Time Machine

It would not surprise me that V-Bird is a well known nut from some other forums called "Zharkov".Same crap, same tone, same bullshit EMR.Feed this troll at your peril.

'' It would not surprise me that V-Bird is a well known nut from some other forums called "Zharkov". ''No, he is not me and I not he, but after reading this I did decide to 'find' him... 'odd-ball' is the phrase... but it is a big world, it can accomodate 'all sorts' can't it.He does hold with matter being the result of manipulation of EMR by the forces I mentioned, so he has some either friends who work in my field or has read some of my papers...As to 'spin gravity'... we did look at that, but came to the conclusion the maths were faulted and failed to move anything on, it merely fitted 'some' of the things we observe, a sort of square peg that fitted a round hole purely because its' cross corners dimension equalled the diameter of the hole...'' Same crap, same tone, same bullshit EMR. ''EMR is not 'bullshit' as you so eloquently put it.I think he too would have great difficulty accepting what I say, in that you are more alike than you might want to acknowledge.'' Feed this troll at your peril. ''The easiest way to kill a troll is to PROVE him to be one...So again I ask for anyone to give me the 'mass' of time or an energy value for it... anything that gives it any substance at all.If you can do this I will admit that I am one dumb guy.To me a troll is someone who starts slagging people off rather than addressing the simple question...The question remains unanswered

You have now referred to 'in your field' and 'papers written'A week ago you mentioned 'my grad students' I believe.Could you perhaps elaborate on what you do for a living and what field you work and publish in?

Weapons.

So, can anyone find me anything that gives any substance at all for time.

V-BirdI am curious about a statement you made in post #53 as follows. Now, since as I understand it mass and energy are equivalent {E=MC2}then how are we to reconcile this with your statement?

---

'Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts.'
(Daniel Patrick Moynihan)

The strong force is part the EMR, it is not additional. This applies to all the forces.{E=MC2} is an interesting equation in this case, there is no time constituent in it.At 'C' there is no time passing at all, it is not even extant.Pure energy 'sees' no time passing as we see it, hence 'unmolested' it does not decay.[This message has been edited by V-Bird, 03-28-2004]

V-BirdI am afraid you have not answered the discrepency. How does the "strong" force foirm mass to keep energy in check when they are two aspects of the same thing?

Why do you insist on calling all forms of energy Electro-magnetic Radiation? Surely only energy in the form of radiation (EM) can be EMR?I think you'd make people understand your point of view easier if you said that the fundamental 'bits' that makes up matter is essentially the same as that which makes up EMR, but they are different forms/configurations/expressions.

The change from one form of energy to another DOES 'see' time in a very direct manner (before, during, after). Just because the amount of energy is constant does not mean you can write it off as unchanging.

It is the function of the forces to manipulate energy, the strong force makes energy bend, it does this so well that it forms an orbit, it also does this without slowing it, this force is the one that forms the very atoms that everything is 'made' from.But the force is an 'energy' that is the 'C' squared bit... light [1] x the strong force [2], that is simply energy times energy.That is why it works, it is perfectly correct and so long as you take account of the other forces that 'detract' from the perfection there is no further modification needed.Have I answered this or have I raised more questions?

You are asserting much and explaining little. It would help if you would frame your arguments in familiar terms. For example, EMR is photons, while the strong force is gluons. Why do you believe they're really both EMR?--Percy

Both are forms of energy, do you agree with that?One 'pure' the other 'acting' as a force, do you agree with that?
.

E=mc2Should be seen as Energy [total]= the mass of an object times the energy [1] times the energy [2] that binds that energy [1]I often hear that the 'C' equals the speed of light therefore has a time constituent, but no, in this case, the 'C' in Einstein equation is just a convenient way to encase energy in its purest form.Nothing I have said here either contradicts Einstein.I use time in my work, but like Einstein I know it is merely something to hang my work on, it gives order but plays no other part at all.[This message has been edited by V-Bird, 03-28-2004]

Therefore as there is no time to travel back in, just your version of what is extent, you can entirely dismiss any thoughts of time travel.The only way is forward, and you can fast-forward, this is times arrow, a dreadful term but one that for the time-being I'll leave alone and intact.