Postagens Originais do John Titor (Parte 22)

Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-16-2001 10:47 PM

I do not know what the 60′s folks sold out of. Since I was around
then, you had two choices, either go to Vietnam or go to college. Take
your pick, you had no other. What I see out of the young generation is
more time for the future to take hold since I lived through very
turbulent times. I wonder how really mad the young folks would be if
they were drafted, or well, go to college. Seems younger people we
tried to make the world better for, do not appreciate it.

How about they do something better, before they find out that life doesn’t have to be nice!

Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-16-2001 11:02 PM
Exactly, some enlisted because they knew otherwise they would be
drafted. Excuse us if we decide to change our minds again and decide
that drafting people would solve some problems in this country.
Probably not, they are still convinced that the cure is college.

Certainly Norway or Denmark did not, they rescinded their
Constitution for a couple of months last year or the year before
because of problems I guess, then re-instituted it again. That has not
happened in the US yet.


Posted by Pamela Moore on 03-17-2001 01:07 AM
John, Got up this morning and checked the web sites and where you posted your new pictures yesterday is this message:
“Sorry, MSN Web Communities is temporarily unavailable while we update our service.
Our improved site will be up and running again as soon as possible.
We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause and encourage you to try back later.
Thank you! “
hmmm….Is there NO WHERE safe???? hhehehehe
what a coincidence…huh?
good news: Doc got his board back up and working…again.
[Edited by Pamela Moore on 03-17-2001 at 01:16 AM]

Posted by Pamela Moore on 03-17-2001 01:26 AM
John,
I just checked the site again because I couldnt beleive it was down.
you better check it…some of your pictures are gone and they have a
little box with a red X in it……………………just like Doc’s
board had.

wow…that IS weird.
hmmm….oh well…Iam sure it will be fixed soon.
when you click on the pictures that are still there you get this message:
“The server is temporarily unavailable.
Sorry, the server is maxed out now. Please try again later when the pressure lets up.”
Nothing like being there at the right time and right place huh?? heheeh well, got to go…
[Edited by Pamela Moore on 03-17-2001 at 01:32 AM]

Posted by Pamela Moore on 03-17-2001 01:38 AM
hahahahah…went back again before I logged off and all the pictures are back up again.
well…I guess they were just updating their systems.

Posted by Andrew Hubbard on 03-17-2001 03:55 AM
1) How big is your time machine?
2) Is it possible that this world line ends at a different time to yours?
3) Does the bible code fortell any events that happen between now and 2036?
4) Is it possible to have a war between two different worldlines? for instance, mine and yours?
5) Couldn’t you be the person single handedly responsible for not
saving the man who finds the cure for cancer, or the person who finds
out how to filter the sea water of nuclear polution, by not
giving us advice on survival? There has been a lot more people who have
done great deeds for makind than people that have nearly destroyed it.

6) How fast is the average connection to the internet in the future? is it all broadband?

Posted by John Titor on 03-17-2001 05:23 AM
((heavier than air aircraft flight which is 1903. He said 1910 which
is way off. Its only the most important date in the history of aviation
and flight other than 1969, the date))

I suppose its impossible to defend every possible combintation of
what people want to see. I don’t believe I said anything about the date
for the first flight. All I did was pick a moment in history.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 11:40 AM
Dear John,
Well, it had to have a ‘Dear John’ reply sometime.
Simply putting us in this multiple world-lines ‘theory’ to us is not
known. Therefore, I can only relate to how the me in this worldline
thinks about this multiple world-lines.

I am the boss of myself here, if anything, then the other mes in
other world-lines that act worse than the me in this world-line do not
have a chance. They can complain about it all they want, but since I am
the boss here of me in this world-line, then I simply imply that I am
killing off (those mes are actually killing themselves) those other
world-lines where the me is worse, simply the me here will not put up
with it. Then the me here is creating new world-lines where the mes
bosses all think that we edge slowly towards a coherent whole before
most of the mes ‘goodly-mes’ die, leaving the dead mes in the other
morally bad worldlines to not have any choice in the say of it ( and
they should now know to repent). Now, this is about as much sense as
this multiple world-lines multiple realities means to me, here in this
me worldline, and if no one including me can understand this new
theory, than I have acheived my objective, understanding that the me in
this world-line is still not sure that all this is happening at any
given moment of time. This is the way to the ‘Source’ and all of the
world-line mes can fight all we want to, but it will not do all of the
infinite mes any good, I guess.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 12:04 PM
I will now try to refine the previous post.
Since in the energy flux of the mes, we are all blinking in and out of
existence at the energy level of existence. Since most humans are not
aware of this sub, sub, sub-atomic energy level, where we all form into
a sorta one energy flux, the infinite mes are always having meetings
for a brief energy moment of all mes. Therefore, information of all of
the mes can change world-lines at those moments of blinking in and the
blinking out of existence of all the worldlines. This may lead to
different part of mes exchanging with the exact same me that left this
previous one world-line. The reason that most of the time this will not
occur is because the information is retained by the me in the worldline
that briefly left for this microscopic energy meet of all the mes, and
ususally the same me that left one particular world-line will still
usually be the same me that comes back to the same worldline. This is
why we would all try to fight if meeting for the other mes know that
this is going on also, and most of the time they cannot interfere with
the good mes in the good worldlines and are left to travel back to
their other worldlines where they take it out on those worldlines.

Thus all of the mes can never be sure that part of some of the mes
just did not happen to change minutely even if just for a moment. This
all goes on continually, as a way of interaction of all mes in all
world-lines.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 12:16 PM
Oh.
Dissertion of Reality
It implies that the Universe and everything in the Universe of all
universes in the superverse is nothing more than an form of energy.
That the mass you imply that you see is nothing more at the sub, sub,
sub, atomic level than energy, given form to appear to make it more
appealing to us as a reality. This was dicussed in books in the mid
80′s and I doubt if you will find anything about this subject on the
Internet. Dealings about reality.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 12:34 PM
Also, since everything everywhere is energy, this has allowed
communication between these different energy ‘states’ and has allowed
the creation of self ‘consciousness’ or self ‘awareness’ by the
constant filtering action of the now energy ‘states’ left to determine
how these energy ‘states’ dealt with determining the best way to
develop these concepts and all concepts in all dimensions of all time.
I guess one could call this the “All”.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 12:47 PM
Now if no one is getting tired of this discussion. I will leave with
the final thoughts and you can have all of your own thoughts.

Through the energy ‘states’ all meeting at all times, it is left
to these moments of meetings to determine the most appropriate ways of
getting to the “All-knowing” God figure we subscribe to. This does not
imply that evil does not have its share of these moments, but simply in
the end of the “All” if there is an end, then the figure of “God” has
already won, and should evil still have its moments than it has been a
bad decision on their parts of these energy ‘meetings’ of information.

Well, something like that.

Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 01:00 PM
This implies the “soul” as being a self-healer, that may or may not correct itself, on the journey to the “All-knowing”.
This implies that the journey can perhaps be as long and as knowing
as it allows itself to be and that we are left with a “Wonderful God”
and the “All” is of good design.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 01:24 PM
Not to ‘hog’ this thread, for I am busy, very busy.
<b> I do not see the need for bomb shelters. Did I not state that it may do you no good.</b>
The fact that underground water sources, that exist, may be at least be
partly shielded from such a blatant exchange of radioactive fallout,
including the lead in it and other parts that may have to be filtered
out, may leave a source of water, but that would depend on where you
set up camp, when the stupidness ends if the radioactive event should
happen.

I leave you with your own thoughts about this.
Next:
Petersen Guide to Wild Berries.
Petersen Guide to Mammals on the North American Continent.
Petersen Guide to Birds of the North American Continent.
etc, etc, the end.

Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 02:58 PM
Conclusion of the “Perfect Symmetry of All”.
As an example:
In Einstein’s Equation there are four possible ‘states’ of reality.
These four would be:
+E = +(MC^2)
-E = +(MC^2)
+E = -(MC^2)
-E = -(MC^2)
The two middle results are of an imaginery numbering system.
The signs are not minus, but negative.
The two middle equations cancel out, forming a “nonexistence”. The other two equations form “existence”.
E = MC^2
-E = -(MC^2).
Both exist.
Now we must venture in to the imaginery worlds of existence.
I leave you to your own thoughts.
As Einstein stated “God does not play dice with the Universe”.
To do other, may lead to irrational and implausible ‘states’ for existence, that can not ever be as been defined.

Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 03:05 PM
Oh, I beg for your pardon with all of this existence.
It is all contained in the Chocolate Sandwich Cremes filled cookies
or in a slice of Apple Pie or with a scoop of Ice Cream of your choice.

This leaves anyone to deal with the anti-dimensions. We all
conclude that dealing with anti-dimensions may be a waste of time, for
we break down the “set” of mathematics (existence) to suit our own
purposals.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 03:16 PM
Oh, I concluded with a new word “purposals”. Its a combination of
“purpose” and “proposals”. I just did not know that I did that, but now
I do.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 03:54 PM
Therefore, there is “infinite world-lines where morals equal zero”
and a “anti infinite world-lines where morals equal zero”, which we do
not use in the reality we subscribe to; and the two imaginary existence
that does no good or evil to prove.

Therefore, there are more “All of yous” in existence, that can be
proved mathematically, for to define “Mathematics”, you have to reduce
every equation for its proof to zero equals zero. Equations must pass
that test or you have no “Mathematics”. It would be reduced to
absurtium.

I beg for your pardon with all of the yous in all of existence.

Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 04:09 PM
Yous are left free, free, free, free, to receive, receive, receive, receive with all of “This”.
You have permission to receive.
Yous may put yours “Evil Eyes” along with yours “anti-Evil Eyes”
and yours “Imaginery Evil Eyes” along with yours “anti Imaginery Evil
Eyes” to all of “This”.


Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-17-2001 04:21 PM
There is then the possibility of “surround protection” that protects
these clumps of energy, although I suppose, that if allowed to break
down, that can happen also.


Posted by Emmett “Darby” Darbyshire on 03-17-2001 05:28 PM
John,
Away the political-legal palaver and back to science for a bit…
A few of our posts back in reply to my comment, “A simple E=Mc^2 is not
the answer…you need real, not virtual mass” to form the singularity”
you said “Not True” or close thereto.

You’re still missing it, John, as we talk about singularities, Hawking Radiation and General Relativity.
The universe that you described, that is, one where mass is
accelerated to light speed and forms a singularity doesn’t exist. If
that were so you have some really bad problems:

1. As you accelerated to light speed in your machine you and your machine formed a black hole
2. From your perspective as you accelerated to light speed every
other object in the universe formed a black hole due to your relative
velocities

Of course neither event occurred. The problem is the comic book
view of General Relativity and the definition of mass in E=Mc^2.

The word “mass” has two distinct and very different definitions:
Mr = relativistic mass
Mo = invariant mass (rest mass)
Invariant mass is independent of v velocity.
You are stating your singularity forms as a result of Mr = E/c^2…The formula is correct. The statement is not.
The definition of rest mass is Mo = sqrt (E^2/c^4 – p^2/c^2)
p=momentum! Momentum…motion…kinetic energy! Its not there in E=Mc^2.
The comic book view that General Relativity somehow suggests that a
if a body is accelerated to light speed that it will form a singularity
is based on the formula “2GM/c^2”. That is, if the body is squeezed
small enough by acceleration its radius will be smaller than the
Schwarzschild radius surrounding it…it falls inside of the event
horizon. This comes from very early interpretations of General
relativity which ignored momentum and angular momentum…it was a static
solution. Einstein himself stated that it applied to kinetic energy –
not rest mass. There are many places where this can be verified.
American Journal of Physics, 55, 739 (1987) which quotes from a 1907
interview with Dr. Einstein; “Out of My Later Years”, Einstein, Albert
(1950), Philosophical Library, NY, Chapter 11 (“E=Mc^2”) note: I’m
proud to possess a very nice copy of this tomb.

Your science is still very wrong, John. (And the baseball players
at Stanford should know better than to suggest that a VW would form in
the accelerator – it would be an Audi)


Posted by John Titor on 03-17-2001 06:04 PM
EMMETT:
((..where mass is accelerated to light speed and forms a singularity doesn’t exist.))
I can’t find where I said that. Could you point that for me?

Posted by Anthony Reed on 03-17-2001 06:37 PM
Hi John,
I went to see your pictures, the one is a bit dark. The red light
arc. I liked the cutaway view but, will you be posting the picture of
the key or legend that goes with the cut away view? Let us know when or
if you will, please. thank you.

A Reed.

Posted by Bob Marz on 03-17-2001 08:04 PM
John: You didn’t say “..where mass is accelerated to light speed and
forms a singularity…” but you did chide Emmitt a few pages back
saying “E=MCsquared can be solved for mass too.”

[Edited by Bob Marz on 03-17-2001 at 08:07 PM]

Posted by John Titor on 03-17-2001 08:31 PM
((You didn’t say “..where mass is accelerated to light speed and
forms a singularity…” but you did chide Emmitt a few pages back
saying “E=MCsquared can be solved for mass too.”))

The speed of light squred is a constant number used to represent
the variation between energy and mass. It does not imply that
acceleration is required to change or represent the other.


Posted by Michael E. Hendrickson on 03-17-2001 08:36 PM
Hey, Cattoir, enough of your “cybernoise”. (How’s that for a
neologism?) Get thee to an abattoir!,( metaphorically speaking, of
course.) MH

[Edited by Michael E. Hendrickson on 03-17-2001 at 08:38 PM]

Posted by Emmett “Darby” Darbyshire on 03-17-2001 11:21 PM
John,
The accelleration to light speed is implied in your reference to
virtual mass. Virtual particles travel at light speed. I tried to give
you an out there but you insisted that the mass was virtual.

OK…here goes:
John was born sometime between 1954 and 1956. He attended a west
coast university, UC Davis, UC Berkeley or Stanford. He has an IQ of
about 120 but was never a physical science major. His major was either
cultural anthropology or general sociology. He may have dropped out in
his senior year but his expected year of graduation was between 1975
and 1977. He took, as an elective, cosmology, introduction to astronomy
or both. He did not take any upper division physical science. Neither
of his parents graduated from a university but managed to provide a
very stable life for him.

His understanding of physics is based on 1970′s emerging physics
but he didn’t keep abreast of the advances in the field until about six
months ago. His new knowledge since that time is based on cursory
internet searches so that he can respond to inquiries. He is very
intelligent and a deceptively good debater even though his knowledge of
physics is limited and a quarter of a century out-of-date.

John, I laud your effort to have tried to take on such an onorous
task as to debate both the social issues of futurism and the scientific
debates of physics. Next time, though, bite off a small slice.

[Edited by Emmett "Darby" Darbyshire on 03-17-2001 at 11:27 PM]

Posted by Javier Cortez on 03-18-2001 01:01 AM
Splendid work Emmett .
Hey John,
Took a look at your pictures of your Supposed “Time Travel Device” on the other message board.
And usually I can pick whether it’s outwardly or just an ordinary piece of technology.
(Partial Psychic remember )
And I couldn’t pick up anything, no hidden impressions, no memories,
all I could see was something just put together with no real purpose.

Well in a way I did pick up something, maybe just 2 Army soldiers.
Purpose unknown??
Btw, Where did you steal it from ?
Lately I have not had any Time Travel dreams. But visions I have. And non show you as a Time Traveler. Sorry .
-J.C.

Posted by John Titor on 03-18-2001 05:57 AM
((The accelleration to light speed is implied in your reference to
virtual mass. Virtual particles travel at light speed. I tried to give
you an out there but you insisted that the mass was virtual.))

The word implied is not a very stable platform to come up with a profile for my parents education but I applaud your attempt.
Well at least we aren’t seeing any more thermal and mass stabs in
the dark. Interesting profile but you couldn’t slide me just 10 more
points on the I.Q.?

Are you suggesting that in all cases there must be an acceleration
component in the conversion of energy to mass or mass to energy?


Posted by Emmett “Darby” Darbyshire on 03-18-2001 07:37 AM
<<<Are you suggesting that in all cases there must be an
acceleration component in the conversion of energy to mass or mass to
energy? >>>

No. Just the present case.
The bigger question is why you weren’t aware of the difference
between relativistic mass (M sub-r) and invariant mass (M sub-o).
You’ve consistently misapplied relativistic mass in situations where
invarient mass is to be used. This isn’t new information…its a
century old. Its a common mistake among pop-science buffs to misapply
the terms. Michio Kaku wrote “Hyperspace” and Steven Hawking wrote “A
Brief History of Time”. These were wonderful books so far as
pop-science is concerned. They aren’t, nor are they intended to be, the
foundation for PhD level physics discussions. You’re understanding of
physics is at the level of those two books and I’m assuming that they
are heavily drawn upon by you as source material.

To continue…
John has held several jobs during the past 25 years, but hasn’t
held any one for more than about 8 years. He interviews well and has no
problem getting hired. He annoys his co-workers and especially his
supervisor. He’s a 60′s Northern California child and has a problem
with authority. He works best when he works alone. He’s taught before,
probably at the Community College level (Palomar Commuity College?) and
maybe even at the State College level (SF State?). He still lives in
the Bay area.

[Edited by Emmett "Darby" Darbyshire on 03-18-2001 at 08:11 AM]

Posted by Pamela Moore on 03-18-2001 08:51 AM Smile
ok Darby,
heres my profile on John,
(guessing on some of course!)heheh
John is a 38 year old male. who has roughly around the same IQ I do and could probably pass a Mensa exam .
He is a kind and caring individual who was chosen to go on a mission
based on who he was related to and how easily he could get the person
to cooperate.and his skills obtained at his university.

He is able to work alone and under great pressure he is very calm.
although he has a great sense of responsibility and morals he will
defend himself and others when confronted to the point of taking a life
if needed. He believes strongly in peoples rights and freedoms and his
community.he cant stand lazy people who dont work.he is a good
samaritan and will not pass by the wounded man laying on the side of
the road. He feels accountable to God for his actions.

He has the basic knowledge to operate and control his machine
.although he is not a physicist he understands the basics in the way
his machine operates and can make minor repairs if needed and he
greatly exceeds in the area of mathematics.

his favorite food is oranges.and he loves to sail.and read old
magazines and books of life before the war.he likes to communicate with
other people on the internet and gets joy out of just the communicating
experience.sharing ideas and learning of history.

and his parents are just as kind and wonderful as he is.
-pamela

Posted by Bob Marz on 03-18-2001 09:19 AM
Hey, let me try this too!
Re: Pamela
Pamela is a loyal person (with dark hair) who (while having an
overly inflated opinion of Mensa) greatly admires John Titor and has
been actively involved or consulting in the Titor memoirs on the
ArtBell BBS message board, mainly on the posts concerning social
issues.

Pamela had a black and white Teddy Bear and though she’s passed
through San Rafael many times has never stopped there. She once ate
Chinese food in a small town called North Salinas, CA.

My name is Bob, I have an IQ of 60, on a good day, and I am a member of
Densa. And even I sensed there was a problem on the acceleration/mass
singularity issue.

[Edited by Bob Marz on 03-18-2001 at 09:23 AM]

Posted by Pamela Moore on 03-18-2001 09:28 AM Smile
Bob-
HEHEHEHE you are funny!
sincerely,
pamela
p.s. that chinese food was good too! heheh
[Edited by Pamela Moore on 03-18-2001 at 10:22 AM]

Posted by Randy Empey on 03-18-2001 10:46 AM
Emmit –
Now, are you arriving at these ‘facts’ through the written word
equivalent of phrenology — or have you actually played amatuer
detective and tracked our storyteller here down?

If it is textual-phrenology, I would be interested in knowing what you’ve deduced from my words here.
If its amatuer detective work, I’m not certain how you are going to get people here to believe you.
Lets assume for a moment that all john has said is true or at least accurate to his knowledge.
They didn’t send back a physics proffessor, but a more down to
earth type guy whose experience in the field would help with survival.
Of course, he mentioned that having family in the right area was a
major factor, but — there is a number of good reasons they wouldn’t
send thier equivalent of Stephen Hawkin back here.

If you don’t know how your time machine works, you are pretty much
stuck to the game plan — less improvision, less hotwiring, more
possibility that the objectives will actually be achieved.

I’d be suspicious if John’s concept of the physics involved made much more sense than it does now.
Currently, there are two main possibilities from my POV — he is
fake and is a gifted story teller (his tale is self-supporting in it
incompleteness, a hard thing to achieve on purpose), or he is real and
definetly not a top of the line 21st century physicist.

Basically, tell us where you got your most recent profile for him
— textual-phrenology, amatuer detective work, imagination? Where?

[Edited by Randy Empey on 03-18-2001 at 10:53 AM]

Posted by Albert Cattoir on 03-18-2001 11:57 AM
If it helps the ‘dogma’ of this forum topic, “they” have found traces of antimatter in this Universe.
Even Enstein would know that both views of his equation is real.
+ (E) = + (MC^2)
and the anti-Universe
- (E) = – (MC^2)
Both exist.
And I might add “just as expected by proven mathematics”.
While we’re dicussing life and death, here is something playful:
Death be with us and with us all.
Ever lurking near or far.
Death may be lurking just around the corner.
Death, Death, Death.
Its a wonder we are still all alive on this Planet, maybe it should read.
Live be with us and with us all.
Ever lurking near or far.
Life may be lurking just around the corner.
Life, Life, Life.

Posted by Javier Cortez on 03-18-2001 02:34 PM
Hey Pamela, that profile you made for John sounds just like me too .
Except I’m not that Old, I am Anti-Time Travel, and I have a high keen
sense in picking things up that are flawed, especially when someone
claims to be from the future. Other then that, it’s just like looking
right in the mirror .


Posted by Emmett “Darby” Darbyshire on 03-18-2001 04:27 PM
Randy,
Its not related to “written phrenology”. Its associated with
linguistics and statistical modelling of the use of English words in
this case. (And any detective work would definitely not be amateur
<wink>

Language, written or spoken, is broken down into regional dialects and
even temporal dialects. That is, when and where you learned to speak
and write a language will determine how you tend to use it (patterns,
word frequency, colloquialisms, idioms, “buzz words” etc.) Someone born
in the late 1920′s (my parents for instance) speaks the language
differently than I…that is: upon very close inspection a distinct
difference is seen.

You can analyze the written word of a target and make some very
reliable guesses about what, when and where they are (were). WIth a
sufficiently large volume of written words you can even determine who
the writer is (maybe). One use is to help validate newly discovered
historical documents that are associated with an historical figure: is
the document a forgery or real?

John’s use of the English is very (and I mean VERY) baby-boomer
typical. Give that a degree of confidence of 90%+. There is absolutely
nothing in his use of the English language that is atypical of someone
born in the United States between 1945-1975 (degree of confidence 99%).

[Edited by Emmett "Darby" Darbyshire on 03-18-2001 at 05:49 PM]

Posted by John Titor on 03-18-2001 05:33 PM
EMMETT:
((John’s use of the English is very (and I mean VERY) baby-boomer typical.))
I actually worked quite hard on that. It appears the physics questions
have come to a hault but at least you’re not insulting about my mother
anymore. Thanks.

((There is absolutely nothing in his use of the English language
that is atypical of someone born in the United States between 1945-1975
(degree of confidence 99%).))

Perhaps you could raise your confidence level to 100% by going from 30 to say… 100 years; maybe 1930 – 2030?
The tools you use to have that much faith in my profile must be
pretty good. I’m interested in what you compared me with. How exactly
does a person born in 1998 who traveled across worldlines from 2036 use
the English language?

Nenhum comentário:

Postar um comentário