On Thursday 07 October 2004 12:17, Nick Reiter wrote: > Gentlemen, > > Back in 2000, I attended a little informal meeting at > University of Arizona in Tucson at the Astronomy > Department on alternative models of gravity. One of > the people I met at that time was the department > contrarian astronomer, Dr. Bill Tifft. Tifft's > speciality was the observation of quantized red shift > anomalies in spiral galaxies. His tentative > hypothesis suggested that at intergalactic sizes, > general relativity may break down, and that space and > time assume properties similar to everyday life in the > quantum realm. > > Now this was meaty stuff, and Tifft was as you might > imagine a fan and intellectual sparring partner of > Halton Arp. However what I found even more > fascinating was Tifft's theory of 3D time. > Fascinating even given that I understood only .0001% > of what he was suggesting! Best I could translate > into Nickspeak, the time domain has a three > dimensional existence, but because we are in the space > domain, we can perceive it only (at best) as an > abstract 4th dimension. However in Tifft's cosmology, > there could be matter, planets, people, existing in > the time domain, and for them, space would be an > annoying poetic relativistic abstraction. The > interface is at photons - or something like that. > > A web search for Tifft's work shows up very little, > though a couple of years ago he had started a website > for the discussion of 3D time models. No idea what > happened to it, or him. Maybe some vortexian with > greater seeking skills than I can follow up. I have > e-mailed Tifft on a couple of occasions over the past > 4 years, to no avail. > > Despite my lack of understanding, it seemed elegant > and had a truthful character to it as theories go. > Still an empiricist, but when I do walk the other side > of the street, I am a sucker for theories that are > elegantly symmetrical. Old fashioned that way. > > NR > > --- Mike Carrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jones wrote: > > <snip>> > > > > > A few years back (25 years to be exact) a fine, > > > nominally-secular, BBS series debuted on American > > > > public TV > > > > > called "Connections" which is enlightening to > > > > merge with > > > > > some of later more open-minded spiritual ideas of > > > > Bill > > > > > Moyers. James Burke, the "Connections" > > > > master-mind, > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com
My thoughts on this are along similar lines in that a question arises: Why can't time have dimensions as well as space? If spacetime is presumed to be 11 dimensional according to some quantum mechanicists, why would not some of these be dimensions of time as well as space or some other realm of dimension heretofor totally outside of our experience. The space outside of space, an interuniversal space if one will. In this vein, Einstein causality could be circumvented by time travelers, as one actually COULD sterilize one's cat's grandfather and still retain his own cat. The affected timeline would be different from ones own. Bear in mind that events in the skew line timelines could be also infinitely different as well as infinitely numerous. Similarly, if space can inflate on a cosmic scale as in present theories deemed politically correct, why can't space also be malleable locally under similar forces generated locally; and if space can expand, then so also can it contract under similar forces. Maybe even a rebound effect where contracted space in front of a force generator will rebound to original size behind it? And maybe some of this rebound would be like a secondary recovery scheme in a carnot cycle such that actual energy consumed in the process would be more efficiently used. I am afraid that I cannot offer any calculations on this or practical methods of achieving these, but it seems that many things are possible. Standing Bear
