65 replies to this topic

[TheSearcher]

Winterwind, on 21 January 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

It was rather obvious, wasn't it.

You'd be amazed the amount of people that actually don't know the show at all.

[Winterwind]

Well, outside of the UK, not really. But here in Canada, at least in SW Ontario, most people my age know it from TVOntario and PBS showing it when we were kids.

Back to time travel... I find the theory that we could possibly travel to the future but not the past interesting. Not being a physicist I'm not well versed but from the simplest perspective, you'd think it would be easier to go to the past, something that has already happened, as opposed to the future, something that hasn't happened yet. But what do I know. Math and hard science were things I did because it was required to graduate. The soft sciences and the arts were what I enjoyed and pursued.

Edited by Winterwind, 21 January 2013 - 07:49 PM.

[DieChecker]

TheLastLazyGun, on 21 January 2013 - 02:40 PM, said:

When you are at a standstill, you travel through time at the speed of light from a stationary observer's point of view.

As you travel quicker and quicker, the slower you travel through time to a stationary observer (or, at least, to someone moving more slowly than you).  So if you are on a spaceship travelling at the speed of light, anyone outside the spaceship who is somehow able to get a quick glimpse into the spaceship through the window would see time on your spaceship at a complete standstill.  However, you yourself wouldn't notice that time has slowed on your spaceship.  You will, however, see time passing extremely quickly outside your spaceship when you look through the window.  So, when you step out of your spaceship, it could well be that half an hour has gone by in your spaceship from your point of view, but 100 years have gone by on Earth.

That's because space and time are linked.  In other words, if you are at a standstill, you move through time at the speed of light from the point of view of a stationary observer.

If you travel at the speed of light, you would have ceased travelling through time at all from the point of view of a stationary observer.

If you travel at half the speed of light, then a stationary observer would perceive you as travelling through time at half the speed of light, and so on and so on.

Imagine space-time as a scale of 1-100, and if you increase one to, say, 40, the other has to go down to 60, etc etc.

The best way to imagine this effect is to imagine that you are on a train and you have a clock.  Attached to the side of the clock is two mirrors facing each other.  Imagine there is a photon of light bouncing from one mirror to the other (for the sake of convenience imagine you can see this photon of light) and the photon hits a mirror once every second, causing the second hand to move forward one second, every second as normal.

You on the train would see this photon bouncing up and down and hitting a mirror once every second.  So, to you, time is passing as normal.

Then imagine that your train goes at high speed through a station.  There is a man on the station platform and, as your train passes from left to right from his point of view, he sees you through the window of the train holding your clock.  He, however, would see the clock and its two mirrors moving from left to right with the train.  He would also see the photon not moving just up and down but also moving left to right at the same time - to him it would be a zig-zagging motion that it's making.  So he would see the photon hitting one mirror but then he would notice that by the time it hits the next mirror that mirror has moved several feet to the right by the time the photon hits it.  So, to him, the photon has to travel a further distance through the air for it to hit that next mirror to make the clock advance a second.  He notices that it takes three seconds for it to travel this extra distance to make the second hand of the clock tick one second.

So this means that whilst a second has just gone by for you on the train, the guy looking at you through the window would actually have perceived that one second for you as three seconds from his perspective.

I enjoyed your post. Though I was actually trying to be funny referencing Harte's post. I don't actually think making something stand still stops time.

[cladking]

Winterwind, on 21 January 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

Back to time travel... I find the theory that we could possibly travel to the future but not the past interesting. Not being a physicist I'm not well versed but from the simplest perspective, you'd think it would be easier to go to the past, something that has already happened, as opposed to the future, something that hasn't happened yet. But what do I know. Math and hard science were things I did because it was required to graduate. The soft sciences and the arts were what I enjoyed and pursued.

It doesn't really matter what physicists think about anything until they've derived an
experiment to test it.  What we know is there is no evidence of someone coming from
the future with foreknowledge and that traveling to the past would entail paradoxes
such as the opportunity to kill your own grandfather.  Even were it possible no such
evidence exists.

However, there are no paradoxes traveling to the future and there are countless hints
that this might have occured.  At the very least there's no good reason to consider it
impossible.

[Choseone]

One way we could travel back in time is if John Titor was correct about the world lines he spoke of. Like looking at yourself in a mirror with another mirror behind you. I liked the Titor stuff even if it was fabricated.

[TheSearcher]

cladking, on 21 January 2013 - 09:21 PM, said:

It doesn't really matter what physicists think about anything until they've derived an
experiment to test it.  What we know is there is no evidence of someone coming from
the future with foreknowledge and that traveling to the past would entail paradoxes
such as the opportunity to kill your own grandfather.  Even were it possible no such
evidence exists.

However, there are no paradoxes traveling to the future and there are countless hints
that this might have occured.  At the very least there's no good reason to consider it
impossible.

Clad, what physicists think about anything is important since they are the most likely ones doing the experiments. I reccon this is your distaste of science showing.  However you are quite correct, there is no evidence of someone coming from the future and theoretically traveling to the past would entail paradoxes and would be a real minefield so to speak.

As to traveling into the future, well in the theory of relativity, time dilation is an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured by observers either moving relative to each other or one staying on the point of origin and the other one moving. So yes could you come close enough to the speed of light you could kind of leap forwards.  Nobody considers it impossible you will find, just not technically possible right now.

[keninsc]

cladking, on 21 January 2013 - 09:21 PM, said:

It doesn't really matter what physicists think about anything until they've derived an
experiment to test it.  What we know is there is no evidence of someone coming from
the future with foreknowledge and that traveling to the past would entail paradoxes
such as the opportunity to kill your own grandfather.  Even were it possible no such
evidence exists.

However, there are no paradoxes traveling to the future and there are countless hints
that this might have occured.  At the very least there's no good reason to consider it
impossible.

The future........I sort of doubt, because our future hasn't happened yet. To the past, perhaps or someone coming back from our future to now might be possible as well. However, here again they would only be able to come backward in time and yes that does sort of imply that if the guy from your future comes back in time then the future is already there, it is but not from our point in time. It's like the old saying, "You can't get there from here.".

[NiteMarcher]

TheLastLazyGun, on 21 January 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

Most physicists, such as Stephen Hawking, know that time travel to the future exists.  That's because we are all travelling into the future all the time, and not at the same rate.

That's because the faster something travels, the faster everything else from its perspective travels through time.  So the travelling object has moved forward in time quicker.  This has actually been proven by the use of highly accurate atomic clocks on aircraft and satellites.  
And that is why scientists KNOW that time travel into the future is possible.  They just aren't sure if you can travel back in time.

http://www.astronomy.../Unit5/gps.html

[cladking]

TheSearcher, on 21 January 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

Clad, what physicists think about anything is important since they are the most likely ones doing the experiments. I reccon this is your distaste of science showing.  

What people believe is irrelevant to mother nature.  It doesn't matter if your name is Sir Isaac
Newton, Imhotep, or Albert Einstein.  No amount of belief has an effect on the concrete world.
Experts invariably disagree about most real events.  I'd defer to experts if they were doing ex-
periments on time but no such field of study as temporal mechanics exists other than on Star
Trek or in thought experiments.  Yes, I've seen theoretical ideas for time travel but still there
are no time travelers out there (I enjoyed Titor as well) and this pretty much implies time tra-
vel will never exist that can take people back in time.

But this doesn't necessarily mean that time travel won't be invented in the future or be an on-
going natural phenomena as discrete events that can take a person forward in time.

I love science but it is being abused by almost everyone now days.  It's this abuse for which I
find distaste. People believe everything is known where in actuality nothing is known. Real know-
ledge is visceral anyway and doesn't necessarily spring from books.

Quote

As to traveling into the future, well in the theory of relativity, time dilation is an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured by observers either moving relative to each other or one staying on the point of origin and the other one moving. So yes could you come close enough to the speed of light you could kind of leap forwards.  Nobody considers it impossible you will find, just not technically possible right now.

Obviously time travel can  be invented in the future but we wouldn't know if they traveled
only forward.  I'm not sure I consider your example true time travel since it only appears be-
cause of disparate perspectives.  A friend suggests we've had time travel since 1949. You
just turn on this idiot box and it transports you four hours into the future.

Edited by cladking, 22 January 2013 - 01:13 AM.

[cladking]

keninsc, on 21 January 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:

However, here again they would only be able to come backward in time and yes that does sort of imply that if the guy from your future comes back in time then the future is already there, it is but not from our point in time.

How would it be possible for my great great great grandson to come back and kill me?

If he kills me then he can never exist and if he never existed then who killed me?

Are these people From the future the ones running things since they know what will happen?

If you can make money by knowing the winner of the next race then you very quickly have all the money.  Who are these people who can't lose and why are they here?  Where are they?  Why can no one see the future?

[keninsc]

Wow! Slow down there Skippy.

Had you actually read the reply I wrote and had some knowledge of the metaphysical side of time travel then you'd already have the answers you're demanding I provide fore you. So, let's take it one little step at a time and see if I can help you out here.

Quote

How would it be possible for my great great great grandson to come back and kill me?

I think the deeper question here would be, what the heck did you do to your family that your Great, great, great(one, two, three. Yeah) grandson would feel the need to come back and bust a cap in your crown? Now, if he does so after he's planted the seed of your linage then guess what, he's still here. And he's still here up until the time that he smokes your a*$ if he pops you before you plant the seed. However, in what state of mind would that make any sense at all? Seriously, go back in time to perform a retroactive abortion on yourself.......four generations removed? What the heck is that all about? I've heard of and known dysfunctional families, but dayum, that takes the cake.

Quote

Are these people From the future the ones running things since they know what will happen?

I'd think not, if they knew what the future held they'd do a better job of it. That or they'd be smart enough to know that changing the present will change the future into something else. What? How the heck should I know?

Quote

If you can make money by knowing the winner of the next race then you very quickly have all the money.  Who are these people who can't lose and why are they here?  Where are they?

I really have no clue what you're talking about, people who can't loose? Can you name me a couple of them, because I have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote

Why can no one see the future?

Because it hasn't happened yet? And not all choices are set in stone until they are done. We can't know who the next lottery winner will be until the winning number is drawn, until then every ticket number has the same unbelievably low chance of winning and the very high probability of loosing.

Calm down and stop and think about what you read before you demand someone to jump threw a hoop like some trained dog for your entertainment. That way you won't look quite so foolish.

[cladking]

keninsc, on 22 January 2013 - 01:21 AM, said:

Calm down and stop and think about what you read before you demand someone to jump threw a hoop like some trained dog for your entertainment. That way you won't look quite so foolish.

It was you who claimed it was possible.

I should have guessed you weren't prepared to defend the point.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

freetoroam, on 20 January 2013 - 03:45 PM, said:

Humans IMHO can not control time, time controls us.
As for impressions left in time..eg:ghosts, yes, I think this is possible and the more likely reason for "ghosts".

Man fears time, but time fears the pyramids - old saying I may have just mucked up.

[cormac mac airt]

Wearer of Hats, on 22 January 2013 - 03:37 AM, said:

Man fears time, but time fears the pyramids - old saying I may have just mucked up.

No, you didn't muck it up. Cladking did in his signature.

cormac

[cladking]

Wearer of Hats, on 22 January 2013 - 03:37 AM, said:

Man fears time, but time fears the pyramids - old saying I may have just mucked up.

Time has nothing to fear from the pyramids.  Time will continue long after the
pyramids are dust.  But the inventiveness of man might control or outlast time
itself.  Meanwhile men are too afraid to do even the simplest science at Giza.

You do the math.

Edited by cladking, 22 January 2013 - 03:58 AM.