Rich
rdunn@gis.net
To the rest of you I have the answers to a number of your questions and know
the technologies, but as some of you have posted, everybody wants the other
guy to do the heavy lifting. My problem is do I take it to my grave,
Question, how many have read any handbooks of
optics/physics/antennae/quantum physics/particle physics/magnetics etc,
cover to cover and marked it up. The problem is do you take it to your
grave. Back to lurking... I don't have time for this, I have more
interesting things to work on.
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve <darklord@darknet.net>
To: Ian Webb <perelman@ix.netcom.com>
Cc: Keelynet List <keelynet@DallasTexas.net>
Date: Thursday, December 31, 1998 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: Time Claim
>> Okay.. I think I see what's happening here.. but I think the
>> alternate-timeline theory still has some problems with paradoxes --
>> what if the version of person A who RECIEVED the information chooses
>> not to send it back to the past version of person A? Would the future
>> version of person A still know the information? If so, where would it
>> come from? Or would they have NO CHOICE but to send it back? I think
>> this -- not sending the information back once you recieve it -- would
>> be the most interesting test you could do of time travel. Of course,
>> there's also the problem of how you objectively observe such an
>> effect, since the rest of the world would change as well. Interesting.
>
>I see what you mean.. ok.. if Person A decides not to send the
>information back to his/her previous self, then the time loop would
>probably stop there.. that version of Person A would still be rich,
>but other versions might not be. As for observing the effect, I don't
>think it would be possible without an actual, physical, time machine..
>Even then I'm not sure it would be worth it.. because each alteration
>of the natural "flow" of time would probably create new timelines..
>So, without possessing a physical time machine, I'm not sure how the
>effect would be observed beyond Person A making a videotape, and
>during filming or shortly after, writing down some numbers which
>happen to be the winning lottery numbers.. that person then sends the
>videotape, and the winning numbers are projected back in time. Or, if
>my theory is correct, into the next "loop".. (see star trek:tng episode
>"Cause and Effect" to see what I'm referring to) Perhaps a better
>term than "loop" would be iteration.. for every possible outcome of an
>event, there exists an alternate, parallel timeline/reality.. there are
>also other timelines, existing at a slightly earlier point in "time"
>compared to your own timeline.. so therefore, the information isn't
>actually being sent back in time, it's being sent to a simultaneous
>timeline that is "lagged" by a certain period of time.. same events
>happening, but they haven't experienced what you have yet.. (eg. a
>lottery).
>
>does that make *any* sense at all? someday I'll write up something on
>all my ideas regarding time.. Most of the people I talk to however
>seem to think I'm pretty crazy.. ah well. ;)
>
>> "The Metaphysics Of Star Trek" had a good explanation of all the
>> logical/philosophical issues involved with time travel, I can't find
>> my copy right now though..
>
>Ahh.. I've seen that book.. don't have it tho, but I do have "The
>Physics of Star Trek". I found it a bit disappointing actually..
>
>> Anyway, I think I understand the process now better.. thanks for
>> clarifying it.
>
>Well I hope this email doesn't confuse you then! ;)
>
>ttyl
>-Steve
>--
> darklord@darknet.net | ICQ: 5113616
> DarkNet Online: http://www.darknet.net
>Digital Fusion: http://www.darknet.net/fusion
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To leave this list, email <listserver@dallastexas.net>
> with the body text: leave Keelynet
> list archives and on line subscription forms are at
> http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>