• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Physicists - the new theologians

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Hi Chalnoth,
Let's say hypothetically, that you "were a "Photon" & I "was a Neutrino" particle & one day we decided to simply race one another from (x ↔ y) the Earth's North polarized pole to its South polarized pole, tell me (realistically) who do you think will "win".....?

Now, immediately you're probably thinking & saying to yourself, "I as a Photon" which is capable of traveling (within a vacuum) at 1.86 •10[sup]5[/sup] c would "win" very easily... right?




Note: Within the above image illustration, notice (#1) how the photon(s) light-beam rate of velocity is 1.86 • 10[sup]5[/sup] (#2) as it collides with the mirrors within her eye then (#3) it's refracted at a velocity of 6.71 • 10[sup]8[/sup] in different directions, therefore using the below law.....

Law Of Refraction


....its reflection coefficient identities is calculated with the trigonometric equation below.


James Prescott Joule, Galileo Galilei, Hendrik Lorentz, Euclid, Albert Einstein, & etc....

M[sup]2[/sup]
–– = • 1kg = 1J ∑≈ {18.7245 • 10[sup]18[/sup]eV}
S[sup]2[/sup]
E = mc[sup]2[/sup]≈ Δt = (+t ≈ ±(γ) ≈ -t ≈) 1 = λ
(+Δx...., E...., {±} ....,-E ....,-Δy)
Δt[sup]1[/sup] = (λ =)T[sup]1[/sup]= T[sub]0[/sub] (1 - V[sup]2[/sup]/C[sup]2[/sup])[sup]1/2[/sup]
x||E||y → t = (-x[sub]-μ[/sub] t±y +μ[sup]+t[/sup])1
∑x + y (x[sup]2[/sup] − 1) = 2/x[sup]½[/sup]y[sup]½[/sup]
{x:|½|+x=|E →μt|r[sup]2[/sup]/v[sup]2[/sup], Δy, x:|E = μ|-x =|½|2f[sup]2[/sup]/2v[sup]2[/sup] • t}
E →μtΔt ≈ ±t (λ)|+t... ±γ ...-t|
1 = (E)||x + y||≤||±x||≥||-y||μt||
f * x(t[sup]2[/sup]) E = μt∫ f (r[sup]2[/sup]) y (t - r) dr[sup]2[/sup]
E ≈ 1≈ (dt • dr • t) ∫λ=(Δt[sup]+½[/sup] ±γ Δ-t[sub]-½[/sub])t1
Super-Kamiokande via Wikipedia said:
Before the idea of neutrino oscillations came up, it was generally assumed that neutrinos travel at the speed of light. The question of neutrino velocity is closely related to their mass. According to relativity, if neutrinos are massless, they must travel at the speed of light. However, if they carry a mass, they cannot reach the speed of light.

In the early 1980s, first measurements of neutrino speed were done using pulsed pion beams (produced by pulsed proton beams hitting a target). The pions decayed producing neutrinos, and the neutrino interactions observed within a time window in a detector at a distance were consistent with the speed of light. This measurement has been repeated using the MINOS detectors, which found the speed of 3 GeV neutrinos to be (1 − (5.1 ± 2.9) •10[sup]−5[/sup]) times the speed of light. While the central value is lower than the speed of light, the uncertainty is great enough that it is very likely that the true velocity is too close to the speed of light to see the difference. This measurement set an upper bound on the mass of the muon neutrino of 50 MeV at 99% confidence.

The same observation was made, on a somewhat larger scale, with supernova 1987a. The neutrinos from the supernova were detected within a time window that was consistent with a speed of light for the neutrinos. So far, the question of neutrino masses cannot be decided based on measurements of the neutrino speed.
Well analytically & logically (you would be incorrect thinking & believing, that) if we were to race one another you (a Photon) would WIN, due to the following reason(s) &, or impediment(s):
Besides from each other, the neutrinos & anti-neutrinos do not have any impediment(s).

Hypothetically, if you & I were to race one another from one solar system to the other due to your electromagnetism, electric charge, the other photons & the other solid objects, you will lose & I will win.

If we race one another from one side of our Milky Way galaxy to the other side, (naturally) due to the above impediment(s) & also including the gravitational effects of the black hole(s) & extreme gravitational effects of supermassive black hole(s) I as a neutrino will always win & you as a photon will always lose.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Yes, and if we are careful about talking about what the speed of a neutrino is relative to, the right way to say it is that a neutrino can never ever catch up to a photon.

That is, if you send a neutrino and a photon off from the same place at the same time, and they don't bump into anything, then the photon will always win the race, because the neutrino has a small but nonzero mass and therefore travels slower.

Hi Chalnoth,

As I was reading.... I came across a statement that you said (above), the section that I've highlighted in red, I want you to explain to me exactly what's your reason(s) for saying it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Chalnoth

Senior Contributor
Aug 14, 2006
11,361
384
Italy
✟36,153.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
As I was reading.... I came across a statement that you said (above), the section that I've highlighted in red, I want you to explain to me exactly what's your reason(s) for saying it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_oscillation

And by the way, in a race from the north pole of the Earth (what is a "polarized" pole?) to the south pole, the photon wouldn't make it because the Earth is opaque.
 
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_oscillation

And by the way, in a race from the north pole of the Earth (what is a "polarized" pole?) to the south pole, the photon wouldn't make it because the Earth is opaque.
Hi Chalnoth,
Concerning your "polarized poles" question it makes me think about E = m...., or all of the energy Δ matter that exist within this dimension (called our universe) wherefore to appropriately answer your question I am going to have to start talking about cosmology, (you may & may not be aware of the fact that, growing-up as a (extremist) child logically I always analyzed all things differently than other people such as, my mother, my brothers, my sister, other scientists, physicists, etc this is only one of the reasons why I absolutely could not accept evolution, Darwinism, etc as anything but 100% fallacies, but anyway back to answering your question) I stated within my earlier post "polarized poles", due to electromagnetism &, or the electric charge of energy Δ matter, whenever I think about anything (the human body, plants, dirt, Hydrogen, Helium, Oxygen, the Suns, the Moons, the Stars, the planets, Wormholes, Black holes, supermassive Black holes, Photons, Neutrinos, etc, etc, etc) I immediately think about magnets, or the (+) positive & the (-) negative attributes, or characteristics of all (E = m, or) energy Δ matter pertaining to cosmology whenever look at organic &, or inorganic energy Δ matter what I see is a magnet, or the properties of electromagnetism (irrelevant to the particular objects infinitesimal &, or enormous mass) & here is just a few examples below:
"THE POSITIVE & THE NEGATIVE"

  • Neutrinos have (0) zero electrical charge(s) externally, but internally (i.e., within its nucleus) it has a (+) positively & a (-) negatively charge core.
  • Protons are (+) positive & Electrons are (-) negative.
  • Wormhole's vortex &, or conduit can only be kept open via (+) positive & (-) negative energy.
  • Naturally, Dark matter is gravitationally (+) positive & Dark energy is gravitationally (-) negative.
  • Within the gravitational field / gradient of the event horizon &, or vortex of Wormholes, Black holes &, or supermassive Black holes there is still a (+) positive attractions & (-) negative repulsions & the Wormholes, Black holes &, or supermassive Black holes rely solely upon the (+) positive & (-) negative electromagnetic attributes, or characteristics of (E = m, or) energy Δ matter.
  • If it wasn't for the electromagnetic gravitational (+) positive & the (-) negative attributes, or characteristics of energy Δ matter irrelevant to the (BB) Big-Bang & the amount time that has passed, nothing would have gravitationally coalesced & there still would be absolutely no; human beings, plants, dirt, Hydrogen, Helium, Oxygen, Suns, Moons, Stars, planets, Wormholes, Black holes, supermassive Black holes, Photons, Neutrinos, etc, etc, etc.
  • The (+) positive & the (-) negative electromagnetic attributes, or characteristics of (E = m, or) energy Δ matter dictates the covalent bond, chemical bond, etc.
I finished reading your Neutrino Oscillation link which I greatly appreciate & after reading it I came to the below conclusion.....

That even Wikipedia has join all of the rest (but, not all) of the scientists, physicists, etc who (knowingly, or unknowingly) agrees with me, right now I am assuming that you're thinking & saying to yourself..... "that's impossible", right?


Well (I am not "omniscient", but) if I am correct in my above assumption, then all that you have to do validate all that I've been saying as 100% correct is......
  • Reread your link.
  • Research the entire Internet.
  • Ask other scientists, physicists, etc.
Note: Another theoretical physicist named João Magueijo also agrees with me & I have been listening to him explain his variable speed of light (i.e, VSL) theory, in which I will recommend to whosoever.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Well, I think I'm done with this discussion. I'm sorry, Zone, but you are quite divorced from reality.
Hi Chalnoth,

You're correct, wherefore I am 100% divorced from reality (the world's & your reality of evolution, Darwinism, paganism, atheism, etc) & I am not surprised that you continuously speak without the necessity of understanding, or knowledge, without any macroscopic &, or microscopic piece(s) of proof, evidence, etc.... to substantiate / validate anything that you say......

Nonetheless, I will say to you as I have said to all the other defeated nonbelievers / Atheist who came before you....., goodbye.
 
Upvote 0

Chalnoth

Senior Contributor
Aug 14, 2006
11,361
384
Italy
✟36,153.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Hi Chalnoth,

You're correct, wherefore I am 100% divorced from reality (the world's & your reality of evolution, Darwinism, paganism, atheism, etc) & I am not surprised that you continuously speak without the necessity of understanding, or knowledge, without any macroscopic &, or microscopic piece(s) of proof, evidence, etc.... to substantiate / validate anything that you say......
I would most certainly take the time to explain the evidence in a fair amount of detail if I thought for a second that you would pay any attention to it. And even if I don't think my opponent in a discussion/debate will pay any attention, sometimes I go ahead and furnish the evidence anyway for the benefit of others who may read the thread.

However, in this case, your poor writing style combined with lots of statements and equations that don't seem to have any meaning at all just makes me not want to even bother.
 
Upvote 0

Cabal

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2007
11,592
476
39
London
✟37,512.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Zone, a genuine piece of advice here: PLEASE use a non-serif font, like Arial, instead of Times New Roman. It really does make things a lot easier to read.

Also, regarding the neutrino/photon thing - this is not something that is an issue for "atheistic science" - it is an issue for science. Just science. No quantifying adjectives needed. It's flat out incorrect. As you can see, people of other faith icons agree with Chalnoth's explanation.
 
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Zone, a genuine piece of advice here: PLEASE use a non-serif font, like Arial, instead of Times New Roman. It really does make things a lot easier to read.

Also, regarding the neutrino/photon thing - this is not something that is an issue for "atheistic science" - it is an issue for science. Just science. No quantifying adjectives needed. It's flat out incorrect. As you can see, people of other faith icons agree with Chalnoth's explanation.

Hi Cabal,

Since there is many other scientists, physicists, etc who (knowingly, or unknowingly) agrees with me your first statement can be interpreted as simply a convenient excuse.


Pertaining to your second statement (also as one who is also of the household of The Lord our God, I will truthfully tell you that), analytically & logically the masses do not equate correctness & to better understand what I am saying here is just a few example below:

  • One (10[sup]0[/sup]) person for his, or her own reason(s) decided to say one day, that the sun exist & ten billion (10[sup]10[/sup]) people for their own reason(s) decided to say one day that, the sun do not exist..... Irrelevant to the mathematical &, or scientific proof, according to your second statement, the one single / solitary individual is 100% incorrect & the ten billion individuals is 100% correct simply because they've formed a consensus.
  • One (10[sup]0[/sup]) person for his, or her own reason(s) decided to say one day, that the Earth is round & ten billion (10[sup]10[/sup]) people for their own reason(s) decided to say one day that, the Earth is flat..... Irrelevant to the mathematical &, or scientific proof, according to your second statement, the one single / solitary individual is 100% incorrect & the ten billion individuals is 100% correct simply because they've formed a consensus.
  • One (10[sup]0[/sup]) person for his, or her own reason(s) decided to say one day that, Noah's Ark, the Ten Commandments stone tablets, the Ark of the Covenant, the Rod of Aaron, the Shroud of Turin, etc exist & ten billion (10[sup]10[/sup]) people for their own reason(s) decided to say one day, that they do not exist..... Irrelevant to the mathematical &, or scientific proof, according to your second statement, the one single / solitary individual is 100% incorrect & the ten billion individuals is 100% correct simply because they've formed a consensus.
  • One (10[sup]0[/sup]) person (you) for your own reason(s) decided to say one day, that you're a male & ten billion (10[sup]10[/sup]) people for their own reason(s) decided to say one day that, you're a female..... Irrelevant to the visual &, or scientifically genetic (DNA) proof, according to your second statement, you the one single / solitary individual is 100% incorrect & the ten billion individuals is 100% correct simply because they've formed a consensus.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Wow.

This is all insane and off topic.

Hi ArnautDaniel,



The amazing fact about "truth" (as God told me) it do not require anyone to know about its existence &, or believe in it for it to be true & remain true & here is just a few examples below:
  • Fire burns whether anyone knows about its existence &, or believe in it, or not.
  • Wind blows whether anyone knows about its existence &, or believe in it, or not.
  • Poison kills whether anyone knows about its existence &, or believe in it, or not.
 
Upvote 0

ArnautDaniel

Veteran
Aug 28, 2006
5,295
328
The Village
✟29,653.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Hi ArnautDaniel,





The amazing fact about "truth" (as God told me) it do not require anyone to know about its existence &, or believe in it for it to be true & remain true & here is just a few examples below:
  • Fire burns whether anyone knows about its existence &, or believe in it, or not.
  • Wind blows whether anyone knows about its existence &, or believe in it, or not.
  • Poison kills whether anyone knows about its existence &, or believe in it, or not.

How is this any less off-topic?
 
Upvote 0

Cabal

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2007
11,592
476
39
London
✟37,512.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Hi Cabal,

Since there is many other scientists, physicists, etc who (knowingly, or unknowingly) agrees with me your first statement can be interpreted as simply a convenient excuse.

Interpret away, but it's not. Your formatting really isn't easy on the eye.


Pertaining to your second statement (also as one who is also of the household of The Lord our God, I will truthfully tell you that), analytically & logically the masses do not equate correctness & to better understand what I am saying here is just a few example below:

  • One (10[sup]0[/sup]) person for his, or her own reason(s) decided to say one day, that the sun exist & ten billion *snip*
[/QUOTE]

Point? Scientific consensus is based on the facts.
 
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Interpret away, but it's not. Your formatting really isn't easy on the eye.


Zone said:
Pertaining to your second statement (also as one who is also of the household of The Lord our God, I will truthfully tell you that), analytically & logically the masses do not equate correctness & to better understand what I am saying here is just a few example below:

  • One (10[sup]0[/sup]) person for his, or her own reason(s) decided to say one day, that the sun exist & ten billion *snip*


Point? Scientific consensus is based on the facts.
Hi Cabal,
After reading your reply I am forced to ask you this question, why do you still think that "the masses &, or the majority equate correctness"?

It's imperative that you understand, I always observe, etc impartially &, or unbiasedly, (& after meticulously analyzing, or continuously replaying your reply within my head, I have discovered a few things) therefore speaking logically, since everyone knows that all things are relative...., when I said within my earlier reply-post....
Zone said:
....analytically & logically the masses do not equate correctness....
Implying that (since we're not omniscient) even if ten billion (10[sup]10[/sup]) people for their own reason(s) formed a consensus one day & decided to start saying that gravity, etc do not exist, since what they're saying is 100% incorrect, then what they're presently thinking, believing & saying remains 100% incorrect & will / can not prevail simply because of their mass &, or their majority relative to the one (10[sup]0[/sup]) individual for his, or her own reason(s) decided one day to start thinking, believing & saying the exact opposite, therefore pertaining to your reply.....
Cabal said:
Point? Scientific consensus is based on the facts.
I am going to disagree with you & say the exact opposite, because I have many incriminating evidence(s) & we'll only use the following (3) three historical facts below as examples:
  • The Flat Earth Theory - At one point in space / time the (masses / majority &) scientific community had formed a consensus that "the Earth was actually flat" & anyone who dared to even think, believe & say that (it's round &) they're incorrect risked being put to death via archaic / antiquated laws, but (thanks to impartial &, or unbiased individuals performing observations of "the other planets, the Sun", etc) at this point within space / time it's a common consensus for everyone upon Earth that "the Earth is round & not flat", therefore anyone who dares to even think, believe & say that it's flat is risking being viewed as psychotic / schizophrenic, put into a straitjacket / padded cell & locked-away.
  • The Sun revolves around the Earth Theory - At one point in space / time the (masses / majority &) scientific community had formed a consensus that "the Sun actually revolves around the Earth" & anyone who dared to even think, believe & say that (the Earth revolves around the Sun &) they're incorrect risked being put to death via archaic / antiquated laws, but (thanks to impartial &, or unbiased individuals performing observations of "the Sun, the Moon", etc) at this point within space / time it's a common consensus for everyone upon Earth that "the Earth (& the other eight planets) revolves around the Sun", therefore anyone who dares to even think, believe & say that it's revolving around the Earth is risking being viewed as psychotic / schizophrenic, put into a straitjacket / padded cell & locked-away.
  • The Steady State Theory - At one point in space / time the (masses / majority &) scientific community had formed a consensus that "the universe always existed" & anyone who dared to even think, believe & say that (the Earth revolves around the Sun &) they're incorrect risked being viewed as psychotic / schizophrenic, put into a straitjacket & locked-away, but (thanks to impartial &, or unbiased individuals performing observations of "Entropy", etc) at this point within space / time it's a common consensus for everyone upon Earth that "matter (or, all of the energy Δ matter via the Big-Bang) is temporal & not eternal", therefore anyone who dares to even think, believe & say that it is eternal risked being viewed as psychotic / schizophrenic, put into a straitjacket / padded cell & locked-away.
Chalnoth said:
I have to admit that I didn't read much of what you wrote there, Zone, but you're just incorrect on neutrinos.

Neutrinos do not travel faster than the speed of light. They are particles that have small but non-zero masses which are typically created at energies that far exceed their rest mass energy. They therefore typically travel at speeds very close to that of light. But certainly not faster.

Always remember that, all things are relative, therefore the two words (small & non-zero) & their definition are not the same &, or do not mean the same thing & I will explain below:
  • Protons have mass energy of 1.67262163683×10[sup]−27[/sup] kg, or 938.27201323 MeV/c[sup]2[/sup] relative to the non-zero mass of the Neutrino(s) & anti-neutrino(s) & amongst scientists, physicists, etc Protons is viewed as "small" relative to the mass of the Neutrino(s) / anti-neutrino(s) & they're viewed as infinitesimally smaller (0[sup]-0[/sup]) relative the mass of the Proton(s).
Also remember that, the Neutrino(s) have "nonzero" (i.e., non-zero-sum), or 0[sup]-0[/sup] zero mass & a mass energy of....

M[sup]2[/sup]
–– = • 1kg = 1J ∑≈ {18.7245 x 10[sup]18[/sup]eV}
S[sup]2[/sup]

....relative to the mass & energy mass of the Proton(s) above.
Chalnoth said:
Photons do not take longer to leave stars because they travel more slowly, but because they run into more things along the way. When we're talking about traveling through space, since space doesn't have nearly as much stuff for photons to bump into as the interior of a star, neutrinos and photons travel at nearly the same speed. Since, however, the neutrinos have a very small mass, they will typically lose the race by some small amount.

Speaking as a impartial &, or unbiased individual, I can not agree with your statement above due to the following:
  • Analytically, since the "neutrino(s)" created within the nuclear reaction core of any Star(s) / Sun(s) irrelevant to its mass takes only (0.2 x 10[sup]0[/sup]) "two seconds" to travel from (x→) the core to (→y) the photospheric surface relative to the (10[sup]6[/sup]) "one million years" it takes the "photon(s)" created within the nuclear reaction core of any Star(s) / Sun(s) to travel from (x→) the core to (→y) the photospheric surface, logically the "neutrino(s)" will always win.
  • Physics, physical laws &, or analytical logic dictate(s) that for any object(s) to be able to achieve the velocity of c &, or higher its mass must be small, or infinitesimally nonexistent due to the force / resistance factors (this is why objects possessing considerable mass can never achieve the velocity of c &, or higher) & irrelevant to the velocity energy Δ matter can only travel upon, or via another form of energy Δ matter.
Contrary to what you've been told, think, believe &, or say the (Photon) light that the human species is currently seeing was created within the nuclear reaction core of our (yellow dwarf Star, or) Sun (10[sup]6[/sup]) "one million years" ago, therefore they will tell whosoever about the condition(s) that existed within the core of our (yellow dwarf Star, or) Sun, as it was one million years ago.

Note: The Blue highlighted sections (above / below) indicates a insufficient understanding & the red highlighted sections (above / below) indicates a contradiction / violation of physics, physical laws & analytical logic.
Zone, I was neither harmed nor offended by your equations. They just make no sense whatsoever. And yes, by the way, I'm a physicist,and you're completely off your rocker when it comes to neutrinos traveling faster than light. The most that you can say is that photons tend to run into more stuff as they travel, and so will take longer than a neutrino if there's a lot of stuff. But that doesn't indicate that the actual velocity of a neutrino is any greater.
Always remember that, all things are relative &, or relative to something else.

Therefore, this is situation of you simply not considering all of the various complexities of (E = m, or) energy Δ matter.

One of the things that The Lord my God (i.e., את השילוש הקדוש) has told me is.... nobody has to agree with me for me to be 100% correct & contrary to what you may have been told, think, believe & say it's already a well established fact that there's many scientists, physicists, etc who (knowingly, or unknowingly) agrees with me 100% & for those who do not believe all that whosoever have to do to validate all that I've been saying as 100% correct is....
  • Research the entire Internet.
  • Ask other scientists, physicists, etc.
Nonetheless, to increase the understanding of whosoever, I will recommend to the individual(s) that he, or she (impartial &, or unbiased) perform a meticulously analysis of both "Cosmic Inflation & Variable Speed of Light" (VSL).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Space & Time

Space & time are interwoven &, or inseparable to each other, which is exactly identical to energy Δ matter.

Analytically, if someone were to ask you the below question....

Question: What is "time"?

Logically, you would be correct in replying....

Answer: "Space".

But, why would anyone be 100% correct by saying "space"?

Well, to appropriately answer the question above, I am going to ask another (analytically logical) question below....

Question: What keeps everything (the Big-Bang, the formation of our Milky Way galaxy & solar system, the birth of Jesus Christ, the Rapture, the battle of Armageddon, the millennial reign, your birth, your mother's birth, etc) from occurring all at once?

Answer: "Time".

Then once again you must ask (whosoever), what is "time"?

Time is the spaces between, or the intervals within, also "time & space" is another form of (E = m, or) energy Δ matter.

Just like if someone were to ask you the question below....

Question: What is "space"?

Logically, you would be correct in replying....

Answer: "Space" is the intervals between, or within "time".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Warp Drive
Contrary to what you may have seen, been told, think, believe &, or say "warp drive(s)" will not & do not allow anyone, or anything to achieve the velocity of c.... far-less (FTL) faster than light.

According to creator(s) of the "Star Trek" TV program(s), their vessel(s) is capable of traveling through space via the (matter (±) antimatter) warp drive(s) conversion(s), in which fold(s) space onto itself as their vessel(s) ride upon the fold(s).

Now, any scientist(s), physicist(s), etc can easily see all of the inherent problems with their "theoretical propulsion" system(s) & I am going to list the below:
  • Space is a energy fabric & currently the only known factors, phenomena &, or anomalies in which is capable of breaking that fabric is the black hole(s) &, or supermassive black hole(s). Physics, physical laws &, or analytical logic dictate(s) that, any object(s) that posses considerable mass (i.e., the planets, the Moons, the Stars) can & will cause the fabric of space to be bent relative to the (circumference &) location where the object(s) is located.
Note: The image below visually shows the fabric of space that the black hole has broken / punctured through, the black hole's gravitational lensing affect(s) / effect(s) relative to the (energy Δ matter, or the) galaxy which passes in front, or over it & the Photons light velocity of 6.71 × 10[sup]8[/sup] which is continuously decreasing to (0[sup]0[/sup]) zero as the light is captured within the electromagnetic gravitational field lines & gradually pulled into the black hole, long before to the galaxy passes in front of, or over the black hole's ominous eye & afterwards.


  • 4 × 10[sup]6[/sup], Besides from the strong electromagnetic gravitation(s), the black hole(s) do not posses small, far-less infinitesimally small / nonzero mass, therefore they're totally incapable of ever achieving a velocity of 1.86 × 10[sup]5[/sup] far-less faster, besides the Big-Bang can not & did not produce black holes & irrelevant to the "Star Trek" TV program(s) & their theoretical matter (±) antimatter propulsion system(s), it's currently impossible for the human species to ride upon any (black hole) fold of the fabric of space as physics, physical laws, analytical logic & the above image visually illustrate(s).
  • 10[sup]5[/sup] - 10[sup]9[/sup], Besides from the extremely strong electromagnetic gravitation(s), the supermassive Black hole(s) absolutely do not posses small, far-less infinitesimally small / nonzero mass, therefore they're also totally incapable of ever achieving a velocity of 6.71 × 10[sup]8[/sup] far-less faster & irrelevant to the "Star Trek" TV program(s) & their theoretical matter (±) antimatter propulsion system(s), it's currently impossible for the human species to ride upon any (supermassive black hole) fold of the fabric of space as physics, physical laws, analytical logic & the above image visually illustrate(s).
  • Trying to using matter (±) antimatter as a means for interplanetary, interstellar &, or intergalactic space travel is a very bad idea, because any space vessel(s) that the human species can build will consist of matter (i.e., matter via the Big-Bang) & will have to be kept totally separated from antimatter to avoid an untimely explosion, but since our bodies consist of Star material, or energy Δ matter via the Big-Bang the act of simply touching antimatter will cause it to convert 100% of your entire body mass into a enormous explosion (or, a miniature Big-Bang) which will destroy our entire solar system, etc.
  • Antimatter (due to its reversed energy Δ matter properties relative to matter) gives a 100% energy conversion ratio only when it's brought into contact with its matter counterpart, allowing matter (±) antimatter to annihilate each other is equivalent to causing a Big-Bang, or miniature Big-Bang's. Therefore, antimatter (naturally) is stated to be the most costly substance in existence, with an estimated cost of $6.25 × 10[sup]10[/sup] per milligram.
Pertaining to the universe, it's currently stated to be about 1.5 × 10[sup]10[/sup] years old & the Big-Bang, some scientists, physicists, etc believes that the ratio of this asymmetry was roughly 1 × 10[sup]9[/sup] antimatter particles relative to 1.0 × 10[sup]9[/sup] matter particles.

Note: Irrelevant to the "Star Trek" TV program(s) theoretical matter (±) antimatter propulsion system(s) being 100% incorrect, since I grow-up watching & enjoying them, I am still going to continue to watch & enjoy them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Time Travel

Analytically, if anyone were to ask you the question below....​

Question: Is time travel possible?​

Logically, you would be correct in replying....​

Answer: Yes.​

But, why would anyone be 100% correct by saying "yes"?​

To appropriately answer the question (above), I am going to have to talk about the following:​

I remember vividly, as a child growing-up (& a extremist in all things) one night, my mother was cooking in the kitchen as I was (simply) looking outside the window, gazing-up not a the Moon & Stars like on a clear night, but at the reddish-orange (rust-like) skies & immediately I saw a enormous rectangular door to another dimension opening (from the top to bottom & closing from the bottom to the top, 30 seconds later) in the sky.... it was so actual to me that, if I would've been outside on the street, I would've asked as many people as possible..... DO YOU SEE THAT! It was so factual to me that hypothetically, I said to myself.... if there had been any planes flying within that particular region of the sky, all of the people aboard it would've passed from Earth's sky into another dimension & (relative to the 30 seconds space / time interval) would've been trapped. Then many years later as a teenager, I & my two older brothers was going to rob someone coming out of a bank & God our Father via Jesus Christ, by means of The Holy Spirit immediately proved to me (1) one of the (Strings) dimension(s) via, (2) making it possible for me to (spiritually) step outside this spatial (Brane) dimension(s), then He accelerated Δt = time(s) dilation(s) spatial variation(s) & (3) proved to me (Multiverses) via visually showing me exactly which dimensional reality I & my two older brothers would enter into & how our lives would turn out if I ignored all that He was currently showing / proving to me & decided to initiate just that one detrimental decision anyway.


[sup]F[/sup][sub]1[/sub][sup] = F [/sup][sub]1[/sub][sup]= Gm[/sup][sub]1[/sub][sup]m[/sup][sub]2[/sub]/r[sup]2 [/sup][sup]= F[/sup][sub]1[/sub][sup]= F[/sup][sub]1[/sub][sup]= K[/sup][sub]e[/sub][sup]= q[/sup][sub]1[/sub][sup]= q[/sup][sub]2[/sub]/r[sup]2[/sup] [sup]= E = E[/sup][sub]k[/sub][sup]+ E[/sup][sub]p[/sub]

Relatively speaking, irrelevant to the Earth's (a small mass & magnet) continuous electromagnetic gravitation around the Sun (a enormous mass & magnet) I still can visually see that the world is upside-down, but anyway here's a dilemma / paradox (i.e., oxymoron) for all, via simply observing the image illustration above it's visually obvious to everyone that.... the Earth has ([sub]r[/sub][sup]2[/sup]) two rotations (&, or spins both forwards ↔ backwards &, or clockwise ↔ counterclockwise). I told my friends at CERN.... if their truly serious about achieving a 100% safe "time traveling, interplanetary, interstellar, intergalactic &, or inter-dimensional space travel"..., I know 100% that we must initiate a more assiduous / scrupulous dissections / analysis of the Neutrino(s) & Antineutrino(s) elementary (energy Δ matter) particles properties. If we do it, it will open-up the door to even more of an understanding & knowledge pertaining to simulating / reproducing its (& Dark matter (±) Dark energy) amazing abilities to pass unimpeded straight through the (normal) Big-Bang energy Δ matter & travel from (x→) the location we're currently in to (→y) the location where you want to be in & how to achieve a 100% safe "time travel, interplanetary, interstellar, intergalactic &, or inter-dimensional space travel" within a relatively short space Δ time & if we do not do anything..., then omit everything.

Warning: Physics, physical laws &, or analytical logic naturally dictate(s) that.... antimatter (due to its reversed energy Δ matter properties relative to matter) gives a 100% energy conversion ratio only when it's brought into contact with its matter counterpart likewise, if a individual brings only one infinitesimally small Antineutrino (±) Neutrino nonzero mass particles into contact with each other, it will give a 100% energy conversion ratio via producing a miniature Big-Bang, etc.

Antineutrinos (±) Neutrinos elementary (energy Δ matter) particles properties represents the best hope, or chance the human species have for being able to use Black Holes • White Holes • Worm Holes for "time travel, interplanetary, interstellar, intergalactic &, or inter-dimensional space travel" within a relatively short amount of space Δ time & they represents the best hope, or chance the human species have for surviving the physiological extremes of space Δ time • Black Holes • White Holes • Worm Holes • Supergravity, etc.

Question: Is (FTL) faster than light (6.71 × 10[sup]8[/sup]) velocity possible?​

Example: Hypothetically, imagine that you are in your car traveling at a velocity of 6.71 × 10[sup]8[/sup] & you for your own reason(s) decided turn on the light within the car & your car headlights. Analytically, physics, physical laws &, or analytical logic naturally dictate(s) that, irrelevant to the particular object(s) velocity, the Photon(s) light within the car will be traveling at a velocity of 6.71 × 10[sup]8[/sup], also that the Photon(s) light from your car headlights will be traveling at a velocity of 6.71 × 10[sup]8[/sup] will also be launched forward from your car at velocity of 1.86 × 10[sup]5[/sup] relative to you &, or the car with a certain color spectrum, this is exactly what would happen whether anyone travels (FTL) Faster than light, or not.​

Therefore, logically the Photon(s) light from within the car & the front headlights will be traveling double the 6.71 × 10[sup]8[/sup] & the presence, or absence of other objects, or matter within this (dimension our) universe relative to whichever, if present, you could make a determination that you were moving at the speed of light irrelevant to your own experience(s) &, or experiment(s). The light that you launched behaves in exactly the same way whether the other referential matter exist(s), or not.​

Answer: Yes.​

Whenever I am asked is it dangerous...? Are there dangers...? I say.... yes & no.​

No, if we do initiate a more assiduous / scrupulous dissections / analysis of the Neutrino(s) & Antineutrino(s) elementary (energy Δ matter) particles properties understanding & knowledge, to achieve a 100% safe "time traveling, interplanetary, interstellar, intergalactic &, or inter-dimensional space travel". But yes, if we decide not to go forward with the program.​
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Analytically since we're not (yet) physically perfect, we all will therefore have many reasons why we can absolutely put a time dilation device &, or a time machine towards some very good use, therefore I can truly understand Mr. Ronald Mallett reason(s) / motive(s) for his passion...., simply watch his video to understand what I am saying.

Note: Contrary to what you may have seen (via TV), read (online, in a book, or newspaper), been told (via others), think, believe &, or say.... The Lord our God (i.e., את השילוש הקדוש) inputted a "fail-safe" device within space Δ time in which compensates for the "Grandfather Paradox", etc & we called it Quantum (M) Universes.​
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Zone

Active Member
Nov 4, 2008
370
8
Irvington, NJ
✟600.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Time Traveling
After watching Mr. Ronald Mallett's video, (which pertains to "time" which is also one of my favorite subjects therefore, I naturally enjoyed it) I realized that he believe(s), think(s) & said somethings (that I highlighted below in red) in which contradicts physics, physical laws &, or analytical logic, which is.....
Mr. Ronald Mallett said:
A time traveler could only journey back as far as the moment when the time machine was first turned on....
I am quoting Mr. Ronald Mallett words (below) via his video....

"In other words, if I turned the device on today & I leave it on for (3.1536 x 10[sup]9[/sup]) a hundred years, then someone a hundred years from now can travel back 75 years, 50 years, 25 years all the way back to the moment when I turned the device on, but they can't travel earlier than that, because the device didn't exist earlier than that & it's the device that is creating the effect, so there's nothing for them to time travel / to materialize into".

Now, speaking as a impartial &, or unbiased individual, I am saying.... perhaps Mr. Mallett's passion caused him to forget the following relative facts:
  • Energy Δ matter (or, E = m).
  • All things are relative.
  • All matter (seen & unseen) is elemental energy &, or all energy (seen & unseen) is elemental matter.
۩۞۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩☼۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۞۩

The Lord our God (i.e., את השילוש הקדוש), He being omniscient, etc said below....


Genesis 11:4-6 (KJV)
And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.

And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

۩۞۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩☼۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۞۩

Wherefore, if anyone were to ask you the (analytically logical) question below....

Question: Can anyone travel (forwards &, or backwards) to any point in space Δ time?

You would be 100% correct by replying below....

Answer: Yes.

Note: The action of "time traveling", grant(s) the time-traveler(s) the unlimited ability to travel (forwards &, or backwards) to any point(s) within space Δ time.

Therefore, contrary to what Mr. Ronald Mallett has been told, has learned, think(s), believe(s) &, or say(s) he can still obtain his objective(s) & his thesis, dissertation &, or application will have to include more than one factor (E = mc[sup]2[/sup], Δt = ....) such as Euclidean space geometry theorem(s), energy gradient(s), etc.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0