JSH: Some history is the future
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum Gravity 343.4: Gravitomagnetism, GravitoWeak Interaction, GravitoStrong Interaction, and Repulsive Combinations
Next: Quantum Gravity 343.5: Multiple Interaction Literature (Continued)
From: JSH on 29 Nov 2009 10:48 On Nov 14, 8:38 pm, JSH <jst...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > One of the weirder things that has emerged from my mathematical > research is the possibility of continual transmission of information > from the future to the past in order to CREATE the future, where key > is what I call the optimal path algorithm. Which it looks like the poster "Rotwang" has debunked as a solution! So all my wild speculations in this post go out the window. > Used against the Traveling Salesman Problem it gives you a traveler > going backwards in time to meet himself, where the algorithm requires > continual communication between the two travelers in order to get the > optimal path. Which it seems does not work, according to the work done by "Rotwang" which is in this thread. > If that is a routine part of nature then light takes the optimal path > in that way, and it also gives an arrow to time--we think we're > traveling forward in the future as we're the collapsed path, when > actually we're traveling both forwards AND backwards in time. > > The collapse to an optimal path gives us the illusion of only going > forwards in time. > > The arrow is the collapsed optimal path which appears to only go > forward in time. > > If so, then some of our "history" can be information transmitted to > the past in order to create our future (and our present). Trashing that idea for the realworld, but I might still use it someday for science fiction. So, yup, nothing to see here, move along. I was just wrong. Happens all the time. James Harris
From: Mark Murray on 29 Nov 2009 12:53 JSH wrote: > So I didn't solve the TSP problem and did not prove P=NP. Oh well. > Not a big deal. Apologies for the insults left along the way? M
From: Mark Murray on 29 Nov 2009 12:54 JSH wrote: > So, yup, nothing to see here, move along. I was just wrong. > > Happens all the time. Noted. Now look at your incorrect SWJPAM paper. M
From: Peter on 29 Nov 2009 15:45 On Nov 29, 12:53 pm, Mark Murray <w.h.o...(a)example.com> wrote: > JSH wrote: > > So I didn't solve the TSP problem and did not prove P=NP. Oh well. > > Not a big deal. > > Apologies for the insults left along the way? > > M Isn't the comedy itself sufficient? Peter
From: Mark Murray on 29 Nov 2009 16:54
Peter wrote: > Isn't the comedy itself sufficient? Naah. Like James, I like dreaming. M |