P
PaulaJedi
Ok, could we not create plasma and mimic the atmosphere of the sun? According to what I am reading, plasma is possible to make.
Looking for John Titor
- Thread starter Y2k38
- Start date
Ok, could we not create plasma and mimic the atmosphere of the sun? According to what I am reading, plasma is possible to make.
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
Yes. That's why I mentioned we could verify this type of interpretation in a laboratory setting. As far as I know, most mediums that transmit light have an index of refraction. So the index of refraction can be determined in a laboratory setting just to see if this interpretation is valid. So what appears to be happening with the sun, is that the suns atmosphere acts like the outer edge of a lens. It bends light that passes through it due to the index of refraction. That does seem like a reasonable explanation to me. The bending of light allows us to see stars that are actually behind the sun.
Since we see this type of lens effect everyday on earth when either the sun or moon are close to the horizon. It does suggest to me that the light we see, which does make the sun or moon appear larger, might also suggest that the sun or the moon may already be past the horizon. Our atmosphere on earth acts like a giant lens to produce this effect. So it's not that hard for me to expect to see this type of phenomena around any celestial body that possesses an atmosphere.
But this interpretation is in conflict with what is taught in school. The schools teach us that gravity is what causes light to bend around the sun. This is just like me seeing my dad bringing in the Christmas presents. What we see, and what we are being told aren't the same thing. And what we see appears to be the truth.
As for the John Titor laser picture? Well I believe someone attached a fiber optic cable to the end of a pen laser to reproduce the same type of photo Titor had. So what it appears is that Titor is using the scientific community explanation that gravity bends light to account for the light bending in his photo. Now that we have caught the scientific community misdirecting us away from the truth, it stands to reason that Titor may not have known that gravity does not bend light. Thus exposing his representation of the laser picture as being an entirely fictional claim. And casting doubt on the rest of his story as well.
John Thomas
Temporal Navigator
That is what I intend.
P
PaulaJedi
But what you witnessed was only a partial truth. Saint Nicholas WAS real. He was an old man that supposedly delivered money to the poor (or something similar). Same with Titor. We're not "seeing" the entire story...the true part of the story... I'm not trying to convince you. Just sayin'.... Who is Titor REALLY???? Could he not be a real time traveler with a false story attached,like Santa?
vodkafan
Temporal Navigator
Ok I said tin I believe it was thin sheet steel. Yes going by the photos and diagrams put up on another forum.
vodkafan
Temporal Navigator
Pohlman certainly seems to have something to do with the whole thing as it is his drawings (from his patent application)
which have been reprinted as "explaining" how JT's time machine works, although it shows nothing workable, no circuit diagrams, no power supply...
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
I would have to say no. The reason being is that we are all victims of our educational system. A system that has brainwashed us into creating explanations for things that we don't understand. But apparently the rules for creating those explanations are being left out. But there appears to be a preference for making something up as opposed to looking for a real fact based explanation.
Why do you believe Saint Nicholas was real?
Why do you believe Titor could be a real time traveler?
Do you have any real facts, or hard core evidence to sway you to believe this way?
I do realize that you might not understand that there has to be some type of verifiable reality to an explanation. But in many cases those types of explanations just aren't available. And our educational system made us this way. To me it appears to be a system that works by keeping everybody effectively stupid. A way to control the masses. I think this is something you have to figure out on your own. I've had no luck at all in trying to show people what's going on. Apparently the educational system is much better at getting us to accept false beliefs mostly without question.
Darby
Epochal Historian
Paula,
Go back and read the posts. By that I don't mean read Pamela's posts that she attributes to Titor. I mean read the posts made by TTO and JT. There's really not much there. It's 142 posts. Take away all the "I don't care if you believe me" quibbling crap posts. What's left?
If I believe your CV that you include in your profile then you have a solid physical science background. Toss out all of the Titor shit and just look at the facts that he posted. When looking at the facts toss out his amazing brain exposition that "E = mc^2" and "ds^2 = sqrt (-ct^2 + x^2 + y^2 + z^2)" college introductory relativistic physics and ask yourself, "Did he actually say anything that we don't already know?" Look deeper than the surface. Look at the topics being discussed on the forums during and for a year before he started posting. Was there really anything new or even original?
Darby
Epochal Historian
Now I'll give you my not-so-surprising answer to my own questions:
Titor has been given the online mystique of being some sort of genius. In reality maybe Boomer is some sort of genius. But based on his posts he is just an ordinary person not given of any information that we don't already have. His knowledge of physics, as exhibited in his posts, is lower division introductory physics for non physical science majors, i.e. - the undergrad physical science requirement for social science majors.
There's nothing, absolutely nothing, in Titor's posts that indicates that he had any sub-surface understanding of the physical laws of nature. What was apparent was his understanding of how alt-sci forums work and how to feed pearls to swine (no disrespect intended to the swine).
Titor has been given the online mystique of being some sort of genius. In reality maybe Boomer is some sort of genius. But based on his posts he is just an ordinary person not given of any information that we don't already have. His knowledge of physics, as exhibited in his posts, is lower division introductory physics for non physical science majors, i.e. - the undergrad physical science requirement for social science majors.
There's nothing, absolutely nothing, in Titor's posts that indicates that he had any sub-surface understanding of the physical laws of nature. What was apparent was his understanding of how alt-sci forums work and how to feed pearls to swine (no disrespect intended to the swine).
Nika_W84
Chrono Cadet
I double maj. and have a BA in social science and I was not req. to take any physics...I am not disagreeing with your entire position, just this one point.
Darby
Epochal Historian
I wasn't indicating physics as a core requirement for a social science major. I was indicating a physical science (physics, chem, geology, etc.) requirement. The requirement vary state to state in the US but when I was an undergrad all students in the University of California schools had to take at least (non major level): 1 year of physical science, 1 year of biological science, 1 year of calculus, 1 semester of social science stats and 1 year of a foreign language for a BA degree. All social scientists should have come away with a basic level of understanding of university level science and math.
I was an experimental psychology major with emphasis on experimental design. That was a BS degree program rather than a BA in psychology and the requirement for math, physical science (esp. chemistry and pharmacology) and biological science (esp. human physiology and neuro-pharmacology) was "somewhat" more than the other psychology programs.
Darby
Epochal Historian
We make plasmas all the time. A plasma is just a state of matter where the atoms are all ionized - electrons are stripped off - and they form a sort of gas. Neon lights and florescent tube lights glow because the plasma is excited by an electric current running through it.
You make the plasma by exciting the electrons beyond their binding energy state - the energy required to keep them bound to the atom. It they are energized to a high enough state they jump up to and off the highest orbital. Viola! Plasma.
Have we recreated the sun plasma on Earth? Sure - many times. And on a large scale. Every fission bomb and fusion bomb every detonated created a plasma far more energetic (per surface area) than the sun. Every such bomb ever detonated output, for a brief moment, more energy than was received over the entire Earth from the sun during that period of time. When you see a film of an atomic or hydrogen bomb detonating you are looking at the plasma (the fire ball). The surface temperature of the sun is about 5770 degrees. The surface temperature of a nuclear bomb is 10's of million degrees. It not only recreates the surface it also recreates the core of the sun (a somewhat loose description - the precise nuclear interactions are quite different than in the sun).
Darby
Epochal Historian
You're at it again - giving half an answer to a legitimate question and extending it to the general answer.
Not "some" but all matter has an Index of Refraction. If you can "see" it, i.e. the stuff interacts with light, then it has an Index of Refraction. When looking at stellar lensing that is taken into account. That's half the answer because it does not account for the total lensing. General Relativity accounts for the otherwise unaccounted for portion of the curvature of the light. This is the science as taught in the schools that I attended.
You're always referring to what is taught in school and getting it wrong. Where the heck did you go to school where they taught this nonsense?
Darby
Epochal Historian
Here's the big difference and why the answer to the bold text is no. St. Nicholas lived 1700 years ago and no one alive today or for the past hundred generations had a conversation with him. The difference is that there are several people on this site who had conversations (albeit through posts) with Titor. The entire text of the conversations in its original form, without any edits, is available. We know exactly what Titor said in his own words. There's no legend behind the words; they speak for themselves.
Caveat: Several of us tend to be skeptical to some degree a good portion of what is attributed to Titor because it did not come onto the forum in its original text. A good deal of posts attributed to Titor were actually posted by Pamela via what she said were private email conversations between them. In those cases we consider the possibility of the unreliable (biased) narrator effect. Titor neither confirmed nor denied that those posts were complete, unedited or even his words. We do know that Pamela did say that she edited portions of the emails. What we don't know is what and to what extent she edited them.
P
PaulaJedi
P
PaulaJedi
My point: If we can create plasma and it can bend light, then could we not create a picture similar to the one Titor posted?
Mylo.X.
Quantum Scribe
Howe can we not be sure that Pamela was not part of the whole John Titor crew/group?
P
PaulaJedi
P
PaulaJedi
Then perhaps "Titor" used plasma in his technology. Everyone is too hung up on gravity.
P
PaulaJedi
I no longer focus on the posts. Evidence lies elsewhere and does not require a physics degree to find.