[Vision2020] Re: Time Travel To The Future is Real

[Donovan Arnold]

Ted,

You are right, it is possible to time travel into the
future. 

However, I do not think you can travel into the past.
At least not at will to specific time.

Take Care,

Donovan J Arnold 


--- tbertruss at aol.com wrote:

> Donovan et. al.
>  
> You are right Debbie, despite what I took to be your
> sarcasm:  Einstein's Theory of Relativity is a lot
> of fun to talk about. 
>  
> Donovan, time travel is not just a possibility, but
> a verified scientific fact.  According to the time
> dilation equation from Relativity, if you travel
> fast enough for long enough relative to another
> object that you left behind in your journey, let's
> say the Earth, you can return to the Earth and in
> effect have traveled into the Earth's future.  If
> you blast off on a spaceship with a clock that is
> set to exactly the same time as a duplicate clock on
> Earth, when both clocks function perfectly, and
> travel very fast for long enough, if you return to
> Earth the two clocks will read different times. 
> They both are correct.  But each clock was
> functioning in a different area of space/time.  A
> human who left behind their identical twin on Earth
> to travel in a very fast spaceship for a number of
> years will return to Earth to find their twin much
> older than they are, assuming both twins age at the
> same rate.  Just like the clocks kept time
> perfectly, both twins were aging at the same rate,
> but were living in different space/time areas.
>  
> A spaceship can thus become a time traveling machine
> to travel into the future.  If our species survives
> for another millennia or two, we may send ships to
> nearby star systems.  The occupants, even if the
> ship is multi generational, will know that when they
> return they will view an Earth that is far further
> into Earth's future that they would have been able
> to view had they remained on Earth, or had been born
> on earth, instead of on a starship.
>  
> I'd provide a link for a reference to the time
> dilation equation from Relativity, but anyone can
> Google it.
>  
> Ted Moffett
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
> To: Warren Hayman <whayman at adelphia.net>; Dan
> Carscallen <predator75 at moscow.com>
> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com; 'Donovan Arnold'
> <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Fri, 6 May 2005 12:24:28 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] date today
> 
> 
> Mr. Haymen,
> 
> I was not calling you out. I was pointing out the
> fact
> that all time once gone is always gone. Time has
> nothing to do with what you pointed out.
> 
> (Pointing out the obvious) Dates cannot repeat. If
> they did, it would be a horrible way of keeping
> track
> of time because we would confuse it with other
> dates. 
> 
> I had taken all the ground work for a BS in
> philosophy
> but dropped it my Junior year when I could not find
> anyone with a job that had a BS or BA in Philosophy
> unless they had a PhD along with it. So I love this
> stuff read all I can on it, watch Discovery Science,
> and have spend lots of time with theologians and
> doctors of philosophy discussing, time, space,
> ethics,
> photon tunneling,particle entanglement etc.
> 
> What you found, 5/05/05 at 5:55:55 (should be
> 05/05/05
> at 05:05:05, there can be no 55/55/55 at 55:55:55,
> which would be all 5s) has nothing to do with time.
> It
> has to do with math. You simple pointed out that
> every
> 13 months and one day we hit a date that has similar
> numbers. This is true for every numerical system
> that
> uses only 10 digits, 0-9 on a rotating system of 12.
> Just like if you only have ten digits you have
> repeating digits every 11. 0, 11, 22, 33, 44, 55,
> 66,
> etc.  
> 
> It is not fascinating to me because it has to occur.
> The probability is 100% providing there are no other
> external factors. What would be fascinating is if it
> DID NOT occur again. If 06/06/06 never happened,
> that
> is what would frighten and mystify me. 
> 
> You write:
> "the concept of temporal duration and sequentiality
> within the currently accepted calendrical system of
> this country (including the modification of Daylight
> Savings Time) as derived and extrapolated from
> higher
> energy electrons within a Cesium atom expressed in a
> digital mode, there exists a high degree of
> probability according to longevity projections
> provided by life science research that said persons
> will never 
> experientially encounter such a digital sequence
> again."
> 
> Here is where your logic and physics clash with
> reality. Your watch, calender, and numbers have
> nothing to do with time. They are simply a crude,
> and
> inaccurate, measuring tool of time and space. If you
> doubt this, set your watch back and see if you go
> back
> in time. If you do, I will admit I was wrong. :P But
> guess what, you can "experientially encounter such a
> digital sequence again.", provided of course you set
> your watch back far enough. But you cannot go back
> to
> 5:55:55 because it never really existed in the first
> place. 
> 
> Numbers do not even really exist (human made). What
> they represent might exist. But not the numbers.
> Numbers are simply a way of representing matter and
> concepts. For example, the year 1986 does not exist.
> It never did exist. Occurrences during a time period
> we define as 1986 did happen. But 1986 never did. We
> simply assigned that time period 1986 so that we
> know
> how long ago it was. We can also reference it to
> other
> time periods in proper sequence. 
> 
> There is only one form of existence for time, and
> that
> is now. All past events and future do not exist, the
> dates are based on assignment of numbers to help
> humans reference sequence of events. We could, if we
> want, just assign letters for years. Or do like
> people
> in the past and call 1986 the 5th year of the Reagan
> Dynasty. 
> 
> Take Care,
> 
> Donovan J Arnold
> 
> Anyone want to talk about the probability of time
> travel? It beats the levy.
> 


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/