From: garcia22@llnl.gov (Manuel Garcia)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.plasma
Subject: Re: Intuition abt. global time reversal
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

In article <5jfg37$1bp$1@jupiter.cs.uml.edu>, Steen Hjortsoe
<101560.1357@CompuServe.COM> wrote:


> Intuition about global time reversal
>
> Postulate I :
>
> A comprehensive nuclear war will not (necessarily)
> lead to a definitive, irreversible destruction of our
> global civilization with an ensuing nuclear winter.
>
> The globe as a whole will instead experience a time
> reversal (with an ensuing time-re-reversal) !!
>
> Postulate II :
>
> The physicists employed by the American and Russian
> military are capable of specifying the entire course
> of events by the following realistic thought experiment:
*********************************************************

Physics as a profession has neither the political power nor will to
implement social change. Nuclear weapons scientists calculate and
build as directed by their governments (scientists do lobby for funds
to continue their favorite programs). Government and corporate
scientists do not propose any idea that could provoke fear and
disapproval by their sponsors, and ridicule by colleagues. Your view
of the workings of professional (that is to say "paid") science is
at odds with social reality.

*********************************************************
>
> An evenly distributed detonation of 30,000 - 60,000
> nuclear units over the entire surface of the globe within
> the same 24 hours will revert the arrow of time.
*********************************************************

What is the physical basis for this assertion? How do you start
from proven physics (F = ma, E = mc^2, that kind of stuff)
and arrive at this statement? Please use logic, calculation,
and experimentation that others could independently reproduce.
The same criticism holds true for other unsubstantiated
statements below.

**********************************************************
>
> There will a global co-reaction with molecules in the global
> atmosphere and superluminal light speeds will be achieved,
> but as events progress, the arrow of time will (slowly) resume
> its normal direction.
>
> In this, second, phase, the subluminal speed of light will
> fall precisely as much below the ordinary speed of light as
> the superluminal light speed exceeded the latter in the first
> phase.
>
> So the total calculation gives a constant light speed of
> 186,000 miles per second, but a couple of events has un-
> deniably occurred / not occurred during the superluminal
> and subluminal amplitudes which cancel each other out in
> the final analysis.
>
> Intuition :
>
> If the above theoretical physical postulates are true then it
> should be very easy to prove their truth by 1) rejecting your
> ingrained prejudice against considering the matter seriously
> and 2) performing a simple calculation.
************************************************************

Prove your own arguments rather than demanding that others
labor to prove your guesswork. Reject your ingrained prejudice
and do some reading, learning, calculation, and research. If your
ideas are reasonable the language of science will allow you to make
a credible argument. If you believe your idea has any value,
then demonstrate this by investing some effort to prove it.
When an individual spouts about some great insight that others
should prove, then it is clear that there is nothing of substance.

*************************************************************
>
> I cannot believe that such a conspicuously clear physical
> effect could evade the open-minded reasoning and
> calculations of a trained physicist.
>
> Suggestion :
>
> I suggest that you deem the issue worthy of 10 minutes of
> your valuable time.

> Steen Hjortsoe
**************************************************************

My initial calculation of your idea took less than a second.
My conclusions were based on my own experience with physics.
If you want 10 minutes of my time, then give me 10 minutes worth
of specifics to consider. I have no objections to the moderator
determining that any submission below this one second threshold
is not worth posting (and I accept the fact that my own submissions
may fall to this ax). Good ideas deserve your study. This has been
the basis of all the earthshaking ideas of science, and many of the
best came from amateurs (flight: Wright brothers, AC power: Tesla).
--
Manuel Garcia
LLNL L-153
POB 808, Livermore, CA 94550
(510) 422-6017
garcia22@llnl.gov
garcia22@popgun.llnl.gov