WORDS FOR THE FUTURE, by John Titor

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!! :eek:
I think I let that one out on behalf of the entire TTI message board....

My boy has 111 posts and they are all from arguements, I feel bad for you!
 
Any idiot with a computer can come up with a theory based on tensors.
Click to expand...
Now let's contrast our styles. If I were like you, I'd have a personal attack as a comeback like "Gee, seeing as how you are over-qualified, I'm surprised you haven't crafted your own tensor theory." But rather what I would point out to you is that by knowing how tensor mathematics works, this allows one to determine the validity of any cobbled-together tensor theory by being able to work the math out for oneself. If you understood how tensor formulations describe the details of physics (that might not necessarily "make sense" to the uninitiated mind), then you might have a different opinion.
Okay, let's address this wind power.
Click to expand...
Wow, I can't wait to hear this explanation from you about how you think this quote from me backs your idea on wind power. No doubt you will try to twist the words and claim that when I am talking about tapping hurricane strength winds that it somehow relates to, or validates, your idea for wind power in nominal winds. Of course, where we differ is that I provided valid engineering calculations to validate the hurricane theory and invalidate your theory. I'm listening.
>So are you telling me that because it is "old news" that it is no longer valid?<

Yes! Science is provisional, not falsifiable. Science is based on facts, not conjecture.
Click to expand...
Agree with second sentence. Only agree with half of first sentence. Any "appropriate" scientific theory must be formulated in a manner where it can be falsified (usually by experiment). Again, that is why Titor's story has no "theory" in it...there is always something that prevents it from being falsified (his lame "worldline divergence" is a big coverall). But what does this have to do with my question about "old math" not being viable? Has someone (you?) shown that tensor mathematics is incorrect? I'm listening.
I will not be able to understand them because it's needless, over-complicated psychobabble.
Click to expand...
You do realize, I hope, that this is the same attitude the Catholic Church took towards Galileo? They did not wish to take the time to understand his scientific models (and the evidence that supported them). Instead, they branded him a heretic (essentially, the same as your branding my maths as "psychobabble"). Once again, I feel sorry for your narrow-minded approach to things you don't comprehend.
Guess that rules you out as a "Titor candidate" then.
Click to expand...
Ahhh yes, another "sly" personal attack. I am so deeply hurt by this....maybe I'd better go have an ice cream to cheer me up. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/frown.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Okay, lemmie try. TV = msnbc - cbs X abc (-HBO). It can also work if you substitute HBO with Cinemax.
Click to expand...
You see, your "formula" goes like this:
1) Throw out some Titor stuff and theories with no scientific basis.
2) Get vehemently angry when someone challenges your science.
3) Ignore valid questions and challenges intended to allow you to exhibit whatever scientific understanding you do have, and finally,
4) Make fun of scientific theory that you do not understand, nor wish to even attempt to form an understanding of.

So tell me: Is this wonderful equation of yours in any way related to your "fantastic" ruminations about pi? Now THOSE were some really scientific thoughts! I was almost hoping you'd write a book on pi! (See, I can do it too!)

Happy Thanksgiving, jmpet. I must say I am thankful for folks like you as you keep life interesting.
RMT
 
Oh yeah, I almost forgot:
Exactly. Any idiot with a computer can come up with a theory based on tensors.
Click to expand...

Here's a little light reading for you on the importance of tensors in physics.

"Tensors are of importance in physics and engineering. In the field of diffusion tensor imaging, for instance, a tensor quantity that expresses the differential permeability of organs to water in varying directions is used to produce scans of the brain. Perhaps the most important engineering examples are the stress tensor and strain tensor, which are both 2nd rank tensors, and are related in a general linear material by a fourth rank elasticity tensor."

For "psychobabble" it sure has done wonders for the advancement of our technology!

RMT
 
Alright, I'll come down off my high horse a little.

>My boy has 111 posts and they are all from arguments, I feel bad for you!<

Is that good or bad? And for who? I personally like arguments becaue with any argument, ultimately one person is right and the other wrong and there is knowledge to be learned on both sides; debates are one step away from breakthroughs.

Re: Tensors. I don't know what they mean, no one knows what they mean. That means it's your job to educate us so we know what you're talking about. It's quite simple- if you're introducing new concepts you need to at least explain them in plain words. I have no compulsion to read up just to grasp the fundamental principles you're referring to. I am willing to learn however if you're willing to teach, but I ain't taking a night class just to participate on a TT board!

Re: Wind power. I don't understand why I have to overstate the simple logic that windmills work. They simply work. You put them up, they spin in the wind and make electricity. I also think that considering you wrote about the positive benefits of wind power days before I joined this forum (which I just read recently), you should be at least a little "in my corner" on the issue.

I would love nothing more than one of these windmill companies to develop a "windmill in a box" system. Then they'd go town to town like travelling salesmen speaking to small town mayors selling free energy. Here's how it would go-

A one million dollar windmill produces enough energy for 500 homes. This is $2,000 per home. If you can sign up 500 homes in your town that want free electricity forever for only $2,000, I will bring this technology to your town. I bet you dollars to doughnuts there's be a lot of windmills everywhere.

Then very quickly, small American towns will no longer be part of a supermassive power grid and the next time some intern spills Coke on the control panel, 15 states won't go dark. As it stands now, especially with the Patriot Act, electricity in our homes is contingent upon two things: big business providing energy at whatever price they determine and our willingness as a people to toe that line. What's the first thing the FBI does in a hostage situation?

Re: Provisionality vs science. Science is provisional, not falsifiable. Your scientific approach of first developing theories then finding the science behind it is flawed because the first time someone finds fault with one of your basic principles, the whole thing falls apart. And on a personal note, provisionality is just plain annoying- the provisional approach ignores facts and looks for flaws. If I used the falsifiable approach to your theory, it would fall right apart.

Re: Philosophy vs science. Science is nothing more than math, period. If Einstein or Galileo or Newton or Hawking or any of them never sat back and wondered and imagined new ideas, they would have never come up with them. This is the provisionality of science: science is good only until a better science comes along. Hawking's approach to science is the same as mine- first you imagine something that's never been imagined and imagine it's real then work backwards and apply the science to make it logical. This is in essence your approach with one difference- first they thought up the end-product, then the invented the science to make it work. If you simplified your theory you'd see how easier it is not only to explain but prove too. And more people would know what the hell you're saying so more people would contribute. As it stands now, all you do is espouse then challenge and that is really my problem with the whole issue.

The Law of Eventuality states that sooner or later, someone somewhere is going to invent a time machine. My approach is to assume it already exists then "look at that McGuffin" and think backwards, then I have a discovery.

Re: pi. Pi is a wonderful thing!

Reading your past posts- you're really on to something, but you're attempting it from different angles instead of the most logical- the simplistic approach. The simpler a theory, the more it applies to everything else; the more people understand it. I can easily write a 100,000 word book on E=MC2 but it would only end up presenting the same information as the formula itself. The only number I think is more interesting than E=MC2 is pi. As far as number information, I'd look closer at the Qur'an. If you really have a valid theory then it's a truth and truths are easily dilutable.

Here's another way to put it. You write your theory, it's proven right, it becomes the new norm. At some point, someone has to make it understandable to teach it to nine year olds. I want that information first. Pique my interest then get complicated.

You can never force someone to agree with you, it's impossible. The harder you try, the harder it will be. The way to get them to agree with you is to speak on simpler and simpler terms until your idea becomes so simple that anyone can understand it. Then you re-complicate matters.

Happy Thanksgiving to all- I think I'm gonna buy me one of those Vegetarian Thanksgiving kits- you guys see this? Tofu turkey, mashed tatoes etc all in a box?
 
First question is jmpet = MEM ? (some software I have thinks you probably are)

"I do not have a secret agenda"
- When someone says this, and they are not a career journalist - they are ALWAYS full of crap and it amounts to "nah, cmon, just trust me here". Titor himself said he was here on a SECONDARY MISSION that he never detailed in full. So his very presence was admittedly a secret agenda.

Titor was irresponsible. When something is this important, you leave it to a journalist, or you enlist the help of a journalist and you do it the right, honest way.

You are right to be mad about what he talks about, but save it for documented, factual reports.

Out of Canada today there was a report of Extraordinary Rendition taking place in Newfoundland. That makes me mad, it is titorish, but the only comment I can give you is that I want the people who gave the a-ok for it to take place to be stripped of their power.

I'm writing in the Bloc Quebecois on my ballot this february. Not because they are sepratist, but because they offer the best protection from this kind of thing. If they do seperate, and there is a better chance than ever of this happening now than ever before, I'll move to Quebec and raise my kids 100% french. Side note on Quebec, Ducep recently announced Quebec will be getting their own provincial army very soon to provide quick response to flood, snow storm, earthquake victims. I think it's a great idea.
 
Re, RMT chap on tensors saved even saved the link.

Saying example."Oh honey please don't object to what Creedo is trying to do for you. With the changes in fashion now-a-days, its probably normal to see a man wear a modified horse halter, while he's driving his car.

RMT; I wont have this. This halter is for the face of a horse and Im a person.

RMT's girl; How about I pull this lead rope down with a few jabs, on the bridge of your nose, so you get the idea?

Creedo, Can we go get another sandwich, Im hungry?
 
Is it me or are these threads getting stupid.

I have one complaint that echo's some of Jimpet statements.

Now I used to enjoy coming here but I get the feeling that it is becoming an exclusive forum for those who have an academic understanding on space time physics. I try to keep up with it but hey, I need the junior high version to really understand it.
Don’t get me wrong! I greatly value the intellect of those posters like RMT, Darby & MEM etc, etc, etc and I even enjoy Creedo’s Red Dwarf meets Starwars on LSD, style of humour. Carl Sagan had a way of getting complex physics across to us interested "plebs" but this forum frequently gets way out of hand to the point of annoyance.

Ok … Now you can all get stuck in to me!
 
- Your software is incorrect.

Well jm's posts are 60% more likely to be you than a spam message is what the software tells me. Which isn't much. But's it's fun to do.
 
>Now I used to enjoy coming here but I get the feeling that it is becoming an exclusive forum for those who have an academic understanding on space time physics. I try to keep up with it but hey, I need the junior high version to really understand it.<

I feel exactly the same way. This site is where the wackos go and surfers go to read up on what the other wackos are doing. (Is it me or does this sound like something Creedo would say?)

>Carl Sagan had a way of getting complex physics across to us interested "plebs" but this forum frequently gets way out of hand to the point of annoyance.<

Carl Sagan was also ostrasized by the scientific community for "telling the secrets of physics". Physics should be fun, physics should be a thing for common people to talk about and this website is where people who have an interest in physics but aren't physicists go, there are more than enough physics websites out there anyway.
 
>Titor himself said he was here on a SECONDARY MISSION that he never detailed in full. So his very presence was admittedly a secret agenda.<

His primary mission was to fix the Y2K glitch. One of his last posts is

>03/24/2001 06:19 pm (about the future) 657
My parting thought revolves around something J.C. has been harping on since day one. No, I do not have a secret agenda but I have been paying a great deal of attention to your worldline. My interaction with you was not a direct mission parameter but it was a secondary mission protocol based on standing orders given to all temporal drivers. That secondary objective is basically to gather as much information about a worldline based on a set of observable variables when we first arrive. Your worldline met those conditions. What amazes me is why no one here wonders why Y2K didn't hit them at all?<

Then there's some info he sent to Art Bell... I remember something about a PM to Bell saying something like "I fixed the Y2K bug for your civilization" which I find hard to believe, that was written in a different style than Titor's. I find it concievable but a lot harder to believe than a time traveller!

His secondary objective makes more sense- find out whatever useful info you can about another successful timeline and perhaps plant the seed for the concept of time travelling, that was there will be more time travellers in the multiverse, that way they increase the likliehood of "another John Titor" popping back into his ZD with a 5100.
 
His primary mission was to fix the Y2K glitch.
Click to expand...

Ah! We have something in common.

It was not his primary mission objective, his secondary. That secondary mission objective is to get the 360 emulator in a “refined” form from the IBM 5100, to be put to use in modern 64-bit computers. That “accidentally” fixed Y2K in our worldline.

I thought of starting a new thread, but I thought it wouldn’t be worth anything, so anyway here it is:

You should have some understanding of computer h/w and s/w to get this.

Read this board. Its real fun!!! :D

http://www.tronguy.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=96
 
To me, the most logical use I can think of for why a guy from the future would want a computer from the past is because of its inherent function: it operates in one-second increments. Modern computers don't do that- they're based on the spin of an atom or something like that... that is their "heartbeat". The 5100's heartbeat is solid seconds. The more accurate it can sub-quantify units of time, the more calculations it can do in a second and the 5100 only understood seconds.

This is important because Titor's machine, which looks like a 5100 if the tekkies ripped it apart for key components then hastily re-assembled to look like what Titor provided, also operates in one second increments. Hmmm...

Maybe his objective was to get the emulator, secondary objective was to chat with us folks to create more timelines with time travel and the 5100 was his to make his own time machine or sell to the Ruskies!
 
Question: Is newbie_0 = jmpet?

Not based on software, but based on observation. LoL

To me, the most logical use I can think of for why a guy from the future would want a computer from the past is because of its inherent function: it operates in one-second increments.
Click to expand...

Well I think any piece of hardware could be recreated, I guess the one second increments you mention could also be done at anytime even without the prototype.. The only thing that you cannot recreate without the source code would be software. That could be the reason for Titor to travel back in Time.(just my opinion)

For instance, take Y2K. All the computer experts predicted computers to malfunction. If it was that easy to fix Y2K, then why was it viewed as a major problem (not by the press, but by the programmers themselves).

The undocumented part in IBM 5100 was clearly the 360 emulator at the time of its release. This was confirmed by Bob Dubke.

Dubke: The 5100's emulator gave programmers access to the functions of the monstrous, and much less portable machines, that IBM had produced during the 1960s.

The System/360 was a single series of compatible models for both commercial and scientific use. The System/360 later evolved into the System/370, the System/390, the zSeries, and the System z9. System/360 (suggesting a "360 degree", or "all-around" computer system) incorporated features which had previously been present on only either the commercial line (such as decimal arithmetic and byte addressing) or the technical line (such as floating point arithmetic). The System/360 was also the first computer in wide use to include dedicated hardware provisions for the use of operating systems. Among these were supervisor and application mode programs and instructions, as well as built-in memory protection facilities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_mainframe
Click to expand...

Bowler: As Hercules has proved, it's within the capability of a single individual to write a complete S/360 emulator in around 6 months which runs on modern cheap hardware.
 
jmpet,

Re: Provisionality vs science. Science is provisional, not falsifiable.

Re: Philosophy vs science. Science is nothing more than math, period.
Click to expand...

I don't want any part of the "argument" - that's between you and Rainman. But I think that I have to respond to the above - because they are wrong.

Science is falsifiable. In fact that is a basic premise of the Scientific Method. The hypothesis and then the theory must be so stated as to be falsifiable. A valid scientific theory has to leave room for it to be disproved. If the theory is shown to be false in just one instance then the theory is falsified, wrong and has to either be tossed out completely or modified.

Example: Newtonian Mechanics. It works wonderfully but along came Maxwell, Lorentz, Poincare and Einstein. Newton was wrong and a small correction had to be added (sqrt (1-v^2/c^2)) to his system of mechanics.

Newton left room for falsification. He was falsified and then corrected. Good science.

The other statement: Science is nothing more than math. That's absolutely incorrect. It just so happens that the language of mathematics can be most elegantly utilized to describe scientific facts. But it is a very common and basic mistake to equate them. Science is science. Math is the language used by scientists to concisely describe the science.

Mathematicians usually miss the boat in physics because all they see is the math. They don't have a feel for what the math is saying to them about some set of real world properties.

A physicist sees the picture that the math paints...even if he s/he doesn't actually solve the math problem.
 
">Titor himself said he was here on a SECONDARY MISSION that he never detailed in full. So his very presence was admittedly a secret agenda.<

His primary mission was to fix the Y2K glitch. "

jm, if you can gather all those posts about titor together then you should be able to find quickly the part about the reason he was posting on the internet. He said it was a secondary mission that all time travelers had. I don't want to keep a dialog going on this otherwise I will begin to suspect you have an agenda.

The timing still uses a crystal as far as I know.
 
if you can gather all those posts about titor together then you should be able to find quickly the part about the reason he was posting on the internet.
Click to expand...

John,s last words on 03-24-2001(after Hercules emulator was complete with 64-bit architecture):

My interaction with you was not a direct mission parameter but it was a secondary mission protocol based on standing orders given to all temporal drivers. That secondary objective is basically to gather as much information about a worldline based on a set of observable variables when we first arrive. Your worldline met those conditions. What amazes me is why no one here wonders why Y2K didn’t hit them at all?

Bring a gas can with you when the car dies on the side of the road.

Farewell.

John
Click to expand...

I think John would share his experiences in detail in 2036. They might do an analysis on how the people react to Time Travel in the past, and how much “threat” they pose to Time Travelers which could be useful for future missions.

His last words were direct reference to Y2K. I noticed his posts, he was gradually giving out information on the IBM 5100 and Y2K. Still no one picked up on it while he was here.

At one point he even said, “I believe the 5100 is unique in its ability to run assembler language on the 360-machine platform and still be portable”.

If Titor was real, I suggest if someone tried to buy the IBM 5100 on e-bay, can instead download the Hercules emulator. It’s free. It wouldn’t do any good, but it could be a great memory of Time Travel, an item involving both the past and the future. The emulator that was hidden in 5100’s ROM, that was ripped off after April 1998, after being “tweaked” by Titor’s grandfather in 1975, and taken to 2036 from 2001.
 
>Science is falsifiable. In fact that is a basic premise of the Scientific Method. The hypothesis and then the theory must be so stated as to be falsifiable. A valid scientific theory has to leave room for it to be disproved. If the theory is shown to be false in just one instance then the theory is falsified, wrong and has to either be tossed out completely or modified.<

Okay, then how do I put this into words? You need solid science to base a theory upon, once you have a theory the process of falsification begins. You can't presume atoms are really pumpkin pies and base a theory on that because that is not science.
 
I never said I believe John Titor either! And I don't! I will go as far as say I believe John Titor 90% of his words, the other 10% of the information he gave is simply illogical. For example, I find it hard to believe that in post-apocolyptic world with five large communities instead of 50 states and a decentralized government whose economy is based on agriculture they decided to spend one billion dollars to make a time machine that would work but never return the time traveller. Closest John Titor came to addressing that was him saying something like "I will be returning to one of many futures that needs the 5100." I just don't buy that. But once again, the message is important.
Click to expand...
I feel the same way. I don't believe Titor was an actual time traveler, he was merely someone who appears to have had a good sense of what is coming and decided to get the message out in a rather creative way.
I still think the message is important. Overall good post jmpet.

RainmanTime, I'm new here, but so far I find your messages annoying like Viagra spam in my inbox. Your messages are unconstructive and it seems they are only intended to provoke people into arguing with you, so that you can boost your ego by harrasing them.
Yes you can say what you want, freedom of speech bla bla bla etc etc. But that still doesn't mean you're not an obvious a s s h o l e.
 
Back
Top