<HTML><BODY><DIV style='font-family: "Verdana"; font-size: 10pt;'><DIV>Donovan et. <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">al</SPAN></SPAN>.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You are right Debbie, despite what I took to be your sarcasm: <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">Einstein's</SPAN></SPAN> Theory of Relativity is a lot of fun to talk about. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>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 identic<SPAN class=correction id="">al</SPAN> 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 <SPAN class=correction id="">clocks kept</SPAN> time perfectly, both twins were aging at the same rate, but were living in different space/time areas.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A spaceship can thus become a time traveling <SPAN class=correction id="">machine</SPAN> to travel into the future. If our species survives for another <SPAN class=correction id="">millennia</SPAN> or two, we may send ships to nearby star systems. The occupants, even if the ship is <SPAN class=correction id="">multi generation<SPAN class=correction id="">al</SPAN></SPAN>, 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.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'd provide a link for a reference to the time dilation equation from Relativity, but anyone can <SPAN class=correction id="">Google</SPAN> it.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ted <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">Moffett</SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><BR>-----Origin<SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">al</SPAN></SPAN> Message-----<BR>From: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.<SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">com</SPAN></SPAN>><BR>To: Warren <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">Hayman</SPAN></SPAN> <whayman@adelphia.net>; Dan <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">Carscallen</SPAN></SPAN> <predator75@moscow.<SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">com</SPAN></SPAN>><BR><SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">Cc</SPAN></SPAN>: vision2020@moscow.<SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">com</SPAN></SPAN>; 'Donovan Arnold' <donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.<SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">com</SPAN></SPAN>><BR>Sent: Fri, 6 May 2005 12:24:28 -0700 (PDT)<BR>Subject: Re: [<SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">Vision2020</SPA!
N></SPAN>] date today<BR><BR></DIV>
<STYLE>
.AOLPlainTextBody {
margin: 0px;
font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif;
font-size: 12px;
color: #000;
background-color: #fff;
}
.AOLPlainTextBody pre {
font-size: 9pt;
}
.AOLInlineAttachment {
margin: 10px;
}
.AOLAttachmentHeader {
border-bottom: 2px solid #E9EAEB;
background: #F9F9F9;
}
.AOLAttachmentHeader .Title {
font: 11px Tahoma;
font-weight: bold;
color: #666666;
background: #E9EAEB;
padding: 3px 0px 1px 10px;
}
.AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldLabel {
font: 11px Tahoma;
font-weight: bold;
color: #666666;
padding: 1px 10px 1px 9px;
}
.AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldValue {
font: 11px Tahoma;
color: #333333;
}
</STYLE>
<DIV class=AOLPlainTextBody id=AOLMsgPart_0_44f5ee64-d790-443b-93f3-30b7945252ce><PRE><TT>Mr. <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">Haymen</SPAN></SPAN>,
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 <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">BA</SPAN></SPAN> 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 philo<SPAN class=correction id="">so</SPAN>phy 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 <SPAN class=correction id="">th</SPAN>at every
13 months and one day we hit a date that has similar
numbers. This is true for every numeric<SPAN class=correction id="">al</SPAN> system that
uses only 10 digits, 0-9 on a rotating system of 12.
Just<SPAN class=correction id=""> l</SPAN>ike if<SPAN class=correction id=""> y</SPAN>ou 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% prov<SPAN class=correction id="">id</SPAN>ing there are no other
ex<SPAN class=correction id="">te</SPAN>rn<SPAN class=correction id="">al</SPAN> 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 tempor<SPAN class=correction id="">al</SPAN> duration and sequentiality
within the currently accepted <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">calendrical</SPAN></SPAN> 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, <SPAN class=correction id=""><SPAN class=correction id="">calender</SPAN></SPAN>, 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.
</TT></PRE></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>