A interesting twist
From that day until March 2001, John Titor stayed with us in our home. He told us he had made a promise to my husband?s father in 1975 that involved preparing us for Y2K. On January 1 2000, the world did not end as John said it would. Strangely, this did not seem to surprise him and instead this seemed to be a burden as a deep sense of sadness overtook him
The whole JT saga ~ combined with the Y2K scare, was brilliant. So brilliant in fact, that I find it to be
one of the stronger arguments in the JT case. It is this very ingredient, which constantly comes to my mind when I think about JT.
Now the plan here is getting everything from my mind, to this forum thread in understandable language. For those who are not IT (Information Technology - aka Computer Department) literate, I will try to easily explain what I mean - and for those who are, sorry in advance for the drivel.
Understanding the computer Computers operate in a no-nonsense way. You may have seen graphics on technical web pages, of the numbers 1 and 0 repeated over and over again. This is an example of what the simplest computer language is. All 1's or 0's. That is it - nothing more. A computer sees
everythying as either a 1 or a 0. EXAMPLE: The computer sees each letter of the alphabet as eight byte's (basically, the
byte is the smallest bit of information a computer uses). The letter 'a' for example is made up of eight 1's and 0's, a.k.a eight bytes of information. The byte sequence for the letter 'a', which is comprised of only 1's & 0's, may be ' 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '. The first
gate, or position of the byte sequence, is the number
1. The rest of the positions are all closed (zero?s). No letter in the alphabet is made up of the same sequence of bytes. For example, the letter ?b? may start with two 1?s: 1 1 0 0 0 etc. When the computer reads the eight bytes, based on the sequence, it knows what to display for us to read. Everything from the color blue to the music you hear from your pc - is nothing more than either a 1, or a 0.
Knowing this, you should understand that a computer
does not think. It does what it is instructed to do. If it is not instructed to do something, it certainly won?t do it. Arguments could be made that a computer is not instructed to ?lock up? after hours of use, but it does anyway. I would consider this an anomaly.
Now let us take the ?date & time? of a computer. When it comes to displaying the names of the months, and the numbers within a date ? the computer uses those 1?s and 0?s. When the computer reads the byte sequence, it displays what it needs to (remember the letter ?a?). In this example, it displays the letters J, U, N, E, so we know that the month is June. It does the same for the date, if today is the 12th, and when the time reaches 11:59:59 pm, as soon as the computer ticks one more second it knows through programming the date display is now the 13th. It knows this because it was told, or programmed, to know this.
If you write a small program to take the number 1, and then add 1 to it, and then to give the total ? a person would invariably see the answer as 2. If you program the computer to keep adding 1 to the previous total, until it is told to stop, it will keep going infinitely based on the rules it was given (after 9, go to 10 ? after 999, go to 1,000, and namely ? after 1,999 ? roll to 2,000).
Taking the aforementioned rules of the computer into mind ? you can easily see that when any and every computer in the world counted one more second after December 31, 1999 at 11:59:59 pm ? the date rolled over to January 1, 2000. The only way for any computer to stop at the year 2000 would be if it were told to do so.
I have worked with computers since 1980, when they were nothing more than Cassette tapes you had to use with a normal cassette player/recorder. You had to hit ?play? to feed your information into a processor ? then after loading you could use the program you were after. Many of us on IT departments discussed the Y2K problem enough to agree that the effect it may have on systems around the world would be minimal to nothing.
So, what does this have to do with John Titor? Glad you asked. If Titor, or anyone for that matter, went back into our past to try and fix the Y2K problem ? we wouldn?t have given it one iota of thought as the year 2000 approached. If, in nineteen-seventy-something, a computer engineer was informed about some impending doom when our systems rolled from 1999 to 2000, he would have fixed or adjusted for it. After he did that, from every day forward ? nobody would have given it second thought because they knew it was taken care of.
To say that the Y2K bug was fixed in 1975 (or whatever year) and then have all the excitement we did about it possibly happening is equivalent to giving people shots against the Plague 25 years after it was wiped off the face of the earth.
The Y2K bug was not going to happen, and the industry knew this. Instead it fed off the fears of the general public and created over 1 Billion dollars in revenue to protect its sheeple against a lie.
How does the JT saga fit into a world where the Y2K bug was nothing more than a load of crap? :blink:
(yeah, i know I'll be flamed for that one - so let me say it for you: There are an infinite number of timelines and an infinite number of possibilities within each timeline. If it happened there, it doesn't mean it'll happen here... etc etc etc.).