Spatial dimensions

[Harte]

But time could be perpendicular right? Future heads up, past goes down. If the second time dimension is a time dimension but time doesn't use it for time, what good is it? Are you sure?

Like I said, ONE theory. It solves lots of problems if it's true, though.
A Two-Time Universe? Physicist Explores How Second Dimension of Time Could Unify Physics Laws

Harte

 

[Harte]

You won't concede that what someone else says may be true? You listen to others only?

In what way does the above sentence make sense? If I "listen to others only" how can am I not conceding that what someone else says is true?
There are things I know. When someone comes up with a claim that I know violates aspects of physical reality that are based on measured and confirmed data, then I know what they say is not true. This is exactly how YOU know what someone says is not true (assuming you ever disbelieve anything someone says, anyway.)
A violation of the current paradigm of reality would require a new explanation of that reality, and the new reality would have to completely explain all the measured and known data that the current one does, plus more. That's work, and that's something assiduously avoided by serious time-travel speculators because it's too easy to stay withing the current paradigm and still travel in time (see previous post.)

Did you try at one point to tell people about time travel with all your articles and I come along with a contradiction?

Of course. I'm still doing it.

Why does it bother you so much what I type here? It's because I hit a nerve but I don't know why

It doesn't bother me that you (in particular) post here. What bothers me is the reams of total crap claims about time travel that are posted here with pretty much no one providing any information concerning how such claims could be (or can't be) true.

You are a good current example of this. Your re-explanation of the new reality you describe is mysteriously absent.
All we have is some words came out of someone's mouth.

Now the question is - have I added anything to this discussion? Your own questions point to you not being aware of the handful of things I just posted for your information. In that respect, I'd say my additions to this thread have improved it astronomically.

However, if a person has the opinion that a "good thread" consists of an outrageous opening post followed by nods and winks from everyone else on the site - like a bunch of bobble head figurines in an earthquake - then I guess my contributions have taken away from the value of the thread.

Harte

 

[Trithinium]

In what way does the above sentence make sense? If I "listen to others only" how can am I not conceding that what someone else says is true?
There are things I know. When someone comes up with a claim that I know violates aspects of physical reality that are based on measured and confirmed data, then I know what they say is not true. This is exactly how YOU know what someone says is not true (assuming you ever disbelieve anything someone says, anyway.)
A violation of the current paradigm of reality would require a new explanation of that reality, and the new reality would have to completely explain all the measured and known data that the current one does, plus more. That's work, and that's something assiduously avoided by serious time-travel speculators because it's too easy to stay withing the current paradigm and still travel in time (see previous post.)

Of course. I'm still doing it.

It doesn't bother me that you (in particular) post here. What bothers me is the reams of total crap claims about time travel that are posted here with pretty much no one providing any information concerning how such claims could be (or can't be) true.

You are a good current example of this. Your re-explanation of the new reality you describe is mysteriously absent.
All we have is some words came out of someone's mouth.

Now the question is - have I added anything to this discussion? Your own questions point to you not being aware of the handful of things I just posted for your information. In that respect, I'd say my additions to this thread have improved it astronomically.

However, if a person has the opinion that a "good thread" consists of an outrageous opening post followed by nods and winks from everyone else on the site - like a bunch of bobble head figurines in an earthquake - then I guess my contributions have taken away from the value of the thread.

Harte

The problem here is you think everyone in the cosmos and beyond have to follow our "laws of physics", which I've never seen a list of. Earthlings have to follow them. They are parameters for us to stay within. Others do not.

 

[Trithinium]

In what way does the above sentence make sense? If I "listen to others only" how can am I not conceding that what someone else says is true?
There are things I know. When someone comes up with a claim that I know violates aspects of physical reality that are based on measured and confirmed data, then I know what they say is not true. This is exactly how YOU know what someone says is not true (assuming you ever disbelieve anything someone says, anyway.)
A violation of the current paradigm of reality would require a new explanation of that reality, and the new reality would have to completely explain all the measured and known data that the current one does, plus more. That's work, and that's something assiduously avoided by serious time-travel speculators because it's too easy to stay withing the current paradigm and still travel in time (see previous post.)

Of course. I'm still doing it.

It doesn't bother me that you (in particular) post here. What bothers me is the reams of total crap claims about time travel that are posted here with pretty much no one providing any information concerning how such claims could be (or can't be) true.

You are a good current example of this. Your re-explanation of the new reality you describe is mysteriously absent.
All we have is some words came out of someone's mouth.

Now the question is - have I added anything to this discussion? Your own questions point to you not being aware of the handful of things I just posted for your information. In that respect, I'd say my additions to this thread have improved it astronomically.

However, if a person has the opinion that a "good thread" consists of an outrageous opening post followed by nods and winks from everyone else on the site - like a bunch of bobble head figurines in an earthquake - then I guess my contributions have taken away from the value of the thread.

Harte

If everyone is so beneath your knowledge level, are you on here to bother people. I thought this site was for the exchange of thoughts and ideas. For 2 years I've been looking for a site to find out what has happened to me. I've learned about God and physics because that's what travelers talk about. This is the best sight I've come across. On my first day you verbally put down me and others. You are angry. Don't take it out on others. It makes you look foolish.

 

[Harte]

The problem here is you think everyone in the cosmos and beyond have to follow our "laws of physics", which I've never seen a list of. Earthlings have to follow them. They are parameters for us to stay within. Others do not.

There are no "laws of physics."

There is a structured model of reality that is based entirely on measured phenomena.
Phenomena that have been measured to a finer and finer degree as a century went by.
These are the phenomena your new model of reality would have to explain.

Regarding Relativity, not one experiment has ever contradicted it. Every experiment has confirmed certain predictions made by Relativity to the utmost detail that was measurable at the time of the experiment. The only real objection to Relativity is that it doesn't fit in with Quantum Theory because in Relativity spacetime is continuous whereas in QM spacetime has little pieces. That's not really even an "objection" when you come right down to it. After all, maybe it's QM that doesn't "fit in" with Relativity.

In other words, it's not "My friend told me."

Harte

 

[Harte]

Yeah Yeah Yeah Hartey, how convenient for you that half this site is missing!!, full of BS!!....You cannot find ANYTHING to substantiate what you said, Zilch, Zero, nuffin ....Anyways, i dont believe you would have been involved in any discussion about your so called "intelligent time-travel" because you have never believed in time travel ...

Was searching for something else and this came up in the search.
Yeah, the main subject is creation of humans, but there was a guy speculating that life was created by some future entities either sending tailored viruses into the past or controlling quantum events in the past. Starts about here, but you might back up a page or so.

Harte

 

[Harte]

If everyone is so beneath your knowledge level, are you on here to bother people. I thought this site was for the exchange of thoughts and ideas. For 2 years I've been looking for a site to find out what has happened to me. I've learned about God and physics because that's what travelers talk about. This is the best sight I've come across. On my first day you verbally put down me and others. You are angry. Don't take it out on others. It makes you look foolish.

Please quote me "putting you down."

If you want to see what that actually looks like, I can accommodate you.

Harte

 

[TimeFlipper]

Was searching for something else and this came up in the search.
Yeah, the main subject is creation of humans, but there was a guy speculating that life was created by some future entities either sending tailored viruses into the past or controlling quantum events in the past. Starts about here, but you might back up a page or so.

Harte

Really

 

[Trithinium]

There are no "laws of physics."

There is a structured model of reality that is based entirely on measured phenomena.
Phenomena that have been measured to a finer and finer degree as a century went by.
These are the phenomena your new model of reality would have to explain.

Regarding Relativity, not one experiment has ever contradicted it. Every experiment has confirmed certain predictions made by Relativity to the utmost detail that was measurable at the time of the experiment. The only real objection to Relativity is that it doesn't fit in with Quantum Theory because in Relativity spacetime is continuous whereas in QM spacetime has little pieces. That's not really even an "objection" when you come right down to it. After all, maybe it's QM that doesn't "fit in" with Relativity.

In other words, it's not "My friend told me."

Harte

How do you measure phenomena? And don't Relativity and Quantum theory use the law of physics which now you say don't exist because I said they don't exist? Doesn't all of your arguments previously involve the law of physics? Yes it is my friend told me.

 

[Trithinium]

Please quote me "putting you down."

If you want to see what that actually looks like, I can accommodate you.

Harte

You know why people puff up and try bullying people by making threats? It's because they are scared and cowards and don't want people to see this in them so they deflect. And I am talking about you.