Ancient Aliens

Let’s say that I have a machine which travels to any random spacetime spot from another timeline. I am not messing with my causality, only theirs.

I would cause stories fo UFOs, aliens and whatnot, but in MY timeline, nobody was doing nothing at that point in spacetime. I wouldn’t even need to travel myself, I could just send a machine so the transport device had non-human performance…

Traveling is in space and with certain energies. Time cant be travelled. Its not a medium, only effect. Physical objects cant travel by leaving the fields of their relations. Its all interconnected and force always makes effect on the body. If someone would want to vanish and reappear somewhere else, he would break the causality and it would result only in vanishing. Forever. In a blaze of energy. Even clocks are not made of time.

It was rather sad when I first understood that.

Time is a property of energy and space. Time depends upon space, so what about some ways in which space could twist time outside of the current timeline? Right now, there are regions in space where time does not exist… or it is as likely to exist forwards, as backwards. We know that black holes actually emit particles and those particles are traveling back in THEIR time, but forwards in OUR time. At last until they meet a particle and annihilate since they’re antiparticles. And crazyest of all, those antiparticles created traveling back in their time, are a reflection of a particle created insiden the event horizon, in a place where there’s literally no time. So the no-time forward of the particle goign in, becomes the anti-time of the anti-particle going out… which in the messy surroundings of a black hole’s event horizon is a very short travel. But it HAPPENS.

Figuring and demonstrating this out is why Stephen Hawking became famous and that radiation which slowly destroys the black hole by evaporating its mass outside of it is called Hawing Radiation.

TL;DR: energy and space make funny things to time.

The black hole phenomenal properties that are talked about are “smoothed” out by the surrounding space and black hole must interact with its surroundings all the time, black hole is a part of space continnuum. Using black hole would be difficult because those phenomena are only there and they are inaccessible. You would have trouble keeping yourself alive or even barely in current shape or form. There is only one timeline and its dictated by the world surrounding us. Everything we do, we have to mind effects of our actions. This is really surpassing raw physics, its emerging from nature, its philosophy.

Time, if you insist on calling it our or their, is only still an illusion. Its the space and energy levels.

Hawkin started to think about imaginary time. No idea what it is exactly except complex numbers applied to physic formulas. It would become quite messy mathematically as with normal time cyclical behaviours can be calculated with help of the Euler formula yet do that of with a complex number as entry to a cyclical formula.

What is called time, takes multiple effects into account. Time is a simplified understanding of world developed by evolution to register and apply logic to the events happening around us, but without much understanding how things work. Its surely a great undertaking to stand in opposition to evolution, to stop using time in the equation.
Then its rather unamusing that you cant find end to things, and you stop caring about the eternity.

Time is a measure of how the earth rotates around the sun.
It is measured in parts of it.

The reason we perceive time as warped in regards to how our sun moves in relation to other suns is partly due to the fact that we rarely need to use that difference.
For all we know, all planets, if not their asteroid, may have a small time change effect in their center of gravity due to the energy which is in it.

That is why an object travelling from another system, of which, there may be one going through our solar system every one year to 2 years or so, is attracted to this energy force, and changes direction when getting near it.

We do have calculation for those time fluctuation as well, and it is adjusted to our more often used time without those fluctuation.

General and Special theory of Relativity also explain those.


Edit:
Also, perhaps contrary to the last article above, I don’t think or see that gravity is caused by changes in space time, although they both have a direct relation to it.
In an equation, mathematical equation, the sides have a symmetrical relation.
They are both equal to one another in some form if not all.
Additionally, if one side contains a parameter of time, compared to energy or gravity, on the other side of the equation, they both have a relation to those factors.
It does not mean that one created the other.
You can even deduce that if mass and time are compared in combination, with an acceleration, be it a constant zero acceleration, that in can in turn be compared to measure differences with those factors in relation to the previous energy and gravity mentioned.

This is very general and does not get into more details and other more specific relations, and their relations differences in measurement or equality.
It is about which factors are part of the system, and which are external.
Why an observer outside of the system may see the result or action, differently than someone in it, and how.

1 Like

We’re not? I would beg to differ. Let’s say we began scouring the universe in search of life (which we are, by the way) and we discover a planet with intelligent life . . . perhaps even humanoid in form like ourselves . . . but that civilization is far behind us, technologically speaking. Is it your opinion we would not find that interesting? We would not continue doing ‘fly-bys’? Maybe landing on the planet, perhaps even doing some ‘experiments’? Obviously, I am theorizing a time when humans could travel those distances fast enough to ‘be in the neighborhood’ more often. LOL. I think we would be far more interesting to aliens than you might imagine.

I saw those before, except I always thought it was man-made or at least, made by human machines, or machines built by human.
Now, this video states they don’t know where those are from, and that there are also resemblance to unidentified sources, if not extra-terrestrial from other life-forms.
That means, possibly not from the moon, or with robots or machines made from human with microbes from outside of earth’s orbit.

Anyways, we need more scientific evidence to find out more facts about this.
Secondly, why would they go about to design a DNA type elliptical diagram display, if they didn’t take it from us?
Anyways, so far, I only have video evidence of those systems, and some written articles.

1 Like
1 Like
2 Likes

But how finite space can be? Infinite? Where are the ends of all these effects? :thinking:

Where is the limit of light wave expansion? :thinking:

1 Like

They didn’t know it was finite, and so, they devised a calculation system which would work for infinite space system.

Of course, there would be discrepancies, and so, hopefully, when calculating those extreme, they would be able to find out where part of the inaccuracies came from.

The limit of light wave expansion, or other forms of energy with the smaller amount of mass, is the speed of the expansion.
The speed is in relation to the medium into which it is propagated.

For instance, let’s say a beam of light traveling on a train, with an observer holding a flashlight on the train, points the flashlight forward, on the same direction as the train, and the train travels at the speed of light.
Now, of course, the train cannot travel at the speed of light.

Then, what if there is another train going in an opposite direction, with a 2nd observer and another flashlight, pointed in the opposite direction.
Now, both trains are travelling in opposite directions, both towards one another, but under the speed of light.

Each beams of light of those 2 flashlights travel at the same speed of light, or does it?
Would the speed at which they reach one another be double of the speed of light since they are in opposite directions, and, both towards one another?

What would happen to an observer outside the train?
Would he see the light beams reaching each other at the maximum speed of light, or would it be double?

Now, there is something very important about that speed or any other speed which is the cause of any speed.
That is, the medium in which that speed travels.
Speed being the number of distance per second travelled.
If that distance expands faster than the speed of light, then, what would the speed of light in that expanding medium be?
Will it be affected by it?
Will the maximum speed be the same?
If the speed of light is then faster than the speed of a light in a space medium which is more stable, how can it be measured to be faster?
Will it be in relation to the medium which is more stable, or the one which is more expanding?

So, anyways, the light travels at the same speed in the expanding medium, only the medium does expand faster than the speed of light.
The reasons the medium expands faster is due to astronomical forces on other scale than 4 or 5 dimensional forces.

What about the light beams in opposite directions?
Those should not reach each other at a speed faster than double the speed of light, and only due to properties related to their respective vectors.
Each is not faster than the max speed.
There is no speed of approach faster than double that speed, unless one of the medium or both, is or are faster.

However, light can be used to measure expanding medium due to it’s speed properties.

So, I am not so sure about the explanation in the videos as I have not verified most of it .
I do recognize good parts of it though.

On another scale, only systems which are the most far from our system are expanding faster than the speed of light.
There are no such expanding systems that I am aware of, which are in close range to our system.

Some of the limit of light wave expansion in space are around SuperNova and Quasar.
Those effects knocked out some of our earth satellites for certain amount of time at and during those period of time.

Actually humans are among the oldest living beings in the Universe. NASA has determined that only 8% of the total habitable planets that are able to sustain life or will be born with life currently exists. Earth is among the 8% of habitable planets that leaves an additional 92% of habitable planets yet to be born.

What this means is that although Earth may seem young we are in fact the early colonists of the Universe. Think of humans as the early seafarers that discovered America. We once thought that Earth was flat and that we would fall off of the edge. But that was proven incorrect, regardless of how popular Flat Earthers want their cult to be.

If you apply the same aspect to Earth then there would in fact be many other planets capable of sustaining life or have life on them. But just like the early seafarers had it rough crossing the ocean to find America, setting out across the sea of space would reward the human species with the same gifts that came with discovering America. Increased land mass to cultivate and raise new populations from. New technologies and sciences would emerge to protect and benefit human life. All resulting in a thriving human based colony similar to the original 13 colonies of the Americas.

The only difference is that there wouldn’t be any populations on the Moon or Mars or other planets in the Sol system that would stand in the way of advancing all human cultures on Earth, unlike the cultures that were nearly wiped out due to America being discovered, regrettably.

Since humans are considered the 8th Line of Creation or the 8th Seed of Creation, I feel it is our duty and promise to the Universe that gave birth to us to spread the seed and civilization of humanity into the unknowns of space.

After all if humans can brave the unknowns of the vast oceans between two continents then humans have the ability to survive the vast distances between the Moon and Mars and beyond.

Light is what expands the Universe. There is a lot of carbon around the edges of the Universe. As light bounces amongst these carbon atoms heat is generated. Heat that causes other atomic reactions to take place that then creates an expanding Universe.

Errr… no. A big no. A large no. A total, complete and absolute no. Just for starters, in the beginning of the universe, carbon didn’t exist, and it would not begin to exist until the first stars formed and began fusing hydrogen.

Yeah, that would cost 2 fortunes or more to come up with a system that could do 0.000,01% of that.
Is this like some kind of bombs that you are planning to drop over there?

And now, for my greatest trick, why and how the Universe is flat, how I plan to flatten it and the dangers of falling off the edges and make you look like a 3D shape in 2D with horrible things.

Bride of Frankenstein is a pretty intense movie, really. That screaming actor who played the Bride didn’t hold back, she was full-on punk/freaky.

The observer on the outside would only “see” the light beams going towards one another at the same maximum speed.
It would not seem to be double the speed to him.
They tried something like that in the Large Hadron Collider , CERN, and I am not sure if the target was going in opposite direction.
I think they tried to focus on timing and finally managed to reach a more static target rather than have 2 in opposite direction at max speed.

Also, it failed with very high costs on the first attempts, although that the test results seems to have been managed to be recorded and the data extracted usable for the subsequent test results.

There’s also difference in what we see as light and our human light range and waves which we do not see, but can deduce and detect the existence of, and analyze with other sensor than our eye sight.
For instance, 2 light beam in 2 dimensional speed from any directions, going towards one another, will be seen as no faster than the speed of ljght.
Their terminal velocity however can reach double the speed of light at the most opposite directions, vector wise.
That is the dimension in which light travel following a linear form, in 2 dimensions to a certain extent.

One example of this is when, the light on the train, added to the speed of the train, does not travel faster than the speed of light , with the added speed of the train, because the inertia of the light is not faster due to the inertia of the train.
That is due to the medium in which the light travel.
If the train travelled in a medium where space expanded , in which the light travelled, the light would be affected, not by the train, but by the medium in which it travelled, and the inertia or momemtum of the light would be related to that of the expanding system, that expanding system being one of space.

That space itself only is expanding in relation to other space and their relative points.
So, dimension of distance in themselves are not fixed, and the space that makes them, changes.
They are stable to certain degree and ratios, and some more different, like around black holes.

When the systems are so far as to expand faster than the speed of light (that is, the speed of light in our system, with less expansion compared to Alpha Centaurii), what we see is from the past.
Light in those systems is pushed further away from us faster than it travels.
It may never reach us in time.
Our solar system may cease to exist before light from the past of those systems distance would reach us.

2 Likes

Maybe in OUR universe . . . but there are many. How many?

The Physicists answer goes something like this: "The Big Bang was essentially a quantum process which generated quantum fluctuations in the state of the early universe. The universe then underwent a period of rapid growth called inflation during which these perturbations were “frozen”, creating different initial classical conditions in different parts of the cosmos. Since each of these regions would have a different set of laws of low energy physics, they can be thought of as different universes.

What Linde and Vanchurin have done is estimate how many different universes could have appeared as a result of this effect. Their answer is that this number must be proportional to the effect that caused the perturbations in the first place, a process called slow roll inflation, and in particular to the number “e-foldings” of slow roll inflation.

Of course, the actual number depends critically on how you define the difference between universes.

Linde and Vanchurin have applied some reasonable rules to calculate that the number of universes in the multiverse and have totted it up to at least 10^10^10^7. A “humungous” number is how they describe it, with no little understatement.

How many of these could we actually see? What’s interesting here is that the properties of the observer become an important factor because of a limit to the amount of information that can be contained within any given volume of space, a number known as the Bekenstein limit, and by the limits of the human brain.

Linde and Vanchurin say that total amount of information that can be absorbed by one individual during a lifetime is about 10^16 bits. So a typical human brain can have 10^10^16 configurations and so could never disintguish more than that number of different universes.

10^10^16 is a big number but it is dwarfed by the “humungous” 10^10^10^7.

“We have found that the strongest limit on the number of different locally distinguishable geometries is determined mostly by our abilities to distinguish between different universes and to remember our results,” say Linde and Vanchurin."

Personally, I think the whole enchilada is contained within a glass jar on God’s night-table. Like His personal snow-globe. LOL.

1 Like