River of Time

D

Designer

Temporal Navigator
River of Time

My primary interest on this site
is paradoxes and how to resolve
that problem.

But my second interest is this.
Are all the people on this planet
in sink with each other at every
tick of the clock. Or is everyone
existence at different tick of the
clock. Example, my brother current
time is March 3rd 2001 where am I
at May 12th 2010; thus not in sink.

If everything is out of sink then
I am dealing other unconscious people
around me since they are not in my
present time.

The only proof that we are all out of
sink is as follows. Michio Kaku
stated that we are all going down
the river of time. So we then can
be at different location of the river
of time thus different current of now.

The second proof that the all we exist at
different now is as follow. The
Web Bot are predicting the future and how
can they do this. Well they can do this
by tapping into people that have different
now or present compared to ours. In other
words different now compared to ours
since they are in our future now.

So the success of the web bots can be proof
that we are all not in sink with the current
time.

This theory of mind may be right since if
time travel is possible I can then travel
to those past and future nows of other people.

Do anyone else wish to add.

PS

Since we only exist (consciously)
in the present now time how can
we have a now time in the past this
may prove time travel being impossible. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/yum.gif
 
Are all the people on this planet in sink with each other at every tick of the clock
Click to expand...

It is my understanding that, No, we are not in sync with each other, Technically, We are not even in sync with our own reflection in the mirror.

my brother current time is March 3rd 2001 where am I at May 12th 2010; thus not in sink
Click to expand...

What?
 
I can't see any reason WHY anyone's time would be 'out of synch' with anyone else's.

By definition, anyone who is here...now.....is at May 12th 2010. A person cannot be here and now, and be at some other date and time as well. My clock on the wall may say it is 5 minutes ahead of the actual time....but that is because the clock is wrong, not because there is something odd with time.

You fall into the oft made mistake of assuming that time is somehow something independent that has an existence of it's own. It isn't. Time is totally related to events. If the speed of time suddenly increased....doubled....across the universe nobody would notice any difference, because an hour would still be 1/24 of the length of a day. So the idea that there is a ( non-relativistic ) sense in which one person's time runs faster than another's makes little sense.
 
Twighlight

So if you are telling me we
are all in the current now
of May 13th, 2010; then we
must conclude time travel is
impossible since there is no
past nows to go to. This would
result in everyone being
unconscious if you went back
there since no one is back
there.

You told me time is run by events
so maybe older event may still
be happening in the past thus
creating old time in which there
may be observers to verify it
happened. Thus repeating itself
over and over again for those
events to live repeatedly. This
has to be true if time travel
is possible. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
My new problem with time travel is
that past events have to all ways repeat
so if you visit it it would still be
there in the past if you go to that
past time. And all the people repeating
these event will be unconscious doing there
thing. Time travel to me look more like
a dream idea and not a reality. And then
the stupid idea of conservation of mass
come up to support these repeating events.
Life would be much easier if the past
did not existed and thus time travel
was impossible.
 
So if you are telling me we
are all in the current now
of May 13th, 2010; then we
must conclude time travel is
impossible since there is no
past nows to go to.
Click to expand...


Sure......'the past' is largely a creation of our own memories. There is no such 'thing' as the past. There isn't a year 1975 sitting out there waiting for someone to travel to it. I don't see how one can travel to the past.....as what one seeks to travel to simply does not exist any more.
 
Sorry I was having a bad writing day
above.

For Time travel to work the following
must be true.

1. The past has to constantly repeat;
thus past mass can't evaporate into
nothing.

2. Consciousness must exist in the past
for all individuals. Since when
traveling to the past you also should
be conscious.

3. Conservation of mass must not be
violated (No duplication of mass with
respect to the present). Can't make
something out of nothing.

If any are violated then time travel to
the past is impossible.

I hope I finally made things clear.

Point 1 and 3 may contradict one another
possible making time travel impossible.

Point 2 may seem as a contradiction how
can you be conscious in the past and
the present. I don't know.
 
I think once we discover how to bend and manipulate space-time, That discovery will also be the start of the "playing field", lets say that on September 15th 2018, physicists and scientists develop a way to bend space-time from and back to a starting point, then everything after 9/15/2018 could be traveled back to, but everything prior to 9/15/2018 could never be seen again because it didn't exist in the "playing field" .
 
3. Conservation of mass must not be
violated (No duplication of mass with
respect to the present). Can't make
something out of nothing.
Click to expand...

#3 is true only in the classical Newtonian limit. In Newtonian physics strict conservation of mass-energy is taken to be true but without any proof. It is an assumption held to be true simply because there was no evidence to the contrary.

But in both general relativity and quantum mechanics it is not assumed to be true and there is evidence that it is not strictly true.

In GR you are surrounded by an event horizon. Not a black hole event horizon but an event horizon just the same. During your lifetime you cannot detect or be affected by anything occuring during your lifetime that is about 80-100 light years distant when you are born. There's not sufficient time for events that far away to reach you before you die even if they are approaching at the speed of light. It's not even theoretically possible for you to know the state of the universe behind the horizon. You can look at the evidence and determine to some approximation what was there 100 or more light years ago but not what is there "now". You can speculate about the laws of physics but you actually can't positively proove them to be true. You can't be absolutely sure that conservation of mass-energy is a universal law.

When you're looking out into the universe at distances billions of light years away you can't even be sure that you are seeing events in the proper temporal order. You're familiar with the concept in special relativity where we talk about objects moving at different velocities have clocks associated with them that are not ticking off time at the same rate. You're also familiar with the concept of light cones.

In SR we'd say that the light cones of objects that are at rest with respect to each other all lie on the same plane of simultaniety and that the light cones are parallel to each other - they aren't "tilted" relative to each other. You can draw a line from one light cone to the other light cone where the line passes through both events and the line intersects both cones at the same place. The events are simultaneous.

Objects traveling at different velocities have light cones that are tilted reletive to each other. Draw the same line and it will not intersect the two events at the same place on both cones. That's another way of describing the differing rates that their clocks are ticking away. The events are not simultaneous.

We usually think of the tilted cones as being associated with traveling at a velocity close to the speed of light. But that's not necessary if they are billions of light years apart. Even small differences in velocity give some small angle between the cones. But even the tiniest angle becomes significant if the angle is stretched over a billion light years. Think of a giant pair of scissors with blades 1 billion light years long. Open the blades the smallest amount possible and imagine how far apart the tips are from each other a billion light years away. The offset, the distance between the blade tips, is how much your clocks will be out of synch. The line drawn across each cone intersects them at different places.

You're here on Earth looking out at some galaxy a billion light years away. In that galaxy there's someone on a planet looking back at you. Both of your planets are orbiting stars. At some point, considering the orbital velocity alone, you might be approaching or receding from each other at 4 million km/hr. At other points in the orbits the difference in velocity will vary between +/-4 million km/hr and zero. A billion years later the images of what occured will arrive at each planet - but they won't arrive in the same order as they were created. Where that line intersects each cone varries as the velocity varies - and the velocity varies from +4 million km/sec (planets approaching each other) to -4 million km/sec (planets receding from each other)...the angle switches from crossing in the future and past portions of the cones. If you can't be sure in what order events occur, precisely when they occured then you can't be sure of much else - including the mass.

In quantum mechanics you are confronted by the uncertainty principle. This principle limits the amount of information that you can have about a particle "now". Just how you attempt to measure velocity makes the mass uncertain. Measure the mass and the velocity (thus momentum) becomes uncertain. There's no way for you to measure the mass-energy to an arbitrary degree of precision. You cannot, even in theory, know what the mass of the universe is therefore you cannot proove that it is strictly conserved and you have evidence before you that suggests that it is not.
 
Back
Top