|
Time Travel (Jovic)
by
Igor Jovic
It is the general belief that UFOs and aliens originate from distant
star systems and galaxies, and that they travel to the Earth using
superior technology. This theory is vastly accepted because we don’t
have such technology, and so we automatically believe that such
objects must be driven by superior races from other planets.
However, in my mind, this theory has fundamental flaws and
inconsistencies which are outlined below:
1. Such flying objects have been seen in all shapes, sizes, and
colors. It’s as if the aliens can’t make up their mind on which kind
of vehicles to use. The traditional shape is the flat disk flying
saucer. Other shapes include cigars, spheres, pyramids, triangles,
and many other shapes. They have been reported in many colors such
as silver, white, orange, red, black and others. The question here
is this; if these objects come from distant stars, then why are the
aliens using so much versatility? Or are we being visited by several
species of aliens all of which use a different technology? If so why
do their ships all look different, while the beings inside all look
the same?
2. If these aliens are from distant stars then they must be very
advanced. Why would such advanced beings visit the Earth for
millennia and continue study us? Surely their advanced technology
would allow them to collect what they need in only a short time. Why
do they keep coming? And what could possibly interest them so much
to keep them here for thousands of years?
3. Why don’t they make contact with us? It has been suggested that
contact with aliens would be the downfall of religion, and would
provoke unprecedented disturbances in our societies. Contact with
superior alien beings could only help mankind in every way. We would
not need to turn our back on religion, nor would we run in panic.
This is because such advanced beings would know exactly how to
introduce themselves, and how to assure us that we can only profit
and learn from them. So why are they hiding from us, and at the same
time showing themselves just enough?
These are the basic problems I have with the alien race theory. And
as we evolve and develop, we’ll find it more and more difficult
believing that UFOs visit the Earth from distant stars. This is not
to say that alien races do not exist, on the contrary, I indeed
believe that the stars are full of advanced civilizations, and that
one day we’ll make contact with them.
So what are UFOs?
I believe UFOs are man-made time machines, driven by human beings
which have evolved into what we call aliens. They come from
our
distant future, and they use these vehicles to travel to their past.
When we look at UFOs and the "aliens" who drive them, we’re actually
seeing how evolution is going to change mankind, and we are seeing
what technology mankind will one day posses.
Remember that in the future mankind will have technology which is
far superior to anything we can possibly imagine today. It’s highly
feasible that in the distant future we’ll even learn to control
time. In fact, Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativity suggests that
time distorts if an object travels at great speeds (faster than the
speed of light).
Experiments have been conducted in this area and they indicate that
the Relativity Theory is correct. Once we have time travel under
control, where will we go? I think the first thing we’ll do is
travel back through Earth’s history. We’ll have the technology to
travel to any point in time, we might for example, want to see who
actually built the pyramids, and what happened to Atlantis.
But what will mankind look like in 500.000 years? Will we be exactly
like we are now? Or will our bodies evolve to accommodate the
drastic changes our high-tech future is bringing us. It’s likely
that we’ll look exactly like reported aliens; long skinny arms and
legs, large brainy heads, and pigment-free skin. If you compare the
look of our distant relatives who lived in caves, to modern man, and
then project this trend, then you’ll recognize that we’re going to
get thinner, weaker, and smarter. We will indeed look like aliens in
the distant future.
This theory has major advantages over others:
1. UFOs are seen in all varieties because they all originate from a
different point in future time, so each type originates from a
specific technological point in time. The saucer shaped UFOs might
be from the 22 Century, the cigars from the 23 Century, the spheres
from the 24 Century, etc. We see various kinds of objects
originating from various points in man’s future. One could compare
this to the advancing developments in the automobile industry - each
technological revolution has created a different looking automobile
because the design must accommodate the technology and advancing
ergonomics.
2. The time travelers don’t make contact because that would distort
the time continuum, and could cause time to split. The outcome of a
major time split could be devastating and very difficult to "clean
up." So it might be best for all not to make contact, and that’s
probably why they don’t.
All this is based on one simple logic; if time travel will ever be
possible then the result will be someone actually doing it. This
means that if they travel back in time we will see them in our time
(if they do not hide from us). And that’s exactly the point - they
might have technology to travel back in time but not to be
invisible, or at least on the first attempts. And I believe they
will have to travel in some sort of vehicle. So the end result is
extremely advanced human beings appearing in some kind of vehicle -
and to me this completely explains UFOs and "aliens"
Other Theories
This leads me to "deja vous," a feeling many people experience from
time to time which is described as "A feeling that I have already
relived this moment". This could in fact be the result of a local
time split. We don’t actually relive a moment - instead, it’s two
realities running parallel but slightly unsynchronized. For a
moment, everything around you exists twice, the original reality,
and distorted reality which is slightly different due to a time
split. Many time splits may be caused by time travelers
contaminating and slightly changing events. And I believe they poses
technology which prevents things from getting out of control - a
sort of vacuum cleaner for time. However, time splits are
unavoidable and they might be responsible for many unsolved
mysteries such as deja vous and things "disappearing" like in the
Bermuda triangle area. Many of the documented unexplainable
mysteries might be the result of time splits.
Much has been written about the paradoxes of time travel, and I
would like to give some of my views on the subject. Paradoxes exists
because we don’t (yet) have the capacity to really understand the
concept of how time actually works. To be able to understand time,
we need to look at the Universe in a totally different light - I
mean in a completely different way. I believe the biggest error many
of us are making is believing that time is linear (a start, a
middle, and an end). I don’t believe this is the case at all. I
believe time (as we understand it) does not exist at all - all
events that have ever happened and ever will all happen at the same
time! It’s our perception of time that makes us think otherwise.
Imagine for a moment a piece of music on a CD. We listen to the
music in a linear way (from start to end), but the music is indeed
stored on the media in a nonlinear way, and all the digital
information on the CD exists at the same time and there is no
beginning and no end. Our perception (the CD player) "serves" the
music bit by bit. It is quite feasible that time conceptually works
in exactly the same manner.
I’m afraid that traveling through a traditional linear time model
would be very difficult to achieve. The reason is that time
presented in such a way is nothing more than the matter of the
Universe arranged in a certain way at a certain moment, and to
travel through such time one would have to rearrange the matter to
reflect a specific point in time.
Whereas the nonlinear approach does not involve matter at all.
Additionally, the nonlinear approach completely does away with
questions like "when did time start," and "how can it continue
forever" - time simply exists all at the same time.
But it may well be that the Universe is also nonlinear, and it’s
only our perception that gives us a feeling of space depth. If the
two systems (space and time) are both nonlinear, then to me, that
explains almost all of the mysteries of existence - everything we
experience including time and space is nothing more than a
perception of something that in reality is quite simple.
Go Back
Questionable Assumptions
by Kalen Craig
Kalen Craig was a physical science technician, employed for 30 years
at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington D.C. He worked mostly
on wave propagation, and radio and radar astronomy projects. But as
you will see if you check out his web site "kalenuniverse.com"; He
has many advanced theories on the leading edge of science.
These are some of the concepts that astrophysicists often make that
we say are not necessarily so.
Do not be surprised if most of the concepts on this list are ideas
you believed to be correct.
1. The ether, as a medium for light and gravity waves, does not
exist.
2. The universe is expanding; and it started expanding as a Big
Bang, from a point some 12 to 20 billion years ago.
3. About 90 percent of the mass of the universe exists as some form
of unseen exotic dark matter.
4. Nothing, not even information, can move faster than light.
5. A photon is a small wave packet particle that moves from source
to sink along one path.
6. Planck’s constant h, represents the smallest quantum unit or
particle.
7. All matter is attractive, so that , the earth would attract a
neutral antimatter mass.
8. Quantum mechanical weirdness can not be explained in terms of
conventional logic.
9. The illusive Higgs particle is difficult to detect, because it
has too much energy or mass.
10. A singularity is said to exist at the center of a black hole. At
a singularity physics fails. So, one is thought to have existed to
justify the Big Bang!
11. A force (appearing as action at a distance) would be due to the
exchange of quantum messenger particles.
The above is a rather comprehensive list. If one or more of these
common assumptions are wrong; then the world of physics is in for a
big surprise.
The authors have questioned all of these beliefs for a number of
years. Kalen and his brother Eugene have recently published a book
and a web site "kalenuniverse.com" explaining much of our reasoning.
We will include some of our ideas in this report, and hope that it
will whet the appetite and curiosity of the reader.
1. ETHER
The idea of an all prevalent ether was accepted by most everyone
until Einstein proved that gravity could be described in terms of
curved 4-dimensional space-time. By viewing space-time as curved one
does not need to assume that space is an ether that accommodates
electromagnetic and gravitational waves. A moving mass or photon
would just follow the curvature of space. No force is required.
However, not needing something does not prove that it does not
exist.
Space curvature in general relativity is thought to be generated by
the presence of mass. Why this should be is not considered. However,
if space acceleration generates gravity and the convergence of space
toward a point generates inertia, then one can incorporate space
acceleration into general relativity; instead of assuming the
presence of matter. Thus space acceleration is mathematically
equivalent to space curvature.
The acceleration of gravity is directed down into the earth. One
must ask, where would such a flow of ether go?
Super string theorists have recently proposed that tiny black holes
exist at the centers of all mass particles. These holes could carry
away the ether flow.
For over ten years the authors have assumed that such black holes
exist inside of mass particles. We are pleased to find that others
are beginning to see things our way.
We therefore, assume that space is an ether like fluid or medium
that flows and accelerates toward mass.
2. SPACE EXPANSION
Space expansion seems obvious because of the observed cosmic red
shift of light from distant sources. Even if we assume that space is
expanding, extrapolating the apparent expansion back to a beginning
point and assuming a fantastic explosion from nothing called the Big
Bang is a bit much.
We point out that if the time dimension is decreasing (time slowing)
the observed red shift would occur without space expansion. The
assumption of time slowing is logically equivalent to assuming that
space is expanding.
Professor William DeSitter was probably the first to propose a time
slowing model of the universe. In 1917 he modified Einstein’s model
by assuming hyperbolic rather than spherical space-time. He
suggested that this would slow time and produce an apparently
expanding universe. He did this before the cosmic redshift was
discovered.
We, of course, adopted the Einstein-DeSitter model by assuming a
toroidal space-time. Our toroid is a closed form of hyperbolic
space-time, which allows time to oscillate between two limits rather
than go to infinity or start from a Big Bang singularity point.
3. MISSING DARK MATTER
The conclusion that much of the mass of the universe is some type of
exotic dark matter, is largely based upon the assumption that all
gravitational forces are attractions. If, as we assume, half of the
matter in the universe is antimatter, that is segregated from matter
because matter repels antimatter; then one would have to rethink the
missing matter problem.
We expect that, in the near future, experimenters will announce that
the earth repels antimatter, because they will have observed that
slow moving neutral antimatter atoms fall up.
Incidentally, a repulsion between matter and antimatter galaxies
would generate and exonerate Einstein’s controversial cosmological
constant.
4. LIGHT SPEED LIMIT
It is conceded by many cosmologists that the concept of wormholes
would permit the instantaneous transfer of matter or information
from one place to another in this universe or even to another
universe.
Wormhole (Schwarzschild) solutions of gravity equations for black
holes were discovered by Einstein, Oppenheimer, Wheeler and others.
But the reality of wormhole tunnels was only recently taken
seriously by most authorities.
Black holes pull mass objects into themselves at velocity c. At
velocity c, according to special relativity, time stops.
Time can be defined by (or as) motion or change.
Our #2 postulate is that: any time---time stops (either by zero
motion or by velocity c motion) a wormhole opens. It is thought that
a velocity c (black) wormhole can transfer mass and information to
another universe. We postulate that a zero motion wormhole can
transfer mass and information (space) to another location in this
universe.
5. WAVE PARTICLE PROBLEMS
Photons appear to expand radially through a vacuum. After a short or
a long time a very large wave front would arrive at the target area.
A very strange thing then happens! All the energy of the photon
group of wave cycles instantly converges upon a receptive particle
(electron). This is called the collapse of the wave equation.
How can all the energy of this group of very large wave cycles
instantly converge upon one point?
In order to avoid this apparent absurdity it is usually assumed that
a photon particle is not compounded from large waves but rather only
exists as a group of small waves called a wave packet. If so, it
does not expand radially as a wave process. Instead as a small wave
packet particle it would follow one path to the target electron. In
this case the wave equation for the photon is thought to be an
imaginary concept that does not actually exist, but even so the
imaginary peak amplitudes of the waves can be calculated and used to
predict where the actual photon particle will land.
However, experiments such as the double or multiple slit experiment,
indicate that a photon can simultaneously go through multiple paths
to a target. In order to do this it must move (expand) as a wave
process not move as a particle.
Our explanation is that Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations
have two
solutions. One for ordinary wave motion called retarded potentials.
The waves are first emitted then received. The other is a mysterious
solution called advanced potentials, where the waves appear to
collapse rather than expand and to have a negative time component.
This solution is usually ignored as undecipherable. What does a
minus time mean?
We assume that it means that advanced potentials can collapse
instantaneously.
We say that electromagnetic waves can generate wormholes; because
the electric and magnetic fields go through a zero motion point at
their maximum amplitudes
One of our primary postulates is that zero motion is zero time and
that a condition of zero time opens a wormhole. The photon waves can
move instantly through such a wormhole and collapse onto a target
electron.
In other words, the collapse of the wave equation is real through
wormholes that accommodate Maxwell’s advanced waves.
6. SUB QUANTUM MECHANICS
Planck’s constant h is the basis of quantum mechanics, which is
strictly an electromagnetic (charge) theory that does not apply to
gravity (mass theory). However, electrons and other Fermion
particles have both mass and charge. The gravity field of an
electron is some 1040 times weaker than it’s charge field.
Consequently, the gravity fields of particles have little effect on
chemistry and on ordinary motions of particles; so is largely
ignored.
We say that there exists a quantum gravity mechanics as a sub realm
of ordinary quantum mechanics, and that these tiny gravity fields
are important.
The charge quantum (Planck’s constant) is
h = mcy where mc is the
electron momentum and y is the Compton wavelength of an electron.
A gravity quantum (Kalen’s constant) would likely be,
k = mcd where d is the Planck unit of length.
This formula gives a gravitational quantum mechanics that is some 20
orders of magnitude weaker than charge quantum mechanics.
We believe that this sub quantum gravity mechanics generates
Einstein’s hidden variables, Bohm’s implicate orders and probably
quantum foam (Higgs’s particles). And we suggest that this foam is
actually the ether (space particles).
7. IS ALL MATTER ATTRACTIVE?
Each or the fundamental particles has an antimatter counterpart.
Most of these antimatter particle pairs have been created in the
laboratory. However, very few antimatter particles have been found
free in surrounding universe.
Most antimatter-matter pairs are of opposite charge and would
attract one another and annihilate (convert into radiation). So few
are found. Radiation can be converted back into matter-antimatter
pairs.
Most theories suggest that, at some time in the past, the universe
had equal amounts of matter land antimatter. Where has all the
antimatter gone?
The experimenters found a slight difference between the decay rates
of particles and antiparticles. This discrepancy, called
charge-parity reversal or CP asymmetry for short, was discovered in
1964 in argon decays. It is commonly thought that a similar but
larger CP asymmetry (during the "Big Bang") could have produced our
present all matter universe.
Our conjecture is slightly different. We think that in the past the
universe was in a state similar to one stage of the Big Bang. It was
a mixture of hot ions and atoms, with equal quantities of matter and
antimatter particles.
CP asymmetry along with random motions of the particles could have
produced local concentrations of normal neutral atoms and molecules.
Once a neutral group formed a repulsion force between matter and
antimatter could protect the group from bombardment by antimatter
particles. This isolating and segregating force could allow local
groups to grow into galaxies and galactic clusters.
A similar process could have produced antimatter galaxies or
clusters, which we see today but do not recognize as antimatter.
But why should we expect matter to repel antimatter? There are
clues!
-
First, it is normal to expect likes to attract and opposites to
repel. Matter and antimatter are opposites.
-
Second, it allows the segregation of matter from antimatter.
-
Third, a segregated antimatter galaxy would look just like an
ordinary galaxy. And the repulsion would prevent us from seeing a
fireworks display between matter and antimatter galaxies.
-
Fourth, the apparent excess mass (dark matter) of the universe would
be explained if half the mass of the universe is in antimatter
galaxies or clusters segregated from matter clusters by repulsion.
We already looked at the fourth clue in our answer #3 on the dark
matter problem.
If the matter repels antimatter the earth would repel a neutral
antimatter atom. Antimatter would fall up!
Look for this announcement in science news headlines. In the near
future.
8. QUANTUM WEIRDNESS
It’s not really weird. Even though,
Niles Bohr once said something
like,
"If a person does not see the weirdness of quantum mechanics he
does not understand quantum mechanics".
This weirdness depends upon
ones’ acceptance of questionable assumptions 4 and 5. We rejected
these assumptions on the basis of the existence of wormholes that
allow the instantaneous transference of space and even mass objects
from one location to another.
9. HIGGS SPACE PARTICLES
A big problem for the particle experimenters is to detect the
Higgs
particle. The abandoned super collider was primarily designed to
measure this particle. Leon Lederman who was in charge of building
the collider, called it the God particle because it apparently
creates mass. The reason physicists believed that they needed such a
big machine was their assumption (based on electromagnetic quantum
mechanics) that the Higgs particle would be very massive. We say
that Higgs particles are just the opposite and have extremely small
mass. We believe that space (ether) is composed of Higgs particles.
And that space flows toward matter. The acceleration of space is
gravity, and the convergence of space toward a point generates
inertia (mass).
10. BLACK HOLES and SINGULARITIES
A black hole is defined as a collapsing concentration of mass so
dense that its surface gravity (called the event horizon) prevents
even light from leaving the mass object.
Classical general relativity seems to predict that that the black
hole will continue to collapse within the event horizon to a point
where gravity is so intense as to create a singularity.
A singularity like dividing by zero is a place where the laws of
physics and math fail. The occurrence of a singularity or of an
infinity in physical theory is a sign that the theory or model is
either wrong or has been extrapolated beyond its acceptable limits.
If, as we say, gravity is the acceleration of space which has a tiny
mass. This acceleration is limited by special relativity to the
velocity of light which would occur at the event horizon of a black
hole. Therefore, gravity does not increase within a black hole to
generate a singularity.
11. ACTION AT A DISTANCE
Newton thought that the idea of a force (action) at a distance
without the intervention of particles or waves was absurd. Most
everyone agrees.
Most theorists assume that these forces are due to boson, messenger
particle exchanges. The authors have not been able to visualize how
a particle exchange can produce an attraction?
However, we believe that boson particle forces are more easily
visualized as due to space flows. Where the disappearance of space
such as gravity space flowing into mass represents an attraction.
The appearance of space, such as charge space flowing out of charge,
represents a repulsion. The appearance of gravity space between
matter and antimatter galaxies constitutes a repulsion. In fact it
represents the cosmic repulsion suggested by Einstein’s cosmological
constant. The attraction between opposite charges is due to the
disappearance of charge space at the interface between the opposite
charges.
Perhaps I should explain that what we call gravity space is an all
prevailing gravity field, similarly and our charge space is an
ubiquitous electrostatic field. We postulate that each fills all of
space, and that together they constitute the ether but are
independent of one another.
The idea of force at a distance as due to space increasing or
decreasing between interacting objects is simple, but new, and may
take a little getting used to.
Go Back
Viewed Effects of FTL Motion
Local FTL and observed pair-production -- Viewed effects of FTL
motion, assuming the constancy of light-transmission relative to the
observer
Let’s suppose that a particle approaches you at a speed greater than
that of light. If we assume that you are standing in a field of
corn, and the particle destroys everything in its path, then you’ll
be able to see the effects of the particle’s motion, (a burning
pathway cut through the otherwise featureless cornfield), even if
you can’t see that particle itself.
Now, let’s assume that the speed of light-transmission is constant
relative to you (as SR says it is), and that the path of the
particle takes it right past where you are standing. What do you
see?
Well, the first thing that you’ll see is a burning opening in the
corn right by you, because the FTL particle will have been traveling
faster than its own signal, and will reach your position before you
can see any evidence of its earlier destruction as it approached
(these signals don’t start turning up after the particle has already
passed you).
Recession
If you happen to be looking in the right direction, you’ll see the
opening progress in the direction of the particle’s travel, but
because of the lengthening timelag, the particle appears to be going
at less then the speed of light.
If there is a marker 1 lightsecond away, and the trench is cut
between you and it in near-instantaneous time, there’s still going
to be a one-second timelag between the trench being seen to open at
your feet and being seen to reach the marker point, because that’s
how long it takes the signal to get back.
Result: a receding FTL object looks as if it is going at less then
lightspeed, no matter how fast it’s really going.
Approach
However, there’s another effect. As the trench recedes away from
you, the light-images from the earlier destruction are now beginning
to reach you. One microsecond after the particle reaches you, you
see the closest 300m of its earlier destruction.
After another microsecond, you can see 600m of burning trench
stretching away from you in the direction the particle came from.
After an additional microsecond, you can see the "old" damage that
occurred 900m away. The "damage-front" for the approach phase
appears to be receding rather than approaching.
So, while the view in one direction is of the particle traveling in
the correct direction at less than c, the view in the opposite
direction is also of damage done by a receding particle, this one
with reversed timeflow (a combination of observer constant-lightspeed
and FTL approach is enough to create the appearance of a particle
traveling backwards in time, although this isn’t a physical effect).
If you videoed the whole scene with a fish-eyed lens on your video
camera, or using a mirror so that you could watch the scene in two
directions, then when you replayed the tape, you wouldn’t see a
single trench being cut from one side of the field to the other, but
instead, two trenches starting at the same point and opening out in
opposite directions.
Instead of seeing what looks like a single particle traveling at
more than lightspeed, you’d see what seemed to be the effects of two
particles emerging out of thin air, and flying off in opposite
directions, one moving forwards in time and one moving backwards!
"Deduced" behaviour
"Observed" behavior
This sounds suspiciously like what quantum mechanics tells us is
seen to happen - particle/antiparticle pairs are supposed to pop out
of thin air without an initial cause, as a purely statistical
effect. However, if you inhabited a region containing particles
travelling at FTL, this is actually the sort of behaviour that you
might see, not because of any magical QM effects or time-travel, but
simply as an artifact of the assumed constant-propagation timelag on
signals.
This does appear to be more than a little like Hawking radiation,
but to do a proper examination of the similarities, we have to look
at how the effect occurs in the presence of a gravitational
gradient.
Notes
Although this example produced observed time-reversal, it doesn’t
introduce causality-violations - the effects are legal and
paradox-free.
We can easily recreate the effect using current equipment. Let’s
suppose that the swathe being cut through out cornfield wasn’t being
cut by a particle moving at more than c, but was being burnt into
the scenery by an errant space-based laser platform designed as part
of an anti-missile defense system.
There’s no limit to the speed at which a spot of light can be swept
over a surface by a distant projector, so if the satellite decided
to burn a line across the cornfield by sweeping a beam across it at
>300,000km/s, then an observer standing in the middle of the field
would again see two spots of light cutting into the corn, travelling
in opposite directions.
If the shape cut by the laser was a barcode representing a series of
numbers coming from an atomic clock onboard the satellite, the
ground-based observer in the centre of the field would see two sets
of numbers being written in opposite directions, one counting up,
and one counting down (they might think that there were two
satellites up there, one of which had an atomic clock that was
running backwards).
Observed time-reversal isn’t, in itself, necessarily a problem. The
paradoxes arise when you try to deal with the Lorentz redshift as
being an effect that is totally separate to the propagation stuff,
or when you try to deal with objects passing through their own
wavefronts "from behind".
Go Back
|