It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are we not time travelers already?

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 02:30 AM
link   
a reply to: charlyv

Well, when dreaming if I go to the 1500s am I not time traveling? Isn't a dream merely a species of reality? I mean, what defines reality as "real" anyway? Isn't dream as capable of teaching you, entertaining you, scaring you? Can't your dreams influence the direction of your life and help you grow, just as "waking life" experiences? Do you not smell, taste, see, hear and touch in your dreams?

At times, aren't you unaware you are even dreaming? You are dreaming right now, haven't you heard the calls to wake up?

edit on 19-9-2015 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 02:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Ddrneville



so you could have missed the whole time experience thingy


That's the weird thing. You wont miss anything. That's how relativity work.


Or would you, you certainly would not know. But , perhaps in this subtle shift, Uncle Bob has an additional hair growing out of his ear, or a there was a new note in your favorite song.. Again, you would not know unless there was a way to compare both outcomes.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 02:36 AM
link   

When you are courting a nice girl an hour seems like a second. When you sit on a red-hot cinder a second seems like an hour. That's relativity.


Damn Einstein was the man.

But yeah when we are talking to each other we are not talking at the same time. Not here but in IRL.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom




Well, when dreaming if I go to the 1500s am I not time traveling? Isn't a dream merely a species of reality? I mean, what defines reality as "real" anyway?


In this vein, the physics of changed gravity and speed does not occur to the dreamer, so me thinks it a bit different. However, reality is indeed in the eye of the beholder.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 02:45 AM
link   
a reply to: charlyv

True, but time travel is often postulated to be travel into an alternate universe. If there are an infinite number of alternate universes or realities -- then in some of them laws of physics may be different. I've had many dreams in which the laws of "this" reality are the same...other times, not so much.

It's been said that if you were to travel into the past, you would split off into an alternate time line, an alternate reality if you will. Well, I contend that a dream may be a peek into an alternate reality or time line of its own.

During brain scans of people awake and sleeping, they can't differentiate between the people dreaming and the people experiencing "this" reality. So awake or sleeping, our brains are acting the same.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 02:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: charlyv

True, but time travel is often postulated to be travel into an alternate universe. If there are an infinite number of alternate universes or realities -- then in some of them laws of physics may be different. I've had many dreams in which the laws of "this" reality are the same...other times, not so much.

It's been said that if you were to travel into the past, you would split off into an alternate time line, an alternate reality if you will. Well, I contend that a dream may be a peek into an alternate reality or time line of its own.

During brain scans of people awake and sleeping, they can't differentiate between the people dreaming and the people experiencing "this" reality. So awake or sleeping, our brains are acting the same.


Interesting as we know so little about what dreams really are. And, with the brain scan... who ever comes up with the sensor location for "Reality and NOT Reality" has the definitive lie detector!



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 02:56 AM
link   
a reply to: charlyv

Yep, the same parts of our brains activate when dreaming vs. awake:



The researchers noticed that brain cells in the medial temporal lobe, a region that acts as a bridge between our memory and our ability to recognize things we see, showed similar activity regardless of whether the patients were asleep or awake, including when they were fixing their gaze on images presented to them by Nir and co.

Link

This kind of explains why dreams can feel so real. To our brain, there isn't much of a difference. The same neurons and regions are working as if you were awake.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 03:01 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom



Yep, the same parts of our brains activate when dreaming vs. awake:


So the alpha, beta, gamma, etc waves are the same? We don't know the difference?

Damn how far off we are off the topic lol.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 03:04 AM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

I guess it follows, that if, through the influences of speed and/or gravity, a person that experiences a time dilation may have different dreams, or... a very similar dream, but with subtle differences. So in essence, the mind may be capable of simulating a time dilation and interpreting it's results. I find that concept a bit fascinating.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 03:04 AM
link   
Not only are we all Time Travellers...
    each one of us going about 1/800 th the speed of light
    around the galaxy
















But, we are also the largest generation in the history of known existence
    and we are all cybernetically enhanced








Mike Grouchy



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 03:11 AM
link   
a reply to: charlyv

Maybe but as per your OP your moon astronauts are the time travellers. Clocks run slower than those clocks on moon.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 03:15 AM
link   
a reply to: mikegrouchy

Time travelers indeed!
That first video is so good, it deserves it's own thread. Thanks for posting it.
Put in the context of timelines, and the physics that come to bear on where we are at any given point in a timeline, that is an extraordinary peek into the immense complexity that would be behind it.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 04:05 AM
link   
According to our conception of "time traveler", a time traveler will always try to be unnoticed. That means we can't have evidence of their existence.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 05:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Trueman
According to our conception of "time traveler", a time traveler will always try to be unnoticed. That means we can't have evidence of their existence.

I would hold that it has happened many times. It is still unexplained and unrecognized, so very little information is revealed.
Cloaking yourself if you could accomplish this, might not be a perfect guarantee, and sometimes there would be a visual effect probably not unlike what is reported.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 08:40 AM
link   
I guess the goal, then, would be to become time manipulators? Semantics I suppose, but then again, "travellers" is pprobably not the right word, since it implies a movement over distance... although, if you wanted to actually experience the future or past on earth, you'd also have to travel a distance since "spaceship earth" is constantly moving through space, in formation with the "solar fleet". Whether this was accomplished simultaneously with time alteration, before, or after, a distance must still be traversed one way or the other, however it is not absolutely necessary if you simply wish to experience the future or past without caring "where" you end up, however pointless it may seem...



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3n19m470
I guess the goal, then, would be to become time manipulators? Semantics I suppose, but then again, "travellers" is pprobably not the right word, since it implies a movement over distance... although, if you wanted to actually experience the future or past on earth, you'd also have to travel a distance since "spaceship earth" is constantly moving through space, in formation with the "solar fleet". Whether this was accomplished simultaneously with time alteration, before, or after, a distance must still be traversed one way or the other, however it is not absolutely necessary if you simply wish to experience the future or past without caring "where" you end up, however pointless it may seem...


This is a very good observation, and also one of the huge technical hurdles that would have to be solved, if there ever was a "time machine". If you could freeze your position in space/time, just for a few seconds, you would be off the planet somewhere in the void of space. Somehow, there would have to be the ability to keep yourself in a position that was relative to where you are on the surface of the Earth. You could easily wind up under the ground as well! The video that mikegrouchy linked in shows the complexity of that very graphically.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: charlyv

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: charlyv

The Apollo astronauts haven't jumped timelines, their progress through time, their 'temporal velocity' for part of their journey, has been altered in respect to the temporal velocity of those on Earth.

Like sailing over a rough ocean and being blown off course does not have to mean they are on a different ocean or sea.



But there is the timeline argument itself. There is in this theory a concept that everything that has happened and will happen all exists at once. We may even shift in and out of them all the time and never know it. The granularity is infinite.
And it is a relative thing, as nothing would change for us, but they have experienced a time displacement that may effect them. It may not be drastic, but is it the same?


The 'modal realist' take on the many worlds interpretation, that alternate realities calve off at each possible outcome, is different from Minkoski space.

By moving descriptions of time away from mathematical constructs, to philosophical ones, we cannot gain clarity or resolution. For example, our subjective experience of time allows enormous leeway in what time actually can be defined to be.

An objective view of time, one that defines time in terms of numbers and repeatable measurement, is the best path to making practical use of the definition. Philosophical or subjective 'time' leads us into absurdities, infinities and paradoxes.


edit on 19/9/2015 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: charlyv

Well, you can have a dream that seems to last hours and hours, but you were only in REM for a short period of time. The processing ability of the brain is quite amazing. If you were able to somehow put your consciousness into a computer, you could experience nearly an infinite amount of lives in mere minutes.



posted on Sep, 19 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: charlyv

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: charlyv

The Apollo astronauts haven't jumped timelines, their progress through time, their 'temporal velocity' for part of their journey, has been altered in respect to the temporal velocity of those on Earth.

Like sailing over a rough ocean and being blown off course does not have to mean they are on a different ocean or sea.



But there is the timeline argument itself. There is in this theory a concept that everything that has happened and will happen all exists at once. We may even shift in and out of them all the time and never know it. The granularity is infinite.
And it is a relative thing, as nothing would change for us, but they have experienced a time displacement that may effect them. It may not be drastic, but is it the same?


The the 'modal realist' take on the many worlds interpretation, that alternate realities calve off at each possible outcome, is different from Minkoski space.

By moving descriptions of time away from mathematical constructs, to philosophical ones, we cannot gain clarity or resolution. For example, our subjective experience of time allows enormous leeway in what time actually can be defined to be.

An objective view of time, one that defines time in terms of numbers and repeatable measurement, is the best path to making practical use of the definition. Philosophical or subjective 'time' leads us into absurdities, infinities and paradoxes.



My views are based on the scientific method. They are not really philosophical.
Presently, there are quantum physicists trying to deal with the concept of timelines, and what I said is taken from theory, albeit spooky. While the math is way beyond me, I think they are really on to something.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join