User Controls
ATTN : aldra.
-
2019-08-21 at 4:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Well if "we" don't know which then the extra knowledge wouldn't necessarily be irrelevant. It could be very relevant if the outcome was mostly positive for you personally in comparison to the life you'd previously experienced…which had it been pretty dull and boring even a negative outcome might be at least more entertaining.
That's true, at the very least it could be entertaining. Or you could extort famous people with blackmail information that was released in the future but pertaining to events that have already happened. -
2019-08-21 at 5 PM UTC
-
2019-08-21 at 5:01 PM UTCSpectraL what you posted was babble.
-
2019-08-21 at 5:01 PM UTC
-
2019-08-21 at 5:02 PM UTC
-
2019-08-21 at 5:04 PM UTCUltimately you are already changing timelines with every decision/action you make and take...this idea that going back in time and changing those decision will result in the destruction of the universe is as ludicrous as suggesting me have a finger sandwich instead of a scone with my afternoon tea will result in a robot race rising to domination at the cost of humanity.
BILLIONS of decisions are made every second...going back in time and changing a few isn't going to do much just as a drop of rain in the ocean doesn't change much...once the ripples have gone it's the same fucking salty ocean. -
2019-08-21 at 5:08 PM UTCUnder the current scientific understanding, you can neither change this past nor change this future, although what happens in this future is governed by free free will and the choices made. The only way the future is created is through the present, but whatever will happen because of the present can't be changed.
-
2019-08-21 at 5:13 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Under the current scientific understanding, you can neither change this past nor change this future
That's what they want you to believe. Meanwhile the scientists in the know are going back in time and having secks with apes and creating the genetic divergence necessary so humans can arise. -
2019-08-21 at 5:33 PM UTCAll you can do is alter another dimension's present, past and future. Nothing you do there will affect this reality.
-
2019-08-21 at 5:43 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL All you can do is alter another dimension's present, past and future. Nothing you do there will affect this reality.
There is only one reality, all other dimensions are part of it...we had this discussion already remember...just like if you have 12 rooms (dimensions) in a house...it's still only 1 house (reality) -
2019-08-21 at 5:58 PM UTC
-
2019-08-21 at 6:04 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson There is only one reality, all other dimensions are part of it…we had this discussion already remember…just like if you have 12 rooms (dimensions) in a house…it's still only 1 house (reality)
but if your locked in one of those rooms and are unable to get out then your room is your reality. -
2019-08-21 at 6:18 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson There is only one reality, all other dimensions are part of it…we had this discussion already remember…just like if you have 12 rooms (dimensions) in a house…it's still only 1 house (reality)
It's one giant machine, yes, but there are layers, and every layer is different, and all the layers work together. -
2019-08-21 at 7:18 PM UTC
-
2019-08-21 at 8:24 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL Watch the video I posted. The science of it is too complex to describe in a post.
I skipped past the 5 year old level BS and got to the actual paper by Ronald Mallett. It's about using relativistic frame dragging to create negative timelike curves.
Then I opened the Wikipedia page and found this paper in response to Mallett's claims
https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0410078
You can read the abstract yourself. -
2019-08-21 at 8:29 PM UTC
Originally posted by Rear Naked Joke I skipped past the 5 year old level BS and got to the actual paper by Ronald Mallett. It's about using relativistic frame dragging to create negative timelike curves.
Then I opened the Wikipedia page and found this paper in response to Mallett's claims
https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0410078
You can read the abstract yourself.
That's not a rebuttal. -
2019-08-21 at 8:48 PM UTC
-
2019-08-21 at 8:49 PM UTC
-
2019-08-21 at 8:50 PM UTC
-
2019-08-21 at 8:51 PM UTC