Traveler wrote in
:

Of course it's a fictitious construct. All models in physical theories
are.

Not true. A model is supposed to represent (model) something in
nature.

You misunderstand what a "model" is, and what is expected of it. A model of
a system is an idealized, abstract representation of some set of entities
and processes hypothesized to exist in nature. It is not a duplicate or a
"scale model" of that system. The system is always richer than the model,
which defines and then treats only those variables in the system which can
be made rigorous --- i.e., deductive. The model is considered valid if its
behavior, which is predictable because it is deductive, can be used to
successfully predict the observable behavior of the system. If it can, then
the idealized entities and processes it postulates are *real* --- we regard
them as "existing in nature."

We have models of the atom that are refined over the years as
knowledge increases. They representr actual entities (electrons,
neutrons, positrons, protrons, etc...). Spacetime is not a model
because it represents nothing physical.

Electrons, etc., are regarded as "actual entities" only because they are
defined in models which have predictive power. Like spacetime, they are
abstract, idealized entities, no different than circles or imaginary
numbers or wave functions. They are concepts --- inventions of the mind
which have analytical and predictive utility.

I have no problem with that. But how does one get from a fictitious
construct like spacetime to time travel.

It is no more fictitious, on its face, than any other model. The proof of
the pudding is in the time-traveling. If it is accomplished, then the model
is validated, and the "reality" protrayed by GR becomes more "real." If it
is not, despite intensive efforts, then that "reality" becomes more
doubtful. But the model will not be replaced until a better one is
contrived which has more predictive power.

On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 15:42:29 -0600, Publius
wrote:

[boring stuff deleted]

It is no more fictitious, on its face, than any other model. The proof of
the pudding is in the time-traveling. If it is accomplished, then the model
is validated, and the "reality" protrayed by GR becomes more "real." If it
is not, despite intensive efforts, then that "reality" becomes more
doubtful. But the model will not be replaced until a better one is
contrived which has more predictive power.

First, spacetime is not a model of anything. It is just a ****ing
graph. Second, it certainly does not allow time travel. It forbids it.
That Einstein could not see this lends credence to rumors that he was
just a mediocre plagiariser. That Godel claimed that spacetime allows
time travel shows him for what he was, a ****ing fruitcake. That you
come to their defence in spite of the overwhelming evidence of their
crackpottery shows you for what you are, an ass kisser. ahahaha...
AHAHAHA... ahahaha... And stop ****ing with my headers, goddamnit!

Physics is so much phucking phun. ahahaha...

Louis Savain

Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm

On 5 Dec 2005 11:58:09 -0800, "Mark Martin"
wrote:

[crap]

Pack it, Martinette. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...

Louis Savain

Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm

"odin" wrote in message
news
In 1949, Einstein's friend, Kurt "lunatic" Godel, announced to the
world that the spacetime of general relativity allows time travel via
closed timelike loops.

[odin]
****ing idiot..... I hope you kill yourself today.

[hanson]
But odin, Kurt Gödel died back on 14 Jan 1978. However, even
if your post mortem blessings to Kurt maybe a tad late, Gödel may
come back via a timelike loop and do like favors onto you ....
Be careful what you wish for... He's a stiff one.. He could do it to you!
ahahaha.... AHAHAHAHA... ahaha... ahahanson

Traveler wrote in
:

First, spacetime is not a model of anything.

GR is.

That you
come to their defence in spite of the overwhelming evidence of their
crackpottery shows you for what you are, an ass kisser. ahahaha...

Ah. playground-caliber *ad homimens*.

My mistake. Thought I was dealing with a grown-up.

Go back to your sandbox.

Traveler wrote:
On 5 Dec 2005 11:58:09 -0800, "Mark Martin"
wrote:

[crap]

Pack it, Martinette. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...

Q: Why do lesbians get farther on their vacations than Traveler?

A: Because while they're on the highway doing 69, Traveler is still
back home, packing his ****.

-Mark Martin

On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 00:04:53 GMT, "hanson" wrote:

"odin" wrote in message
news92dnTfQXZV5BQnenZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@whidbeytel. com...
In 1949, Einstein's friend, Kurt "lunatic" Godel, announced to the
world that the spacetime of general relativity allows time travel via
closed timelike loops.

[odin]
****ing idiot..... I hope you kill yourself today.

[hanson]
But odin, Kurt Gödel died back on 14 Jan 1978. However, even
if your post mortem blessings to Kurt maybe a tad late, Gödel may
come back via a timelike loop and do like favors onto you ....
Be careful what you wish for... He's a stiff one.. He could do it to you!
ahahaha.... AHAHAHAHA... ahaha... ahahanson

ahaha... I think I may have misunderstood odin's eloquent post. Can
someone clarify it for me? Was he addressing his message to Kurt or
me? ahahaha... I think old fruitcake Kurt deserves to travel back in
time so he can die again. ahahaha...

Louis Savain

Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm

"Traveler" wrote in message
...
Here is the reason that Einstein had a poor understanding of his own
theories:
[snip, I did read]


Albert Einstein was better than Harry Houdini,
http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Stage/3487/
better than David Copperfield, Louis.
http://www.davidcopperfield.com/#

All three knew about smoke and mirrors, but Einstein's smoke and
mirrors is on paper. David Copperfield can make an elephant disappear.
Einstein could make time disappear. And he's more famous. At the age of 13
he got his first inspiration from http://www.jimloy.com/geometry/every.htm
That's not dumb, that's pretty smart.

Androcles.

"Daryl McCullough" wrote in message
...
Louis Savain says that "Einstein was dumb". There is another saying
that starts out "Don't throw stones...".

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY

You should heed it.
Androcles.

"Mike" wrote in message
oups.com...

Traveler wrote:

[snip]


Certainly, but this does not prevent a bunch of crackpots, con artists
and lunatics (e.g., Kurt Godel, Albert Einstein, Kip Thorne, Michio
Kaku, Stephen Hawking, Brian Greene, Carl Sagan, David Deutsche,
etc...) from believing in time travel, even though the "model" does
not support motion in time at all. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...


You forgot to add, Baez, Roberts, Dirty van der Psychous von Pandora,
Samy the Wormhead, Eric Goose and plenty of others. they all believe,
whether they know it or not, in a block universe.


Mike

Those people are dumb sheep. Einstein was a smart butcher.
Leg of Goose, anyone?
Fishbait? Wormy will do.
Sperm? Dork Van de merde doesn't have any.

Androcles.