Einstein Going Back in Time

PSI Blog 20220704 Einstein Going Back in Time

 

As I mentioned in PSI Blog 20220627, regressives, by definition, don’t know what time is. Here is another article from New Scientist demonstrating its collaboration with regressive physics:

 

Could we ever go back in time? Relativity does not rule it out

 

https://go.glennborchardt.com/rev

 

“The physics thought to explain the arrow of time is not as simple as you might think – and in traversable wormholes, Einstein’s theory of general relativity does in principle offer routes to the past”

 

“While most physicists agree that there is a link between entropy and the arrow of time, how they relate is disputed. Some physicists think increasing entropy gives time its arrow, while some say the arrow is just an illusion. Others think we lack a basic understanding of time and, perhaps, marrying the quantum and classical worlds together will lead us to a new way of thinking about it. Some theories do away with entropy in the picture of time altogether.”

 

Hope you don’t get another headache reading this one too. It is crap like this that should have been rejected by anyone who claims to be a scientist, much less a theoretical physicist. That is why I keep mentioning “The Ten Assumptions of Science.”[1] Almost anyone can use them to sift the scientific wheat from the religious chaff. What the author Anna Demming and her long-deceased hero Einstein are claiming here is the Seventh Assumption of Religion, reversibility   (Some processes are reversible).[2] That is, of course, the dialectical opposite of the Seventh Assumption of Science, irreversibility (All processes are irreversible).

 

 

Forget that dumb “wormhole” stuff and give this simple explanation to your doubting friends:

 

Each night the sky appears unique. To “go back in time” one would have to move all the planets and stars back to those unique positions obtained on the particular night you desired. Good luck with that!

 

Any claim that reversibility has been observed is simply a woeful, typical “systems” analysis that ignores the environment of the system. Regressive interpretations of entropy do the same thing—ignore the environment. These use the Sixth Assumption of Religion, noncomplementarity (All things are subject to divergence from all other things), while the Sixth Assumption of Science, complementarity (All things are subject to divergence and convergence from other things) is the correct assumption.

 

Note how all these regressive interpretive mistakes use the consupponible assumptions of religion, with the Eighth Assumption of Religion, finity (The universe is finite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions) exalting the Big Bang Theory to its deserved position as the “Last Creationist Theory.” Once we overthrow that despicable logical mess we will inevitably arrive at its replacement, Infinite Universe Theory, the Last Cosmological Revolution.

 

 

---

[1] Borchardt, Glenn, 2004, The Ten Assumptions of Science: Toward a new scientific worldview: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 125 p. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/TTAOS].

[2] Borchardt, Glenn, 2020, Religious Roots of Relativity: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 160 p. [ https://go.glennborchardt.com/RRR-ebk ].