Dawn Flood wrote:
On 10/30/2025 7:46 AM, JTEM wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1376517560848333
One massive problem with time, and you've been taught this
your whole life, is that it's "Relative."
Time isn't the same for everyone, everywhere.
Time isn't the same for a photon as it is for us. In fact, a
photon isn't supposed to experience time at all. So, from the
photons perspective, there is no "Delayed" choice. From the
perspective of the photon, information isn't traveling much
less traveling faster than light. It is from our perspective
but not from the perspective of the photon.
There's more than one interpretation. The mistake is in
latching onto one specific explanation and pretending you
"Know" the answer.
No!!a Please see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Honey, you need to read & learn more before continuing to
pontificate on things that you know little to nothing about!
Dawn
doesnt everything shrink the faster one goes until it becomes
zero at c? so there wont be any distance between two points?
Physically covering every place in the universe at one time is
not possible under physical laws.
On 10/30/25 6:02 PM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 16:29:19 +0000, jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
On 10/30/2025 7:46 AM, JTEM wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1376517560848333
One massive problem with time, and you've been taught this
your whole life, is that it's "Relative."
Time isn't the same for everyone, everywhere.
Time isn't the same for a photon as it is for us. In fact, a
photon isn't supposed to experience time at all. So, from the
photons perspective, there is no "Delayed" choice. From the
perspective of the photon, information isn't traveling much
less traveling faster than light. It is from our perspective
but not from the perspective of the photon.
There's more than one interpretation. The mistake is in
latching onto one specific explanation and pretending you
"Know" the answer.
No!!a Please see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Honey, you need to read & learn more before continuing to
pontificate on things that you know little to nothing about!
Dawn
doesnt everything shrink the faster one goes until it becomes
zero at c? so there wont be any distance between two points?
Physically covering every place in the universe at one time is
not possible under physical laws.
This may or may not be related to my saying "Potential" place and
not "every place."
This may or may not be related to my saying "Potential" place and
not "every place."
Whereas I replied to jojo,
On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 16:29:19 +0000, jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
On 10/30/2025 7:46 AM, JTEM wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1376517560848333
One massive problem with time, and you've been taught this
your whole life, is that it's "Relative."
Time isn't the same for everyone, everywhere.
Time isn't the same for a photon as it is for us. In fact, a
photon isn't supposed to experience time at all. So, from the
photons perspective, there is no "Delayed" choice. From the
perspective of the photon, information isn't traveling much
less traveling faster than light. It is from our perspective
but not from the perspective of the photon.
There's more than one interpretation. The mistake is in
latching onto one specific explanation and pretending you
"Know" the answer.
No!!-a Please see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Honey, you need to read & learn more before continuing to
pontificate on things that you know little to nothing about!
Dawn
doesnt everything shrink the faster one goes until it becomes
zero at c? so there wont be any distance between two points?
Physically covering every place in the universe at one time is
not possible under physical laws.
Kenito Benito wrote:
-a-a-a-a-a Physically covering every place in the universe at one time is
not possible under physical laws.
doesnt higgs field cover the entire universe?
On 10/30/25 10:50 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
No!!-a Please see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Oh. So you want me to guess what your position is?
What do you find compelling at that page?-a What convinces you,
specifically?
I think it will be *Fascinating*, you explaining your position.
Oops. You tried to fake it. Again. And I called your bluff.
Again.
Dawn Flood wrote:
On 10/30/2025 7:46 AM, JTEM wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1376517560848333
One massive problem with time, and you've been taught this
your whole life, is that it's "Relative."
Time isn't the same for everyone, everywhere.
Time isn't the same for a photon as it is for us. In fact, a
photon isn't supposed to experience time at all. So, from the
photons perspective, there is no "Delayed" choice. From the
perspective of the photon, information isn't traveling much
less traveling faster than light. It is from our perspective
but not from the perspective of the photon.
There's more than one interpretation. The mistake is in
latching onto one specific explanation and pretending you
"Know" the answer.
No!!-a Please see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Honey, you need to read & learn more before continuing to pontificate
on things that you know little to nothing about!
Dawn
doesnt everything shrink the faster one goes until it becomes zero at c?
so there wont be any distance between two points?
On 10/31/25 4:24 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 00:34:25 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/30/25 6:02 PM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 16:29:19 +0000, jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
On 10/30/2025 7:46 AM, JTEM wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1376517560848333
One massive problem with time, and you've been taught this
your whole life, is that it's "Relative."
Time isn't the same for everyone, everywhere.
Time isn't the same for a photon as it is for us. In fact, a
photon isn't supposed to experience time at all. So, from the
photons perspective, there is no "Delayed" choice. From the
perspective of the photon, information isn't traveling much
less traveling faster than light. It is from our perspective
but not from the perspective of the photon.
There's more than one interpretation. The mistake is in
latching onto one specific explanation and pretending you
"Know" the answer.
No!!a Please see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Honey, you need to read & learn more before continuing to
pontificate on things that you know little to nothing about!
doesnt everything shrink the faster one goes until it becomes
zero at c? so there wont be any distance between two points?
Physically covering every place in the universe at one time is
not possible under physical laws.
This may or may not be related to my saying "Potential" place and
not "every place."
Whereas I replied to jojo, anyone who has made it past fifth
grade will know it was related to his comment. Further, nowhere in
your initial post do you comment about potential place.
Once again you PROVE you cannot accept reality.
No you weren't.
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 16:29:19 +0000, jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
On 10/30/2025 7:46 AM, JTEM wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1376517560848333
One massive problem with time, and you've been taught this
your whole life, is that it's "Relative."
Time isn't the same for everyone, everywhere.
Time isn't the same for a photon as it is for us. In fact, a
photon isn't supposed to experience time at all. So, from the
photons perspective, there is no "Delayed" choice. From the
perspective of the photon, information isn't traveling much
less traveling faster than light. It is from our perspective
but not from the perspective of the photon.
There's more than one interpretation. The mistake is in
latching onto one specific explanation and pretending you
"Know" the answer.
No!!a Please see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Honey, you need to read & learn more before continuing to
pontificate on things that you know little to nothing about!
doesnt everything shrink the faster one goes until it becomes
zero at c? so there wont be any distance between two points?
Physically covering every place in the universe at one time is
not possible under physical laws.
doesnt higgs field cover the entire universe?
Just read the article
Your reply makes no sense.
On 11/1/25 12:22 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Just read the article
This is a discussion group, not a literary society. What is your
position?
Again, as always, your mental illness blinds you to your behavior
but you're parading your narcissistic personality disorder here.
Deep down you know how worthless you are, how stupid everything
you say is, so you want me to guess what you think.
Well. We both know that you don't think. You have no position.
You're here obstructing, trying to stop any discussion you can't
control...
Google:-a Retrocausality.
Try to grasp it.
I get it.
your mental illness blinds you to your behavior
but you're parading your narcissistic personality disorder here.
Deep down you know how worthless you are, how stupid everything
you say is
You have no position. You're here obstructing, trying to stop any
discussion you can't control.
On 11/1/25 6:51 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
Your reply makes no sense.
Lol! Your many varied mental disorders are funny!
Continue to
Keep on,Keep on... not grasping a word of this?
-aDawn Flood wrote:
I get it.
No. No you do not.
Not even as a sick joke.
You want me to guess at your position. Why? Why not just lay
down a position?-a You're here in a discussion group. You
keep replying as both this "Dawn" jackass and others, so you
clearly want to "Discuss," but won't.
Supposedly photons do not experience time. Thus, there is
no "Delay" for a photon. And because they don't experience
time, they don't experience "Space." It takes them exactly
as long to reach every point in "Space" that they may
potentially reach i.e. ZERO time.
Now, speaking rhetorically, put those both together. We
have no "Delayed Choice." Not for the photon. We have
no "Spooky Action at a "Distance," either. There is no
distance.
No, Honey, this is simply false!-a Our so very, very amazing & beloved
star, the Sun, is 150 or so million kilometers away (sometimes, a little more, sometimes a little less), and all of its photons, with no
exceptions, travel that distance on their way to Us!!-a And, so, each & every one of them travel that distance!!
On 11/2/25 1:56 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
No, Honey, this is simply false!-a Our so very, very amazing & beloved
star, the Sun, is 150 or so million kilometers away (sometimes, a
little more, sometimes a little less), and all of its photons, with no
exceptions, travel that distance on their way to Us!!-a And, so, each &
every one of them travel that distance!!
Wow. It's almost as if I said that time & space doesn't exist FOR THE
PHOTON, not us humans.
Wow. Again, WOW!
If I hadn't pointed out that the lack of time/space is only from
the perspective of the photon, not us, and that this offers one
explanation for the Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement observations,
I would be even more shocked!
Actually, sparky, you don't even need to be traveling the speed of
light to observe the phenomenon. With sufficiently sophisticated
equipment -- like atomic clocks -- you can keep one on earth, send
the other buzzing around in orbit and then observe the difference in
time between the two.
On 11/2/2025 3:41 PM, JTEM wrote:
Actually, sparky, you don't even need to be traveling the speed of
light to observe the phenomenon. With sufficiently sophisticated
equipment -- like atomic clocks -- you can keep one on earth, send
the other buzzing around in orbit and then observe the difference in
time between the two.
Yes, the bit about the moving clocks is so, so very true!!
On 11/2/25 8:04 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
On 11/2/2025 3:41 PM, JTEM wrote:
Actually, sparky, you don't even need to be traveling the speed of
light to observe the phenomenon. With sufficiently sophisticated
equipment -- like atomic clocks -- you can keep one on earth, send
the other buzzing around in orbit and then observe the difference in
time between the two.
Yes, the bit about the moving clocks is so, so very true!!
It's not about moving clocks, you idiot!-a You can't deconstruct
issues no matter WHAT handle you post under...
The issue is time dilatation.
Not atomic clocks, time dilatation.
The clocks are one example, the photon is another but they are
both examples of the same thing:-a Time dilatation.
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 15:20:22 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/1/25 6:51 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
Your reply makes no sense.
Lol! Your many varied mental disorders are funny!
Continue to use projection as your preferred means of trolling.
You will because I command you to do so.
Hey
On 11/2/25 5:18 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 15:10:36 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
your mental illness blinds you to your behavior
but you're parading your narcissistic personality disorder here.
Deep down you know how worthless you are, how stupid everything
you say is
You have no position. You're here obstructing, trying to stop any >>>discussion you can't control.
Keep on, keep on trollin'.
Keep on... not grasping a word of this?
On 11/2/2025 7:43 PM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/2/25 8:04 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
On 11/2/2025 3:41 PM, JTEM wrote:
Actually, sparky, you don't even need to be traveling the speed of
light to observe the phenomenon. With sufficiently sophisticated
equipment -- like atomic clocks -- you can keep one on earth, send
the other buzzing around in orbit and then observe the difference in
time between the two.
Yes, the bit about the moving clocks is so, so very true!!
It's not about moving clocks, you idiot!-a You can't deconstruct
issues no matter WHAT handle you post under...
The issue is time dilatation.
Not atomic clocks, time dilatation.
The clocks are one example, the photon is another but they are
both examples of the same thing:-a Time dilatation.
Hmm.-a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity. I
am only posting messages in this group using the same email address and never, ever use any others.-a Why are you thinking otherwise??-a I am not sure why you continue to call others names; does doing that make you
feel better??-a Why not just try to be a nicer person?-a I mean, what do
you have to lose??
Hmm.-a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity.
On 11/2/25 10:30 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Hmm.-a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity.
No it isn't.
The rule is time dilatation. The clocks are merely an illustration of
this rule, an experimental means to confirm/observe the phenomenon.
Hmm.-a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity.
Read more to help you understand why
On 11/2/25 10:30 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Hmm.a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity.
No it isn't.
On 11/3/2025 1:51 PM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/2/25 10:30 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Hmm.a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity.
No it isn't.
The rule is time dilatation. The clocks are merely an illustration of
this rule, an experimental means to confirm/observe the phenomenon.
Read more to help you understand why you have no idea what you are
talking about! Let's start here:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/muon.html
On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 19:13:54 -0600, Dawn Flood
<Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/3/2025 1:51 PM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/2/25 10:30 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Hmm.-a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity. >>>No it isn't.
The rule is time dilatation. The clocks are merely an illustration of
this rule, an experimental means to confirm/observe the phenomenon.
Read more to help you understand why you have no idea what you are
talking about! Let's start here:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/muon.html
The simpleton doesn't want to be right. He wants people to just
agree with him.
On 11/3/25 8:13 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Read more to help you understand why
Again, you want me to read something that wasn't written
by you and then guess as what your position is.
Why don't you tell state your position?
Oops!-a That would require you to actually have one!
And we both know you don't. You're just a narcissist who
can't admit to his stupidity...
Honey,
I have told you this before that I am not an expert.
I have to stop craving being manipulated by
The
YouYour mental illnesses have nothing to do with me.
Continue
If youWhat is it you're pretending to dispute here?
On 11/4/25 7:57 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Honey,
Yes, my moist towelette?
I have told you this before that I am not an expert.
So stop pretending you hold a position if you don't have one.
It's not hard.
Instead you keep posting URL and inviting me to guess what
you think, when you admit that you have no thoughts.
On 11/4/2025 1:24 PM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/4/25 7:57 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Honey,
Yes, my moist towelette?
I have told you this before that I am not an expert.
So stop pretending you hold a position if you don't have one.
It's not hard.
Instead you keep posting URL and inviting me to guess what
you think, when you admit that you have no thoughts.
What I think is that, of the 100+ climate models that the IPCC is using,
our World's future average global temperatures will be within one
standard deviation of all of those models, excluding the upper & lower 10%.-a Did I make myself clear enough on this one??-a Or, do I need to repeat things but in a different way?!-a Please let me know if I am not making sense here!!
-aDawn Flood wrote:
I have to stop craving being manipulated by
Why don't you just say what you think?-a How is that manipulation?
You keep hitting reply. You keep typing a reaction. Why not just
state your view instead of an emotional splash?
It's actually a lot easier than the idiocy you've been posting.
For one thing, you don't have to try to remember what you said,
if it's what you actually think. But when you rationalize and
try to bullshit your way through life you do have to remember
what you made-up last time, or keep looking like a fool.
What I think is that, of the 100+ climate models that the IPCC is using,
our World's future average global temperatures will be within one
standard deviation of all of those models, excluding the upper & lower
10%.
Okay, here's my position!-a I don't think that retrocausality is a phenomenon that exists in Nature.-a Clear enough for you??
Yes, the bit about the moving clocks is so, so very true!!
On 11/2/25 8:04 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Yes, the bit about the moving clocks is so, so very true!!
I was the one who introduced the concept. So you are admitting
that I am right.
It's also not about clocks. The experiment with the clocks was
just to prove the phenomenon.
On 11/4/25 5:25 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
What I think is that, of the 100+ climate models that the IPCC is
using, our World's future average global temperatures will be within
one standard deviation of all of those models, excluding the upper &
lower 10%.
#1.-a Absolutely NOTHING WHAT SO EVER to do with the Delayed Choice
Quantum Entanglement.
#2.-a The only way to judge the future results of "Climate Models" is
to look at the past predictions and the real outcomes. They show a
100% failure rate.
#3.-a The underlying defect in your thinking, what excludes any
possibility of "Science," is that you're comparing the Holocene to
itself.
Who cares?
If you want to know what the Holocene should look like, why not compare
it to the previous interglacial, or the one before that?
Oo!-a I know:-a It's because they were warmer. Some 130,000 years before
the industrial revolution, Neanderthals ruling Europe and it was
warmer, sea level was roughly 16 feet higher from all the melted ice
and the "Thermal Expansion."
So a reasonable, rational test says Gwobull Warbling is a farce, and
going by your own climate models -- past predictions -- it's all a
farce, yet we need to impoverish BILLIONS to save the polar bears?
AND THEN there's the fact this you derailed yourself. You're replying
to a thread on the Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement experiments
and observations, not a thread on climate change.
Seems your disconnect from facts is pretty inclusive...
Nope.-a Two observers who are moving relative to each other will BOTH observe the OTHER's clock to run SLOW!!
Yes, I do admit that I made a mistake, and I am sorry.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1376517560848333
One massive problem with time, and you've been taught this
your whole life, is that it's "Relative."
Time isn't the same for everyone, everywhere.
Time isn't the same for a photon as it is for us. In fact, a
photon isn't supposed to experience time at all. So, from the
photons perspective, there is no "Delayed" choice. From the
perspective of the photon, information isn't traveling much
less traveling faster than light. It is from our perspective
but not from the perspective of the photon.
There's more than one interpretation. The mistake is in
latching onto one specific explanation and pretending you
"Know" the answer.
On 11/4/25 4:09 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 19:13:54 -0600, Dawn Flood
<Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/3/2025 1:51 PM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/2/25 10:30 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Hmm.a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity. >>>>No it isn't.
The rule is time dilatation. The clocks are merely an illustration of
this rule, an experimental means to confirm/observe the phenomenon.
Read more to help you understand why you have no idea what you are >>>talking about! Let's start here:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/muon.html
The simpleton doesn't want to be right. He wants people to just
agree with him.
Your mother was right
On 11/4/25 4:09 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 14:51:03 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/2/25 10:30 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Hmm.a That "moving clocks run slow" is one of the rules of Relativity.
No it isn't.
You do NOT want the truth. You just want people to agree with
your uneducated positions.
Your mental illnesses have nothing to do with me.
On 11/3/25 4:04 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sun, 2 Nov 2025 12:10:35 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 15:20:22 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/1/25 6:51 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
Your reply makes no sense.
Lol! Your many varied mental disorders are funny!
Continue to use projection as your preferred means of trolling. >>>>You will because I command you to do so.
Hey
Hello.
How many more threads are you going to "Continue" posting
the exact same thing
On 11/3/25 4:05 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sun, 2 Nov 2025 12:12:39 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/2/25 5:18 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 15:10:36 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
your mental illness blinds you to your behavior
but you're parading your narcissistic personality disorder here.
Deep down you know how worthless you are, how stupid everything
you say is
You have no position. You're here obstructing, trying to stop any >>>>>discussion you can't control.
Keep on, keep on trollin'.
Keep on... not grasping a word of this?
If you cannot understand sixth grade level English, well, that's >>unfortunate.
What is it you're pretending to dispute here?
Gwobull Warbling is a hoax.
It's not science. It was never science. It does not follow
the principles of science, it cares not one wit for the
scientific method.
On 11/4/2025 9:25 PM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/4/25 5:25 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
What I think is that, of the 100+ climate models that the IPCC is
using, our World's future average global temperatures will be within
one standard deviation of all of those models, excluding the upper &
lower 10%.
#1.-a Absolutely NOTHING WHAT SO EVER to do with the Delayed Choice
Quantum Entanglement.
#2.-a The only way to judge the future results of "Climate Models" is
to look at the past predictions and the real outcomes. They show a
100% failure rate.
#3.-a The underlying defect in your thinking, what excludes any
possibility of "Science," is that you're comparing the Holocene to
itself.
Who cares?
If you want to know what the Holocene should look like, why not compare
it to the previous interglacial, or the one before that?
Oo!-a I know:-a It's because they were warmer. Some 130,000 years before
the industrial revolution, Neanderthals ruling Europe and it was
warmer, sea level was roughly 16 feet higher from all the melted ice
and the "Thermal Expansion."
So a reasonable, rational test says Gwobull Warbling is a farce, and
going by your own climate models -- past predictions -- it's all a
farce, yet we need to impoverish BILLIONS to save the polar bears?
AND THEN there's the fact this you derailed yourself. You're replying
to a thread on the Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement experiments
and observations, not a thread on climate change.
Seems your disconnect from facts is pretty inclusive...
Yes, I do admit that I made a mistake, and I am sorry.
On 11/4/25 11:06 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Nope.-a Two observers who are moving relative to each other will BOTH
observe the OTHER's clock to run SLOW!!
Now you're just in free fall fantasy.
The experiment, the one that allowed humans to actually observe
dilation involved one clock on the earth and the other moving
anywhere from 7 to 17 thousand miles per hour. Time moved
slower for the clock in orbit.
On 10/30/2025 11:29 AM, jojo wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
On 10/30/2025 7:46 AM, JTEM wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1376517560848333
One massive problem with time, and you've been taught this
your whole life, is that it's "Relative."
Time isn't the same for everyone, everywhere.
Time isn't the same for a photon as it is for us. In fact, a
photon isn't supposed to experience time at all. So, from the
photons perspective, there is no "Delayed" choice. From the
perspective of the photon, information isn't traveling much
less traveling faster than light. It is from our perspective
but not from the perspective of the photon.
There's more than one interpretation. The mistake is in
latching onto one specific explanation and pretending you
"Know" the answer.
No!!-a Please see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Honey, you need to read & learn more before continuing to
pontificate on things that you know little to nothing about!
Dawn
doesnt everything shrink the faster one goes until it becomes
zero at c? so there wont be any distance between two points?
No!!-a Unlike everything (especially, me) that has mass (and, of
course, do not confuse weight & mass!), photons have no mass and
do not experience time.-a Remember high school?-a You multiply how
fast you are going by the time you travel to get the distance you traveled!-a (Did you pay attention while in high school!?)-a Do the
math, and ask yourself how distance changes when the change in
time is equal to zero!-a (Of course, let your speed be constant.)
By the way, I just bought a new pretty v-neck tee that has the
integral form of Maxwell's equations on the front right above the
bust.-a It is a white background with black text. I think that it
will look good with my black skirt & sandals.-a-a Cool, don't ya
think?!-a People will probably think that I am weird, but I do not
care.
Dawn
if someone realizes that, ONLY THEN, talk to them.
On 11/4/2025 11:13 PM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/4/25 11:06 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Nope.-a Two observers who are moving relative to each other will BOTH
observe the OTHER's clock to run SLOW!!
Now you're just in free fall fantasy.
The experiment, the one that allowed humans to actually observe
dilation involved one clock on the earth and the other moving
anywhere from 7 to 17 thousand miles per hour. Time moved
slower for the clock in orbit.
Yes, BUT, if you were sitting on that satellite as it orbited our World, that "one clock on the earth" would also appear to you to be running SLOW!!
Yes, BUT, if you were sitting on that satellite as it orbited our World, that "one clock on the earth" would also appear to you to be running SLOW!!
Get it now??
Whereas /Gwobull Warbling/ is
That you
If you
You
You
On 11/5/25 11:53 AM, jojo wrote:
if someone realizes that, ONLY THEN, talk to them.
Hmmm... if someone doesn't know their ass from their elbow, posts
random "Cites" they never read, demands others read them and guess
at what their point (not the cite's) must be.... they should only
talk to people who know better than they do.
On 11/5/25 3:28 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 00:17:18 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
[Snip to focus on this one point]
Gwobull Warbling is a hoax.
It's not science. It was never science. It does not follow
the principles of science, it cares not one wit for the
scientific method.
Whereas /Gwobull Warbling/ is something you made up, you're
actually being honest for once. I do wonder how you will divert from
this aspect of reality. I am confident you will solve this "mystery"
in short order.
Wrong topic. Again.
On 11/5/25 3:26 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2025 14:48:46 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/3/25 4:04 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sun, 2 Nov 2025 12:10:35 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 15:20:22 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/1/25 6:51 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
Your reply makes no sense.
Lol! Your many varied mental disorders are funny!
Continue to use projection as your preferred means of trolling. >>>>>>You will because I command you to do so.
Hey
Hello.
How many more threads are you going to "Continue" posting
the exact same thing
If you offer a greeting to me, I will reply with a greeting to
you. So, I'll post a greeting as many times as you do.
Now divert from reality. I command it, so you will. You cannot
resist.
Your OCPD is quite independent of me.
ContinueYeah you do keep posting the exact same thing to numerous threads, none
YOU
I'm so glad you
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 00:59:44 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/5/25 3:26 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2025 14:48:46 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/3/25 4:04 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sun, 2 Nov 2025 12:10:35 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2025 15:20:22 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 11/1/25 6:51 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
Your reply makes no sense.
Lol! Your many varied mental disorders are funny!
Continue to use projection as your preferred means of trolling. >>>>>>>>You will because I command you to do so.
Hey
Hello.
How many more threads are you going to "Continue" posting
the exact same thing
If you offer a greeting to me, I will reply with a greeting to >>>>you. So, I'll post a greeting as many times as you do.
Now divert from reality. I command it, so you will. You cannot >>>>resist.
Your OCPD is quite independent of me.
Continue to project your mental health issues. I command you do
so, which means you will.
Yeah you do keep posting the exact same thing to numerous threads
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 00:57:06 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/5/25 3:28 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 00:17:18 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
[Snip to focus on this one point]
Gwobull Warbling is a hoax.
It's not science. It was never science. It does not follow
the principles of science, it cares not one wit for the
scientific method.
Whereas /Gwobull Warbling/ is something you made up, you're >>>>actually being honest for once. I do wonder how you will divert from >>>>this aspect of reality. I am confident you will solve this "mystery"
in short order.
Wrong topic. Again.
YOU brought up "Gwobull Warbling."
I'm so far about you.
On 11/6/25 4:44 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 15:27:16 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/5/25 11:53 AM, jojo wrote:
if someone realizes that, ONLY THEN, talk to them.
Hmmm... if someone doesn't know their ass from their elbow, posts
random "Cites" they never read, demands others read them and guess
at what their point (not the cite's) must be.... they should only
talk to people who know better than they do.
I'm so glad you acknowledge we know better than you. I wondered
if you could accept any aspect of reality. It's nice to see you can
accept this part, if nothing else.
Retrocausality
On 11/5/25 7:50 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Yes, BUT, if you were sitting on that satellite as it orbited our
World, that "one clock on the earth" would also appear to you to be
running SLOW!!
Get it now??
You are phenomenally stupid.
What you're saying, and not grasping, is that time slows down the closer
you get to the speed of light. Which is what I've been saying. And for
the photon, it stops.
These aren't different things. They are illustrations of the exact same phenomenon.
So according to Einstein, in his relativity, even though observations
differ, both observers are correct. So from the perspective of a photon
there is no "Delay" (see subject line). There is no time for them. So
there is no such thing as a "First" or "Before" and "After." They
don't exist. They do for us, and for us that is correct, but not the
photon.
This is how the Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement experiment &
observations can reveal Retrocausality. Because FOR US one thing
happened before the other, even though for the photon they didn't.
You need to learn more:
As for photons, they do exist;
WHAT THE HELL are you pretending to be reacting to?
Certainly not anything I ever said.
On 11/7/25 9:03 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
You need to learn more:
What do I need to learn? WHAT is your opinion? Your position?
As always, you need me to guess. Your narcissistic personality
disorder won't let you dare spell out a position...
As for photons, they do exist;
Who or what is "They?" The photons? Who said they didn't?
WHAT THE HELL are you pretending to be reacting to?
Certainly not anything I ever said.
1)-a Backwards Time Travel is an absolute physical impossibility.yy; such will never (as in ever) happen, nor has such ever happened.-a To be more precise, backwards time travel has a zero probability of occurring.
2)-a Tachyons do not exist anywhere in NatureTachyons do have support. There is evidence that is consistent with
just
because some theoretical physicist discovers a solution to Einstein's
field equations that indicates that worm holes, time travel, blah, blah blah, etc., exists means absolutely nothing and proves absolutely nothing.
4)-a Experiment trumps anything & everything.
Until & unless experiment
evidence exists for some phenomenon
You need to learn more:
As for photons, they do exist
On 11/8/25 1:58 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
1)-a Backwards Time Travel is an absolute physical impossibility.yy;
such will never (as in ever) happen, nor has such ever happened.-a To
be more precise, backwards time travel has a zero probability of
occurring.
Which is what I said. For people. But it lays within the realm of possibilities for information because of theoretical particles such as tachyons. This is not a violation of any laws of nature, as per Retrocausality.
2)-a Tachyons do not exist anywhere in NatureTachyons do have support. There is evidence that is consistent with
tachyons. This is a long ways from "Proving" they exist but as of
now, assuming they do exist, we might only detect them indirectly.
Kind of hard to "Prove" anything with only indirect detection.
just because some theoretical physicist discovers a solution to
Einstein's field equations that indicates that worm holes, time
travel, blah, blah blah, etc., exists means absolutely nothing and
proves absolutely nothing.
It does, actually.
Science is the study/understanding of nature. Technology is the
application of that knowledge. Even nuclear reactors have existed in
nature. All we are doing, with science, is figuring out how nature
does it so we can do it in a way that suits us.
Worm holes?-a We might've already detected one or more. Time travel? If
it's theoretically possible, in all probability it has happened. Things
have been thrown back in time -- rocks, particles...
4)-a Experiment trumps anything & everything.
You mean like the Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement, that appears
to demonstrate information traveling backwards in time?
Retrocausality?
No. You don't like that.
Until & unless experiment evidence exists for some phenomenon
Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement.
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality
vis-|a-vis some sort of "time travel".
As
for #2, we will have to agree to disagree.-a No theoretical physicist believes that any and all solutions to GR/QFT is indicative of some
natural occurrence in the real World.
On 11/8/25 9:52 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality
Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement
That's one.
Actually, if you do the Google, it started with light originating
a gazillion years ago, observed through gravitational lensing.
vis-|a-vis some sort of "time travel".
The thing you've got to remember about Einstein is that, according
to him time is "Relative." Its not the same for everyone everywhere
but the different observations are correct for everyone everywhere.
In other words, if I see it happening backwards, it really happened backwards, even if some other perspective says it happened at the
same time.
As for #2, we will have to agree to disagree.-a No theoretical
physicist believes that any and all solutions to GR/QFT is indicative
of some natural occurrence in the real World.
You're just making shit up.
The fact is, if someone is within the realm of possibilities then it
all comes down to probabilities, and as unlikely as it is occur it
had to occur.
The universe is just too big.
Like I said:-a Purely natural NUCLEAR FREAKING REACTORS have existed,
and no doubt do exist on other worlds.
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
On 11/9/2025 5:33 PM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/8/25 9:52 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality
Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement
That's one.
Actually, if you do the Google, it started with light originating
a gazillion years ago, observed through gravitational lensing.
vis-|a-vis some sort of "time travel".
The thing you've got to remember about Einstein is that, according
to him time is "Relative." Its not the same for everyone everywhere
but the different observations are correct for everyone everywhere.
In other words, if I see it happening backwards, it really happened
backwards, even if some other perspective says it happened at the
same time.
As for #2, we will have to agree to disagree.-a No theoretical
physicist believes that any and all solutions to GR/QFT is indicative
of some natural occurrence in the real World.
You're just making shit up.
The fact is, if someone is within the realm of possibilities then it
all comes down to probabilities, and as unlikely as it is occur it
had to occur.
The universe is just too big.
Like I said:-a Purely natural NUCLEAR FREAKING REACTORS have existed,
and no doubt do exist on other worlds.
What you're posting is just nuts.-a Some reactions (both nuclear and/or chemical) have a probability of ZERO occurring.-a Lots of examples of
these exist and are easily found online; here's one:
Fe{+3} + Sn{+4} -> Fe{+2} + Sn{+2)
The above is a chemical reaction which cannot happen.-a Ergo, it's
possible to describe things that never happen, ever.
Your example of natural fission (or, fusion) reactions is irrelevant.
Those types of reactions are POSSIBLE, as opposed to backwards
causality, which is IMPOSSIBLE.
Our "big universe" is irrelevant; the same physics applies everywhere.
As for time being "relative", this blanket statement is false, and I
have already told you this!
An observer's proper time is an INVARIANT quantity, that is, ALL
observers agree on the time that another observer is measuring (e.g.,
"if Alice says that her clock reads 3 PM, everyone will agree that
Alice's clock is really at 3 PM".-a It is only the case that Alice will
say that any other observer who is in motion relative to her will have a clock that is moving SLOWER than her clock.
Gravitational lensing described by General Relativity, the curvature of spacetime around a large massive object and the path (a geodesic) that
light will take; such has nothing to do with Quantum Mechanics, as
General Relativity is a classic, geometric description of gravitation.
If two events, A & B, are causally related (Event A caused Event B),
then ALL observers will AGREE that A caused B, and therefore, that Event
A happened BEFORE Event B happened.
Dawn
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
What you're posting is just nuts.
-a Some reactions (both nuclear and/or
chemical) have a probability of ZERO occurring.
The above is a chemical reaction which cannot happen.
Your example of natural fission (or, fusion) reactions is irrelevant.
Those types of reactions are POSSIBLE, as opposed to backwards >causality, which is IMPOSSIBLE.
Our "big universe" is irrelevant
Whereas this
What does
IWho gives a fuck? You don't even know what you're reacting to!
On 11/9/25 8:56 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
What you're posting is just nuts.
No. It's actually pretty conservative. But you're not just insane,
you're an idiot.
If something is within the realm of possibilities -- and as you
yourself admitted, time travel is -- then it all comes down to
PROBABILITIES.
If it's a ONCE IN A BILLION SUNS EVENT, we're looking at it
happening 100 to 400 times over the life of our galaxy.
There are 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe. So if
it's a ONCE IN A TRILLION SUNS EVENT, we're looking at 200 to
800 trillion times over the life of the observable universe.
The numbers are staggering. The numbers are so massive that
virtually ANYTHING possible is, over the life of our universe
anywhere from probably to ALREADY HAPPENED.
-a Some reactions (both nuclear and/or chemical) have a probability of
ZERO occurring.
We are speaking of things that have been determined to be
possible, not impossible.
Nothing excludes backwards time travel. And to achieve that
all we need do is a change in perspective. After all, time
is relative, it's different for two observers, so for one
there is no backwards time movement but for the other there
is. One example of this is the Photon which can't play by
our rules because it doesn't correspond to time. So, for us,
information can move backwards even though for the photon it
is not.
But, the real game changer would be faster-than-light
particles like a tachyon. If we can prove they exist, figure
out how to detect them, even if only indirectly, and we can
figure out how to produce them, we just created a time machine
for information. We can communicate with the past.
The one drawback is that we could not send information back
any further than the construction of the detector.
The above is a chemical reaction which cannot happen.
Is this why you won't take your meds?
We already know that the individual pieces exist and are real:
Photons, the fact that our concept of time does not apply to
them, the fact that our concept of space does not apply to
them and thus we can produce results that move backwards in
time FOR US.
Your example of natural fission (or, fusion) reactions is irrelevant.
No, you're just retarded.
It's an example of how technology is merely harnessing the power of
nature. All technology. Science figures out how nature works, tech
is the application of that knowledge. AND THIS IS TRUE IN ALL CASES.
It couldn't be any more simple.
There have been "Reenactors" who easily bested ancient Roman Iron
production, using Roman tech, even though the Roman economy was
dependent upon that tech. How? Because the modern reenactors
understood the science guiding the process so they were just better,
more efficient, without even consciously trying.
Turns out that the Romans, lacking our understanding of the science,
were so bad at iron production that their slag -- the waste/biproduct
-- was a major source of Iron for Mussolini.
Those types of reactions are POSSIBLE, as opposed to backwards >causality, which is IMPOSSIBLE.
Observations appear to confirm it.
But, as per Einstein, it all comes down to "Relativity."
Our "big universe" is irrelevant
No. You're just retarded.
The appeal to size/scale is the entire basis for SETI and even
ridiculous claims such as the Fermi "Paradox," which isn't even
a paradox, for Christ's sake...
But, the very concept of life on other worlds is that the universe
is far too large for their not to be any.
Because you are retarded you can not take knowledge you have HERE,
and apply it THERE. You are literally pretending that the rules,
the very laws of nature begin anew with every topic...
; the same physics applies everywhere.
Lol!-a You ARE retarded!-a It's not just an act!
If the same physics apply everywhere then the photon never experiences
time nor distance. However, we do. So for us things happen at different
times and in different places even if not for the photon:
Retrocausality!
And, yes, according to Einstein, this is the way things are supposed
to work! AND, from both perspectives the observation is TRUE!
So for us IT IS TRUE that information moved backwards in time, for
the photon it happened simultaneously.
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
No, Honey, time travel is IMPOSSIBLE
The numbers are staggering. The numbers are so massive that
virtually ANYTHING possible is, over the life of our universe
anywhere from probably to ALREADY HAPPENED.
None, some things are impossible
Yes, as Ken has already pointed out to you, there are peer-reviewed
papers that state that time travel is a physical impossibility.
Tachyons don't exist
which is why they have not been discovered.
Has nothing to do with that.-a Ask yourself this, "Why have no quarks,
which are part of the Standard Model, never been observed in
isolation??"
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Sat, 8 Nov 2025 00:03:05 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
[Snip to focus on this one point]
WHAT THE HELL are you pretending to be reacting to?
Certainly not anything I ever said.
Whereas this is a written medium, your claim is actually true.
I'm sure you are quite upset with yourself for posting accidentally >>something true and accurate.
You don't even know what my position is!
On 11/6/25 10:51 PM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 08:32:20 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/6/25 4:44 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 15:27:16 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/5/25 11:53 AM, jojo wrote:
if someone realizes that, ONLY THEN, talk to them.
Hmmm... if someone doesn't know their ass from their elbow, posts >>>>>random "Cites" they never read, demands others read them and guess
at what their point (not the cite's) must be.... they should only >>>>>talk to people who know better than they do.
I'm so glad you acknowledge we know better than you. I wondered
if you could accept any aspect of reality. It's nice to see you can >>>>accept this part, if nothing else.
Retrocausality
What does that have to do with your acknowledgement that we know >>better than you? It's as if you KNOW you've been PROVED wrong and are >>DESPERATE to divert from reality. OK, that is EXACTLY what is
happening.
Instead of proclaiming how bright you are,
On 11/6/25 10:51 PM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 08:30:20 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2025 00:57:06 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/5/25 3:28 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2025 00:17:18 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
[Snip to focus on this one point]
Gwobull Warbling is a hoax.
It's not science. It was never science. It does not follow
the principles of science, it cares not one wit for the >>>>>>>scientific method.
Whereas /Gwobull Warbling/ is something you made up, you're >>>>>>actually being honest for once. I do wonder how you will divert from >>>>>>this aspect of reality. I am confident you will solve this "mystery" >>>>>>in short order.
Wrong topic. Again.
YOU brought up "Gwobull Warbling."
I'm so far about you.
I suppose I should be pleased that you're about me. But it's just >>weird.
Your desires aside, please address the points already raised.
Unless you really are intellectually unable. If that is the case,
you'll only continue to follow my command to divert.
Who gives a fuck?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On 11/9/25 11:52 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
No, Honey, time travel is IMPOSSIBLE
No. It's not. Possibly for humans but there's nothing that excludes
it. You're just retarded, that's all.
The numbers are staggering. The numbers are so massive that
virtually ANYTHING possible is, over the life of our universe
anywhere from probably to ALREADY HAPPENED.
None, some things are impossible
Time travel isn't one of them. It's not excluded under Einstein's
work. You're just far too stupid to do anything but read
headlines.
Yes, as Ken has already pointed out to you, there are peer-reviewed
papers that state that time travel is a physical impossibility.
For humans, it certainly seems that way. But I wasn't speaking of
humans. The rules as we see & live by do not apply to sub
atomic particles.
Tachyons don't exist
You're retarded AND stubborn. There is support for their existence.
They can not be ruled out.
which is why they have not been discovered.
There have been observation which fit the model for tachyons.
Has nothing to do with that.-a Ask yourself this, "Why have no quarks,
which are part of the Standard Model, never been observed in isolation??"
They've never been observed. Period.
Quarks are "detected" indirectly. Which would likely be the case with tachyons where direct detection would be impossible.
Oh. If you can only detect something indirectly, that means you can
only detect it when it's with something else. What you're doing is
detecting the predicted response/reaction to the presence of the
quark.
You, being retarded, have already misunderstood and misrepresented
far too much. Why don't you talk within your knowledge sphere, like
how much you enjoy farting in the tub & biting the bubbles...
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
Okay, yep, I am not an expert
While exotic solutions to GR certainly exist
(Please note that everything that I wrote in the above paragraph was
purely from my memory;
Tachyons don't exist
You're retarded AND stubborn. There is support for their existence.
They can not be ruled out.
Yes, they can be ruled out, at least as of today.
The standard model that comprises the 17 fundamental particles makes testable predictions
But, as I have PROVEDI love that you're insane. I honestly do. It's hilarious, to
Retrocausality
What does that have to do with your acknowledgement that we know
better than you?
Thank youWhat's my position? Remember how you were pretending to know?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On 11/10/25 7:51 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Okay, yep, I am not an expert
-a-a-a-a-a-a [---a great deal of irrelevant bullshit deleted---]
While exotic solutions to GR certainly exist
There is nothing excluding time travel. In fact, you are always
moving in time -- including backwards -- relative to other
points in the universe.
Always.
For you & me, you'd have to be so far separated for this movement
backwards through time to amount to anything that it's impossible,
as far as we know, for either of us to be effected by any time
differences. But this is not the case with the photon.
Because time slows down as you move closer to the speed of light,
until it actually stops at light speed, things that happen
instantaneously for the photon appear to happen at two different
times FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE.
And we're right. It is real. It is two different times, for us,
even if not for the photon.
Because time is relative.
(Please note that everything that I wrote in the above paragraph was
purely from my memory;
I sincerely doubt it, meaning I don't believe you. I know that
memory isn't intelligence but why regurgitate irrelevant nonsense
in the first place?
Tachyons don't exist
You're retarded AND stubborn. There is support for their existence.
They can not be ruled out.
Yes, they can be ruled out, at least as of today.
Wrong. There is support for their existence. There are observations
which are consistent with Tachyons existing. It's not "Proof" but
we are speaking of a rather exotic concept here, and we couldn't
even detect them directly anyway.
The standard model that comprises the 17 fundamental particles makes
testable predictions
subatomic particles pop in & out of existence, quantum tunnel through
things, display "Spooky Action at a Distance"...
Oddly, nothing I've stated even qualifies as "Exotic."
You want "Exotic?" Do the Google on "One Electron Universe."
Or if you want *Me* to get all "Exotic" on you, I could spill my views
on the Multiverse...
Saying "Entangled Photons are Always in the Same Place & Same Time" is rudimentary. The inescapable consequence of this is that, because we
live under extremely different rules, what happens in the exact same
place & time for the photon is happening at different places and at
different times for us. And we're both right.
It really is simultaneous for the photon, it really is separated by
time & space for us.
It's inescapable.
PLUS, if tachyons do exist -- AND THERE IS SUPPORT FOR THEIR
EXISTENCE -- we can send messages backwards through time.
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
On 11/10/2025 11:29 AM, JTEM wrote:
On 11/10/25 7:51 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Okay, yep, I am not an expert
-a-a-a-a-a-a-a [---a great deal of irrelevant bullshit deleted---]
While exotic solutions to GR certainly exist
There is nothing excluding time travel. In fact, you are always
moving in time -- including backwards -- relative to other
points in the universe.
Absolutely not!!-a EVERYTHING in the Universe moves FORWARD in time, no exceptions whatsoever!!!-a Please take some time to learn about Special Relativity and Minkowski space.
Always.
For you & me, you'd have to be so far separated for this movement
backwards through time to amount to anything that it's impossible,
as far as we know, for either of us to be effected by any time
differences. But this is not the case with the photon.
Because time slows down as you move closer to the speed of light,
until it actually stops at light speed, things that happen
instantaneously for the photon appear to happen at two different
times FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE.
No!!!-a Again, learn about PROPER TIME.-a As one gets closer and closer to the speed of light, one's proper time does NOT slow down!!!-a Once again, proper time is an INVARIANT quantity.-a One's time does not stop, ever,
even at the speed of light!!
Once again, "moving clocks run slow" is the simple run that you are
missing here, and by the Principle of Equivalence, time will run slower
in a gravitational field, but to an observer in that field, time will
appear to pass in a completely normal manner.
And, so, consider an observer who is crossing the event horizon of a
(large) black hole.-a From that vantage point of that observer, all is
well (at least for a while!); but from the vantage point of another
observer who is far away from the black hole's event horizon, it will
appear that "time will have stopped" for the observer who is crossing
the event horizon, but for that observer, his/her clock will "tick" normally.
And we're right. It is real. It is two different times, for us,
even if not for the photon.
Because time is relative.
Only to an extent!-a Once again, proper time is an INVARIANT quantity,
that is, ALL observers will agree on each other's proper time.
(Please note that everything that I wrote in the above paragraph was
purely from my memory;
I sincerely doubt it, meaning I don't believe you. I know that
memory isn't intelligence but why regurgitate irrelevant nonsense
in the first place?
It is clear to me that you do not understand relativity theory.-a As for
me, I admit that I am no expert, but I do understand that in Nature some physical quantities are conserved ("the same before & event an event")
and that others are invariant ("all observers agree on the said quantity").-a And, so again, just from my memory:
1)-a Energy is conserved but not invariant.
2)-a Mass is invariant but not conserved.
3)-a Electric charge is both invariant & conserved.
4)-a Velocity, along with a bunch of other things, is neither conserved
nor invariant.
Make sense?-a If you don't understand the above, then you really need to learn more, and until (and if) you do, please stop pontificating on
subjects that you do not (yet) understand.
Tachyons don't exist
You're retarded AND stubborn. There is support for their existence.
They can not be ruled out.
Yes, they can be ruled out, at least as of today.
Wrong. There is support for their existence. There are observations
which are consistent with Tachyons existing. It's not "Proof" but
we are speaking of a rather exotic concept here, and we couldn't
even detect them directly anyway.
Nope.-a As I have told you, tachyons are not part of the Standard Model. Please look this up!
The standard model that comprises the 17 fundamental particles makes
testable predictions
subatomic particles pop in & out of existence, quantum tunnel through
things, display "Spooky Action at a Distance"...
Oddly, nothing I've stated even qualifies as "Exotic."
You want "Exotic?" Do the Google on "One Electron Universe."
Or if you want *Me* to get all "Exotic" on you, I could spill my views
on the Multiverse...
Saying "Entangled Photons are Always in the Same Place & Same Time" is
rudimentary. The inescapable consequence of this is that, because we
live under extremely different rules, what happens in the exact same
place & time for the photon is happening at different places and at
different times for us. And we're both right.
The issue here is one of locality, and you really need to learn more.-a I have recommended this video for you before:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcqZHYo7ONs
This time, please watch it!
It really is simultaneous for the photon, it really is separated by
time & space for us.
It's inescapable.
Once again, event at the speed of light, one still experiences time!-a A photon's "clock" at the speed of light still "ticks".-a From the vantage point of any other observer, the photon's time has stopped.-a It's called the Lorentz transformation; look it up and plug the numbers in!!
PLUS, if tachyons do exist -- AND THERE IS SUPPORT FOR THEIRNope, no support for them whatsoever, which is why they are not part of
EXISTENCE -- we can send messages backwards through time.
the Standard Model:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
Dawn
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Absolutely not!!
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
-aDawn Flood wrote:
Absolutely not!!
You are *Such* a fucking idiot!
Honestly, you are an insane retard...
You are literally "Arguing" that photons experience time.
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
Look up the Lorentz factor "gamma"; when the
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
Absolutely not!!
You are *Such* a fucking idiot!
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 18:20:07 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
Absolutely not!!
You are *Such* a fucking idiot!
And yet, she's far more intelligent than you. I realize that,
given your lack of education, this isn't saying much.
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Yep, I admit that I screwed-up on this one:
In any case, such has nothing to do with tachyons,
And yet
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
On 11/11/25 8:34 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Yep, I admit that I screwed-up on this one:
-a-a "Yep. I admit that JTEM is right."
In any case, such has nothing to do with tachyons,
Lol!
You're such a fucking idiot... "Even if I'm wrong I'd
right."
Photons break your idiotic worship of "No Retrocausality."
BECAUSE photons don't experience time AND WE DO, the result
HAS TO BE quantum funkiness such as Retrocausality. It has
to happen, BECAUSE photons and how they exist can't fit into
our human model of space & time.
Get it, speaking rhetorically?
FOR US there is a "Before" and "After" and we can't escape
this. But for the photon there is no such thing. Thus, the
Delayed Choice Quantum Entanglement were the entangled
photon knows what WE ARE GOING TO DO to it's entangled pair.
Retrocausality.
Yet the entirety of your objection to tachyons is that they
break the laws of physics which we just broke with the photons
anyway, creating Retrocausality.
Why are tachyons not listed
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On 11/11/25 2:29 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 18:20:07 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
Absolutely not!!
You are *Such* a fucking idiot!
And yet, she's far more intelligent than you. I realize that,
given your lack of education, this isn't saying much.
Your sock puppet
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
So you
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On 11/12/25 3:57 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Tue, 11 Nov 2025 14:49:38 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/11/25 2:29 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 18:20:07 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
Absolutely not!!
You are *Such* a fucking idiot!
And yet, she's far more intelligent than you. I realize that, >>>>given your lack of education, this isn't saying much.
Your sock puppet
So you still hold the delusion that you and only one other person
are on Usenet? It's either that or you just got caught in a lie.
It's not about me,
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You're the one
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
On 11/13/25 4:00 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Wed, 12 Nov 2025 11:13:49 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/12/25 3:57 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Tue, 11 Nov 2025 14:49:38 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/11/25 2:29 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 18:20:07 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Dawn Flood wrote:
Absolutely not!!
You are *Such* a fucking idiot!
And yet, she's far more intelligent than you. I realize that, >>>>>>given your lack of education, this isn't saying much.
Your sock puppet
So you still hold the delusion that you and only one other person >>>>are on Usenet? It's either that or you just got caught in a lie.
It's not about me,
You're the one who has a mental illness that makes you believe, >>firmly, that you and only one other person are all of Usenet. Or you
have been lying.
Which is it?
So I invented photons?
YourI have nothing to do with your mental illness(es).
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
And yet, she's far more intelligent than you. I realize that, >>>>>>>>given your lack of education, this isn't saying much.
Your sock puppet
So you still hold the delusion that you and only one other person >>>>>>are on Usenet? It's either that or you just got caught in a lie.
It's not about me,
You're the one who has a mental illness that makes you believe, >>>>firmly, that you and only one other person are all of Usenet. Or you >>>>have been lying.
Which is it?
So I invented photons?
Your attempt to divert from your very real mental illness is >>acknowledged.
So, what are you pretending to disagree with?
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
I
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On 11/15/25 3:36 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2025 12:04:51 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
It's not about me,And yet, she's far more intelligent than you. I realize that, >>>>>>>>>>given your lack of education, this isn't saying much.
Your sock puppet
So you still hold the delusion that you and only one other person >>>>>>>>are on Usenet? It's either that or you just got caught in a lie. >>>>>>>
You're the one who has a mental illness that makes you believe, >>>>>>firmly, that you and only one other person are all of Usenet. Or you >>>>>>have been lying.
Which is it?
So I invented photons?
Your attempt to divert from your very real mental illness is >>>>acknowledged.
So, what are you pretending to disagree with?
I already detailed that.
The pussy is here! The pussy is here! Look at her cower, just
like a pussy, too terrified to even attempt an answer...
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
At least youI am the sweetest man on earth, REFUSING to stoop to name calling,
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
(Time) 11/30/25 AgainX2 greeting Dawn here ...
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-|a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?'
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
Your not being able to reply appropriately over the past 60 min since
being greeted here means, JTEM, you're #StatCOVID19Test **positive**
which indicates you're possibly infected w/#COVID (See https://youtu.be/F9cjfEiLQIk or https://tinyurl.com/StatCOVID19Test
for the science).
On 12/1/25 7:02 AM, HeartDoc Andrew wrote:
Your not being able to reply appropriately over the past 60 min
since
being greeted here means, JTEM, you're #StatCOVID19Test
**positive**
which indicates you're possibly infected w/#COVID (See
https://youtu.be/F9cjfEiLQIk or
https://tinyurl.com/StatCOVID19Test
for the science).
There was never anything to reply to! Not in this group.
I saw this and thought "I went to bed" but it wouldn't matter if
I did or did not. There was no reply posted to this group.
Did Satan block your post?
JTEM wrote:
On 12/1/25 7:02 AM, HeartDoc Andrew wrote:
Your not being able to reply appropriately over the past 60 min since
being greeted here means, JTEM, you're #StatCOVID19Test **positive**
which indicates you're possibly infected w/#COVID (See
https://youtu.be/F9cjfEiLQIk or https://tinyurl.com/StatCOVID19Test
for the science).
There was never anything to reply to! Not in this group.
I saw this and thought "I went to bed" but it wouldn't matter if
I did or did not. There was no reply posted to this group.
Did Satan block your post?
who gets covid these days?
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
(Time) 12/01/25 AgainX2, Re: JTEM ...
On Mon, 08 Apr 2024 16:42:22 -0400, HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy
Spirit, boldly wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
(no reply for > 60 min)
Your not being able to reply appropriately over the past 60 min since
being greeted here means, JTEM, you're #StatCOVID19Test **positive**
which indicates you're possibly infected w/#COVID (See https://youtu.be/F9cjfEiLQIk or https://tinyurl.com/StatCOVID19Test
for the science).
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
(no reply for > 60 min)
Your not being able to reply appropriately over the past 60 min since
being greeted here means, JTEM, you're #StatCOVID19Test **positive**
which indicates you're possibly infected w/#COVID (See https://youtu.be/F9cjfEiLQIk or https://tinyurl.com/StatCOVID19Test
for the science).
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
(no reply for > 60 min)
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
Your not being able to reply appropriately
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
(no reply for > 60 min)
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
(no reply for > 60 min)
-aHeartDoc Andrew wrote:
(no reply for > 60 min)
What are you posting these to alt.atheism?-a The last few days I haven't
even been downloading headers cus there's too many of them, and I'm too disgustingly lazy to go through them all.
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
(no reply for > 60 min)
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
(Time) 12/04/25 Again, Re: JTEM ...
I will solute the divinity in you, and call on the angels
bless you and shower you with wealth & prosperity, but
only if you reply appropriately within 60 minutes. After
that they may tie your shoe laces together or bring you
warts. It's all out of my hands.
JTEM wrote:
Check your crossposts, otherwise you're just going to get
killfiled.
Crossposts have been checked.
In the interim, I am otherwise wonderfully hungry for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, JTEM, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
On 11/12/25 12:30 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Why are tachyons not listed
Who cares?
Literally NOTHING was listed in the past. Did nothing exist
before someone decided to come up with a list?
You're religious. You need a high priest to reveal "Truth"
unto you.
Try thinking for a change.
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Derive the Dirac equation for me from scratch; no Internet & no
cheating.-a Present your results here.
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
On 12/8/25 2:15 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Derive the Dirac equation for me from scratch; no Internet & no
cheating.a Present your results here.
How does this alter the fact that photons don't experience time
so quantum weirdness -- like Retrocausality -- is inescapable.
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Your failure
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
On Mon, 8 Dec 2025 14:40:31 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/8/25 2:15 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Derive the Dirac equation for me from scratch; no Internet & no
cheating.-a Present your results here.
How does this alter the fact that photons don't experience time
so quantum weirdness -- like Retrocausality -- is inescapable.
Your failure is acknowledged.
It's OK. You're in what, fourth grade? You haven't had the
education necessary to even understand the Dirac equation. Odds are,
you didn't know of its existence until Dawn's post. Because of this,
you can't know how it applies to the discussion.
Now try to divert from the truth. You will because I command it.
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Yeppers!-a I can't derive the
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On 12/9/2025 3:28 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Mon, 8 Dec 2025 14:40:31 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/8/25 2:15 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Derive the Dirac equation for me from scratch; no Internet & no
cheating.a Present your results here.
How does this alter the fact that photons don't experience time
so quantum weirdness -- like Retrocausality -- is inescapable.
Your failure is acknowledged.
It's OK. You're in what, fourth grade? You haven't had the
education necessary to even understand the Dirac equation. Odds are,
you didn't know of its existence until Dawn's post. Because of this,
you can't know how it applies to the discussion.
Now try to divert from the truth. You will because I command it.
Yeppers! I can't derive the Dirac equation on my own, but I have seen >others do so, and it makes sense!!
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
-aDawn Flood wrote:
Yeppers!-a I can't derive the
So you're pretending to address... what?
I don't play your over-the-top narcissism game and I'm never
going to.
YOU are pretending to address the fact that photons don't experience
time. And it is a fact, and you even acknowledged it. Yet you're
pretending to refute what I say... idiot.
We do experience time. For us, there is a past, there is a present
and there is a future. Photons don't experience time and we do. This
is why photons break all our rules of nature, as in the case of Retrocausality or "Quantum Strangeness at a Distance."
This actually translates to The Multiverse, which Einstein describes
but doesn't name so idiots can't comprehend that he said it, described
it.
"He didn't use that word so he never talked about it!"
Google & misunderstand Simultaneity. Take your time. We can laugh
at you over it later.
NOTE:-a Einstein's Simultaneity and the famous "Train hit by lightening" thought experiment is illustrating Retrocausality in the Delayed
Choice Quantum Entanglement experiment in that from one perspective
both lightening bolts happen at the exact same time, and from another perspective one of them happens FIRST and then the other. BOTH
PERSPECTIVES ARE RIGHT! BOTH ARE REAL! That is the part that you stupid people can't wrap your head around.
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
No, no, and no!!-a The thought experiment by Professor Einstein only
relates to events that are acausal.-a If one event causes another event
On 12/10/2025 3:22 PM, JTEM wrote:
aDawn Flood wrote:
Yeppers!a I can't derive the
So you're pretending to address... what?
I don't play your over-the-top narcissism game and I'm never
going to.
YOU are pretending to address the fact that photons don't experience
time. And it is a fact, and you even acknowledged it. Yet you're
pretending to refute what I say... idiot.
We do experience time. For us, there is a past, there is a present
and there is a future. Photons don't experience time and we do. This
is why photons break all our rules of nature, as in the case of
Retrocausality or "Quantum Strangeness at a Distance."
This actually translates to The Multiverse, which Einstein describes
but doesn't name so idiots can't comprehend that he said it, described
it.
"He didn't use that word so he never talked about it!"
Google & misunderstand Simultaneity. Take your time. We can laugh
at you over it later.
NOTE:a Einstein's Simultaneity and the famous "Train hit by lightening"
thought experiment is illustrating Retrocausality in the Delayed
Choice Quantum Entanglement experiment in that from one perspective
both lightening bolts happen at the exact same time, and from another
perspective one of them happens FIRST and then the other. BOTH
PERSPECTIVES ARE RIGHT! BOTH ARE REAL! That is the part that you stupid
people can't wrap your head around.
No, no, and no!! The thought experiment by Professor Einstein only
relates to events that are acausal. If one event causes another event,
then ***ALL*** observers in our entire Universe will agree that 'Event
A' came *before* 'Event B'.
Do you understand this??
Being right has NEVER been his goal.
So you're NOT pretending to be a narcissist.
I tried in the past
On 12/11/25 4:24 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
No, no, and no!!-a The thought experiment by Professor Einstein only
relates to events that are acausal.-a If one event causes another event
It's actually all about reference frame.
From our reference frame, the effect precedes the cause but only inside
of our reference frame. If we assume the reference frame of the photon
they happen simultaneously.
In the experiment referenced above (See subject line), The information
isn't even known until after the fact. That alone will satisfy whatever nonsense you Googled and are now misunderstanding.
But this is inescapable and it's not the only example of the photon
breaking our rules of nature. I've only pointed this out numerous times
which means I can look forward to continue pointing it out without you
once ever getting it:
"Spooky Action at a Distance."
It's nothing more than another illustration of the photon and the consequences of it not experiencing time. That's all. And as before,
it breaks our rules but only because the rules of the photon do not
fit into our idea of reality.
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On 12/11/25 4:22 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
-a-a-a-a-a I tried in the past
Expectations were not high.
Photons don't experience time. They violate our rules of
existence. It's impossible for them not to, as they don't
experience time (or even distance) and we do.
Dawn Flood wrote:
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
"And Isaiah had replied, 'This will be a sign to you from the LORD
that He will do what He has promised: Shall the shadow go forward ten
steps, or go back ten steps?' 'It is easy for the shadow to lengthen
ten steps (i.e. forwards time travel),' answered Hezekiah, 'but not
for it to go back ten steps (i.e. backwards time travel).' So the
prophet Isaiah called out to the LORD, Who brought the shadow back the
ten steps it had descended on the stairway of Ahaz (i.e. backwards
time travel).o (2 Kings 20:9-11 w/ parenthetical clarification)
In the interim, as discussed earlier, I am simply https://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) for food right now
(Luke 6:21a) and hope you, Dawn, and others reading this, also have a
healthy appetite for food right now too.
So how are you ?
"Spooky Action at a Distance."
It's nothing more than another illustration of the photon and the
consequences of it not experiencing time. That's all. And as before,
it breaks our rules but only because the rules of the photon do not
fit into our idea of reality.
No!-a What you are describing
Did you know that you can have a radio without any external electricity (battery, A/C outlet, hand crank, solar, etc.) to power it?!
On 12/12/25 10:11 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
"Spooky Action at a Distance."
It's nothing more than another illustration of the photon and the
consequences of it not experiencing time. That's all. And as before,
it breaks our rules but only because the rules of the photon do not
fit into our idea of reality.
No!a What you are describing
I'm describing the fact that photons don't experience time. This is
why we have "Spooky Action at a Distance."
According to our rules, the speed of light, C, is a universal speed
limit and nothing can travel faster. Yet if you measure one photon
it's entangled pair INSTANTLY reacts regardless of distance -- breaking
our universal speed limit. This is because time does not exist for the >photon, and hence neither does space.
This isn't a "Paradox." This is an inescapable consequence of not >experiencing time.--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
I honestly have no way to account for your difficulty with such a simple >concept, except to conclude that you are either mentally retarded or
perhaps brain damaged.
...chemically inhibited?
Drugs? Lots of drugs? Lots & lots of drugs?
The concept is valid for massive particles as well as photons.
It is instantaneous, but it can't be used to send messages or other
forms of information
On 12/12/25 5:53 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
The concept is valid for massive particles as well as photons.
*Sigh*
No matter the sock puppet, never any reading comprehension...
Speed of light. Photons do not experience the speed of light and
as an inescapable consequence entangled photons are always in the
same place, and it's always the same time for both.
It is instantaneous, but it can't be used to send messages or other
forms of information
There goes quantum computing!
How does that relate to quantum entanglement in, say, electrons with different spins?
On 12/12/25 11:14 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
How does that relate to quantum entanglement in, say, electrons with
different spins?
Why? What answer changes anything I've said?
Photons don't have time or space. We do. So for us there's all this
strange quantum funkiness that just plain never exists for the photon.
And it's how we get Retrocausality.
On 12/12/25 2:17 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Did you know that you can have a radio without any external
electricity (battery, A/C outlet, hand crank, solar, etc.) to power it?!
Yes.
Photons still don't experience time. As an inescapable consequence,
they violate our rules of existence.
You cannot point to a single scientific experiment and/or observation
that supports retrocausality vis-a-vis some sort of "time travel".
On 12/12/25 10:11 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
"Spooky Action at a Distance."
It's nothing more than another illustration of the photon and the
consequences of it not experiencing time. That's all. And as before,
it breaks our rules but only because the rules of the photon do not
fit into our idea of reality.
No!-a What you are describing
I'm describing the fact that photons don't experience time. This is
why we have "Spooky Action at a Distance."
According to our rules, the speed of light, C, is a universal speed
limit and nothing can travel faster. Yet if you measure one photon
it's entangled pair INSTANTLY reacts regardless of distance -- breaking
our universal speed limit. This is because time does not exist for the photon, and hence neither does space.
This isn't a "Paradox." This is an inescapable consequence of not experiencing time.
I honestly have no way to account for your difficulty with such a simple concept, except to conclude that you are either mentally retarded or
perhaps brain damaged.
-a-a-a-a-a ...chemically inhibited?
Drugs? Lots of drugs? Lots & lots of drugs?
No, Honey, that is
No matter the sock puppet, never any reading comprehension...
On 12/12/25 4:36 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2025 15:24:31 -0600, Dawn Flood
<Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/10/2025 3:22 PM, JTEM wrote:
aDawn Flood wrote:
Yeppers!a I can't derive the
So you're pretending to address... what?
I don't play your over-the-top narcissism game and I'm never
going to.
YOU are pretending to address the fact that photons don't experience
time. And it is a fact, and you even acknowledged it. Yet you're
pretending to refute what I say... idiot.
We do experience time. For us, there is a past, there is a present
and there is a future. Photons don't experience time and we do. This
is why photons break all our rules of nature, as in the case of
Retrocausality or "Quantum Strangeness at a Distance."
This actually translates to The Multiverse, which Einstein describes
but doesn't name so idiots can't comprehend that he said it, described >>>> it.
"He didn't use that word so he never talked about it!"
Google & misunderstand Simultaneity. Take your time. We can laugh
at you over it later.
NOTE:a Einstein's Simultaneity and the famous "Train hit by lightening" >>>> thought experiment is illustrating Retrocausality in the Delayed
Choice Quantum Entanglement experiment in that from one perspective
both lightening bolts happen at the exact same time, and from another
perspective one of them happens FIRST and then the other. BOTH
PERSPECTIVES ARE RIGHT! BOTH ARE REAL! That is the part that you stupid >>>> people can't wrap your head around.
No, no, and no!! The thought experiment by Professor Einstein only >>>relates to events that are acausal. If one event causes another event, >>>then ***ALL*** observers in our entire Universe will agree that 'Event >>>A' came *before* 'Event B'.
Do you understand this??
John probably doesn't understand. He has claimed he's not yet 10
years of age, so he isn't too likely to have been taught. But he
doesn't care.
Being right has NEVER been his goal. Simply using 'argumentum ad >>hominem' seems to be his only motive and goal.
It's a discussion group, you demented twat.
Then youAlways about me yet I have never acquiesced to your desire
Thank you
You seem to believe that quantum entanglement is restricted to
photons.
On 12/13/25 10:21 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
No, Honey, that is
Me:-a "Oh, look, here's an experiment that demonstrates Retrocausality."
Spasm:-a "No I watched a Youtube video and misunderstood a webpage!"
Me:-a "Oops, the experiment is still there."
Spasm:-a "No you made it up plus you lie & stuff cus I misunderstood something.
Me: "Okay, the experiment is still there."
Spasm:-a "No impossible & stuff!"
Me:-a "Great. The experiment is still there."
On 12/13/25 12:41 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
You seem to believe that quantum entanglement is restricted to
photons.
Look. You're a raging narcissist
cowering behind a bevy of sock
puppets so you don't know what I said. And I'll remind you now
but it won't do any good because exposing your repeated errors
simply triggers A STRONGER narcissistic reaction/defense...
Photons are one of the only two things I mentioned, the other
being the proposed Tachyons.
And look up at the subject line. Copy & paste it into Google.
It's correct that final word but it will get you there: Your
"Cite" that was never missing.
You goddamn Tim Walz...
The link that I posted was from a PhD physicist.
Weren't you just recently accusing someone of wanting to drink your
saliva?
On 12/13/25 4:57 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
Weren't you just recently accusing someone of wanting to drink your
saliva?
You do want to.
And given your, um, your "State" of existence, I
don't blame you one bit.
So, again, I raised the example of an experiment that demonstrates >Retrocausality. And you went mental.
Again, don't blame you, mostly blame your parents but, there it is.
On 12/13/25 1:11 PM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2025 20:51:42 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
No matter the sock puppet, never any reading comprehension...
Then you should cease using them.
Always about me
On 12/13/25 1:11 PM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2025 08:12:36 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/12/25 4:36 AM, Kenito Benito wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2025 15:24:31 -0600, Dawn Flood >>>><Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/10/2025 3:22 PM, JTEM wrote:
aDawn Flood wrote:
Yeppers!a I can't derive the
So you're pretending to address... what?
I don't play your over-the-top narcissism game and I'm never
going to.
YOU are pretending to address the fact that photons don't experience >>>>>> time. And it is a fact, and you even acknowledged it. Yet you're
pretending to refute what I say... idiot.
We do experience time. For us, there is a past, there is a present >>>>>> and there is a future. Photons don't experience time and we do. This >>>>>> is why photons break all our rules of nature, as in the case of
Retrocausality or "Quantum Strangeness at a Distance."
This actually translates to The Multiverse, which Einstein describes >>>>>> but doesn't name so idiots can't comprehend that he said it, described >>>>>> it.
"He didn't use that word so he never talked about it!"
Google & misunderstand Simultaneity. Take your time. We can laugh
at you over it later.
NOTE:a Einstein's Simultaneity and the famous "Train hit by lightening" >>>>>> thought experiment is illustrating Retrocausality in the Delayed
Choice Quantum Entanglement experiment in that from one perspective >>>>>> both lightening bolts happen at the exact same time, and from another >>>>>> perspective one of them happens FIRST and then the other. BOTH
PERSPECTIVES ARE RIGHT! BOTH ARE REAL! That is the part that you stupid >>>>>> people can't wrap your head around.
No, no, and no!! The thought experiment by Professor Einstein only >>>>>relates to events that are acausal. If one event causes another event, >>>>>then ***ALL*** observers in our entire Universe will agree that 'Event >>>>>A' came *before* 'Event B'.
Do you understand this??
John probably doesn't understand. He has claimed he's not yet 10 >>>>years of age, so he isn't too likely to have been taught. But he >>>>doesn't care.
Being right has NEVER been his goal. Simply using 'argumentum ad >>>>hominem' seems to be his only motive and goal.
It's a discussion group, you demented twat.
Thank you for proving me 100% correct. You are dismissed.
It's not about me,
On 12/13/25 3:57 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
The link that I posted was from a PhD physicist.
So you're pretending that he's the only one and everyone agrees
with him, or at least nobody out ranks him -- being the only
person EVER to hold a Phd -- and that's your final answer?
Honestly, WHY aren't you asking your nurse to look over these
things before you post them? Would sabe you a lot of
embarrassment...
I'll give you a hint, and you go put on your Einstein Cap and
try & figure out what it means:
The people who came up with the experiment I referenced hold
WHAT degree? Is it a Phd or a Sponge Bob Squarepants certificate
of Crabby Patties?
Go on, sparky, take a wild stab at it...
But you see, speaking rhetorically:-a You have no clue even how
to BEGIN to question any topic. "Guy has Phd!" Yeah, as if they're
the only one... Sheesh!
Think more, act out with your various mental disorders less.
Have a nice day.
Please CITE a SINGLE physicist who agrees with you!
Again, you
You'veIt's not about me. That's your mental illness(es) at work, as
Sounds like some homosexual fantasy.
And given your, um, your "State" of existence, I
don't blame you one bit.
That's really nauseating.
More from the article I posted that
On 12/14/25 10:56 AM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Please CITE a SINGLE physicist who agrees with you!
How about the ones who came up with the test, or the one whose
work they based it on?
Moron.
Seriously. Even after humiliating you for this exact type of
insane tunnel vision, you do it again!
You don't have to disgrace yourself like this, not every time.
You can run this incredibly stupid remarks of yours by others
first, get some feedback before committing to your insanity.
But that's your narcissism, isn't it?-a You can't admit your
stupidity. You can't deal with the fact that you're stupid.
Some scientific papers
On 12/14/25 12:12 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
Sounds like some homosexual fantasy.
An audio rorschach test!
And given your, um, your "State" of existence, I
don't blame you one bit.
That's really nauseating.
Your state of existence is nauseating.
More from the article I posted that
You're a moron so you forgot the most important part:
How does this article you never read and don't understand make
the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiment go away?
How does it change the results?
You can't remember, your disorder is blocking you, but you're
pretending to address the things I've said. So, how are YOU
are doing that?
On Sun, 14 Dec 2025 14:40:06 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/14/25 12:12 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
Sounds like some homosexual fantasy.
An audio rorschach test!
What a strange activity
"The delayed-choice quantum eraser does not communicate information in
a retro-causal manner because
On 12/14/25 5:29 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2025 14:40:06 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/14/25 12:12 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
Sounds like some homosexual fantasy.
An audio rorschach test!
What a strange activity
Your disassociating! Not a surprise...
"The delayed-choice quantum eraser does not communicate information in
a retro-causal manner because
You're a raging jackass, as you constantly prove, but you merely
cherry picked an opposing opinion.
Clearly it's not the only point
of view. If you're having difficulty figuring out what I mean, why
don't you ask yourself "Who came up with the idea for the
experiment in the first place??
HINT: It was designed to demonstrate Retrocausality!
It's the standard interpretation.
On 12/14/25 10:06 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
[--Troll--]
It's the standard interpretation.
So the experiment designed to demonstrate Retrocausality isn't
allowed to contract some interpretation, cus you think it's
standard.
Well. Totally scientific there...
On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 21:49:49 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
So the experiment designed to demonstrate Retrocausality isn't
allowed to contract some interpretation, cus you think it's
standard.
What do you mean by that?
On 12/16/25 12:02 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 21:49:49 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
So the experiment designed to demonstrate Retrocausality isn't
allowed to contract some interpretation, cus you think it's
standard.
What do you mean by that?
It's a mystery.
And you express typical narcissistic behavior with
every post, every sock puppet.
A mystery even to you
On 12/17/25 12:16 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
A mystery even to you
No. I have reading comprehension & retention. And even if I
didn't
I know how to look at older posts. This is all well
above your pay grade, obviously.
So Retrocausality is demonstrated in the cited experiment.
And this sent you spiraling into a tizzy, and I think that's
funny.
In other words
On 12/17/25 11:39 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
In other words
I could spell it out for you 10 different ways
and your massive
personality disorder would still prevent you from comprehending...
Okay, so the referenced experiment was designed to demonstrate >retrocausality, and this triggered you, sent you into a tizzy.
Why?
You're constantly move backwards & forwards in time, maybe by
centuries, from other reference points in the universe. Same
universe, vastly different reference points...
Why did this one experiment cause you to lose bladder control?
And yet it was you
On 12/21/25 6:13 PM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
And yet it was you
Not about me, honey.
Your mental illness is all about you.
So I tried rephrasing this, breaking through your mental..
mental.. your.. shall we say "Issues?"
Anyway, I asked you to accept what you already accepted,
that photons don't experience time, and I asked you to
think of some ways how that would mess us up in our
observations. And you... you... what?
You switched handles and acted out emotionally again.
But try it: WE experience. WE do. But not the photon.
So what are some of the ways that this difference in
perspective would have manifest, from our point of view?
I'll spell out one thing, to help you get going, but it
won't work. You're too far gone to think.
Anyhow:
"Spooky action at a distance."
To us, entangled particles share "Information" faster than
the speed of light. Because we exist in time and photons
don't. To the photon, it takes exactly the same amount of
time for it to reach Mars as it does to reach all the
other galaxies we can see, which is no time at all.
Instantly!
So "Spooky action at a distance" is one way that the differing
perspectives would manifest.
What are some other ways?
On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:33:05 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:Vincent Maycock wrote:
Not interested, faggot.
On 12/22/25 2:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:33:05 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:Vincent Maycock wrote:
Not interested, faggot.
Lol! The mask is gone! We see the malicious, dirty little
malcontent!
Look. You're a classic narcissist and this fact shine through
all your alters. You've been exposed as a fool
and you can't
accept this, so you're trying to distract.
It's not working.
Photons don't experience time so they don't follow our rules.
One rule is faster-than-light communication and another is
Retrocausality.
Take your meds, accept the fact that you're a sniveling little
runt of an "Intellect"
and go play with your poo.
Good luck with that!
On 12/22/25 2:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:33:05 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:Vincent Maycock wrote:
Not interested, faggot.
Lol! The mask is gone!
On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 23:41:00 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/22/25 2:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:33:05 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:Vincent Maycock wrote:
Not interested, faggot.
So youSwitching handles, avoiding the topic... revealing your
Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 23:41:00 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/22/25 2:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:33:05 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:Vincent Maycock wrote:
Not interested, faggot.
This is proof that you're a mentally ill sock puppet. You're far too
much of a pussy to risk public exposure for this like homophobia!
No, you're just a twisted little freak
triggered over the fact that
photons don't experience time, so they do things that don't seem
right to us -- even impossible -- because we do experience time.
One thing they do is appear to break the rules of faster-than-light >communication, with their "Spooky Action at a Distance."
They aren't
doing ANYTHING "Faster" because "Faster" is a product of duration, and >without time there is no duration.
You can't grasp this at all, can you? No. Of course not. This is why
you're spazzing out...
Anyway, talk to your shrink. Get your lithium upped.
Good luck with that!
Kenito Benito wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 23:41:00 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:Switching handles,
On 12/22/25 2:30 AM, Vincent Maycock wrote:
On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:33:05 -0500, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:Vincent Maycock wrote:
Not interested, faggot.
Lol! The mask is gone!
So you are gay? OK.
I presumed Vincent was mocking your calling him by a pet name, >>"honey." Turns out, he was spot on.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 54 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 12:06:25 |
| Calls: | 742 |
| Files: | 1,218 |
| D/L today: |
1 files (1,690K bytes) |
| Messages: | 183,172 |
| Posted today: | 1 |