It was a discussion back on Infoworld

Post #125,740 by ben_tilly 11/14/03 6:08:12 PM Reply	It was a discussion back on Infoworld And I was the culprit. So I should remember. It stands for a device which general relativity predicts should allow time travel back to when the device was made. The device in question is rather beyond our current ability to create though, so at most it allows people in our far future to get back to our future. I heard about it in discussion with an old math professor of mine, Dr. Gary G. Miller. I'll let you puzzle over the particulars of what this device might be and why it would be called GRR until you either give up and ask or else find it on your own. Cheers, Ben "good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not" - [link\|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html\|Stefano Mazzocchi]
Post #125,743 by Nightowl 11/14/03 6:16:30 PM Reply	Re: It was a discussion back on Infoworld I'll let you puzzle over the particulars of what this device might be and why it would be called GRR until you either give up and ask or else find it on your own. Well, Greg had challenged me to find out a) what it was and b) what it's significance to iwethey was and why all knowledge was derived from it, in another thread in this forum entitled "What is an Obligatory LRPD?" Apparently I succeeded, because he welcomed me as a new acolyte, although I never quite knew which answer was right, (I'd made several guesses in the thread). It was instead a response to Chris that seemed to do the trick. ;) Nightowl >8# "The difference between being immature and child-like is that one is what you are, and one is what you choose to be." Comment by Nightowl
Post #125,833 by orion 11/15/03 2:19:58 PM Reply	Time travel has always facinated me I never knew what a GRR was, I must have missed that thread. Still give me a TARDIS any day, telepathic interface, time and space and relative dimensions. I might even take it for a spin into E-Space. :) Plus it can look like anything if the Chameleon circuit is not broken. I always felt that there was a link to time travel between gravity and speed/velocity. In high school I took Physics and got an A out of it and wrote some time travel equasions based on existing equasions for gravity, speed, and other factors. Too bad I lost it and forgot what I had written down. There was a square root involved because I also used E=MC^2, so it could go forward or backward in time, but I had no idea how to control that. *"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"*
Post #126,666 by ben_tilly 11/19/03 1:11:10 AM Reply	I'm sure that it was wrong Highschool physics won't go beyond special relativity, within which you can't get time travel. It does give you enough to play with to confuse yourself into thinking that you found something that you didn't, and I did that to myself a few times in highschool as well. For enough physics to really understand the detailed predictions of time travel, you have to go a lot farther than that. Cheers, Ben "good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not" - [link\|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html\|Stefano Mazzocchi]
Post #126,721 by orion 11/19/03 3:39:51 PM Reply	It may have been wrong but it was fun trying to figure it out. We had a motto in our class, "Phsyics is Phun":) Of course in order for time travel to work, we need to have the ability to move in space as well as time. This is because the universe is moving and where the Earth was say 100 years ago, could be empty or or have something else there. The TARDIS took care of this with its massive computer model of the universe. Too bad it is just SciFi, but you can see they thought about it a lot when creating the show. *"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"*

Welcome to IWETHEY!