The time Traveller

It’s the recreation room computer looks like some of the other people here or there kids have been playing on the pc as my login times are different to some of my work times and the last post isn’t even mine I will delete it from this pc and start to use my laptop thanks for bringing it to my attention

Not my post

Not my post

Thoughts on Temporal Uniformity When is now ? This is a awkward question Common sense is indeed violated but going against common sense is not applicable to uncommonly experienced situations such as relative motion near the speed of light. Fortunately common sense dose tell us that a characteristic speed of vacuum waves cannot possibly depend on who’s vacuum they are propagating in. Events can always be described without coordinates but special relativity deals specifically with how to use coordinates in space witch exhibits non intuitive behaviour when comparing lengths and time among different observers

Yes If you exclude the man-made category from that theory it dose indeed crushes completely. But however as you know everything is made up of electrons that all vibrate at different rates that make up all the elements ! Pretty much every thing in the see able universe. Sorry for stating the obvious ! But one has to take into account that there is much evidence to show that the electrical magnetic energy produced by the mind can inter act with its physical surroundings. So if mankind invents time concept then the minuet he invented it it come into existence and began to interact with the physical but when you don't observe it then time the concept becomes irrelevant and behaves so. (particles / dark matter / electrons / neutrinos / ?????? Believe me there are more ooh gravity! ) just like the experiment with Electrons fired at a 2 slits form a orderly spectrum but the minuet you physically view this happening they scatter. The reason this happens is the brain creates a electromagnetic pulse when a thought is manifested it is the interaction of this energy field that the brain creates that interacts with the electrons behaviour thus causing them to scatter. So I would conclude from this and may I say there are lots of other examples of this sort of interactions going on including the concept time can also interact with the physical universe. Whether or not mans interpretations of these interactions are correct ore incorrect is down to ones own judgment ore ones findings after many years of research . Lets say for example if man says that light travels at a speed of 186000 miles a second or 700 million miles an hour. Then that is his interpretation of it based on his own interpretation of maths so all interactions with this theory will obviously abide by the interactions on the subatomic level.( magnetic resonance ) But that is why things like dark matter and things like electrons being in two places at the same time and neutrinos faster than light do not fit into mans understanding. and because of this they behave in a way that doesn't fit mans concept of time yet these interactions that carry on and on and on irrespective of his concept (time). They are perfectly normal occurrences in the universe. I believe it will take mankind to reinvent himself before he can grasp the type of new physics needed to interact with this reality. It is unfortunate that humans have stoped thinking about humans. Fortunately many thinking people of our time have pinpointed the problem and insist on thinking "scientifically", rather than thinking "scientifically as physicists"… Science is not only "thinking numbers based on physical evidence" – it can also be "thinking logically" or "thinking systematically".And even more important is the fact that really great science is about thinking "out of the box", it is about thinking in a way that one would consider "illogical"… The greatest scientific theories were the result of irrational thinking of great minds, who went outside the "logic" of their time…

my brain hurts lol

Wow good question give me 20 min and I will write down what I believe and post back Well where do you start with this one ha ha ha "Standard experimental techniques exist to determine the propagation speed of forces. When we apply these techniques to gravity, they all yield propagation speeds too great to measure, substantially faster than lightspeed. This is because gravity, in contrast to light, has no detectable aberration or propagation delay for its action, even for cases (such as binary pulsars) where sources of gravity accelerate significantly during the light time from source to target By contrast, the finite propagation speed of light causes radiation pressure forces to have a non-radial component causing orbits to decay (the 'Poynting-Robertson effect'); but gravity has no counterpart force proportional to v/c to first order. General relativity explains these features by suggesting that gravitation (unlike electromagnetic forces) is a pure geometric effect of curved space-time, not a force of nature that propagates. Gravitational radiation, which surely does propagate at lightspeed but is a fifth order effect in v/c, is too small to play a role in explaining this difference in behavior between gravity and ordinary forces of nature. Neutrinos =faster than light E=Mc/2 = not really there are a number of things that exist that break that rule. Einstein's theories were based on false presuppositions drawn from Enlightenment philosophy about the nature of the cosmos. Einstein said that he does not trust a scientific theory which cannot be reduced to a simple elegant picture which a child can understand. Einstein himself started with such child-pictures and developed them through mathematics on the black board. The whole of his work consisted of imaginative mind exercises in his office. He left the empirical testing to others as a 'mopping up.' If I can show that Einstein's child-figures are self-contradictory, then the theories based upon those concepts must be false. Einstein uses plug figures to make the numbers balance. In short, Einstein cheats. The empirical proofs of Einstein's theories do not constitute a discovery of 'laws of nature,' as many people assume. Even scientists sometimes fall into this trap. The empirical proofs only establish that Einstein's mathematics are practically useful for a limited range of applications. The are useless for problems which are above or below the 'radar range' of these applications. Einstein's ability to predict physical nature in a spotty way, does indeed demonstrate the existence of orderly laws of nature we can count on, but does not demonstrate that he knows what those laws are. He has only found a technique to impersonate those laws in order to calculate predictable outcomes." Higgs boson = I think if I am correct they have just discovered a new element and not the Higgs. but I believe that they are under so much pressure to come up with a result they may announce this new element as the Higgs. but then later on they will retract the statement but hey what a brilliant bit of research I hope I am wrong and they have found it . As to time well it only exists because man invented it. matter does not move relative to space. There was no need for the Fitzgerald/Lorentz contractions. What really happens is that, although bodies do not move relative to space itself, their mass/energy does flucuate to different 'space energy levels'. The change in 'relativistic mass' of a body indicates changes in the body's 'space energy level'. 'Rest Mass' only indicates a body's mass on earth, within our portion of our galaxy. In other galaxies or even in other parts of our galaxy a body's rest mass may be different. Time does not slow down as a rocket accelerates in space, only the astronaut's quartz watch slows as the quartz's mass increases. (Its vibration changes with it mass.)" just like god exists because man invented him everything before BC had no knowledge of god. ( I just know I am going to get some stick for that statement just to let you know I am not out to try and disprove the existence of god its just a dame good reference point and if any one is offended by my comment I apologise. ) Now back to time ! Time is still a collection of numbers that has been put into some sort of order just like language is made up from letters put into some sort of order to make up words. its just man has had a lot longer to get language rite . What I will say is the new language maths in its own rite isn't wrong as you car' t argue 2+2=4 and so on with in mans under standing of the maths but when you try to use this language to map the universe and space time continuum it doesn't quit fit it will give you a dame good representation of it but not the correct answer one was looking for. There isn't a mathematical language yet that can do this . Example The same Electrons can exist in two places at the same time and zip in and out of this phase at will. ' light can be bent around planets or a strong magnetic field yet the same two beams of light left at the same time the beam that was bent around the planet has clearly travelled a greater distance yet arrives at the same time. Neutrinos =faster than light. the practical zoo a whole number of elements that the big bang could not have produced and dare I say it a new one they have just discovered. Electrons fired at a 2 slits form a orderly spectrum but the minuet you physically view this happening they scatter. This is just a small amount of examples of things not fitting into the frame of time.

minutus-cantorum-minutus-balorum-minutus-carborata-descendum-pantorum-a-little-song-a-little-dance-a-little-seltzer-down-your-pants. Ha-ha. Thanks for the chuckle. I haven’t heard that saying in a LONG time. Ha-ha Early work in nuclear physics indicated that the nuclear decay parameter, l , was a constant. It was and still is generally believed that this decay rate is unaffected by changes in external parameters such as pressure, temperature, electromagnetic fields, and differing chemical environments. It is believed that radioactivity is a spontaneous, random event. The fundamental assumption made is that the decay of an atom is independent of the age of that atom.5 Schumann published his research results in the journal 'Technische Physik' The Schumann Resonances are quasi-standing electromagnetic waves that exist in the Earth's 'electromagnetic' cavity (the space between the surface of the Earth and the Ionosphere). Like waves on a string, they are not present all the time, but have to be "excited" to be observed. They are not caused by anything internal to the Earth, its crust or its core. They seem to be related to electrical activity in the atmosphere, particularly during times of intense lightning activity. Schumann Resonances occur at several frequencies, specifically 7.83 (strongest), 14, 20, 26, 33, 39 and 45 (weakest) Hertz, with a daily variation of about ± 0.5 Hz. So long as the properties of Earth's electromagnetic cavity remains about the same, these frequencies remain the same. Presumably there is some change due to the solar sunspot cycle as the Earth's ionosphere changes in response to the 11-year cycle of solar activity. Importance of Resonance for Life Although the existence of the Schumann Resonance is an established scientific fact, there are very few scientists who are aware of the importance of this frequency as a tuning fork for Life. It's proposed that it is not merely a phenomenon caused by lightning in the atmosphere, but a very important electromagnetic standing wave, acting as background frequency and influencing biological oscillators within the mammalian brain.

I agree with this I finished my PhD15 years ago along with several other letters after my name to my dismay feel are worthless now. I have worked along side BAE DERA and NASA and a lot has changed since then new ideas come and go and come and go again. I work in a class 7 security government labs I travel to several different countries collaborating our work if I was honest if I new then what I know now and have seen with my own eyes I some times wonder just how far I might have evolved in my field of physics if given this information back then I tell you it would blow your mind. the one thing that I don't agree with is how the governments of this world can keep mankind from the truth about just how far physics has advanced even in the last 5 years my only hope is bright young physicists like your self and others keep questioning the system I was just trying to open a few bright minds to the fact its not always black and white. I promises you that with in the comments I have made there is some real advancements to be made the answer is there its not all as it seems at first glance if you ask your university tutor about the comments I have made and take a good look at his expression when he tries to explain then ask him of the record if he really believes what he is telling you and then ask him for his own take on it all. if it isn't different form the curriculum then I will humbly back down yours respectfully the time traveller

I am not saying that its so bad I am saying its got a long way to go I think phys has done an outstanding job to date and I am proud to be part of some of the new cutting edge physics going on to day in the dark back rooms that will take mankind into the future and I have full respect to all those in the phys and sci community it takes a special type of person to do this some times god forsaken work but hay some one has to do it right I believe its discussions like this that lead to new ideas and with in those new ideas just maybe we can take one more step closer to the answer Science is one thing I would defiantly agree with you on. but physics is a whole different ball game the bases of physics is subjective if you just look at the last 10 years they are now excepting theories that was ridiculed 10 years ago it is not for me ore any other person to say other wise all we can do is put forward our thoughts and hope we can meet some were in the middle like I said on my profile page and I too see my self with in this statement and try to rise about it every day When people do not realise their own intellectual limits, they do not enter into the struggle to understand that which they have failed to comprehend . Learning is no substitute for understanding. It is in admitting a lack of understanding and in wrestling with the problem that the mistakes of the past are rectified I I am sorry if I went on a bit and maybe broke one of the forums rules I respect your comments but just between you and I I was stating physics' facts in about 80% of my comments the rest was just a subjective and something we have to solve day in and day out here but hey like you know its just on day at a time we can only endeavour to do our best

Reality is a fact you can visually observe. And it doesn’t take maths to explain whether the visual representation is correct is another matter all together

what iamSuggesting is like my earlier statement This is a fundamental limitation of mathematics. It is quite possible to have a true mathematical relationship, that suggests a particular physical model, and yet the theory may be completely wrong. This makes mathematics very confusing and deceptive. I mention this because it is very important in explaining why mathematical physics is now so absurd as many of its mathematical truths have been misunderstood, which has resulted in incorrect theoretical interpretations (which is why a correct knowledge of physical reality is so important to mathematicians / mathematical physics). It is not surprising that our language should be incapable of describing the processes occurring within the atoms, for, as has been remarked, it was invented to describe the experiences of daily life, and these consist only of processes involving exceedingly large numbers of atoms. Furthermore, it is very difficult to modify our language so that it will be able to describe these atomic processes, for words can only describe things of which we can form mental pictures, and this ability, too, is a result of daily experience. Fortunately, mathematics is not subject to this limitation, and it has been possible to invent a mathematical scheme - the quantum theory - which seems entirely adequate for the treatment of atomic processes; for visualization, however, we must content ourselves with two incomplete analogies - the wave picture and the corpuscular picture." 'Light and matter are both single entities, and the apparent duality arises in the limitations of our language.' The mistake was to assume that this limitation was inherent in our language, thus we could never directly describe reality and must limit ourselves to describing the 'pattern of events in mathematical terms'. As it turns out the limitation came from having the wrong language - a language founded on discrete 'particles' in space-time (mathematical) rather than spherical standing waves in space (physical). And some maths physicists have come to this same conclusion as to the limitations of mathematical physics,I believe that mankind has a long ways to go before he develops this new concept of the ( mathematics language) in the scheme of things its still in its infancy It also explains why 98% of all complex phys maths keeps hitting a brick wall one of the big questions in physics' over the years? is where did all the particles come from because the theory of the big bang couldn't have produced them all this is still a fundamental problem for the world phys community and CERN was built to try and solve this problem and as quoted by the phys at CERN The Higgs boson is a famous subatomic particle first theorized to exist back in the mid-1960s. It's a key part of some beautiful mathematics that would explain a fundamental mystery: why things have mass. The adding of new dimensions is wrong to do in a mathematical eq they will not find this particle with CERN they will just add to there frustration when they find new elements that have always been there but in the past just eluded them and they to could not have come into existence from the big bang . But if there is one comfort in all this mankind is relentless and a most resourceful species and will get there in the end the mathematical equations just need to factor in the constantly changing subatomic frequencies they will then find the maths will make a lot more sense and start to add up I am not saying this is easy to do as it means calculating within six dimensional space and having to apply frequencies algorithms that constantly change one moment to the next to the equations but during the course of the calculating one answer will keep popping out that is a constant that will be the right answer all the other numbers are just background noise and should be ignored

As you know there are a number of different types of clocks from the atomic clock that use the decay method. I see the problem with this is it is still a man made concept for counting the decay eg 1234567 and so on and 1 to 60 = 1 minuet x 12 = 12 hours and x by 2 = 24 = night and day. it was mankind that decided this numerical system and I believe that its incorrect. mathematics is also based on this system eg 12345678910 and so on as a new type of language it has still got a long way to go mankind developed verbal language over millions of years. maths has only been around for a blink of an eye and is fare from developed if you look at some of the main mathematical problems in physics most do not add up so a new dimension is invented to try and make sense of the problem as time with in space isn't a constant also Greenwich Mean Time is constantly having to change time to make up for gained time i believe this is due to the change in the earths resonance frequency at one time it was about 7 hertz now its up around 12. we now have two north poles and one south. most of the planets population are unaware that if you calculate the gain they are actually living a 17 too 18 hour day / night. its no longer 24? also if you was actually to stop and think about it you can notice the change. if you are in your 40 or 50 you defiantly can see it. if you are in your 20 then not so much if you ask some one in there 60 they will say time seems to go so fast nowadays. its not there age it's the fact that over the last 100 years the earths natural frequency has gone from 7 too 12 hertz its this frequency that determines time and this alone so no matter how well a synchronise machine works eg a clock it will never depict actual time if you also take into account that everything is made up of electrons right down to a grain of sand on the beach to the modern man walking down the high st then you also have to except that it is all interconnected and ultimately affected by frequency so it stands to reason that if the earths frequency has gone from 7 hertz to 12 hertz then this has a profound effect on everything else . I would like to add that if you also look at the development of technologies over the last 100 years and you compare it to the change in the earths natural frequency you can see the advancement follows the same curve as the resonant change I believe this increase has given mankind the ability to understand more complex models of the universe and his environment and has given him new insights in understanding technologic growth Modern day physics and astronomers have now also discovered that the expansion of the universe is speeding up and not slowing down this too makes sense if you compare it to mankind's place within this model

When light passes a large body in the universe the gravity of the said mass causes the light to bend and curve around the mass so in theory the light adjacent to the light that has just curved around the mass will be travelling faster as the curved light has travelled a greater distance so there for one or the other would have had to of travelled at a different speed its not possible for some thing travelling at a constant to cover a greater distance eg the straight line is say 500.000miles and the curved line is 510.1740 miles how can something with the same speed and velocity cover two different distances at the same time and speed QED

When light passes a large body in the universe the gravity of the said mass causes the light to bend and curve around the mass. so in theory the light adjacent to the light that has just curved around the mass will be travelling faster as the curved light has travelled a greater distance. so there for one or the other would have had to of travelled at a different speed, its not possible for some thing travelling at a constant to cover a greater distance eg the straight line is say 500.000miles and the curved line is 510.1740 miles. how can something with the same speed and velocity cover two different distances at the same time and speed QED

It seem to me after looking over a number of the physics forums it becomes quit obvious that some of the clearer thinkers are amongst the public population. I think that one of the biggest setbacks in the field to date is 92% of all physicists are all blinkers due to there education and refuse to think out of the box as this is no longer in there comfort zone. It would do the industry well to take a long hard look at some of the topics being discussed with in some of the forums and to take on some of the ideas present there It is some times amusing to see a none physicist make a perfectly valid comment only to be shot down by a clearly blinkered point of view from a phys who works in the industry . I sometimes wonder what it would be like to be in a position to be able to divulge some of the information that we here at the labs are privy too and wonder if we to would be verbal attack for stating actual facts that they have no knowledge off.

This is a fundamental limitation of mathematics. It is quite possible to have a true mathematical relationship, that suggests a particular physical model, and yet the theory may be completely wrong. This makes mathematics very confusing and deceptive. I mention this because it is very important in explaining why mathematical physics is now so absurd as many of its mathematical truths have been misunderstood, which has resulted in incorrect theoretical interpretations (which is why a correct knowledge of physical reality is so important to mathematicians / mathematical physics). It is not surprising that our language should be incapable of describing the processes occurring within the atoms, for, as has been remarked, it was invented to describe the experiences of daily life, and these consist only of processes involving exceedingly large numbers of atoms. Furthermore, it is very difficult to modify our language so that it will be able to describe these atomic processes, for words can only describe things of which we can form mental pictures, and this ability, too, is a result of daily experience. Fortunately, mathematics is not subject to this limitation, and it has been possible to invent a mathematical scheme - the quantum theory - which seems entirely adequate for the treatment of atomic processes; for visualization, however, we must content ourselves with two incomplete analogies - the wave picture and the corpuscular picture." 'Light and matter are both single entities, and the apparent duality arises in the limitations of our language.' The mistake was to assume that this limitation was inherent in our language, thus we could never directly describe reality and must limit ourselves to describing the 'pattern of events in mathematical terms'. As it turns out the limitation came from having the wrong language - a language founded on discrete 'particles' in space-time (mathematical) rather than spherical standing waves in space (physical). And some maths physicists have come to this same conclusion as to the limitations of mathematical physics,

Man decided that night and day should be split up in to 24 hours. 12 hours each, and each hour to be split into 6o min 60 seconds. All was invented by him . his only reference to this decision was in fact night & day. light and dark Man has always sort to put things into little boxes to try and make sense of things he invented counting 1234567 and so on this system was ok back in the day when it was I have 5 potatoes you give me 1 rabbit as you know this was the earliest form of maths and at that time man wasn’t even aware it was maths. As the human race developed so did its ability to use the numeric system that all mathematics are based on to day? But if you look at the behaviour of particles and the spaces they occupy then you would realise that they don’t obey the numeric system at all and that is why physics has to invent new dimensions and even then there is a . something recurring number so in truth it still didn’t add up but this is all to often ignored.

We don’t get out much in my work and we do have a one track mind at times and tend to ramble on a bit a habit hard to break. But it’s a sad fact that classified will do that to you at times

I do apologise but it’s the only way to explain the process that was undertaken my friend but point taken it dose look like one might need a cup of tea and biscuits to get through it all