Another story, true, but you wont belive it...

Skepti,

I don't quite know how to receive your last post - the part that responded to my reply to Einstein.

Just to clarify, "the judge ruled, the jury brought in a verdict and the fat lady sang her song on that issue just after the turn of the millennium" was in reference to the fact that the vast majority of posters here and elsewhere as having long ago accepted that he was making predictions about the future.

The jury has certainly brought in a verdict on the outcome of his predictions as far as I'm concerned. He's missed on every prediction that wasn't a vague, slick answer or cute quip response to someone's question or comment.

The time travel part of the story was over as soon as he disclosed that the total mass of the gadget, including the two black holes, was 500 lbs (225 kg). There ain't no way, no how, now or any time in the future, that a black hole with a mass of ~100 kg will generate a wormhole that can "suck" in a Chevy pick-up, intact along with rider, and deposit it intact somewhere else. The event horizon of such a BH is many, many orders of magnitude smaller than the smallest possible sub-atomic particle.

The entire planet Earth, if collapsed into a black hole, would have an event horizon radius of ~4.5 mm - about the same radius as your little finger. A Chevy pick-up wouldn't survive intact entering a wormhole created by that mass.

Titor's BH's would have event horizon radii of ~1.5*10^-29 meters. If a proton actually had a classical radius it would be something on the order of 10^-15 meters.

This is based on the static limit BH solution. HIs spinning charged BH's would have a very slightly larger event horizon radius.

Is there anything that we can compare that has a size difference on the order of magnitude above? Well, sort of - though its not even close.

Our Local Group of Galaxies (Milky Way, Andromeda, Triangulum and six other galaxies) has a diameter of about 6 million light years. The Universe has a diameter of about 35 billion light years.

If you plug & chug the numbers you come up with:

Local Group = 6 * 10^19 kilometers

The Universe = 3.3 * 10^23 kilometers

If Titor's event horizons were the size of the Local Group and a proton maintained the same relative size, the diameter of the proton would be larger than the entire universe - not 6 thousands times larger than the event horizon (as the Local Group is as compared to the Universe) but 100 trillion times bigger. (That's why I said that there was a "sort of" good comparitor. I couldn't think of anything larger than the entire universe to compare it to.
)

This is a part of Titor's Silly Science.
 
Skepti

(unless, of course, you were willing to take up and indulge in a Star Trek-style course in scientific techno-babble to explain why a force-field powerful enough to bend the light of a 'demo' laser doesn't bend any other light from its surrounds.) For this reason, Einstein, given that you mentioned your misgivings about Titor's photos earlier, I find your 'Devil's Advocate' ability to debate either side of an argument questionable and problematic when it comes to Titor.
Click to expand...

I will agree with you. Up to a point of course. The laser picture has always fascinated me too. Could it actually be duplicated with any type of present day science? I think it has been proved that you could duplicate a photo like that with a fibre optic cable. But my main reason for losing interest was because the photo had been through a photo editing program. Like photoshop. The photo could have been produced in a photo editing program with very little effort at all.

Up untill recently that laser photo looked like silly science. A little over a month ago I was playing around with a gravity wave generator I built. I've mentioned this in another thread. I think it was time travel mechanics. I happened to notice that the frequency of the Electromagnetic wave I was using to generate the gravity wave actually increased by 15 percent when I shifted the ground plane of the EM wave in the negative direction. So it looks like I've come across a method to alter the flow of time for an EM wave. That's my current interpretation. I've done some checking and there is no time flow modification for normal time keeping devices exposed to this EM time flow altering field. Just the EM wave seems to be effected. Radar invisibility? An incoming radar wave would have its frequency shifted and no longer would be detected by enemy radar detectors. What a cool stealth device that would make. Wait a minute. Didn't they try that back in the 40's? Anyway, it appears my device is very frequency specific. On the theory side I'm moving toward an idea that there are two time forces opposing each other. But I think mother nature has put reality together so that the opposing time flows are not originating from identical phenomena. It's almost like mother nature found a way to make an apple equal an orange. Everything is still at the zero point. My point for bringing this up is that it does appear that there is a way to control the flow of time without using the bone crushing effects of a gravity field. So it might be possible to come up with a device that would effect the flow of time for the light emitted by a laser without effecting or distorting the surrounding light reflecting objects. This I believe could actually be developed based on my observations so far. I'm still playing around with the device. So more experiments in time control are definitely on my agenda
 
Very interesting /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

If you could make a gravity wave generator, why not someone make a anti-gravity wave generator? anyone thought of that? I believe that however you made the current gravity wave generator, perhaps you could reverse the effects? hmm.. not sure if it would work or not, but try it anyways and see for yourself how it goes.
 
"Our Local Group of Galaxies (Milky Way, Andromeda, Triangulum and six other galaxies) has a diameter of about 6 million light years. The Universe has a diameter of about 35 billion light years."

I dont believe that. How can science figure the diameter of the universe???? Never proven, because it is all based in theory applications. Scientists say its fact... is it really? brainwashers everywhere!

My theory is that the universe is infinite. The distant star outside our galaxy that you see tonight in a clear sky, are light already emitted millions, or perhaps billions of years ago, just now arriving to earth...and we do not know if that specific star still exist. Again, time is man's invention. Man created measurements for the rotation of the earth around our star and the rotation of our day-nights as well for the calendar included. Technology only enabled man to get precise timing measurement mechanism.

I believe that, in order to "time travel" we will have to take the word "time" out of it. Its a grand illusion for sci fi fascinations.

IF someone had their hands on a radically advanced technology, or invented it, would they share it with the world or would they keep it to themselves? hmm... pending on what was invented.

I still think a lot of science is nothing but hocus pocus to get people believe in things that doesnt really exist or it does exist, but in a illusive way. Only specific things, mind me.

"exotic science" ... they tell so many stories, none of them are believable unless seen with your own eyes.

I have seen things you science people wouldnt dare touch subject on. It would be considered "debunked" at first mentioning of such thing. I guess that EXPERIENCE is all what it counts NO MATTER what people say. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Pro7,

I dont believe that. How can science figure the diameter of the universe???? Never proven, because it is all based in theory applications. Scientists say its fact... is it really? brainwashers everywhere!
Click to expand...

Uhhh...the visible portion of the universe is about 30-40 billion light years in diameter. What's beyond is irrelevent to the current discussion. I wasn't making a definitive statement on cosmology, I was giving a familiar scale to compare the relative sizes.

BTW: Astronomers and cosmologists don't say that it's a fact that the universe is that size. They report the state of the current evidence and indicate that there is a limit to our ability to "see" any further across the universe at this time. They also state that the actual size depends on what the mass of the universe is, which is not fully known; the true value of the cosmological constant, which is not fully understood; and what the actual quantum physical conditions of the big bang were, which is also not fully understood.

For a competent scientist to pose an idea as a theory is neither blasphemy nor an unqualified guess. The word "theory" in the context of the scientific method has a differerent meaning than the common use of the word, which is taken to simply mean an opinion. To qualify as a theory a scientific idea has to pass muster via research, paper submission, peer review, revision and acceptance for general publication in a journal (or rejection).

(So in the end I guess that I did make a statement about cosmology. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif )
 
Pro7

If you could make a gravity wave generator, why not someone make a anti-gravity wave generator? anyone thought of that? I believe that however you made the current gravity wave generator, perhaps you could reverse the effects? hmm.. not sure if it would work or not, but try it anyways and see for yourself how it goes.
Click to expand...

Just for clarification, the particular gravity waves that I have been experimenting with do appear to have both gravity and antigravity within the wave. Most of my observations are with the wave equally balanced above and below ground potential. It's like the wave is a zero point wave. But if I were to find a way to move the wave above ground potential, then I am theorizing that a real gravity field would be created. My previous experiments with gravity pulses below ground level have not produced any perceivable motion in testing. So currently I am of the opinion that matter appears to be immune to this type of antigravity. I have had some success in changing the ground state of the gravity wave pulses. It involved using two gravity wave emitters each being fed a gravity wave pulse out of phase with each other. I was very interested in that at the time and actually built a device using six gravity wave emitters. That project was almost complete when I discovered how to turn the gravity pulse generator into a continuous gravity wave generator. So I shelved the six emitter gravity pulse project. I am interested in the gravity wave phenomena because of Bob Lazars claims. And of course I want to build a device using two gravity waves out of phase with each other just to see if any of Bobs claims have any validity. But I kinda got sidetracked again when I made the altered time flow observation. Although I now believe that this altered time flow observation is an effect of the weak force. I have already built weak force generator number one. There is no time dilation effects observed yet. But I can definitely see these experiments confirming Bob Lazars claims. I just never expected to see a connection to radar invisibility. That was a surprise. That would be kind of my own independant validation that quite possibly the philadelphia experiment did happen. It doesn't stop there. If I get this weak force generator to bend a laser beam, I'll be posting a video of that for sure. Of course that would throw some newly developing physics into John Titors ballpark. I never expected to do that either, but let the chips fall where they may.
 
EInstein,

How about opening a thread on your subject. It's a bit confusing to have two unrelated discussions going on on a single thread.
 
I agree with you Darby /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Again, one has to be careful what scientists say nowadays. Albeit skeptical to their words since scientists do know that research can be abused as well.

Anyways,

I do have a theory of "motion travel" which we might relate to "time travel" but in a different point of view.

First we need to look at our 'facts'.

--We are moving in forward motion.
--In "time related action", what we did a minute ago is in past tense.
--Our bodies are "locked" into that forward motion. A biological telomere mechanism which causes us to "Age" possibly along with the forward motion of everything else.
--Our brains are based in electrochemical functions. (following from http://health.howstuffworks.com/brain1.htm)

Secondly we are going to discuss the theory of 'motion travel'.

--Time Dilation (following from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation)

Again, in a recent post on here, we all know that 'Time' is a man's invention of precise technical calculations (i.e. calenders or atomic clocks) and is a illusion of how we view 'time'. Under the wikipedia topic regarding Time dilation (same URL posted above), regarding space flight:
----
Time dilation and space flight

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed retards the rate of passage of onboard time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human travelling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on Earth. For sufficiently high speeds the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home. Indeed, a constant 1 g acceleration would permit humans to travel as far as light has been able to since the big bang (some 13.7 billion light years) in one human lifetime. The space travellers could return to Earth billions of years in the future (provided the universe had not collapsed and our solar system were still around, of course). A scenario based on this idea was presented in the novel Planet of the Apes by Pierre Boulle.

A more likely use of this effect would be to enable humans to travel to nearby stars without spending their entire lives aboard the ship. However, any such application of time dilation would require the use of some new, advanced method of propulsion. A further problem with relativistic travel is that at such velocities dispersed particles in the rarefied interstellar medium would turn into a stream of high-energy cosmic rays that would destroy the ship unless extraordinary radiation protection measures were taken. Strong electromagnetic fields that could ionize and deflect any interstellar matter has been suggested as one way to avoid these potentially disastrous consequences.

Current space flight technology has fundamental theoretical limits based on the practical problem that an increasing amount of energy is required for propulsion as a craft approaches the speed of light. The likelihood of collision with small space debris and other particulate material is another practical limitation. At the velocities presently attained, however, time dilation is not a factor in space travel. Travel to regions of spacetime where gravitational time dilation is taking place, such as within the gravitational field of a black hole but outside the event horizon (perhaps on a hyperbolic trajectory exiting the field), could also yield results consistent with present theory.
-----

Theory of 'motion travel', I would also place it under gravity. Gravity would have tremendous effects on our bodies. We all know that on aboard the space shuttle/space station the astronauts would have to keep exercising.

(following from http://www.space.gc.ca/asc/eng/astronauts/living_exercising.asp) in space, if we do not keep exercising we would lose muscle and bone mass in less gravity. We were born on Earth with full gravity pulling on our bodies all of our lives. We go into space where there is less gravity, we are not accustomed to that.

This is where the theory of motion travel comes into play regarding our bodies in space. It is clear that we know we would lose muscle and bone mass in less gravity, but WHAT ELSE do we lose?

I believe, without any sufficient evidence to back up this theory, that Telomerase/Telomere in our bodies are "gravity regulated", thus using the forward motion of energy, not 'time', leading to a belief that if we travel further away from all the planets and the star in this solar system, the less gravity would have effect on our bodies. In total complete non gravity environment, is it possible that we could become 'ageless'?.... Again, in a nongravity environment, it could also impact other body functions as well.

A theory is just a theory until some day we try to leave this solar system, then we will learn what it would be from there.


This is the main reason why I do not believe in 'Time Travel' as so explicitly displayed in SCI FI magazines, television and elsewhere. If one were to "travel backwards" but not "time based" we would have to discard all of our clocks because 'time' would have no meaning according to our bodies. I believe that travelling in motion backwards has something to do with gravitational forces of how it is manipulated. From the day we were born until the day we die, is that 'forward motion' or 'time'??? It is clear to me in my own opinion that 'time' has nothing to do with our bodies as we are just accustomed to be using 'time measurements' for our birthdays (i.e. calendars and clocks).


---
Now according to Einstein, in the previous post on here regarding "gravitronic" pulses, be aware that you are experimenting on something that could also disrupt the nature of your own body. In most cases, things would go bad inside the body when a belief of "gravity regulated" entities inside the body are being disrupted from their own normal daily function routines.

There are a lot of talks on the internet/tv about how cellphones,etc using radiofrequency radiation energy (a weak form of "gravitronic disruptor") causing cancerous items inside the body to form, etc.. stuff like that, even though there has been no definite evidence of such causes.

When I indicated "Gravitronic", it is a SCI FI name which has no real meaning, but only relating to 'disrupting gravity fields' using electronics, otherwords a 'Gravitronic disruptor'. (Gravity+Electronics=Gravitronic) (as a clarity) /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Back
Top