John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/ttiforum/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=time_travel
http://www.timetravelinstitute.com/ttiforum/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=time_travel
John Titor's Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
- Thread starter gagsta
- Start date
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
o' sorry, wrong link.
here is the real link
http://www.anomalies.net/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=9;t=001138
my mistake
o' sorry, wrong link.
here is the real link
http://www.anomalies.net/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=9;t=001138
my mistake
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
If this were a solid object, in pertaining to the said laser light, then it would have had to been colored in sections, with a color marker.
When a laser light pumps its light, it does so, sometimes, with the beam being affected by the surroundings.
If this were a solid object, in pertaining to the said laser light, then it would have had to been colored in sections, with a color marker.
When a laser light pumps its light, it does so, sometimes, with the beam being affected by the surroundings.
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Warmest greetings QXR'
Anomalies, to my knowlege is a separate entity.
There were flames wars here at one time, however the ones who stayed on, tried to patch things up, once the hormones abided a bit.
The Anomalies site is run by a guy who was a communications expert, in the military.
Darby Darbyshire, if I'm correct still helms the time travel section there.
They don't work for us, but are in association at times on certain issues.
This Titor affair is certainly interesting, as it comers a lot of time and involves some people from this era.
As I had said laser light will show composites of colors, within the central emitted beam, if such items as smoke, is held within the air.
The instructor is holding,..... it looks like,.. a Havana Tampa Jewel?
Gravity might not affect displaced smoke, however the time travel machine, is right on the front seat.
So you have two loci placed in areas, one eight feet away and the other is your zeropoint generation of the double kerrs, which is right on the seat.
So you secondary mass field, is right next to the driver, this is why the pulsed light drips off.
I did not understand this before.
There is a second vehicle involved, and this may be a truck.
Comments and conjecture are protected in their postings, under the time travel theory rule.
Thank you
Warmest greetings QXR'
Anomalies, to my knowlege is a separate entity.
There were flames wars here at one time, however the ones who stayed on, tried to patch things up, once the hormones abided a bit.
The Anomalies site is run by a guy who was a communications expert, in the military.
Darby Darbyshire, if I'm correct still helms the time travel section there.
They don't work for us, but are in association at times on certain issues.
This Titor affair is certainly interesting, as it comers a lot of time and involves some people from this era.
As I had said laser light will show composites of colors, within the central emitted beam, if such items as smoke, is held within the air.
The instructor is holding,..... it looks like,.. a Havana Tampa Jewel?
Gravity might not affect displaced smoke, however the time travel machine, is right on the front seat.
So you have two loci placed in areas, one eight feet away and the other is your zeropoint generation of the double kerrs, which is right on the seat.
So you secondary mass field, is right next to the driver, this is why the pulsed light drips off.
I did not understand this before.
There is a second vehicle involved, and this may be a truck.
Comments and conjecture are protected in their postings, under the time travel theory rule.
Thank you
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Sorry, when I said "Does the anomalies.net site still work for you guys?" I didn't mean "work" as in "employed", I meant "work" as in "function". When I type www.anomalies.net in my browser, nothing ever appears, I just get a blank screen, and eventually an error message pops up saying "a connection failure has occurred". Since this happens every time I try to go there, I had thought maybe the site was taken down, but if everyone else can view it maybe it's a problem with my browser or something.
As for the laser picture, aside from the question of whether the beam looks like a real laser beam should, there's a bigger problem--if he's claiming the beam is being bent by gravitational effects, that's totally ridiculous, the gravitational force needed to bend a light beam that much is huge, if the gravity of the "microsingularity" was that strong in the neighborhood of the light beam, it would pull any solid objects at the same distance from it right in and crush them, yet the surrounding car appears to be holding together just fine. Plus, since it's only the gravity of a black hole that causes light to bend, the microsingularity would have to be supermassive to create a strong enough gravitational force--a "microsingularity" weighing less than 500 pounds (as he claimed the unit containing them weighed in a post on 01-29-2001, and a later post on 02-08-2001) would not bend light any more than any other 500-pound object from a few feet away. I know this because my undergraduate degree was in physics, but if you don't want to take my word for it, look at this quote from a set of physics lecture notes:
The same point is made in this black hole FAQ:
Basically, John Titor is a joke in terms of his science, it sounds like he read a few pop-science books to come up with some technobabble that would sound realistic to the uninitiated, but anyone with a little training in physics can see his story is complete nonsense.
Sorry, when I said "Does the anomalies.net site still work for you guys?" I didn't mean "work" as in "employed", I meant "work" as in "function". When I type www.anomalies.net in my browser, nothing ever appears, I just get a blank screen, and eventually an error message pops up saying "a connection failure has occurred". Since this happens every time I try to go there, I had thought maybe the site was taken down, but if everyone else can view it maybe it's a problem with my browser or something.
As for the laser picture, aside from the question of whether the beam looks like a real laser beam should, there's a bigger problem--if he's claiming the beam is being bent by gravitational effects, that's totally ridiculous, the gravitational force needed to bend a light beam that much is huge, if the gravity of the "microsingularity" was that strong in the neighborhood of the light beam, it would pull any solid objects at the same distance from it right in and crush them, yet the surrounding car appears to be holding together just fine. Plus, since it's only the gravity of a black hole that causes light to bend, the microsingularity would have to be supermassive to create a strong enough gravitational force--a "microsingularity" weighing less than 500 pounds (as he claimed the unit containing them weighed in a post on 01-29-2001, and a later post on 02-08-2001) would not bend light any more than any other 500-pound object from a few feet away. I know this because my undergraduate degree was in physics, but if you don't want to take my word for it, look at this quote from a set of physics lecture notes:
The same point is made in this black hole FAQ:
Basically, John Titor is a joke in terms of his science, it sounds like he read a few pop-science books to come up with some technobabble that would sound realistic to the uninitiated, but anyone with a little training in physics can see his story is complete nonsense.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Thanks for that, QXR37.
I'll now await the reply from Creedo.
Kind Regards,
RainmanTime
Thanks for that, QXR37.
I'll now await the reply from Creedo.
Kind Regards,
RainmanTime
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
What most people don't get about how this said unit would have worked is the physics and mechanical properties, right away.
This is an electro pulsed affair, so not a true black hole, however a simulation of one, to make and event within the structure of space and time.
There are two poles to this, one within the unit itself, that simulates a gravity well, however the pull of gravity near the unit itself, is relative, so it is possible to sit near the unit while it is in operation.
The second field phenomenon, is what I refer to as the doublarity, or the outer field established boundary.
This second field is established either feet away from the G.E. unit and is somewhat of an approximation, however there is analiantion of matter at this point, so gravity digestion and or heating are established on the second filed out?
This outer realm of temperature is some two hundred degrees.
So the windows must be rolled up, during a full on mode of travel.
A black hole is a super density, so all entry points outside of the black hole, with regards to both angles and closeness of approaches, are referred to as veneer levels of approximation.
No, these are not real true black holes, but only rough approximations.
The outer fields is termed as a nonspecific location, as the other field does not really exist in time.
So the avarice of being able to go backwards forwards in time, if you can inject electrons on the outer field surface of the doublarities.
The big question remains, is it possible to inject these said electrons from within to the outer field?
Or inject electrons into the first fields?
Since there is multiparism between the first and second fields, you've also injected the second outer field, or do they use a transmute reassembly of electrons, via spatial jumps, from center modified mass zero, or the first field, and then phase assemble your electrons outside the second field?
This is not known, but has to be one of the three.
Remember, this is only a pulsed affair, so this is not a true black hole.
Note it was said that this unit takes along clogs of dirt, when it jumps from time to time?
So the second field, must have considerable holding structure to it?
Microsingualities are not this type of apparatus.
They might use a nobidium inlay, on a very highly machined process, within said Tripler mini-cylinders.
What most people don't get about how this said unit would have worked is the physics and mechanical properties, right away.
This is an electro pulsed affair, so not a true black hole, however a simulation of one, to make and event within the structure of space and time.
There are two poles to this, one within the unit itself, that simulates a gravity well, however the pull of gravity near the unit itself, is relative, so it is possible to sit near the unit while it is in operation.
The second field phenomenon, is what I refer to as the doublarity, or the outer field established boundary.
This second field is established either feet away from the G.E. unit and is somewhat of an approximation, however there is analiantion of matter at this point, so gravity digestion and or heating are established on the second filed out?
This outer realm of temperature is some two hundred degrees.
So the windows must be rolled up, during a full on mode of travel.
A black hole is a super density, so all entry points outside of the black hole, with regards to both angles and closeness of approaches, are referred to as veneer levels of approximation.
No, these are not real true black holes, but only rough approximations.
The outer fields is termed as a nonspecific location, as the other field does not really exist in time.
So the avarice of being able to go backwards forwards in time, if you can inject electrons on the outer field surface of the doublarities.
The big question remains, is it possible to inject these said electrons from within to the outer field?
Or inject electrons into the first fields?
Since there is multiparism between the first and second fields, you've also injected the second outer field, or do they use a transmute reassembly of electrons, via spatial jumps, from center modified mass zero, or the first field, and then phase assemble your electrons outside the second field?
This is not known, but has to be one of the three.
Remember, this is only a pulsed affair, so this is not a true black hole.
Note it was said that this unit takes along clogs of dirt, when it jumps from time to time?
So the second field, must have considerable holding structure to it?
Microsingualities are not this type of apparatus.
They might use a nobidium inlay, on a very highly machined process, within said Tripler mini-cylinders.
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Oh on the puter QXR, might be your Java applettes, or you need to run maintiance.
Your sys should handshake with Anomalies?....If not, then it is something internal.
Consult your ISP people, could be a handshake protocols, in the language, or your connection speed.
Oh on the puter QXR, might be your Java applettes, or you need to run maintiance.
Your sys should handshake with Anomalies?....If not, then it is something internal.
Consult your ISP people, could be a handshake protocols, in the language, or your connection speed.
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
I think he is correct with the statement of it being fake. But disagree with how it is fake. It probably is a laser pointer. Look at the beam, it is perfectly straight to where it meets the window. The beam appears to be visable outside of the car. Is the window rolled up or down? The widow has to be rolled up, beacuse if it were rolled down there is no way that smoke will just sit there without the breeze effecting it. So basically what you see is just the reflection of the beam on the window. With the correct angle of the beam and the correct angle of the camera you will see a bending effect of the beam. Which this photo depicts. You can argue this statement, but it will be very hard to persuade me to think otherwise.
I think he is correct with the statement of it being fake. But disagree with how it is fake. It probably is a laser pointer. Look at the beam, it is perfectly straight to where it meets the window. The beam appears to be visable outside of the car. Is the window rolled up or down? The widow has to be rolled up, beacuse if it were rolled down there is no way that smoke will just sit there without the breeze effecting it. So basically what you see is just the reflection of the beam on the window. With the correct angle of the beam and the correct angle of the camera you will see a bending effect of the beam. Which this photo depicts. You can argue this statement, but it will be very hard to persuade me to think otherwise.
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
There is no way to "simulate" the light-bending effects of a gravity well according to the known laws of physics, or any mainstream theories of physics still in development such as string theory. I guess anything is possible if you pick the right "alternative physics" theory, but Titor suggested in his posts that his time machine was based on mainstream physics ideas, and approvingly cited authorities like Hawking in support of his claims, as well as mainstream theories like relativity (which is the basis for both Kerr black holes and the Tipler cylinder, both of which he mentioned often) and string theory. Some examples:
(As a side note, Titor is confusing special and general relativity here. Special relativity is only about the effects of velocity in a region with no gravity--to incorporate gravity, you need general relativity.)
Finally, his longest explanation of the physics behind his machine:
This last one is an interesting mix of real science and nonsense. His first four points are basically correct summaries of different consequences of the theory of general relativity. General relativity does say that acceleration and gravitation should have the same effects, something known as the equivalence principle. The comment about rotating black holes having two event horizons and ring-shaped singularities is also correct--read Geometry of Kerr Black Holes for a little more info. From this page, here's a diagram of one:
Based on a principle that spacetime must be "geodesically complete", physicists speculate that if you take the right path through a region close to the ring singularity, you would come out through a "white hole" (which is like a black hole in reverse) in some totally different region of spacetime--this, I suppose, is the basis for his "DONUT-SHAPED SINGULARITY = PASSAGE INTO ALTERNATE WORLDLINE" section, although the theory suggests that it would be necessary to travel within the inner event horizon of the black hole to do this, and you would only come out through a preexisting white hole, while his time machine supposedly transports anything within a large distance of the "microsingularities" and does not seem to involve any preexisting white holes. Also, a note on his comment "Please see Penrose diagrams for Kerr Black holes or you can examine the calculations of Frank Tipler"--while it is true that Penrose diagrams are used to follow the paths of travellers going into a black hole and coming out through a white hole, I don't think Frank Tipler contributed to the theory of rotating black holes, this seems to be a confused reference to the Tipler cylinder, which is a totally different theoretical possibility for time travel involving a very dense (but not infinitely dense like a black hole singularity) rotating cylinder. It was later proved by Hawking that this would only work as a method of backwards time travel if the cylinder was infinitely long, a finite-length cylinder wouldn't do. There is really no connection between Tipler cylinders and Kerr black holes, despite comments like this from Titor:
Also, Titor refers in his above explanation (and in numerous other posts) to his microsingularities creating a "Tipler sinusoid", but there is no such term in existing physics. I think this is basically his excuse for the fact that despite his numerous references to Kerr black holes and Tipler cylinders, his proposed method of time travel doesn't work anything like a Kerr black hole (in which you'd actually have to travel to into the black hole, through the inner event horizon) or a Tipler cylinder (which, again, would have to be a dense, infinitely long rotating cylinder). Thus, the last item on his list above has no resemblance to anything in moder physics:
Anyway, I've gone kind of astray from my original point, which was just that it would require a radical overhaul of modern physics to say that the path of a light beam could be curved by anything other than a genuine gravitational field, and Titor repeatedly stressed that the principles his time machine worked on were just building slightly on physics which we already know about today.
There is no way to "simulate" the light-bending effects of a gravity well according to the known laws of physics, or any mainstream theories of physics still in development such as string theory. I guess anything is possible if you pick the right "alternative physics" theory, but Titor suggested in his posts that his time machine was based on mainstream physics ideas, and approvingly cited authorities like Hawking in support of his claims, as well as mainstream theories like relativity (which is the basis for both Kerr black holes and the Tipler cylinder, both of which he mentioned often) and string theory. Some examples:
(As a side note, Titor is confusing special and general relativity here. Special relativity is only about the effects of velocity in a region with no gravity--to incorporate gravity, you need general relativity.)
Finally, his longest explanation of the physics behind his machine:
This last one is an interesting mix of real science and nonsense. His first four points are basically correct summaries of different consequences of the theory of general relativity. General relativity does say that acceleration and gravitation should have the same effects, something known as the equivalence principle. The comment about rotating black holes having two event horizons and ring-shaped singularities is also correct--read Geometry of Kerr Black Holes for a little more info. From this page, here's a diagram of one:
Based on a principle that spacetime must be "geodesically complete", physicists speculate that if you take the right path through a region close to the ring singularity, you would come out through a "white hole" (which is like a black hole in reverse) in some totally different region of spacetime--this, I suppose, is the basis for his "DONUT-SHAPED SINGULARITY = PASSAGE INTO ALTERNATE WORLDLINE" section, although the theory suggests that it would be necessary to travel within the inner event horizon of the black hole to do this, and you would only come out through a preexisting white hole, while his time machine supposedly transports anything within a large distance of the "microsingularities" and does not seem to involve any preexisting white holes. Also, a note on his comment "Please see Penrose diagrams for Kerr Black holes or you can examine the calculations of Frank Tipler"--while it is true that Penrose diagrams are used to follow the paths of travellers going into a black hole and coming out through a white hole, I don't think Frank Tipler contributed to the theory of rotating black holes, this seems to be a confused reference to the Tipler cylinder, which is a totally different theoretical possibility for time travel involving a very dense (but not infinitely dense like a black hole singularity) rotating cylinder. It was later proved by Hawking that this would only work as a method of backwards time travel if the cylinder was infinitely long, a finite-length cylinder wouldn't do. There is really no connection between Tipler cylinders and Kerr black holes, despite comments like this from Titor:
Also, Titor refers in his above explanation (and in numerous other posts) to his microsingularities creating a "Tipler sinusoid", but there is no such term in existing physics. I think this is basically his excuse for the fact that despite his numerous references to Kerr black holes and Tipler cylinders, his proposed method of time travel doesn't work anything like a Kerr black hole (in which you'd actually have to travel to into the black hole, through the inner event horizon) or a Tipler cylinder (which, again, would have to be a dense, infinitely long rotating cylinder). Thus, the last item on his list above has no resemblance to anything in moder physics:
Anyway, I've gone kind of astray from my original point, which was just that it would require a radical overhaul of modern physics to say that the path of a light beam could be curved by anything other than a genuine gravitational field, and Titor repeatedly stressed that the principles his time machine worked on were just building slightly on physics which we already know about today.
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
QXR says;There is no way to "simulate" the light-bending effects of a gravity well according to the known laws of physics, or any mainstream theories of physics still in development such as string theory. I guess anything is possible if you pick the right "alternative physics" theory, but Titor suggested in his posts that his time machine was based\\\
Creedo answers; This is not so, there is the Einstein Bose condensate, there is also superluminal cesium C.So you can both speed up and slow down light.
There are and I'm sure that I've heard of this, effects now that bend light in a laboratory using a very powerful magnet.
The simplest one is light at a distance bending over galaxies and planets, where mass over M+ equals distortion of transit, however I'm not saying microsingularities at all.
Your dealing with the physics supposedly from 2036, so some things have changed.
Like I said, this is probably a pulsed gravitational effect more akin to a gravitational pulsar, rather than a steady state phenomenon.
Overpumped C in lasic, probably bends due to a gravity phenomenon.
It may be that since mass is relatively at rest, does not correspond to the gravity attraction of the Triplers as posed on the car seat.
However what is the problem, is the acceleration rates of C in a relative gravity well location.
Mass in C stringed is contigual, therefore an enmass field, however overpumped lasic, is a free acceleration phenomenon and would then correspond to a gravity well.
This is a phenominon which is pulsed, so mass may stay at rest, or relative to the gravity well, where overpumped lasic C, can not correspond to this option?
Yes I know what a double nonspecific locaty with reference is to a kerrs phenomenon, I knew so a few years ago, plus the necessary dynamics.
If this is for the audience, then your most kind.
QXR says;There is no way to "simulate" the light-bending effects of a gravity well according to the known laws of physics, or any mainstream theories of physics still in development such as string theory. I guess anything is possible if you pick the right "alternative physics" theory, but Titor suggested in his posts that his time machine was based\\\
Creedo answers; This is not so, there is the Einstein Bose condensate, there is also superluminal cesium C.So you can both speed up and slow down light.
There are and I'm sure that I've heard of this, effects now that bend light in a laboratory using a very powerful magnet.
The simplest one is light at a distance bending over galaxies and planets, where mass over M+ equals distortion of transit, however I'm not saying microsingularities at all.
Your dealing with the physics supposedly from 2036, so some things have changed.
Like I said, this is probably a pulsed gravitational effect more akin to a gravitational pulsar, rather than a steady state phenomenon.
Overpumped C in lasic, probably bends due to a gravity phenomenon.
It may be that since mass is relatively at rest, does not correspond to the gravity attraction of the Triplers as posed on the car seat.
However what is the problem, is the acceleration rates of C in a relative gravity well location.
Mass in C stringed is contigual, therefore an enmass field, however overpumped lasic, is a free acceleration phenomenon and would then correspond to a gravity well.
This is a phenominon which is pulsed, so mass may stay at rest, or relative to the gravity well, where overpumped lasic C, can not correspond to this option?
Yes I know what a double nonspecific locaty with reference is to a kerrs phenomenon, I knew so a few years ago, plus the necessary dynamics.
If this is for the audience, then your most kind.
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Something everyone should read!
Even though origonally I had a debate with a friend about whether it was fiber optics, or PS (which still had the capabilities to do that even then). We agree d it was Fiber Optics when I first learned about this quite some time ago. But that's not really the issure here...
This is only if you're intirested in how 'JT' duped tons of people. If so, read on...
'JT' took pictures, and created 'scientific articles.'
But we know that they only go so far, then stop, when we analyze them we see that they're just junk science piled up. The yway he did it was by taking things that the to 'average sci-fi freak' who's absorbed so much of the movies they think that they know what they're talking about kinda person would say, wow, this is genuine timetravel. Meanwhile this JT only has to come up with answers that sound good. Doesn't even have to be necesarily coherent, even I could do the same thing with the type of people he origonally had.
it's been going on since medival times with Alchemist. They did a couple of stupid tricks for the peasants, they spread the word, eventually it gets back to the more important people (in this case people with brains) and eventually the king which then summons him to see what he has to offer, and he's convinced it's real (if even subconciously) before he's even seen it. The Alchemist is smart, he doesn't go to the smart or important people right away, start by word of mouth.
I think that this whole mess has gotten bigger than even 'JT' himself though possible.
Something everyone should read!
Even though origonally I had a debate with a friend about whether it was fiber optics, or PS (which still had the capabilities to do that even then). We agree d it was Fiber Optics when I first learned about this quite some time ago. But that's not really the issure here...
This is only if you're intirested in how 'JT' duped tons of people. If so, read on...
'JT' took pictures, and created 'scientific articles.'
But we know that they only go so far, then stop, when we analyze them we see that they're just junk science piled up. The yway he did it was by taking things that the to 'average sci-fi freak' who's absorbed so much of the movies they think that they know what they're talking about kinda person would say, wow, this is genuine timetravel. Meanwhile this JT only has to come up with answers that sound good. Doesn't even have to be necesarily coherent, even I could do the same thing with the type of people he origonally had.
it's been going on since medival times with Alchemist. They did a couple of stupid tricks for the peasants, they spread the word, eventually it gets back to the more important people (in this case people with brains) and eventually the king which then summons him to see what he has to offer, and he's convinced it's real (if even subconciously) before he's even seen it. The Alchemist is smart, he doesn't go to the smart or important people right away, start by word of mouth.
I think that this whole mess has gotten bigger than even 'JT' himself though possible.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Greetings QXR37,
It is nice to see a real scientist on this board who knows his physics. Are you taking notes and reviewing the URLs he provides, Creedo? I think they will help you in your "Titorquest" that you cannot seem to let go of. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
QXR37: I'd like to know your thoughts on another part of the Titor story that I find a little too coincidental. That is: He (the alleged Titor) describes the gravity-induced time warp effect as being created by these two microsingularities. And he provided alleged diagrams of how the field was formed with one microsingularity in front of, and one behind, the time travel target (person). This sounds suspiciously like a ripoff of Dr. Miguel Alcubierre's Warp Drive concept from his paper of 1992 (if I recall the year correctly). This, along with your other citations of already-established concepts of theoretical physics, seems to support the theory that whoever concocted the Titor Project/Experiment "borrowed" from many different reputable sources to try to make his story sound coherent and believable. Hence, this could provide a logical continuation of his "story" that time travel concepts were developed with minor tweaks of existing physics.
Your thoughts? Kind Regards,
RainmanTime
Greetings QXR37,
It is nice to see a real scientist on this board who knows his physics. Are you taking notes and reviewing the URLs he provides, Creedo? I think they will help you in your "Titorquest" that you cannot seem to let go of. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
QXR37: I'd like to know your thoughts on another part of the Titor story that I find a little too coincidental. That is: He (the alleged Titor) describes the gravity-induced time warp effect as being created by these two microsingularities. And he provided alleged diagrams of how the field was formed with one microsingularity in front of, and one behind, the time travel target (person). This sounds suspiciously like a ripoff of Dr. Miguel Alcubierre's Warp Drive concept from his paper of 1992 (if I recall the year correctly). This, along with your other citations of already-established concepts of theoretical physics, seems to support the theory that whoever concocted the Titor Project/Experiment "borrowed" from many different reputable sources to try to make his story sound coherent and believable. Hence, this could provide a logical continuation of his "story" that time travel concepts were developed with minor tweaks of existing physics.
Your thoughts? Kind Regards,
RainmanTime
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Sadone says;It's been going on since medieval times with Alchemist. They did a couple of stupid tricks for the peasants, they spread the word, eventually it gets back to the more important people (in this case people with brains) and eventually the king
Creedo responds, If I think that I hear you correctly your saying that mystery school graduates were charlatans or jerks?
Man' you've got worlds more courage than I do.
I might go into a bar shout insults and then run?
But to insult mystery school grads,...mmmmm, I take my chances outrunning the bar's patrons.
In a place once known as Essex on Avon, the kids there never threw rocks at some of the old people,Know why?
Rainman Time says;It is nice to see a real scientist on this board who knows his physics. Are you taking notes and reviewing the URLs he provides, Creedo? I think they will help you in your "Titorquest" that you cannot seem to let go of.
Creedo answers; only healthy conjecture and at that very obsolete conjecture at that.
You know the theoretical output of the said Tripler cylinders......?
If ya don't know that, then you know nothing.
Sadone says;It's been going on since medieval times with Alchemist. They did a couple of stupid tricks for the peasants, they spread the word, eventually it gets back to the more important people (in this case people with brains) and eventually the king
Creedo responds, If I think that I hear you correctly your saying that mystery school graduates were charlatans or jerks?
Man' you've got worlds more courage than I do.
I might go into a bar shout insults and then run?
But to insult mystery school grads,...mmmmm, I take my chances outrunning the bar's patrons.
In a place once known as Essex on Avon, the kids there never threw rocks at some of the old people,Know why?
Rainman Time says;It is nice to see a real scientist on this board who knows his physics. Are you taking notes and reviewing the URLs he provides, Creedo? I think they will help you in your "Titorquest" that you cannot seem to let go of.
Creedo answers; only healthy conjecture and at that very obsolete conjecture at that.
You know the theoretical output of the said Tripler cylinders......?
If ya don't know that, then you know nothing.
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
It's not possible to speed up light beyond its velocity in a vacuum, and you can only slow light down by having it pass through a medium--what's really going on in this case is that the photons are repeatedly being absorbed and re-emitted by the particles that compose the medium, which appears to slow the overall beam down even though the individual photons still travel at the speed of light between particles. The slowing of light through a medium also causes light beams to become bent when they move from one medium to another (because of Fermat's principle which is illustrated here), this is just the phenomenon known as "refraction" which is responsible for the bent appearance of objects viewed through water:
But this bending only happens when light travels through different mediums (or different regions of the same medium) which each have a different refractive index. In Titor's picture, though, it appears that the beam was just travelling through ordinary air, and there's no way light travelling through air would be curved that way. Also, I think it's a safe bet that Titor was inspired by diagrams showing how light is bent near black holes, which are very common in pop science books and articles about black holes, such as this picture from here:
No, in classical electromagnetism it is impossible for a magnetic field, no matter how strong, to bend light. This is a consequence of something called the principle of superposition which says that the electromagnetic field from multiple sources is just a linear sum of the field that would be created by each source on its own. Here are some pages which discuss the fact that magnets cannot bend light:
http://van.hep.uiuc.edu/van/qa/section/Light_and_Sound/Properties_of_Light/20020312194513.htm
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/dec99/944439780.Ph.r.html
http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache
WaCuam_4voJ:www.physicsforums.com/archive/topic/4125-1.html
That’s not due to magnetic fields, it’s due to the gravity of those galaxies and planets, which curves spacetime according to Einstein’s theory of general relativity. You’re right that singularities are not necessary, but my point is that you need a huge gravitational field to bend light noticeably over a distance of a few feet (as opposed to over a distance of light years), as the laser in Titor’s picture was doing.
Are you talking about gravitational waves? Anyway, it doesn’t matter whether the gravitational field is varying with time, either way the gravitational force in the regions and times where the light is bending significantly would have to be massive.
What is "overpumped C in lasic"? Is this a recognized physics term, or one that you came up with yourself?
What are "the Triplers"? Do you mean a Tipler cylinder, or Titor’s "Tipler sinusoid"? Like I said, a Tipler cylinder would have to be infinitely long, and "Tipler sinusoid" seems to be an invented term. I guess you could argue it’s a physics term that hasn’t been invented yet, but it doesn’t really matter, as long as we’re still working within the framework of general relativity, the only way to actually curve a beam of light (as opposed to refracting it by making it travel through a medium) is to curve spacetime, and in general relativity curved spacetime and gravity are equivalent (for example, see this summary of general relativity, which says ‘in Einstein’s theory the instantaneous gravitational force is replaced by the curvature of spacetime’, or this one which says ‘Gravity arises because every free-falling bit of matter always travels from its past to its future at a constant acceleration along a curve that is locally straight. This curve is its world line. To say that it is locally straight means that it is a geodesic … The curvature of a manifold determines the path of any geodesic, and hence the path followed by any object as it moves from its past to its future’).
Gravity does not alter the speed of light in a vacuum, which I assume is what you’re using "C" to refer to.
I don’t understand most of these sentence--could you define (or give references that define) the terms and phrases "mass in c stringed is contigual", "enmass field", "overpumped lasic", and "double specific locaty"? Are you using your own theories of physics here, or are you trying to talk about what would be true in established theories like general relativity? I’m guessing these are your own personal theories, since none of these terms show up in google. If you want to try to come up with your own "alternative physics" then go for it, but like I said, in contemporary physics the only way to get a beam of light to actually bend (as opposed to just refracting it by making it pass through the right medium, which didn’t appear to be happening in the picture since Titor was just shining the beam through the air) is to have it travel through a region of high gravitation. In general relativity, gravity = curved spacetime, and light always takes the shortest path through spacetime (known as a ‘geodesic’), so it can only curve if spacetime itself is curved.
It's not possible to speed up light beyond its velocity in a vacuum, and you can only slow light down by having it pass through a medium--what's really going on in this case is that the photons are repeatedly being absorbed and re-emitted by the particles that compose the medium, which appears to slow the overall beam down even though the individual photons still travel at the speed of light between particles. The slowing of light through a medium also causes light beams to become bent when they move from one medium to another (because of Fermat's principle which is illustrated here), this is just the phenomenon known as "refraction" which is responsible for the bent appearance of objects viewed through water:
But this bending only happens when light travels through different mediums (or different regions of the same medium) which each have a different refractive index. In Titor's picture, though, it appears that the beam was just travelling through ordinary air, and there's no way light travelling through air would be curved that way. Also, I think it's a safe bet that Titor was inspired by diagrams showing how light is bent near black holes, which are very common in pop science books and articles about black holes, such as this picture from here:
No, in classical electromagnetism it is impossible for a magnetic field, no matter how strong, to bend light. This is a consequence of something called the principle of superposition which says that the electromagnetic field from multiple sources is just a linear sum of the field that would be created by each source on its own. Here are some pages which discuss the fact that magnets cannot bend light:
http://van.hep.uiuc.edu/van/qa/section/Light_and_Sound/Properties_of_Light/20020312194513.htm
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/dec99/944439780.Ph.r.html
http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache
WaCuam_4voJ:www.physicsforums.com/archive/topic/4125-1.htmlThat’s not due to magnetic fields, it’s due to the gravity of those galaxies and planets, which curves spacetime according to Einstein’s theory of general relativity. You’re right that singularities are not necessary, but my point is that you need a huge gravitational field to bend light noticeably over a distance of a few feet (as opposed to over a distance of light years), as the laser in Titor’s picture was doing.
Are you talking about gravitational waves? Anyway, it doesn’t matter whether the gravitational field is varying with time, either way the gravitational force in the regions and times where the light is bending significantly would have to be massive.
What is "overpumped C in lasic"? Is this a recognized physics term, or one that you came up with yourself?
What are "the Triplers"? Do you mean a Tipler cylinder, or Titor’s "Tipler sinusoid"? Like I said, a Tipler cylinder would have to be infinitely long, and "Tipler sinusoid" seems to be an invented term. I guess you could argue it’s a physics term that hasn’t been invented yet, but it doesn’t really matter, as long as we’re still working within the framework of general relativity, the only way to actually curve a beam of light (as opposed to refracting it by making it travel through a medium) is to curve spacetime, and in general relativity curved spacetime and gravity are equivalent (for example, see this summary of general relativity, which says ‘in Einstein’s theory the instantaneous gravitational force is replaced by the curvature of spacetime’, or this one which says ‘Gravity arises because every free-falling bit of matter always travels from its past to its future at a constant acceleration along a curve that is locally straight. This curve is its world line. To say that it is locally straight means that it is a geodesic … The curvature of a manifold determines the path of any geodesic, and hence the path followed by any object as it moves from its past to its future’).
Gravity does not alter the speed of light in a vacuum, which I assume is what you’re using "C" to refer to.
I don’t understand most of these sentence--could you define (or give references that define) the terms and phrases "mass in c stringed is contigual", "enmass field", "overpumped lasic", and "double specific locaty"? Are you using your own theories of physics here, or are you trying to talk about what would be true in established theories like general relativity? I’m guessing these are your own personal theories, since none of these terms show up in google. If you want to try to come up with your own "alternative physics" then go for it, but like I said, in contemporary physics the only way to get a beam of light to actually bend (as opposed to just refracting it by making it pass through the right medium, which didn’t appear to be happening in the picture since Titor was just shining the beam through the air) is to have it travel through a region of high gravitation. In general relativity, gravity = curved spacetime, and light always takes the shortest path through spacetime (known as a ‘geodesic’), so it can only curve if spacetime itself is curved.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Creedo states:
Now, on to your question:
I know enough about Tipler (an astronomer by trade, not recognized for his deep grasp of difficult topics in physics) to know that his infinite rotating cylinder THEORY has a lower probability of being fact than many other competing theories from reputable physicists. Jack Sarfatti is a friend of mine...do you know HIM, Creedo? Do you understand HIS work? It's more pertinent than Tipler's. I also favor the work of Dr. Ronald Mallett, because his premise is based on what I have discussed before about how ring laser gyros work to yield TIME rate of rotational measurements. More evidence of Tipler's wishes to become a "pop science icon" is displayed in book The Physics of Immortality . Note at the end what a reputable science journal (Nature) thinks of Tipler's work.
OK, I'd like you to take note of something, Creedo. I actually RESPOND to your questions. I address them. You often dress me down for thinking I am being rude to you. Well I've got news for you: Your unwillingness to respond to questions I pose to you (especially the ones that I know you cannot answer) is also rude. So here's a question for you, and I suggest you answer it. Because if you don't, and all you want to do is get into a name-calling and insult-heaving "discussion", I can tell you right now I have the language skills to "rip you a new one". The question for you is:
Do you understand the PRACTICAL (not theoretical) difference between Science and Engineering?
Think hard. Because it has direct relevance to the issue of time travel theory vs. practice.
RainmanTime
Creedo states:
First of all, it is TIPLER...if he was named TRIPLER, I might give his theories a deeper look, but that's the Qabalist in me talking!
I know enough about Tipler (an astronomer by trade, not recognized for his deep grasp of difficult topics in physics) to know that his infinite rotating cylinder THEORY has a lower probability of being fact than many other competing theories from reputable physicists. Jack Sarfatti is a friend of mine...do you know HIM, Creedo? Do you understand HIS work? It's more pertinent than Tipler's. I also favor the work of Dr. Ronald Mallett, because his premise is based on what I have discussed before about how ring laser gyros work to yield TIME rate of rotational measurements. More evidence of Tipler's wishes to become a "pop science icon" is displayed in book The Physics of Immortality . Note at the end what a reputable science journal (Nature) thinks of Tipler's work.
OK, I'd like you to take note of something, Creedo. I actually RESPOND to your questions. I address them. You often dress me down for thinking I am being rude to you. Well I've got news for you: Your unwillingness to respond to questions I pose to you (especially the ones that I know you cannot answer) is also rude. So here's a question for you, and I suggest you answer it. Because if you don't, and all you want to do is get into a name-calling and insult-heaving "discussion", I can tell you right now I have the language skills to "rip you a new one". The question for you is:
Do you understand the PRACTICAL (not theoretical) difference between Science and Engineering?
Think hard. Because it has direct relevance to the issue of time travel theory vs. practice.
RainmanTime
Re: John Titor\'s Laser Picture Was FAKED - Proof
Where'd you see that diagram? I didn't find it at johntitor.com.
Yeah, if he did show a diagram like that it could very well be loosely based on the Alcubierre idea, which involved getting space to contract in front of you and expand in back of you, so you can get to places faster than light even though within the 'bubble' you were in, you never actually exceeded light speed. Like stable wormholes, the Alcubierre drive apparently requires "exotic matter" with negative energy, physicists don't know if that's possible or not...an ordinary black hole (whether large or 'micro') wouldn't be enough to make one. Also, even if we had the exotic matter, apparently no one knows how you'd go about bending spacetime in the right way to create the 'warp' bubble. And this physicist seems to argue that it's not even certain that the Alcubierre drive is actually allowed by general relativity.
Where'd you see that diagram? I didn't find it at johntitor.com.
Yeah, if he did show a diagram like that it could very well be loosely based on the Alcubierre idea, which involved getting space to contract in front of you and expand in back of you, so you can get to places faster than light even though within the 'bubble' you were in, you never actually exceeded light speed. Like stable wormholes, the Alcubierre drive apparently requires "exotic matter" with negative energy, physicists don't know if that's possible or not...an ordinary black hole (whether large or 'micro') wouldn't be enough to make one. Also, even if we had the exotic matter, apparently no one knows how you'd go about bending spacetime in the right way to create the 'warp' bubble. And this physicist seems to argue that it's not even certain that the Alcubierre drive is actually allowed by general relativity.