New Theory

[Modern_Einstein]

Hey Everyone!

I have completed a new theory of time travel that, luckily doesnt involve black holes, worm holes or any other 'theoretical' objects. This idea has come a long way since i first thought it up ( Grade five - Now i am going into grade 8) and also explains singularities.

I purpose that our 4 dimensional universe is made up of the three visible dimentions (obviously) and instead of Space Time as the fourth dimension i would like to use Light Time (L, t). To furthmore help with the understanding of this concept i will begin in explaining how this ties in with black holes. Physisists have theorized that a black hole is a super dense object in which nothing can escape - including Light; and in this cas Time as well. Takiing this farther u can say that a singularity is not the point of no return but when Time and Light meet (Light needs to be thought of as entitetical not physical). Now, since light and time have been parallel, they have not met. When they meet a super dense object ( such as a planet or star) there straight path is curved. Now, if they meet a very dense very heavy object like a black hole ( in which light cannot escape) then the straight path now becomes a spiral ( visual water running down a drain). When light and time has reached the point of metting it creates a singularity. ( this means that its not the super dense object that is causing object to disappear but the action of time and light meeting and creating a singularity DUE to the massive object. When time and light meet, this is when the 'star' becomes a black hole'.

Considering that time and light do run parallel than we can say that an object moving close to the speed of light, that it will still time travel. We can deduce this from the fact that if can move AND accelerating at any rate we will reach the speed of light. So, if we are moving AND accelarating at any rate we are also cathiching up with time and moving Forward though time itself.

Picture two cars on the highway going 100 km/h. Now there is another car sevral km back going 20 km/h and exelerating at any rate of any size (0.000000001 m/km or accelerating 1 m/h ever km/h).
Eventually that car with catch up with the two cars moving at a constant speed.

Knowing ALL of this we still can consider the fact that very large and dense object will effect Light and Time. So taking this into account it will be easier to catch up on time on Earth ( as an example) than on the moon because gravity will compesate (compestaion will vary with different ammounts of gravity for the remaining speed of 80 km/h by curving time and light.

please tell me what you think of this and anything that is wrong with it so i can finally perfect my theory of time travel. Sincerely Ty.

 

[Modern_Einstein]

I have also been wondering something else... If somebody is on a high speed jet, they are time travelling technically. Say he has a wife at home who has not been on a high speed jet. When the husband gets off the high speed jet how can he see his same wife or is he seeing his future wife that has now become his present wife. If so then his wife has missed a small part of her life in which she won't remember because by time travelling ( technically) he has changes the future and therefore the past because his wife wasn't on the high speed jet... Confused!

 

[Darby]

[quoteplease tell me what you think of this and anything that is wrong with it

[/quote]

I purpose that our 4 dimensional universe is made up of the three visible dimentions (obviously) and instead of Space Time as the fourth dimension

Space-time is the three spatial dimensions plus a time dimension. Space-time isn't "the fourth dimension".

Physisists have theorized that a black hole is a super dense object in which nothing can escape - including Light; and in this cas Time as well.

It's not a theory. It is a definition. What does "time can't escape a black hole" mean and what evidence do you have to support that position?

Takiing this farther u can say that a singularity is not the point of no return but when Time and Light meet (Light needs to be thought of as entitetical not physical).

Taking what further?

What is the meaning of light and time "meeting"?

I don't believe that "entitetical" is actually a word so I have no idea what you mean here.

Light is definitely physical. There's even a particle of light. We call it a photon and is can be detected, measured, manipulated, folded, spindled, mutilated, etc. It's quite real.

Now, since light and time have been parallel, they have not met.

Where did you establish this in your post? Parallel to what?

Considering that time and light do run parallel than we can say that an object moving close to the speed of light, that it will still time travel.

False proposition considering no basis has been established to support the initial proposition.

We can say that an object traveling at any speed relative to an observer will obey the laws of special relativity. This isn't new information. It will "time travel" in the sense that the object's clock and the observer's clock will tick away at different rates.

We can deduce this from the fact that if can move AND accelerating at any rate we will reach the speed of light.

If we were living in 1900 we could naively deduce that "fact". Since 1905, however, we have learned that that is not the case. We've also verified that it cannot be done countless tens of thousands of times for the past 100 years. We verify it every day, for example, in particle accelerators. The increases in particle accelerator power necessary to eck out an increase in particle velocity when the particle is traveling very close to the speed of light is exactly what is predicted by special relativity.

So, if we are moving AND accelarating at any rate we are also cathiching up with time

No clue what this means. Catching up with time? We're running behind time? In any case it is a false proposition if it based on the assumption of accelerating to the speed of light.

and moving Forward though time itself.

So far there's no experimental evidence that suggests that we are running backwards through time or that it is even possible in practice. There are solutions to general relativity that suggest that in theory it might be possible. To date none of the solutions seem to apply to our particular universe.

 

[Darby]

If somebody is on a high speed jet, they are time travelling technically. Say he has a wife at home who has not been on a high speed jet. When the husband gets off the high speed jet how can he see his same wife or is he seeing his future wife that has now become his present wife. If so then his wife has missed a small part of her life in which she won't remember because by time travelling ( technically) he has changes the future and therefore the past because his wife wasn't on the high speed jet... Confused!

Don't be confused. No one missed anything and no one changed the future. It doesn't matter whether you're on a high speed jet, a bicycle, walking on the sidewalk, are in Maimi and the other person is north of you in Toronto or on another planet. You have a velocity relative to other objects not sharing that state with you. As a result of the difference in relative velocity your clock will not run at the same rate as the other objects' clocks. This is simply how the laws of our world work.

These effects are so small that over the course of a lifetime they are inconsequential. If you lived out an 80 year life on a "high speed jet" traveling at 1 km/sec (3600 km/hr, about Mach 3.4) and your twin stayed put on the ground never moving at all you would be .01403 seconds younger than your twin.

 

[sprite]

Just tell us what the damn answer to the grandfather paradox is? What did they say the answer is in the article? I read the damn thing and couldn't find it.

 

[paladius]

ME, you have an interesting perspective on singularities (being a result of time and light meeting as opposed to a singularity having the influence on the time and light) which I suppose you should develope further.

Your question about the husband on the jet and his wife is mute, because you are missing the point that time existing for each individual separately. Although a wife may have become relatively younger to the husband, the husband has become relatively older to the wife. Each individual life existing on a continual plane without skips or drips.

ME, let me ask you this... what do you think the relation between mind and matter is?

 

[Twighlight]

" Now, since light and time have been parallel, they have not met. "

Photonic interaction ( which includes light ) is the very basis of time. It's a key concept, which one can even perceive in Einstein's E=MC^2.

Essentially, time exists via things interacting. Those interactions are the 'events' that differentiate one moment of time from another. Even in totally empty space, there is still time.....created by the interactions of virtual particles.

Without 'light' there would be no time. You cannot seperate time into some property on it's own. It's a mistake people keep on making. Time does not 'exist'....it is not a physical thing you can grab some of and take away. It is a process.....a property of objects....but not an object itself.

 

[TimeLord]

Paladius, this isn't the first time I've seen you post regarding the mind when discussing time travel or related topics. Would you mind explaining (here or in another thread) your views on what the mind is, how it works, and how it's related to time travel (in as much detail as possible)? Thanks. :D