Phil Wainwright
Junior Member
- Messages
- 76
Hi there all,
Well once again, I am sitting at my desk blogging.... or writing crap... Probably the same thing in my case. Please accept my apologies for any digressions and rambling, tis just my nature.....
So, On Thursday Night, I watched a programme called the Science Behind Dr. Who. It was a brilliant lecture given at the Royal Institute by none other than Professor Brian Cox.
It covered a lot of very interesting topics, it opened up some areas of confuddlement for me, and has a direct impact on my preparations for the re-creation of the Philly Experiment. It also has a direct impact on the topics here regarding time travel!!!!!!!!
So, as far as I understand, the whole basis for science debunking time-travel is due to the fact that the 'Speed-Limit-of-The-Universe' is light speed. However, it seems that light speed does not have a speed in relation to anything. Therefore it is classed as 3x10*8M/S regardless. Therefore unless you can exceed light speed you cannot deviate from your future or past light cones........
However, this becomes really very interesting when looking at wavelength/frequency calculations. They all work with light at the speed mentioned above, although in reality it is a little lower at 299,792,458 M/S.... however, when using radio transmissions, there is the Standing Wave Ratio (SWR) a common value to all of you who played with CB radios.... (Sorry young kids, this pre-dates instant messaging
)
The SWR was always at 1:1.1 when the antenna was at the correct length for the frequency used. So, how do the calculations work, when the constant used is not constant? Is this the first glimmer of evidence for another dimension/field affect that is currently missing from calculations? I wonder if it is this 5th dimension that allows the formation of a working, viable UFT? (Unified Field Theory)
But this then creates another problem for me, Fermi's Paradox...... Although typically aimed at the whole UFO/ET question, the premise of the paradox, is "If they exist, why have we not seen them?" (Not getting into the argument about that, just using it as a discussion point )
If Fermi's Paradox is a true and valid discussion point, then why is it still true and valid when looking at time travel? (Yes I know my experiment is with the Philly Exp, but according to the notes I have read on this, then UFT plays a vital part in the scenario). Therefore If I can crack the true secrets of UFT, then we all stand a chance of going somewhere. so, why am I not walking into my own office now with proof that I really am me, come back to offer some design advice.... practical stuff such as "see that large sparking electrical contact..... don't touch it!" Does that mean that it is not possible to ravel along your own world-line, thus preventing this paradox from occurring? or is it because I never achieve my experimental goals. If it because it is not possible to travel one's own world-line, once you enter another world-line, can it ever be possible to return to your start-point?
So, if we now consider the bending of light (optical and RADAR invisibility) as the prescribed goal of my experimentation, we have to accept that a light path can be deformed by extreme electro-magnetic fields (This can also be shown by CRTs where the raster scan of the picture is achieved my electro-magnets). By assuming from the CRT experiments, and the knowledge of black-hole theory where light cannot escape, we have to assume that there is evidence for a working UFT.
It would appear that for all my experiments, and for those of you who are looking at time-travel experiments, should we not devote a percentage of our time to 'crowd-source' a valid working hypothesis for the existence of a UFT. Is there another field that we need to consider to create this UFT?
How do we measure and understand a field that is alien to our understanding? I guess that this may only be possible in the early stages of this hypothesis by looking for the affects of it; much like an angler can see the movement of a fish without seeing the fish. As medicine can see the affects of a new disease without knowing what that disease is.....
Therefore with your experiments, and tests, would you all please do me the great service of letting me know enough of your results so I can try and work out a UFT. Yes I would be happy to sing confidentiality agreements. I need to know when things are either very right (when maths say they should be wrong) or vice-versa. I believe it is only by accurate and repeated study that we can find that elusive fact that makes the whole theory work.
Well once again, I am sitting at my desk blogging.... or writing crap... Probably the same thing in my case. Please accept my apologies for any digressions and rambling, tis just my nature.....
So, On Thursday Night, I watched a programme called the Science Behind Dr. Who. It was a brilliant lecture given at the Royal Institute by none other than Professor Brian Cox.
It covered a lot of very interesting topics, it opened up some areas of confuddlement for me, and has a direct impact on my preparations for the re-creation of the Philly Experiment. It also has a direct impact on the topics here regarding time travel!!!!!!!!
So, as far as I understand, the whole basis for science debunking time-travel is due to the fact that the 'Speed-Limit-of-The-Universe' is light speed. However, it seems that light speed does not have a speed in relation to anything. Therefore it is classed as 3x10*8M/S regardless. Therefore unless you can exceed light speed you cannot deviate from your future or past light cones........
However, this becomes really very interesting when looking at wavelength/frequency calculations. They all work with light at the speed mentioned above, although in reality it is a little lower at 299,792,458 M/S.... however, when using radio transmissions, there is the Standing Wave Ratio (SWR) a common value to all of you who played with CB radios.... (Sorry young kids, this pre-dates instant messaging
)The SWR was always at 1:1.1 when the antenna was at the correct length for the frequency used. So, how do the calculations work, when the constant used is not constant? Is this the first glimmer of evidence for another dimension/field affect that is currently missing from calculations? I wonder if it is this 5th dimension that allows the formation of a working, viable UFT? (Unified Field Theory)
But this then creates another problem for me, Fermi's Paradox...... Although typically aimed at the whole UFO/ET question, the premise of the paradox, is "If they exist, why have we not seen them?" (Not getting into the argument about that, just using it as a discussion point
) If Fermi's Paradox is a true and valid discussion point, then why is it still true and valid when looking at time travel? (Yes I know my experiment is with the Philly Exp, but according to the notes I have read on this, then UFT plays a vital part in the scenario). Therefore If I can crack the true secrets of UFT, then we all stand a chance of going somewhere. so, why am I not walking into my own office now with proof that I really am me, come back to offer some design advice.... practical stuff such as "see that large sparking electrical contact..... don't touch it!" Does that mean that it is not possible to ravel along your own world-line, thus preventing this paradox from occurring? or is it because I never achieve my experimental goals. If it because it is not possible to travel one's own world-line, once you enter another world-line, can it ever be possible to return to your start-point?
So, if we now consider the bending of light (optical and RADAR invisibility) as the prescribed goal of my experimentation, we have to accept that a light path can be deformed by extreme electro-magnetic fields (This can also be shown by CRTs where the raster scan of the picture is achieved my electro-magnets). By assuming from the CRT experiments, and the knowledge of black-hole theory where light cannot escape, we have to assume that there is evidence for a working UFT.
It would appear that for all my experiments, and for those of you who are looking at time-travel experiments, should we not devote a percentage of our time to 'crowd-source' a valid working hypothesis for the existence of a UFT. Is there another field that we need to consider to create this UFT?
How do we measure and understand a field that is alien to our understanding? I guess that this may only be possible in the early stages of this hypothesis by looking for the affects of it; much like an angler can see the movement of a fish without seeing the fish. As medicine can see the affects of a new disease without knowing what that disease is.....
Therefore with your experiments, and tests, would you all please do me the great service of letting me know enough of your results so I can try and work out a UFT. Yes I would be happy to sing confidentiality agreements. I need to know when things are either very right (when maths say they should be wrong) or vice-versa. I believe it is only by accurate and repeated study that we can find that elusive fact that makes the whole theory work.
