Community > Science & Philosophy

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 … 20 21 Next

Topic: Is time travel possible?
davidben1 Joined Wed 12/05/07 Posts: 6120	Sat 01/10/15 09:07 PM
Oh my I think i just swooned a little an unfearing fe... perhaps we should collaborate and create unfearing magical offsrping... smiles

davidben1 Joined Wed 12/05/07 Posts: 6120	Sat 01/10/15 09:13 PM
Oh my I think i just swooned a little an unfearing fe... perhaps we should collaborate and create unfearing magical offsrping... smiles of course, that was in a metaphorical way... smiles.

tamitateo Joined Sun 12/21/14 Posts: 822	Sat 01/10/15 09:39 PM Edited by tamitateo on Sat 01/10/15 09:43 PM
Oh my I think i just swooned a little an unfearing fe... perhaps we should collaborate and create unfearing magical offsrping... smiles I have been reading for hours how did I miss this whole topic? S&P

stan_147 Joined Thu 05/15/14 Posts: 3442	Mon 01/12/15 01:35 PM
Time is the inverse of frequency and a confidence trick perpetuated by the Swiss to sell more cuckoo clocks and watches.

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 01/12/15 02:08 PM
"time" is just a unit of measurement, a perception in our heads.. nothing tangible, same as an inch, gallon or light year... if earth had a different orbit, our "time" would be different

SheikOfLaBroquerie Joined Thu 01/31/13 Posts: 1973	Mon 01/12/15 02:46 PM Edited by SheikOfLaBroquerie on Mon 01/12/15 02:47 PM
Our problem is the assumption time, as a fixed increment, can not be made constant. Here in is the dilemma. I've got a G.P.S. that goes up to a satellite to receive a signal from an Atomic Clock on board. But,is it absolute...? Apparently not! It's just the most accurate thing we've got to work with.

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 01/12/15 03:12 PM
Our problem is the assumption time, as a fixed increment, can not be made constant. Here in is the dilemma. I've got a G.P.S. that goes up to a satellite to receive a signal from an Atomic Clock on board. But,is it absolute...? Apparently not! It's just the most accurate thing we've got to work with. still a perception... accurate to our time

SheikOfLaBroquerie Joined Thu 01/31/13 Posts: 1973	Mon 01/12/15 05:08 PM
You've heard the expression, 'Time flies when you're having fun'? Our perception of the passing of time is sometimes woefully inadequate.

bashajones Joined Fri 08/08/14 Posts: 7943	Mon 01/12/15 05:09 PM
Oh my I think i just swooned a little Wha?...You UNDERSTOOD that?....lol Hi, davidben...

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 01/12/15 05:24 PM
Honestly? Math doesn't prevent one from going back in time but no one knows how to do it. To go forward in time you just increase speed. The faster you go, the more time will slow for you. If you get near the speed of light your time will pass very slowly indeed. If you were on a spaceship traveling near the speed of light for twenty years, only a few years would pass in your time. That just means you will get to your destination faster....how is that time travel No, time doesn't work that way. Time is relative. Only a few years would pass on the spaceship and the twenty years would pass on Earth. The person on the spaceship would have traveled into the future by slowing the rate time passed for him. the supported theory, but i say it's bunk...more jibberish, since time is nothing but thought

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 01/12/15 05:26 PM
Apparently, light travels at about 186,000 miles per second. If One was able to travel faster then the speed of light, then hypothetically You could catch-up to the light that has been dispensed from a past event. Thus, recording an event as the light from that past event catches-up to You (The Observer) again. The only problem is, You still wouldn't be able to do anything about the event that You've perceived again. You'd only be able to see the event again as it occurred in the past, countless billions of miles back from the said event's original location. I'm going Old-School on saying what I believe Isaac Newton thought about time. "It is constant and can not be changed." He would of scoffed at the idea of 'Time Travel.' Actually Newton was wrong. Einstein's theories have been well proven and show that time is extremely flexible. Newton may have been the smartest human to ever live but his Laws of physics only apply to a part of space/time when viewed from a certain perspective. Sadly, if Newton had been parked in front of a black hole with modern instruments, we may have learned a lot more. no, Einsteins theory's are still just that, theorys ... look at what quantom says about his theorys...

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 01/12/15 05:27 PM
A better question... Can light be effected by the Doppler effect? After all, light's speed in all its wavelengths may not be constant. if gravity effects light like they think it does, then it would not be a constant...

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 01/12/15 05:28 PM
there you have it! http://www.cnet.com/news/colliding-black-holes-could-warp-space-time-itself/#ftag=YHF65cbda0 Colliding black holes could warp space-time itself If the two black holes meet, they could release as much energy as 100 million supernova explosions as they shatter their galaxy, a new study finds. more guessing, since no one has ever seen it happen

SheikOfLaBroquerie Joined Thu 01/31/13 Posts: 1973	Tue 01/13/15 12:50 PM
If yes, then how? I cannot understand the process, especially the twin paradox. Why one twin is getting older faster than the other one who travels to the outerspace ? Albert Einstein proposed the theory of relativity. Again, this is just a theory or a conjectured idea. Why time stands still once you reach the speed of light is beyond me. I can understand how light can be bent over tremendous distances under the influence of tremendous gravitational pull, but personally can't begin to understand the rest. Also, I can appreciate how energy only alters is form. It just continues to be dissipated in an alternate state. Closing Thought: Regarding the prospect of going back in time itself... Watch Groundhog Day (The Movie)

jerry44444 Joined Mon 01/12/15 Posts: 5	Sat 01/17/15 11:57 AM
Yes possible Travelled 2000 years

messi_is_a_tim_1888 Joined Fri 11/28/14 Posts: 3309	Sat 01/17/15 11:59 AM
Yes possible Travelled 2000 years Aye and your still wearing that period in the pasts fashion?

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Sat 01/17/15 04:03 PM
If yes, then how? I cannot understand the process, especially the twin paradox. Why one twin is getting older faster than the other one who travels to the outerspace ? Albert Einstein proposed the theory of relativity. Again, this is just a theory or a conjectured idea. Why time stands still once you reach the speed of light is beyond me. I can understand how light can be bent over tremendous distances under the influence of tremendous gravitational pull, but personally can't begin to understand the rest. Also, I can appreciate how energy only alters is form. It just continues to be dissipated in an alternate state. Closing Thought: Regarding the prospect of going back in time itself... Watch Groundhog Day (The Movie) if time stood still at the speed of light, the wouldn't everything be at a stand still? are they saying it's different if WE go the speed of light, but what about the light itself? they say that when we look at a star that 10,000 light years away, then we are looking 10000 years in the past, which i belive is true... but then they say if we were to go there at the speed of light, time would stand still... can't have it both ways, seems like more made up drivel to me...

SheikOfLaBroquerie Joined Thu 01/31/13 Posts: 1973	Sat 01/17/15 04:10 PM
Apparently, light travels at about 186,000 miles per second. If One was able to travel faster then the speed of light, then hypothetically You could catch-up to the light that has been dispensed from a past event. Thus, recording an event as the light from that past event catches-up to You (The Observer) again. The only problem is, You still wouldn't be able to do anything about the event that You've perceived again. You'd only be able to see the event again as it occurred in the past, countless billions of miles back from the said event's original location. I'm going Old-School on saying what I believe Isaac Newton thought about time. "It is constant and can not be changed." He would of scoffed at the idea of 'Time Travel.' Once more, this would only be for the benefit of the person who's actually going faster than light. Can they change anything...? NO!

metalwing Joined Fri 11/14/08 Posts: 26218	Sat 01/17/15 09:38 PM
Apparently, light travels at about 186,000 miles per second. If One was able to travel faster then the speed of light, then hypothetically You could catch-up to the light that has been dispensed from a past event. Thus, recording an event as the light from that past event catches-up to You (The Observer) again. The only problem is, You still wouldn't be able to do anything about the event that You've perceived again. You'd only be able to see the event again as it occurred in the past, countless billions of miles back from the said event's original location. I'm going Old-School on saying what I believe Isaac Newton thought about time. "It is constant and can not be changed." He would of scoffed at the idea of 'Time Travel.' Actually Newton was wrong. Einstein's theories have been well proven and show that time is extremely flexible. Newton may have been the smartest human to ever live but his Laws of physics only apply to a part of space/time when viewed from a certain perspective. Sadly, if Newton had been parked in front of a black hole with modern instruments, we may have learned a lot more. no, Einsteins theory's are still just that, theorys ... look at what quantom says about his theorys... Einstein's theories are what makes your gps work. Two different clocks with time changed by gravity and speed must be in sync.

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Sun 01/18/15 03:56 AM
Apparently, light travels at about 186,000 miles per second. If One was able to travel faster then the speed of light, then hypothetically You could catch-up to the light that has been dispensed from a past event. Thus, recording an event as the light from that past event catches-up to You (The Observer) again. The only problem is, You still wouldn't be able to do anything about the event that You've perceived again. You'd only be able to see the event again as it occurred in the past, countless billions of miles back from the said event's original location. I'm going Old-School on saying what I believe Isaac Newton thought about time. "It is constant and can not be changed." He would of scoffed at the idea of 'Time Travel.' Actually Newton was wrong. Einstein's theories have been well proven and show that time is extremely flexible. Newton may have been the smartest human to ever live but his Laws of physics only apply to a part of space/time when viewed from a certain perspective. Sadly, if Newton had been parked in front of a black hole with modern instruments, we may have learned a lot more. no, Einsteins theory's are still just that, theorys ... look at what quantom says about his theorys... Einstein's theories are what makes your gps work. Two different clocks with time changed by gravity and speed must be in sync. i'm aware of the difference, but it's not time dilation, it's something else, IMO...maybe the vacuum of space makes the radio signals change when they hit the atmosphere, slowing them down... not sure, i just don't think it's time dilation when there is no such thing as time..