Whistleblower Speaks on Area 51

reply to post by Nevertheless


All of that is just a personalized definition on what time is. It is the 4th dimension. I call absolute BS also as any physicist would absolutely disagree.
I highly doubt you personally know any physicists.
I'm done arguing with a nobody, I am gonna go back to reading my books as they are ten times worth my time as opposed to someone lazily trying to debunk a cornerstone of reality.
Enjoy being right only in your own head just for the sake of having a dissenting opinion.

Start quoting facts if you ever wanna truly debate something.

Originally posted by RothchildRancor
reply to post by Nevertheless

 

All of that is just a personalized definition on what time is.

I'm sorry, but it is not.

It is the 4th dimension.

Again, in order to keep track of the changes in our physical 3-dimensional world, we need it. There is nothing strange about that.

I call absolute BS also as any physicist would absolutely disagree.

Why would "any physicist" disagree?

I highly doubt you personally know any physicists.

What difference would that make?
Regardless, I'll be having dinner with a whole institution of physicists on Wednesday evening.

I'm done arguing with a nobody,

Just as a suggestion for the future, in order to learn something useful, you should focus on the content in the discussion instead of a title someone may or may not have. Unfortunately in this case, you do not even know what that title is.

I am gonna go back to reading my books as they are ten times worth my time

May I ask what you are reading?

as opposed to someone lazily trying to debunk a cornerstone of reality.

I'm not debunking a cornerstone of reality. I was merely pointing out the confusion that our definition on human experience of time might bring with it.

Start quoting facts if you ever wanna truly debate something.

Quoting facts is quoting facts, not debating.
Also, I'm not bringing up anything that science already hasn't.

Originally posted by Nevertheless
Why would "any physicist" disagree?

In principle I agree with most of what you said, speaking as someone who majored in physics. My advice would be to be a little more clear by making statements in the context of what has been proven in experiment. There are always speculative theories which haven't been proven that may permit exceptions to what you said, namely:

Originally posted by Nevertheless
"Traveling into the future" which is possible, only means that the rate of change is slower locally relative to whatever it is you want to over-live.
And that's why you can't travel backwards, because there is no such thing.

First sentence is fine. Second statement, I would say that nobody has ever demonstrated that backward time travel is possible on a macro scale. On a quantum scale there's the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment which has some interesting results like apparent retro-causality.

This delayed choice quantum eraser experiment raises questions about time, time sequences, and thereby brings our usual ideas of time and causal sequence into question.

Now that doesn't suggest a person can time travel backward, but there are still some theoretical ideas about that:

Will We Travel Back (Or Forward) In Time?

Is there any way of going backward in time? Once again, Einstein may have provided the answer. His 1915 theory of general relativity showed that space and time are curved, and that the curvature can be large in the neighborhood of very massive objects. If an object is dense enough, the curvature can become nearly infinite, perhaps opening a tunnel that connects distant regions of space-time as though they were next door. Physicists call this tunnel a wormhole, in an analogy to the shortcut a worm eats from one side of a curved apple to the other.

In 1988, Kip Thorne, a physicist at Caltech, and several colleagues suggested that you could use such a wormhole to travel into the past. Here's how you do it: move one mouth of the wormhole through space at nearly the speed of light while leaving the other one fixed. Then jump in through the moving end. Like a moving astronaut, this end ages less, so it connects back to an earlier time on the fixed end. When you pop out through the fixed end an instant later, you'll find that you've emerged in your own past.

The problem with wormholes is that the openings are microscopic and tend to snap shut a fraction of a second after they're created. The only way to keep them open, as far as we know, is with matter that has negative density. In layman's terms, that's stuff that weighs less than nothing. This may sound impossible, but the Dutch physicist Hendrik Casimir theorized in 1948 that holding two plates of electrically conducting material very close together in a vacuum actually does create a region of negative density that exerts an inward pressure on the plates.

There are also more speculative theories I'm aware of. I'm not sure our models are complete enough to make absolute statements about backward time travel, but I think saying that nobody has ever demonstrated that backward time travel is possible on a macro scale would be accurate.

Originally posted by Urantia1111

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by extraterrestrialentity
What do you think ATS?

Well, the video is over an hour long, so maybe you could briefly answer a question.
Does he at any point move from the "telling stories" state, to a state where he says something that can be independently verified?

what exactly about area 51 do you think could be independently verified, and what source would one use? aside from google earth photos, where would "independent verification" of a completely classified installation come from. another whistleblower?

I've worked for the government in the past and could easily verify that with old pay-stubs, screen shots of my bank account, my union card, income tax, scan of my ID badge, pension contributions and so on. Albeit I didn't work at a super secret army base with aliens but he must have been paid.

Originally posted by VinnyCaravella
I've worked for the government in the past and could easily verify that with old pay-stubs, screen shots of my bank account, my union card, income tax, scan of my ID badge, pension contributions and so on. Albeit I didn't work at a super secret army base with aliens but he must have been paid.

Lazar provided a W-2 form but there are some problems with it as discussed here:

www.ufowatchdog.com...

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Nevertheless
Why would "any physicist" disagree?

In principle I agree with most of what you said, speaking as someone who majored in physics. My advice would be to be a little more clear by making statements in the context of what has been proven in experiment. There are always speculative theories which haven't been proven that may permit exceptions to what you said, namely:

Originally posted by Nevertheless
"Traveling into the future" which is possible, only means that the rate of change is slower locally relative to whatever it is you want to over-live.
And that's why you can't travel backwards, because there is no such thing.

First sentence is fine. Second statement, I would say that nobody has ever demonstrated that backward time travel is possible on a macro scale. On a quantum scale there's the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment which has some interesting results like apparent retro-causality.

This delayed choice quantum eraser experiment raises questions about time, time sequences, and thereby brings our usual ideas of time and causal sequence into question.

Now that doesn't suggest a person can time travel backward, but there are still some theoretical ideas about that:

Will We Travel Back (Or Forward) In Time?

Is there any way of going backward in time? Once again, Einstein may have provided the answer. His 1915 theory of general relativity showed that space and time are curved, and that the curvature can be large in the neighborhood of very massive objects. If an object is dense enough, the curvature can become nearly infinite, perhaps opening a tunnel that connects distant regions of space-time as though they were next door. Physicists call this tunnel a wormhole, in an analogy to the shortcut a worm eats from one side of a curved apple to the other.

In 1988, Kip Thorne, a physicist at Caltech, and several colleagues suggested that you could use such a wormhole to travel into the past. Here's how you do it: move one mouth of the wormhole through space at nearly the speed of light while leaving the other one fixed. Then jump in through the moving end. Like a moving astronaut, this end ages less, so it connects back to an earlier time on the fixed end. When you pop out through the fixed end an instant later, you'll find that you've emerged in your own past.

The problem with wormholes is that the openings are microscopic and tend to snap shut a fraction of a second after they're created. The only way to keep them open, as far as we know, is with matter that has negative density. In layman's terms, that's stuff that weighs less than nothing. This may sound impossible, but the Dutch physicist Hendrik Casimir theorized in 1948 that holding two plates of electrically conducting material very close together in a vacuum actually does create a region of negative density that exerts an inward pressure on the plates.

There are also more speculative theories I'm aware of. I'm not sure our models are complete enough to make absolute statements about backward time travel, but I think saying that nobody has ever demonstrated that backward time travel is possible on a macro scale would be accurate.

Here we go, actual science. Not just babble randomly misquoting famed physicists.

You my friend bring to the table all I was trying to say but have too busy a work schedule to fully describe.

Have you ever seen Time by Michio Kaku? Well worth a watch.

I suggest that Nevertheless quits trying to debunk aimlessly and give it a watch also.
Let the real physicists speak instead.

Based on the research of many, the only invented aspect of Time is our human definition of it.
Time being the measure of change that all matter and organism progress through is that definition.

Without the transfer between day and night or the movement of our sun and stars we would be completely without
our species personalized measurements.

Clocks and calenders would've never been invented or the systems of counting the minutes and ages. Just complete darkness.

So it is not time that we humans have invented, it is the measure and observation of the effects of time itself.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by VinnyCaravella
I've worked for the government in the past and could easily verify that with old pay-stubs, screen shots of my bank account, my union card, income tax, scan of my ID badge, pension contributions and so on. Albeit I didn't work at a super secret army base with aliens but he must have been paid.

Lazar provided a W-2 form but there are some problems with it as discussed here:

www.ufowatchdog.com...

I'm not American so I'm not entirely sure what information is included in a W2 but he should easily be able to apply an entire folder of information to establish that he worked there. The fact that he can't, personally, makes me suspicious.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Nevertheless
"Traveling into the future" which is possible, only means that the rate of change is slower locally relative to whatever it is you want to over-live.
And that's why you can't travel backwards, because there is no such thing.

First sentence is fine. Second statement, I would say that nobody has ever demonstrated that backward time travel is possible on a macro scale. On a quantum scale there's the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment which has some interesting results like apparent retro-causality.

I'm sorry, I was merely trying to point out that so-called "time-travel" as we know it has nothing to do with traveling in time per se.
When it comes to retro-causality, the wiki article you pointed to also states:

Some have interpreted this result to mean that the delayed choice to observe or not observe the path of the idler photon will change the outcome of an event in the past. However, an interference pattern may only be observed after the idlers have been detected (i.e., at D1 or D2).

Not to mention the even more bizarre Schrödinger's cat we'd have in that case.

Will We Travel Back (Or Forward) In Time?

[...]
In 1988, Kip Thorne, a physicist at Caltech, and several colleagues suggested that you could use such a wormhole to travel into the past. Here's how you do it: move one mouth of the wormhole through space at nearly the speed of light while leaving the other one fixed. Then jump in through the moving end. Like a moving astronaut, this end ages less, so it connects back to an earlier time on the fixed end. When you pop out through the fixed end an instant later, you'll find that you've emerged in your own past.
[...]

Even if we ignore wormholes being theoretical, impossible to create and impossible to use (for humans) due to the requirements, and the problem of moving such, not to mention in near the speed of light, it'd STILL be a jump in space, not time. What would you gain in going through all that trouble instead of just moving near the speed of light yourself?

Originally posted by RothchildRancor
Here we go, actual science. Not just babble randomly misquoting famed physicists.

Actually, the "actual science" above nicely pointed out the problems with time-travel.

You my friend bring to the table all I was trying to say but have too busy a work schedule to fully]
describe.

Could you point out what in what the other poster's quotes verified what you were trying to say?
Also, read my answer above to his comments.

I suggest that Nevertheless quits trying to debunk aimlessly and give it a watch also.

He is pretty interesting and fun to listen to.

Let the real physicists speak instead.

I prefer not to comment that more than this.

Speculating about Area 51 or other classified government sites is fun, but ultimately something of a snipe-hunt. Persons with actual clearances and experiences at that level aren't going to volunteer, confirm, or deny anything, so you're pretty much left with poseurs, publicity-hopefuls, and/or pranksters. As long as you understand this, fine.

More productively and truthfully, there is a lot of hard and publicly-available science in aerospace issues, including of course the topic of extraterrestrial life and travel. Much of this is fascinating, and a bit tough to get your head around.

For example, it's popularly assumed that the velocity of light is an absolute constant which cannot be exceeded, thus putting something of a damper on aliens' ability to zip over here from Alpha Centauri to levitate a few cows and anally probe their owners. Actually if you keep your foot on the accelerator pedal, you'll go right up past lite, but you'll outdistance [or ultracompress] the various EMS detection systems of others: you'll "disappear" [as they will conversely to you]. Thus the problem of translite becomes one of not bumping into stuff you can't detect, which at those speeds is pretty much "all she wrote". About the only thing you could do is project a stream of antimatter in front of you to annihilate anything in your path, and just keep your fingers [or tentacles] crossed that something itself of antimatter doesn't wander or orbit into your path. And of course knowing when and where to put on the brakes becomes a matter of complete calculation, since your external detection systems are, as noted above, nonfunctioning.

As for UFO visitations, today and in recent years nothing, and I mean nothing, gets through NORAD's umbrella without being noticed, identified, and tracked. The most annoying problem is not invading Martians, but the vast amount of space junk up there from several decades of launchings of all sorts of toys. Some of it orbits, some falls down, some drifts off. Collective pain in the ass. Probably not Hollywood movieworth.

Michael A. Aquino
Lt. Colonel, PSYOP, USA-Ret
Space Intelligence Officer 35B3Y
Ex-USSPACECOM J2X/MJ

reply to post by maquino


Okay, I'll bite...at least on the mechanics of alleged alien flight. I have never seen an alleged UFO - alien, military, or otherwise. However, I tend know something or two about advanced physics.... Your post made me think of two ideas....

1. I've seen numerous accounts from people who have witnessed alleged UFO's that they can stay stationary in the air (usually with no sound), move in all 3 dimensions at various speeds, and are often noted to suddenly "shoot off into space" at immediate speeds unattainable by "publicly known" modern aircraft. Given this description, which I will assume is accurate for the basis of this analysis, nothing is stated about achieving acceleration beyond the speed of light. Perhaps the noted movement is a "ramping up" to the speed of light? I've done countless scientific experiments with optics. The description given of the movement doesn't seem to mimic that of light....at least, not at "take off." Yet, the object does appear to "disappear." Would this be indicative of reaching the speed of light? Creating the scenario you illustrated (i.e. "rending light reflection obsolete")?

2. And what about the theory of wormholes? If I were going to pop in from Alpha Centauri, why go at the speed of light when I could potentially "bend space"?

I believe it would be a statistical impossibility for aliens to NOT exist. Given that dynamic, the question is how their technology works which would allow them to travel, especially unnoticed. I would propose that their technology far exceeds our limited knowledge, or even knowledge they may share with our limited minds. (How would you expect a Neophyte to understand that which is 2nd nature to an Adept?) It may incorporate frequencies far beyond the known spectrum? Or maybe it incorporates some sort of quantum coordinate system? There are many ways we can speculate....

Cheers