Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time machine
- Thread starter Mop
- Start date
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
This is what I was saying in some other thread. The 1/r^2 law does not imply to a Donut shaped singularity which is the very subject of this thread. It is SAFE to sit inside the hole of the donut. The car only acts as a medium for Time Travel. As long as you are inside the inner circle you are safe.
I am NOT proving that the picture is real here, but the facts that Titor provided cannot allow the picture to be falsified.
I know that this post will be followed by RMT’s “where are the scientific facts†statement and also very long explanations to debunk it.
Well that’s impossible cuz no Titor-curious person can jump into the future and bring back a Time Machine.
This is what I was saying in some other thread. The 1/r^2 law does not imply to a Donut shaped singularity which is the very subject of this thread. It is SAFE to sit inside the hole of the donut. The car only acts as a medium for Time Travel. As long as you are inside the inner circle you are safe.
I am NOT proving that the picture is real here, but the facts that Titor provided cannot allow the picture to be falsified.
I know that this post will be followed by RMT’s “where are the scientific facts†statement and also very long explanations to debunk it.
Well that’s impossible cuz no Titor-curious person can jump into the future and bring back a Time Machine.
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
Help me understand your point. Are you saying it is impossible for a gravitational gradient to exist that starts just outside the automobile, as titor claims?
Or are you saying that if a gravitational gradient exists that starts just outside the automobile the picture would look different? If so, how should it look?
Help me understand your point. Are you saying it is impossible for a gravitational gradient to exist that starts just outside the automobile, as titor claims?
Or are you saying that if a gravitational gradient exists that starts just outside the automobile the picture would look different? If so, how should it look?
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
Yes. There is no way to turn off the effects of a gravity source that strong. Yet the laser beam inside the vehicle shows there is no distortion. It's like the occupants are in a shielded zone that sheilds against gravity. There is nothing in the universe that even suggests this is possible to shield against gravity this way.
The only shear point in the universe that can cut off space is the event horizon of a black hole. If space is cut off then there should be no reflection at all. Yet we see the bent laser beam. This isn't possible.
Yes. There is no way to turn off the effects of a gravity source that strong. Yet the laser beam inside the vehicle shows there is no distortion. It's like the occupants are in a shielded zone that sheilds against gravity. There is nothing in the universe that even suggests this is possible to shield against gravity this way.
The only shear point in the universe that can cut off space is the event horizon of a black hole. If space is cut off then there should be no reflection at all. Yet we see the bent laser beam. This isn't possible.
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
Yes I am. We are bound and limited by the laws that exist within our universe. Of course I haven't considered using something that would exist outside our universe. That would fall under the realm of Titor. The successful con.
Yes I am. We are bound and limited by the laws that exist within our universe. Of course I haven't considered using something that would exist outside our universe. That would fall under the realm of Titor. The successful con.
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
I agree with that. I believe that new discoveries can lead to a change in the way we view our universe.
I understand where you are coming from. You cannot see that the way we view our universe may change as new discoveries are made.
I'm sure those that "knew" the earth was the center of the universe said many of the same things you are saying.
I don't see we have anything left to discuss. You haven't convinced me of anything other than you are sure titor is a "con" and you have not convinced me of anything.
end of message.
end of conversation.
I agree with that. I believe that new discoveries can lead to a change in the way we view our universe.
I understand where you are coming from. You cannot see that the way we view our universe may change as new discoveries are made.
I'm sure those that "knew" the earth was the center of the universe said many of the same things you are saying.
I don't see we have anything left to discuss. You haven't convinced me of anything other than you are sure titor is a "con" and you have not convinced me of anything.
end of message.
end of conversation.
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
Yes I agree with that. Using sigularities does violate conservation laws. But that does't mean it is impossible cuz that's what CERN is upto.
I am not going to reply to any Debunking of this statement cuz it is useless.
Yes I agree with that. Using sigularities does violate conservation laws. But that does't mean it is impossible cuz that's what CERN is upto.
I am not going to reply to any Debunking of this statement cuz it is useless.
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
A statement I overlooked:
Note the word in bold:
The person, (Ori) who suggested this method is not someone whom you can debunk saying that “you don’t have knowledge of physicsâ€. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
A statement I overlooked:
Note the word in bold:
The person, (Ori) who suggested this method is not someone whom you can debunk saying that “you don’t have knowledge of physicsâ€. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
Here is one.
Kerr-type Black Hole
As it turns out the collapse of a star would not likely, according to most physicists, settle down into a static, non-rotating state but instead would likely be spinning. In the 1960's, Roy Kerr worked out some equations that predicted that a black hole spinning at a high velocity would assume a ring shaped singularity rather than a point singularity (Halpern, 1992). This would be due to the centrifugal force of the spin. Under the conditions of a Kerr-type black hole one could enter from a polar region and travel through the center of the ring thereby reducing the severe tidal forces exhibited by other types of black holes. Gribbin (1992) states that there are theories that seem to indicate that such a Kerr-type black hole could, like the Einstein-Rosen bridges of the Schwarzschild solution, produce a gateway to either another universe or some perhaps large displacement in our own, not as another black hole but as a "white hole" that repulses matter out into the "other" universe.
According to some recent work of mine, the answer is that they (particles that enter black holes) will go off into a little baby universe of their own. A small, self contained universe branches off from our region of the universe. This baby universe may join on again to our region of space-time. If it does it would appear to us to be another black hole that formed and then evaporated. Particles that fell into one black hole would appear as particles emitted by the other black hole, and visa versa. ... In the last few years, a lot of people have been working on baby universes. I don't think anyone will make a fortune by patenting them as a method of space travel but they have become a very exciting area of research. (Hawking, 1993, p.121,125)
Gribbin further states that " An astronaut who dived through the ring but stayed close to it and circled around the center of the black hole in an appropriate orbit would be traveling back in time" (Gribbin, 1992, p.163). If the other side is a white hole where matter is forced out into the universe, then perhaps travel is possible. But is it a white hole in another universe or a white hole in the past of our universe? According the common belief, white holes may have been common in the early history of the universe but chances of finding one near our present timeline is unlikely. Others think that quasars could be white holes, but they are so far away that they represent light from many millions to perhaps billions of years ago. Remember that you cannot return to our universe due to the event horizon on our side. On the other hand perhaps these so called other universes may just be our own universe at some other time." Just as Schwarzschild's solution can be extended into an antiworld-another universe, where time runs backwards-so Kerr's solution extends into an infinity of other universes both worlds and anti-worlds" (Davies, 1995, p.244).
http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/blackholesth.htm
Here is one.
Kerr-type Black Hole
As it turns out the collapse of a star would not likely, according to most physicists, settle down into a static, non-rotating state but instead would likely be spinning. In the 1960's, Roy Kerr worked out some equations that predicted that a black hole spinning at a high velocity would assume a ring shaped singularity rather than a point singularity (Halpern, 1992). This would be due to the centrifugal force of the spin. Under the conditions of a Kerr-type black hole one could enter from a polar region and travel through the center of the ring thereby reducing the severe tidal forces exhibited by other types of black holes. Gribbin (1992) states that there are theories that seem to indicate that such a Kerr-type black hole could, like the Einstein-Rosen bridges of the Schwarzschild solution, produce a gateway to either another universe or some perhaps large displacement in our own, not as another black hole but as a "white hole" that repulses matter out into the "other" universe.
According to some recent work of mine, the answer is that they (particles that enter black holes) will go off into a little baby universe of their own. A small, self contained universe branches off from our region of the universe. This baby universe may join on again to our region of space-time. If it does it would appear to us to be another black hole that formed and then evaporated. Particles that fell into one black hole would appear as particles emitted by the other black hole, and visa versa. ... In the last few years, a lot of people have been working on baby universes. I don't think anyone will make a fortune by patenting them as a method of space travel but they have become a very exciting area of research. (Hawking, 1993, p.121,125)
Gribbin further states that " An astronaut who dived through the ring but stayed close to it and circled around the center of the black hole in an appropriate orbit would be traveling back in time" (Gribbin, 1992, p.163). If the other side is a white hole where matter is forced out into the universe, then perhaps travel is possible. But is it a white hole in another universe or a white hole in the past of our universe? According the common belief, white holes may have been common in the early history of the universe but chances of finding one near our present timeline is unlikely. Others think that quasars could be white holes, but they are so far away that they represent light from many millions to perhaps billions of years ago. Remember that you cannot return to our universe due to the event horizon on our side. On the other hand perhaps these so called other universes may just be our own universe at some other time." Just as Schwarzschild's solution can be extended into an antiworld-another universe, where time runs backwards-so Kerr's solution extends into an infinity of other universes both worlds and anti-worlds" (Davies, 1995, p.244).
http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/blackholesth.htm
TTraveler83
Temporal Novice
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
now in saying this, are you implying that we cannot bend or go around these laws without entirely breaking them? before the airplane it was impossible to fly due to the "law" of gravity. IMPOSSIBLE. so we cunningly decided to make wings that would manipulate air to create lift as long as we had a propellant. am i wrong in this? so why would any other law be so stone solid that eventually we can't work around it? don't get me wrong i really agree with you but your close mindedness is going to get you no where. time travel at this point is a fantasy at what point can you try to prove or disprove anything in the fantasy genre. keep an open mind on this type of forum it wouldn't make sense otherwise
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
Manmade laws we can break. But natures laws are a different matter all together. For instance: two objects can't occupy the same place at the same time. We can use natures laws, but it's not likely we will be able to change or alter them. That's just the way it is.
Manmade laws we can break. But natures laws are a different matter all together. For instance: two objects can't occupy the same place at the same time. We can use natures laws, but it's not likely we will be able to change or alter them. That's just the way it is.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
RMT
I can't begin to tell you how incorrect this statement is! So tell me this: When a man looked up in the sky and saw birds flying (all this BEFORE the airplane, mind you), did that convince him that flying was "impossible" due to the law of gravity? I get the feeling you may have not thought this whole thing through before you posted. But that's OK, as long as you learned something about flight and "impossible". Most people of science will never use that word. What they will use is "highly improbable" if there is data that indicates it is so.
RMT
MadMacs2010
Temporal Novice
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
I'll just chuck in an old overused quote from Sherlock Holmes here...
"It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet (1892)
I'll just chuck in an old overused quote from Sherlock Holmes here...
"It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet (1892)
Re: Nature.com: Gravity doughnut promises time mac
Where is also the statement that Titor made about the machine being on at low power and not full power?
Also where is the statement made in the article from Nature.com about how Ori thinks that one can not travel back past the point the machine was made?
Also, the point in my opinion is that gravity is not the main thing in that picture, but light is, and I see no camera made or video camera made that can take a picture like that the first place. The only one that has 3CCDs in it is a cheaper video camera then what I bought, I defy you to take a picture that has color in it in the complete dark it seems to be. But, lets say a flash was used, then I see no camera light or flash that leaves a picture like that also. But then I do not know everything either, so it still all points to conjecture in the end.
Where is also the statement that Titor made about the machine being on at low power and not full power?
Also where is the statement made in the article from Nature.com about how Ori thinks that one can not travel back past the point the machine was made?
Also, the point in my opinion is that gravity is not the main thing in that picture, but light is, and I see no camera made or video camera made that can take a picture like that the first place. The only one that has 3CCDs in it is a cheaper video camera then what I bought, I defy you to take a picture that has color in it in the complete dark it seems to be. But, lets say a flash was used, then I see no camera light or flash that leaves a picture like that also. But then I do not know everything either, so it still all points to conjecture in the end.
MadMacs2010
Temporal Novice
Because Donuts are FAR more interesting, they come in SO many different variations!!
I prefer them with strawberry icing and little sprinkles myself....
.
.
.
.
.
.
What am I saying!
.
.
OMG! I become Homer Simpson!!
mmmmmmmDonuts!