manderson

CLADKING: I think what bothers me so much about Manderson's post is that it rubs against my beliefs. I don't want to believe no one cares how the pyramids were really built because my whole philosophy of life is that we are supposed to have as much fun as possible leaving the world a better place than we found it. MANDERSON: You are a son of Thoth/Hermes (positivist)...it is people like u who make this world a better place. i did not say "no one cares", i merely said many on this forum are not the calibre of scientist you believe they are, will not understand and lack interest generally and are no more open-minded than the egyptologists your criticize. if you are posting for fun then u are in the right place; if u expect to make a difference in the world by posting here, u are wasting ur time (sorry for the honesty). ANOTHER DISSONANT POINT: be cautious that your love for egypt does not slide into egyptocentrism (not any better than Greco-Romano-centrism). Like it is false to suggest Greece & Rome came out of nowhere...it is equally false to suggest Egypt came out of nowhere as a miracle civilization. Example: Don't forget the over 200 pyramids in Meroe Sudan (Kush) - more than in all of egypt. Don't forget the many pyramids in south america, as well as the very impressive Angkor Watt temple in Cambodia, etc. how about Mount Kailash Pyramid (Northern Tibet)? And the Pyramids of Mauritius? Etc? How about Olmec pyramids which have disappeared because of their distant antiquity and mud brick contruction? Does your theory hold for these other pyramids/structures which are not sitting on the bank of a river or on water collection devices? I am not saying your theory is wrong....i am not saying i hold the secrets...i am just pressing your thought envelope (without telling u what i think). ANALOGY: To be in awe ONLY of egypt's pyramids is akin to being in awe of the Burj Khalifa (world's tallest tower in Dubai), ignoring the fact that the first skycraper in the world was built in 1885 in Chicago (the Home Insurance Building) and that it is America that provided the technology to the rest of the world. Which brings me to another trap ifind archeologist/researchers fall into: namely assuming it was impossible for knowledge of the technology to spread internationally in ancient times. i am not shocked that some of the oldest pyramids are found in Brazil because brazil is just across the water from south africa (see a globe)...likewise i am not shocked at the similar finding of pyramids across the water in Mauritius (see link below). i think an important thing for us to all realize is that humans learn from each other, build upon the knowledge of each other, interact with each other, travel among each other, and interbreed with each other. BABEL: now i am not terribly familiar with the concept of Babel, but i decided to look a bit into it and presume this is a reference to the ancient Babylonian Tower (ziggurat) that history says was destroyed by Alexander the Great (died 323BC - giving us a date for the end of the tower/ziggurat). Are u proposing that there was a single human language up until about 323BC or sometime during the life of the tower? Tower is said to have been built by Nimrod (son of Cush)...i have no approximate date for Nimrod life, but his father Cush is said to have been the founder of the City of Axum in Cush (ancient Ethiopia). History tells us Axum was founded about 400BC, therefore Tower of Babel had to be built AFTER that date. Now are you saying that between 400BC (when Nimrod's father lived and afterwhich Nimrod built Babel) and 323BC (when Alexander destroyed Babel) we had a single language? DISSONANCE: Even if we assume Babel predates Cush and goes back 2,000yrs we still have a problem. According to recent findings the earliest writings (found so far) was by the Harrapa civilization in India dated approximately 5,500years ago....over 3,000years before the most generous dating for Babel/Nimord or Cush. What do you make of this information? (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/334517.stm). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/02files/Pyramids_World.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/worlds-oldest-pyramids-are-discovered-1353095.html http://www.gigalresearch.com/uk/pyramides-maurice.php http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/334517.stm SORRY IF I give you too much headache...that's what we are here for: to push each other.

CLADKING: “I'm here specifically to expose this to real scientists. Egyptologists are are very knowledgeable and intelligent but do not follow proper scientific procedures nor do scientific testing.” MADNERSON: you are wasting your time and is disseminating your rich thought in a way that expels your thought but leaves no legacy or lasting benefit to create the sort of change your passion clearly desire. The anonymous ones here largely are not classifiable as “real scientists” – they are bloggers and little else. It best u are reaching some physics students and graduates on the margins of their professions. In short u are largely dealing with low level disciples. Egyptologists for the most part are minions of those who fund their expeditions…u err by expecting scientific standards of so called Egyptologists? They are not scientist…they are archeologist specializing in Egypt? Why do u think a profession was created specifically for Egypt? (where are the Romeologist?, Greeceologist? Etc). It is certainly not because of a belief in ignorance of the ancients…it is precisely because the OPPOSITE is know to be true. Most so called Egyptologists are minions who help mine ancient knowledge so that contemporary people can appropriate it, claim it as their own inventions/creations/discoveries…just as the so called greek philosophers did after Alexander’s invasion…just as the French did after napoleons invasion…just as the Masonic founding father of US did in making Washington on the Potomac a copy of Luxor on the Nile… Ramp theory and all the other nonsense is decoy…yes most mainstream ‘Egyptologists’ believe the decoy. Simply I FUND only Egyptologist who believe in the version of story I wish to put out there. One’s who do not believe that story I do not fund and make sure they do not have access to perform digs. Simple really. CLADKING: “Their results are correct to the degree the assummptions are correct but these assumptions are apparently all in error...They are hamstrung by assumption and tend to get angry when challenged. MANDERSON: and u think internet bloggers will be better just because the url has the word “science” in it? I finance only the fools who will advance the version of story I want out there. Simple as that. I can guarantee u that u would not get financing. Bloggers on this site are so sequestered on their blog they lack basic awareness of matters all over the mainstream media, yet alone truly thoughtful matters. Case in point one level intense criticism when I posted about U.S. military actively developing telepathy for military applications….this fact is not exactly revolutionary or secret. I google 2seconds and find an msnbc link on what close minds dismiss as nonsense: (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27162401/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/army-developing-synthetic-telepathy/#.UQMoVh2gaSA) Why waste ur time educating people who desire not to learn? CLADKING: “They have been horribly maligned for many centuries. They have been ridiculed, laughed at, and had their graves desicrated since time immemorial. The major source of my passion is simple curiousity about how they built these. “ MANDERSON: nothing mind bloggling here. Envy, Admiration, Cognitive Dissonance – all combined with a desire to appropriate and take credit for that which one envy and admire. Started with the Greece, continued by the Rome, Arabs, French, Brits and founding father of U.S.. CLADKING: “That the ancients are defined for political, religious, and racial reasons also sticks in my craw. They deserve to be understood for who and what they were and if I'm right then we can't even understand ourselves or the nature of humanity without understanding the Egyptians and by extension, cavemen. “ MANDERSON: You idealism is noble and admirable. But my friend it is called war. Egypt was attacked, for thousands of years she defeated her envious attackers and infiltrators, but ultimately lost one day. The story that frustrate u is being written by the victors and their heirs. Don’t expect a glorious eulogy. The lies can be found in the same Bible u respect. Story of exodus of Hebrews (who were Hebrew speaking Egyptians not Ashkenazi khazars: http://gbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/12/14/gbe.evs119.short?rss=1) Personally I think there is a nexus between the expelled Hebrews, the hyksos invaders and pharaoh akhenaten. CLADKING: “I believe Egyptology just took a wrong road 150 years ago based partly on racism but primarily on inertia and building on older beliefs.” MANDERSON: It took wrong road when the last indigenous pharaoh (Nectanebo) fled south to Napata (Nubia) after Persian invasion (by Artaxerxes). Nail when in the coffin with death of Cleopatra and her ally Julius Ceasar. We can weep all we want…the fact is that the ignoramus won. Racism was necessary to preserve not just the false theory of racial supremacy but more importantly to resolve the cognitive dissonance the facts of kemet posed to such theory, and most importantly revamping Egypt racially was necessary to maintain public support for the rather profitable business of the traffic in humans (ie atlantic slave trade). Inertia on older beliefs is true…for this look no further than the Roman Catholic Church which appropriated Jesus’s teachings (after 300yrs of banning it) as a tool to expand the empire, genociding fellow Europeans, who in turn became converts and repeated the genocidal process onto the natives of the Americas, carribean, Australia, etc. CLADKING: “I can't thank you enough for the encouragement. I've gotten very very little.” MANDERSON: I do not encouirage u. I speak truth….it is hearing of the truth that encourages u. The fact that blog disciples would criticize u underscore the fact that electing to target bloggers is pissing ur valuable know how onto poreless stones. CLADKING: “Truth to tell, I've always believed human intelligence is grossly over rated. It barely exists at all. Everything we do is primarily a manifestation of habit founded on beliefs developed by the learning made possible by language. Yes, there are flashes of true intelligence in people but there is in animals as well. We simply are creatures of habit.” MANDERSON: I agree and disagree. I disagree in that I know humans have incredible capacity and know that this capacity is “underated” (not overrated). I agree in that most are unaware of this capacity and for this reason never move towards developing it. I agree we are creatures of habit, but disagree this is indicative of low or overrated intelligence. HABIT is simple natures automation mechanism. The intelligent will intelligently exploit this fact by developing good habits to AUTOMATE their intelligence (I call these the “CONSCIOUSLY COMPETENT”). Most I admit have no conscious awareness and their habits are developed without conscious intent and largely by external forces: these I call UNCONSCIOUSLY INCOMPETENT….most people are unconsciously incompetent, but that does not mean they are of low intelligence…it simply means they have latent capacity. CLADKING: It's not hidden. It's right out in the open everywhere we look. It's in the PT, Bible, Koran, and various ancient writings. We simply misinterpret it. This knowledge and the ability to get back to where we once were will have to wait until the science is done. MANDERSON: u are right. It is hidden in open sight. Obelisks in rome, paris & so called Washington monument stolen from Luxor for the founding of these cities is another example. CLADKING: “I don't believe that primitive societies today usually have much commonality with societies in the distant past…But they may be mostly irrelevant to trying to understand cavemen or the ancient Egyptians who were the "crown of creation" relative other peoples who spoke natural language.” MANDERSON: Can’t say I agree. I clearly respect ur mind, but to say u can’t find out much from a crime scene by studying the rubble is a view u may wish to re-examine. If society today was to suffer a nuclear holocaust or extinctive meteor impact should it following that studying whats left over will be irrelevant to trying to understand the skyscrapers, airplanes, electricity, etc that use to exist? You best bet it would appear is to start by analyzing the remaining rubble. NB: instead of expending ur fine intellect blogging to poreless stones, why not publish a book (under pen name to maintain ur anonymity), get ur ideas out to waaaaay more people who want it, and enjoy the bonus of getting richer in the process?. Just a thought….

CLADKING: first i must say you are incredibly generous and that you'd share so much valued knowledge on a public forum to people who for the most part will not grasp the bulk of your thought. initially i was inclined to dismiss what u had to say about babel/language change, but because of the sense in the rest of your ideas i would be foolish not to listen and attempt to follow ur thinking. i admit to a kneejerk rejection of Bible-ism, notwithstanding knowing great truths can be filter therefrom. i see very few (if any) flaws in the portions of your reasoning that i follow. I do agree Herodotus describe the method of building the pyramids. i am convinced the methodology was that of using locked canals similar to the Panama Canal and the methodology is something we could easily replicate if desired. how the stones were quarried, i don't know: do you have any ideas on how this might have been done? (where does freeMASONry fit into this? if at all?). why are u sharing so rich information on a forum such as this where clearly no one has much real interest, aptitude or inclination to understand? Why are u so passionate about this area? What caused u to investigate this area? And most imortantly "Who are you?" And given ur clear understand of certain affairs, what do u believe is the reason the assinine explanations of egyptian technology is peddled to the world. clearly our world today has enough intelligent people to know u can't build what was the worlds tallest structure for thousands of years by using ramps? why so much lies about egypt? why feed the general population so much disinformation? the strategy on egpyt is akin to military misinformation stratgey used to manipulate public opinion and sow support for invasions/wars? or can it be that the 'experts' really are as stupid as they seem? who is behind the information controll and why? I know ignorance is key to controlling people...from taliban to cia to islamic mullahs. controll people by becoming the pilot of their minds and u controll all else. controll is exercise by evil. as in the presence of light darkness ceases to be: so it is clearly fear. What wisdom do u speculate the ancients had/practiced (pre-babel if u will) that has been lost? Or if not lost, is being hidden? Sorry too many questions but u wrote so liberally and generously ur generosity elicited it. Regards... ps: i don't see eye to eye with u on babel/language lost. not to say i could not, but it is simply not something i have so far developed familiarity with or given thought to. i will review ur thoughts on this. what sources can u direct me to that in ur view are credible?. CLADKING: "Virtually no writing of any sort from before 2000 BC existed up to this point." I do not find that fact alarming. keep in mind "writing" per se is no holy grail prima facie evidence of civilization, neither are buildings. keep in mind the ancient world was primarily "oral" in their recording of history - much of this oral history i believe can still be found in many cultures, but our obsession with "writing" leads us to not see the elephant in front of our eyes. writing is actually far less effective way of preserving knowledge and bringing it forward across time to future generations. think of writing as saving information on a harddrive instead of memorizing the information and convey it from memory. if u lose or damage the harddrive the knowledge is lost or damaged. if u had it memorized (oral) you do not lose the knowledge unless u and other memorizers of the knowledge are killed (destroyed) by invaders, etc. so unlike u i do not currently place much weight on the fact that written languages did not litter the ancient world....instead i believe we would be well served to resume committing our knowledge to memory as the ancients did. i also believe we would be well served and far more would be disclosed to us if we take the time to learn the numerous oral histories still remaining of ancient societies and this could fill alot of gaps and reduce much speculation. with ur wisdom, i am sure u can clearly see that the bias towards "written" language falls squarely in the realm of contemporary arrogance, baseless conceit, and ignorance of the ancients. your concurring thoughts and/or rebuttles please.... CLAD KING: "All of history falls into place and makes perfect sense once it's realized that the language actually did change and the old science was utterly lost except for fragments of its metaphysics in modern religions." Rather than piecemeal judge u on sectional internet posts it may be more useful to fully review ur ideas. have u published anything that outlines the body of your thought that i can review and better assess your view? here you are talking about change in language which i find to be a sounder ground than speaking of absence of writing. now languages change and go extinct all the time and with that much knowledge does get lost, but much is also preserved in the new languages/dialects that evolve. greatest loss is in case of destroying (killing) usual via war and conquests. language loss as an explanatory model for loss of old science is certainly good grounds. but rather than focussing exclusively on what was lost and why (we gain little from that i believe), focus on what remains and allow that to lead u to discover/deduce/speculate as to what was/is. again study the ALIVE ancient societies of today, study their ORAL histories and i suspect this will open a massive door into the past u endeavor to examine. simply coming to the conclusion that the ancients were highly intelligent breaks contemporary stereotype, but otherwise disclose little about what they actually knew. best to also study ancients of today to gain real insights and reduce speculation (which by definition is bound to be wildly incorrect, albeit better than the ignorance we are now beset by).

no dispute there but everything is energy is it not? hence at the speed of light matter changes into pure energy. in fact there is no such thing as matter. i believe we believe 2c is impossible because we experience time uni-directionally (ie as a positive integer). at a higher dimension time by reasoning must exist bi-directionally (ie as both positive and negative integer - even if we can't experience it ourselves it must exist because everything must have an opposite. i personally believe we can experience bi-directional time: meaning we can go back in time (not as matter but as energic beings of consciousness - ie our true selves). i do not view myself as the body: i view the body as something in which i reside. i believe that i am an energetic being who in accordance with laws of thermodynamics cannot be destroyed. i believe my thoughts (evidenced by brainwaves) is a form of energy which travels at light speed. telepathy is a fact and US military is already using it. so while this may sound wonky to you, it would be much wiser to look into these ideas for your personal benefit. now of course you don't have to. QUESTION: if u are the body, then what happens if i give u artificial arms, artificial legs, artificial organs, face transplant, etc (all of which are doable with current technology). once i artificially replace ALL your body parts: is it still you? so who are you? can u be destroyed? you is the inner being within....you are not the body...you are energy with consciousness...you are what religious people call God. i am not religious...i am just uniting the 2

Euclidean and Galilean equations use to yield same answers on both sides: they no longer do (same with Relativity - by reasoning i BELIEVE einstein's equations will ultimately run into same problem). i do not believe einstein is God. i believe he made extraordinary contributions to physics which will one day be superceded. assuming all he had to say is eternally true EVERYWHERE is not the sort of thinking that will advance science. i see nothing engaging in demonstrating prowess at regurgitating equations others discovered (anyone can do that if they chose to study). i agree the proof of the pudding is in the proof....but i am just typing/reasoning for fun. after logging off i may never return to the site.

i i now understand you. you reason from the assumption that Relativity theory is immutable or at least correct - therefore you test what i say against that and if it does not fit you discard. that's not the type of discussion i was attempting to engage. i was proposing to the mind to disregard theories and simply reason and imagine. i know SR says speed is same against all reference frames, but i dont believe it and einstein himself in GR seem not to believe it either. I believe it only appears to be true because of our limitations...but as u are not willing to engage in imagining it will not be possible for us to discourse. How can we hold absolute beliefs about 4D & higher dimensions when we can only really conceive 3D? I believe doing so is very dangerous. Thanks for sharing Brian Greene - Kaku claims he is co-founder of String Theory (i respect his thinking as i find his openness to be in line with genuine scientific tradition).

so if it is not YET unproven are we to assume it is eternally true. or should we humbly say "...based on what we know right now this is what we seem to have, but reason indicates it is likely to change as we learn more in future." i do not even believe we have "Laws of Physics"...what we have are explanatory models which we continue to use so long as empircal test support them, but we discard those models as soon as they are contradicted empirically. explanatory models are not laws: they are just models, they are not reality. different cultures evolve different models to explain the natural world based on their cultural norms. religions use 'God models', science use Energy models, hindus and ancient egyptians use Consciousness/Energy models. scientific models are wonderful but it would be unwise to dismiss value that can be gained from other models. Before the Laws of Thermodynamics, religion models told us that god is omnipresent and omnipotent: which means same as saying Energy (God) can neither be created nor destroyed. i am not religious, but i keep open mind and anyone who calls themselves a scientist should practice divergent thought as well....at best something new will be learned, at worst new thoughts can be stimulated. it is very important not to dismiss prior to open exploration.

i don't know the answer, but my belief is no. if the universe curves then by definition such curvature mandates changes. now it is likely the case that all changes are governed by set formulae. i think things appear constant to us because of the great distances/quantities we are dealing with - just like earth appears flat and use to be believed was flat, but only appeared flat because of the great distance relative to our measuring tool (the human eye). likewise i do not trust use of the atomic clock as accurate instrument for measurement nor do i believe the equations of Relativity or Quantum physics are applicable EVERYWHERE. If we believe that then we believe science is complete and their is nothing left to discover...so why waste our time in continued research. i think our current models will come up against their limitations sooner or later, get discarded and replaced with new and better models....even the ideas of our greatest genius's will run their course sooner or later. Some dogmatic so called scientist (aka religious extremist) however scathingly attack anyone who has the audacity to entertain new thought, while they themselves propose NO new thought. they attack others just to feel good feeling they are right, but lose sight of the fact that more can be gained by brainstorming new ideas even if all those new ideas are incorrect.

i know ur specialization is to stalk, deliberately misconstrue & insult to make yourself feel smart. please ignore my post if that is what u are about. thanks thanks. i was just being lazy typing 186k (i presume others would no what is meant and i am pleased that u do)

CHADKING: thanks for your feedback. you said: "My primary divergence is that I believe there is a nearly invisible change in the language that took place about 2000 BC and is remembered as the story of the tower of babel. This change in the language masked many of the ideas that Greece borrowed and then these ideas were never credited. Greece adopted all the civilization it conquered and merely got a lot more from Egypt than others. It seems obvious that Egypt and the Dogon (if applicable) also had precedents and were we able to track all these precedents we would find that even the very first people 40,000 yeatrs ago contributed." i see no divergence in language. we lost the spoken egyptian language but recovered the written version via rosetta stone. the spoken language although extinct can be traced among the descendants of ancient egyptians who scattered southward, but no one wants to look at those people because it does not map with what they wish to feed the masses. Here is an article that connects dispired egyptians linguistically to the Luo Tribe: http://www.luhya.net/documents/LUO%20ORIGIN%20OF%20CIVILISATION.pdf. To me nothing has been "masked", rather they simply are EXCLUDED from what is taught for political reasons....however if you are unaware of the exclusion techniques it will appear information is "masked/unknown/mysterious". I suggest reading Chris Dun, Cheikh Anta Diop, Gerald Massey, Volney's Ruin of Empire, Herodotus. I like Chris Dun for his perspective as an engineer instead of these historians that call themselves egyptologist who have no expertise in engineering, physics or mathematics but purport to explain ancient physics, engineering and mathematical systems (these guys are misinformed and come with political agendas....i just want clean facts). i apologize TO YOU for the generalization that lumped YOU in. i stand by the general statement as applicable to most, but with exclusion for you and the few to whom it does not apply.

i love modern science. i deplore conceited egomaniacs who insult the intelligence of ancient intellectuals. modern science did not develop in a vacuum....it owes its foundation to the ancients who were conquered especially greece and rome's conquest of egypt. unfortunately Rome embraced christianity and plunged europe into the Dark Ages as the popes favoured stories of witchcraft and flat earth rather than egyptian knowledge of round earth, atum (atom), cosmology, engineering, etc. the Rennaisance was an emergence out of Europes Dark Ages NOT a FIRST TIME discovery of scientific knowledge. Such advance knowledge was commonplace in china, india and egypt for thousands of years before. Chinese invented gun powder but used it for firecrackers, india, china and Ghana sailed the oceans to the Americas and traded with american natives hundreds of years before Columbus was born and while Rome thought the earth was flat. So because our society has only recently emerged we assume no one did so before us - what arrogance? what ego?

thanks John for your respectful reply. travelling on photon is just a thought experiment - technically we could say it violates SR but complies with GR. I bring you to a quote from Einstein on SR & GR: In the 1920 book "Relativity: the special and general theory" Einstein wrote: ". . . according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity... CANNOT claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light VARIES WITH POSITION". In other words, einstein himself believed that the speed of light CAN vary and does NOT have unlimited validity. where it loses validity is with "curvature of photon rays", which is exactly what i am implying. Speed of light is SAID to be constant in an inertial frame when their is no variation in position. vary position and constancy disappears! another variable to consider is the accuracy of the instruments (atomic clock) we are using to measure light's speed - as we develop more accurate instruments we will be reporting that a DIFFERENT speed of light. i believe we should imagine, not just propogate current theory as dogma because the fact is our knowledge and understanding improves over time. it use to be so called fact that the earth was flat, then it was a fact that earth was centre of the universe, copenicus was fact, galileo was fact, newton was all fact....Einstein himself was no where near as dogmatic or arrogant as his unthinking disciples today. thought experiment: photon A has a relative speed of ZERO in comparison to photon B moving parallel in the same direction...hence each photon has no speed relative to each other (now relative to a 3rd observer in an inertial frame, speed would of course be "c" (which is approximately 186mi/s based on the best atomic clocks we now have - when we get better clocks, this 186mi/sec will be reported as a different more accurate number). by stationary i mean "stationed" on the surface of our universe (as opposed to a different universe). you can subsitute the word "located".

Cavemen were in europe during ice age and before (10,000 - 35,000yrs ago) and had no high culture. they cannot be compared to egyptians who had the planets most advanced civilization whose knowledge diffused to greece, rome, then great britain and USA. US capital was designed as a copy of thebes/luxor. u are 100% right, ancient civilizations (egypt, china, india in particular) were very advance even compared to today. the idea of the atom came from the egyptian god ATUM. aristotle, socrates, plato, herodotus and many greek philosophers went to school in egypt. the engineers that designed and supervised the building of the pyramids no doubt surpass most of the engineers we have today. the closest we have come to their engineering is building of the panama canal and building office towers - but theirs is more impressive because they did not rely on cranes and motorized vehicles. Christopher Dunn suggest they did so by harnessing the forces of nature (eg using water as elevator - much in the same way that the panama canal does today). The Dogon tribe in Mali (who descended from the ancient egyptians) were incredible astronomers and in fact discovered Sirius B star hundreds of years ago - it was only discovered in the past century by modern astronomers. The biggest problem plaguing modern scientist, historians, etc is their EGO. They falsely believe ancient people were backwards and even stupid. they fail to realize that the best engineers of today cannot replicate the pyramids. they fail to appreciate the challenge they would face if they were to attempt to replicate building the Wall of China, Grand Temples of Luxor. The Bagavad Gita over 2,000years ago theorized about not just the Big Bang, but multiple universes (we still have not yet fully wrapped our heads around the idea of the Big Bang yet alone multiple universes) this recurring claim is an utter insult to the people. somehow Rome did not have help in building the coliseum or Greece the parthenon, but egypt in rabid minds had to be built by aliens or some other nonesense explanation. egyptians were scientifically very advance, so were ancient indians and ancient chinese. india, china, ethiopia and egypt for thousands of years were the planets pre-eminent civilizations. india and china are on their way to reclaiming their usual standing. ancient engineers, scientist & mathematicians had competence that rank with the best of the modern world. many of their accomplishments modern experts are unable to replicate - hence the insulting suggestion it was built by aliens (guess it feels better to say that than admit they were smarter than us). they did all they did without global warming or harm to the environment. this alien talk is just bigotted nonesense.

ok ok some clarity here. i did not say we can EXCEED the ABSOLUTE speed of light. what i spoke of was RELATIVE SPEED, which is what i think the post is about. I do not believe "c" is at all the speed of light, rather i believe light itself has no absolute speed and only appears to have speed. we could easily say light is stationary and it is our universe that is moving at "c", hence the ratio is the only thing that is absolute and not light itself. Example: we are on spaceship earth. are we travelling at the speed of earth's movement through space or are distant objects in space approaching us? our 'movement' is relative (not absolute) - same with light.

what is the speed of light? is it 186mi/sec? i do not believe so. this is only so if we are stationary inside our universe. the 186mi/sec i believe is simply a constant ratio of spacetime, thus if we imaginatively rode a photon, then from our view on the photon there is no motion (ie zero speed, and space disappears!). 186mi/sec only APPEAR to be the speed on light because we are on the surface of our universe. in addition by travelling on a second photon in the opposite direction, we double the RELATIVE speed of light which causes time itself to disappear! what is even more remarkable is NONE of this violates SR.

A: yes B: yes. if both photons travel in same direction then there is ZERO relative motion (ie at rest). if in opposite directions, then the relative speed doubles, notwithstanding speed relative to inertial reference does not change. what you are addressing is space warp and wormholes. the answer is only NO if you stay on the surface of the universe, but interdimensionally it makes sense.

Moderator i agree. lets erase entirely the personal attack INITIATED against me by the gentleman (i am shocked at such a response and it caught me off guard: hence the rebuttles). please instead see the following links so this matter may be discussed rationally: http://iopscience.iop.org/0264-9381/11/5/001/pdf/0264-9381_11_5_001.pdf (Alcubierre: The Warp Drive - Hyperfast travel within general relativity) - you need to purchase the article, however Alcubierre's equation is below: EQUATION: where is the lapse function that gives the interval of proper time between nearby hypersurfaces, is the shift vector that relates the spatial coordinate systems on different hypersurfaces, and is a positive definite metric on each of the hypersurfaces. Alcubierre's Warp Drive essentially posits that you can exceed the relative constant inside wormholes by warping (contracting in front and expanding behind) space. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJZXDEUOao0 (kaku on Alcubierre) (Hawking on wormhole time travel...ie exceeding speed of light) (Kaku: Why your head is older than your feet) My proposal (and reasoning) that APRICIMO's idea of doubling the speed of light is theoretically possible rest on the concept of wormholes. it is the idea that everything is porous (has holes) including time itself, thus enabling inter-dimensional travel. The theory of relativity breaks down immediately after the big bang and inside wormholes: alcubierre's equation allows e=mc2 to still hold because of warping. The thought experiment i use is standing on a beam of light, parallel to a second beam travelling in same direction. in this thought experiment, from light's perspective LIGHT HAS NO SPEED. APRICIMO's idea would simply involve having the 2nd beam travel in the reverse direction to create warp. I would appreciate a reasoned rebuttle, rather than simply having my thoughts referred to as "nonsense" (that is what is invective). velocities should work like that under warp conditions. this requires imaging one is not on the surface of the universe, but rather travelling through holes in it. sort of like travelling through tiny holes in our planet to get to the other side, as opposed to travelling on the surface of our planet. now imagine our planet is the universe with similar wormholes that allow you to go from one side to the next. we do know that blackholes exist and it is believed wormholes exists, so i do not see his proposal as without merit. for us light speed appears to be fixed simply because we can only engage in positive time travel (currently). if each integer of time had a corresponding negative value (which i suspect it does), then the proposal makes sense. the old saying: if a tree falls in the forest and you did not see it or hear it, did the tree actually fall. of course it did - the fact that you cannot see it has no bearing on the fact that it happened. likewise with light i suspect: our senses ability to detect should have no bearing on what absolutely (or relatively) happened. another analogy: airplane flying at mach 2. u do not hear the sound of this airplane until after it has passed. the fact that you did not HEAR the sound of the airplane until AFTER it passed has no bearing on the fact that it was travelling at mach 2. our sensory capacities do not dictate reality, they only detect it....and if they are unable to detect it does not mean reality did not occur.

i trust the views of mikio kaku over your dogmatism (u sound like a religious fundamentalist - definately not using the scientific method). mikio kaku asserts that due to differences in the relative speed of light, time beats faster on the moon than on the earth, and even faster at your head than at your feet. far from nonesense, what i say have support from hawkins & kaku: they believe the speed of light is relative and that einsteins constant ("c") refers to a ratio not an absolute speed. rather than self-aggrandizement maybe you should just google for few moments to see what both leading physicist have to say on the issue (try that instead of arrogance).

ooh what misguided arrogance. read and regurgitate and believe that is intelligence. i can assure you time is NOT constant, and it does vary. this is what makes wormholes and time travel possible. co-founder of string theory (mikio kaku) agrees, but u the self-appointed genius critic presumably know better. the gentleman who posed the question about travellling at 2c is brilliant and i agree with him even if it turns out we are both wrong. u on the other hand lack imagination and mistake regurgitation for intelligence.

I agree with you 100%. The speed of light is not constant, but rather it is relative to the speed of the observer. If you are stationary, then the relative speed is 186k, but if you travel at 50% of this relative constant, then the relative speed of light slows down by 50% (meaning travel time increases proportionately, while distance travelled illusively APPEAR to increase proportionately). If you go at 100%, then the relative speed of light is 0 (meaning you are not moving relatively speaking, but in fact you do absolutely at 200% relative to a stationary reference). What your beautiful question ask is what happens if you reverse directions. By doing so you can exceed the relative speed of light. I know they say this is impossible, but i do not believe this claim. I believe you can double the relative speed of light simply by travelling at the speed of light in the reverse direction (this is the 6th orthogonal dimension). When you do this time disappears! FYI: when you travel in positive direction at the speed of light, space stands still (but only SEEM to disappear...this apparition is an illusion because the speed of relative travel is 0 in the former case). Now if you were to travel in the 5th dimension, the maximum you could increase the relative speed of light is 50% (total 150%), and from their you would diminish proportionately with duration/distance down toward 186k but never reaching it. DISCLAIMER: everything is just wrote could be all B.S. i am not a physicist, i have zero training....but these are simply my thoughts. i welcome feedback (no posturing please...)