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.

 

Time travel is impossible because time is not real

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog




Time is a constant.


Not so.


www.google.com.au...


Einstein's theory of relativity states that time and space are not as constant as everyday life would suggest. He suggested that the only true constant, the speed of light, meant that time can run faster or slower depending on how high you are, and how fast you are travelling.


wiki


A physical constant, sometimes fundamental physical constant or universal constant, is a physical quantity that is generally believed to be both universal in nature and have constant value in time.



And constants are


www.quora.com...


The term mathematical constant usually refers to some particular number whose value is fixed by purely mathematical definition. Common examples are e and π.

A mathematical constant can be contrasted with a mathematical variable. For example, in the formula A=πr2, A and r are variables.

A mathematical constant can also be contrasted with a physical constant whose value is fixed by empirical measurement. Examples of physical constants include Newton's gravitational constant G and Planck's constant h.




posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: projectvxn

How about travel to a different past?

That would seem to negate or at least mitigate the effects of any paradox that my occur.

Same with travel to the future really, its never going to be the same timeline if multiverse theory holds any weight.



OK..traveling to the past would require knowing where everything is. the sun,rotation,posistion of the earth and universe,as well as numerous other things. Traveling to the future is easier,but requires approaching the speed of light to slow time down for yourself and then after you return it is the future to you.

As cool as Steins gate is just going to the future in your own timeline does not require a new world line.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: projectvxn

How about travel to a different past?

That would seem to negate or at least mitigate the effects of any paradox that my occur.

Same with travel to the future really, its never going to be the same timeline if multiverse theory holds any weight.



The many worlds view of quantum mechanics might offer something like that, but it isn't likely.

In order to travel back in time in any universe where entropy exists(read forward arrow of time) would require the reversal of entropy in that universe.

Knock the cup off the table and watch it shatter. Now do it all backwards perfectly and you'll see how hard it is to travel back in time in any universe.
edit on 11 1 2019 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

edit on 11 1 2019 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: lSkrewloosel
In my eyes time is just a form of measurement and go as far as just a human construct. Time and space for example , time measures how quick you close a space. From getting to point a to point b. Other than that we dont record time accurately as we base it on the four seasons rather than a full turn of the planet.

. a reply to: neutronflux



Agree. Time is just measurement of motion.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea




but misunderstanding time doesn't make it not real. Time is what it is: the measurement of the movement of celestial bodies through space from our perspective here on earth, with "time" denoted by seconds, minutes, degrees, and hours, as well as days, weeks, months and years. So a "year" denotes the earth's 360° orbit around the sun... today a "month" is roughly 1/12 of the sun cycle, but it was once known as a "moon," denoting the (approximately) 29 days of the moon's cycle from one new moon to the next


I'm going to pretend to be stupid and I don't understand what you're saying. ( lol )

All you've explained really is movement of celestial bodies ie distance travelled. Not time as such.




"is time a physical quantity?"

www.google.com.au... ikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FTime_in_physics&usg=AOvVaw3atJneib3pk7UQ0raiWlNv


Inclassical, non-relativistic physics it is a scalar quantity and, like length, mass, and charge, is usually described as a fundamental quantity. Time can be combined mathematically with other physical quantities to derive other concepts such as motion, kinetic energy and time-dependent fields.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Time is just a measurement.
Like 1,2,3
I could teach you what cgovzthg vddhcyjse cccccsgbdygf means too.




posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight


I'm going to pretend to be stupid and I don't understand what you're saying. ( lol )

All you've explained really is movement of celestial bodies ie distance travelled. Not time as such.


Not exactly. We measure "time" in terms of the movement of celestial bodies, yes, but not in terms of distance traveled so much as in terms of how much of a set cycle has been completed. For example, a year does represent the earth's 360° worth of travel around the sun, but the determinant is the completion of the cycle. Months are roughly 1/12 of that total cycle, or 30° travel within the cycle... days are roughly 1/365 or 1° of travel within that cycle.

These units of measurement are not arbitrary. They are based on known and observable factors.

I would be far more inclined to entertain thoughts and theories about parallel dimensions and universes based on overlapping cycles of movements in the cosmos.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

How does that equate with my last post where I said...


We don't need implements though. If I travel at a substantial speed for say a year, then return to Earth my hair will have grown by x amount. However upon my return I will find that my identical twin's hair has ten years worth of growth.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: Boadicea

How does that equate with my last post where I said...


We don't need implements though. If I travel at a substantial speed for say a year, then return to Earth my hair will have grown by x amount. However upon my return I will find that my identical twin's hair has ten years worth of growth.


I'm not exactly sure what you are asking. What "implements"?

My best guess is that apparently you are looking for cause and effect where it does not exist. Apparently "time" and/or "distance" in and of themselves are not the causes for the effect. What other factors could be at play?

Perhaps hair growth has more to do with the nature of light... the angle of the sun's rays, the distance of the sun's rays, the ratio of darkness to sunlight, etc.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Time is an illusion.
Lunchtime, doubly so.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

i am unsure on the " viability " of time travel - i dont dismiss it outright - but the actual realities of time travel in my view of it - should it be possible - bear no resemblence to the fiction presented so far -

but as for time . yes time is real in my world view

and my evidence for this is - if we have a circular " race track " of known diameter . and 2 cars traveling in opposite direction at diffent - and known velocities . if they pass each other at point A - we can predict acuratley where they will make thier next pass



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

The 'implement' comment was in reference to a poster commenting about measuring time. Let me try again.

If you travel at a substantial percentage of the speed of light you will find that upon your return more time has elapsed on Earth than it has for you. Depending on the speed then a century might have passed but for you it might only have been a year or two.




edit on 1-11-2019 by midicon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Words are not the reality they represent. The word reality is not reality. So it could be with human language the idea of time is complete arbitrary and doesn't exist in reality. And also, at the same time, time travel is real because reality allows it. Just because our words don't make sense or don't match reality doesn't say something meaningful about reality.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: Boadicea
The 'implement' comment was in reference to a poster commenting about measuring time. Let me try again.
If you travel at a substantial percentage of the speed of light you will find that upon your return more time has elapsed on Earth than it has for you. Depending on the speed then a century might have passed but for you it might only have been a year or two.


Say you have a device capable of generating a gravitational field, then maybe there's a way to create a feedback look where reality gets bent opening up a door to another dimension. Accelerating to the near speed of light doesn't really change the fabric of reality or bend it.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:17 PM
link   
“Time” is not an illusion.

The illusion is that Time is Linear, and (therefore) discretely divisible into ever smaller “bits of time”, which we perceive as passing from “past” through to “future”.

“Time travel” is therefore not impossible, but merely “unnecessary”; its existence would be, like our perception of Time itself, the result not of the reality of the thing itself, but of our flawed perception/comprehension of the thing.

What is the smallest possible “division” of Time, the briefest “particle” if you will, that Time can be divided into as a discrete instance, separate and isolated from any other such particles?

Now, if this tiny particle of Time actually existed, regardless of how tiny and “brief” it ultimately is defined to be,

How could it pass from existence into the state of non-existence necessary for the next “time particle” to exist?

Two “moments in time” cannot exist simultaneously in the linearity we accept as “Reality”.

And if we can identify a “smallest, briefest, division of Time” as a discrete entity, separate and apart from all others,

What exists “between” one “particle” of Time and another?

Whatever that is, it could only be defined as “non-Time”, a null void of non-existence; which would of course preclude any passage or communication from particle to particle.

So, if Time can be divided, Reality is merely a “trick” of perception.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: Boadicea
The 'implement' comment was in reference to a poster commenting about measuring time. Let me try again.
If you travel at a substantial percentage of the speed of light you will find that upon your return more time has elapsed on Earth than it has for you. Depending on the speed then a century might have passed but for you it might only have been a year or two.


Say you have a device capable of generating a gravitational field, then maybe there's a way to create a feedback look where reality gets bent opening up a door to another dimension. Accelerating to the near speed of light doesn't really change the fabric of reality or bend it.


I really was just commenting on the idea that time is just a measurement of movement. The idea that travelling at such velocities affects the passage of time in some sort of real way. I could be wrong in my understanding but I think that's what the physicists claim.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: Boadicea

The 'implement' comment was in reference to a poster commenting about measuring time. Let me try again.


Thanks for clarifying.


If you travel at a substantial percentage of the speed of light you will find that upon your return more time has elapsed on Earth than it has for you. Depending on the speed then a century might have passed but for you it might only have been a year or two.


Actually, no -- the same exact amount of time has elapsed. The earth still traveled the same distance in its orbit at its known speed.

If the physical effects are different, then it is obviously caused by something other than "time."






posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

I think you are wrong about this but I'll have to check with Google lol.

ETA...

The faster the relative velocity, the greater the time dilation between one another, with the rate of time reaching zero as one approaches the speed of light (299,792,458 m/s). ... For sufficiently high speeds, the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years on Earth.

That was the first thing that came up on Google. So ten years travel would amount to a century here on Earth.
edit on 1-11-2019 by midicon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: Boadicea

The faster the relative velocity, the greater the time dilation between one another, with the rate of time reaching zero as one approaches the speed of light (299,792,458 m/s). ... For sufficiently high speeds, the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years on Earth.


I had to google that to find out what this was talking about, which is Time Dilation -- which is about the process/accuracy of measuring time... and the physical effects of various factors that can and do take place during a set amount of time, but has nothing to do with time itself.

The earth maintained its known speed in its known path around the sun.



posted on Nov, 1 2019 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

Still wrong. When one returns from travelling at that substantial speed then one might find that there is no one left alive that we once knew. Check it out for yourself.
It is paradoxical I know but that is what the physicists claim. For people on Earth, and on the ship, time appears to move as normal but upon the return there is a substantial difference. Not only in the measuring devices but in real time that has passed.



edit on 1-11-2019 by midicon because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join