Time Travel (Jovic)

by Igor Jovic

It is the general belief that UFOs and aliens originate from distant star systems and galaxies, and that they travel to the Earth using superior technology. This theory is vastly accepted because we donít have such technology, and so we automatically believe that such objects must be driven by superior races from other planets.


However, in my mind, this theory has fundamental flaws and inconsistencies which are outlined below:

1. Such flying objects have been seen in all shapes, sizes, and colors. Itís as if the aliens canít make up their mind on which kind of vehicles to use. The traditional shape is the flat disk flying saucer. Other shapes include cigars, spheres, pyramids, triangles, and many other shapes. They have been reported in many colors such as silver, white, orange, red, black and others. The question here is this; if these objects come from distant stars, then why are the aliens using so much versatility? Or are we being visited by several species of aliens all of which use a different technology? If so why do their ships all look different, while the beings inside all look the same?

2. If these aliens are from distant stars then they must be very advanced. Why would such advanced beings visit the Earth for millennia and continue study us? Surely their advanced technology would allow them to collect what they need in only a short time. Why do they keep coming? And what could possibly interest them so much to keep them here for thousands of years?

3. Why donít they make contact with us? It has been suggested that contact with aliens would be the downfall of religion, and would provoke unprecedented disturbances in our societies. Contact with superior alien beings could only help mankind in every way. We would not need to turn our back on religion, nor would we run in panic. This is because such advanced beings would know exactly how to introduce themselves, and how to assure us that we can only profit and learn from them. So why are they hiding from us, and at the same time showing themselves just enough?

These are the basic problems I have with the alien race theory. And as we evolve and develop, weíll find it more and more difficult believing that UFOs visit the Earth from distant stars.


This is not to say that alien races do not exist, on the contrary, I indeed believe that the stars are full of advanced civilizations, and that one day weíll make contact with them.


So what are UFOs?
I believe UFOs are man-made time machines, driven by human beings which have evolved into what we call aliens.


They come from our distant future, and they use these vehicles to travel to their past. When we look at UFOs and the "aliens" who drive them, weíre actually seeing how evolution is going to change mankind, and we are seeing what technology mankind will one day posses.

Remember that in the future mankind will have technology which is far superior to anything we can possibly imagine today. Itís highly feasible that in the distant future weíll even learn to control time. In fact, Albert Einsteinís Theory of Relativity suggests that time distorts if an object travels at great speeds (faster than the speed of light).

Experiments have been conducted in this area and they indicate that the Relativity Theory is correct. Once we have time travel under control, where will we go? I think the first thing weíll do is travel back through Earthís history. Weíll have the technology to travel to any point in time, we might for example, want to see who actually built the pyramids, and what happened to Atlantis.

But what will mankind look like in 500.000 years? Will we be exactly like we are now? Or will our bodies evolve to accommodate the drastic changes our high-tech future is bringing us.


Itís likely that weíll look exactly like reported aliens; long skinny arms and legs, large brainy heads, and pigment-free skin. If you compare the look of our distant relatives who lived in caves, to modern man, and then project this trend, then youíll recognize that weíre going to get thinner, weaker, and smarter. We will indeed look like aliens in the distant future.

This theory has major advantages over others:

1. UFOs are seen in all varieties because they all originate from a different point in future time, so each type originates from a specific technological point in time.


The saucer shaped UFOs might be from the 22 Century, the cigars from the 23 Century, the spheres from the 24 Century, etc. We see various kinds of objects originating from various points in manís future.


One could compare this to the advancing developments in the automobile industry - each technological revolution has created a different looking automobile because the design must accommodate the technology and advancing ergonomics.

2. The time travelers donít make contact because that would distort the time continuum, and could cause time to split. The outcome of a major time split could be devastating and very difficult to "clean up."


So it might be best for all not to make contact, and thatís probably why they donít.

All this is based on one simple logic; if time travel will ever be possible then the result will be someone actually doing it.


This means that if they travel back in time we will see them in our time (if they do not hide from us). And thatís exactly the point - they might have technology to travel back in time but not to be invisible, or at least on the first attempts. And I believe they will have to travel in some sort of vehicle.


So the end result is extremely advanced human beings appearing in some kind of vehicle - and to me this completely explains UFOs and "aliens"


Other Theories
This leads me to "deja vous," a feeling many people experience from time to time which is described as "A feeling that I have already relived this moment".


This could in fact be the result of a local time split. We donít actually relive a moment - instead, itís two realities running parallel but slightly unsynchronized. For a moment, everything around you exists twice, the original reality, and distorted reality which is slightly different due to a time split.


Many time splits may be caused by time travelers contaminating and slightly changing events. And I believe they poses technology which prevents things from getting out of control - a sort of vacuum cleaner for time. However, time splits are unavoidable and they might be responsible for many unsolved mysteries such as deja vous and things "disappearing" like in the Bermuda triangle area. Many of the documented unexplainable mysteries might be the result of time splits.

Much has been written about the paradoxes of time travel, and I would like to give some of my views on the subject. Paradoxes exists because we donít (yet) have the capacity to really understand the concept of how time actually works. To be able to understand time, we need to look at the Universe in a totally different light - I mean in a completely different way.


I believe the biggest error many of us are making is believing that time is linear (a start, a middle, and an end). I donít believe this is the case at all. I believe time (as we understand it) does not exist at all - all events that have ever happened and ever will all happen at the same time! Itís our perception of time that makes us think otherwise.

Imagine for a moment a piece of music on a CD. We listen to the music in a linear way (from start to end), but the music is indeed stored on the media in a nonlinear way, and all the digital information on the CD exists at the same time and there is no beginning and no end. Our perception (the CD player) "serves" the music bit by bit. It is quite feasible that time conceptually works in exactly the same manner.

Iím afraid that traveling through a traditional linear time model would be very difficult to achieve. The reason is that time presented in such a way is nothing more than the matter of the Universe arranged in a certain way at a certain moment, and to travel through such time one would have to rearrange the matter to reflect a specific point in time.

Whereas the nonlinear approach does not involve matter at all. Additionally, the nonlinear approach completely does away with questions like "when did time start," and "how can it continue forever" - time simply exists all at the same time.

But it may well be that the Universe is also nonlinear, and itís only our perception that gives us a feeling of space depth.


If the two systems (space and time) are both nonlinear, then to me, that explains almost all of the mysteries of existence - everything we experience including time and space is nothing more than a perception of something that in reality is quite simple.



Questionable Assumptions

by Kalen Craig

Kalen Craig was a physical science technician, employed for 30 years at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington D.C.


He worked mostly on wave propagation, and radio and radar astronomy projects. But as you will see if you check out his web site "kalenuniverse.com"; He has many advanced theories on the leading edge of science.



These are some of the concepts that astrophysicists often make that we say are not necessarily so.

Do not be surprised if most of the concepts on this list are ideas you believed to be correct.

  1. The ether, as a medium for light and gravity waves, does not exist.

  2. The universe is expanding; and it started expanding as a Big Bang, from a point some 12 to 20 billion years ago.

  3. About 90 percent of the mass of the universe exists as some form of unseen exotic dark matter.

  4. Nothing, not even information, can move faster than light.

  5. A photon is a small wave packet particle that moves from source to sink along one path.

  6. Planckís constant h, represents the smallest quantum unit or particle.

  7. All matter is attractive, so that , the earth would attract a neutral antimatter mass.

  8. Quantum mechanical weirdness can not be explained in terms of conventional logic.

  9. The illusive Higgs particle is difficult to detect, because it has too much energy or mass.

  10. A singularity is said to exist at the center of a black hole. At a singularity physics fails. So, one is thought to have existed to justify the Big Bang!

  11. A force (appearing as action at a distance) would be due to the exchange of quantum messenger particles.

The above is a rather comprehensive list. If one or more of these common assumptions are wrong; then the world of physics is in for a big surprise.

The authors have questioned all of these beliefs for a number of years. Kalen and his brother Eugene have recently published a book and a web site "kalenuniverse.com" explaining much of our reasoning.

We will include some of our ideas in this report, and hope that it will whet the appetite and curiosity of the reader.


The idea of an all prevalent ether was accepted by most everyone until Einstein proved that gravity could be described in terms of curved 4-dimensional space-time. By viewing space-time as curved one does not need to assume that space is an ether that accommodates electromagnetic and gravitational waves. A moving mass or photon would just follow the curvature of space. No force is required.

However, not needing something does not prove that it does not exist.

Space curvature in general relativity is thought to be generated by the presence of mass. Why this should be is not considered. However, if space acceleration generates gravity and the convergence of space toward a point generates inertia, then one can incorporate space acceleration into general relativity; instead of assuming the presence of matter. Thus space acceleration is mathematically equivalent to space curvature.

The acceleration of gravity is directed down into the earth. One must ask, where would such a flow of ether go?

Super string theorists have recently proposed that tiny black holes exist at the centers of all mass particles. These holes could carry away the ether flow.

For over ten years the authors have assumed that such black holes exist inside of mass particles. We are pleased to find that others are beginning to see things our way.

We therefore, assume that space is an ether like fluid or medium that flows and accelerates toward mass.

Space expansion seems obvious because of the observed cosmic red shift of light from distant sources. Even if we assume that space is expanding, extrapolating the apparent expansion back to a beginning point and assuming a fantastic explosion from nothing called the Big Bang is a bit much.

We point out that if the time dimension is decreasing (time slowing) the observed red shift would occur without space expansion. The assumption of time slowing is logically equivalent to assuming that space is expanding.

Professor William DeSitter was probably the first to propose a time slowing model of the universe. In 1917 he modified Einsteinís model by assuming hyperbolic rather than spherical space-time. He suggested that this would slow time and produce an apparently expanding universe. He did this before the cosmic redshift was discovered.

We, of course, adopted the Einstein-DeSitter model by assuming a toroidal space-time. Our toroid is a closed form of hyperbolic space-time, which allows time to oscillate between two limits rather than go to infinity or start from a Big Bang singularity point.

The conclusion that much of the mass of the universe is some type of exotic dark matter, is largely based upon the assumption that all gravitational forces are attractions. If, as we assume, half of the matter in the universe is antimatter, that is segregated from matter because matter repels antimatter; then one would have to rethink the missing matter problem.

We expect that, in the near future, experimenters will announce that the earth repels antimatter, because they will have observed that slow moving neutral antimatter atoms fall up.

Incidentally, a repulsion between matter and antimatter galaxies would generate and exonerate Einsteinís controversial cosmological constant.

It is conceded by many cosmologists that the concept of wormholes would permit the instantaneous transfer of matter or information from one place to another in this universe or even to another universe.

Wormhole (Schwarzschild) solutions of gravity equations for black holes were discovered by Einstein, Oppenheimer, Wheeler and others. But the reality of wormhole tunnels was only recently taken seriously by most authorities.

Black holes pull mass objects into themselves at velocity c. At velocity c, according to special relativity, time stops.

Time can be defined by (or as) motion or change.

Our #2 postulate is that: any time---time stops (either by zero motion or by velocity c motion) a wormhole opens. It is thought that a velocity c (black) wormhole can transfer mass and information to another universe. We postulate that a zero motion wormhole can transfer mass and information (space) to another location in this universe.

Photons appear to expand radially through a vacuum. After a short or a long time a very large wave front would arrive at the target area. A very strange thing then happens! All the energy of the photon group of wave cycles instantly converges upon a receptive particle (electron). This is called the collapse of the wave equation.

How can all the energy of this group of very large wave cycles instantly converge upon one point?

In order to avoid this apparent absurdity it is usually assumed that a photon particle is not compounded from large waves but rather only exists as a group of small waves called a wave packet. If so, it does not expand radially as a wave process. Instead as a small wave packet particle it would follow one path to the target electron. In this case the wave equation for the photon is thought to be an imaginary concept that does not actually exist, but even so the imaginary peak amplitudes of the waves can be calculated and used to predict where the actual photon particle will land.

However, experiments such as the double or multiple slit experiment, indicate that a photon can simultaneously go through multiple paths to a target. In order to do this it must move (expand) as a wave process not move as a particle.

Our explanation is that Maxwellís electromagnetic equations have two solutions. One for ordinary wave motion called retarded potentials. The waves are first emitted then received. The other is a mysterious solution called advanced potentials, where the waves appear to collapse rather than expand and to have a negative time component. This solution is usually ignored as undecipherable. What does a minus time mean?

We assume that it means that advanced potentials can collapse instantaneously.

We say that electromagnetic waves can generate wormholes; because the electric and magnetic fields go through a zero motion point at their maximum amplitudes

One of our primary postulates is that zero motion is zero time and that a condition of zero time opens a wormhole. The photon waves can move instantly through such a wormhole and collapse onto a target electron.

In other words, the collapse of the wave equation is real through wormholes that accommodate Maxwellís advanced waves.

Planckís constant h is the basis of quantum mechanics, which is strictly an electromagnetic (charge) theory that does not apply to gravity (mass theory). However, electrons and other Fermion particles have both mass and charge. The gravity field of an electron is some 1040 times weaker than itís charge field. Consequently, the gravity fields of particles have little effect on chemistry and on ordinary motions of particles; so is largely ignored.

We say that there exists a quantum gravity mechanics as a sub realm of ordinary quantum mechanics, and that these tiny gravity fields are important.

The charge quantum (Planckís constant) is h = mcy where mc is the electron momentum and y is the Compton wavelength of an electron.

A gravity quantum (Kalenís constant) would likely be,

k = mcd where d is the Planck unit of length.

This formula gives a gravitational quantum mechanics that is some 20 orders of magnitude weaker than charge quantum mechanics.

We believe that this sub quantum gravity mechanics generates Einsteinís hidden variables, Bohmís implicate orders and probably quantum foam (Higgsís particles). And we suggest that this foam is actually the ether (space particles).

Each or the fundamental particles has an antimatter counterpart. Most of these antimatter particle pairs have been created in the laboratory. However, very few antimatter particles have been found free in surrounding universe.

Most antimatter-matter pairs are of opposite charge and would attract one another and annihilate (convert into radiation). So few are found. Radiation can be converted back into matter-antimatter pairs.

Most theories suggest that, at some time in the past, the universe had equal amounts of matter land antimatter. Where has all the antimatter gone?

The experimenters found a slight difference between the decay rates of particles and antiparticles. This discrepancy, called charge-parity reversal or CP asymmetry for short, was discovered in 1964 in argon decays. It is commonly thought that a similar but larger CP asymmetry (during the "Big Bang") could have produced our present all matter universe.

Our conjecture is slightly different. We think that in the past the universe was in a state similar to one stage of the Big Bang. It was a mixture of hot ions and atoms, with equal quantities of matter and antimatter particles.

CP asymmetry along with random motions of the particles could have produced local concentrations of normal neutral atoms and molecules.

Once a neutral group formed a repulsion force between matter and antimatter could protect the group from bombardment by antimatter particles. This isolating and segregating force could allow local groups to grow into galaxies and galactic clusters.

A similar process could have produced antimatter galaxies or clusters, which we see today but do not recognize as antimatter.

But why should we expect matter to repel antimatter? There are clues!

  • First, it is normal to expect likes to attract and opposites to repel. Matter and antimatter are opposites.

  • Second, it allows the segregation of matter from antimatter.

  • Third, a segregated antimatter galaxy would look just like an ordinary galaxy. And the repulsion would prevent us from seeing a fireworks display between matter and antimatter galaxies.

  • Fourth, the apparent excess mass (dark matter) of the universe would be explained if half the mass of the universe is in antimatter galaxies or clusters segregated from matter clusters by repulsion.

We already looked at the fourth clue in our answer #3 on the dark matter problem.

If the matter repels antimatter the earth would repel a neutral antimatter atom. Antimatter would fall up!

Look for this announcement in science news headlines. In the near future.

Itís not really weird. Even though, Niles Bohr once said something like,

"If a person does not see the weirdness of quantum mechanics he does not understand quantum mechanics".

This weirdness depends upon onesí acceptance of questionable assumptions 4 and 5. We rejected these assumptions on the basis of the existence of wormholes that allow the instantaneous transference of space and even mass objects from one location to another.

A big problem for the particle experimenters is to detect the Higgs particle.


The abandoned super collider was primarily designed to measure this particle. Leon Lederman who was in charge of building the collider, called it the God particle because it apparently creates mass. The reason physicists believed that they needed such a big machine was their assumption (based on electromagnetic quantum mechanics) that the Higgs particle would be very massive. We say that Higgs particles are just the opposite and have extremely small mass.


We believe that space (ether) is composed of Higgs particles. And that space flows toward matter. The acceleration of space is gravity, and the convergence of space toward a point generates inertia (mass).

A black hole is defined as a collapsing concentration of mass so dense that its surface gravity (called the event horizon) prevents even light from leaving the mass object.

Classical general relativity seems to predict that that the black hole will continue to collapse within the event horizon to a point where gravity is so intense as to create a singularity.

A singularity like dividing by zero is a place where the laws of physics and math fail. The occurrence of a singularity or of an infinity in physical theory is a sign that the theory or model is either wrong or has been extrapolated beyond its acceptable limits.

If, as we say, gravity is the acceleration of space which has a tiny mass. This acceleration is limited by special relativity to the velocity of light which would occur at the event horizon of a black hole. Therefore, gravity does not increase within a black hole to generate a singularity.

Newton thought that the idea of a force (action) at a distance without the intervention of particles or waves was absurd. Most everyone agrees.

Most theorists assume that these forces are due to boson, messenger particle exchanges. The authors have not been able to visualize how a particle exchange can produce an attraction?

However, we believe that boson particle forces are more easily visualized as due to space flows. Where the disappearance of space such as gravity space flowing into mass represents an attraction. The appearance of space, such as charge space flowing out of charge, represents a repulsion. The appearance of gravity space between matter and antimatter galaxies constitutes a repulsion. In fact it represents the cosmic repulsion suggested by Einsteinís cosmological constant. The attraction between opposite charges is due to the disappearance of charge space at the interface between the opposite charges.

Perhaps I should explain that what we call gravity space is an all prevailing gravity field, similarly and our charge space is an ubiquitous electrostatic field. We postulate that each fills all of space, and that together they constitute the ether but are independent of one another.

The idea of force at a distance as due to space increasing or decreasing between interacting objects is simple, but new, and may take a little getting used to.



Viewed Effects of FTL Motion

Local FTL and observed pair-production

Viewed effects of FTL motion, assuming the constancy of light-transmission relative to the observer

Letís suppose that a particle approaches you at a speed greater than that of light. If we assume that you are standing in a field of corn, and the particle destroys everything in its path, then youíll be able to see the effects of the particleís motion, (a burning pathway cut through the otherwise featureless cornfield), even if you canít see that particle itself.

Now, letís assume that the speed of light-transmission is constant relative to you (as SR says it is), and that the path of the particle takes it right past where you are standing. What do you see?

Well, the first thing that youíll see is a burning opening in the corn right by you, because the FTL particle will have been traveling faster than its own signal, and will reach your position before you can see any evidence of its earlier destruction as it approached (these signals donít start turning up after the particle has already passed you).


If you happen to be looking in the right direction, youíll see the opening progress in the direction of the particleís travel, but because of the lengthening timelag, the particle appears to be going at less then the speed of light.

If there is a marker 1 lightsecond away, and the trench is cut between you and it in near-instantaneous time, thereís still going to be a one-second timelag between the trench being seen to open at your feet and being seen to reach the marker point, because thatís how long it takes the signal to get back.

Result: a receding FTL object looks as if it is going at less then lightspeed, no matter how fast itís really going.


However, thereís another effect. As the trench recedes away from you, the light-images from the earlier destruction are now beginning to reach you. One microsecond after the particle reaches you, you see the closest 300m of its earlier destruction.

After another microsecond, you can see 600m of burning trench stretching away from you in the direction the particle came from. After an additional microsecond, you can see the "old" damage that occurred 900m away. The "damage-front" for the approach phase appears to be receding rather than approaching.

So, while the view in one direction is of the particle traveling in the correct direction at less than c, the view in the opposite direction is also of damage done by a receding particle, this one with reversed timeflow (a combination of observer constant-lightspeed and FTL approach is enough to create the appearance of a particle traveling backwards in time, although this isnít a physical effect).


If you videoed the whole scene with a fish-eyed lens on your video camera, or using a mirror so that you could watch the scene in two directions, then when you replayed the tape, you wouldnít see a single trench being cut from one side of the field to the other, but instead, two trenches starting at the same point and opening out in opposite directions.

Instead of seeing what looks like a single particle traveling at more than lightspeed, youíd see what seemed to be the effects of two particles emerging out of thin air, and flying off in opposite directions, one moving forwards in time and one moving backwards!

"Deduced" behavior

"Observed" behavior

This sounds suspiciously like what quantum mechanics tells us is seen to happen - particle/antiparticle pairs are supposed to pop out of thin air without an initial cause, as a purely statistical effect.


However, if you inhabited a region containing particles travelling at FTL, this is actually the sort of behaviour that you might see, not because of any magical QM effects or time-travel, but simply as an artifact of the assumed constant-propagation timelag on signals.

This does appear to be more than a little like Hawking radiation, but to do a proper examination of the similarities, we have to look at how the effect occurs in the presence of a gravitational gradient.


Although this example produced observed time-reversal, it doesnít introduce causality-violations - the effects are legal and paradox-free.

We can easily recreate the effect using current equipment. Letís suppose that the swathe being cut through out cornfield wasnít being cut by a particle moving at more than c, but was being burnt into the scenery by an errant space-based laser platform designed as part of an anti-missile defense system.

Thereís no limit to the speed at which a spot of light can be swept over a surface by a distant projector, so if the satellite decided to burn a line across the cornfield by sweeping a beam across it at >300,000km/s, then an observer standing in the middle of the field would again see two spots of light cutting into the corn, travelling in opposite directions.

If the shape cut by the laser was a barcode representing a series of numbers coming from an atomic clock onboard the satellite, the ground-based observer in the centre of the field would see two sets of numbers being written in opposite directions, one counting up, and one counting down (they might think that there were two satellites up there, one of which had an atomic clock that was running backwards).

Observed time-reversal isnít, in itself, necessarily a problem.


The paradoxes arise when you try to deal with the Lorentz redshift as being an effect that is totally separate to the propagation stuff, or when you try to deal with objects passing through their own wavefronts "from behind".