Compiled from my thoughts on a thread created by u/Tetartos_Ippeas and copied from c/4thHorsemanNews.
https://x.com/0ccultbot/status/1982390502260343218 [According to Michael Relfe and Andrew D. Basiago, the CIA has been involved in time travel operations as far back as the 1960s.]
Station identification: Remember, I larp as high-effort high-IQ. Let's continue having fun with it.
I'm allowed to reveal a few things about time travel but obviously all time travelers are agreed on the actual time when Massive Disclosure happens and (checks watch) it hasn't happened yet. Once it happens I'll be there to help guide.
Always beware claims that "I've been time traveling since X". What they mean is that some present, or future, event allowed them to time travel back to X and then they backdated their claim. For instance, if (when) the future me gave the 1971 me a book [Webre's 2005 Exopolitics, according to Webre] then I too could claim I've been time traveling since 1971 but it was actually the future me.
The guy you're quoting [Basiago on Noory's Coast to Coast] is obviously twisting things just a little to take the heat off the real time travelers, much like flat earthers take the heat off the real Antarctica research. You can't actually send a book back in time you can only send the contents. All you need is a reception frequency in the past that can see the book you're sending. The time travelers don't want you to know how easy those past receptor fields are to find as they are regular constructs of the activity of any human mind. We just don't think of them as such so we don't see the time travelers talking to us.
Time is a construct that can be dispensed with as an explanation. I'm still working on how Minkowski (who was smart enough to teach Einstein) differed from Euclid on how to insert time into the dimensions; that's my current avocational pursuit. That means there are two easy ways to construct time and they roughly correspond to the static forever and the experiential flow (the future potential pouring into the past actual as human anticipation becomes human memory). But there are other more exotic ways, and the Big Bang and black holes give hints; these are the ones that allow time travel. When I grow up I'm going to be a black hole miner. But first I must master that Minkowski spacetime.
Yes, CTCs [closed timelike curves] are wormholes, you just need to open up any of those M-theory dimensions beyond the Planck distance. The reason these paradoxes don't happen is that there's only one live universe we're dealing with (Novikov) and those paradoxes commit the common fallacy of mistaking the multiverse for true time travel. (If you want multiple timelines you need a multiverse and time travel will not help you; I have less experience with those.) Godel proved that he was always right except when he was wrong, that's incompleteness; so it's true that there are always incomplete aspects to time travel, but they don't affect the real practice at all just like infinity doesn't affect computing. In particular when you send the information back, the unexpected egg (apparent paradox) demonstrates that the recipients cannot know completely that it's legitimate and that's why it's sufficient to transmit substantially rather than perfectly. Cassandra in mythology knew "perfectly", which makes her a goddess rather than a human, but her listeners could not know perfectly (and so in that exaggeration they refused even substantial knowledge). Anyway, that also explains the evidence, namely it's so ubiquitous that it's been mistaken for other phenomena and ignored. The evidence for time travel is then something you can accumulate substantially but (as to any event) not perfectly until the event is completed and the loop closed; for instance, the (future) Official Disclosure event won't be believed if I gave you the correct date so it doesn't matter, but when it happens the past confirmations will all be there.
Anyway the wormhole mechanics for time travel are (as I said) about the bits not the atoms, which are processed via spacetime entanglement. The wormhole mechanics for teleportation are the atoms not the bits (unlike the imaginations given here), so they are a different story and they are processed via higher-dimensional transfer just like in Flatland.
"Euclidean" is a bit of a retronym for non-Lorentzian spacetime because you need a word for when time is additive instead of subtractive and so that's what I called it even though applying Euclid to time was a later development. Time follows all the Euclidean postulates anyway so it's natural to say [pseudo-Euclidean]. I don't say Minkowski is dispensable, rather he and Euclid (Newton) are two primary ways to view time and I don't have a good enumeration on all the major ways yet. For instance, the life review of an NDE is clearly a transtemporal event.
Black holes are not effective time travelers. (Yet.) They permit limited travel via Hawking radiation (I highly distrust the proposed alternative, exotic matter), which is basically the completely least efficient method of time travel; if you trace the antiparticle back in time you find it again at a much earlier instant outside the past event horizon. Black holes are important because they teach us about building white holes, which are the real winners. I suppose white holes could be effectively harnessed for time travel (hadn't thought about it) but they are mostly for zero-point energy tapping and may also allow more accurate multiverse access than otherwise. (Hartle found a theoretical Planck-sized closed universe attached to the Big Bang white hole via "quantum" tunneling, so that may be an example of how to connect the multiverse; it's still theory, and could be wrong, but is a great idea so far, better than say Tipler.)
What I claim to know about physics is that Einstein was right and "quantum" physics is bunk because its descriptions are deceptive even as its math is mostly right. It's deconstructionist; the cat is either alive or dead, never both (that would be multiverse again instead, not "quantum fluctuation"). I suppose I need a grant so I can work out the full math instead of keeping it at the conceptual level. (Also I've pointed out evidence of Magueijo lightspeed decay, which has the benefit of changing all kinds of math and bringing it into agreement with young-earth creationism.) But when I need to bring in those anomalies I try to be direct about them.
I had to look up Henri-Louis Bergson, yes, that's a philosophical description of xyz-t spacetime as opposed to xyz+t. But in xyz+t, in Planck units, Hartle and Hawking proved, there really is some kind of transcendence of the sequentiality of time and some kind of stasis, and that's what I've been working on getting my head around. Obviously, since memory increases with "forward" time, that's the entropic arrow and that's why we call it "forward"; but I call it the future pouring into the past and that's a bit of a backward description, properly reflecting the antitime effect that is going on. (Hawking calls this lightcone pour "pear-shaped", but I call it chocolate-chip-shaped.) No disrespect to any of three laws of thermodynamics of course, it's just a different frame of reference.
Naturally black hole mining is like interstellar travel or space elevators, something you need perhaps centuries to work on, which is why I'm doing it now and relying heavily on help from future me and others. At heart it's a simple application of Tipler.
So receptor fields and wormhole rides are, above, two different things. The first, time travel, absolutely requires consistency between source and target because you want both, departure and arrival, because time travel departure without arrival is exactly the subject of Asimov's story "Blank!". So you need long entanglement, in the same way the other article just described what they're calling "quantum teleportation" over phone lines but is really just spatial entanglement. Time travel is temporal entanglement, put simply. Now, since H. G. Wells pointed out that everyone knows how to time-travel "forwards" because they do it every day, the real game is what it means to time-travel "backwards", so let me focus on that one: target "precedes" source. Since we already "know" the past the target cannot be something contradictory to what we "know"; but remember that memory and anticipation are the same effect and have the same imperfections and limitations (with slightly different application due to sign change). If you want to be in the past (like when I traveled to Dealey Plaza for 1963-11-22, but I was a couple minutes off on my best try so didn't get the good stuff), it's not you that the past interacts with but the bits that represent you, and those bits are going to (1) be consistent with what we now know about the past and (2) be sufficient but not complete (because otherwise you'd have the Cassandra paradox instead of the unexpected egg). You can't send artifacts back like in Tenet, that would be antimatter and so would need shielding and be somewhat prohibitive; from your position in the present what you can do easily is to influence the formation of the artifacts that are already there, like in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency. Receptors are necessarily Shannon information constructs, which include humans, angels, computers, DNA, crystals, etc. The information is transmitted by a resonance between source and target that has sufficient mathematical identity to be successful (mental note: separate the error-correction channel next time). The actual resonance appears primarily to exist in the M-theory dimensions in Calabi-Yau manifolds (I keep forgetting those guys), and then rather like RNA bases self-pairing the unique manifold representing a certain travel event pairs itself with a sufficiently similar manifold in the target time and the resonance and transfer is achieved.
The second one, wormhole rides, is only about ordinary teleportation. The part about a physical transporter is just all bogus, Star Trek meets The Prestige. It's not done with big tech constructions and portals, it's more like flying, you just catch an updraft called a wormhole and your body will hold itself together if you get a strong enough one. They're everywhere too. I have a little trouble doing it (kind of like hula hooping) but I know people who have done it. Obviously Roddenberry never realized that the Enterprise would've already beamed up all the gold in Ft. Knox if the dilithium were working as advertised, so that would never work in most freewill universes. That's why it's not about the tech or the inanimate but about the living being that is transporting; only things like humans have the tech within them to be able to do transport because they are alive and thus connected to the opening of the additional dimensions via biotic process (you didn't think it was just about eating, excreting, and reproducing, did you?). Thus Neo's deja vu cat is better explained. Most modern science regards discussion of "spirit" as pseudoscience, but Futurama pointed out that if you say something that sounds more scientific like "lifeforce" they are fine with that instead even if it's just code for the same thing. So the scientific basis of "lifeforce" (spirit) is just that there must exist measurable phenomena in these additional dimensions that uncurl them beyond the Planck distance. If an Abbott Flatlander thinks he has only two dimensions, a Spherelander would tell him his body actually has a tiny extension or "depth" in a third dimension, and movement forward and backward in the third dimension is Flatland teleportation; and if the third dimension is warped via Calabi-Yau manifold then the teleport puts you in a different connected place (compare Dewdney's Planiverse).
Think about what you want to use this for.
The best text on time travel is Revelation and the best text on space travel is Ezekiel; get to know those books closely and you'll see where the details come from. The time travelers have not permitted the general laws to be stated yet but there are great approximations and the central code is in those two books to start with.
Tesla was Eastern Orthodox, so you're allowed to talk to him and he might even get back to you on it. Great time-travel joke, fren! Watch out that past me doesn't steal it and claim priority.
I love this! So many things to think about and look into, thank you. I'm familiar with a lot of these references but this requires deep thinking for me and I just now wanted to make sure I chimed in because it's so cool!
I myself am a bit of an amateur time traveler and the proofs just keep stacking, I can't travel to times that haven't been prepared for me and I think it's by design as you alluded to in this quote.
I have plans to revisit this post and am grateful for it!
SO COOL!!!
When I know I have such unqualified approval from you, TINAE, it doesn't matter what anyone else says. God bless you.
Aw. God's blessings on you too, fren.
Shroedinger cheated the science just like Einshtein. Both put "observation" above reality, and for the reasons I don't fully understand this cheating, that was pushed to the throats of science establishment, was accepted.
Einshtein cheat was based on the simple trick - he presented the picture distorted by Lorenz transform as a reality, not as a picture that distorted by choosing light (EM wave) for observation. Lorenz transformations are perfectly valid for observing moving objects with sound. It will be exactly same formulas, but with speed of sound instead of speed of light. Then, this simple cheat was rised to the level of dogma and voila, we was screwed.
Shroedinger with his cat example did almost same thing. Posed effects of using light for observation as a reality. Cat is simply dead or alive since the experiment start, we just didn't observe the result. Not observing result does not mean it is simultaneously in all possible states. And we was screwed again.
Both cheats does not change how things really happen, only adds "mathematically correct" limits that was used to cut every single scientific study of everything that is out of that fake limits.
Math is just a language for describing real world. Nothing more. It is not a science, it is a lagnuage. And as in any other language you could compose perfectly grammatically and syntactically correct phrase that have absolutely no any sense or just pure bullshit.
Rising math to the level of science and then replacing science with math effectively stopped any progress.
All that Minkovsky "spaces" and other shit have nothing to do with reality. Light speed is not a maximum speed in the universe and traveling with whatever speed does not produce any paradoxes. If somedody will observe something weird, is not a paradox or a problem. He just used wrong mean of observation, and that's all. Supersonic planes are real, and you can hear weird things listenig their flights, and this does not mean supersonic movement is impossible.
Black holes as they are depicted by modern science are also more like visual effect, than something real. Change light as mean of observation to something more advamced and faster, and most black hole weirdness will go away.
Time traveliing using wormhole to the different time, also need space travelling, if you want to travel to the same point in space, but in another time. Everything moves, so with high probability you will just come oiut to interstellar space, travelling only in time through wormhole.
Wormholes have nothing to do with teleportation or whateved. It is just a connection between two points using some shorter path through another dimensions or subspaces. Wormhole move nothing, it is a traveller travel through it, in whole, just like travelling usual ways.
Qestion of time is not clear at all, and that some math cheaters just named it a "dimension" means absolutely nothing. Math is just a language, and as in any language any bullshit could be spoken on that language. That does not make that bullshit real.
Declaring time a "dimension" without any scientific proof, made all possible scientific exploration of time "unnecessary". So, until we throw out Eishtein bullshit we will never find anything specific about time. So, the question of time travel is open and there are no any answers.
I find Bohr and Heisenberg as the true culprits while Einstein and Schrodinger seem to be trying to keep reality real, but I also pointed out here that both groups had their ink smudges.
Perhaps! If so we need new language to describe it.
Very probably!
I keep telling people that.
They're very straightforward, but, yes, people call it teleporting anyway due to the unrefined measurement technique.
Sure, something's gotta give. There are better models than the spaces we've inherited, and we may succeeded in passing the better models on to our kids so they can say how crazy we were in search of still better models.
Not really. Only thing is needed - to move special relativity to the place where it belongs - right near exactly same Lorenz transformations for the speed of sound, and forget all that Einstein nonsence about light speed limit, paradoxes and all that stuff.
As for better models, they are just untested theories, and will stay in that state until that insanity when math dictates what to explore and experiment with, will be abandoned. Nobody will ever grant a cent when there is already exist a theory rised to the level of dogma. Any grants will be denied because any other model will in one thing or another contradict Einstein, and this is a no go. It is a dead end, and we could only hope that there will happen some clear occasional discovery that will force scientific establishment to at least discuss something that contradicts Einstein. However, looks like even in that case this discovery would be just ignored or discredited, like it already happened with Gunter Nimtz experimental proof that EM wave tunelling speed at least multiple times faster than speed of light, up to exactly zero tunnelling time other researchers assume after replicating his experiment on much more precise equipment than Nimtz had .
Of all the books I wish I could finish reading, it would be 'The (unfinished) Dark Tower' by C.S. Lewis. I read it a lot and I often wonder what it really means, I've only been given snippets of possible realities as of 'now'.
I recently saw another comment from you about JFK and it reminded me again that Lewis dies that same day.
I don't know what it means or if it means nothing.
Just some thoughts that have popped my way today and I wanted to update in this thread.
Yes, it was today 11-22 in fact.
Someday I wanted to purchase the rights to The Dark Tower and finish it. If you have it digitally that would be a great next book, but if you don't then I don't want to overburden your typing. Most of its themes he preferred reworking into That Hideous Strength and I think from his description of the difficulties of plotting he just never got a resolution for Tower that tied everything together as neatly as he was accustomed.
But Tower is about teleportation and multiverse, not time travel.
I thought I'd read a joke about how Kennedy, Lewis, and Huxley walk into heaven, and Peter says ....
What if time is a dimension that can be manipulated, within a limit?
Exactly! Then you get official disclosure like this. Standard time warp works the same as space warp does in relativity where distances are relative based on observer unless invariant measurement is defined. But extradimensional warping allows the wormhole effect of entanglement of times and places and basically can manipulate any events closer together with enough work.
I do have the digital but I also bought it.
It is mutliverse/teleportation but I think it does tie into time in ways that are just out of my reach right now.
Could you really finish it? I've had similar wonderings..
Edit: it sounds like it'd be a funny joke but I don't know it.
I say I could do it with God's help. I'm sure Doug Gresham has other offers.
You'd get my vote, if there were such a thing.
Hmm - that, and some of the recent UFO videos were always the most compelling stuff I had heard on the subject
Video in question:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cBwT_2bbeto&pp=ygUgTWgzNzAgYWlycGxhbmUgZGlzYXBwZWFyYW5jZSB1Zm8%3D
Making this comment so I remember to read this post when I get a chance
I’m coining a new phrase TMTR. Too much to read.
^ too much to recognize
Then you could have just moved on..