Thank for the link, I'm reading it and at the moment I have found it interesting.
The problem with serious discussion about time travel is that we need to understand in other way to understand how the universe works.
Yes, but huge sweeping changes to the geometry of space isn't what makes a "new way to understand." Very tiny changes to fundamental understanding has dramatic effects on the rest of physical understanding and by the very fact that what we do know is already really accurate, it is the case that even tinier changes are what we should be looking for.
People that have studied in university use the classic point of view of science, valid, but incomplete to fully understand the time travel physics. And the people that haven't studied in university cannot fully explain physics in a correct way.
Your statement reeks of begging the question and besides that is nonsense. It even has a hint of presupposing that people who don't know university physics are somehow better in some way (this
really makes no sense).
So, what happens? People with an university degree have a classic, proven, point of view about physics and usually they don't want to believe in these kind of "para-physics", because almost always this non conventional point of view is rated as esoteric science, pseudoscience, etc...
No, that really isn't it. It's just that, if your idea looks like poor or commits logical fallacies it will be called on those things. You'll notice that no one ever straight up rejected your notions, but simply explained it as "It doesn't work like that." Know why? Because
it doesn't work like that. The thing with these new and radical ideas is that the authors dive in with all the confidence in the world, and a really odd and deep-seated assumption that what they are saying is right. There is no concern for the truth of the statement, no effort wants to be spent in understanding
what really is. Ultimately, there is no humility. It's as though these authors unassumingly believe that they're right and the dogmatic experts are wrong.
In the pseudoscientific world there are a lot of charlatans, of course. For that reason, pseudoscience is classified as a non-sense way to understand physics. But the true key is that someones in the pseudoscience world seems to be right. But they are very little known. So, speaking about time travel could be like trying to find a needle in a haystack.
"Someone in the pseudoscience world seems to be right."
REALLY? Well gosh mate, someone in the REAL science world seems to be right. What now?
These kind of paraphysics include:
Quantum electrodynamics, vorticular physics, quantum numerology, vibratory chemistry, hyperdimensional physics, unified field theories, etc...
Another obstacle is that is very difficult to find information about these fields. The little I know, I have learned reading books in 5 different languages since 1920 to the actuality. And I have found very little amount of books. And you need to know about chemistry, physics, electrical engineering...
Almost an impossible task to achieve.
... you think QED, and Unified Field Theories are paraphysics? You even put QED and UFT next to something called "Quantum numerology." Nope, not even close.
The only way is to read all kind of things with an open mind, get the points in common that the information has and put in practice very simple experiments. The only experiment I've proposed, is to interact with matter using non-electromagnetic waves, aka pure potential waves.
With this experimentation, it could be possible to learn how to affect matter with electrical currents. And, understand than materialization and dematerialization could be possible.
I've also some books in Italian that explains how to access to the memory of solid objects, reading past events.
To those who find the following points in opposition to what they think:
You terribly missed the point as to why I posted that link. To have a serious discussion regarding time travel (or anything) we must all be speaking the same language. Otherwise, too much is lost in semantics and in
understanding what is already well accepted. Good arguments and thus new discoveries, be they conventional or not, must ultimately and unfailingly break down into a series of
trivially true statements (be they mathematical in nature, or
not). If we don't understand
mass, and
electromagnetism, etc. in the same fashion then it might as well be the case that we're not even speaking english.
So, I posted those links to show you guys what the
experts are saying. If we're going to try to understand time travel in any such way, it's best for us to speak the language of the people who have thought about it the most, and have been the most thorough. These people have
really followed each concept through to its logical end, especially the basic ones we have been discussing here.
It's their life, they do it 40+ hours a week.
One more thing, I really want to stress the following point: Being non-educated in physics does not make you open-minded or better in any way (
seriously, why should it? If I don't go to art-school am I better at drawing/painting than an artist? If I don't major in history, am I somehow made more aware of historical fact?).
Creativity is a property that belongs to the individual, not to the profession. If you take a creative person and teach them physics - do they all of a sudden lose their creative nature? No, of course not, that'd be absurd.
If you are going to do physics, at least make an effort to understand the arguments that already exist, and why they are explained in the ways they are, this is the beginning of developing a keen understanding of a field that you seem to be interested in. Not knowing, making a mistake, these are all part of the process of learning and they should be accepted and welcomed. Science isn't about speaking the most amount of jargon or discussing the most esoteric of ideas, it's about understanding a spinning top or the steam on my windows, or the green on the plants. It's simple, and it's about observing and understanding.