INTERESTING FACT

Anon. wrote:

Pranav wrote:
Hahaha.. Get a life people, its easier than it sounds, get laid every once in a while, might help. I mean why in the world are you so concerned about how the universe came into existance.Say by some devine mean you do come to kow about it, so.. then what, it wont make your sex life any better or increse your appetite. jus be practicle, think half of what you give for all this bull**** and you wil be going places.

A couple things I would like to say;

-If you don't care about this, why are you even here?
-Understanding how the universe works is probably the most important thing humanity could ever hope to do.
-Wanting to learn and become intelligent is very important for everyone
-While this isn't practical knowledge (like spelling...)it doesn't influence other aspects of life (unless it is your job)
-you can't judge a book by its cover, especially anonymous people, I can say for a fact I get more than you do. You'll probably get mad, disagree, maybe even call me a liar, but you can't prove me wrong.
-It pays to be educated (literally)
-Women like men that don't sound like ignorant thugs.

lmao, OWNED. You sir are my hero of the day ^^^

Satish wrote:
Who believes this? We expects the facts to be posted here and not hypothetical. If this would have been proved, the whole world physics will get changed and they would have been a Nobel winner! Just forget some posts like this...

Actually this is true... It does not disprove Einstiens theory of relativity, though. In the theory of relativity, Eintstien put the speed of light as the fastest possibility. It has just recently been proven that a nutrino can move faster. The whole world of physics has been changed.

Who believes this? We expects the facts to be posted here and not hypothetical. If this would have been proved, the whole world physics will get changed and they would have been a Nobel winner! Just forget some posts like this...

Pranav wrote:
Hahaha.. Get a life people, its easier than it sounds, get laid every once in a while, might help. I mean why in the world are you so concerned about how the universe came into existance.Say by some devine mean you do come to kow about it, so.. then what, it wont make your sex life any better or increse your appetite. jus be practicle, think half of what you give for all this bull**** and you wil be going places.

A couple things I would like to say;

-If you don't care about this, why are you even here?
-Understanding how the universe works is probably the most important thing humanity could ever hope to do.
-Wanting to learn and become intelligent is very important for everyone
-While this isn't practical knowledge (like spelling...)it doesn't influence other aspects of life (unless it is your job)
-you can't judge a book by its cover, especially anonymous people, I can say for a fact I get more than you do. You'll probably get mad, disagree, maybe even call me a liar, but you can't prove me wrong.
-It pays to be educated (literally)
-Women like men that don't sound like ignorant thugs.

Hahaha.. Get a life people, its easier than it sounds, get laid every once in a while, might help. I mean why in the world are you so concerned about how the universe came into existance.Say by some devine mean you do come to kow about it, so.. then what, it wont make your sex life any better or increse your appetite. jus be practicle, think half of what you give for all this bull**** and you wil be going places.

In my opinion, they didn't do it! They may seriously think they have done it. However, it is my contention that the theory of relativity, although brilliant for the time is wrong in many aspects, light being one of them. Don't forget, we are still talking about a theory. Relativity is a theory; light theory still leaves many questions about what light is. Science knows a little about heat and pressure but they still can't define these things…. it's all theory. Science knows that if they do "A", "B" happens. Even measurement of any kind is incomplete, if you can't indentify both the smallest and the largest particles that exist in natural space which science can't do, then… our contemporary science is primitive!

With regard to the theory of relativity, Einstein was brilliant in his presumptions but his theory takes a wrong turn because he didn't understand how "other dimensional particles" rotate through solar dimensional particles. Einstein theorized that the weight of space was constant and that it would put equal pressure on the object moving in space. In Einstein's mind, light and space were constant; however, if light could be repelled by gravity…(gravity is yet to be defined as well), then the pressure produced by flying at the speed of light would cause a body in space to disassemble into natural space…or become part of the cosmos…i.e., infinite energy. There is a lot of spooky science here.

The theory of relativity needs to evolve because a body flying at the speed contemporary science refers to as the speed of light, would not become part of the cosmos because the pressure on the moving body is not a constant. So a craft could fly at this speed and even exceed it.

Alien craft fly very fast because the shape of their craft allows them to fly within a part of space, like a ping pong ball in a pressurized tube. The greater the tolerance of the craft within this geometrical structure in space the faster they can fly.

I would appreciate if you would explain how they did it. Einstein's theory would make it impossible because it would take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate a body to light speed and to go faster than the speed of light would take more than an infinite amount of energy, which is not possible because, obviously, you cannot surpass infinity.

Very Well Anon, I do appreaciate the time. I don't mean to pushy or beligerent but in all fairness what are the facts you presented me with? Maybe instead of having a battel of ego's we might, time might be better served by exploring ideals and concepts seldom explored. I enjoy a good debate and an opportunity to present my work. My point is this, it's easy to be critical but it is difficult to research and then debate. If one feels the need to spend time and energy tearing someone elses work down, then at least extend the curtesy to be well versed on the material in dispute. In other words, if it is important enough to comment on it at all it must be important enough to be well versed on.
If your interested and with all due respect, take Thompsons, work point by point as I have and make a case which can be debated.
All great work begins with those who are critical of it....Eintein is a good example. He had to reign in his best work for fear of rejection from the scientific status quo who thought he was a quack and one who was edging toward the mystical or spooky science.
I wish for you also the very best...

Look Scott, I give up. This is hardly the place to argue about our believes and it is clear that there is no changing your mind.

I have presented you with facts, nothing more and you have denied them. For example, Its like saying the sky is blue, that is a widely accepted scientific fact, but you don't believe that because J.S. Thompson says it is made out of tapioca.

You call me a part of the "herd" well so be it, I do believe modern science as agreed upon by the world, but at least I choose what to believe. For example, I don't believe in string theory because I like quantum mechanical models of reality better, you on the other hand, can go ask J.S.Thompson which you should believe in. Perhaps I am in stride with the norm, but I make my own choices and believes, I am not told them.

This is the last time I will post on this,
goodbye, and really I mean this, good luck Scott.

Following the herd is really important to you. Put your insecurity behind you for just a minute if you can and attempt to be one of those guys you wish to immulate. Light is a theory, google it if you don't know that. While your at it, look up circuit theory and charge theory...(probably written by those with credentials)If you insist on following the work of those who follow the work of other and so on and so forth at least use a little of your own God given logic which exists believe it or not within each and every one of us (you are not excluded from this theory).
J.S. Thomson attemots to give us pause to think about advanced technology, which doesn't exist yet and it doesn't exist becuase no one has any theories about it and if they did, they would be considered fringe theories kind of like all of the theories which went beyond the boundaries of the status quo. You know that place where morons lay in wait for those creative enough to step outside of those boudaries. Those whose only talent is in agreeing with or critizing those they know the rest of the herd will critizize as well. It's safe it's secure if only for a while and if and when his theories do prove to be valid, your comments will be left to obscurity anyway, so it's safe.
Your atomic clock scenario is wrong. I don't care what kind of a clock you have or how accurrate it is, it is still a mechanical devise and yes, I know this might sound difficult but space has weight maybe you have read somewhere about dark matter...it's a theory also.
Your right everyone can be a blogger maybe you should try it but then again you would just be saying the same tings that everybody else says...people like you truly do grow on trees!
With all of this said....I would love to debate the issues with you or anyone but be specific, use your brain, attempt to be creative and maybe this world we live in would become a better place. Maybe this is hard for you to understand but with all of the genius that surrounds us, the world is still a primitive place...have you noticed? Maybe, just maybe it could use some new ideas....it's just a thought!

Okay, I decided to read the article you refer to, But first I searched for J. S. Thompson. Before I read a legitimate scientifict article, I want to make sure it is written by someone that I can trust. However I could not, other than finding his "Ezine @rticles" or the site "Divine Advanced Human Beings" there is nothing anywhere to actually suggest that J. S. Thompson is anything more than an average Joe with an active imagination.

Besides the complete lack of anything other than the word of J.S. Thompson, I will read on into "Why The Big Bang Never Happened... and why we need to know it!"

1/4 of the way through - J.S. Thompson doesn't once mention how he came to any of these conclusions. He simply says, this is what happens. Not why, not how he figured out how the universe works. Because all of his works seem to show that this one man, with no legitimate background other than writing on the internet seems to have FIGURED OUT THE UNIVERSE. Something all of man kind, since we were evoloved enough to think, has failled to do. Reading on...

-again speed of light highly exact, and in fact, in the metric system of measurement, one meter is exactly the length of 300 wavelengths of red orange light and that is how the exact size of a meter is saved as.

1/2 " I would like to propose to you... " not a good sign. In a scientific article.

3/4 An Electron can never be observed and we can therefore never know where one is, I find that if electrons in the universe did move through "electron conduits" we would have a much easier time finding them.

4/4 Look. For your sake, and for whoever else believes what I have just read. In scienctific method, nothing exists, and nothing is true, until you have proof. Proof is what changes a theory to fact. Firstly, everything in this article is only a theory - if it could even be called that- there is ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF supporting this guys claims. The "highly theoretical!" ideas of modern science DO have proof. Scientists know and have tested to make sure they know, what light is. We know there was a big bang, not only from the totally uniform expansion of the universe (I have never in my life even once heard that it has expanded in some places and shrank in others ) we can see the spectrum of light that still lingers in space as a result. Scientists made two identical atomic clocks, they tell time accurate to something like 1:00.0000000000000000000000001 o'clock, they put one is space, one on earth, the one in space move much faster than the one on earth, the one in space came back to earth showing that the time was earlier than the one on earth, or in otherwords, relativity.

Everything you have said, cited and everything J.S. Thompson has said (he doesn't cite of course) is fiction. It is some idea that J.S.Thompson just had one day and decided he was enlightened or something. I have as much valaditiy as the scientific ramblings of J. S. Thompson, YOU are as qualified as he is. He just decides and states how the universe works. I can do that too, I could even write about it on the internet. Anyone could.

It is my hope that these forums, at least propose new ideas and not rely on the theories and concepts (including the mathmatics) of days gone by. Society stands at the threshold of advanced technology and with this technology amazing new medical and communications problems (to name a few) will be solved.
There is very little that modern technology understand. We can make fire (or a microwave oven) but we don't really understand how it works. We can make light happen but we don't really understand what is happening. Heat theory and light theory tell us something but all in all they are still theories which continue to demand explanation. Contemporary science knows that if it does "A" "B" happens! Other than that we don't know much!
It's true that time slows as speed increases, at least on the mechanism we use to measure it. If you take two clocks and out one under more pressure, which one will run slower? Time is not flexable. We live on a planet which rotates and orbits within a universal mechanism and it is always on time. No matter how fast we go, the universal clock is always on time!
With regard to light; What I said was that light is a chemical reaction. It is neither a wave nor a particle. Lets just say it is a piece of a particle with one density and exisitng within one pressure spectrum interacting with another within another piece interacting with another piece of a particle in another. Light is a multi dimensional reaction. (read: "The structure of space and Universal Respiration...by J. S. Thompson).
Yes....when we take a particle out of space such as a microwave and we force it from its natural place in space, it travels at a speed equivelent to the force we put behind it and that can be very fast. These particles were traveling at relative (quantum space) speeds before we tampered with them and after they are cataputled through our mechanism (microwave oven), they are traveling at much faster speeds, now within atomic space. A small dust particle floating in space drifts along with the air current but when you take a leaf blower and attempt to clear the air, it excelerates to the level of the force we have generated (weight to thrust) This is what happens when you take a small particle that exists in atomic space and move it wioth power generated from atomic space. How much more can you excellerate a quantum particle in q space with a devise that exists in atomic space?
Light reacts...it doesn't travel anywhere. When science ponders the speed of a light of a distant star, the first thing he or she does is consider a theory known to us all....the "theory" of relativity. Mr Einstein was a genius and a great humanitarian but it is time that we consider new possibilities. The current methods used to measure light emanating from distant stars, red shift and the doppler effect are built around a theory that will always remain a theory. Relative motion is good, the speed of light will never work out....try as we may. It's time to take a new approach.
When I mention the speed of frequency, I'm not talking about a wave, I'm talking about a chain reaction of one particle to another. If one considers space a sea of particles, one linked to the other, we can begin to understand how a circuit works. Everything must complete a circuit in order to move...(circuitry and charge are also theoretical) Circuits are not linear but evolutionary. Because everything in space moves, when the siganl at the point of initiation returns the point of initiation has moved because all particles rotate and orbit...thus the "evolutionary circuit"! (read: "Why the Big Bang Never Happened and Why We Need to Know It"...by J. S. Thompson)

Divineadvancedhumanbeings... I have to say I really disagree with much of what you said.

The speed of light is actually highly accurate. In fact, you can use a microwave and plate full of chocolate chips to determine the speed of light.



Scientists do have much more specific and accurate methods obviously.

You go on to say that "Light as opposed to particles" (implying light is a wave) but then you compare light to electrons (which are particles). Also I don't know how to interpret what you mean by "moves at the speed of frequency, which is almost instantaneous!"

Now what I do know is that visible light is an electromagnetic wave. An electromagnetic wave is a kinda transitional state between a magnetic field and electric current. Light has been proven to act like both a particle and a wave and is composed of photons, which yes, do act like electrons because of their similar sizes.

And finally, when we look at a star moving from a very far distance in the galaxy it is not in real time. Light may be fast, but in the infinity huge scale of the universe that doesn't mean much. Or in other words, the light that reaches us is showing us an event that would already have happened to that star, but we are only able to perceive the event now because the light is only now reaching us. Light is often the bi-product of chemical reactions light in itself is a form of energy and not a chemical reaction.

divineadvancedhumanbeings.com

Light does not travel... Light is a chemical reaction process and a bi-product of Universal Respiration...

Many of the problems associated with determining how the universe was created relates to the measurement of light, which is used to measure our distance from other star systems. Current theory regarding the motion of light, supports the speed of light at 186,000 mps. This is highly theoretical! I would like to propose to you that light doesn’t move at all like contemporary science tells us. Light as opposed to particles (photons) moving through space, is a chain reaction associated with the motion of electrons and moves at the speed of frequency, which is almost instantaneous! Light is a chemical reaction which would occur at a slightly slower speed but nevertheless, almost instantaneous. In other words, the light which is used to measure whether a star is moving away from a center, is inaccurate as we are seeing this light in almost “real time”!


To read article in its entirety, visit http://tinyurl.com/29uuqrp

i read this after my last post lol... but still all in all this is what it comes down to! however an interesting topic to read the many different opinions lol

Truth wrote: #
Light has nothing to do with how fast you can travel.
Think of it logically - In the absence of light, what is your speed limit - and take it from there.
Light and time are not linked at all. It doesn't matter how fast or how far you go - the clock still ticks.
You cannot travel through time - because to travel forwards in time - the events you are moving forwards towards in the timeline must have already happened - so you would in fact be coming from the past.

wont ever be possible by this theory!! lol.. leave your house at 4:20 pm traveling 100 times faster then the speed of light in a straight line of travel around the globe and stop back at the house and check the time and date!!

The speed of light has not been broken. Anon is right, if an object has any mass at all it is impossible to acquire enough energy/force to move it incrementally up to or past the speed of light, as every little bit closer you get to the speed of light you have to put exponentially more energy to achieve the same increase in speed you just accomplished.

Now, for those who do not understand why accelerating would make you time travel, or more accurately, why accelerating would slow down time for you, the answer is in Einstein's theory of relativity. E=mc^2. Aside from the mathematical component of this formula, there are theoretical assertions to be drawn. For this case, there is a finite amount of energy, and that energy is proportional to mass. There are four dimensions, three spatial dimensions and one time dimension. At any point in time you are expending energy to navigate these four dimensions, and most of the time the amount of energy you spend in the time dimension is relatively constant because of your nearly constant speed through space.

Remember, we're talking about speed as compared to the speed of light which is about 3x10^8 meters per second, so even if you go 200 mph in a race car you still do not approach a significant fraction of the speed of light, so no significant fraction of your energy is diverted to spatial travel at 200 mph. The more energy you expend in the spatial dimensions, the less you have to travel through the time dimension. So if you spend almost ALL of your energy traveling through space, you will have relatively little to travel through time with, and thus will go very slowly through time while everyone else who is traveling slower through space than you is traveling at what, relative to you, seems fast forwarded. So while you watch them age 10 years you may only age 1 (That's not an actual calculation, but just serves to illustrate the point).

I just travelled faster than the speed of light. All this makes just as little sense here as it did before I started moving!

now i'm no physicist, and i'm not entirely sure i remember this exactly, however it was always my general understanding that anything that has a mass cannot exceed the speed of light.Not because light has anything to do with it though, its the velocity. when an object with mass reaches light speed it would require an infinite amount of force to accelerate it any further... now clearly if you punch in light speed and any mass, your calculator will tell you otherwise, but i'm reasonably sure, this is why objects can't exceed light speed, theres more to it certainly, but thats all i can remember on the topic and my understanding of it.

Light has nothing to do with how fast you can travel.
Think of it logically - In the absence of light, what is your speed limit - and take it from there.
Light and time are not linked at all. It doesn't matter how fast or how far you go - the clock still ticks.
You cannot travel through time - because to travel forwards in time - the events you are moving forwards towards in the timeline must have already happened - so you would in fact be coming from the past.

STOP dreaming about time travel and thing about ur future life. Get a LIFE!!

I personally believe that travelling faster than the speed of light is not possibe because as we know the things we see are represented by the light refflected off objects, so assuming a car travells forward faster than the speed of light it would catch the light refflected from its earlier position and the light from its current position, so in a matter of just seconds it would be hit by so many photons(which compose light) that it would instantly melt. Am I right?

I am not sure i understand this right. What i get is that you are saying that if someone is able to move faster than the speed of light they would be able to time travel? Now it is known(fact) that time itself only travels forward and is somehow connected to speed of light so if you were able to move faster than speed of light that would only mean that u could go into the future but not the past. Is that right or am i missing something?

Matt wrote: #
To answer the question above. No, you wouldn't be traveling back in time. Its like leaving the starting line in a drag race after your opponent, but finishing ahead of him. Just because you finish before him, doesn't mean that you traveled through time any differently.

your stuped u dont understand

Why would accelerating slow down time?