Time Travel no way

By the way, I came across this site and article that talks about time variants, gravity and taking it all into account in GPS satellites.
You might find this info enlightening. (You time skeptics should really read this) http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/gps-relativity.asp

Don't worry NW. The idea of time travel has been greatly skewed by popular media and science fiction, as with many sciences (note the number of 'quantum physicists' running around on these forums).

Despite our valiant efforts to explain what time travel really some people on both sides are not going to take the time to read it or understand it.

I time travel everyday...in 24 hr shifts.

Not considering the movement of the oncoming traffic as one crosses the street can have tragic consequences in real life...movement is not time. Speed is not time. Time is a measurement ....as a 'thing' that can be bent and shaped it is non-existent.




The science of Logic.
Mathematical Equation:
If A = B and B doesn't equal C then time doesn't exist.

So if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with... (just kidding)
Seriously though, movement could not happen if there was no such thing as time. Time is a necessary property of the universe, just as gravity is. Some have suggested that gravity itself may be time (don't ask me how they figure that, I don't have a clue). If time was non existent, then how could we even begin to measure it? Also if time were non existent, then why are calculations to compensate for time variants between GPS satellites and the earth needed? Did you read the link I posted on that topic? Your posts have been brief and argumentative without providing any basis for saying time does not exist. If you are serious about your logic statement, please define what you mean by the terms.

True or False: Movement could not happen it there was no such thing as a way to measure it's movement.

One cannot measure time. The measurement of speed/movement itself IS time and in that since time does exist. Coordination of satellite and Earth orbit are necessary for obvious reasons.

I didn't read the link you posted.

No its called special relativity, look it up.

I didn't read this entire post so forgive me if this was already mentioned, but they have already proved that time travel is indeed possible. The did so by putting a clock in an airplane, according to what I read, they had two or three clocks all set the the exact same time, one was left on the ground, one was in the city the plane was to arrive at, and the other was put on the plane for travel. The ending result was that the clock on the plane when it landed was two minuted off the other two clocks. The theory behind it had to do with speed of travel versus time in general.

And yet you haven't given us any alternative way to explain relativistic effects

This is a science forum, not mysticism and pseudoscience, so I'm sure you have some way to back it up.

So now you are saying time does exist? Movement could still happen if there was no way to measure it, but you can't measure something that does not exist.
If speed/movement itself is time then why would we not assume the possibility of time travel? The link I provided is very interesting (at least I think so), you might find it worth your time to at least skim over it a bit.

What on earth?

I was trying to say he didn't hear about special relativity (was uneducated), and now you are telling me the same?

Is this some kind of a game?

Time travel is possible forward and backwards, sort of.....let me try and explain better.

When you accelerate the time around you slows down (but your time stays the same). Therefore if you are traveling at near the speed of light everything else is almost stopped (relative to you). If you built a space ship capable of traveling at .5c (half the speed of light) and you flew around the Milky Way for 1 year (your time on the space ship) at .5c then returned to Earth only about 6 months would have passed on Earth...thus putting you 6 months into the future (Earth's future) but also 6 months into your past. Now if you traveled at .99c (damn near the speed of light) for 1 year then returned to Earth only a couple weeks would have passed.

Einstein's General Relativity states that nothing can accelerate to the speed of light....but it is theoretically possible to go from 0 mph to twice the speed of light instantaneously. If that where to happen and you traveled for 1 year at 2c then returned to Earth you should theoretically arrive back at Earth 1 year before you left. Additionally if you went and set in the event horizon of a black hole the time dialation would be so great that sitting there for a year (your time) then returning to Earth would put you way the hell into Earth's future (probably 20-100 years) or even longer depending how far into the Event Horizon you where.

We have the technology to travel at speeds of .5c or even higher (but less than c) today. What we don't have is the unification of desires necessary to build such a space ship. With proper funding and unification of desires we could probably develop or discover the technology, resources and elements we would need to instantaneously jump to speeds higher than c.

Do you enjoy hopping a thread and posting 1/2 stuff that has been discussed and 1/2 stuff that is science fiction? Which seems to indicate two things,
1. You did not read the thread yet
2. You don't understand everything you are posting about.

You don't know whats going to happen with u in next minute how can you predict's someone 's life after 10 yrs.!!

This thread has NOTHING to do with predicting the future. We're talking about time travel, more specifically what is
time - how does it work, is travel to the future or to the past possible? The thread was started with an article that
stated that we have the know how to do time travel now, but it would be so expensive that even the world's
billionaires would think it too expensive to achieve. What ever happened to the original article poster AztecInca?
You posted a great article, what do you think about how the thread has progressed?

I propose a thought experiment. Let's say we have two coordinate systems, one the Earth and the other a space ship that was traveling around the Earth at 99.9999% of the speed of light. This last assumption is impossible for lots of reasons, but this is just to illustrate something about time. No matter how fast the space ship went, it would never disappear into the future. It is true that from our point of view (Earth) the occupants would live a very long time, but they would still be in the present moment.

~~~Cebrakon

That's what I thought, but as Northwest and Camlax pointed out, there is no "universal absolute" time. So time is relative to each observer. To the observer on earth, the spaceship occupant who left and traveled at lightspeed for a year, upon returning home would (to the earth observer) have aged less than he/she. True that what we see in sci fi movies is misrepresented/exaggerated, but there is no denying the fact of actual time variance. In case you hadn't read it, here's an interesting article on time variance and GPS satellites: http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/gps-relativity.asp

I don't follow on this one. It seems to me that the rear of the car should be illuminated before the front, regardless of where you are observing from (inside or outside train). Because the train is moving, the photons have a shorter distance to travel from their point of origin (where the lightbulb was located at the exact moment it was turned on) to the location the rear of the car is at upon collision with those photons. Since this train is traveling near the speed of light, the distance should be close to zero.

If I am inside the train I should still see the rear illuminated first and the front illuminated last. In order for me to see both illuminated at the same time you would have to add the speed of the train to the speed of the photons approaching the front of the train, and subtract the speed of the train from the speed of the photons approaching the rear of the train. But you cannot add to or subtract from the speed of light, so it cannot be observed that the light hits the front and rear of the car at the same time.

I'm probably missing something, but that's how it appears to me.

It is the rate that time passes in the other guy's reference that seems to change, but everything is still in the same NOW. Not only is that required by quantum mechanics, but it also follows from the special relativity rules, if you imagine the consequences. For instance, to the people in the space-ship, nothing in the space-ship will seem to have changed. But things seem to happen faster and faster in the rest of the universe. As one continues to accelerate past 4 nines (99.9999...%) to 5 nines and so forth, the planets start to whirl around the Sun faster and faster. Indeed, the rotation of the galaxy happens faster and faster. Instead, of one revolution per 250 million years, it starts moving fast enough to be seen. Stars pop into existence and just as quickly die. The distance from one star to the next shrinks, until one is reaching them every few minutes...then seconds...milliseconds. Finally, one is popping from one galaxy to another in just a few minutes. And that just continues, so long as we play this thought experiment. However, from Earth the starship seems stuck like a fly in the sky, as eons rise and fall on Earth. Continents separate and collide, mountains rise up and then are washed away. Civilizations rise and fall (at their normal rate, which is about 1 every 3000 years). Ice ages come and go every 100,000 years. Plate tectonics are on a much longer geological scale. After mankind becomes extinct (inevitable but unknown when), that starship will still have made little progress across the sky. Yet, it has never disappeared into the past or future. It is therefore still here NOW.

There are particles called coismic mesons, made up of 2 quarks, which come from great distances, other stars at least, even though they are highly unstable at rest, lasting much less than a second. They arrive at 4 nines or 5 nines of the speed of light, which gives them a very long life from our point of view. Long enough to travel great distances.

~~~Cebrakon

Well, although I don't understand the math behind all of this, what you are saying is what seemed/seems likely to me as I had stated early on is this thread:

"The concept of time has two seperate veins. One is the time we experience as "now". The other is time as it relates to physics. When experiments have been done with atomic clocks that demonstrate time variants between the earth and space shuttles, one thing seems clear to me. Although there is a definite difference in time relating to physics, both observers on earth and in space experience the same "now" regardless of that difference. ... There is a question in my mind that if a more extreme time difference is possible (say a full year or a decade) would not the observers still experience the same "now", just from different time perspectives?"

I'm curious as to what Northwest and Calmax have to say to your post.

You are absolutely right Strange F8:
(Your forum name reminds me of a kid John Strangeway, if that's not you disregard that)

There was a 'Twilight Zone' episode that fully explored that idea... A group of bank robbers invented a way to use suspended animation to "freeze" themselves in time in a laboratory deep in the desert. They robbed a bank (or train) for a ton of money and gold bars... They then went into suspended animation for 100 years or so... A couple from the future drove by the one guy that actually lived through the arduous trek... They stopped when they saw him at the side of the road almost fully dehydrated... He offered a giant brick of gold to them just for a sip of water... The lady looks over to the guy driving and says "Tom, what is that he's holding?"... As it turns out gold had become something as unimportant and trivial as sand... The only place it was even used was in a museum to show what people used to use to trade things back in the past...
This really makes you think.. Chocolate, Spices, and Tea were all at one time highly valuable and sought after.. Since industrialization these things have become mass produced and cheaply priced... I'm sure this sort of trend will continue into the foreseeable future...

One last thing, for the couple highly logical/scientific posters I see here:
I really feel for you guys trying to use all the proven facts you can and putting them together in clear and concise ways; and then end up having ignorant people saying things like 'ghosts, yes i believe... but time travel, no way'... Not only does that brutally point out their lack of intelligence and reasoning skills, but it is insanely frustrating to be having an intelligent conversation and then have someone come in a blurt out a fart joke... That's just about the equivalent of what they're doing here...
I mean.. COME ON!! 'If A=B and B does not equal C, then time doesn't exist...' or whatever the hell he was saying..
**I give those people credit who can read the ignorant statements, posted without proof, and not strangle a small animal, or go on a murder spree.**
**It's because of people like you and I that we have all of these technological advances that so many people just take for granted.**

I am strange, but I'm not John Strangeway.

Some things have ceased being currency, however they are still viable as tradable commodities. Gold is in that realm, but who knows what TIME will bring economically. Physical currency may no longer be used (see the book of Revelation). Already a majority of exchange is done electronically.

I try to engage the ignorant in dialog - much brighter people than I have done the same for me and hopefully I have learned from the process. Unfortunately, some people prefer to remain ignorant; after all, "ignorance is bliss". Right?

I think that they not so much choose to remain ignorant; it's almost like they're saying the things they do just to get a rise out of people.. Whether that be a conscious decision or not..

It's kind of funny. Ignorance truly is bliss, but you have to be intelligent in order to understand that there is a clear difference between the two mindsets. While we sit and worry about global warming, or the political repercussions of engaging Iran, they are sitting in the kitchen staring at the sink wondering how clean water is pushed through that hole and try to guess if it would spray forever if they left the faucet on.
OK, perhaps that's an extreme example; but you catch my drift I'm sure.

If that were so, then you would have different measurements for light speed in different directions of space, which can not be true.
You have to have the same measurement in all directions.

If that were so, we would measure light traveling at various speeds depending on direction, while being on earth, because earth is constantly changing net speed in one direction.

Okay...

So say there was some type of detector that could measure the speed of a single photon without altering it's direction or speed. You place one detector on a post in the ground, another on a car which is to drive towards the post, and another car that is to drive away from the post. Each detector would record the same speed for that single photon, irregardless of the speed and direction of the detector was moving, right? It wouldn't make sense if that were because the photon was slowing down or speeding up between detectors to exactly counter the effects of the detector's speed...that implies some kind of exchange in information between the photon and the detector it has yet to hit. So could it be, because space is not absolute, that the cars weren't really moving at all in relation to some point in space agreed upon by the source of the photon and the detector, but they were moving in relation to some point in space agreed upon by each driver? That must have been considered by someone else before me...is there any reason to believe it is incorrect?

I'm not sure I got your question right...

but in regards to moving detectors of speed of light, it would go like this:

let's forget about detectors, and say both the viewer and driver have eyes everywhere, or they have an army of observers
that instantly know what is going on everywhere in the universe.
that way, we don't have to take Doppler effect into account, and simply concentrate on distance light actually travels in a time interval

So, one man is standing on the ground, and the other guy is in the car, driving at 0.5 light speed.

So, to simplify things, both of them are omniscent (just so we don't have to take into account how late is some information when it gets to the observer)

The man on the ground sees a car traveling at 0.6c, speed traveling at c in all directions, and light distancing from the car at 0.4c in front of the car, and at 1.6c behind the car relative to the car.
That's pretty much common sense

And now relativity comes into play:

the man in the car is seeing this:
light is traveling in front of him at c (not 0.4c), light traveling behind him at c too (not 1.6c)

To those who hardly understand how time travel works by just reading some explanations found here..... i found an interesting site which has an animations of how this possible(timetravel).

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/time/think02.html

Quantum mechanics requires a universal absolute now. Also, special relativity requires time to be an imaginary number. A continuum of imaginary numbers does not allow time travel. Time is also imaginary in the ordinary sense of being something created by the mind, out of memories of past cycles and expectations of future cycles. The time variance used by GPS satellites is also quite real. When you do calculations with complex numbers, such as space-time, the imaginary part affects the final outcome, since to square it, or raise it to any even power makes it an ordinary real number, but negative in sign. I don't have any problem with any of the applications of relativity. I just want to point out that those GPS satellites never disappear into the past or future. They are always in the NOW. There is no reality to a physical past or present.

~~~Cebrakon

So then my original thoughts on this are more correct. If we were sitting in the same room and one of us had the ability/technology to accelerate their time frame/flow, then the person who did the time acceleration would appear to the the other as simply sitting still - barely moving, or not at all. The one who remained in the original time flow would appear to the person who had accelerated as moving somewhat faster or extremely faster than what they are experiencing. Perhaps this is like where 2 gears of different sizes meet. The point of meeting would be the "now" they both experience, but each one would be moving at speeds different from the other.

As for retro time travel, although it may be a mathmatical possibility, I'm beginning to think it is probably not possible in an actual physical sense (perhaps in a metaphysical sense however, but thats a topic for a different forum).

horrid post.