implies you are going
> into a different past (one with a different "s") because, let's face
> it, in the original past, no one popped in with a time machine, now
> did they.
> 
> So when you go back 20 years into the past, your coordinates change
> from (x, y, z, t, s) to (x, y, z, t', s'). Normally, when not time
> traveling, "s" remains constant and "t" increases at the normal "speed
> of time" which is 1 second per second as we are currently traveling
> inexorably into the future at 1 second per second.
> 
> I've tried to give you a "theory" without resorting to what you said
> you didn't want to hear. Your welcome.
> 
> P.S. Killing your grandfather won't help - lol.
> 
> Mike
> See you at the show trials - lol.
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Michael J. Strickland                   Reston, VA
> ---------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web