Jump to content

On the conservation of energy in time...


ProgBoy1
 Share

Recommended Posts

I believe that I have solved the dilemma of the violation of the law of conservation in time travel. To people not familiar with this violation, it in essence is this:

 

The conventional view of time-travel is that a person disappears out of the present and then instantaneously appears in the past. Is that correct? For now I shall assume as if it is.

 

Now, the problem is that when the person appears in the past, energy is created, not to mention the body's mass. (As air molecules are replaced.) And the same thing is true for in the present; it's a loss of energy, i.e. the air molecules have to fill in the void. To conventional scientists, this is a double violation of the law of conservation of energy, and thus time-travel in the manner hence described is impossible.

 

However, I have come up with an interesting solution to this problem. As Einstein and Minkowski said, space and time exist simultaneously in the space/time continuum (as its name implies.)

 

Now, according to the incorrect theory that most scientists use, there is a double violation of the law of conservation of energy because energy disappears from the present, and energy is added to the past.

 

But if you take into account Einstein and Minkowski's theory, then the net loss and gain of energy and mass CANCELS EACH OTHER out, viewed from an 'Absolute Observer', who is observing, so to speak, from outside the space/time continuum.

 

Thus, I believe that I have made this 'double violation' invalid. How do you like them apples?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BRAVO!

 

I like them "Apples" very much, I have been trying to get this through, but all to often as you noticed, it falls on deaf ears, and it shows, why do you think so many people in mainstream science continue to accept the beforemetioned misnomer?

 

Space & Time are indeed, truly ONE ENITY, therfore, "NO SEPERATION" exists between them! ergo "Space/Time Continuum" acting in simutaneous accord.

 

The name "Universe" is defined to the meaning, or translation by such definition as "One-Voice" (Uni=1 *** verse=voice)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, space is the absence of anything. It is non-matter, non-particle, non-wave, and non-energy. It is a void. Time is not a thing, either. It is not matter or energy. It is a unit of measurement (nanosecond, day, year, etc.). It is a measure of the duration of the movement of matter.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. It seems right, from a mathematical point of view. I love math, so no complaints there. But isn't it true that classical conservation of energy/mass has never been proven invalid? Time travel does violate this, if no mass/entropy is transferred to displace the traveller.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...