No6

The FTSE had a good day, the Dow is having a good day, but oil is creeping up again, $75 a barrel on news that Condi Rice was out visiting in the Middle East and that a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah is "unenforceable."

But how about this. A fire? Or Venezuela putting the squeeze on the US?

Oil also gained after traders said a crude distillation unit at Venezuela's Amuay refinery will be shut for five to seven months following a fire.

The plant is part of the giant 940,000 barrel per day (bpd) Amuay-Cardon complex, the world's biggest refining complex and a top supplier of U.S. gasoline imports.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/24/markets/oil.reut/index.htm

No6,

 

I’m sure the U.S. hasn’t faced to satisfying results in its previous (probable) tries in the field under discussion of this forum. Take a look at this link (in one of its comments, my name has been mentioned!):

http://www.betterhumans.com/blogs/george/a...04/01/5525.aspx

This (if true) has trivial scientific errors. Also, to the best of my knowledge, and due to technical matters, the U.S hasn’t been able to access to a right framework for a practical spacewarp. Most of my work is based on quite fresh peer-reviewed papers of Kuhfittig, Graham, and Olum. Similar to a patient hunter, I’ve been observing the procedure of improving the efforts to furbish a more achievable model of spacewarp and NO finding could have been gained, apart from during recent months. However, a famous argument is: if America were as advanced as it seems and rumors say, its army has had much less troubles in Iraq, Afghanistan, and finding terrorists like Bin Laden; in addition we shouldn’t have faced to accidents like explosion of shuttles (sad dying of astronauts), multi-times delay of launching them, and not being impressed by the old technology of Russia. You can add damages of the natural disasters like hurricanes, etc and some others to that country, to the list.

From the link above.

DARPA to develop Einstein-Rosen bridge

DARPA, the US military’s advanced concepts research team, is working on an ambitious project to create nothing less than an ‘Einstein-Rosen bridge'. Referred to by some physicists as ‘timeholes,’ it is thought that the US military is set to introduce time travel to the battlefield by the end of the decade.

“This is clearly the future of armed conflict,” says DARPA lead scientist Tetsuo Hasegawa, “the ability to go back in time and destroy the enemy before tensions have even arisen would represent an unprecedented advantage in the history of warfare.”

and...

In addition to going back in time before the enemy is ready, it is also hoped that “quick-trip” time jumps will be made to the recent past in the event of a mistake or miscalculation on the battlefield. In this sense, the ERB would essentially act as a real-world 'undo' button. It is even speculated that so-called “foresight trips” will be made to the future to assess potential outcomes.

When asked about such ethical and practical problems as disrupting sensitive timelines or the grandfather paradox, Hasegawa noted, “Sure, those are potential issues, but I think you’re missing the point – this is time travel we’re talking about.”

DARPA hopes to roll-out a prototype ERB for testing in late 2008.

Cross-posted from Sentient Developments.

Published Saturday, April 01, 2006 12:32 PM by George

1) This idea about going back in time, changing the past, if it could happen, theory based on the multi-verse is that the universe would create different time-lines. One, where the past is changed and another where the time-line carries on and history isn't changed. This overcomes the paradox that you can go back in time and kill your grandfather and yet still exist. In one universe timeline you are not born, in another you are'

2) Look at the date on the article - an April fool (joke, hoax).

Also, IMHO = In my humble opinion.

Staffed by 100's (1000's?). The number of people working on black projects number 100's maybe 1000's.

A sign of things to come.

No real surprise there. I'd be more surprised if the Chinese were not doing this. This is the shady, largely un-reported world, which often only comes out later in expose books or now on the web. China are doing it now, Russia and Cuba 20 years ago. One way or another, they are all playing this game, whether it's the US backing Bin Laden when he was knocking seven bells out of the Russians in Afghanistan in the 80's, or the Chinese sending their agents out across the world now. Power politics, buying influence, propping up tin pot dictators, supporting terrorists (or freedom fighters when they are your guys), war by proxy, etc, etc, nothing new in it.

But what does all this mean for the average person right now? The US consumer might be horrified at the thought of $4 a gallon, but here in the UK, we are facing £5 a gallon. What wll be the consequencies of that?

"Analysts said the political risk factors that dictate oil prices are 'out of control', pointing to even higher prices to come.

The crisis coincided with the average price of petrol in the UK hitting a record high of 96.85p a litre, or £4.40 a gallon.

and

Yesterday's petrol price beat by a fraction the previous record of 96.81p a litre reached on May 11.

It means UK drivers are spending £6.14million more on petrol each day than they did at the start of the year - with the average two-car owning family paying an extra £19.38 on petrol per month.

The price of diesel remains below the record high of 99.19p a litre reached on May 4, and currently stands at 98.74p."

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article....mp;in_page_id=2

It's a good job there is no inflation then, otherwise people might start getting a little unhappy.

I've been telling ya this for months but no one listens to my folksy little opinions.

 

Dont be naive, people.

This is not a regional flare-up

 

China is making the moves here.

They are testing our reflexes at every opportunity.

Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, Sudan, Venezuela....its all China and its all about securing resources.

 

Oil is NOT coming down.

Get yer heads around that.

Rather than squinting over charts trying to make a buck off someone elses labour, I'd suggest you look around at how you can function without oil.

Don't think anyone's being naive. No one on here is talking about $30 oil and China has been covered over and over again. How everyone will function, or not, with $100, $200 or $300 oil will ultimately be the big question. China will not get it all, let's be clear on that and if they did monopolise it, then it will be they who dictate the price (and it won't be any of the figures mentioned above). There needs to be this continued competition for this resource and that alongside the peak oil question will be the determining factor.

"It seems that oil is destined to hit $80 before the end of July and maybe even higher should tensions erupt abruptly," said Kevin Kerr, editor of Global Resources Trader, a newsletter published by MarketWatch.

"The U.N. will have a full slate of activity trying to negotiate all of the hot spots on the planet right now," he said.

http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Stor...ers&siteid=

hmmm ......... depends on how quickly the russianns deliveri on the anti aircraft contract; once delivered and installed etc they will only be vulnerable to stealth bombers and only the us has these!

 

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/01/russia-is-key.html

 

"..............What has to be asked, therefore, is what makes the difference – what makes the likelihood of an Israeli strike imminent? The answer, of course, is makes the difference the forthcoming delivery by Russia of the SA-15 Gauntlet anti-aircraft missiles, the sales of which it has been negotiating since 2001, and right through the EU3 diplomatic initiative.

...................."

And even the stealth is not a sure thing. One was brought down in the action over Serbia a few years ago. The Serbs reportedly gave what was left of it to the Russians.

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9903/28/downed.plane.03/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-10...POE=click-refer

If these anti-aircraft missiles are delivered and start being deployed around the nuclear facilities, then you might get fireworks. Israel of course, is the only known WMD state in the region.

No6,

 

I’m sure the U.S. hasn’t faced to satisfying results in its previous (probable) tries in the field under discussion of this forum. Take a look at this link (in one of its comments, my name has been mentioned!):

http://www.betterhumans.com/blogs/george/a...04/01/5525.aspx

This (if true) has trivial scientific errors. Also, to the best of my knowledge, and due to technical matters, the U.S hasn’t been able to access to a right framework for a practical spacewarp. Most of my work is based on quite fresh peer-reviewed papers of Kuhfittig, Graham, and Olum. Similar to a patient hunter, I’ve been observing the procedure of improving the efforts to furbish a more achievable model of spacewarp and NO finding could have been gained, apart from during recent months. However, a famous argument is: if America were as advanced as it seems and rumors say, its army has had much less troubles in Iraq, Afghanistan, and finding terrorists like Bin Laden; in addition we shouldn’t have faced to accidents like explosion of shuttles (sad dying of astronauts), multi-times delay of launching them, and not being impressed by the old technology of Russia. You can add damages of the natural disasters like hurricanes, etc and some others to that country, to the list.

 

…And how do you protect an idea for time travel? …

 

Oh God please you save me from these guys who do NOT understand I don’t believe in time travel!!!! Also, nobody requests patent for a new kind of science or engineering, it’s ridiculous, isn’t it? I’ve read the rules. Besides, there are some funny and serious matters about the patent of my work, which I’d say later. By the way, I prefer not to be anxious on what’s going on in Nevada or Arizona; I do my job and they do their job; no war, OK?

 

…on Nick Cook’s book …

 

I repeat: traveling at light-speed or even beyond is not my favorite. I think to bending (warping) of spacetime.

At last: be more exact Mr. Dude. I’ve cited one work of Podkletnov in my Ref. [114]!!!!

I should have been more precise. I should have said, and how do you protect an idea for time travel, space warp, space surfing, wormhole travelling, whatever? Is it patented? You may not believe in time travel, that's fine, but there are others working on this. It may be futile, but they are working on it. My points hold true, these things are being worked on already and the black projects are already staffed by 100's (1000's?) working on similar ideas.

It doesn't matter that the US can't find Bin Laden or the fact that they are bogged down in an insurgent war. The US military machine is designed to fight conventional wars against a conventional foe and win them quickly. This they largely do, but what is going on in Iraq, they are not best equipped for. IMHO, it's an un-winnable war by conventional means. It has to be won through hearts and minds and I doubt the US can do that either in the Middle East.

As for Podkletnov, I didn't mention him, it was Cook's quote, but raised to show that the ideas are out there and if they are out there, you can bet that some Government black project somewhere is working on it.

So you need either to be be working for one of those "projects", or find someone with the money, a billionaire who doesn't mind the odd million or two being used for exotic scientific projects, and you mention Branson (by the way, if you approach him, make sure you get his name right, it's Branson, not Bronson). This is what happens in the film you keep mentioning "Contact".

"Virgin boss Sir Richard Branson has since launched his commercial Virgin Galactic service that will eventually use spaceliners based on the SpaceShipOne concept."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5173388.stm

If you have got the qualifications, you may have to work on more conventional aspects of space travel first. A job in a University, research or http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/. How you would do this or get there, I have no idea.

And doesn't that logo remind you of a little gray alien? One for the crank sites that.

WTIC closed at $76.70 today. Middle East boiling again.

Can't see Iran doing that nuclear deal with Israel's forces on the march.

Rockets hit Israeli city of Haifa.

The Israeli ambassador in Washington, Danny Ayalon, described the Haifa incident as a "major escalation" of the crisis.

He said the international community should make it clear to Iran and Syria - who both have links with Hezbollah - that they were "playing with fire".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5178058.stm

You have to read between the lines of much of what is said that comes out of the Middle East. State's like Iran openly say they would like to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth, Israel responds in kind. Sometimes actions are taken to provoke or scupper certain plans. Was the Israeli action of the last week or so taken in part to stop any US/Iran backroom deal? They were provoked, but they don't always respond in such a heavy handed way. Israel would like Iran dealt with - one way or another. They have already made it clear that if Iran looks like it is getting close to having the bomb, Israel will strike first.

Nice chart of OILB.

More on my plans:

 

As soon as gathering enough budget, I'd make a team. Members of that team would be experts and technicians in various areas of physics, engineering, mathematics and computer simulation. As once I mentioned I could compare it to building a big accelerator and the only one I know who could unify such branches in direction of a practical spacewarp is (for now) myself. Then we'd start our holy efforts in two main fronts, immediate doing of a few predictions of my papers, specially testing of the core of my model on ANEC violation by an asymmetric perforated cavity made of metallic hydrogen and running intense electric and magnetic fields to give a charge back-reaction to the system. On the other hand, we need exact solving of the equations by a (or more) supercomputer and modelizing of the process by the theory group to help the experimenters. I evaluate we'd be able to perform tests on traversing the gas, oil and water in less than a year and the expenses shouldn't be more than about millions. However, that quite depends on which entity does the job, for example if I'd be contractor (or actually in any legal manner that I could afford) of the U.S. Department of Energy or army or navy, etc, and do the things in a national lab, that would be a huge reduction of the costs; but if a private company decides to launch a completely new lab plus related issues, that would certainly be more expensive. If the experiments goes well, we could start removing the mediation between producer and user of the fuel and water. More exactly, there would be no need to millions of tons and kilometers of pipes throughout the world, and other ones like huge tankers. In that condition, a refinery in say China could receive its raw material directly from Saudi Arabia.

Next phase would result removing of wires and cables (mostly in industrial scales); along with mineral applications, and when all of the above would occurred, by gaining more experiences, the dream approaches to the humanoid applications. Along with doing so, I'd create a special division devoted to study the applications in outer space, definitely colonizing the Mars or Europa (a proper satellite of Saturn).

It's my ideal plan and I'd be thankful to see your advices, comments, critics, guidance and everything about the outlines and/or details ...

 

Cheers

How do you know that this hasn't been tried or planned already? As well as NASA, the US spends billions on black projects every year, space, time travel, anti-gravity, whatever you want to call it, it is probably high on that agenda. And how do you protect an idea for time travel? Is it patented? Once the theory is out there and the possible mechanism for making it work is known it's probably already being worked on in some secret facility in the Nevada or Arizona desert. I'm sure they have many projects in the pipeline or going on as we write.

Have a look at Nick Cook's The hunt for Zero Point. A good yarn, if nothing else, but full of interesting stories on the black project world.

"There is real work going on in the USA today on anti-gravity - the most visible of it at NASA, where the space administration is investigating the use of 'impossible science' to develop hardware that will allow a manned spacecraft to journey into deep space before the century is out by travelling at light-speed or even beyond. In the course of researching this story, I discovered and met with a Russian scientist called Podkletnov who has succeeded in 'blocking' gravity with super-conductors. Technically, this is scientific heresy, but Podkletnov is doing it and others aren't far behind. There's a race going on here and the prize is huge: whoever cracks the technology and brings it to market first taps into a potentially limitless energy source and develops an exotic and novel form of propulsion that requires no fuel."

http://www.randomhouse.co.uk/minisites/zer...zero_point.html

No6,

 

I agree with you to some extent, however natural continuing of the conversation between you and me would need saying much philosophy, and the logical principles of the TOE (theory of everything), plus some of its mathematical details where are under investigation by many researcher of the fields like (super)string theory, quantum gravity, novel branches of the advanced mathematics and other related regions.

By the way, you're right about the special relativity, but when I began to read the relativity for FTL purposes, I disappointed of the usability of the relativistic velocities for a spacecraft, due to the factors like (inertial) mass increasing, and length reduction, along with the terrible practical difficulties of controlling of such a spaceship through the starts, planets, asteroids, cosmic dust, etc.

Well, being right on the question of special relativity should not be that difficult, considering that it is proven fact that time travel to the future is possible via this method, although it is a one way ticket. This has been measured in the laboratory and on location using atomic clocks, aircraft, satellites and rockets. It is proven that time slows down the faster you move.

In 1975, Professor Carrol Alley tested Einstein's theory using two synchronised atomic clocks. Carol loaded one clock onto a plane, which was flown for several hours, while the other clock remained on the ground. At the end of its flight, the clock on the plane was slightly behind the one on the ground. Time had actually slowed down for the clock on the plane. It had travelled forward in time.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/wormholes/default.htm

As for the elusive TOE (theory of everything), which a number of physicists seem to think we are getting closer to. Any TOE that does not include human consciousness is worthless IMHO.

The "presentist" view

Some theorists have argued that the matter of the universe only exists in the present moment. Thus, if one were to travel back from the 'present' to an earlier time, none of the material universe would be found there, because it will have remained in the present: the traveller alone is the only part of the universe to have gone back to the earlier time. In terms of a 4-dimensional spacetime, the traveller (or, more generally the atomic particles that comprise the traveller) would have travelled 'back' to an area of spacetime corresponding to an earlier value of 't'; but none of the other particles that form the universe will have done so, so the traveller finds precisely nothing when arriving back at the earlier time. This viewpoint eliminates all of the supposed paradoxes about time travel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel

So, either the universe has some recording mechanism of the past built into it, probably at the quantum level, or the only possibility of time travel to the past is via the multiverse, the many-worlds interpretation. This would involve extra-dimensional travel where past times might still exist. Highly speculative and still largely science fiction than science fact.

I'm surprised that zero point energy hasn't come up again.

No6,

 

As I told above, I have no desire (and surely no ability) to study the "Plenty of theories around that" in detail. By the way, logically traveling to the past is so much more achievable than to the future; similar to recording and replaying of the information from the past and NOT the future, besides as far as I know if one makes a time machine, (s)he couldn't go back to the times before the time of machine construction. You see?, intuitively affecting on the passed events is very more reasonable on the event not happened yet (future) in our frameworks, but I accept (indeed, I feel) if one could go backward in time, moving forward in time shouldn't be fundamentally forbidden neither ..

Where exactly is the past recorded, other than in the memories of human beings and known or speculated history?

Time travel into the future in theory is possible and much easier. Einstein's "special theory of relativity" showed how time changes with motion. For example, an object traveling at high speeds ages more slowly than a stationary object. This means that if you were to travel into outer space and return, moving close to light speed, you could travel thousands of years into the Earth's future.

No6,

 

One: The scientific definition of a time machine is a mechanism directing one to the "PAST" and NOT the future.

 

Two: As I've mentioned, my model does not violate the causality. I've called it a "spacewarp", NOT a "timewarp".

 

If you'd agree the above points, we could continue the discussion ...

 

By the way, where are the others? Don't be shy! Come and leave a comment ...

 

Cheers,

Mammad

Ok, I'll amuse you for a while, but you are still trying too hard. You have an interesting definition of a time machine and you may need to expand on both that definition and which scientific theory holds that "a time machine is a mechanism directing one to the "PAST" and NOT the future." Not the future? Plenty of theories around that would disagree with that one.

And anyway, it must be true, as they did it in Back To The Future parts 2 and 3 and all they used was a DeLorean for gods sake.

Here is a basic definition;

Time travel is the concept of moving backward or forward to different points in time, in a manner analogous to moving through space. Additionally, some interpretations of time travel suggest the possibility of travel between parallel realities or universes.

You may be thinking of;

Special spacetime geometries

The general theory of relativity extends the special theory to cover gravity, describing it in terms of curvature in spacetime caused by mass-energy and the flow of momentum. General relativity describes the universe under a system of "field equations," and there exist solutions to these equations that permit what are called "closed time-like curves," and hence time travel into the past. The first and most famous of these was proposed by Kurt Gödel, but all known current examples require the universe to have physical characteristics that it does not appear to have. Whether general relativity forbids closed time-like curves for all realistic conditions is unknown. Most physicists believe that it does, largely because assuming some principle against time travel prevents paradoxical situations from occurring.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel

Come on guys!

 

Give me your guidance

OK, let's meet. You name the time and place, past present or future it doesn't matter as I have a special machine that will get me there.

You are trying too hard. Use of language is all wrong.

Cheers dude.

Games - I used to play worldwinner.com, where I could make decent money playing whack-a-mole (ahem), which it turned out I was pretty good at. There was one guy in Canada that could beat me but otherwise I was up there. They don't offer whack-a-mole any more.

That's typical. Just when you have found your vocation in life they take it away from you. You could have been a contender.

INTERESTING comparison with water and commodities.

But Not fully valid IMHO. Here's why I say that:

If you invest in a mining or exploration company, then you investment is helping to find or mine more gold- thus, it helps add to supply. That is especially true when you invest through a private placemnt, but also through purchases in the secondary market because your investment helps to give liquidity tp those who invested in the PP, and thus helps to encourage find and mining gold ort other commodities.

 

There is no such addition to resources coming from an investment in an online gaming company.

I wouldn't disagree with this. I was talking in very general terms about the question of ethics as there are some people who do not really care about what value a company may bring. If it is deemed unethical, they wouldn't invest in it, and on the political fringes will do everything they can to shut it down. We could add to the debate tobacco and some pharmaceuticals/bio-tech companies (animal experiments).

There remains the issue of ethics. Is it ethical to make money on gambling? The activity is illiegal in some countries, but many people enjoy it as a form of entertainment. Properly managed, gambling can be fun, even when you lose a bit. And some folks claim to make money on it. If enough people play, the online providers of the game can make money, even if they take only a small share of the wagers. In fact, their spreads can be less than Vegas, Monte Carlo, or other established gambling hotspots. So maybe they are the low cost providers of this important form of entertainment.

 

In GEI's spirit of openness, let's discuss the Online Gambling business

Now, this one opens a can of worms. In every form of gambling there are pros who make money, but most will lose. And of course, many consider the stock markets, especially trading as nothing more than a form of gambling, or to give it a more appropriate name, speculation. The stock markets have been described as a casino, especially when it comes to short term trading and just like gambling on horses or other forms of betting the losers make up the majority. If you look at the reasons why the majority lose, whether it's trading markets or horse racing, etc, the reasons are very similar.

Is it unethical to make money from people's addiction to gambling? Well, is it unethical to make money from say investing in water (considering that many people across the world die from the lack of it), uranium (the nuclear issue)or many other companies or sectors? And what about Gold? Many people are investing in it because it is probably the best hedge against bad news, like war and people being killed. In fact, to a large degree right now it relys on bad news to go up. When you think about it, there are lots of things that you could put the unethical tag on.

Do I bet? The answer would be no when it comes to traditional betting, but I am bullish on many of the more traditional companies in this sector like William Hill and I have bought their shares in the past. Like any share or sector it is important to get to know how they work and in following them I've noticed certain trends in the way their price reacts to events. However, I'm not that keen on the on-line gaming companies.

As the saying goes, gambling is a mugs game, unless you happen to be one of the lucky few who have figured out a way to approach it like a pro, do your homework and find a system that works. That's the same for the financial markets or any other form of speculation.

Any shares connected with IT & related industries.

In time, I think it would be an idea to have a seperate section within the Markets Forum for other sectors, like IT. I don't think it would take anything away from the identity that GEI is trying to create for itself and it might attract traders/investors and others who have interests away from metals or green energy. After all, many of us who come here regularly probably invest/trade in other sectors anyway, so it would be a place to discuss that.

DrBubb, you are not trying to start a conspiracy theory are you? You just might have disclosed the real reason why the US is planning, in the opinion of some, to attack Iran.