amin...@gmail.com
unread,May 27, 2017, 4:29:50 PM5/27/17You do not have permission to delete messages in this group
Either email addresses are anonymous for this group or you need the view member email addresses permission to view the original message
to
Hello..
Here is my final corrected text on (i have corrected some typos because
i write fast and think fast):
Can we travel back in time?
Here is my thoughts that i have just wrote:
It is a very interesting question that demands rationality
and logical thinking to answer it ...
To answer it, i start from a mathematical subject which is the mathematical arithmetic series.
An arithmetic series has as its main characteristic that
the difference between its terms is constant ... and that its sum
gives (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), a_n being the last term ... now you have to be smart and notice with me that just before the final step of the final calculation that resulted as a general equation of the arithmetic series, the calculation of the arithmetic series required of us a much bigger time to solve the series .. But as soon as the result (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2 has been reached, the time for the resolution of the arithmetic series has greatly diminished, therefore the time preceding the resolution has compressed a lot and allowed us to travel in the the future quickly, the resolution of the arithmetic series which gave: (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), it's like a wormhole in the universe permit us to time travel in the future more quickly, but understand with me that the time travel in the future that allows you to make the equation of (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2) is relative to the time taken previously by the arithmetic series just before the discovery of the equation (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), and thus that the universe is computable and that ultimately it allowed a time travel and thanks to mathematics that is something extra-ordinary in itself.
Now I will be more logical and ask myself the following question:
Is there any contradiction in my evidence since a car
is not a machine to allow time travel in the future to
the simple reason that the regions where we will travel and arrive
faster with a car will not have aged in time that corresponds to the future time in which one arrives by the feet?
I answer this in a more logical way:
Notice that when I said that the mathematical equation
of the arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2) is a time travel machine that permits to travel in the future, because it is an equation that also predicts the result more quickly to which one arrives by paper without this equation, so the time has no hold on the theoretical result that is predicted faster so that there is no contradiction when it comes to theoretical prediction. Also when you use this invention That is this mathematical equation of the arithmetic series: (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), it is that you are living the future of the one who has not yet invented or used this equation and who will arrive there in its future, therefore it is for this reason that this equation is also a time travel machine that permit to travel in the future and it has a predictive characteristic.
So there is no contradiction and therefore we can
consider a car as a time traveling machine to travel in the future, like
the microprocessor, and like several other mathematical inventions
as the mathematical equation of the arithmetic series.
Here is one of my conclusion:
If you are traveling from Montreal to Paris
by airplane, and that another person swims and walk
by foot to Paris, and assume that the person who moves by swiming
and walking wants to see Paris and answer some questions,
And if you travel to Paris by plane and you
answer these questions more quickly since you are going to see Paris
more quickly than the person swimming and and walking , so that
has a predictive character as the mathematical equation of the
arithmetic series (a_n * (a_n + 1)) / 2), since you will be able
to send an email quickly to the person who wants to
to swim and walk to Paris and give him
the answers he's looking for, so you'll be able to see
the answers of his future, and this predictive characteristic
can be considered as a time travel machine that permits to travel in the future,
so the aircraft and the car are like time travelmachines that permit to travel in the future ... as well as the processors and other mathematical inventions and others...
Rationality and logic also have a predictive characteristic,
so you must also reason better in a more scientific manner and take into account the scientific and empirical evidence to
be ahead of others, like a time machine that permit to travel in the future..
If a first person receives a valuable advice and this advice
of value allows him to better control his future and to succeed in his life in the future by executing this valuable advice and also it allows him to predict his future, and besides, imagine that a second person will receive in its future this valuable advice, then the first person will be able to guess with CERTITUDE the future of the second person which will be the consequence of the execution of this valuable advice , and not only the first person will have lived the future of the second person before the second person, since the two will have lived the same event by the execution of this valuable advice, then in my opinion we must reason as in fuzzy logic rather than in boolean logic and
notice that since the first person will guess with CERTITUDE
The future of the second person and will also live the future event of the second person, then those two theoretical and
empirical evidences confirms that the first person has lived the future
event of the second person, so this valuable advice could be called by mathematical approximation a time machine that permits to travel in the future, I say "approximation", because we by analogy are as in fuzzy logic rather than in boolean logic, in addition to that, that the fact that the first person guesses with CERTITUDE the future of the second person, this informs in a logical manner that this certainty change our way of perceiving, for this certainty, even if
it is not travel in the future, it is by approximation
as a journey into the future, for a journey into the future
will lead to the same certainty, and as a result
the same certainties permit us to affirm by approximation
that the valuable advice is a time machine that permit us to travel
in the future.
Then you understand that I am also a Platonist,
Because you noticed that I can define this time travel in the future as a platonic event, so when i said that a valuable advice is a time machine that permits to travel in the future, you understand that it makes us live platonically the future of others, and since I am a also Platonist, I affirm that a valuable advice is a time travel machine
that permit us to travel in the future of others since time has no hold on the ideas, and that the same idea through time inside two
persons, is the same idea, therefore my proof is made that the valuable advice is a time machine that permit us to travel in the future.
When you imagine a circle, I asserts that not only can you imagine the circle in material or matter but also in immaterial, as was my proof that I have just given you , this immaterial essence of the idea is reified by our reason, and that is the reason that gives it existence. So this in my opinion is sufficient proof that the idea exists because we feel it by our reason and it pays homage to our beloved philosopher Plato.
It is this reification of the immaterial essence of the idea
by reason which gives the necessary and even sufficient approximation to call even a valuable advice a time machine that permit to travel in the future.
Then since the idea exists and since a sensation also exists,
then one can not also distinguish an idea from the generated sensation
by the execution as an automaton of a valuable advice at a time t1 and a time t1 + t2, and since an idea does not age then we can affirm that valuable advice is a time machine that permit us to travel in the future, and the valuable advice has a predictive characteristic, because the approximation is sufficient since we are not in boolean logic but in fuzzy logic.
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.