Hi folks,
I'm a researcher based on the west coast and I am
interested in phenomena involving time travel or teleportation.
I also do research in alternative energy (zero point energy, Geet device,
Tesla coils, anything that can tap excess energy from the zero point field).
I'm just putting this out there to see if anyone has been researching time
travel such as finding natural anomalies of time travel (e.g. some places
on earth where "time slips" are common).
Also, I was wondering if anyone has tried building devices in an effort to
warp time. For example, some "free energy" devices could hypothetically affect local gravity and inertia, thus also affect the local rate of time.
Let me if you've had experiences in researching time travel or if you're
tinkering in your lab/garage in an effort to replicate a time warp.
Thanks.
only parallel time travel is possible, it allows the ability to possible outcomes or probabilities without breaking the laws of a paradox.
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on October 10, 2011, 10:44:55 AM
only parallel time travel is possible, it allows the ability to possible outcomes or probabilities without breaking the laws of a paradox.
Time dosent exist. It is us that is moving forward true those single fraim filmstrip, there is no such thing as an movement. Lets say you did stop time, there would be no movement. For that matter there is nothing at all that exist, except the experience, the experience is really real... but it stops there- nothing alse is real.
We are masters of illusions, who do you belive you are ?, i know who i belive you are, and all alse that exist within all that is
(and all that was and all that will ever be) we are all equal gods that play around forever that makes up all that is. We have just chosen to forget so we can have the pleasure of re---member, to become a member again from were we never left, but we created the illusion of it. And yes i agree, the experience is sooooo real.
Time dosent exist because everything exist already, and have always existed and will exist forever. We dont move true time, we move true already existing versions.
Now that dosent mean that we cannot travel in time, it mean that everything is possible.
This is how i see it, i only share my view. I belive that is what we do when we talk to eachother. It has nothing to do with me trying to change you and visa verse, that is so old, and could only exist since nobody challenge it- and asked the question why do we talk to eachother, what is the purpose.
I look forward to the day somone share how we can build free energy machine+ antigravety + time travel machine, oboy...then i have something to do for a long long time :)
cheers Tommy
;D
Try to imagine if we are outside the earth's circulation, we are outside the rule of the earth.
Everything is quiet, no moving unless you make something to become pass, but i think we can never go back to pass that we do but we can make a repeat process to make it perfect and junk the pass experience. simple ;)
If for say, Time travel is possible, you can not travel back to your own original time line, you can only fuck it up for someone else in another parallel dimension and or a parallel time dimension, end of statement. no paradox in my statement.
a parallel time dimension is another probability to your own original time line but you did something else in life that's different. these are called probability existences.
as long as you avoid the paradox you can come to a theorem. simple.
if your theory of time travel has any inkling of paradox in it then it won't work.
you yourself can never avoid bumping your shin on that coffee table, it will always happen, unless a time parallel dimension of yourself stops you from doing so.
will you become a time traveler? unless so unruly and weird crap has been correcting itself in your life, I wouldn't think so.
Quote from: telemachus on October 10, 2011, 03:51:51 AM
Hi folks,
I'm a researcher based on the west coast and I am
interested in phenomena involving time travel or teleportation.
I also do research in alternative energy (zero point energy, Geet device,
Tesla coils, anything that can tap excess energy from the zero point field).
I read in a book once that the military reverse-engineered UFO technology to use a Tesla coil in a flying saucer.
I don't have the book now, but I think it was distributed by the World Exlporer (Wexler) publishers.
They have books that others---I admit---think are worthless. I don't read them, but I don't condemn them, either.
--Lee
Anyone interested in time travel needs to thoroughly check out this web site:
http://andersoninstitute.com/
Somewhere on that site it states several countries or organizations already have this capability and there needs to be laws or controls put in place to prevent serious problems that could arise from the careless experimentation with time travel. Excellent site by a physicist who at an early age was working for the U.S. Air Force conducting advanced research. Check it out.
Quote from: e2matrix on October 11, 2011, 12:41:50 AM
Anyone interested in time travel needs to thoroughly check out this web site:
http://andersoninstitute.com/
Somewhere on that site it states several countries or organizations already have this capability and there needs to be laws or controls put in place to prevent serious problems that could arise from the careless experimentation with time travel. Excellent site by a physicist who at an early age was working for the U.S. Air Force conducting advanced research. Check it out.
Quote from: e2matrix on October 11, 2011, 12:41:50 AM
Anyone interested in time travel needs to thoroughly check out this web site:
http://andersoninstitute.com/
Somewhere on that site it states several countries or organizations already have this capability and there needs to be laws or controls put in place to prevent serious problems that could arise from the careless experimentation with time travel. Excellent site by a physicist who at an early age was working for the U.S. Air Force conducting advanced research. Check it out.
old news but thanks the same, I have been keeping on top of time travel research for some 30 years now.
the current theorem is to make a theory that avoids any possible paradox period or the time travel theory is not excepted in any current theology and or theory.
if a paradox can be involved, forget it.
For all you religious nuts out there, do you really think a god would let 'you' time travel? not even a true scientist would allow this. you are double screwed. won't ever happen.
only selfless observers will be allowed to observe. those that have solid oath in not screwing up things will be allowed. you, lol
besides, the money needed to make an event occur is governmental. no one person could afford it.
Look what can happen when you go back to the future ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5aRcwHULaI&feature=fvst
Quote from: powercat on October 11, 2011, 12:23:02 PM
Look what can happen when you go back to the future ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5aRcwHULaI&feature=fvst
LoL this is funny :). Lets take a look at what would happend and not happen in this youtube.
He went back and had it with his mom, and that messed up everything in his original timeline.
Since time dont exist-everything is happening, (not at the same time), at the same forever lasting now moment.
The only time that exist is now-forever...
you ask sometimes, what time is it now, it is always the same queston, and always the same answer-time is now.
what number is it for this now moment ?. The watch is moore like a cosmic gps that tells us not were we are, but the sun.
It is only a number describing movements of the earth so we can predict were the sun is. But we knew that dint we ?
I agree we knew that, but somehow when we talk about it, then that knowlage is long gone.
We belive movements are time because it mooves-but it dont move, our consciousness is moving creating the illusion of movement.
Since everything exist in a forever lasting now moment- there is no here or there,
there is here and there. We are everywere forever.
Humans experience only one path creating the illusion of time, and the illusion that stuff happen in a surten order.
One way of seeing it could be like there is endless with frequency's, endless with parallel realities, with endless of times for all those
frequency's/parallel realities
So back to the story. The professor with his machine changed the boy into another now moment witch happen to be when
his mother is young,
she has always existed, even when she got a kid and grew old, that version is still existing.
He just picked up were his fathers was supposed to be and made his mother pregnant.
The boy got born, and later in his life he meet the professor and his machine- that switched him into the now moment that his mother youth lives in
and make her pregnant.
He then go back to this now moment and everything is like normal, she, the mother will get the baby.
The boy`s original mom will not know anything about it.
Tommy
a day, week, months years is passing because the earth is moving but if we are outside the earth then nothing is moving, we are still at the place where we are. then the big question is
HOW CAN WE TRAVEL IF THERE IS NO POINT OF TRAVELLING?. ??? :D ;D
Well, here is an article of a patent for time travel. ;]
http://theintelhub.com/2011/10/13/u-s-scientist-patents-time-machine/
Love that itelhub. ;]
Mags
actually you'd be traveling in parallel dimensions of event possibilities of a given event, it is not really time travel at all. just probability jumping.
There are times when making very important decisions time seemed to stop and wait for my choice. Things get quiet then and time waits. I am sure this happened at least 5 times in my life. Hope this is of help to you. Even the sounds outside faded away.
Thanks for all your insights. There are different schools of thought about backwards time travel. Some people (like Dr. David Anderson) claim that we can go back and change things permanently and the timeline doesn't branch off or become an alternate reality. And of course there is the "many worlds" theory, which argues that going back and changing the past does cause a timeline to branch off into an alternate reality.
More exotic: the Philadelphia experiment, with the Delta-T Antenna (octahedron antenna) one coil X vertical, one anther (Coil Y) at 90° from coil X, and the last (coil Z)horizontal (between the two pyramid formed by the octahedron... The "legend" is you feed coil X and Y with two phase at 90° (like a motor) and control frequency you obtain a rotating magnetic field that distort space time, depending of the frequency you can travel in the past, freeze the time or future, teleportation seems possible too... The last coil Z was feed with withe noise or DC...
It seems in this device that rotating magnetic field is the key to obtain abnormal effect, (look like the rotoverter and PK, time gravity effect !!!!)...
Of course it's just some speculation, the experiment is not reproduced at this time...
In this type of study, i think we are not becoming a scientist but a sorcerer :D :D :D
i think i am going to take a unit lesson in hogwarts. :D
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on October 15, 2011, 07:47:11 AM
In this type of study, i think we are not becoming a scientist but a sorcerer :D :D :D
i think i am going to take a unit lesson in hogwarts. :D
Science has a tendency to debunk magic.
What is time?
To me time is nothing more than a man made measure used to measure motion. at its very basic time is a measure of the oscillations of energy in the universe. or perhaps in another way the rotations of electrons around a nucleus.
When can go forward in time by slowing our own relative atomic time, that is if we accelerate to near the speed of light our own atomic vibrations slow down RELATIVE to the rest of the universe. therefore we age slower.
Gravity effects time because it effects the speed of those vibrations. hence Einsteins space-time.
but how can we reverse the universe's time relative to our time?
That is what reverse time travel is. we need to wind back the entire universe while preventing our own atomic vibrations from going in to reverse.
is that possible?
does it even make sense?
In summation, going forward using some sort of stasus, yes absolutely possible. going backwards again? No I don't ever believe we can.
CC
@CC
Physical time travel is impossible whether it is to future or to past. Any material which has physical mass cannot be accelerated to velocity of light as per Einstien's equations. But those (Einstien's) equations are not applicable for entities which donot possess physical mass. As you know the entire universe is made of just two real things; one is matter and the other is field. A field (magnetic, electrical, gravitational etc.,) is as real and universal as matter but does not possess physical mass. Hence to travel through time one has to convert his material body to a field body or make his spirit (soul) come out of his body. (out of body experience is not new phenomenon, several people have experienced it). Certain people see dreams while sleeping which becomes true after some times. It means that it is possible to travel through time mentally since mind can travel faster than light.
When it is possible to exist as 'living matters' (all living animals) it should also be possible to exist as living fields (spirits or ghosts)
When there is possibility of mater world (earth) there should also be possibility of a field world (heaven).
Accepting without proof is blind faith and not religion. A true religion does not encourage blind faiths. As Einstien rightly said ' Science without religion is lame and religion without science id blind'
Regards,
Vineet.K.
Actually "Physical Time Travel" happens all the time. Astronauts age slower than those of us who are earthbound. but only by a tiny amount. That is because time moves slower in lower gravity than in higher gravity. Each time you fly in a plane, you jump forward in time by just a fraction. Why? because those on the ground and even the ground itself move through time faster than you do.
My point was going backwards in time is in my opinion not possible. Because by my definition there is no such thing as backwards in time.
Going backwards in time also raises so many paradoxes and impossibilities that it is most likely impossible even if my definition of time is totally wrong.
As far as out of body experiences and other fanciful stuff, I'll leave that to those who like to colour their beliefs by their desires rather than use a scientific approach.
CC
Oops I forgot...
I also carefully used the word "Stasis" for a reason, even though I spelt it wrong.
If you are locked in some sort of stasis (not possible so far I know), you effectively jump forward in time. Because in the "stasis field" if one was possible, freezes (not by cold, but by stopping or slowing motion) all matter within your body. Thus time does not pass for you while it trundles forward for the rest of the universe. So given that there is no proof a "stasis field" is impossible, forward time travel in amounts larger than a few nanoseconds is in my opinion theoretically possible. Just don't plan to ever come back.
I imagine due to the huge gravity in a black hole time moves very slowly there.
Look up Gravitational time dilation and the twin paradox for more information about gravity and time. The connection between gravity and time is scientifically proven.
CC
@CC
I agree with your argument. I don't have any intention of finding mistakes in your argument. I am just interested to know the exact meaning of 'Time Travel'.
Consider two boys of same age, one running with normal speed and the other with speed of light continuosly for one year in a circular path. After one year when they stop running one boy will be one year younger than the other since he has run with speed of light. But the point here to be noted is that when they started running both were in 'present time' and even when they stopped running both were in 'present time'. Only difference is that one boy will be younger than the other. Can you call it time travelling? If this is called as time travelling, then nature has provided better ways for that. Few animals like frogs, bats, some species of snakes etc., are capable of stopping their time by hybernating. As long as a frog is hybernating time does not move with respect to it and it does not get aged. Only after coming out of hybernation its clock starts ticking again and it gets aged as usual. (frogs are capable of hybernating for hundreds of years)
Now you are living in 2011. By some means if you go to 2015, come back and explain to your friend what you saw in 2015, that can be called as time travelling.
Am I right?
Regards
Vineet.K
Now is the only time, what has gone is now memory, what is coming is a prediction based on memory,
the moment is now Hmmm so many theories
Time travel, whether you go back or forward you would probably like to return to where you left from,
anyway most films that I enjoy about time travel seemed to rely on this.
I did hear of a scientist that was building a machine that could send particles back in time, there was even a documentary made about his work on Channel 4 (UK) about 15 years ago
from what I can remember the dilemma with his device was that when he turned it on he should have been receiving the particles that he had sent back in time, but what would happen if he receive those particles and then decided not to send any back in the first place :P
Teleportation anyone ;D
Quote from: vineet_kiran on October 18, 2011, 09:06:40 AM
@CC
I agree with your argument. I don't have any intention of finding mistakes in your argument. I am just interested to know the exact meaning of 'Time Travel'.
...
Now you are living in 2011. By some means if you go to 2015, come back and explain to your friend what you saw in 2015, that can be called as time travelling.
Am I right?
Regards
Vineet.K
Yes I would consider that time travel.
Hibernation is not time travel, it slows the "body clock" but doesn't stop the time clock. The particles in the body age at the same rate. so the frog is older when it comes out of hibernation, I am not sure about the 100years, I think that is a wives tail.
The two running boys is a good example of frames of reference. in the theory of relativity its all about frames of reference. before the two boys start running they are in the same frame of reference. Therefore time is the same for both of them. when they are running they are both in different frames of reference. so time acts differently for each. when they both stop they return to the same frame of reference.
Frames of reference can mean different things depending on the context. in this case the fast running boy doesn't know he is in a different frame of reference, to him time travels quite normally. and ditto for the slow running boy.
CC
Quote from: powercat on October 18, 2011, 12:14:32 PM
I did hear of a scientist that was building a machine that could send particles back in time, there was even a documentary made about his work on Channel 4 (UK) about 15 years ago
from what I can remember the dilemma with his device was that when he turned it on he should have been receiving the particles that he had sent back in time, but what would happen if he receive those particles and then decided not to send any back in the first place :P
These are the impossibilities I speak of. One of the reasons I don't believe it is possible to travel back in time, no matter what your theory of time is. Become your own father is another one. or kill your father before you are conceived.
Some will postulate that if you go back in time you create a different time stream. great for sci-fi's but it doesn't answer what time is and personally I don't believe in creating alternate universes / time streams ala string theory just to make a theory work. I just think it makes it too complicated. The simplest answer is usually the correct one.
Another reason I don't believe in time travel is, where are all the time travelers? Of course one may consider the lack of time travelers just means humans don't make it!
WTF. 100 Million year hibernation!
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/05/the-100-million-year-sleep-earths-longest-hibernation-cycle-todays-most-popular.html
CC
http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/CETINBALZAMANDAYOLCUX.HTM
Quote from: Magluvin on October 14, 2011, 12:03:22 AM
Well, here is an article of a patent for time travel. ;]
http://theintelhub.com/2011/10/13/u-s-scientist-patents-time-machine/
Love that itelhub. ;]
Mags
Hey Mags, Thanks for that link as I found something very interesting. I don't know whether to laugh or be stunned at the correlation. I looked at that patent application that Pohlman made in April of 2006 and guess what. Two of the diagrams/pictures in that patent application are exact photocopy duplicates of pictures I have saved on my hard drive that are dated 2004 which came from the John Titor info (claimed time traveler) and John Titor showed these in discussions he was having at the time with others on the Internet. That could really twist your brain thinking about that. On the one hand one could presume that Pohlman's (who appears to be a real genius with many degress and a MENSA member) device actually becomes a reality in the future built by GE and this was what Titor used to travel back in time or Pohlman took the Titor story seriously and stole his pictures for his patent knowing that is how it could look in the future. I can think of lots of twists you could come up with on how that came about.
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on October 11, 2011, 12:49:14 AM
old news but thanks the same, I have been keeping on top of time travel research for some 30 years now.
the current theorem is to make a theory that avoids any possible paradox period or the time travel theory is not excepted in any current theology and or theory.
if a paradox can be involved, forget it.
Well I guess you haven't been at it as long as I have then. And David Anderson of the Anderson Time travel Institute was largely hiding out from 2002 to 2010 so if you haven't heard what he has been doing in the last year or so you are way behind. Anyone who wants to spend a couple fascinating 20 minute breaks listening to 2 of the 5 interviews with him might check out the youtube's below. Those 2 in particular discuss how they came across what very well may be how Zero point energy is tapped for essentially free energy. In the process of making their time machine they found they were getting a large excess of energy. I think most people who have studied time travel have heard that a Caduceus coil can cause time altering effects. He didn't mention a Caduceus coil but it's my guess that they are using some type of Caduceus to create time travel and recent info on the Kapanadze device that has apparently now been replicated indicates it has a Caduceus coil in it.
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4frPTl1jtY
Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6g0J4vn6EM
Just another tidbit on that Titor time travel deal and this patent for a time travel machine filed by Marlin Pohlman (a director of Oracle). This is a quote from someone on another forum regarding the filing of that patent: "I don't know if anyone here knows the process in America for filing a patent - the price to build a 28 page condensed patent like this is well over $100,000-$250K+ especially with all of the scientific and equipment explanations. There are several pages of referenced research as well.
This is not some out of the box hoax or even an elaborate government hoax... this is a well thought rip-off from John Titor - there is no way that this guy is Titor - he has to be a corporate shill or Popan Disco himself... people you can't see the obvious connections, this is a well built, researched and thoroughly researched and established patent... not the work of an individual or even a small company. they reference several theories and combinations of theories and every possible option to cover their basis for legal control of the space-time continum through this machine... this patent is perhaps the most important document in the history/future of the universe..."
There are 152 references listed at the end of that patent. That takes a lot of research to put together a patent like this guy said - not some joker playing a game and not someone who would 'borrow' images for his first two figures in the patent from what John Titor posted around 2001.
After digging around a bit further I found the Marlin Pohlman did indeed reverse engineer John Titor's time machine to make his patent. His patent was only an application and his intent is for all to have it freely to experiment with. Marlin did this patent when he was fighting a serious disease as time travel was always an interest of his. He was taking a leave of absence from work and due to special meds he was given his cognitive powers were increased (from an already very intelligent guy) and while in bed with the illness did most of this work. He was very open about all this. He also said his patent app had expired but it was only because for it to become a patent he had to have available all components of it. The one hangup of course was the 'singularity' which requires huge amounts of energy like the super colliders but even those have apparently not been able to maintain a singularity for long enough to do anything much with it. Thus the patent was dropped.
Quote from: e2matrix on October 19, 2011, 02:51:29 PM
Just another tidbit on that Titor time travel deal and this patent for a time travel machine filed by Marlin Pohlman (a director of Oracle). This is a quote from someone on another forum regarding the filing of that patent: "I don't know if anyone here knows the process in America for filing a patent - the price to build a 28 page condensed patent like this is well over $100,000-$250K+ especially with all of the scientific and equipment explanations. There are several pages of referenced research as well.
patent is in fact relatively cheap, Patent lawyers on the other hand are extraordinarily expensive, hence the high cost. a patent pending application only costs around $100. The patent itself a few hundred more.
Patents sadly don't need to work. proof of that is the ou devices that have never worked.
This in my opinion is the biggest problem with the Patent system. many patents are created to inflate the patent holders ego, be part of a scam or and this is the real biggie become part of a patent trolling exercise.
People see a patent as proof that something works, that's why its so important in scams. if you tell someone you have a working wormhole generator and here is the patent they tend to believe you even when they are smarter than the average Joe.
When someone claims a patent on OU or similar my scam radar goes into high gear.
I still believe time travel itself is fanciful for the reasons I have stated. I would love to be wrong, and most likely on many points I am. But I no longer think time is a dimension. its just a tool invented by humans to measure motion.
CC
I do't know whether this report is genuine but still...
Vineet.K.
there is no real original time per say, just slices of parallel(and or time) dimensions. they are called probabilities. it still will not interfere with your original probabilities. no paradox. you can change nothing within your original time line. only an alternate.
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on October 22, 2011, 02:02:06 AM
there is no real original time per say, just slices of parallel(and or time) dimensions. they are called probabilities. it still will not interfere with your original probabilities. no paradox. you can change nothing within your original time line. only an alternate.
you have no proof of any of what you just claimed... ::)
... and it's "
per se"... again, tu stultus es...
And you have even less evidence to spew your nonsense. My evidence is based upon the most intelligent minds in the world, you are not included in this array of scientific expertise. you, by genius is called a dunce compared to the scientific genius around you. you are retarded compared to them.
and so you will remain retarded all your life.
you have no idea how wickedly smart some people are and you will have no idea just how stupid you think you can be. there are some who are so intelligent on this earth you might as well consider yourself a worm by comparisons.
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on October 24, 2011, 01:32:05 AM
And you have even less evidence to spew your nonsense. My evidence is based upon the most intelligent minds in the world, you are not included in this array of scientific expertise. you, by genius is called a dunce compared to the scientific genius around you. you are retarded compared to them.
and so you will remain retarded all your life.
you have no idea how wickedly smart some people are and you will have no idea just how stupid you think you can be. there are some who are so intelligent on this earth you might as well consider yourself a worm by comparisons.
that's not proof... again, tu stultus es...
try a cogent response instead of logical fallacy (ad hominem) ::)
Wilby, I will let the world know, the day you stop stalking me is the day you will figure all things out. by then, all things will have come to pass.
not from your book but from my book. the book of science.
I know your book very well, when you cross over one mountain there shall be be another in your path.
total hogwash.
science has conceived more than you a billion fold.
your god has contributed little in the name of man.
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on October 24, 2011, 01:44:12 AM
Wilby, I will let the world know, the day you stop stalking me is the day you will figure all things out. by then, all things will have come to pass.
not from your book but from my book. the book of science.
that's hilarious... especially coming from you, the mental midget who doesn't know the difference between "" and 0... ::)
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on October 24, 2011, 01:48:00 AM
that's hilarious... especially coming from you, the mental midget who doesn't know the difference between "" and 0... ::)
you mean Zilch, moron.
Zilch it is. 0
between you and I. you need to go on a diet, a diet of you and I. cause you are very unintelligible compared.
I follow all the current rules of science, you don't. that makes you a complete moron.
I do not make the rules, only the wickedly smart make the rules.
that you are not.
when it comes to """" and zero they are the same thing, I am a programmer and I know such things, in fact, I am an important programmer beyond this place.
I program A.I systems beyond your control.
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on October 24, 2011, 01:56:29 AM
you mean Zilch, moron.
Zilch it is. 0
between you and I. you need to go on a diet, a diet of you and I. cause you are very unintelligible compared.
I follow all the current rules of science, you don't. that makes you a complete moron.
I do not make the rules, only the wickedly smart make the rules.
that you are not.
when it comes to """" and zero they are the same thing, I am a programmer and I know such things, in fact, I am an important programmer beyond this place.
I program A.I systems beyond your control.
no. i didn't mean "zilch". can you read what i wrote? check your eyes...take your meds...
you said, and i quote:
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on October 15, 2011, 09:24:36 AM
If Ohm = "" Then Ohm = 0
If Ohm > 0 Then Ohm = Resistance
If Resistance = "" then Resistance = 0
If Resistance > 0 then Resistance = Heat
simple programming.
"" and 0 are not the same thing... ::) any novice programmer knows this... ::)
"" is a string. 0 is an integer. strings are NOT integers... tu stultus es.
"" is absence of information. 0 is a quantity... again, tu stultus es.
you are no programmer, AI or otherwise. i doubt you could write a DOS batch file... ::)
void Zeroenergy(int will, int cut)
{
return(mrn = will + cut) ;
}
; :D :D :D :D :D
;D not functioning function ;D joke
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on October 24, 2011, 02:33:26 AM
no. i didn't mean "zilch". can you read what i wrote? check your eyes...take your meds...
you said, and i quote:"" and 0 are not the same thing... ::) any novice programmer knows this... ::)
"" is a string. 0 is an integer. strings are NOT integers... tu stultus es.
"" is absence of information. 0 is a quantity... again, tu stultus es.
you are no programmer, AI or otherwise. i doubt you could write a DOS batch file... ::)
Not wanting to pick sides here, but as I am an accomplished programmer I feel I can contribute.
In many programming languages "" == 0 ( "==" means "is equal to?", "=" normally means assignment, as in let A be equal to B )
Some languages regard "" as undefined and will throw an error if you try to assign it to an integer or float. This is the common "NaN" error.
But languages such as c and its derivatives will normally assign the value 0 (zero)
QuoteIf Ohm = "" Then Ohm = 0
is entirely acceptable psuedocode and often used.
CC
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 04:45:31 AM
Not wanting to pick sides here, but as I am an accomplished programmer I feel I can contribute.
In many programming languages "" == 0 ( "==" means "is equal to?", "=" normally means assignment, as in let A be equal to B )
technically == is an 'equal' operator
but, it is for integers... for strings, as used in thecuttingedge's example, the
correct operand would be eq and not ==. again. strings are not integers...
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 04:45:31 AM
Some languages regard "" as undefined and will throw an error if you try to assign it to an integer or float. This is the common "NaN" error.
the difference may be subtle, but there is a difference...
0 represents an integer in the set of all integers (called the set Z in mathematics) NULL (which is what "" is) is not an integer, and it could represent the absence of things that aren't even numbers (as it does in this case... ie: "" is a nullstring and not an integer).
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 04:45:31 AM
But languages such as c and its derivatives will normally assign the value 0 (zero)
is entirely acceptable psuedocode and often used.
CC
no. if i were to write the code:
if (ohm="") {ohm=0;}
what would be happening is... that if variable ohm was a null
string it would then be set to an integer. 0 in this case. since you are referencing C and derivatives try this code equivalent:
"".Contains(0);
and see if it returns false or true...
it's not even pseudocode... ::)
Drinking again are we?
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on October 24, 2011, 05:14:18 AM
technically == is an 'equal' operator but, it is for integers... for strings, as used in thecuttingedge's example, the correct operand would be eq and not ==. again. strings are not integers...
the difference may be subtle, but there is a difference...
In what language ? in perl 'eq' is correct for strings, in bash 'eq' is correct for integers. In C/C++ == is correct for integers and pointers to characters, a string is nothing more than an array of characters. When dereferencing C/C++ pointers, it points to the first character (of the string). For a null string "" the first character is (multi)byte 0.
For a scripting language such as perl 'eq' is the string comparison operator. it does not exist in languages such as c/c++ etc.
So for C/C++
if ( *Ohm == "" ) is perfectly valid whereas in perl you would use
if ( $ohm eq "" ) and in bash
if [ $ohm == "" ]
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on October 24, 2011, 05:14:18 AM
0 represents an integer in the set of all integers (called the set Z in mathematics) NULL (which is what "" is) is not an integer, and it could represent the absence of things that aren't even numbers (as it does in this case... ie: "" is a nullstring and not an integer).
no. if i were to write the code:
if (ohm="") {ohm=0;}
what would be happening is... that if variable ohm was a null string it would then be set to an integer. 0 in this case. since you are referencing C and derivatives try this code equivalent:
"".Contains(0);
and see if it returns false or true...
There is no such thing as "".Contains() in C. C is not object oriented. If you attempted that you would get a compiler error. even c++ which is object oriented "".Whatever() is invalid.
But if it were valid "".Contains(0) (like in c#) it would return false, because it is a null string and does not contain anything at all.
Hence why I said "in many languages". That was the point. As I don't know what language cutting was talking about I was not limiting the discussion.
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on October 24, 2011, 05:14:18 AM
it's not even psuedocode... ::)
Actually it is psuedocode, psuedocode does not need to be syntactically correct and in fact does not have a syntax other than it must portray the intention of the code. that's why its called psuedocode.
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 05:52:57 AM
Drinking again are we?
In what language ? in perl 'eq' is correct for strings, in bash 'eq' is correct for integers. In C/C++ == is correct for integers and pointers to characters, a string is nothing more than an array of characters. When dereferencing C/C++ pointers, it points to the first character (of the string). For a null string "" the first character is (multi)byte 0.
i don't drink... it's wilby... as in will be. as in arguing the difference tween null and 0 with neophytes
will be driving me to drinking... ::) the symbol zero is converted into NULL by the compiler in (void *)0. The internal representation of NULL doesn't have to be zero and it's not correct to say that the NULL pointer is zero... ::)
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 05:52:57 AM
So for C/C++ if ( *Ohm == "" ) is perfectly valid whereas in perl you would use if ( $ohm eq "" ) and in bash if [ $ohm == "" ]
and if i were to use your perl code and print qq{$ohm}; it would print nothing... it wouldn't print 0 now would it. ;) because they are NOT equal, nor synonymous.
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 05:52:57 AM
There is no such thing as "".Contains() in C. C is not object oriented. If you attempted that you would get a compiler error. even c++ which is object oriented "".Whatever() is invalid.
But if it were valid "".Contains(0) (like in c#) it would return false, because it is a null string and does not contain anything at all.
my bad. i should have said C# and it would return false because... wait for it... the Contains (and Compare) function is for comparing
strings to strings and not strings to integers... ;)
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 05:52:57 AM
Hence why I said "in many languages". That was the point. As I don't know what language cutting was talking about I was not limiting the discussion.
Actually it is psuedocode, psuedocode does not need to be syntactically correct and in fact does not have a syntax other than it must portray the intention of the code. that's why its called psuedocode.
but you are missing the point... again...
null is not 0. nor are they synonyms...
and in C the symbol zero is converted into NULL by the compiler in (void *)0. the internal representation of NULL doesn't have to be zero and it's not correct to say that the NULL pointer is zero... ::)
actually it's not pseudocode. from teh wiki...
"pseudocode is a compact and informal high-level description of the operating principle of a computer program or other algorithm. It uses the structural conventions of a programming language, but is intended for human reading rather than machine reading. Pseudocode typically omits details that are not essential for human understanding of the algorithm, such as variable declarations, system-specific code and some subroutines."
although i agree that it does have some qualities of actual pseudocode, such as not declaring vars or subs, that doesn't make it pseudocode.
edit: if you want to argue this further, i suggest you take it to stackoverflow...
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on October 24, 2011, 06:08:22 AM
i don't drink... it's wilby... as in will be.
but you are missing the point... again...
null is not 0. nor are they synonyms...
and in C the symbol zero is converted into NULL by the compiler in (void *)0. the internal representation of NULL doesn't have to be zero and it's not correct to say that the NULL pointer is zero... ::)
actually it's not pseudocode. from teh wiki...
"pseudocode is a compact and informal high-level description of the operating principle of a computer program or other algorithm. It uses the structural conventions of a programming language, but is intended for human reading rather than machine reading. Pseudocode typically omits details that are not essential for human understanding of the algorithm, such as variable declarations, system-specific code and some subroutines."
although i agree that it does have some qualities of actual pseudocode, such as not declaring vars or subs, that doesn't make it pseudocode.
...
edit: if you want to argue this further, i suggest you take it to stackoverflow...
Yeah I got the name. on here you must spend a lot of time looking wistfully at the bottle.
I never said anything about null pointers. "" IS NOT a null pointer! it is an empty string in C/C++ that is represented by the character "\0"
now try this on a C compiler.
Quote#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main() {
int i = atoi("");
printf("%d",i);
return 0;
}
Then read the return values section here...
http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/clibrary/cstdlib/atoi/
Reread your paragraph about psuedocode. your interpretation is simply different from mine thats it. psuedocode can be totally different depending on the language you are used to. psuedocode for Python would be different from psuedocode for PERL. The Parentheses and Braces you added where superfluous and are not usually shown is psuedocode, unless it was necessary or simply easier/quicker/clearer.
SO. Yeah I have spent a bit of time on there.
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 08:28:33 AM
Yeah I got the name. on here you must spend a lot of time looking wistfully at the bottle.
I never said anything about null pointers. "" IS NOT a null pointer! it is an empty string in C/C++ that is represented by the character "\0"
yeah i got a bottle with your name on it now... ;)
we have been talking about null and 0 and you mentioned C pointers... hello context!!... ::)
look... regarding false, null, nothing, 0, undefined, etc., etc.
each of these has specific meanings that correlate with actual concepts. sometimes multiple meanings are overloaded into a single keyword or value.
in C and C++, NULL, false and 0 are overloaded to the same value (in my opinion, C is 'broken' in that respect). in C# they're 3 distinct concepts.
null or NULL usually indicates a lack of value, but usually doesn't specify why. 0 indicates the natural number zero and has type-equivalence to 1, 2, 3, etc.
and in languages that support separate concepts of NULL should be treated only a number.false indicates non-truth. and it used in binary values. it doesn't mean unset, nor does it mean 0... it simply indicates one of two binary values...
nothing can indicate that the value is specifically set to be nothing which indicates the same thing as null, but with intent...
undefined in some languages indicates that the value has yet to be set because no code has specified an actual value...
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 08:28:33 AM
now try this on a C compiler.
your example is barely even tangential to the discussion... you are
converting string to integer which is not what thecuttingedge's "pseudocode" as you call it was doing... is it? ::) but thank you for proving my point that strings are not integers and must be converted to like type before compare. ;)
Quote from: CuriousChris on October 24, 2011, 08:28:33 AM
Reread your paragraph about psuedocode. your interpretation is simply different from mine thats it. psuedocode can be totally different depending on the language you are used to. psuedocode for Python would be different from psuedocode for PERL. The Parentheses and Braces you added where superfluous and are not usually shown is psuedocode, unless it was necessary or simply easier/quicker/clearer.
SO. Yeah I have spent a bit of time on there.
i am aware what pseudocode is. ::) if you insist on being pedantic, please spell it correctly... and no, it doesn't have to look any different in python, perl, pascal, c or any other language you can think of... that's the point of pseudocode... ::)
eg:
extract the next word from the line (good)
set word to get next token (poor)
append the file extension to the name (good)
name = name + extension (poor)
FOR all the characters in the name (good)
FOR character = first to last (ok)
another eg:
set total to zero
set grade counter to one
while grade counter is less than or equal to ten
input the next grade
add the grade into the total
set the class average to the total divided by ten
print the class average.
furthermore,
i wasn't showing pseudocode... i was showing actual code that
would compile... what are you going on about?
Sorry guys.
It was written as VB script.
If Ohm = "" Then Ohm = 0
simply says, If Ohm has no string then it is equal to an integer of 0.
Wilby, if you wish to test it you can make a .vbs file and test it, it will receive no error.
If Ohm = "" Then Ohm = 0
Well I don't know what meds willy is on, but its pretty strong stuff, perhaps he should cut back.
Your 'code' is perfectly fine cutting.
In psuedocode which in this case is longer than the code.
If Ohm is an empty string then
set Ohm equal to zero
CC