Prev: Galois group of a quintic polynomial over Q
Next: Help with a (hopefully famous) quote
From: sanboz on 15 Nov 2009 12:57

"JSH" <jstevh(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:04874ca3-d17f-4100-8439-437d1ad11d23(a)h40g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> 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.

Join the Ashtar Command, they do that all the time. They have "channelers"
that get furure information from Aliens in Spaceeships waiting to land, and
beam it to Earth where it is used for profit by the Channelers.

I am sure the path is sub-optimal, as they (Aliens) are not here yet,
although they can talk to us.

>
> 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.

What if he does it twice, then there would be 4 ?

that would be a 2 ^ k problem, and 2 ^ k different paths

>
> 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.

arrow OF time. not "to"

>
> The collapse to an optimal path gives us the illusion of only going
> forwards in time.

and some of us stay stuck, with illusion of being sucessful

>
> 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).

but history is created by the present, and is already over in the past.

>
> And that includes legends and mythologies, so yes, Revelations, for
> instance, seems to have future weapons in it.

It does not, read it, you have been watching too much TV


> With this theory that's
> because it actually hasn't happened yet, but was information sent to
> the past about what will happen in order to MAKE it happen.
>
> Parts of Genesis appear also to actually be stories about the future,
> not the past.

appear, stories ? sounds like fiction, dude

>
> So the future is an active participant in creating itself.

circular thinking, what gave you that idea, "itself" ??

>
> Which means there is no way to know what knowledge is future knowledge
> transmitted to the past, unless that future wishes you to know, and
> then of course you CAN know. And there seem to be no limits. (So
> yes, conceivably you can get winning lottery numbers from the future,
> but ONLY if the future needs you to have that information to create
> itself.)

Therefore, you must accept the fact that your research is still meaningless
into the future, because it is not sucessful in the past


>
> And if you can understand all of that you gotta be a singular type of
> human being as it is very confusing. But one thing is clear, if I'm
> talking about it, and I'm right, then the only reason I know to even
> tell it is because the future needs me to know and needs me to tell it
> for that future to exist.

You should advise Obama.

>
> It seems to me that such mind-numbing information would have a
> predictably large impact on a human population, which is why people
> haven't maybe really known it before; therefore, it seems likely some
> epic event is about to occur, which is allowing the information to be
> known.

if it is "mind-numbing", nobody wants to hear it or understand it.

>
> For various reasons the idea is floating around that the "end of the
> world" is in 2012. My memory is that Sir Isaac Newton actually
> calculated the correct year and he got 2010, but I've seen no mention
> of that in the record, so I'm not sure why I have that number.

go see the movie, numb-nuts.
It will tell you your past future what to tell you to do for your future
past.


>
> It may be future knowledge.

"future knowledge" = "guessing"


>
>
> James Harris


From: Owen Jacobson on 15 Nov 2009 14:59
On 2009-11-14 23:38:49 -0500, JSH <jstevh(a)gmail.com> said:

> 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.
>
> 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.

You have attached unwarranted, semi-mystical importance to the
"backwards" part of your trivial variation on bidirectional search[1].
It does not imply time travel; you can model it just as well by
thinking of two travellers, one going forward through the original
graph, and one going forward through a reversed version of the original
graph.

It'd serve you well to read up on how others have already solved graph
problems in general, and NP-complete graph problems specifically,
before running around trumpeting your "innovations". It's a pity you
won't.

-o

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bidirectional_search> for starters.

From: JSH on 15 Nov 2009 22:32
On Nov 15, 11:59 am, Owen Jacobson <angrybald...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2009-11-14 23:38:49 -0500, JSH <jst...(a)gmail.com> said:
>
> > 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.
>
> > 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.
>
> You have attached unwarranted, semi-mystical importance to the
> "backwards" part of your trivial variation on bidirectional search[1].

I checked the "bidirectional search" over a year ago when it was first
trotted out as what my optimal path algorithm does.

But the actual algorithm applied to TSP has a backwards Traveler, who
is going backwards in time to meet himself along the optimal path. In
order to calculate that path the backwards Traveler has to communicate
with himself in the past--or you can say the Traveler moving forward
in time has to communicate with himself in the future.

It's not mystical. It's an integral part of the actual algorithm,
where the optimal path once calculated collapses to a single traveler
moving forward in time.

> It does not imply time travel; you can model it just as well by
> thinking of two travellers, one going forward through the original
> graph, and one going forward through a reversed version of the original
> graph.

And you don't mention communication between the two travelers.

Now I've had over a year to ponder this thing and it scared me for a
long time, and still unsettles me, as it changes how you look at just
about everything we think we know as human beings.

But I have a simple analogy: to get, say, a college degree, when
you're a kid it can help to SEE yourself in the future getting that
degree. And from the perspective of gaining that accomplishment you
can make decisions like not to go out partying on the night before you
take your SAT's. Your imagined future self helps you make a decision
today.

What we see as conscious decision making may just be a rather basic
algorithm built into fundamental reality.

> It'd serve you well to read up on how others have already solved graph
> problems in general, and NP-complete graph problems specifically,
> before running around trumpeting your "innovations". It's a pity you
> won't.

I have read up a lot on issues in this area. But I'm also considering
an idea I have which seems to answer a lot of questions. From a
purely intellectual perspective it's a fascinating algorithm to
consider, and the implications are world shaking if true.

Then in physics optimal paths are taken by information transmission
from the future to the past and vice versa. Continually. All the
time.

So to physics information transfer backwards and forwards in time
would be just a normal way of doing business.

It's how physics even knows which way forward in time is!

> -o
>
> [1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bidirectional_search> for starters.

I've checked it before.

The scariest part of the optimal path algorithm I've merely hinted at
here. The scariest thing is that it may be why you think you're
conscious. Then human beings actually live in a different state
relative to time than they realize, slightly, out of phase, always
partly in the future in some sense. But to us, we're merely seeing
ourselves in some possible future.

What this algorithm says instead though is that we may be seeing
ourselves at times IN THE FUTURE, and it's not just your imagination,
but physics.

Not mysticism, but a weirder reality.


James Harris
From: sanboz on 16 Nov 2009 09:29

"JSH" <jstevh(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fa5c6070-f59d-4d4a-a224-2d4e10fbf493(a)y10g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 15, 11:59 am, Owen Jacobson <angrybald...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2009-11-14 23:38:49 -0500, JSH <jst...(a)gmail.com> said:
>
> > 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.
>
> > 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.
>
> You have attached unwarranted, semi-mystical importance to the
> "backwards" part of your trivial variation on bidirectional search[1].

I checked the "bidirectional search" over a year ago when it was first
trotted out as what my optimal path algorithm does.

But the actual algorithm applied to TSP has a backwards Traveler, who
is going backwards in time to meet himself along the optimal path. In
order to calculate that path the backwards Traveler has to communicate
with himself in the past--or you can say the Traveler moving forward
in time has to communicate with himself in the future.

It's not mystical. It's an integral part of the actual algorithm,
where the optimal path once calculated collapses to a single traveler
moving forward in time.


******************start message*******************

=> JOIN THE ASHTAR COMMAND
We already do this on a real time basis, get beyond primitive theory; and
free your mind of limited thoughts;

http://www.ashtarcommandcrew.net/

http://www.luisprada.com/Protected/the_ashtar_command.htm

http://ashtarcommandtruth.com/

http://www.lightvoyager.com/ACnews/accnews.html

http://ashtar.galactic2.net/

http://ashtargalacticcommanders.ning.com/

http://www.freewebs.com/ashtargalacticcommand/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashtar_(extraterrestrial_being)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu0PGd-IVNI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gflfRrcn6QI

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/6844/Ascension_Timelines__Ashtar_Command_and_2012/

***************end message*******************************


> It does not imply time travel; you can model it just as well by
> thinking of two travellers, one going forward through the original
> graph, and one going forward through a reversed version of the original
> graph.

And you don't mention communication between the two travelers.

Now I've had over a year to ponder this thing and it scared me for a
long time, and still unsettles me, as it changes how you look at just
about everything we think we know as human beings.

But I have a simple analogy: to get, say, a college degree, when
you're a kid it can help to SEE yourself in the future getting that
degree. And from the perspective of gaining that accomplishment you
can make decisions like not to go out partying on the night before you
take your SAT's. Your imagined future self helps you make a decision
today.

What we see as conscious decision making may just be a rather basic
algorithm built into fundamental reality.

> It'd serve you well to read up on how others have already solved graph
> problems in general, and NP-complete graph problems specifically,
> before running around trumpeting your "innovations". It's a pity you
> won't.

I have read up a lot on issues in this area. But I'm also considering
an idea I have which seems to answer a lot of questions. From a
purely intellectual perspective it's a fascinating algorithm to
consider, and the implications are world shaking if true.

Then in physics optimal paths are taken by information transmission
from the future to the past and vice versa. Continually. All the
time.

So to physics information transfer backwards and forwards in time
would be just a normal way of doing business.

It's how physics even knows which way forward in time is!

> -o
>
> [1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bidirectional_search> for starters.

I've checked it before.

The scariest part of the optimal path algorithm I've merely hinted at
here. The scariest thing is that it may be why you think you're
conscious. Then human beings actually live in a different state
relative to time than they realize, slightly, out of phase, always
partly in the future in some sense. But to us, we're merely seeing
ourselves in some possible future.

What this algorithm says instead though is that we may be seeing
ourselves at times IN THE FUTURE, and it's not just your imagination,
but physics.

Not mysticism, but a weirder reality.


James Harris


From: Mark Murray on 16 Nov 2009 13:18
sanboz wrote:
> "JSH" <jstevh(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:fa5c6070-f59d-4d4a-a224-2d4e10fbf493(a)y10g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

....etc

Sanboz - it is very hard to see what you wrote and what you are quoting.

Please quote properly. Turning off HTML may help.

M
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Galois group of a quintic polynomial over Q
Next: Help with a (hopefully famous) quote