what ifs...
- Thread starter TimeTraveler23
- Start date
TimeTraveler23
Chrono Cadet
i dont think this woukd happen but i dont know so here it is.........could an object's time and speed
slow down so much that it possibly when backwards in time
slow down so much that it possibly when backwards in time
TimeTraveler23
Chrono Cadet
yes exactly this si how it would travel into the future...correct? it would be traveling forward slower and get five years into the future in 2 years(numbers just picked not percise) thus traveling into the future
Re: TimeTraveler23
That is what I believe. The object's atoms take longer to do what all other atoms are doing, therefore, by the time the atoms of our object have completed what all others have done in a smaller time frame, more time has passed in the perception of our object. How to do this? Decreased electron orbit speed? If that is the case, wouldn't you have to somehow lessen the gravitational pull of the nucleuses? If you did that, might the electrons lose attraction to that atom and the atom would then destabilize? Perhaps, but probably only if you slowed it down to that point (if that is even possible).
Bob
That is what I believe. The object's atoms take longer to do what all other atoms are doing, therefore, by the time the atoms of our object have completed what all others have done in a smaller time frame, more time has passed in the perception of our object. How to do this? Decreased electron orbit speed? If that is the case, wouldn't you have to somehow lessen the gravitational pull of the nucleuses? If you did that, might the electrons lose attraction to that atom and the atom would then destabilize? Perhaps, but probably only if you slowed it down to that point (if that is even possible).
Bob
Darby
Epochal Historian
TT23,
The current answer is no. That doesn't mean that physicists say that it is impossible. It means that by current standards of knowledge there is no theory of General Relativity or QM that satisfies all of the criteria required for reversing the flow of time.
Could it happen? Maybe. But there's a problem. Even if "maybe" becomes "absolutely, yes" the paradox is that over a significantly long period of time, time travelers arrive in great numbers all over the present, past and future relative to whenever you decide to look at history.
This means that only a Super Being, who is outside of the universe looking in, could find a period of time where time travel begins and when time travel was not present. From the POV of an observer inside the universe it would be virtually impossible to find a time when time travel was absent.
And we - in the here and now - don't see significant numbers (meaning we see approx. zero - otherwise we would not be having this discussion) of time travelers and we don't have time machines.
That's a problem that is hard to explain away.
If time travel is actually possible it will be invented. It permeates all of history therefore violating linear temporal cause and effect...but we don't see it happening.
The current answer is no. That doesn't mean that physicists say that it is impossible. It means that by current standards of knowledge there is no theory of General Relativity or QM that satisfies all of the criteria required for reversing the flow of time.
Could it happen? Maybe. But there's a problem. Even if "maybe" becomes "absolutely, yes" the paradox is that over a significantly long period of time, time travelers arrive in great numbers all over the present, past and future relative to whenever you decide to look at history.
This means that only a Super Being, who is outside of the universe looking in, could find a period of time where time travel begins and when time travel was not present. From the POV of an observer inside the universe it would be virtually impossible to find a time when time travel was absent.
And we - in the here and now - don't see significant numbers (meaning we see approx. zero - otherwise we would not be having this discussion) of time travelers and we don't have time machines.
That's a problem that is hard to explain away.
If time travel is actually possible it will be invented. It permeates all of history therefore violating linear temporal cause and effect...but we don't see it happening.
Re: Darby
"And we - in the here and now - don't see significant numbers (meaning we see approx. zero - otherwise we would not be having this discussion) of time travelers and we don't have time machines."
I've said this before and I'll say it here. I'm not stating this as fact, but it may be possible that all of the UFO sightings are time travelers. This would certainly satisfy your need for significant numbers.
Reference: http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/ndxevent.html
Bob
"And we - in the here and now - don't see significant numbers (meaning we see approx. zero - otherwise we would not be having this discussion) of time travelers and we don't have time machines."
I've said this before and I'll say it here. I'm not stating this as fact, but it may be possible that all of the UFO sightings are time travelers. This would certainly satisfy your need for significant numbers.
Reference: http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/ndxevent.html
Bob
TimeTraveler23
Chrono Cadet
what if ...somehow timetravelers structure became less dense when traveling at such speeds that they became somewhat invisible...could they also possibly be our ghosts
creedo299
Epochal Historian
The conundrum, distant lights telling:
If the light from the beginning of the universe was held in Hubble's Deep Field Surveys, as being the light quiescent, of the beging fractal of our realized universe, then this is past distance viewed to time.
However if all the variable sets which are contained within the universe state, that in rudimentmentry, elementary sets of collections of coordinates, that all known sets composing the universe, must maintain and travel within the shell of the universe, or inside.
Then those galaxies may not exist any more?
Furthermore if due to the value of known sets, all components of the universe must vie by these known sets, then just what and where are to Hubble Deep-field proto-astrical sets now?
In other words, are we only viewing light information, or substance?
If the universe travels as one ball, then where have these proto-astrical sets of beginning galaxies gone?
Are the located past the shell of the travel of the universe, or non-eixsting, or existing, but only by accessed by special key?
If the light from the beginning of the universe was held in Hubble's Deep Field Surveys, as being the light quiescent, of the beging fractal of our realized universe, then this is past distance viewed to time.
However if all the variable sets which are contained within the universe state, that in rudimentmentry, elementary sets of collections of coordinates, that all known sets composing the universe, must maintain and travel within the shell of the universe, or inside.
Then those galaxies may not exist any more?
Furthermore if due to the value of known sets, all components of the universe must vie by these known sets, then just what and where are to Hubble Deep-field proto-astrical sets now?
In other words, are we only viewing light information, or substance?
If the universe travels as one ball, then where have these proto-astrical sets of beginning galaxies gone?
Are the located past the shell of the travel of the universe, or non-eixsting, or existing, but only by accessed by special key?
Actually, what I have read lately is that:
The clocks do not slown down, except due to the increase mass that the clock may gain, but that would be only when an object reaches relativistic (Einstein) speed, and that is only close to the speed of light, which is the fastest speed one can get to, as known. Light (photons) has such a very very small mass (if any at all - it is so small that it can not be measured yet) that it travels the fastest in the Universe.
So, according to the explanation of it, you are the object slowing down, if you could move at such relativistic speeds. And that probably is not possible, unless some sort of field that protects you could be built, and they think that something like a force field will be science fiction for many years, as the scientists think it is just a dream right now!
So, people think of it as the clocks slowing down, but that may only be due to gravity and its affects on the clocks. But you traveling that fast, you would slow down, so heart beat, motions taken, anything, speech even, would all slow down, and become slower, and slower, and slower the faster near relativistic speeds you traveled along.
Actually it may be, that alegbra is the end product of the math, but starting out, may be many calculations of calculus or differential equations (another form of calculus. Once those many limits in math are worked out without running into the stopper which is infinity (you can not use infinity and get the math done), then it may be simplified down to algebra in the end, and a simple equation come out of all of the math that was done!
In math, the purpose of math is to simplify down from more difficult equations that one started out with. And doing that sort of math can take -- years!
Afterall, Albert Einstein took ten years from 1905 when Special Relativity came out, to come up and simplify down to his General Relativity Equation which came out in 1915 --- E=mc^2. (Energy=Mass times the Speed of Light (c) squared.
The Special Relativity Equation was --- E=(pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2 or Energy= (the momentum times the speed of light) squared + (the mass times the speed of light squared) squared!
But now in particle accelerators (smash protons together very fast at relativistic speeds - near the speed of light -- 0.99999999c), there is an additional factor that they consider and that is the number of electronVolts that it gains also -- or the gamma factor.
The clocks do not slown down, except due to the increase mass that the clock may gain, but that would be only when an object reaches relativistic (Einstein) speed, and that is only close to the speed of light, which is the fastest speed one can get to, as known. Light (photons) has such a very very small mass (if any at all - it is so small that it can not be measured yet) that it travels the fastest in the Universe.
So, according to the explanation of it, you are the object slowing down, if you could move at such relativistic speeds. And that probably is not possible, unless some sort of field that protects you could be built, and they think that something like a force field will be science fiction for many years, as the scientists think it is just a dream right now!
So, people think of it as the clocks slowing down, but that may only be due to gravity and its affects on the clocks. But you traveling that fast, you would slow down, so heart beat, motions taken, anything, speech even, would all slow down, and become slower, and slower, and slower the faster near relativistic speeds you traveled along.
Actually it may be, that alegbra is the end product of the math, but starting out, may be many calculations of calculus or differential equations (another form of calculus. Once those many limits in math are worked out without running into the stopper which is infinity (you can not use infinity and get the math done), then it may be simplified down to algebra in the end, and a simple equation come out of all of the math that was done!
In math, the purpose of math is to simplify down from more difficult equations that one started out with. And doing that sort of math can take -- years!
Afterall, Albert Einstein took ten years from 1905 when Special Relativity came out, to come up and simplify down to his General Relativity Equation which came out in 1915 --- E=mc^2. (Energy=Mass times the Speed of Light (c) squared.
The Special Relativity Equation was --- E=(pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2 or Energy= (the momentum times the speed of light) squared + (the mass times the speed of light squared) squared!
But now in particle accelerators (smash protons together very fast at relativistic speeds - near the speed of light -- 0.99999999c), there is an additional factor that they consider and that is the number of electronVolts that it gains also -- or the gamma factor.
TimeTraveler23
Chrono Cadet
that is very intriguing and interesting thanks for this reply ....i will be looking a lot further into thsi when i return to school
TimeTraveler23
Chrono Cadet
yeah but any ideas on ghosts being future time travelers
So you have personal proof. Proving it only to yourself because of your personal experiences. Do you have any physical evidence capable of being shown to another person?
I am not bashing you. I'm just pointing out a difference between evidence and personal proof. I've had many things happen to me and proven beyond a doubt. When I try telling others, unfortunately I have no concrete evidence. All that I can do is give my word.
I am curious, though. What did you talk to the ghost about?
- Bob
I am not bashing you. I'm just pointing out a difference between evidence and personal proof. I've had many things happen to me and proven beyond a doubt. When I try telling others, unfortunately I have no concrete evidence. All that I can do is give my word.
I am curious, though. What did you talk to the ghost about?
- Bob
TimeTraveler23
Chrono Cadet
that would be so awesome if it is true (not doubting it)......tell them to come to jersey by the way do u know who they are ghosts of
"Everything is impossible, until it is not!"
"Everything is impossible, until it is not!"
TimeTraveler23
Chrono Cadet
what if time travel was invented??????/