The Time Tunnel

[TimeNot_0]

I see no technology yet to support anything (or else I am missing it) so all my words are is a theory.

 

[Num7]

I moved this thread to the John Titor section. As stated earlier by Sam, this discussion isn't about finding out if Titor is real or not. There are plenty of debate topics in place right now to keep the debate going, without having to use this thread as yet another debate discussion.

Thanks.

 

[Peregrini]

But he also predicted Hawking changing his mind on the black-hole subject, wich exactly happened as John said it would. Basicly what i'm saying is, there is a greater chance that he was real.

Yes, that's exactly right! John said Hawking would change his mind about this and it happened. There are many things John said would happen that did happen, but the naysayers will never give him credit. Conviction of a Time Traveler is a book written about some of the evidence that supports John as a true Time Traveler (there is more), but again, none of that information is given credit.

Some disbelievers, i.e. Peregrini and Einstein, will never believe John Titor was a real Time Traveler, no matter how much evidence is presented (and they persist in ridiculing those who do believe on this forum). Just like some people will never believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, no matter how many miracles He performs or that He raised Himself from the dead. Not comparing Jesus to John Titor, just the blindsightedness of the naysayers.

The incorrect information in this post has been addressed in the "new debate thread". Those of you that actually want to know the truth can find it here;
Debate - John Titor Debate (The Time Tunnel) | Paranormalis

 

[Ren]

What you do is skirt around the virtual horizon

Very nice observation. Where did you learn that?

 

[TimeNot_0]

I thought of it a long time ago now as a method that may make sense if it is possible to travel to parallel universes in time forward or back because parallel universes according to the supposed time traveler (JT) are at different times (and maybe at the same time also) and only when the divergence gets too big are they more different than you may be able to handle. (At one time I also took calculus and differential equations in college a long time ago, and lost my brain so........................that also is a different story but was more real to me.)

When parallel universes was proven by the Oxford Team of Dr. (forget his name??) back in 2007 when reported at Breithart (like that ??) website, they stated that they thought parallel universes were all different - like branches on a tree branching out differently.

I think I read somewhere that they are thinking of ways of proving that there are parallel universes or have come up with something lately, but I read so much and my brain went lost a long time ago, that I forget everything I read. I sure someone else can start looking up this stuff. Lately I find most news about physics at:
Phys.Org - Science News, Technology, Physics, Nanotechnology, Space Science, Earth Science, Medicine

and of course at GLP sometimes on the left side.

Just don't ask me to do any calculus equations as that was a long time ago with a book that seemed to be from somewhere else.

 

[Ren]

and of course at GLP sometimes on the left side.
Just don't ask me to do any calculus equations as that was a long time ago with a book that seemed to be from somewhere else.

You currently need a MATHML application in order to do the math. My Firefox browser reads it though. In Japan we say めんどくさい。It means, "too much trouble".

 

[ossito2012]

If I'm correct I believe there is no proof of multiverses. Scientists are also divided on the types of multiverse. A few types are quantum, cyclic, brane, holographic, or even a grand singular type. Each derived from its own branch of physics with the grand singular one being able to be used to with all of Science. Some of the best work is being done by simulation of multiverses on a computer. See Nick Bostrom from Oxford or the Church-Turing thesis.