Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Time Travel 2


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
51 replies to this topic

#18 Tormod

Tormod

    Hypographer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14353 posts

Posted 04 June 2004 - 02:02 AM

CD27, it seems it is you who are insulted by people's responses to your posts.

1) Please read our FAQ (link in the menu above) and read the posting guidelines.

2) Your comments about Christians not killing and America is this or that is very interesting (after all, America is a country with a church on every corner and state sanctioned executions). You might be interested in catching up with some of the threads on "GOD" and other discussions about religion elsewhere in these forums. And - you may be in America but a lot of our members are not. You are showing a very typical American arrogance.

3) If you ever ask anyone to "leave you alone" in these forums, you might think twice about why they are not leaving you alone. There are very dedicated people here who are not afraid of asking for proof and who will continue to bug you until you can provide ut.

I would ease off the arrogance and try to accept that in these forums we discuss just about everything - but we demand that claims be backed up by proof, which you have not done. Taking cover under "But I believe this is so" is in direct violation of our FAQ.

AND...double posting is not welcome. Once is plenty.

Tormod

#19 Freethinker

Freethinker

    Resident Atheist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3064 posts

Posted 04 June 2004 - 10:28 AM

Originally posted by: CD27
for one, the christians "in the past" were not "real christians".

Here we go again. Another Christian that is the ONLY Christian EVER to be allowed to determine who is and who is NOT a Christian. It is so funny to see Christians on one hand want to claim that Christianity is a MAJORITY religion, yet on the other hand want to deny that anyone else is an ACTUAL Christian.

You Christians have not only tortured and killed all the non and other believers throughout history, but even other Christians that did not think exactly like you.

those christian did kill and murder, last time i checked, i don't see any true christians today kiling anyone unless it is slef defense.

Hahaha, so if I give specific examples, you will want to claim that they either are not ACTUAL Christians, since YOU are THE person to make that determination (Sorry St Peter! lol), or that suddenly the bible says "Thou shalt not kill, except in self defense".

if you're going to say that christians kill people all the time, prove it.

Ireland, Bosnia, Crusades, Inquisition, Hitler, Europeans first coming to America, Oklahoma Bombing, KKK, Abortion Drs., G.W. Bush, ...

i don't have to prove anyhting to you,

No you don't. But don;t expect to come to a Science based site and spew religious nonsense without being able to prove it. You merely show the intellectually empty rhetoric of Christian dogma and mindset.

you either belive it or you don't, that's all.

Yes, some people will "believe" anything, no matter how much it lacks credible support of grounding in logic. People like me don't have that failing.

i live by faith that there is a spirit,

Lacking any VALID reason to believe, yes you DO live by faith.

Each of us has to decide how valuable our life is. To some, they place a high value on their life and require that valid evidence be used to determine what philosophy they base their life on. Others are willing to sell their lives out to nothing but empty claims and faith based superstitions.

get a life and stop bugging me on this.

YOU came HERE. If you don't like having to live up to the level of dialog required in a science based site, why bother?

if i insult you by posting my belifs,

It is not ME that is being insulted when you post empty claims and unsupportable assertions. I am amused by your ramblings.

#20 sanctus

sanctus

    Resident Diabolist

  • Administrators
  • 4225 posts

Posted 04 June 2004 - 01:05 PM

Originally posted by: CD27
And in the process of doing that, i ran across an amazing discovery, it is yet to be tested, to even be true or not, i have absolutely no mathematics to it, i myself am no mathematician, buti have a good understanding in physics.



how you can understand physics but not mathematics puzzles me.Anyway then you write

Negative and positive charges, attraction and repulsion, they just didnt mix together. I discovered that without some force to push the electrons away from the protons it would cause a catostrophic end of the atomic structure, and i didn't want to see that. Some people tell me that it is the force of the electron's high speeds that holds it away from the proton. That is false, electrons can not move that quickly without causing a constant electrical disturbance, and from what i can see, i dont get electricuted constantly, do you? I didn't think so. I aggree, the electrons move relatively fast, but not fast enough to overcome the laws of electrical forces. Yea, it's a simple idea, but if they were even able to move fast enough to keep from falling into the atom, well they would end up colliding with each other and we would see little electrical "pops" in mid air all the time, but we dont.



You've got the right not know something and starting from there make a theory that doesn't hold. I tell what I learned (that doesn't imply it's right, but all experiences made prove it).
You are right in classical electrodynamics the atom wouldn't hold together, the electron turning would send off EM waves and lose energy until it collides with the nucleus. In Quantum Mechanics, the electron isn't seen as a moving particle, but is sort immobile all around the nucleus with a certain probability of presence everywhere (even kilometers away) and therfore doesn't lose energy and therefore the atom doesn't collapse.
So, before you type on science site a theory you made (nothing against it, actually it could be very interesting) with what you learned about physics in high school, I would suggest you type on google "stability of the atom". Or what you could do as well is go in the "physics and mathematics" section and write there a post to get the info.

Just about religious killing, it's true that you only hear about islamic extremists/integralists in the western media, but if you look at what one has to do to be defined as an religious integralists you will find out that Bush (and generally rest of his government) are quite much christian integralists. He is it just in a bit more hidden way, as imposing democracy seems a noble christian thing to everyone, noble enough that one can even kill some non-believers in the name of democracy. As, if they were already christians, they would be already democratic seen that christianity has only good values.... and so on.
I sincerily admire your courage stating that you cannot see a single christian killing if it is not in self defense, but, yes, I forgot war against terrorism is self-defense. Did you never think that the terrorists are maybe there because the US-gouvernment acts in his arrogant way. Ok, I stop here, not that there would not be more to say.

#21 CD27

CD27

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 179 posts

Posted 05 June 2004 - 10:10 AM

sanctus,

for once, finally, a man with integrity. instead of completely bashing your theory, you actually tried to help me with it, an bash it. lol. i appreciate that. for one, and i kow this is a bit of a personal problem, but you helped, i've been very sick due to a stomach flue, just recently able to actually walk without falling down. and all of these poeple just tearing my theory apart, and then giving quite stupid reasons as to why, was just making me sicker. it tends to tick me off when peole ask questions that are already answerable by just reading the theory. not to say that anyone actually read the entire theory. but to bring my religion in the concept, i did however tell you to turn away if you did not belive in the spiritual dimension, it was your choice to read on further. and therefore your choice to cause turmoil in this forum. i did not ask or even want someone who is not in correspondance to the spiritual dimensions, even descretely, to even try to read this theory. so from now on, anyone who looks at it in the view of being wrong because of religion, i will simply ignore. now, sanctus, i appreciate you very much. i had absolutely no idea that quantum mechanics says that electrons are mobile. if i had put that in account i probably would never have even come up with my theory. but still, i believe that inol jello still exists within any electrical charged area, wether the electron or proton itself moves, makes no diference. it is still there, i'll just subtract the idea of there being an inol force. and, btw, it is possible to not have a good understanding in math and yet have one in physics. i see things very differently than most everyone else. i don't lock myself in the ideas that everything i'm being taught is absolutely correct. therefore i think outside of the box, not inside of this very dense closed in space. there is a 50/50 chance of everything you're being told in physics is correct. look at it this way: a long time ago, everyone thought that the earth was flat, and al of that went side by side with all of the observations that they could make at that time. but centuries later, new laws and observations in physics "proved" them wrong, despite their evidence that tehy were correct. and it has done that time and time again. for some reason people forget that. they forget that the same thing could very well happen to the laws of physics that they now understand. later on down the line, a new observation and law of physics could prove that everyhting we are thnking is "correct" to be wrong, despite what evidence we may have to say that it is correct. you must always remember that 50/50 chance that you could be wrong, as i do as well. i have never once thought that i could not be wrong, i know i can, but that doesn't stop me from trying to grow inmy thoughts.
about the christian religion, just to clear things up. bush and his government, are jsut that, the government. since when did anyone trust the government? i am not part of the government, so i am not trapped by what the government officials tell me to do, i live by the book, not what someone else tells me.
i am terribly sorry for the very bad typos here, i can fix them later, but not now, i have a doctor's appointment to go to, so take care all.

#22 Tormod

Tormod

    Hypographer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14353 posts

Posted 05 June 2004 - 11:55 AM

Originally posted by: CD27
i did however tell you to turn away if you did not belive in the spiritual dimension, it was your choice to read on further. and therefore your choice to cause turmoil in this forum. i did not ask or even want someone who is not in correspondance to the spiritual dimensions, even descretely, to even try to read this theory. so from now on, anyone who looks at it in the view of being wrong because of religion, i will simply ignore.


Consider this a warning: if you continue to say that your postings are not meant to be read by others, you will be banned. I have not built this forum as a soapbox for anyone - it is open to all who follow our rules. If you want only a select few to read your ideas, posting them on a public forum is not a good idea.

i don't lock myself in the ideas that everything i'm being taught is absolutely correct. therefore i think outside of the box, not inside of this very dense closed in space. there is a 50/50 chance of everything you're being told in physics is correct.


No, that is not correct. There is no evidence to back up such a claim. You are saying that physicists half of the time are incorrect (or how else would half of what you hear be wrong)? I question your claimed insight into physics. What is your background in the field?

look at it this way: a long time ago, everyone thought that the earth was flat, and al of that went side by side with all of the observations that they could make at that time.


There is no evidence that people in the past thought the earth was flat. This idea is rather new, and is a myth. In fact, we know that civilisations as far back as we can trace had strong interests in astronomy and could calculate celestial events quite accurately (re Stonehenge).

but centuries later, new laws and observations in physics "proved" them wrong, despite their evidence that tehy were correct.


This is wrong, since people never thought the earth was flat.

about the christian religion, just to clear things up. bush and his government, are jsut that, the government. since when did anyone trust the government? i am not part of the government, so i am not trapped by what the government officials tell me to do


President Bush calls himself a Christian. His Government is therefore run by a Christian man. Which part you play in it has no relevance to this discussion.

i live by the book, not what someone else tells me.


Now there's an oxymoron if I ever heard one (but we've heard that statement many times in these forums).

i am terribly sorry for the very bad typos here, i can fix them later, but not now, i have a doctor's appointment to go to, so take care all.


Don't worry about the typos, worry about your health. Take care and get well.

Tormod

#23 Freethinker

Freethinker

    Resident Atheist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3064 posts

Posted 05 June 2004 - 12:36 PM

Originally posted by: Tormod
This is wrong, since people never thought the earth was flat.

Oh that this was true. As I posted a quote that I was holding on to as a Sig (still will at some point) I thought it would be relevant to post it here also.

"If you accept the literal truth of every word of the Bible, then the earth must be flat. The same is true for the Qu'ran. Pronouncing the earth round then means you're an atheist. Anyone of the round persuasion does not believe in God and should be punished." [Muslim religious edict, 1993 Sheik Abdel-Aziz Ibn Baaz Supreme religious authority, Saudi Arabia]

Now remember, this was only 11 years ago.

Ain't it amazing what nonsense religion will try to force us to believe, by threat of death!

#24 Tormod

Tormod

    Hypographer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14353 posts

Posted 05 June 2004 - 01:21 PM

Oh well. My bad. Posted Image

But it still happened *after* "physics proved them wrong" (sometime more than 11 years ago).

Tormod

#25 Tim_Lou

Tim_Lou

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 918 posts

Posted 05 June 2004 - 01:55 PM

yeah, you can say that 1/2 of physics stuffs are wrong.

but what?
yea, so?
prove it wrong!
if people just sit there and say its wrong, theyr not doing anything...

this is just the way this world works,
as freethinker said b4.

proofs are required.
if i just say the earth was round in the past, it wasnt gonna help.

yes, believing in wrong stuffs may be bad,
but you must believe in it first in order to disapprove it. (get an idea of it first)

#26 Tim_Lou

Tim_Lou

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 918 posts

Posted 06 June 2004 - 06:54 PM

i think of a way of proving whatever time traveling theory:

whenever you publish a theory about time travel, attach something like

"please travel to me at xxx location at xxx time period.... sincerely xxx....to my dear future reader"

if no one from the future comes to meet you, your theory is......

#27 CD27

CD27

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 179 posts

Posted 06 June 2004 - 09:20 PM

very good tim. unfortunately, the problem with time travel is: A GOLDEN RULE "any time travel at all will always affect the future, always. even just having somone see you in a particular place and time. that's all it takes to change someone's choices from what they would be if they did not see you.

#28 Tim_Lou

Tim_Lou

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 918 posts

Posted 06 June 2004 - 09:29 PM

"any time travel at all will always affect the future, always"

so, how is it possible to travel back in time?

#29 CD27

CD27

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 179 posts

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:08 PM

you can travel back or forward through time, the same way, well, using my theory. but even just being seen in a different time, wether past or future, could possibly have some afect on someone's thoughts that may cause a change in a decision...from there you can guess what would happen.

#30 Uncle Martin

Uncle Martin

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 735 posts

Posted 06 June 2004 - 10:22 PM

Would it be possible to use your theory to transport this forum back in time to 6-2-04 when the topics still made sense?

#31 Tormod

Tormod

    Hypographer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14353 posts

Posted 07 June 2004 - 08:34 AM

Originally posted by: CD27
you can travel back or forward through time, the same way, well, using my theory. but even just being seen in a different time, wether past or future, could possibly have some afect on someone's thoughts that may cause a change in a decision...from there you can guess what would happen.


So I could technically be president of the United States, but someone went to the past and chopped down a cherry tree, and that set in motion something which made things turn out otherwise.

Okay. It still does not explain *how* we can travel back in time.

Tormod

#32 Freethinker

Freethinker

    Resident Atheist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3064 posts

Posted 07 June 2004 - 12:52 PM

Originally posted by: Tim_Lou
as freethinker said b4.

AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH......... I'm becoming a positive example to follow! NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!!!!!! lol

#33 Tim_Lou

Tim_Lou

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 918 posts

Posted 07 June 2004 - 01:35 PM

travel back time is simply impossible~!!!!!!

if i traveled back time in purpose, and kill Albert Einstein, what would happen?

if i killed my father?
if i killed Thomas Edison?
if i was in love with someone and a baby of mine was born?

ok, so, you can travel back to present day.
but! that means your not time traveling, since the world is different.
you are simply traveling to another parallel universe!

#34 sanctus

sanctus

    Resident Diabolist

  • Administrators
  • 4225 posts

Posted 08 June 2004 - 10:42 AM

there is actually a russian physicists (don't remeber his name, but that he works at moscou if that is of any help) who is working time travel and his theory was something like you wrote at the end of the post we would travel to a parallel universe. Therefore it would be possible to go back in time and kill yourself, because you killed yourself in another universe and therefore you are still able to travel around in time because the one you killed wasn't you in the past in your universe.
Actually they made also a film based on this theory (a bad film I reckon), it's called "The One".