Debunking ET contacts with a conspiracy theory - Page 6

jtcarl · 14th December 2012, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

The uncertainty principle is dependent on time as a dimension in the Newtonian sense.

"The Newtonian theory does consider time as a dimension to be the fourth dimension of motion." -- http://library.thinkquest.org/06aug/02088/newton.htm

And . . . ?

You do have a point to make, yes?

Anders Lindman · 14th December 2012, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by jtcarl

And . . . ?

You do have a point to make, yes?

The uncertainty principle makes time travel uncertain, even if it was possible, both forward and backward in time. At least if real time travel was attempted with physical particles. So instead of a single timeline, the uncertainty principle allows for virtually infinite different pasts and futures. So time is not really a dimension.

jtcarl · 15th December 2012, 02:27 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

The uncertainty principle makes time travel uncertain, even if it was possible, both forward and backward in time. At least if real time travel was attempted with physical particles. So instead of a single timeline, the uncertainty principle allows for virtually infinite different pasts and futures. So time is not really a dimension.

You seriously need to go back to school. You don't understand the uncertainty principle and how it applies to general reality, and you have no understanding whatsoever of dimensional structure. It's like you picked up a bunch of words on TV, and you want to use them in general conversation so people will think you possess more knowledge than you actually do. Unfortunately, you were watching the Sy Fy Channel instead of PBS, and now you've butchered this conversation.

Seriously ... the greatest theoretical physicists in history, including Albert Einstein, are all wrong because you don't know what a dimension is? Christ, not even God would have the patience to take this any further. And that's not an invitation to talk about religion.

Learn some science, and then talk about it.

Anders Lindman · 15th December 2012, 04:53 AM

Originally Posted by jtcarl

You don't understand the uncertainty principle and how it applies to general ~~reality~~ realitivity, ...

You can't even send a single particle back in time a millisecond without it being positioned completely different than the actual past, due to the uncertainty principle. So how can a whole person be sent several years back into the past? It just doesn't compute.

jargon buster · 15th December 2012, 05:29 AM

Quote:

You can't even send a single particle back in time a millisecond

full stop.

Anders Lindman · 15th December 2012, 05:50 AM

Originally Posted by jargon buster

full stop.

Someone on this forum posted a clever thread about how particles have to be copied in order for time travel to work, something like that (I think the thread is in the science section). That's a brilliant observation. Think of having a single atom traveling back in time one hour. One hour ago the atom already exists! So if the atom would be able to travel back in time it would have to insert itself as a NEW particle in the past! Utterly preposterous sci-fi nonsense. And imagine to insert a whole person into the past. For example if you were to travel back in time 10 minutes, you would have to insert a whole copy of your physical body into the past which already contains your body. Even when not taking the uncertainty principle into consideration, time travel becomes pure fantasy without any foundation in reality. And with two physical bodies, from which body would your consciousness be experienced? Someone proposed from both bodies. That would be pretty confusing. Imagine having to move two physical bodies at the same time with your consciousness.

I don't think the people who believe in time travel actually have thought it through.

RoboTimbo · 15th December 2012, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

It just doesn't compute.

Full stop.

14th December 2012, 02:33 PM	#201
jtcarl New Blood Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 24	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman The uncertainty principle is dependent on time as a dimension in the Newtonian sense. "The Newtonian theory does consider time as a dimension to be the fourth dimension of motion." -- http://library.thinkquest.org/06aug/02088/newton.htm And . . . ? You do have a point to make, yes?
jtcarl New Blood Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 24

14th December 2012, 05:43 PM	#202
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by jtcarl And . . . ? You do have a point to make, yes? The uncertainty principle makes time travel uncertain, even if it was possible, both forward and backward in time. At least if real time travel was attempted with physical particles. So instead of a single timeline, the uncertainty principle allows for virtually infinite different pasts and futures. So time is not really a dimension.
	Last edited by Anders Lindman; 14th December 2012 at 05:48 PM.

15th December 2012, 02:27 AM	#203
jtcarl New Blood Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 24	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman The uncertainty principle makes time travel uncertain, even if it was possible, both forward and backward in time. At least if real time travel was attempted with physical particles. So instead of a single timeline, the uncertainty principle allows for virtually infinite different pasts and futures. So time is not really a dimension. You seriously need to go back to school. You don't understand the uncertainty principle and how it applies to general reality, and you have no understanding whatsoever of dimensional structure. It's like you picked up a bunch of words on TV, and you want to use them in general conversation so people will think you possess more knowledge than you actually do. Unfortunately, you were watching the Sy Fy Channel instead of PBS, and now you've butchered this conversation. Seriously ... the greatest theoretical physicists in history, including Albert Einstein, are all wrong because you don't know what a dimension is? Christ, not even God would have the patience to take this any further. And that's not an invitation to talk about religion. Learn some science, and then talk about it.
jtcarl New Blood Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 24

15th December 2012, 05:29 AM	#205
jargon buster Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 4,064	Quote: You can't even send a single particle back in time a millisecond full stop.
	__________________ ^{^{“She’s pregnant and in very big trouble.” ......And wasn't she just}} http://www.angelfire.com/planet/thin...hildorlife.pdf Part 1 of this thread http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=176799

15th December 2012, 05:50 AM	#206
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by jargon buster full stop. Someone on this forum posted a clever thread about how particles have to be copied in order for time travel to work, something like that (I think the thread is in the science section). That's a brilliant observation. Think of having a single atom traveling back in time one hour. One hour ago the atom already exists! So if the atom would be able to travel back in time it would have to insert itself as a NEW particle in the past! Utterly preposterous sci-fi nonsense. And imagine to insert a whole person into the past. For example if you were to travel back in time 10 minutes, you would have to insert a whole copy of your physical body into the past which already contains your body. Even when not taking the uncertainty principle into consideration, time travel becomes pure fantasy without any foundation in reality. And with two physical bodies, from which body would your consciousness be experienced? Someone proposed from both bodies. That would be pretty confusing. Imagine having to move two physical bodies at the same time with your consciousness. I don't think the people who believe in time travel actually have thought it through.
	Last edited by Anders Lindman; 15th December 2012 at 05:55 AM.

15th December 2012, 04:53 AM	#204
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by jtcarl You don't understand the uncertainty principle and how it applies to general ~~reality~~ realitivity, ... You can't even send a single particle back in time a millisecond without it being positioned completely different than the actual past, due to the uncertainty principle. So how can a whole person be sent several years back into the past? It just doesn't compute.

15th December 2012, 06:12 AM	#207
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,885	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman It just doesn't compute. Full stop.