Why John Titor's trip was unlikely

[1122]

Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

The Earth is orbiting the Sun at a rate of about 67,062 miles per hour.

John Titor claims that his machine can take him 10 years per hour back in time at "100% power".

Since Titor's VGL system would allow him to stick to the Earth, he would have traveled back in time 87,600 hours (10 years) and traveled a distance of 5,874,631,200 miles because of the Earth's (reverse) orbit.

That would mean that John Titor traveled approx. 1,631,842 miles per second into the past, or 8.7600440314282621132473402733807 * the speed of light.



I won't even begin to describe why I think this makes his journey unlikely. Two words: "centripetal force"

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

An interesting, thoughtful, and scientific approach to the debunking of Titor, 1122. Well done, sir!

The Earth is orbiting the Sun at a rate of about 67,062 miles per hour.

Yes. And if we measure Earth motion only relative to the Sun, we must also account for the translational motion of the Sun as relative to the center of our galaxy. And then we must also account for the translational motion of the center of our galaxy with respect to other galaxies. So by moving back in Time, Titor is also (necessarily) moving back in Space... as well as Mass.

I won't even begin to describe why I think this makes his journey unlikely. Two words: "centripetal force"

Indeed. And there are additional problems associated with a "time travel gain" of 10 years per hour that make it highly unlikely.

RMT

 

[Hercules]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

That would mean that John Titor traveled approx. 1,631,842 miles per second into the past, or 8.7600440314282621132473402733807 * the speed of light.

It had nothins to do with the speed of light. He travels to the past of another worldline through a donut shaped singularity which is the pathway.

 

[newbie_0]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

He didn't say "stick to earth" anywhere.

Basically, the unit takes a reading of the local gravity and samples it during the "trip" in pulses. If the gravity is too far off, the unit stops or reverses itself to the last sample period where the readings were correct. If there is some sort of failure, the unit shuts down and drops out to where ever you may be.

So if the "centripetal force" was too much it's the VGL's job to revert to last known good.

 

[1122]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

Hercules and Newbie_0,

Reply to this thread once you've left fantasy land.

Thanks,
Bob

 

[newbie_0]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

Me and Herc, stranded on the island of sanity.

A JT debunker telling everyone who doesn't agree with their math that we are in "fantasy land". How spirited and original.


You said:

Since Titor's VGL system would allow him to stick to the Earth, he would have traveled back in time 87,600 hours (10 years) and traveled a distance of 5,874,631,200 miles because of the Earth's (reverse) orbit.

The duration of his "travel" was not 10 years and most importantly, his machine doesn't move.

Question posed long ago to JT,

John, if you were really a time traveler, you'd be dead. The Earth, the solar system and the galaxy are all moving. If you did travel back through time, you'd materialize in 1970 where the Earth will be in 2036, which is the vacuum of space.

JT's reply:

This is an excellent point and one I thought I went over a bit earlier. There is a gravity lock system that compensates for the local gravity outside of the Tipler sinusoid. This is the reason the unit is only accurate to about 60 years.

Yet another budding young debunker:

Time travel may be possible; you would not land on Earth. You would land in a vacuum of space. You have to take into account that the Earth, the solar system and the galaxy are all moving.

JT replies:

Yes, this is a problem. It was solved by taking a "snapshot" of the local gravity around the unit before leaving a worldline and incorporating it into the sinusoid during travel. The short answer is, you "stick" to the earth but this is only a useful explanation to understand it and it's not practical. Since the computer system is using a virtual reference, the calculations become flawed. Thus:


1. Based on the accuracy and timing of the "snapshots" the distortion units are limited to how long they can travel before becoming unstable.


2. We must leave and arrive in areas we have prior or future knowledge of in order to avoid massive objects (buildings, water, etc…)


3. The unit has a fail-safe system during travel that drops out in case of a unit shutdown or radical departure in gravity readings.

Yet another poster,

If the electron injection system alters the shape of the field, would that not force the unit to accelerate through space as well as time?

He never gets tired of repeating the same thing:

There is no relative movement in space due to three main factors. Large, kinetic energy inducing effects of the gravity field are compensated for by the interaction of the singularities. The mass of the unit and any objects inside the sinusoid do not exhibit any huge increases on the departure worldline during travel. The observed path of the traveler is obtained by changing the gravity, not by moving the vehicle. The black hole comes to you.

Think about a dot moving 1 pixel/hour across a screen. A programmer could change the variable that holds the last know position of the dot. Suddenly the dot appears 100 pixels away. So if the dot "changes position", it's still moving at 1 pixel per second. There was no motion observed in this case - all the viewer sees is the dot appear in a new location. No motion taking place, just the new "location" being updated.

 

[newbie_0]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

<- particularly proud of previous prose /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[1122]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

The duration of his "travel" was not 10 years and most importantly, his machine doesn't move.

I was using 10 years as a reference to the per hour displacement he described his machine is capable of. John states clearly that he can travel back in time 10 years per hour.

Think about a dot moving 1 pixel/hour across a screen. A programmer could change the variable that holds the last know position of the dot. Suddenly the dot appears 100 pixels away. So if the dot "changes position", it's still moving at 1 pixel per second. There was no motion observed in this case - all the viewer sees is the dot appear in a new location. No motion taking place, just the new "location" being updated.

To move in time, and maintain position on Earth over that time, you must move with the Earth. His machine would have to follow the Earth's rotation, revolution around the Sun, revolution of the Sun around the center of the galaxy, motion of the galaxy within it's local group, and expansion of the universe. Using only the speed of the Earth around the Sun, I calculated that John's machine would have had to take him 8.7x the speed of light to maintain it's position on the Earth. This was based on the 10 years per hour, and using the distance the Earth travels in 10 years to calculate the speed at which he would have displaced in space.

Bottom line: To maintain your position on Earth, you must remain attached to the Earth and match it's speed. Otherwise, you would have to calculate the position of the Earth at the desired time you are traveling to and move towards that position.

 

[newbie_0]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

To move in time, and maintain position on Earth over that time, you must move with the Earth.

Seeing as to how we don't yet "move in time", I don't have the foggiest idea why you choose to say this with complete certainty.

Bottom line: To maintain your position on Earth, you must remain attached to the Earth and match it's speed. Otherwise, you would have to calculate the position of the Earth at the desired time you are traveling to and move towards that position.

Do you understand my pixel story, or do you chose to pretend you don't in pursuance with some sort of devious intention?

The variable that holds the position is changed. That is what JT tries to explain in his story. The machine doesn't "move", it's position is updated. If the VGL detects the machine is in the wrong spot, it slows down the process or stops completely. The exact specifics on how gravity from rotating microsingularities can change the fundamental variables that represent the time and location are yet to be completed.

If you think we'll never get there, I think you're heart is in the right place. If it were up to me I'd rather time travel not be discovered for a million years. I'd be happy without air conditioning and without a billion cars and giant buildings. I don't understand why we are racing to get more toys, why so many people have to starve to death while so many push technology to the limit so we can read the internet in the bathroom. If it gets invented and the the population escapes a natural disaster, then I guess it was worth it.

 

[1122]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

Seeing as to how we don't yet "move in time", I don't have the foggiest idea why you choose to say this with complete certainty.

The logic is simple. John remains consistent with his position on Earth as he travels. As he moves backwards in time, he is moving through space to maintain his position with the Earth. There is no other way around it. The math is extremely simple.

Do you understand my pixel story, or do you chose to pretend you don't in pursuance with some sort of devious intention?

Sure I understand, but I don't believe it applies to reality.

The variable that holds the position is changed. That is what JT tries to explain in his story. The machine doesn't "move", it's position is updated. If the VGL detects the machine is in the wrong spot, it slows down the process or stops completely. The exact specifics on how gravity from rotating microsingularities can change the fundamental variables that represent the time and location are yet to be completed.

This is what I meant by fantasy land. Using this to contradict my logic about his displacement in space, as well as time, does not hold water. How does his machine not "move" when it has to hold position with Earth to arrive at that position once it has stopped?

 

[newbie_0]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

The logic is simple. John remains consistent with his position on Earth as he travels. As he moves backwards in time, he is moving through space to maintain his position with the Earth. There is no other way around it. The math is extremely simple.

No, as he moves backward in time, he "appears" in the right location. He doesn't actually MOVE through space. Part of the story. He says we discover how to do this with dual microsingularties. So you can't debunk something that he says is yet to be discovered.

Matter changes "location" without any propulsion. It just appears in the new spot. If the computer can't figure out how to alter the gravity field in a way that will make the traveler appear in the right location, it will slow down, and eventually "compute" it's way back to the last know good location.

He said many times the craft does NOT move through space. Ok? You question was asked and answered already by JT himself.

 

[1122]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

No, as he moves backward in time, he "appears" in the right location. He doesn't actually MOVE through space. Part of the story. He says we discover how to do this with dual microsingularties. So you can't debunk something that he says is yet to be discovered.

Matter changes "location" without any propulsion. It just appears in the new spot. If the computer can't figure out how to alter the gravity field in a way that will make the traveler appear in the right location, it will slow down, and eventually "compute" it's way back to the last know good location.

He said many times the craft does NOT move through space. Ok? You question was asked and answered already by JT himself.

Do not take my lack of response as defeat in debate. There is nothing more to discuss with you.

 

[newbie_0]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

Hard to have a debate when JT already answered your question.

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

Hard to have a debate when JT already answered your question.

But if his answer to the question defies scientific inquiry, then it cannot be true or correct. I could invent any sort of capability that could never be realized, and simply tell you "it has not yet been discovered". Just because I give you a statement that you cannot prove does not make it possible, or somehow "exempt" from our known laws of energy.

This is the error in your thinking that 1122 is exhibiting. Mass, Space, and Time are all intimately connected. ALL scientific measurements tell us that this is so. No matter what JT said, you cannot move through Time without also moving through Space (and also Mass). They are 3, balanced metrics of our physics, and there are certain interactions between them that just cannot be violated. The overarching rules are conservation of energy and momentum. If Titor's machine never moves in space, then it would violate these conservation laws. Because quite simply the following is true: You cannot point to a single thing existing in our universe that DOES NOT move. For the person behind JT to ever claim that some contraption he dreamed up does not move reveals his lack of deep understanding of the one constant in our universe: MOTION.

RMT

 

[newbie_0]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

But if his answer to the question defies scientific inquiry, then it cannot be true or correct.

Don't you mean to say it 'might' not be correct? I'd agree it hasn't been proven correct.

I could invent any sort of capability that could never be realized

I'm not so sure about that, I'd bet you could think up something very theoretical that would have a lot of potential to be realized.

This is the error in your thinking that 1122 is exhibiting.

That would only be true if I insisted his story was completely 100% true. I do not make this claim.

For the person behind JT to ever claim that some contraption he dreamed up does not move reveals his lack of deep understanding of the one constant in our universe: MOTION.

So you don't understand my pixel story either? How do you explain entanglement? Entangled photons seem to communicate, faster than light.

You cannot point to a single thing existing in our universe that DOES NOT move.

OPINIONS!! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif :oops:

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

Don't you mean to say it 'might' not be correct? I'd agree it hasn't been proven correct.

No, I don't mean that. My statement was correct in diction and tense for what I meant:

"But if his answer to the question defies scientific inquiry, then it cannot be true or correct."

The writer behind JT never provided sufficient definition of anything that could be quantifiably verified by scientific inquiry. That's because he spoke to people in prose, and could not and did not ever quantify what he was talking about with even the simplest of maths.

I'm not so sure about that, I'd bet you could think up something very theoretical that would have a lot of potential to be realized.

Well of course I could. But I could still dream-up and describe stories of things that could NOT be realized. In fact, those types of stories are EASIER to create as long as I don't provide any specific measureables in the telling of my story. Hence the JT tactic.

That would only be true if I insisted his story was completely 100% true. I do not make this claim.

Oh, I can play that game too! So then stake your claim on the believability of Titor then! Do you believe it is only 50% true, or maybe closer to 75% true? Help me understand what, exactly, you are claiming about Titor's story. That would tell me how serious you are in this! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

So you don't understand my pixel story either? How do you explain entanglement? Entangled photons seem to communicate, faster than light.

I understand your pixel story as just that... a story. Nothing in your story disproves the nature of Matter and Motion as the basis for physical reality of Mass, Space, and Time. In fact, when you analyze the operation of the electrical system involved in your story, you will see that it depends upon the MOTION of electrical current through a machine made of MATTER. You cannot decouple the concept of Time from the base concepts of Matter and Motion.

OPINIONS!!

Very well then. If this is only my opinion, and not fact, then perhaps you can cite for me one single example of a body of matter that does not move? Any one physical example would be OK to convince me.

RMT

 

[Hercules]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

May be this should help. Just read the last part to see whether JT's theory is plausible or not.

http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

 

[newbie_0]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

"But if his answer to the question defies scientific inquiry, then it cannot be true or correct."

That's short sighted don't you think? Good thing JT didn't travel back to 1692.

The writer behind JT never provided sufficient definition of anything that could be quantifiably verified by scientific inquiry. That's because he spoke to people in prose, and could not and did not ever quantify what he was talking about with even the simplest of maths.

If he did, he would have violated his main characters primary rule that he isn't going to help people get rich.

Well of course I could. But I could still dream-up and describe stories of things that could NOT be realized. In fact, those types of stories are EASIER to create as long as I don't provide any specific measureables in the telling of my story. Hence the JT tactic.

JT's tactic was to use Tippler's old time travel theory. Invent something as elaborate as JT's time machine. I challenge you. (Half kidding, it's waste of time, but you never know, you'd have better chance than I would at making something cool)

Oh, I can play that game too! So then stake your claim on the believability of Titor then! Do you believe it is only 50% true, or maybe closer to 75% true? Help me understand what, exactly, you are claiming about Titor's story. That would tell me how serious you are in this!

My believability rating as a percent score would vary day to day from 0 to 100. Depending on how much mental anguish the story is putting on me, my rating approaches 100. Mostly hovers around 50 though. The author didn't trip on his words, or give up and admit the hoax. He carried through with it to the end. It's taken quite a toll of me mentally, this story. Family hates me, my girlfriend left, and lost two jobs. I might not ever be able to work again in this field, because of this story. The mystery and all...

You cannot decouple the concept of Time from the base concepts of Matter and Motion.

My pixel example is not really decoupling these concepts. You said yourself that there are forces going through the computer to make the pixel appear in it's new location. Just as there are forces at works in JT's story. Altering gravitational forces has an effect on matter contained within the field, so the story goes.

The OP insisted there is no other way to move through the universe than the SINGLE method we have discovered after existing for a only a few years compared to the age of the universe. I'm just saying we don't know for sure yet. If the universe explodes, I'll admit you're both right, but only because we never had time to figure out new ways.

Any one physical example would be OK to convince me.

I'm not trying to convince you, I'm just saying I don't refute the possibility that matter can "appear" out of nowhere. If a single particle can pop into existence because of changing forces, then it sounds possible we can figure a way how to control all particles. To make them disappear and reappear somewhere else faster than light.


What is entanglement? Is that fully explained? This is an honest question. I was told photons appear to communicate over massive distances, faster than light. You change the spin of one photon and the other photon matches the spin without any external force. (Well, at least without any measurable force we understand yet). Was this explained to me correctly?

 

[Hercules]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

Movement of space, time, and earth rotates, so to time travel, you need to orbit around the sun in the reverse direction (10 times means ten years) to reach the desired point in both space and time!(I doubt whether I got your point correctly? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif)

First of all this puts forward the question of the theory of evolution. John Titor and the Experts in Time Travel in his worldline in 2036 visualizes that the Big Bang gave rise to multiple universes and worldlines. If there is a present, there is a past and there is a future and you live in all of these.

According to this theory, you need not orbit around the sun in the reverse direction to go to the past, if the past always existed, you only need to make a pathway to reach the destination.

I agree with your observation. What you INSIST on is, he SAID his machine travels at the rate of 10 years an hour so he is traveling through space.

What I observed was, 10 years an hour is just a measurement of the capacity of the Time Machine. Every electrical item comes with specifications. A motor has specifications of its speed in rpm(revolutions per minute), the maximum load it can handle, etc.

May be in the advanced Time machines, which are capable of handling more power, they could travel 20 years an hour. It is just a unit of measurement, not movement.

I don’t know whether you confused the 10 years an hour with speed, wherein a person or object travels through space, or you found this topic as an interesting (with your calculations about sun and Earth) one to debunk JT.

Discussing about JT’s theories is very interesting, so I dropped in. If you feel it is a hoax (and its flawed by you in this thread) or agree it is real, it does not affect me in any way.

This is a forum about Time Travel, and JT’s posts gave deep insight into Time Traveling tactics. There are people who does not want to learn more things about the Superverse and follow “Ignorance is Bliss” and these things look like fantasy. Even in JT’s worldline there are people who opposed Time Travel. One reason is the theory behind TT relating to evolution and multiple worldlines is directly contradictory (with proof) to what they’ve been preaching about all these years.

The writer behind JT never provided sufficient definition of anything that could be quantifiably verified by scientific inquiry. That's because he spoke to people in prose, and could not and did not ever quantify what he was talking about with even the simplest of maths.

LARGE GRAVITY = STATIC BLACK HOLE
The next step is to find a large gravity source to use in your time machine. Static black holes provide this type of power. As one twin approaches the event horizon or edge of the black hole, the other twin will watch him as he appears to slow down. He will notice his twin’s watch run slower until it stops at the event horizon. The twin moving toward the horizon will notice none of this and see his watch running just fine. Although possible, a trip into a static black hole will not take you to another worldline and it’s one-way. The force of gravity will crush you.

ROTATING BLACK HOLE = DONUT-SHAPED SINGULARITY
Fortunately, most black holes are not static. They spin. Spinning black holes are often referred to as Kerr black holes. A Kerr black hole has two interesting properties. One, they have two event horizons and two, the singularity is not a point, it looks more like a donut. These odd properties also have a pronounced affect on the black hole’s gravity. There are vectors where you can approach the singularity without being crushed by gravity. (For those interested in seeing a graphic of a photon trip through a Kerr black hole, try here)

DONUT-SHAPED SINGULARITY = PASSAGE INTO ALTERNATE WORLDLINE
Another other more interesting result of passing through a donut singularity is that you travel through time by passing into another universe or worldline. Please see Penrose diagrams for Kerr Black holes or you can examine the calculations of Frank Tipler.

So now the problem becomes….where do we find a donut-shaped singularity?

A PONDERING HAWKING = MICROSINGULARITY
Steven Hawking proposed the existence of microsingularities that were created in the big bang. They were probably about the size of a proton and disappeared over the years due to an effect of radiation evaporation. (Yes, black holes do emit energy.)

 

[1122]

Re: Why John Titor\'s trip was unlikely

Movement of space, time, and earth rotates, so to time travel, you need to orbit around the sun in the reverse direction (10 times means ten years) to reach the desired point in both space and time!(I doubt whether I got your point correctly? )

That is what Titor's method would suggest. It is not how I believe time travel will be accomplished. It is also why I believe that time travel can only occur in space, not on the surface of a planet. Maintaining position on an object in motion while traveling in time is just not practical, and I've shown that in my first post.

I have been thinking about a space ship traveling faster than light (thus back in time) within our solar system. Would it be 'thrown' out of the solar system because of the movement around the galaxy/universe and so on? Or, is it possible that the solar system has a wake that we are caught in because of its massive size?

Regardless, Titor's journey would not work. The Earth does not have a significant force that would assist in keeping a time traveler attached to it. If the traveler does not attach him/herself to the Earth for their entire trip, they must travel through space to reach their destination. I can't imagine the amount of thrust and course correction/perfection it would take to remain on the Earth while traveling back in time.