what ifs...

T

TimeTraveler23

Chrono Cadet
Increased speed slows time. The faster an object is traveling the slower times goes in and around that object. what if an object went so fast that, not only did time slow down, but it also froze. Than, the person would be frozen in time, but could not slow down because there would be no time for them to accomplish this task. This would be a whole new paradox, that cannot be fixed in anyway, unless some other object caught up to it and slowed it down; however, in order to do that, it would have to be going faster than the original object which would cause it too to be slowed down. Any comments on this idea... /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif <font color="blue"> [/COLOR] <font color="blue"> [/COLOR] <font color="blue"> [/COLOR] <font color="blue"> [/COLOR]
 
What you do when you've stated the problem this way, is make the quantity of time realized as being dualistic and non super-relativity....The reason for this is in Einstein's percept of relativity, he gives the sole eye to distortion of time, to the observer in transit.
 
Could you slow down the speed in which particles moved, via absolute zero, by doing this would the object age rapidly? since moving faster slows times does moving slower speed up time?
 
Increased speed slows time. The faster an object is traveling the slower times goes in and around that object. what if an object went so fast that, not only did time slow down, but it also froze.
Click to expand...

What if you take a couple of physics classes and come back when you have learned that no "Object" can go so fast that it will "Freeze". If you move fast enough that time is basically at a stand still (paused), you would be travelling at the speed of C, which would also mean you cannot be Mass because it would take an infinite amount of energy to push any mass to the speed of light. Not to mention actually moving mass At the speed of light would probably shred space-time. Energy can travel at this speed but not mass.

Einstein never said anything about Faster than light travel or communication, only that it was impossible to travel At the speed of light.
 
Einstein never said anything about Faster than light travel or communication, only that it was impossible to travel At the speed of light.
Click to expand...
Gotta correct you there, as Einstein never even said that... although countless number of people seem to think he DID say this.

Einstein went to great pains to setup the concept of the OBSERVER and the frame of reference for the observer's OBSERVATION. These are the key words to keep in mind when you consider Relativity. Now let me paraphrase what Einstein did say about traveling at/above the speed of light. In essence the point he made was this (and again, this is a paraphrase, so no questions asking me to cite where this quote appeared):

It just may be possible to travel at/above the speed of light. However, the problem posed by Relativity is that no inertial OBSERVER would ever be able to make the OBSERVATION that someone/something actually DID reach/exceed the speed of light. Or to put it in even shorter and simpler terms: We might be able to exceed the speed of light, but no one will ever see us do it.

And that is exactly what Relativity is saying with regard to observation.

RMT
 
Just so you know RenUnconscious I am a freshman in highschool, and physics classes are not offered yet. If they were I would surely be taking them. Also, I beg to differ. An object would be able to reach the speed of light; however, going by what Einstein said, to that object light would be going 180,000 mps faster relative to that object. So technically no object could ever reach the speed that light would be presently traveling, but it could catch the speed 180,000mps. So what if you just learned a little about the topics you rebuttled. Thanks!!!
 
Ren

Increased speed slows time. The faster an object is traveling the slower times goes in and around that object. what if an object went so fast that, not only did time slow down, but it also froze.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



What if you take a couple of physics classes and come back when you have learned that no "Object" can go so fast that it will "Freeze". If you move fast enough that time is basically at a stand still (paused), you would be travelling at the speed of C, which would also mean you cannot be Mass because it would take an infinite amount of energy to push any mass to the speed of light. Not to mention actually moving mass At the speed of light would probably shred space-time. Energy can travel at this speed but not mass.
Click to expand...

You are right about it taking an infinite amount of energy to actually reach the speed of light. That is the principle behind particle accelerators. They pump up the particles with energy and their mass increases.

So basically you have to cheat to get to the speed of light. Kind of like pulling another rabbit out of the hat. If you think outside the box, then the speed of light isn't the ultimate speed obtainable. You just can't do it by adding more energy. Possibly the solution would be to take energy out instead. Kind of like adding negative energy. At present our science can't do that. But nature seems to have a solution. It does seem to me that gravity fields do tend to drain energy out of objects which results in their attraction. So I do believe the light barrier will be crossed eventually. But it will take a much deeper understanding of the concept of energy.
 
Eeeeeeeeeeeee-gads, must correct you all.

It was I, that clung to Rainman as the sun rose over the forest primeval.He protected me from the beast in the wilds, all night long.

It was then, Ren, (the man-bird), flew through the sky, with a red-hot chili pepper up his as*, on towards, to near the speed of light.

As I clung to Rainman, drench from the night before rain, giving thanks.
I said,"Look Rain, it's that giant deer, a buck in the sky!..It's goig out to catch, the near speed of light Ren, with a chili pepper up his as*.

Rain carefully placed his hunting rifle cross his chest and majestically looked onward, as a full rotational came out infront of Ren and took him to another dimension.

*"All of these years Dan, you thought a full rotational was a giant buck, didn't you"? Rainman replied with white shining teeth.

Rain taking off his quilted hunting cap and letting his golden locks flow to the length of his shoulders as he laughed gleefully explained.

Dan, my lad, what you have to understand is that if you go so far, the giant critter from the other dimension will bend over and take you near to the speed of light ship, to another dimension, always.

With these words, Ren was eaten by the giant buck and we never saw him again.

At this happenstance, in the middle of nowhere Rainamn sat down at the piano and play four classical and jazz sonatas, on his grand piano.

Never was there a hottie so eaten, under the Penrose grace such as this.

And the question was posed once more, what preytell is a Sir Author Penrose full Rotational?


Copy_of_Elk6.jpg
 
At this happenstance, in the middle of nowhere Rainamn sat down at the piano and play four classical and jazz sonatas, on his grand piano.
Click to expand...
It was Darth Vader himself who did teach me to play the ivories with such style and grace. Unfortunately, this was a future event which had already come to pass in the yesterday of a meeting between father Luke and son Anakin.

When Time is twizted on its head, reverse is the way of the things we thought!

Play ye the piano of LIGHTspeed! And modify SpaceTime in accordance with Will.
RMT

PS - Ye have now been blessedly exposed to a Cabalistic invocation!
 
Notes only.Where a mass is propelled towards light speed, at a certain point in that realm, light inherent within that mass, will strive to come out.

The rotational value, that Penrose of England speaks of, is the lending of another dimension to effect the dimension that the to near speed of light goaled mass, is trying to attain, due to nonlinear symmetry, so the values of interdimansional margins are acquiesced upon and the other dimension comes into this one, which is thought?

This theory of Penrose goes against what the Pleiadeans have said, that in a near line of acceleration, to where there is some magnetic acuity, of the object, say a ventured flying saucer, that does not have what is known as a tachyon drive, thre rotational never comes, however at almost the speed of light, the object destroys itself, by the overventing of C, or light within mass.

This is why in deep stringed space, above C patterns are never achieved in it, however mass must always be transfigured to another realm.

This would be the bank of or the transition to tachyon mass?
 
Re Kev:If your going to throw a brick at your girlfriend and the brick travels at light speed, you cant hit light speed with the brick, as all the light secretly captured in the brick would fly out.

The brick would kind-a explode, sort of, also called disgennising, to an assigned realm of matter?

So you either have to throw the brick slower, or take her out fer a soda and then,...well kiss-er, or well I don't know whut ta tell you????


Awe gosh Kev, ya got a girl?

A full rotational is where you throwm the brick at about fourth fiths the speed of light and a cop pops out of the bushes and eats the brick?
 
TT23,

Increased speed slows time. The faster an object is traveling the slower times goes in and around that object. what if an object went so fast that, not only did time slow down, but it also froze. Than, the person would be frozen in time, but could not slow down because there would be no time for them to accomplish this task. This would be a whole new paradox, that cannot be fixed in anyway, unless some other object caught up to it and slowed it down; however, in order to do that, it would have to be going faster than the original object which would cause it too to be slowed down. Any comments on this idea…
Click to expand...

You have to put “speed” in terms of some relative point of view. Time would appear to be slowed for the moving object as measured by an observer at rest…relative to the moving object.

It is the “at rest” observer who would make the determination that time was running at a slower pace on the moving object. And as long as the object is moving in a “uniform motion of translation” (in a straight line and at a constant speed) and not rotating observers on both objects could state that they were at rest and the other object was moving (and had clocks running at a slower pace). Neither observer would detect anything abnormal about their own clock.

This appears to be a paradox, but it isn’t. If the observers decide to bring their clocks together and compare them one of them has to turn around and travel to the other person. The person who does that will feel the force of slowing (a negative acceleration), the lateral component of centrifugal force as he turns around or both. The “paradox” is resolved at that point because they are able to determine who was moving and who was “at rest”.

(Note that I put the scare quotes around “at rest” because the person who is at rest is only at rest relative to the other object. S/he is in relative motion to a multitude of other objects in the universe.)

The person in the moving object won’t have any problem slowing down. S/he could have a rather important problem if the velocity was some very large portion of the speed of light.

If the velocity was, for instance, .999999999999999 c for every hour of proper time experienced by the traveler, his “at rest” partner would experience 61,286 years. His pal might not live long enough for them to compare clocks.


In the case of your “chase pilot” there’s no problem. The chase pilot is traveling at some huge velocity as is the person that he’s chasing…relative to the “at rest” observer…not relative to each other.

Their velocities might be very low relative to each other. If the chase pilot is going 10,000 km per hour faster – even though the “at rest” observer sees them both going at near light speed – he will catch up and their clocks will be fairly well synchronized. Their “at rest” pal might have been dead for a few million years but they won’t notice anything unusual relative to each other.
 
Kevin,

Could you slow down the speed in which particles moved, via absolute zero, by doing this would the object age rapidly? since moving faster slows times does moving slower speed up time?
Click to expand...

This is basically the same problem that TT23 posed. The velocity of the particles is relative to some observer deemed to be "at rest."

If the at rest observer sees some object moving near the speed of light and then sees it slow down and eventually come to rest relative to himself he would see the other objects clocks moving slowly and then speed up and eventually synchronize its rate with his clock when it came to rest.

In the case of your particles, no, they aren't going to age rapidly because they are cooled to Absolute Zero (0 degrees Kelvin). At near Absolute Zero the particles are simply at rest relative to the observer.

Again, Absolute Zero, is relative. In the laboratory you might measure the particle velocity to be zero but your friend, driving by the lab in his car at 60 mph, will not say that they are at Absolute Zero.

And at Absolute Zero your particles are clearly within the realm of quantum mechanics. There will be an uncertainty about their velocity and location. They will still have some minimum velocity at 0 Kelvin.
 
Kevin &amp; TT23,

You have to take my examples with a bit of a grain of salt. The reason for this is because "real" observers aren't blind. In the examples there are assumed to be only four objects in the entire universe...two observers and two clocks. They start out in empty space standing still next to each other and then they start to move apart, slow down and return to the original location and stop to compare clocks. Pretty unrealistic in the real world.

To move at these huge velocities they would have to be out in space where they have a really huge "laboratory" to move around in. They can see objects, like stars, planets, galaxies, etc. other than themselves. They don't really have too much of a problem determining who is moving "fast" and who is moving "slow" to decide who is relatively "at rest". They can choose some distant star as their common point of reference to determine velocities.

Because these examples involve the Special Theory of Relativity I would suggest two books for you to read.

1) "Relativity: The Special and the General Theory" by Albert Einstein. It's a very good little book, available through Amazon or at Borders in paperback. It is a popular science volume and involves a very minimum of math stated as basic algebra.

2) "The Special Theory of Relativity" by David Bohm. Available in paperback at the same places. Dr. Bohm includes a lot more math but it is still basic algebra (with just a very few differentials). You can understand most of the book even if you don't have the math background. It is quite a bit more advanced than Einstein's pop-sci book.

Those two books will give you a reasonably good foundation toward understanding STR.
 
thanks very much, but reading the books should nto be too difficult because math is my strong subject. I am a freshamn taking precalc so algebra will not be too difficult to understand...thank you very much for your time and post!


"Everything is impossible, until it is not!"
 
Back
Top