Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

WE CAN SEE THE PAST!


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#61    Startraveler

Startraveler

    Fleet Captain

  • Member
  • 4,503 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New England

  • Knowledge Brings Fear.

Posted 03 July 2007 - 07:38 AM

Quote

But do space time have any meaning then?


Something doesn't have to be an absolute to have meaning. Plenty of things depend on the observer's perspective but they're still very real. I realize time can be tricky but there's no reason to imagine it doesn't exist.



#62    Snake022

Snake022

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 258 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newbury Park, Ca

  • When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car.



Posted 08 July 2007 - 11:56 PM

Quote

We can see the past through space, if we look at a star the star could allready be dead. but we see the light because its millions of years old going through space. This called time....... time exsist between dimenchons and worlds. We can also vist the future by flying in deep space and then come back 1,000 years later.

It is very possible. people dont belive this because there ither dont belive or dont have anything to do while there governemt is lieing.



it is possible, i know a lot about dimensions and time. yes, we can see the past because light only travels so fast, it will take years to reach us if it is far away. it really is not seeing that past, because it has happened, and it may not be there, but it is still in the same time as us, its all happening at the same time. we just still see the light, its the past, but not really, because time does not slow down if you go farther into space, it just takes longer for things to reach us. yes, if you want to say its the past, you not wrong, but there is just more to it. and of course you can SEE into the future if you wait 100 years, because 100 years has just past, but its not the past, its the present, because its now, it WAS the past 100 years ago, but you cant GO into the future, you can say you can, but you will always be in the present, because if you build a time machine, and go into the future, to US, you are in the future, because you are ahead of us in time, but for you, you are in the present, because as soon as you stop, you are in the time that is happening NOW, to you at least.

and, as for the time and dimension thing, time is part of the 4th dimension, and higher. it only exist in the 4th dimension and up because in this dimension, no object can exist in the 4th dimension unless it has the 3 physical properties, length, width, and depth, and the non physical property of time applied to it. it needs time because, and object that cannot exist for any amount of time on this earth, cannot exist at all. as for the 3rd dimension, its length, width, and depth, but it doesnt need time because its exist as it is now, it doesnt get old. it just exists.  and for dimensions higher than 4, it still has time, because think about it. the 1srt dimension has length only. 2nd has length and width. 3rd has length, width and depth. 4th has length, width, depth, and time. so it only make sense that the 5th has length, width, depth, time, and another property. we dont know what that 5th one is because well, we have never gone to the fifth dimension, so we cant imagine what it is.


#63    camlax

camlax

    Psychic Spy

  • Closed
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,435 posts
  • Joined:03 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:OH-IO

  • "It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. "
    -Carl Sagan

Posted 09 July 2007 - 02:49 AM

It seems to me, in my short time on these boards there is much confusion about what time really is. So Ill go ahead and make a post about it using some simple mathematical examples to improve understanding. As a disclaimer.. I will treat time and its behavior as in the case of special relativity, Those of you more endowed in quantum physics maybe be inclined to argue, but this is a simplistic sakes kind of thread. Maybe should have started a new topic but well see. Ill try and keep it simple and to the point, as most people are not as enthused as me about math and physics.

First lets start by defining what we mean by time. Time is a human idea, it is a scalar quantity we use to measure things or keep track of things. Much like labeling drawers on your tool chest. What time is not is a place. The past or the future do not exist in any real sense, only awareness of them because we perceive time as universal and linear. So looking at stars is not actually looking in the past, what you see when look at a star is light that may have taken millions of years to get, but I assure you the light is in the present, as is the star in question. Because you can not see the star over the vast distance does not mean it is in the past. Say I get a letter from China that took 6 days to reach me, the letter like the light is in the present, it just took "time" to get to me. Furthermore China is not existing in the past because I can not see it.


Now we keep track of time with seconds, the time standard in science. Surprising that most don't know what a second is. Keeping with the whole simple definition thing a second is...
It is the amount of time it takes a cesium-133 atom to transition between two ground states. Which corresponds to 9,192,631,770 periods of radiation for transition between states to occur.

Now on space-time and space travel.

Space is big, Sitting here in our homes and modern lifestyles we often forget that, if even realize it all. For instance the milky way is approximately 90,000 light years in diameter, our local group is is around 10 million light years diameter. Im sure many of you have heard of a light year, but lets go ahead and define it for everyone. A light year is...
The amount of time it takes light to travel in 1 year or 31 556 926 seconds. Now since we know how fast light travels in a vacuum (299 792 458 meters per second, well call it c from now on) and how many seconds are in the average year, we can calculate how far light goes in a year c*(seconds in a year) and we see light goes 9.46 10^15 meters (quick break for notation the ^ symbol means raised too) or roughly 5.88 10^12 miles.

So that means, that traveling at c it would take approximately 90 000 years to cross the milky way or roughly 10 million years to cross our local group. The fastest man made object was the satellite Helios which traveled at approximately 150 000 miles per hour or 67 056 meters/second or .02% the speed of c. Electromagnetic radiation such as radio waves also travel c in a vacuum. I made an earlier post with a mathematical example which I am going to copy here, baring no one has a problem with that  tongue.gif .

QUOTE(me)
The first radio broadcasts sent into space were in 1958 by President Eisenhower. Thats 49 years ago. Now radio waves are electromagnetic waves and travel at c in a vacuum. How far have those radio waves gone in 49 years?

Lets calculate it, 49 years x 5.86x10^12 miles per year is 2.87x10^14 miles, thats far that number again is 287 000 000 000 000, thats 287 trillion miles, I know unimaginable. But how far is that really? Well the Milky way for instance (our own galaxy) is roughly 90,000 light years in diameter (calculations range from 80k to 100k). In other words the Milky way (for our calculations) is 5.27x10^17 miles across (90 000x 5.86x10^12). That means in 49 years, traveling at light speed, those radio waves have made it a whooping .054% (distance traveled/diameter of the milky way). It only gets smaller from there. Our local group (The milky way and the surrounding galaxies) is around 10 million light years diameter, and that is close on a cosmic scale. So in 49 years, our light speed radio waves have traveled..... .00049% of the diameter of our local group.


Now it has also been stated in other threads that time, is relative to the observer, there is no universal time, but what does that mean? It turns out that speed effects time. Lets use a simple math example to show this.

We need a formula for this, we will use linked-image. This is how time is treated in special relativity and we get this from Lorentz Transformations, which I will spare you all the math of how we arrive at this equation, just know its correct.

Lets say we have two friends bob and tom, tom wants to travel to a planet 20 light years away. In his spaceship we tom's clock, while bob remains behind on earth with his clock.

For simplicities lets define our variables.
linked-image we'll call dt and it  is the time as seen by bob.
linked-image we'll call dt' and it is the time relative to the traveler in our reference frame.(Tom)
v is the velocity relative to Tom, the traveler.
c is the speed of light
and the square root ill write as (equation)^.5
I know, dont get discouraged yet it will make more sense in a minute.

Which we know is 1.89 x 10^17 meters away (get that by light year*20 light years).  Now lets say we invent a new type of engine that allows us to travel at 80% the speed of light, or .8c. We then set off for our new planet and wonder how long it will take us to get there.

Well I am sure most of us have seen this equation before from a high school physics or math class linked-image
velocity equals distance divided by time. Since we know our velocity, .8c (units in meters per second) and we know our distance 1.89 x10^17 meters we can calculate roughly the time it takes us to get to this planet. So plug in the knows, use some simple algebra and we get 7.9 x10^8 seconds or roughly 25 years. This what here on earth we would guess and indeed it is what bob measures. But what about tom's clock?

Time to use that scary looking equation we saw earlier.
We are looking for dt', the time as seen by tom's clock. so we have dt=7.9 x10^8 seconds, v=.8c, we plug these numbers in and rearrange our equation.

dt'=(dt)(1-(v^2/c^2))^.5 and we get tom's clock shows 15 years have gone by.

So if at the start of our endeavor, Bob and Tom are twins and 30 years old. When tom arrives at this new star, he will seem to be 45 while bob will seem to be 55.

Now to you quantum physics buffs you may want say, we need to add to this! but again its just a simplified example to show that time is relative to the observer, not a universal constant.

edit: forgot I found this nifty little applet to help visualize it.
Time dilation applet
Well it appears theres no embed functionality so will have to just clicky the link.


Edited by camlax, 09 July 2007 - 04:32 AM.

"Sorry, but my inner voice tells me to tell your inner voice the following:
It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt.
Could you please relay that message to your inner voice?"
~Harte

"Imagination without knowledge is Ignorance waiting to happen."

#64    camlax

camlax

    Psychic Spy

  • Closed
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,435 posts
  • Joined:03 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:OH-IO

  • "It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. "
    -Carl Sagan

Posted 09 July 2007 - 03:28 AM

Quote

and, as for the time and dimension thing, time is part of the 4th dimension, and higher. it only exist in the 4th dimension and up because in this dimension, no object can exist in the 4th dimension unless it has the 3 physical properties, length, width, and depth, and the non physical property of time applied to it. it needs time because, and object that cannot exist for any amount of time on this earth, cannot exist at all. as for the 3rd dimension, its length, width, and depth, but it doesnt need time because its exist as it is now, it doesnt get old. it just exists.  and for dimensions higher than 4, it still has time, because think about it. the 1srt dimension has length only. 2nd has length and width. 3rd has length, width and depth. 4th has length, width, depth, and time. so it only make sense that the 5th has length, width, depth, time, and another property. we dont know what that 5th one is because well, we have never gone to the fifth dimension, so we cant imagine what it is.


Time is only dimensional when associated with space, you can not assign, say a particle a specific spot in time. Imagine we have a ball bouncing in a cube, its coordinates given by x,y,z. Saying time is the fourth dimension, you would be able to assign the ball a location of x,y,z,t. But you can't predict where the ball is at or will be, at an absolute time, only a time as measured by an observer. If there was a static time constant motion in spatial dimensions would be impossible. I know hard to think about,

Quantum mechanics and Einstein time often clash. There are problems with each. For instance, with directional time it would seem quantization could not occur, the universe would be completely random and you would be able to return the universe to a state of previous events. Since this can not be, time would appear to have some directionality to it.It gets very confusing and I am too tired to make another long post, maybe another night.

"Sorry, but my inner voice tells me to tell your inner voice the following:
It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt.
Could you please relay that message to your inner voice?"
~Harte

"Imagination without knowledge is Ignorance waiting to happen."

#65    Snake022

Snake022

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 258 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newbury Park, Ca

  • When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car.



Posted 09 July 2007 - 05:09 AM

Quote

Time is only dimensional when associated with space, you can not assign, say a particle a specific spot in time. Imagine we have a ball bouncing in a cube, its coordinates given by x,y,z. Saying time is the fourth dimension, you would be able to assign the ball a location of x,y,z,t. But you can't predict where the ball is at or will be, at an absolute time, only a time as measured by an observer. If there was a static time constant motion in spatial dimensions would be impossible. I know hard to think about,

Quantum mechanics and Einstein time often clash. There are problems with each. For instance, with directional time it would seem quantization could not occur, the universe would be completely random and you would be able to return the universe to a state of previous events. Since this can not be, time would appear to have some directionality to it.It gets very confusing and I am too tired to make another long post, maybe another night.


that is true, you cant predict where it would be, but if it didn't have time, like you said, and it was only a x,y and z coordinates, and time did not apply, it would only be 3d, it would not need time, because it just exist. but if it is the 4th dimension, time does apply to it


#66    camlax

camlax

    Psychic Spy

  • Closed
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,435 posts
  • Joined:03 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:OH-IO

  • "It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. "
    -Carl Sagan

Posted 09 July 2007 - 12:44 PM

Quote

that is true, you cant predict where it would be, but if it didn't have time, like you said, and it was only a x,y and z coordinates, and time did not apply, it would only be 3d, it would not need time, because it just exist. but if it is the 4th dimension, time does apply to it


yes but because there is no universal axis of time, there is no corresponding spot in the universe where it will ever be that you can predict, you can only predict its position in the 4th dimension on a time scale that you create. Which is often why in QM time is not treated as an independent dimension.

Without time as seen by an observer any motion would be impossible, With absolute universal time, motion would be impossible.

Edited by camlax, 09 July 2007 - 12:45 PM.

"Sorry, but my inner voice tells me to tell your inner voice the following:
It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt.
Could you please relay that message to your inner voice?"
~Harte

"Imagination without knowledge is Ignorance waiting to happen."

#67    Snake022

Snake022

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 258 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newbury Park, Ca

  • When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car.



Posted 10 July 2007 - 07:42 PM

Quote

yes but because there is no universal axis of time, there is no corresponding spot in the universe where it will ever be that you can predict, you can only predict its position in the 4th dimension on a time scale that you create. Which is often why in QM time is not treated as an independent dimension.

Without time as seen by an observer any motion would be impossible, With absolute universal time, motion would be impossible.

yes, because we would move through time as we move through space. time is man made, and for all we know, the 4th dimension might not even be time, for all we know it could be l, w, depth, and thought. we really dont know, we are certain that length, width, and depth are involved, because its a common thing that we need in order to be 3d, but when it comes to time, the only non physical dimension, some people are not as certain. we assume we have time because its explains things like progression and advancement. and it may also be essential to exist in the 4th dimension because and i quote "the time machine" by H.G Wells (i know its fiction, but it makes sense)

'Can a cube that does not last for any time at all, have a real existence?'  
'any real body must have extension in four directions: it must have Length, Breadth, Thickness, and- Duration. But through a natural infirmity of the flesh, which I will explain to you in a moment, we incline to overlook this fact. There are really four dimensions, three which we call the three planes of Space, and a fourth, Time. There is, however, a tendency to draw an unreal distinction between the former three dimensions and the latter, because it happens that our consciousness moves intermittently in one direction along the latter from the beginning to the end of our lives.'

yea, even tho it is fiction, it speaks the truth.


#68    Virginie

Virginie

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined:02 Jan 2010

Posted 02 January 2010 - 12:15 PM

Hi,


I have read the entire topic (except the post from camlax, too long and complicated for me I guess). I still have a question...
I know we can't but let's imagine we go 41 LY away from the Earth and look at the moon... we would see two guys walking on its surface. Since the light, the "image", needed 41 years to reach that point.
We would see an event that happened in the past... ? We would see the past in the Now.. ?


To link this topic to extraterrestrial life : we could have neighbors without really knowing about it, don't you think ? We look at a planet that is millions of LY away from us, therefore we see it the wait it was millions of years ago, not the way it is "Now" over there.
People living on a planet 70 million LY away from us would look into their telescope and see dinosaurs here, not us...



Stupid I know, but...

Edited by Virginie, 02 January 2010 - 01:09 PM.


#69    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 January 2010 - 06:55 PM

View PostBlue_army, on 16 June 2007 - 01:52 PM, said:

We can see the past through space, if we look at a star the star could allready be dead. but we see the light because its millions of years old going through space.

It's actually because the light we see was generated thousands to billions of years past. What you describe is true, and is basic physics.

Quote

This called time....... time exsist between dimenchons and worlds. We can also vist the future by flying in deep space and then come back 1,000 years later.

Only if we fly through space at a relativistic fraction of the speed of light.

Quote

It is very possible.

It is theoretically possible, yes.

Quote

people dont belive this because there ither dont belive or dont have anything to do while there governemt is lieing.

Frankly, what that last sentence said doesn't make any sense at all...

People don't believe because they don't believe?  Or because they don't have anything to do while their government is lying???


If people don't believe this, it is because they don't have any understanding of special relativity or general physics.
The government doesn't have a single thing to do with this whatsoever.



#70    Alien Being

Alien Being

    Psychic Spy

  • Closed
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,456 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 January 2010 - 06:56 PM

View PostBlue_army, on 16 June 2007 - 01:52 PM, said:

We can see the past through space, if we look at a star the star could allready be dead. but we see the light because its millions of years old going through space. This called time....... time exsist between dimenchons and worlds. We can also vist the future by flying in deep space and then come back 1,000 years later.

It is very possible. people dont belive this because there ither dont belive or dont have anything to do while there governemt is lieing.

True we could look for space phenomonem which reflect light and see Earths past in it.


#71    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 02 January 2010 - 07:00 PM

View PostVirginie, on 02 January 2010 - 12:15 PM, said:

Hi,


I have read the entire topic (except the post from camlax, too long and complicated for me I guess). I still have a question...
I know we can't but let's imagine we go 41 LY away from the Earth and look at the moon... we would see two guys walking on its surface. Since the light, the "image", needed 41 years to reach that point.



Only if we could reach a place 40 LY distant instantaneously.

Quote

We would see an event that happened in the past... ? We would see the past in the Now.. ?

Only if we were there now, in 2010.  We'd be picking up light from the Earth system that left there in 1969-1970.

Quote

To link this topic to extraterrestrial life : we could have neighbors without really knowing about it, don't you think ?

Yes.  And odds are, we do.

Quote

We look at a planet that is millions of LY away from us, therefore we see it the wait it was millions of years ago, not the way it is "Now" over there.
People living on a planet 70 million LY away from us would look into their telescope and see dinosaurs here, not us...



Stupid I know, but...

Not stupid.  Fundamentally correct.


#72    Brakzar Break

Brakzar Break

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 403 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Area 51, Nevada

  • Fear we shall, the coming forth nuclear winter.

    Open fire!

Posted 02 January 2010 - 07:04 PM

View PostgreggK, on 17 June 2007 - 04:07 AM, said:

<!--quoteo(post=1727769:date=Jun 16 2007, 08:02 AM:name=joc)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(joc @ Jun 16 2007, 08:02 AM) View Post</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Time doesn't exist.  You can not go back in time because the past is an illusion.  When we see the light from a star system what we are seeing is the present.  The star in fact may be non-existent but we are seeing the present journey of light. The Earth is as old as the Earth is and yet we experience it in the present.  One cannot 'fly' into deep space.  At the height of our technological advancement we have not even traversed past our own moon.  Think about it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I don't want to hear about time not existing anymore because time does exist everywhere.  Tell me where time does not exist.  Tell me why time does not exist.  Time does not exist when you have no more time, but time exist.  Seconds and hours are a division of time and that time is the rising and setting of the sun.  The lunar calendars are not made up.  A farmer depends on the harvest and the crops depend on the moon and the moon goes from new to quarter to half to full and back to new in 28 days.  The day is from sunrise to the next sunrise.  You cannot reach up there and grab the sun and pull it down and say there is no more time.  And you cannnot make time not exist by saying there is no time.  Time exist for people who want to progress from this point to the next.  Time exist for people who want to finish what they start.  And when you say the past is an illusion, the present is real and your movement makes the last present the past.  When you go from point A to point B, point A does not disappear when you leave it.
Now, it is not possible to reclaim or return to the past when you are alive because it has gone, but your mind is a recorder with a camera and you can replay the past in your mind.

Life is just one huge continuous..cycle that ages.. erm I'm not sure if that's the word I'm looking for. Technically speaking, there's so such thing as a day or night or calenders. Even seconds, hours, etc. It's just to keep track BUT it's not really time itself. Life itself is like one HUGE "day" with no end.

But I don't think you can travel into the past, and I have doubts about the future because it has not happened yet.

Edited by Brakzar_Break, 02 January 2010 - 07:06 PM.

Posted Image
Banner credits to Kesoglu, Sketchboook, Hitokiri-Hime, and Ulundo.

"Casualties many; Percentage of dead not known; Combat efficiency; we are winning." - Colonel David M. Shoup




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users