Motion and gravitational time decelerate or slow. The slowing of your
clock takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe. By
proper time a small duration has elapsed but the rest of the universe
has aged far into its future. A slow now and a fast now appear the
same. That is proper time. Slow or fast it is still exactly the same
order unfolding.

Mitch Raemsch

wrote in message
...
Motion and gravitational time decelerate or slow. The slowing of your
clock takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe. By
proper time a small duration has elapsed but the rest of the universe
has aged far into its future. A slow now and a fast now appear the
same. That is proper time. Slow or fast it is still exactly the same
order unfolding.

Mitch Raemsch


The unfolding is (-) to (0) via (+). The traveler is never observably or
communicatively up-to-date with any destination point upon departure from
any departure point. If the traveler could measure the light second to the
destination to be exactly the same second as his clock measures, he's not
getting even a single silly millimeter closer to his destination than when
he was setting at his departure point. He may be going somewhere but he's
detouring his destination keeping a perfect distance from it at all times.
The only way he closes any distance at all with his destination is to
measurably squeeze at least 1.x external light seconds into every one second
of his own his own clock ticks. He knows he's powering to his destination
(constant boost) when that squeeze reaches 2 light seconds per clock second,
3 light seconds per clock second, and so on.

But in our "all history universe" we observe, the unfolding in travel is
always relative history under observation here (-) toward currency and
object reality there (0) ((-) to (0) via (+)). "The slowing of your clock
takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe," is where you
the traveler are always sitting in a time before time (-), as far as your
destination is always concerned, and travel from it -- futuristically (+) --
to 'now' (0).

I can see it another way as well, from the destination's point of view.
The traveler always comes from the 'future' of the destination (+) to the
destination's 'now' in time (0)! He certainly isn't coming from the
direction of the destination's PAST (in the destination's point of view)! No
traveler ever comes from the direction of the destination's past to now --
always the future to now (in the destination's point of view)!

I've always found it easy to see the traveler's point of view...and the
departure point's point of view (well described over the decades). It's
always been a lot more difficult to see the destination's point of view of
an oncoming traveler. It is a reverse viewpoint, and a reverse direction in
time the traveler is coming from, from the future to now, though still a
picture all futuristic until the exact moment of arrival, now! I'll bet
there are few anywhere that can see the destination's viewpoint I've laid
out here... a traveler's line [future to now]. It happens to be the only way
a traveler can view his departure point in the distance of spacetime -- from
wherever his present locality is -- as being a distant past under
observation. He had to travel [to that distant past] in traveling distantly
away from his departure point....which welds well to the destination's point
of view of the traveler's time travel, future to now rather than past to
now. "He certainly isn't coming from the direction of the destination's PAST
(in the destination's point of view)!"

The cosmological constant is (0)....and it isn't a mistake. It never was
(regarding an infinite Universe being the bigger picture actually, that is).

GLB

On Mar 20, 4:10*am, "G. L. Bradford" wrote:
wrote in message

...

Motion and gravitational time decelerate or slow. The slowing of your
clock takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe. By
proper time a small duration has elapsed but the rest of the universe
has aged far into its future. A slow now and a fast now appear the
same. That is proper time. Slow or fast it is still exactly the same
order unfolding.

Mitch Raemsch

* The unfolding is (-) to (0) via (+). The traveler is never observably or
communicatively up-to-date with any destination point upon departure from
any departure point. If the traveler could measure the light second to the
destination to be exactly the same second as his clock measures, he's not
getting even a single silly millimeter closer to his destination than when
he was setting at his departure point. He may be going somewhere but he's
detouring his destination keeping a perfect distance from it at all times.
The only way he closes any distance at all with his destination is to
measurably squeeze at least 1.x external light seconds into every one second
of his own his own clock ticks. He knows he's powering to his destination
(constant boost) when that squeeze reaches 2 light seconds per clock second,
3 light seconds per clock second, and so on.

* But in our "all history universe" we observe, the unfolding in travel is
always relative history under observation here (-) toward currency and
object reality there (0) ((-) to (0) via (+)). "The slowing of your clock
takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe," is where you
the traveler are always sitting in a time before time (-), as far as your
destination is always concerned, and travel from it -- futuristically (+) -- *
to 'now' (0).

* I can see it another way as well, from the destination's point of view..
The traveler always comes from the 'future' of the destination (+) to the
destination's 'now' in time (0)! He certainly isn't coming from the
direction of the destination's PAST (in the destination's point of view)! No
traveler ever comes from the direction of the destination's past to now -- *
always the future to now (in the destination's point of view)!

* I've always found it easy to see the traveler's point of view...and the
departure point's point of view (well described over the decades). It's
always been a lot more difficult to see the destination's point of view of
an oncoming traveler. It is a reverse viewpoint, and a reverse direction in
time the traveler is coming from, from the future to now, though still a
picture all futuristic until the exact moment of arrival, now! I'll bet
there are few anywhere that can see the destination's viewpoint I've laid
out here... a traveler's line [future to now]. It happens to be the only way
a traveler can view his departure point in the distance of spacetime -- from
wherever his present locality is -- as being a distant past under
observation. He had to travel [to that distant past] in traveling distantly
away from his departure point....which welds well to the destination's point
of view of the traveler's time travel, future to now rather than past to
now. "He certainly isn't coming from the direction of the destination's PAST
(in the destination's point of view)!"

* The cosmological constant is (0)....and it isn't a mistake. It never was
(regarding an infinite Universe being the bigger picture actually, that is).

GLB

ii the past i thought i understood, presently im not so sure

On Mar 20, 4:10*am, "G. L. Bradford" wrote:
wrote in message

...

Motion and gravitational time decelerate or slow. The slowing of your
clock takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe. By
proper time a small duration has elapsed but the rest of the universe
has aged far into its future. A slow now and a fast now appear the
same. That is proper time. Slow or fast it is still exactly the same
order unfolding.

Mitch Raemsch

* The unfolding is (-) to (0) via (+). The traveler is never observably or
communicatively up-to-date with any destination point upon departure from
any departure point. If the traveler could measure the light second to the
destination to be exactly the same second as his clock measures, he's not
getting even a single silly millimeter closer to his destination than when
he was setting at his departure point. He may be going somewhere but he's
detouring his destination keeping a perfect distance from it at all times.
The only way he closes any distance at all with his destination is to
measurably squeeze at least 1.x external light seconds into every one second
of his own his own clock ticks. He knows he's powering to his destination
(constant boost) when that squeeze reaches 2 light seconds per clock second,
3 light seconds per clock second, and so on.

* But in our "all history universe" we observe, the unfolding in travel is
always relative history under observation here (-) toward currency and
object reality there (0) ((-) to (0) via (+)). "The slowing of your clock
takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe," is where you
the traveler are always sitting in a time before time (-), as far as your
destination is always concerned, and travel from it -- futuristically (+) -- *
to 'now' (0).

* I can see it another way as well, from the destination's point of view..
The traveler always comes from the 'future' of the destination (+) to the
destination's 'now' in time (0)! He certainly isn't coming from the
direction of the destination's PAST (in the destination's point of view)! No
traveler ever comes from the direction of the destination's past to now -- *
always the future to now (in the destination's point of view)!

* I've always found it easy to see the traveler's point of view...and the
departure point's point of view (well described over the decades). It's
always been a lot more difficult to see the destination's point of view of
an oncoming traveler. It is a reverse viewpoint, and a reverse direction in
time the traveler is coming from, from the future to now, though still a
picture all futuristic until the exact moment of arrival, now! I'll bet
there are few anywhere that can see the destination's viewpoint I've laid
out here... a traveler's line [future to now]. It happens to be the only way
a traveler can view his departure point in the distance of spacetime -- from
wherever his present locality is -- as being a distant past under
observation. He had to travel [to that distant past] in traveling distantly
away from his departure point....which welds well to the destination's point
of view of the traveler's time travel, future to now rather than past to
now. "He certainly isn't coming from the direction of the destination's PAST
(in the destination's point of view)!"

* The cosmological constant is (0)....and it isn't a mistake. It never was
(regarding an infinite Universe being the bigger picture actually, that is).

GLB

For a more detailed analysis of what really happens in the twin
paradox and the implications for time travel please see http://EdgarLOwen.com/stc.pdf

Edgar

On Mar 20, 1:25*am, wrote:
Motion and gravitational time decelerate or slow. The slowing of your
clock takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe. By
proper time a small duration has elapsed but the rest of the universe
has aged far into its future. A slow now and a fast now appear the
same. That is proper time. Slow or fast it is still exactly the same
order unfolding.

Since that's the same thing as climbing up on a mountain
and shouting "Time is curved", it's also why people invented
lasers, digital, satelites, and robots for the science idiots.
Since the lasers show quite readily that time is not invariant.
The digital shows spontaneously that the mountain science cranks
are not only fools, but they are continuous fools.
And the satellites proof immediately, that P.V. cells not only
work,
they work particularly well with Exxon idiots.
And the Robots prove what they always proved.
The New York Times and not only idiot Journalists,
but they are, indeed, Manhattan idiot Journalists.




Mitch Raemsch

On Mar 25, 3:37*pm, "
wrote:
On Mar 20, 1:25*am, wrote:

Motion and gravitational time decelerate or slow. The slowing of your
clock takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe. By
proper time a small duration has elapsed but the rest of the universe
has aged far into its future. A slow now and a fast now appear the
same. That is proper time. Slow or fast it is still exactly the same
order unfolding.

* *Since that's the same thing as climbing up on a mountain
* *and shouting "Time is curved", it's also why people invented
* *lasers, digital, satelites, and robots for the science idiots.
* *Since the lasers show quite readily that time is not invariant.
* *The digital shows spontaneously that the mountain science cranks
* *are not only fools, but they are *continuous fools.
* *And the satellites proof immediately, that P.V. cells not only
work,
* *they work particularly well with Exxon idiots.
* *And the Robots prove what they always proved.
* *The New York Times and not only idiot Journalists,
* *but they are, indeed, Manhattan idiot Journalists.





Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Time is not curved. There is just its slowdown which is the
Mathematical Gamma factor curve. There is no dimensional curvature to
time. It simply slows.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

On Mar 25, 10:31*pm, wrote:
On Mar 25, 3:37*pm, "
wrote:





On Mar 20, 1:25*am, wrote:

Motion and gravitational time decelerate or slow. The slowing of your
clock takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe. By
proper time a small duration has elapsed but the rest of the universe
has aged far into its future. A slow now and a fast now appear the
same. That is proper time. Slow or fast it is still exactly the same
order unfolding.

* *Since that's the same thing as climbing up on a mountain
* *and shouting "Time is curved", it's also why people invented
* *lasers, digital, satelites, and robots for the science idiots.
* *Since the lasers show quite readily that time is not invariant.
* *The digital shows spontaneously that the mountain science cranks
* *are not only fools, but they are *continuous fools.
* *And the satellites proof immediately, that P.V. cells not only
work,
* *they work particularly well with Exxon idiots.
* *And the Robots prove what they always proved.
* *The New York Times and not only idiot Journalists,
* *but they are, indeed, Manhattan idiot Journalists.

Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Time is not curved. There is just its slowdown which is the
Mathematical Gamma factor curve. There is no dimensional curvature to
time. It simply slows.

It only slows to idiots imagining themselves falling into a black
hole.
But since the only thing in black holes is dieing galaxies,
that only proves two things:
Cosmologists have warped imaginations, and there is no
such thng as slow. Since if there was such a thing as slow time
that would only prove that there is also fast time.



Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Mar 25, 7:10*pm, "
wrote:
On Mar 25, 10:31*pm, wrote:





On Mar 25, 3:37*pm, "
wrote:

On Mar 20, 1:25*am, wrote:

Motion and gravitational time decelerate or slow. The slowing of your
clock takes you fast into the future of the rest of the universe. By
proper time a small duration has elapsed but the rest of the universe
has aged far into its future. A slow now and a fast now appear the
same. That is proper time. Slow or fast it is still exactly the same
order unfolding.

* *Since that's the same thing as climbing up on a mountain
* *and shouting "Time is curved", it's also why people invented
* *lasers, digital, satelites, and robots for the science idiots.
* *Since the lasers show quite readily that time is not invariant.
* *The digital shows spontaneously that the mountain science cranks
* *are not only fools, but they are *continuous fools.
* *And the satellites proof immediately, that P.V. cells not only
work,
* *they work particularly well with Exxon idiots.
* *And the Robots prove what they always proved.
* *The New York Times and not only idiot Journalists,
* *but they are, indeed, Manhattan idiot Journalists.

Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Time is not curved. There is just its slowdown which is the
Mathematical Gamma factor curve. There is no dimensional curvature to
time. It simply slows.

* *It only slows to idiots imagining themselves falling into a black
hole.

Neutron stars would reveal it and so does high speed motion bunker



* *But since the only thing in black holes is dieing galaxies,
* *that only proves two things:
* *Cosmologists have warped imaginations, and there is no
* *such thng as slow. Since if there was such a thing as slow time
* *that would only prove that there is also fast time.





Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -