Dean Mullen

I was just thinking, maybe time doesn't merely exist but there is only the present that exists, and yet through space & motion objects can continuously alter & change this one moment feels eternal and yet because we can change it thanks to space & motion we get an illusion that there is a sense of flowing time. Time travel to the future is just speeding up your motion through space. But if you wanted to return to 2010, you can still somewhat do it, for 2010 was just a certain configuration of matter in space, and not an actual time so if you reconstructed the way everything was in 2010 down to the atomic scale, that would be the best way to time travel and strictly speaking you could consider it returning to 2010 for it was the exact same configuration and with no time, nothing truly separates that 2010 and the original 2010 amazingly.

Of course I know that but the odds of it re-occurring five times in a row is 2x2x2x2x2 = 243 isn't it? or is that not true.

If you have 3 possibilities in a random number generator or lets say as an analogy, 3 balls in a bag, the odds of any particular ball coming out is 3/1, yet the odds of 2 coming out 5 times in a row is 3x3x3x3x3 = 243, so the odds of that occurring is 243/1, so lets say we did our random picking, and 2 came out 4 times in a row, then the odds of it continuing would be extremely unlikely, at 243/1 for it to come out a 5th time, so it shows that 2 coming out a fifth time is unlikely, yet at the same time there is only 3 options so then you conclusively speaking can realize that the odds of 2 coming out is both 243/1 and 3/1 at the same time? how can this be? Paradox? PS: apologies for spelling error, I meant of course probability paradox.

If the past is just memories & the future is yet to happen, the only time you can be certain exists is the present, and the only place you can be certain exists is the place you observe. Even though it seems unlikely, there is no certainty that I was even here typing the start of this post, about 20 seconds ago. There is room for the possibility you are shifting through consciousness in other words, you are only you for a split momment of time and you observe the memories of you then leave you, although it sounds crazy, there is no way to disprove it. You cannot travel through time thus you cannot prove the past even happened, although I do believe the past did happen, I just think its interesting to see how much uncertainty there is in the most basic common concepts.

Mixing maths with science, many scientists are convinced there is other Universes and that they have varying laws of physics, I realize that this may effect mathematics in a real way. Mathematics may work differently in different universes, although it sounds uncomprehendbale that there could be a universe in which 1+1 = 3, it maybe possible, for if you lived in a universe were 1+1 always equalsed 3, and it was natural for if you put an apple beside another apple, there is three apples, you would not question 1+1 = 3, yet in our universe, maybe 1+1=2 just seems natrual and normal, for we grew up with it, and no nothing else than it. There may also be multi-multiverses, where +, -, x and divsion come into existence and whom knows if you climb the hierarchy ladder of existence far enough, you reach a point were maths is created, if not then were does maths come from? you could pressume it doesn't come from anywhere and is just the natrual concept of reality, yet we cannot pressume this if the laws of physics vary per universe, and thus you can conclude that you must throwaway the assumptions that the way things work in this universe is the same for everywhere else. I call this theory the Hierarchy Mathematical Systematic Theory.

What is an experience? what creates it? although the brain can produce calculations, what causes these calculations to be experience by the conscious being within? I cannot comprehend an experience, for we cannot create experiences in computers even if we recreated the brains network exactly, that means an experience may not be created by a known brain function. Like the brain inherits information from the external world but what causes the experiencer to inherit the informaiton inside the brain? there must be some sort of force or mechanism that creates experience within the brain that we just don't know about?

I was just thinking, if you had a 2-D circle sidewards and shown to a three dimensional observing entity, there appears to be nothing there, yet something is there, and maybe the opposite is true. There appears to be something yet there is nothing. And maybe nothing exists. Although it sounds irrational, just open your mind for a minute and maybe nothing exists. Although you may argue "I doubt therefore I am" yet if you wrote the words "I doubt" on a piece of paper, you could then realize the possibility of letting a computer process the words "I doubt" in someway, then maybe our brains can process the words "I doubt" and we can experience an illusion that "I doubt" yet it is only the brain stating "I doubt" and the brain does not experience, for it is possible for the brain to be an illusion, thus the concept "I doubt therefore I am" maybe an illusion and not true. We maybe so deep inside the illusion of everything that it becomes so real and so defined, we find no reason to believe it's not there. Yet science has always pressumed then been disproven. We pressumed the world we see is external, yet it is really internal and experienced inside our brain, we pressumed reality was solid & defined, yet quantum physics tells us otherwise and that reality is created by consciousness and that the solidity of matter is no more than an illusion. This is a leap in thinking, and yet the idea nothing can create an illusion in the first place seems impossible, even if it were possible we may neve realize it, because we haven't thought that deeply and explored reality that complex yet. I guess it is more of a philisophical leap of the imagination, but in theory it could be true, yet I'm not sure.

Yes but I am showing the relativity between a second and a metre, I should of explained that more, I didn't mean literally space & time, I published another post that states time does not exist, so maybe this is incorrect or that it can be used to show the difference between are measurments, nothing official.

Could the flow of time be an illusion? the question is, do we travel from the present to the future or does the future come to us? either way in which time flows, there is a problem: the present is always the present, yet we are always travelling from the present to the future. (paradox) I think the resolution to such a paradox is looking at is as this: 00:01am = Past at 00:02am 00:01am = Present at 00:01am 00:01am = Future at 00:00am so a single time can be the past, present or future depending on what time it is now, yet now is always now and so how can the relativity between now, the past & future even change in the first place? what causes the flow between past, present & future, what is the true defintion of tick tock? I believe the answer is time does not exist, only motion exists, that you can speed it up and slow it down relative to other objects, but you cannot travel backwards through time for time does not exist. Motion is not a dimension, just a physical phenomneon produced by space, and that you could conclude there is not 11 dimensions but only 10 and space itself which can be defined as an entity which contains the 10 dimensions produces the phenomneon of motion within, the way in which objects travel through space, and the faster your speed, the slower the motion of the external world, and you cannot travel faster than the speed of light, because there is no time to travel backwards through, so it would be essentialley a paradox. This is why time travel is not possible, because time itself doesn't exist.

But you have to trust time exists, I believe it should be called space-motion, you can speed up & slow down motion and time is just a method we humans use to distuingishe points between two events and a tick tock clock is just a mechanism that is set at a fixed rate, but it is not really time that causes it to flow it is just motion and that if you travel at Cx2 then the motion would go backwards yet that is not possible, I guess regardless of what I or you say it doesn't matter because nothing can go faster than the speed of light, but yet I do understand what you mean but time does not exist in my opinion and that is why you cannot travel at Cx2

I see but where does the light go when you say it is lost? and even if it is lost there maybe some mechanism to harness it still.

If you can project light beams against mirrors and it can in some sense keep the light beam lasting longer, what if you have a circular machine containing countless mirrors and that you project the light of an object for e.g. onto a mirror then close the machine from the outside world fast enough so that the light does not escape and is kept on an infinite loop of mirrors thus the light of the from can be kept as clear as the room itself even after the room is gone, and that if you opened it up and observed it for a split second you see the room through the mirror and would see a more than crystal clear image of the room as if it was still there and it would look so real it would be more realastic looking than any camera or video technology we attain, and if we could somehow use this concept to hold onto light for long enough we could create photos & videos of recorded events that look so real we cannot distinguishe it from reality, although it seems impossible if it could be done we could open up a completely new world of recording light. And we could also mix light togehter and create special effects that look as real as reality itself, so you could get to observe completely fictional videos create by mixing the light attained from certain objects, so if you done so you could amazingly create videos & images more real than any technology before. It may be difficult if not impossible to do this but it would be interesting to try.

I believe if you travelled faster than the speed of light regardless of it being possible or not, just say it was you would not time travel but light projection illusion time travel in other words if you travel faster than the speed of light you are moving faster than the projections themselves or the light itself thus they move relatively further away thus the light beams coming from another object would seem to get further & further away thus giving one the illusion that you are watching the object which produces the light beams as before it happened, yet also don't forget you would be moving faraway from this object thus if you moved back towards it, you would find you haven't time travelled at all and that the object is still in the present and so are you and so are you and the object. here is some mathematical equations to explain what I mean Object = C You = C x 2 (your travelling twice the speed of light) If you look at the object, for every unit of time passed it would appear to move that further back in time, in other words if you travelled C x 2 for one second you would see the object as it was one second before the time it is, and then travel an extra second and it you get the light a second before that, and so if you travelled at C x 2 for five years, you would see the object as it was five years before you left, thus you may get to see yourself beside the object, thus get the illusion there is two you's, and in other words you would view time as going backwards, yet in truth you would just be going further into space and to places that haven't recieved the light that is of the true state of the object, so an example of this idea would be: You Leave Earth for a star that is 10 light years away in 2011. You travel to the star at C x 2 and arrive there in 2016. If you look back at Earth, you would see the earth as it was 10 years before 2016 thus 2006. So if you looked back at Earth you would see it as if you have travelled back in time yet it is all an illusion. And then if you waited till 2026, you would see yourself leaving the earth and heading towards you. Yet this is obviously just the light of you leaving which you have left behind, so in other words if you travel at C x 2 you lose your light property, and I guess time travel to the past isn't possible even if you travelled faster than the speed of light. Yet it is not possible to travel faster than the speed of light, but even if it was time travel to the past wouldn't be possible regardless.

Space & Time are relative but what is the relativity between one metre and one second? I conclude that you can use the speed of light to unite and distuingishe the relativity between space measurments & time measurements although measurments is just the creation of our imagination, it is feasible to calculate a metre in time and a second in space as in their relativity. So the speed of light is about 299,792,458 meters/second So a meter is the speed of light divided by the speed of light, then what is a metre in time? If you calculate how long it takes to travel a metre at the speed of light you can develop relativity: thus how long does it take to travel a metre at the speed of light? it takes 1 divided by 299,792,458 thus it takes 0.000000003 seconds to travel a metre at the speed of light thus a metre in time is 3e-9 seconds. and a second in space is 299,792,458 metres. thus this means the relativity between the two measurments is 3e-9 to 299,792,458 and that 299,792,458 divided by 3e-9 is the answer to the relativity between space & time which is 9E16 aka about 90,000,000,000,000,000 or 90 quadrillion. I don't know if this means anything or it is true but if it is then 90 quadrillion is the number that separates space & time.

I said consciousness not humans, and consciousness on earth has been around for about 3 billion years but the first consciousness was around for up to 10 billion years lets say on alien planets, I cannot tell you if it was 10 billion but it was probably more than 3 billion years, and quantum physics highly suggests that consciousnes creates reality, the double split experiment clearly reflects the concept that the act of observation creates one possibility from an infinite realm of possibilites for the particular object one observes and that the wave function that states reality does not exist as such is destroyed, in other words consciousness creates reality, just check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4Z8CqAiYI8 this link, its a bbc horizon about that topic and shows how the evidence is growing towards consciousness creates reality as a fact amazingly. 1. I don't think you are understand what I am saying, I am basing the idea on the quantum physics theories that suggest consciousness creates reality and destroys the wave function and develops a one possibility seemingly solid & defined reality, basically I am saying if consciousness brings reality into existence then my body which is part of reality does not exist, thus I do not exist when I am not observing myself. 2. I am not saying reality is like a dream that you would have during the night, I know there is rational laws of physics but I believe reality is a different form of reality and it makes sense that the entire reality is within our consciousness as the holographic universe would support this and the idea that reality is a drema really fits the concept consciousness creates reality as quantum physics suggests, I cannot describe in what way it is a dream but if you study wave functions and the collapse of it, it seems reality is a dream & it must be. I am not talking about the holographic universe reality I am talking about quantum reality, I can tell from your and everyone elses reply here tha you didn't realize I am refering to the observation effect that states "atoms exist as a wave function and when a conscious observer looks at it, one possible state comes into existence" in other words consciousness creates reality. It is the work of niels bohr. if you want to know more check out this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4Z8CqAiYI8 its a bbc horizon documentary on the quantum reality, that is what I mean by consciousness creates reality.

If consciousness essentially creates reality and observation forms reality into a defined state, then I was just wandering were is my body and thus myself when I am dreaming? I have realized that my body including my head cannot exist when I am asleep & dreaming because I am not observing it nor sensing it in anyway, this must mean that my body, brain & self does not exist when I am dreaming, yet if that is true, then what produces the dream? The only possibility I can see is that all of reality is a dream and that the dream of reality and the dreams within reality which we have every night is produced from a higher level of reality beyond this world, and that would make sense of the thought "Consciousness creates reality" because in a dream, we create reality, yet we have no idea we are doing it for our sub-conscious is performing this act without us knowing, so whom knows maybe all of reality is in some sense a dream and that are sub-conscious creates it, yet it obviously has much more complex & defined properties, and that if you leave a cup on the table, turn your head away and then turn back it is still there yet in the dreams we have at night, it could mysteriously dissapear. it seems irrational but I do not see too much wrong with it honestly. I also can see evidence we are all one consciousness separated in this dream with the illusion of space & time because of the unified field theory.

Based on the concept of the Multiverse which contains an infinite number of universe, it is imaginable that there maybe a multi-multiverse or to make things simple an M2V where two represents the number of multi's in the world which contains an infinite number of multiverses and onto M3V containing an infinite number of M2V's and all the way onto MInfinityV. The MV contains laws of physics, which vary per universe and the M2V contains laws of laws of physics which vary per MV and onto M3V contains laws of laws of laws of physics which vary per M2V. So for e.g. Each Universe: Different speed of light Each Multiverse: statement that speed & light exist and so on. But the key varies for us would be mathematics Each Universe: Different properties of adding, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Each Multiverse: Different forms of NAEMHS (Numerological Acting Entities of Mathematical Hierarchy Systems) (so adding, subtraction, multiplication & division is unique to our multiverse) Each M2V: Different numbers (so our level of numbers is on one line from -infinity to infinity and all in between yet, each M2V have their own number line each infinitely different than the other) Each M3V: Different forms of calculation (so our ways of calculating using numbers is unique to our M3V) Each M4V: Different forms of understanding (so our ways of understanding is unique to our M4V) Each M5V: Different forms of X (There is nothing to say about this realm because nothing of what it contains exists in our world so it is literally impossible for us to understand what has no properties of the world we live in) Yet in M3V and onward numbers do not exist so calling it by number is incorrect so I only use the numbers to make it simple yet in truth, it contains no numbers, no size, no concepts that we can tie our knowledge of the world to. Even though this theory sounds irrational, it is not impossible as the concept existence comes to an end is more irrational and we can look at the works of Georg Kantor to see how just as there is a hierarchy of infinities in maths there can be too in nature and there can be an end to infinity and a beginning of bigger infinity's, some infinity's, a whole infinite step above the previous, so based on that concept you could imagine it existing in nature.