Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travel Discussion
Time as Related to Moebius Transform E/M
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Harte" data-source="post: 12314" data-attributes="member: 443"><p><strong>Re: Time as Related to Moebius Transform E/M</strong></p><p></p><p>Most of you had to know that I would not let this one pass.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> <strong></strong></p><p><strong>If we are traveling a distance relative to two axes, where is the "Y" component here?</strong></p><p> <strong></strong></p><p><strong>There is nothing in this equation or the statements preceding it about the speed of travel. This equation represents only a <em><strong>distance</strong></em> measurement.</strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p><p>No conundrum here at all. At C, time stops according to special relativity. When no time flows, it is invalid to calculate distance based on vt.</p><p> </p><p>Additionally, let v=0, t=1 in the above equation. (Say you are sitting in your chair for 1 second). Then :</p><p> </p><p>distance = sqrt(-c^2), a large imaginary number. But the first equation already took care of the imaginary element in the time dimension "ict", see?:</p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>This would indicate that space is also a "complex number system." Somehow, I doubt that.</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> <strong></strong></p><p><strong>Can't believe Iggy missed this one.</strong></p><p><strong>Far from being "never zero, the distance from A to B is zero when the value of v is equal to x/t.</strong></p><p> <strong></strong></p><p> <strong></strong></p><p><strong><strong> </strong></strong></p><p> <strong><strong></strong></strong></p><p><strong><strong>This equation above is a combination of the two previous ones with the quantity [0=>v=>u] substituted for the constant C. How do you get away with substituting a variable for a constant? The equation implies that the speed of light varies from 0 to U. Invalid all around.</strong></strong></p><p> <strong><strong></strong></strong></p><p><strong><strong><strong> </strong></strong></strong></p><p><strong><strong><strong></strong> </strong></strong></p><p><strong><strong>Maybe I'm wrong here, but I think I can see why they haven't been.<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite38" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> </strong></strong></p><p> <strong><strong></strong></strong></p><p><strong><strong>Harte</strong></strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Harte, post: 12314, member: 443"] [b]Re: Time as Related to Moebius Transform E/M[/b] Most of you had to know that I would not let this one pass. [b] If we are traveling a distance relative to two axes, where is the "Y" component here? There is nothing in this equation or the statements preceding it about the speed of travel. This equation represents only a [i][b]distance[/b][/i] measurement.[/b] [b] [/b] No conundrum here at all. At C, time stops according to special relativity. When no time flows, it is invalid to calculate distance based on vt. Additionally, let v=0, t=1 in the above equation. (Say you are sitting in your chair for 1 second). Then : distance = sqrt(-c^2), a large imaginary number. But the first equation already took care of the imaginary element in the time dimension "ict", see?: [b] [/b] This would indicate that space is also a "complex number system." Somehow, I doubt that. [b] Can't believe Iggy missed this one. Far from being "never zero, the distance from A to B is zero when the value of v is equal to x/t. [b] This equation above is a combination of the two previous ones with the quantity [0=>v=>u] substituted for the constant C. How do you get away with substituting a variable for a constant? The equation implies that the speed of light varies from 0 to U. Invalid all around. [b] [/b] Maybe I'm wrong here, but I think I can see why they haven't been.:) Harte[/b][/b] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travel Discussion
Time as Related to Moebius Transform E/M
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top