|
Time
Nov 4, 2004 10:29:38 GMT -5
Post by Andrew on Nov 4, 2004 10:29:38 GMT -5
I'm posting AGAINST Time, AGAINST Time Travel.
Then why the Bloody Hell am i posting an artical supporting, and telling you about Time Travel? I quote Henry Moore; To know one thing, you must know the opposite.
|
|
|
Time
Nov 4, 2004 21:04:44 GMT -5
Post by Arachis on Nov 4, 2004 21:04:44 GMT -5
And I disagree...
before you can start to theorise about time, it would help to be able to understand relativity, and relativistic effects... then to go and read the "accepted" theories of time and time travel.
once you have read that stuff.. come post something...
|
|
|
Time
Nov 5, 2004 0:55:39 GMT -5
Post by bezzerkker on Nov 5, 2004 0:55:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Time
Nov 5, 2004 1:09:07 GMT -5
Post by Arachis on Nov 5, 2004 1:09:07 GMT -5
hes with the "doesnt exist" category....
|
|
|
Time
Nov 5, 2004 1:31:30 GMT -5
Post by bezzerkker on Nov 5, 2004 1:31:30 GMT -5
Thank you Captain Obvious, can I have my job back?
What I meant is that is he trying to disprove it while working with the single timestream or the branching one? The branching one is the more likely one, while the single is more widely used in novels and movies. In the single timestream one, nothing changes if you go into the past because it has already been done. Sometimes, the person that tried to fix it turned out to be the one that made whatever they wanted to prevent happen in the first place. While travelling in the past doesn't seem possible now, there are still theories. In order to accomplish it, we need exotic matter to hold open a black hole and a machine to control the black hole. Also, if there is no white hole for the matter that is sucked in to be spewed out through, then the travellers are screwed. My time travel knowledge is a bit muddled because I haven't done anything with it in a matter of months and Stephen Hawking changed his theories regarding black holes.
|
|
|
Time
Nov 5, 2004 2:41:33 GMT -5
Post by Andrew on Nov 5, 2004 2:41:33 GMT -5
Well, im not trying to disprove the time you use in physics, well..bad example. I'm trying to disprove "TIME" the..spiritual..like.."silk" of the universe..stuff people go voodoo over.
Not TIME as a measurement, i told myself (last year)
"Time is not a spiritual, metaphysical force, nor state of life, it is a measurement of our existence or measurement of two points of daylight."
I can't really..MAKE you understand it, its in my mind you kinda have to see it. Just like the spoon. THERE IS NO BLOODY SPOON!!!. THEN WHAT THE HECK AM I HOLDING?!
|
|
|
Time
Nov 5, 2004 22:06:08 GMT -5
Post by bezzerkker on Nov 5, 2004 22:06:08 GMT -5
Could you clarify what you mean by "people go voodoo over"?
|
|
|
Time
Nov 5, 2004 22:34:32 GMT -5
Post by Archagon on Nov 5, 2004 22:34:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Time
Nov 5, 2004 23:32:22 GMT -5
Post by Evilduck on Nov 5, 2004 23:32:22 GMT -5
Time does not exist in my opinion. Things just are and they move around. There is no fourth dimension in which they move, they move in three dimensions.
|
|
|
Time
Nov 6, 2004 4:25:30 GMT -5
Post by Andrew on Nov 6, 2004 4:25:30 GMT -5
voodoo meaning...
"YE GODS! IF THEY SHOOT THE LASER INTO SPACE THEY WILL RIP TIME AS WE KNOW IT!"
actually they were trying to do some stuff with lasers..speed of light and people thought they would "rip time". tehy never shot the laser into space... i think that was a smart move.. could of blown the moon or something. [sarcasm]
|
|
|
Time
Nov 6, 2004 22:27:19 GMT -5
Post by Monolith on Nov 6, 2004 22:27:19 GMT -5
"Mini-me, stop humping the laser!"
|
|
|
Time
Nov 7, 2004 6:02:15 GMT -5
Post by Andrew on Nov 7, 2004 6:02:15 GMT -5
That was random yet to the point. But yes, Grave said exactly what i ment to say in the first place.
|
|