Molecular Cohesion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Todays time travel theorist all present models that would require enormous amounts of energy to solicit even the slightest changes in time. Although these theories are very well founded and valid, I personally feel that these ridiculous amounts of energy are not necessary to move an object through space/time. If one were to look at this problem as though time were a mighty river and our position in space/time was a raft adrift in the current, modern theorist appear to be trying to stop and reverse the flow of the river in order to reverse time. This of course is not practical. The foundation of my space/time manipulation theories are based on the manipulation of molecular cohesion. So what does molecular cohesion have to do with space/time? Simply put, molecular cohesion is not only the "glue" that binds the universe together, I believe it to be the binding force of our reality or particular place in space/time. VIA the manipulation of the energy levels in molecular structures, I theorize that temporal "high" and "low" pressure's can be created. Moving an object through time, very simular to the way in which an aircraft's wings give it lift. Again using the "mighty river" analogy, the rivers force is molecular cohesion. Lower the molecular cohesion (mass density) around the raft and the raft would not flow with the rest of time. Events in the past would begin to flow by the raft. Increase molecular cohesion (mass density) around the raft and the raft would flow faster than normal, into the future.
 
ST-IC

Extend your molecular cohesion idea to include the inside and outside (of mass objects) and their boundry plane.

The future arrives from the outside is inverted across the boundry plane and becomes stored as past inside the object.
 
Thank you for your input, but I would prefer to stick to proven methods of space/time manipulation. The idea of using changes in mass density to effect space/time is not only part of Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" but it is also a fact that has been proven. The past is not something that is "stored" anywhere, it coexists with the present and future.
 
The past is in fact stored AS mass as virtual photons are absorbed - at least relative to our instruments. Actually, the only thing we see is the past! All we see with our instruments are "snapshots" of what was action that are stationary with respect to T=0 space-time. mass does not change in 3-space, it changes in 4-space where it is not even really mass as we know it. All mass is timeless! energy is the only truly dynamic "entity". Virtual Photons carry action, and without their interaction with matter, we would see absolutely nothing of that matter. it would not even exist in our reality! The future is carried by these virtual particles, the present is the border between past and future, and the past is 3-spatial, what we know as existence. we do not even observe the present! As soon as we can, however, we will have opened a door to infinity. we will have at our fingertips somtehing so powerful, we could be as gods... we would experience the true essence of existence - and would truly understand that what was just said is only true to us as physical beings. You are correct in that the past present and future exists all at once, but that is only true in between instances - for lengths of time less than the planck unit for time. It is only true in 4-space, not in 3-space.
 
ST-1C

Oooh, you like mass density. What you need is a couple of minature blackhole singularities. Thats how JohnTitor skips about time. He keeps two of them in a big yellow suitcase built by General Electric Corp. Some thing about elongating the gravic field and injecting electons to create a field warpage. Never could figure it out.

He has gone back to 2036 but his legend lives on.
 
Richar18

What do you think is the critcal defining property between a virtual photon and a real photon?


>>>The only thing we see is the past<<<

I don't agree. It is as if the the exclusion principle is at work in the macro domain. We can know the past but can't change it. We can change the future but can't know it. What we experiance is the future becoming the past. Maybe it is just HOW you want to think about it. The physical world you see can be considered the end result of the past (which I find distressing) or you can consider it to be the very beginning cusp of the future arriving.

For example, somebody fires off two bullets at you. One has past and struck the wall behind you. The other is on the way. Which bullet is of more importance to you, the past one or the future one? In other words if all you can see is the past, then maybe you should adjust your habitual mode of perception.
 
If you have not already realized, I do not subscribe to the full theories of virtual photons, let alone an event matrix being locked into matter. Matter would still exist even without light. A blind person can still perceive and interact with reality because light is only one form of energy! The universe is full of various forms of energy by which reality can be perceived. You stated; "energy is the only truly dynamic entity". This is true! To say that light is the master of the universe is to say that other forms of energy do not exist. I do not deny that light does interact with matter in a profound way, but it is not the only form of energy that does!

From your perspective, the past can only be "replayed" as a recording. What I am stating is that the past is the passenger car behind us traveling on the same train of energy.

Imagine a light traveling from a distant star that is a million light years away. What we see here on Earth happened a million years ago. Think of that light as a being frozen into a very long train and time in the universe is halted. Now we have 1 million years of history in that beam train of light,(in this sense time is stored). Travel to any given point on that train and you will witness the events from the corresponding time period. Time is stored in energy, not mass. If energy is dynamic then so is time.
 
I have heard that story! Although, I believe it as far as I could throw a quantum singularity. LOL
 
ST-IC
>>>Time is stored in energy not mass<<<

That is a loaded statement.

What is every where and goes no where? Space. What is the nature of space? Is it dynamic or static or neither or both? I say matter and energy are secondary properties of space.

What if space was litterally the mind of god? Which is to say we will never have all the answers. It is a matter of using a set of theories that best match local observation of our local reality, and the ways that we are capable of thinking about it.

I'm wandering off into philsophy here. To wit; maybe there is an ultimate truth and maybe not.
 
&gt;&gt;&gt;The only thing we see is the past&lt;&lt;&lt;

I don't agree. It is as if the the exclusion principle is at work in the macro domain. We can know the past but can't change it. We can change the future but can't know it. What we experiance is the future becoming the past. Maybe it is just HOW you want to think about it. The physical world you see can be considered the end result of the past (which I find distressing) or you can consider it to be the very beginning cusp of the future arriving.

For example, somebody fires off two bullets at you. One has past and struck the wall behind you. The other is on the way. Which bullet is of more importance to you, the past one or the future one? In other words if all you can see is the past, then maybe you should adjust your habitual mode of perception.
Click to expand...

That's a very interesting point.
I believe it's relative in how deeply or analytical the phrase is looked at and interpreted.
IE; If we believe that the past can be obtained for travel in theory / then our concept of the three states of perception of existance (past, current, future) are strictly linear, whether infinite or finite is of little relevance...
However, if parallel universes exist, with varying distinctions of seperation, and dimensional goverances (ie. - time) are taken into context...well then...the subconscious might just as well live in the past as well as the future (present being processed by the cognitive conscious) - for existance of the subconscious (paranormal to quantum understanding) time would have little factors?

Chicken or the egg or both?

I just don't understand when someone takes for granted a short sentence and adheres little meaning to it; then answers with an answer of supposed boundless meaning. Not trying to offend anyone, but sometimes communication is lacking sure, I agree (superficial) - but the ego doesn't always have to play the constant now does it?


Fascinating ideas !

...and as I always, I concur, I could certainly be wrong.
 
Angle,

Richard's post was a bit rambling but he did at least get one part correct. We only perceive the past. The absolute minimum time required to receive information is limited to the speed of light. All incoming information that we preceive is limited, in the most simple form, as a function of

T_min = c/L where

T_min - the minimum time for a signal to arrive at the receiver
L - distance between transmitter and receiver
c - the speed of light

That assumes that the information is transmitted as electromagnetic energy, the fastest form of information transmission.

Internal information processing by the mind is much, much slower. Neural signal transmission is on the order of 125 meters/sec.

So, everything that you see occured in the past.

Quantifying "the present" presents a bit of a problem (pun intended). We really can't preceive the present as such. Events always resolve to having occured in the past. Just how far in the past is relative to both the distance and relative velocity between the observers and the event. Different observers will have differing opinions as to the time component of the event. But they will all agree that it occured in their absolute past.
 
Thanks for clarifying Darb - I see that perspective plays a role I was not taking into consideration. I appreciate the method used ^^


/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Angle,

You're welcome.

BTW:

I had a typo in my equation. It should be

T_min = L/c and not

T_min = c/L

If you plug &amp; chug some numbers you might have, for instance

T_min = 1 km/ 300,000 km * sec^-1


Cancel kilometers (km) in the equation and you have 1/300,00 seconds.

If you're 1 kilometer away from the event then you end up seeing the event 1/300,000 seconds after it occured.
 
Angle,

No. No humble pie here. Consider it a physics lesson from a non-physicist to another non-physicist.

The world is what it is. Just because we can't really perceive "the present" in terms of what our logic dictates should be the present doesn't mean that our perception of the world is somehow flawed. It's not. As I said, it is what it is. We seem to function rather well given the problem of the meaning of "now" though that actually means there's always a time delay (retarded time) in the mix.
 
Back
Top