Why "Einstein's" Time Reversal Would Not be Found With FTL....

..

..You Often hear about the problem of time reversal being a problem if Faster Than Light (FTL) wave motion is allowed even in possibility, as if it were a proof of relativity instead of just a possibility (this may be reduced to absurdarn thanks to a slow modem in my web machine..). No physics proof exists yet for this claim even though FTL seems to have already been observed in experiments. (See my Physics Synopses GENERAL WAVE DYNAMICS, (GWD) for more).

..

..Why is time not reversed with FTL? Even in relativity with the twin paradox where the twins are the same age as they often are (if not triplets!) and one returns millions of years later, the high speed traveller is not influencing the earth and it's dwellers in any way, both twins are just moving at their own rate, one slow and one fast without connection, this is just a disconnection of the field flowing at two rates, one high speed the other lower. The high speed twin's ship is not influencing the Earth. Since evidence for Faster Than Light seems to have already been observed as I say in the synopses if there were time reversal it seems we would have already seen it. For instance, the cosmos has been found at the greatest scales of distance to have a set of symmetrical "sides". COSMIC IMAGE Click Here.
...I think this could be explained only by way of a high speed Faster Than Light connecting force, not electromagnetism because light is not FTL, but rather gravity, since it's the only other long range force known to be present linking the two sides of the cosmos.

...

Because of the causal disconnection of the "slow" speed of light like centrifugal force each linear motion like the atoms in the air of a balloon would go more and more outward like in entropy, thus in GWD, entropy and centrifugal force are both caused by relativity. With no way to know what is before or after here and alpha centuri, the connection is so loose it would lose power by relativity alone and energy conservation for higher energy physics would be disproven, and there is no evidence for this.

..

Gravity is much lighter than light so it would go much faster than light, you lighten up to travel fast. If you have a train with the Doppler shift caused by the constant speed of sound, when you go faster than sound past it, the sound is a compressed at near sound speeds, but if two observers are going beyond the speed of sound in opposite motion, the airship and the train are disconnected. This would be how gravity waves would go faster than light and not have infinite weight like relativity says, the gravity may be like an antenna of much other wavelength than the light of electromagnetism, and two unlike antennas wouldn't much resonate, so in GWD gravity mostly just passes through the lower power fields so the infinite mass at the speed of light of relativity or faster wouldn't be a problem. While a high speed airship traveller doesn't see the train as reversed in time by way of light, even with a jet faster than sound, the slower sound waves when the jet reaches them are picked up in order from old to new just as they are emmited except in a higher speed sequence, this faster than sound isn't time reversal of the time of the sound no matter how fast the airplane moves (or at any angle by way of light or sound. The aftershock sound heard by the observer on the ground is not time reversed even if the light travelling through it is faster than sound, it's in the order of the events on the plane, first we hear the first sound then the later sound).

..

The light is so much faster, we can see the "real" events on the train, and we believe the light is more reliable to say what goes on on the train. The sound tells us more, but we believe the people on the train are moving forward in time, if by the sound we would think they were not, and by gravity there may be a more reliable way to hold the mass of the cosmos together than by relativity. For time reversal to be feasible at FTL by relativity, the high speed ship's field would have to "control" the distant field of the earth if it were reversed in time. This isn't the same as the twin paradox where the two fields are just disconnected with both observers flowing ahead through time at different rates, here the high speed field would have to reverse all the other fields in the cosmos because the starship visitor could go anywhere in the cosmos and when he arrives if Faster Than Light time reversal were true, he would always be moving into the past wherever he went. The signal to or from a high speed observer seems more like a movie of the same events that are slower or faster for some observers than an absolute way to control them. This is why my observation that contradiction would be in the complete control of time between the observers is true; a high speed observer watching a distant starship event like a muon or a hot dish might see indefinite cooler stability, the speed of light being thermodynamic, while a low speed observer will see the hot dish, and when the low speed starship speeds up to the same speed as the higher speed observer, the two will both agree and disagree, even though the time is not reversable by the low to high speed observer in relativity itself. Einstein said because there's no other way for the information between the high and low speed observers to connect than by light and because the light controls the relativity, mass and time, this is not gotten around. In truth because of paradoxes like this, there must be an underlying set of events for each observer not seen by way of the light (as if "through a filter") like rest mass that relativity doesn't explain. The motion changes the field relative to the observer, not the events themselves. The high speed observer sees nothing unusual about the events around on his starship, and if the other observers are moving at many speeds there would be many ways the high speed observer's events would be changed as they would whizz past. We might thus find the real events of the distant starship and the mass and energy there by way of a faster than light signal. We could also find who is more at rest. Contrary to relativity, more mass like the earth is at rest than the moon, and the sun is more at rest than the earth, so on the average by conservation of momentum we can find the "real" more reliable speed of the observers from the framework of the more massive frame, as in the ether because the ether which Maxwell used to exactly predict the speed of light was assumed to move along with a mass like the earth, a more massive frame has more field around it, slowing it down more than a lighter mass.

..

Einstein derived the equivalence of mass and energy from the simple equations of special relativity. The mass increases with the speed in the regular way. So Einstein believed that if the mass is derived from the motion or energy of the starship, mass and energy are the same. In GWD like linear and angular momenta they are generally the same but not exactly the same. Linear and angular momentum are both alike or there would be no conservation of momentum; even so like waves and particles they can't be exactly the same because they're much the opposite. Mass and energy like mass and inertia can be in any ratio, you weigh more at the higher than the lower latitudes on the Earth because mass (gravity) and inertia (centrifugal force) or mass and energy are in no definite ratio. If they were exactly the same the mass and energy of the sun would convert instantly, and the cosmos would be either completely mass or energy. They wouldn't be exactly the same in special relativity because the basic set of events for each observer found by the higher speed wave would be mostly the same. Relativity would be mostly true but because mass and energy are also unalike the higher speed lower power wave may be of more worth to us. Gravity would be more reliable to find the truth even with the stronger influence of light on the speed of the events from a distance. Because the conservation laws go from simple to complex with lower to higher density forces like in subatomic physics as if the field at one level always energises up from the field below it and not from nowhere via energy conservation, gravity being the lowest energy would be the foundation field, and mostly of most worth. If Emc2 is the most important F=ma wouldn't seem to ever be true at lower energy, and because gravity may be more important it may be of worth to us in many ways. GWD may not disprove relativity, but the physics of gravity may be special, just as radio hasn't disproven words and we may use it for its special uses, sound is good for the physics of sound, light has other uses.

..

Because the signal of the gravity waves are of lower energy and are less influenced by the light between them, and because the basic set of events near the high speed observer is unchanged, the new IP machines that may soon be built used to both make and recieve gravity waves by a shock wave of subatomic heavy particles in a known probable way might be used to find an underlying set of events about both the rate of time and the order of the events all observers say is true. This may not completely so because gravity is an acceleration, so the gravity wave may change a bit in speed between the observers, and the electromagnetic field between the observers has enough influence to change the observed rate of time from a distance. This may not seem like the events seen on the train by way of the sound, because at high speed sound may influence the train a bit by friction and heat as it moves through the air, while the high speed events seen on the high speed starship by other observer's speeds may seem much more influental by way of the light. However the basic events of the high speed ship are the same. Mass and energy are mostly the same but I think they're not exactly the same especially at low energy like For F=ma the low speed version of Emc2 because mass is heavy and energy is light, and the connection between angular and linear momentum generally connects them. If they were exactly the same mass like an acceleration and energy like linear motion would be like a line both round and linear at the same time, or the same for waves and particles.

..

The disproof of time reversal relates to the problems of a giant time machine of the H.G. Wells type which is unfeasible not because of the impossibility of just moving all the particles to older coordinates of space and time based on a good historical record, the problem is that it would take a huge machine to rebuild it, so the whole ancient world would have to be rebuilt in order to visit it because no ancient world now exists. This would be why even with all the genius of science, physicists haven't yet built a real time machine of worth. (The contradictions like a person going in the time machine and has an accident to influence events so the time traveller couldn't be born, are not disproof of time travel if the mass of the traveller is just moved from one world to the past world created by the giant time machine because it's just moving mass from one set of coordinates to another, and the future world doesn't have to be connected for the travel to exist any more than moving from one world to another by more usual travel is impossible, if both the older and newer worlds of time travel existed by way of a big machine and there was a way to move between them this is not disproof of time travel itself. Contradiction is not disproof of physics, all around are opposite action reaction pairs, and energy conservation is based on a balance of heavy mass and light and all the other opposites in the cosmos.)

Many believe time reversal isn't impossible, but it would take a much higher resolution machine than just the waves of small masses of special relativity to reverse it, this essentially another disproof of mine like the problem of the contradiction about the lifetime of the muon but on a larger scale. Almost all the information in our mass around us is about electromagnetism, so to rebuild a past set of coordinates of mass and energy, each particle would have to be moved with sharp resolution not seen in general fields like of relativity, a general field of waves can't control all the motions of all the particles of the cosmos at short range like it would take to build the giant H.G. Wells machine. A wheel is not oval like in projective geometry even if we see it sideways and oval from a distance, and the events themselves from a distant observer wouldn't be time reversed other than their image, like the wheel. We can't control how round or oval a wheel is just by seeing it from a distance.
Thus if there is FTL now being observed and/or good reason to believe in it, if time reversal went with the FTL and it was not just disconnected at higher speed than light like the plane and the sound of the train, the cosmos would be hugely changed, this about the high speed airship is more of worth than an old 45 rpm 78. Since it's not time reversing this would be evidence that disproof of Faster Than Light via time reversal was just speculation by others than Einstein about relativity..
While time reversal is possible by way of machines to control the coordinates of all the complex masses and motions of particles by way of the guidance of a well enough informed recording of where to move the mass and energy to, the idea that long range physics of a simple field to make all these complex changes for the cosmos in general is not worth proof or disproof of any physics. While time reversal in retro without a large machine seems impossible, some may say, time reversal is obviously impossible other than with short range change by large machines. Actually Einstein's own conclusion was that it was possible for Faster Than Light just so the motion of the waves that were Faster Than light were never slower. Einstein himself believed that Faster Than light wasn't impossible, just that as far as he could tell by 20th century physics, the speed of light seemed like a limit because of the infinite mass added in in special relativity at nearer light speeds. To explain the evidence for Faster Than Light by my own belief is not disproof of Einstein's vision. It seems he allowed augmentation of his own conclusions in just the way about the speed of light or higher speeds that may be possible with respect to his idea that Faster than Light wasn't impossible. In relativity the speed of light is absolute motion and without any change if via Einstein's explanation that there was no absolute rest, absolute motion of light is another absolute, why one but not the other seems to be what sometimes even Einstein thought about the speed of light. He believed faster than light to not be impossible, but his disproofs about time reversal are not nearly so definite and while as you see on my synopses link there is now lots of evidence for faster than light, no evidence exists for time reversal, and no evidence may in a 100 years from 2057 ago. "Disproofs of Faster Than light by time reversal" were mostly added on by other physicists who weren't as great as Einstein.
..