MigL

No he has not. Any information regarding the alien has travelled the separation. That information is current to the past time; it does not get altered along the way. Any space-time diagram applies only to YOU, the observer at the origin. Anybody else's will be different. You cannot put two 'observers' in a space-time diagram, and try to make observations fit both sensibly.

Sorry Swansont, poorly worded on my part. Here is a quote from Wiki on four-velocity which may explain better... "Physical events correspond to mathematical points in time and space, the set of all of them together forming a mathematical model of physical four-dimensional spacetime. The history of an object traces a curve in spacetime, called its world line. If the object has mass, so that its speed is less than the speed of light, the world lie may be parametrized by the proper time of the object. The four-velocity is the rate of change of four-position with respect to the proper time along the curve. The velocity, in contrast, is the rate of change of the position in (three-dimensional) space of the object, as seen by an observer, with respect to the observer's time." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-velocity IOW things can't actually move in space, UNLESS there is a change in time also. ( they would be moving at infinite speed )

Sure JC, but maybe Phi is on to something... Some purposes, or objectives, may be more important than monetary rewards. In the case of war, freedom from oppression is the reward. In the case of exercise, good health is the reward. In the case of raising your kids, strong familial bonds are the reward. That's what I like about this forum, we all have blinders to some degree, but other members can help you see where you may not have looked previously.

For one thing you keep insisting on 'motion' through the spatial and temporal dimensions. If you take relativity seriously, there is no space, and there is no time; only space-time, as the two cannot be separated. The argument is that you can neither move through time, nor move through space, but you are at ALL locations you occupy in space-time. In a simplified case, as you used, where we consider only two dimensions, displacement horizontally and duration vertically, you exist as a line through space-time. Vertical if you are standing still, with a slope if you undergo a displacement. And if your axis are marked in seconds and kilometers, the slope of this line can never be less than 1/300000. IOW you CANNOT move only in space. In this example, 'now' is a point on the line, and differs for every observer; that point, 'now' is what each of us perceives to be moving, through space-time. I can't really explain the 4dimensional equivalent, but you exist as a volume, 'extruded' through a fourth orthogonal time dimension, and your 'now' is a hypersurface or 'foliation' of the space-time manifold, and again, none are common to differing observers. You are trying to understand 'motion' through time, and inventing all these complexities, much like the 'add-ons' to the Ptolemaic System in its later years before Copernicus replaced it, to try and explain things which are not even required. Take Occam's razor and cut away everything that isn't needed.

There is some 'pride in your work' effect going on, Phi, but I don't think it is the only one, or even the overriding one. The engineers who worked on what became the SR-71 Blackbird, at Lockheed's 'Skunk Works' in Burbank, were certainly an elite group of engineers led by 'Kelly' Johnson. And they were paid very well compared to the 'grunt' engineers who worked for the main facility ( in Palmdale, I believe ). They worked 100 hr work weeks, and solved problems in the late 50s which are insurmountable for most countries ( even today ). None of them held any patents, but a lot of them eventually moved into senior positions in the company. Ben Rich, a bright young engineer, who worked for Johnson, went on to head the Skunk Works after Johnson, and under his direction the 'stealth' concept was developed. Over 40 yrs later, Lockheed-Martin ( and Northrop-Grumman ) still have the best stealth knowhow in the world. If a public institution could have done the same, I'm sure NACA ( until 1958 ), and later, NASA, would have. Of course you could throw the Manhattan Project, in Los Alamos, right back at me. But I would counter that people do strange things in times of war, and they give for society/nation as opposed to petty personal benefit.

Did a little reading ( as per your link ) on the Krasnikov tube. Essentially a one-way wormhole, such that you need two to cause a closed timelike loop, and a causality violating ''time machine'. Interesting.

Good post. Everything was sensible up to and including graph #4. Then you went 'off the rails' again. And you really have to stop with the 'flying', 'sliding', and any other kind of ill-defined terminology of 'movement' through time. Events don't 'move' through time; our individual perceptions of 'now' do.

is thread has given me an opportunity to focus/confirm my thoughts on Socialism ( thanks INow ). And why B Sanders should not be considered the 'boogey man' by Republicans and Democrats alike Both Socialism and Capitalism have a use and, if not corrupted ( big IF ), can be beneficial for society. Capitalism gives everyone the opportunity to care for themselves. Socialism gives society the opportunity to take care of everyone equally. It would seem that a mix of the two allows for people to better themselves, while ensuring that no-one is left behind

I have seen these studies, usually at work, just before time for raises. But let's b honest, nobody would be at work if they weren't going to get paid. Other motivators, like recognition of good work, application of other skills/abilities to the job at hand, etc., are simply perks that make work bearable. Making someone rich is a great motivator for innovation. You may get acceptable programs, but not programs that lead the world. No, I call myself human... And George Orwell disagrees with your first statement.

Funny how the poor are always assumed to commit crimes because of basic needs, while the rich commit crimes because they are greedy and evil. Wealth discrimination, virtue signaling or just guilt ? Greed is greed, and ALL humans share the trait regardless of wealth.

I could agree with the training of troops/personnel, but I'm not convinced that equipment manufacture and innovation is suited to Socialistic practices. And that was my original assertion...

On my birthdate... No, seriously ( and back to the OP ), the only reason for quantum 'weirdness' is that QM involves a paradigm ( every chance I get to use that word ) shift in the way we view reality. While the classical view is deterministic, the quantum view is probabilistic. It's a difficult shift in viewpoint when we first encounter QM. ( but you get used to it )

Botox ( or a variation of the Vulcan nerve pinch ).

You're right about the consolidation of the defense industry Alex. I'm most familiar with the aerospace industry... In the 50s and 60 there were dozens of defense contractors, healthy competition, and world leading products. Now Boeing has acquired McDonnell and Douglas. Lockeed joined Martin, and acquired Hughes aircraft, and Convair from General Dynamics. Northrop joined Grumman. LTV ( Vought ) was acquired by the Carlyle group and hasn't been heard from since. Fairchild joined Republic and proceeded to go bankrupt. We now have Boeing, LM and Northrop-Grumman providing the new trainers and the KC-46 with huge cost overruns, the F-35 with huge cost overruns, and the B-21 with huge cost overruns respectively. You are right Phi, guarantee is too strongly worded. But it does seem to turn out that way quite often. Probably because greed is a great motivator.

I gave some examples of the products and equipment American defense contractors have come up with... China, for all its economic prowess has yet to develop jet engines comparable to 1960s engines from PnW and GE ( or RR ) despite all research being subsidized by the state. Russian and Chinese stealth isn't remotely comparable to what the Americans have achieved, and TsAGi, the Russian aeronautical research center is funded by the state. And neither can compete with American/European civil aircraft either ( I'd fly on a B 737 Max8 before I fly anything Aeroflot ). America's defense budget may be huge, but don't forget that it single-handedly defeated the USSR, because, even though the defense budget of Russia is a tenth of America's, it economy is the size of the Benelux countries, and a large percentage of its GDP. You'll have to elaborate on 'training of most First World countries results in a mediocre product', as I'm not sure what you mean, Zap. Is there a market for atomic clocks and a profit to be made, Swansont ? If there was, I guarantee you'd be working in private industry, making a LOT more money, and a better product.

I have to wonder, Phi. Would a military that has equipment provided by publically funded production ( cutting out the Capitalistic greedy defense contractors ), give us the cutting edge equipment like stealth, aircraft carriers the size of small cities, thermonuclear bombs or space shuttles and rockets that can go to the moon ? Or do you think that it was the Capitalistic striving to make better equipment, win multi-billion dollar contracts, and make a profit ? The capitalist system guarantees that whoever provides the best product, gets the most profit, and competition drives costs, and profits, down ( assuming the BETTER product is awarded a contract, not the CHEAPEST ). A socialist system guarantees a mediocre product and a monopoly, so costs never diminish. A careful analysis for each product/service would guide as to the better approach, socialistic, capitalistic, or a mix of the two.

I always use whole numbers and even ( or odd, depending on my mood ) numbers to show the one-to-one correspondence. Most people would think that there are only half as many even numbers ( 2,4,6,8,10,...) as there are whole numbers ( 1,2,3,4,5,6,...). But you can easily see that each whole number can be doubled to give each even number, so in the case of infinite sets of both there is a one-to-one correspondence between each n, and 2n ( for whole and odd, n and 2n-1 ). That means the two infinities are equal. If you can't do a one-to-one correspondence then the two infinite sets cannot be equal and one must be greater than the other.

First you propose your 'mental affliction' has resulted in 'enlightenment'. Now you're hiding behind this 'affliction'; when called out on it, you accuse me of lacking compassion/virtue/understanding, for pointing out that you're just seeking attention. And you still haven't presented your ideas... ( you seem to be going out of your way to prove me right )

We are the Borg ?

At first reading I assumed he meant electron/positron pairs had positive/negative masses, and stopped reading. Turns out he's actually implying the direction of a vector potential makes it positive or negative absolute value, not just convention. And again I stopped reading...

It's a good thing I don't come to the Religion forum very often. An awful lot of garbage gets posted here. Oddprophet must be lacking a life, and friends, as he just seems to want 'empty' conversation. He's written half a book already, but still hasn't gotten round to presenting his 'insight'.

Then why is D Trump afraid of J Biden winning the nomination ? Going as far as getting his buddy in the Kremlin to 'push' for B Sanders.

Weirdness is relative. ( hey, did I just propose a new unification ( QM and GR ) strategy ? )

String Theory as a mathematical 'framework' is certainly useful and a valid area of study. String Theory, applied to our Universe ( as a Physical theory ), not so much Supersymmetry ( in its various forms ) and supersymmetric particles, have stubbornly refused to be found, and ( I believe ) that is a requirement for a workable ( Physical ) theory. I have also read that proton decay, as required by SU(5) and SO(10) GUTs, is incompatible with String Theory. So the race is on, Supersymmetry or proton decay; which will be found first ?

Wormholes are also consistent. And they also require 'exotic' matter to keep from collapsing. Even better, they eliminate the need for a spaceship; you just step through the 'hole', and you are there. One method is not more realistic/feasible than the other .