Reply to comment

Dear Fred:

Sorry about the copyright infringement. I didn't see the fine print. For future reference, you should place a (c) beside anything like that limerick if you want to be sure that no one copies it.

As for Hawking's contention for the protection of causality, he's since backed away from his original chronology protection conjecture because he couldn't find a physical basis for it. Which is just as well since all the examples that I ever read, that he used to argue for, were wrong.

I never read the Universe in a Nutshell, so I can't comment on what he wrote about there. I've read other comments that he's made, for example his article on time machines in an issue of Astronomy one time, and lecture transcripts.

As for the mistake that the kids caught - I'm letting the drama build a little, but I'll say this much, it is no fluke. Instead it is the beginning of a sunami of revelations concerning the inadequacies exhibited by some of the world's biggest minds in physics to be able to properly ascertain and compute accurately the problems concerning time and temporal modification possibilities as they exist in abstract and advanced concept models today.

Big claims, yes. If there wasn't something to them, however, the proclamations wouldn't be getting hadn't out next week. This overall scheme has been in the planning for well over a year, so I'm going to let it play itself out at my own pace. However, all the details will be available soon enough, to be followed by more revelations that will last well into next year. What you're witnessing now is the rocking of a tipping point - the progression through the butterfly diagram of a Rene Thom catastrophe. Once it all starts to happen, it will be as shocking to everyone else as it was to me when I first started to discover these things. That was five years ago, or so.

All I can say for now is stay tuned...