Okay everybody, maybe when forming an opinion about something that may or may not have happened why don't you research the physics behind it all. Learn about Einstein's Unified Field Theory, it is the one supposedly used. When debating something based in science try to avoid basing it on ad hominem, I mean you really won't get anywhere with the person you are debating with if you only appeal to emotions rather than logic, right? Anyway, in the clearly defined and known area of physics time travel and becoming "invisible" do exist, however, not on a large enough scale to cover a single drop of water much less a person and definitely not a naval destroyer. First off on the whole issue of making a destroyer invisible according to unified field theory; "The description of the system, which uses gravity to bend light around the ship, is theoretically possible, but would require a mass considerably greater than that of the Sun (which does bend light due to gravity, but only slightly - its mass does not warp space-time all that much)." While, invisibility and time travel would be interesting, fact is we just aren't that advanced. We just simply cannot devise an energy source efficient enough to work. Well, there is antimatter but the cost of production rules out the whole efficiency part. One day antimatter will be cheap enough to be useful and everything will change, for good and bad but right now it is impossibility. Just be realistic, go over to these websites and learn something about it all, while it isn't here now (except in particles, i.e., smaller than an atom) eventually (in our lifetime or not) it will be a reality on a larger scale. By the way, I included an array of research labs for those who are wary of believing the U.S. government. CERN also happens to be the largest physics laboratory, although calling it a lab kind of undermines it all, it's an entire city in itself.
- CERN: http://public.web.cern.ch/; located in Switzerland.
- Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics: http://www.inp.nsk.su/; located in Novosibirsk, Russia.
- Fermilab: http://www.fnal.gov/; outside Chicago
- Brookhaven National Laboratory: http://www.bnl.gov/; in Brookhaven of course.
Hope I didn't bore you or piss anyone off, if so sorry...
reply
share
theido
19 years ago
'When debating something based in science try to avoid basing it on ad hominem, I mean you really won't get anywhere with the person you are debating with if you only appeal to emotions rather than logic, right?'
I'd like to appeal to something I said in an earlier post in regards to this:
'LOL. People laughed at Columbus also. Infact a lot of the technologies that we take for granted in our modern age were once believed to be impossible and pure science fiction. I think its pretty arrogant and the epitomy of stupidity to so pompously declare that certain things are impossible whilst at the same time standing in the light of an era where the impossible has been achieved.
Please allow your brain to consider the possiblity of things not widely accepted as possible.'
Does this statment not qualify as a more logical approach as opposed to emotional?
'Anyway, in the clearly defined and known area of physics time travel and becoming "invisible" do exist, however, not on a large enough scale to cover a single drop of water much less a person and definitely not a naval destroyer. First off on the whole issue of making a destroyer invisible according to unified field theory; "The description of the system, which uses gravity to bend light around the ship, is theoretically possible, but would require a mass considerably greater than that of the Sun (which does bend light due to gravity, but only slightly - its mass does not warp space-time all that much)." While, invisibility and time travel would be interesting, fact is we just aren't that advanced. We just simply cannot devise an energy source efficient enough to work. Well, there is antimatter but the cost of production rules out the whole efficiency part. One day antimatter will be cheap enough to be useful and everything will change, for good and bad but right now it is impossibility.'
Ok, well we don't really know for sure what happened, but all I'm saying is that there WAS an event. What that event involved is debatable. When you talk about antimatter and its cost and the like, you are actually not proving that enough antimatter was never produced. This may be one of the exact reasons the whole project failed (but was a success at the same time). Perhaps they realised the gravity of the research and the cost incurred in producing such a massive quantity of antimatter. Charles Berlitz DID cover the science behind the whole project, but I could not follow it all, not having the strongest grasp on science myself. I was able to fathom the whole bending of light idea and even how it could act as a shield. But I think we need to be careful when we say that based on taught science, physics, chemistry etc. that something is not within our grasp at the moment. Remember who funds our universities and colleges. Namely government bodies such as, (possibly) NASA and other entities with scientific research and development interests, private pharmacutical companies that teach doctors that treatment and cure hold the largest portion of hope against terminal diseases rather than prevention etc. We need to look really hard at who is telling us all our information and not play it down everytime to government paranoia.
We need to be free-thinking and information processors rather than idiots that lap up any crap and are satisfied with a major sporting event or over-indulgence in drugs and alcohol to mask our burning desires to learn more.
-'Morons, your bus is leaving!'-
reply
share
19 years ago
[deleted]
theido
19 years ago
I never said that the government controls us, there are powers that pull their strings also that bring the governemnt to its knees usually financially and influence what laws can be passed. I don't know where you live, but here in Australia, it is getting harder and harder to live the kind of life you want, especially when human rights organisations are so wrapped up in saving lives that they even protect the criminals that walk our streets. They disarm the citizens and send us out like lambs to the slaughter. Women are too afraid to go anywhere alone for the danger of being attacked and it even happens in broad day-light. But that's all another topic really.
You want to talk about entities hiding information from the public? Would the information get out if they WERE trying to hide something? Perhaps it does, but people that hear about it always say the same things, 'You're just being paranoid. I don't believe that's possible, they would have told us.' Do you realise how contrdictory people can be? They want the information provided if its true, but they won't believe it unless the TV or the government tell it to them. Only then is it factual. As if a government is going to admit to performing a dangerous experiment where many lives were lost or ruined. Think about teleportation and the like, how many government officials do you think have personal, financial interests in low-tech industry? HEAPS do. So if low-tech or old-tech industry dies, the hip pocket of the shareholders will suffer. So keep the old-tech until we can work out a way of making some form of revenue off the new-tech. Its this simple.
And I never said that there was some lone scientist working away in his private lab performing experiments that would revolutionise world industry. But funny that you mention that, because there WAS once a Yugoslavian scientist/tinker by the name of Tessler in the last century that discovered many amazing things that we still don't use today. He discovered how to transmit electricity without using wires or cables and he also came up with a design for an anti-gravity engine. He was murdered by some government entity (possibly the CIA) if my memory serves me well.
-'Morons, your bus is leaving!'-
reply
share
19 years ago
[deleted]
theido
19 years ago
'By the way, his name was Tesla. Bye, bye credibility.'
Wow. I spelt his name wrong. From my whole post all you can comment on is my spelling a man's name wrong. And this makes ME lose credability??? Who cares if I hold no credability with you? Not me.
Actually, NO. I'm convinced. That link you gave me proved your point even hammering it right home. Thank you for helping me to see the light. I recommend everyone go and visit that link. It proves without a shadow of doubt that global conspiracy is only a fairy-tale.
Credability...
-'Morons, your bus is leaving!'-
reply
share
19 years ago
[deleted]
theido
19 years ago
'My point is that you make wild assertions about government activity and provide no information to back up your claims other than a story about an infamous scientist; a story which you, for the most part, get WRONG.'
How can I provide you with information? I don't have any documents here on me. Anything I've ever read belonged to someone else. Anyone can find these things out, all it requires is a little independant research. I never learned about Tesla in high school at all and even if I was I doubt that I'd have been told the whole story anyway. I have no information to offer you, just what is in my head. But as far as the actual Philadelphia Experiment goes, I did recently finish a book by Charles Berlitz that chronicled the factual evidence regarding this event. Find the book yourself and give it a read.
'By the way, it's spelled 'credibility'...'
Thanks for clearing this up. I don't know how I've managed to come this far without you there to correct my spelling errors...
-'Morons, your bus is leaving!'-
reply
share
19 years ago
[deleted]
theido
19 years ago
'"I have no information to offer you, just what is in my head."
So it IS all in your head. They say the first step towards rehabilitation is admitting that.'
Lame.
I had considered rewriting this sentence wondering if you would take it the way you obviously have, but thought that you would not pull that hand on me. I think you know what I meant by this statement, so I'll leave it at that.
The fact is, I don't have proof in my possession, but if you want some more 'interesting' reading material, also look up a book called 'The Unseen Hand' by Ralph Epperson(sp?). This book should be extremely hard to get, but you never know your luck.
Just so you know, I don't eat, sleep and breath this conspiracy stuff, I'm just aware of certain things and keep them in mind when it comes to making decisions about my life. I like to consider many things before throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but if you want to continue to mock my intelligence or sanity for a better word, go right ahead. Your agreement is not essential or even overly desirable for my future living.
And if you REALLY love calling people on spelling errors, maybe your efforts on me are mis-directed. I suggest you take a scan through the many different posts and threads with people barely able to construct a working sentence let alone correct spelling. I think this would more likely be your true calling.
-'Morons, your bus is leaving!'-
reply
share
19 years ago
[deleted]
theido
19 years ago
'When the boredom is severe, I do occasionally troll the Paris Hilton boards loosing my venegeance on unsuspecting 14 year old girls.'
Vengeance for what? I shudder to concieve...
So you admit to being a troll? They say the first step in rehabilitation is found in admission.
-'Morons, your bus is leaving!'-
reply
share
19 years ago
[deleted]
theido
19 years ago
'And the first symptom of a problem is regurgitation.'
So tell me what's so different about your approach? Hmmm?
reply
share
stephenstleger
19 years ago
dear theido,
Charles Berlitz is widely regarded to be a sensationalist hack who bent and misdirected stories to suit his sensationalist claims. The Philadelphia experiment is based solely on the demented scribblings of a man who was never found, a Carlos Miguel Allende, who had both the spelling and written grammar of a ten year old. In the Moore and Berlitz book, there are quoted newspaper articles that simply never existed: - all in support of the conspiracy theory.
Moreover, not one credible witness is produced by the authors (nor have any come forward in the 62 years since). And why? - to bolster book sales. No one wants to hear the more prosaic truth: That the government is more concerned with balancing the budget than conspiring to control the population. (Well they are but only in the sense that orderly populations who pay taxes and work are easier to govern than anti-war demonstrators who have riots, but that's another days discussion).
The thing about conspiracy theorists is that, generally, they are not interested in finding information that would lead to an impartial truth, but more interested in finding information that would support their theory, and discarding or ignoring information that would damage it. Their minds are already closed. A good example of this is the Moon landing theory. I work as a film cameraman and can say that all the so-called anomalies in the pictures are absolutely normal photographic artifacts present in any camera on the earth or moon and only people who know nothing whatsoever about photography point them out as proof of conspiracy. Be careful of second hand information as people who give it generally have their own agenda.
I agree with out esteemed friend above. Why don't you find out about Unified Field Theory and research it properly before pinning your flag to a mast without all the facts.
I don't know if you've noticed but there has been a marked change in reality television recently - instead of showing the myth behind the Roswell landings, there has been a notable swing towards attempting to get at the truth of the events: In this case that it was, boringly, more likely a Rawin-Sonde balloon. Looking at the cold, and regrettably less interesting, hard facts,it becomes clear that the biggest factor in these myths is the human capacity to dream and hope for bigger things.
Many thanks,
James Mather
reply
share
DazzaPFC
19 years ago
theido, I think you may have also been thinking of Edward Teller. It's an easy mistake to make.
I agree with your train of thought. I think to not do so would be naive. We can't trust our Leaders (be it Bush or Blair) to expalin the budgetary process, how can we trust them, or their sycophants, to involve us in anything this controversial.
We have to question everything and keep an entirely open mind. No evidence to support an argument doesn't necessarily mean the argument etc is invalid (FAO stephenstleger).
The other geezer ('kingofnowt') is wrong. Plain and simple :-)
Heil Pucinni!
reply
share
holewheremyheadshoul
19 years ago
Jesus H Christ, How can anybody believe such *beep* to be true? how can anybody with any common sense believe that the governments of our planet are keeping such secrets from us, especially the US government which has proved itself time and again to be completely inept at almost everything it does, face it people the world really is as boring and mundane as it seems.
reply
share
byter2k
18 years ago
Alrighty then.....Next!!!
I'm not a conspirary theory theorist, nor do I believe anything the government tells me.
But I do believe in Science, and I do believe that it is impossible to hide any great scientific advances. Look at the discovery of anti-matter and all the scientific possibilities that lie within that discovery. Look at the discovery of Quantum theory and application of Quantum cryptography. These are all truly remarkeable discoveries that any government would want to keep under it's hat, but guess what....it didn't happen.
I urge anyone who strongly believes in the plausability of time travel based on our understanding of current earthly science, to pick up a copy of any Stephen Hawking book.
Read about the science FIRST, THEN argue the conspiracy.
reply
share
adamk420
18 years ago
Well yeah it would hard to keep the technology secret if teams of scientists had to discover it, but they didn't. The technology obviously came from a crashed E.T. space ship. We get lots of tech that we use today from ships that have crashed.
reply
share
crc-4
18 years ago
Don't you think creating such a large gravitation feild would be useless in becoming invisible. I mean when you would would think something was up when you see some ivsible object drawin planes water air and anything with mass towards it? Further more how would we manipulate gravity? Electric current creates a magnetic field what would we use to create a gravitation field.
And how is time travel all of a sudden possible?
reply
share
bernie-122
17 years ago
@death2retro:
Don't use science to back up your point of view unless you know what you're talking about.
Bending light doesn't begin to explain disappearing ships and time travel. Antimatter is the dream of an idiot.
Unified Field Theory isn't what you think it is. The holy grail of Physics is to have all 4 of the known physical forces explained by one single theory. So then, gravity and electromagnetism would have some common explanation. There is no indication that this will happen any time soon, if ever.
It was amusing reading this thread; I knew Tesla would get a mention sooner or later. (Tessler! LOL!!) He did some interesting experiments with high voltage/high frequency and that was that. Nothing mysterious about it at all.
Much as I'd like to believe that the Philadelphia Experiment was real, the technology of the 1940s was far, far too crude to have produced anything like the wormhole-ish phenomenon we're talking about. To the people back then, cell phones and flat-panel television sets would have been some sort of sorcery, just as far-fetched as a wormhole.
Today, such things are commonplace, but wormholes are just as far-fetched as ever. While even Stephen Hawking will admit to their theoretical existence, producing and controlling one is an entirely different matter.
The only remotely feasible way to do this would be to capture and contain a tiny black hole with the mass of, say, a large mountain. This pinpoint-size object would be exceedingly dangerous; if you accidently dropped it (assuming you could handle it without being sucked into it), it would eat through the earth's crust, right through to the core and out the other side, having then gained substantial mass. Then it would fall back and repeat the process indefinitely. Eventually, the earth would be a thin hollow shell with a black hole inside it. Maybe. Or maybe just the black hole, having the same mass as the former earth did.
Turning this little black hole into a time-tunnel with fixed endpoints requires suspension of belief in physics to an extremely unrealistic degree. Those physicists who allow the possibility of a wormhole existing do so with the proviso that it would be highly ephemeral and extremely unstable.
The movie, in view of the outlandishness of the physics it was attempting to portray, and the obvious budget constraints, did a pretty good job, imho. I enjoyed it for what it was. Somehow, the hammy acting just made it more endearing.
reply
share