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 problem

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 03:43 PM
link   
I'll have to agree with Yarium on this one--you're writing a novel, not something to send to Physics Weekly. Try and get something that's close enough to the general concepts of time that most people are familiar with, maybe throw in a dash of relativity or multiple dimensions, but don't loose the story. Some of the greatest plots in the world were ruined by too much attention to detail, and some of the greatest stories ever written had little in line with reality (how many hobbits have you ever seen?)

I completely understand wanting to keep it as realistic as possible, but try to keep it as a novel and not a thesis project (unless you are covertly working on a thesis, in which case you might want to try a better cover
)



apc

posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
I am not knowledgeable enough about how time dialation proves linear time to comment on that point. But, the linear time model and the ability some people have to see future events is something I haven't been able to reconcile. If people can see into the future, what would you propose as a theory of how that is possible? If you don't have an answer, that is fine.


Time dialation describes multiple "nows" existing simultaneously relative to the observer(s). Relatively, time is linear, because of the existance of linear deviation.

I can't really explain on solid ground how some people appear to be able to gain knowledge of future events. I too have had similar occurances of "future dreams." I suspect an unperceived tangent to reality (an unseen interconnecting dimension, subspace, hyperspace, 'the spirit realm'... call it what you will) is associated with this phenomena, but I am unable to define further.



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 04:26 PM
link   
I understand. As for the possibilities of how the future can be seen, they are all good ones. I too have a hard time envisioning the details of how it can be so. I couldn't resolve the reality of the linear time model supporting the supposition that the future had not happened yet, with seeing it. Still don't see it. But last year I became compelled to formulate an acceptable model that would. So I did.


apc

posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 05:44 PM
link   
I dont want to stray too far from the topic but I wanted to clarify a bit on my above speculation regarding future dreams. One must remember that often times, these dreams, just like deja vu, didn't actually happen. They are in fact a failure of our memory centers to properly process the present. The "Whoa, this has happened before," or "I dreamed this Im sure of it," is actually our brains getting a few fractions of a second out of sync with our perception. Yes... it really did happen before... a few seconds ago. Not saying this explains everything, but it should be taken into account.

[edit on 20-1-2006 by apc]



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
I dont want to stray too far from the topic but I wanted to clarify a bit on my above speculation regarding future dreams. One must remember that often times, these dreams, just like deja vu, didn't actually happen. They are in fact a failure of our memory centers to properly process the present. The "Whoa, this has happened before," or "I dreamed this Im sure of it," is actually our brains getting a few fractions of a second out of sync with our perception. Yes... it really did happen before... a few seconds ago. Not saying this explains everything, but it should be taken into account.

[edit on 20-1-2006 by apc]

doesnt apply. not to mine. I told some of these to others, thinking it was just a dream, later learned it was more. they are not deja vu. they are like a video or photo, exact.



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII

Originally posted by apc
I dont want to stray too far from the topic but I wanted to clarify a bit on my above speculation regarding future dreams. One must remember that often times, these dreams, just like deja vu, didn't actually happen. They are in fact a failure of our memory centers to properly process the present. The "Whoa, this has happened before," or "I dreamed this Im sure of it," is actually our brains getting a few fractions of a second out of sync with our perception. Yes... it really did happen before... a few seconds ago. Not saying this explains everything, but it should be taken into account.

[edit on 20-1-2006 by apc]

doesnt apply. not to mine. I told some of these to others, thinking it was just a dream, later learned it was more. they are not deja vu. they are like a video or photo, exact.


And I have to agree with Blackguard on that. I've had those kinds of experiences, oftentimes enough to know things that I couldn't possibly know, and see real consequences.

For example, one that happened a few years ago whilst I was still in high school. I was in a computer lab, with my back to the door. Suddenly, the memory returned of the dream from 6 months prior, and I KNEW that a teacher was about to walk in. In my dream, the teacher caught me on www.newgrounds.com (which is where I was when this actually happened), and I got in trouble. Since I knew this was about to happen, I quickly changed screens. Moments later the teacher walks in. My dream had saved me from embarrasment.

Also times where it has saved me has also been a discussion about hydroplaning on Highway 69 from Toronto to Sudbury with my mother (avoided having a friend get in trouble, since he was driving the car), and other arguements or would-have-been arguements. However, many times it was just about nothing.

The earliest time it happened to me that I can remember was during a drive from my home to my nonna's (grandmother's). I was very young at the time, about only 10 years old. I recognized the discussion my zia (aunt) and mother were having, and asked why they were talking about it when they had discussed it before. They told me they hadn't discussed it before, and then I told them how their discussion finished - which rather baffled them because they hadn't yet said it, and it made sense.



posted on Jan, 21 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   
First book is robert a heinlein's "the number of the beast"
second is timeline by michael crichton

Timeline has the bettre answer to feild your question and the number of the beast has some interesting ideas and big words.
Enjoy!



posted on Jan, 21 2006 @ 01:02 PM
link   
as einstein proved e= mas x celeritas squared and in the mirrow theory thatif one was movin at 670.000.000 at the speed of light holdin a mirrow than the reflection of him self would not appear in the mirrow!st but 2nd is the theory that even at light speed light would still move away from us at light speed even if we are also at light speed. I would think a black hole or a worm hole might hold a key to goin back in time as a white hole theory says it is the wast from a black hole (or anything sucked in it)



posted on Jan, 21 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Time travel Is not possible because time itself does not exsist, it's just a measurement we use, only the present Is possble and the past only exsists In are minds as in memories. Not to mention the fact that matter can not be In anyone place at any given time and, also heres food thought through out history the matter that makes up the mass of your body was In some form or another on the Earth.

Im not to scientific as you can tell lol but If you think about it what I just said makes perfect sense



posted on Jan, 21 2006 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Since the novel is fiction, you can write whatever you want regardless of science in reference to time travel. In your novel gravity may not obey the inverse square but instead an inverse cube! Do whatever you like.


Originally posted by ElliottWilson
as einstein proved e= mas x celeritas squared and in the mirrow theory thatif one was movin at 670.000.000 at the speed of light holdin a mirrow than the reflection of him self would not appear in the mirrow!st


Humans cannot travel the speed of light. The mirror puzzle is used as an introduction question to explain "If a runner is moving close to the speed of light and has a mirror at arm's length, will he see himself in the mirror?" with what you know about relativity.

[edit on 21-1-2006 by Frosty]



posted on Jan, 21 2006 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by One_Love_One_GOD
Time travel Is not possible because time itself does not exsist, it's just a measurement we use, only the present Is possble and the past only exsists In are minds as in memories. Not to mention the fact that matter can not be In anyone place at any given time and, also heres food thought through out history the matter that makes up the mass of your body was In some form or another on the Earth.

Im not to scientific as you can tell lol but If you think about it what I just said makes perfect sense


1Love1God, you're taking time in the philosophical and metaphysical existance of it. Metaphysically you're correct. We can't travel back in time, and we can't see forward in time. We cannot remember the future, and we can't plan out our past. Thus, the only time that matters is now, and now is the only sense of time. Memory is but a way to account for a change in parameters.

However, that is only metaphysically. Scientifically and physically, going deeper into the underlying foundations of the universe, the truth becomes blurier instead of crisper.

In fact, with all laws of physics as we know them, there is absolutely no reason that time should not move backwards instead of forwards - but if it did so, we would never notice.


And you want some desert to go with your food?

All that matter that makes up who you are, what that table is, what everything is... it's almost entirely made up of empty space. An atom isn't solid. It's a nucleus which is only a speak of dust in a football field in it's middle, and an electron field around it where the electrons pop in and out of existance in accordance with probabilities.

And even the nucleus and electrons are mostly empty, and are made up of quarks.

And even quarks may be emptier still... possibly just made up of 2-dimensional, vibrating loops of strings.

And these strings themselves may just be energy...

Everything that you are, it could all be crunched into one infintessimally small point, smaller than a proton in a nucleus. And perhaps even smaller still.



posted on Jan, 21 2006 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yarium


Can you prove or show any evidence that 1Love is wrong and that time is anything other than the interval between point A and point B?

[edit on 22-1-2006 by Frosty]



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 12:34 AM
link   
This reminds me of all those notions physicists have of parallel universes and such. especially where they compare our existance and others to lanes on a super highway. Well, here's a question for everyone.

Why can't we have lanes (universes) which are running in the opposite direction??

Punch through to a parallel universe which is running in the opposite direction (which or course is "running forward" to them.) then punch your way back to this universe, when you've reached the year in which you want to return? Presto...you're in the past!


Did that make sense?



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Toelint
This reminds me of all those notions physicists have of parallel universes and such. especially where they compare our existance and others to lanes on a super highway. Well, here's a question for everyone.

Why can't we have lanes (universes) which are running in the opposite direction??

Punch through to a parallel universe which is running in the opposite direction (which or course is "running forward" to them.) then punch your way back to this universe, when you've reached the year in which you want to return? Presto...you're in the past!


Did that make sense?

yeah man that made sense! cool as theory!!
very creative mind u have



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Frosty, Atomic Clock experiments on general relativity and space-time. One clock stayed on earth, while another was sent aboard the ISS (International Space Station) for several months. After that time period, when the Atomic Clocks were brought back together and studied, it was shown that clock #2 in space was a few millionths of a second fast. More "time" had passed for it than for clock #1 on earth. This is because space, time, and matter are interconnected. If time were simply a notion, something that we said existed only to account for changes in where we are from where we were, then the clocks should have returned and still been the exact same speed.

Instead, clock #2 passed through more "space" of time.


Toilent, what you're saying is entirely possible, and I wouldn't be surprised if you saw that idea in "Sliders"
. They did an episode on such an idea. But yes, you could travel to a universe travelling in the opposite direction in time. Problem though, what happens to you? Will time for you still move forward, or will you not notice this change as you switch to reverse time. Moreover, you must enter that universe at the time in which you wish to leave, since once there you'll leave at the point in which you entered (if anyone can grasp why on that, you get a shiney penny).



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Ok, here's how you can work it so they can travel back in time then travel back to their (near) host reality they came from.

Problem: when you travel back in time your very presence alters history from that point on.
If you were to go back 2 million years and step on an ant, 2m years later you could have wiped out an entire species of bird because that ant was forefather to an entire population of ant that the bird fed on.
In short the problem is chaos theory, butterfly to hurricans

Solution:
Impact the past as little as possible

1 - First in their time, the present, have them travel out to the dark side of pluto or somehwere very far and distant as well as hidden from view of the earth.

2 - Then from that distant point travel back in time
In the past journey to the earth
Load your ship up with a ZPM or other ancient priceless lost treasure.
Travel back to your hiding spot behind pluto

3 - Travel back further to a point about 20 min or so before they arrived in the first place.

4 - Wait

5 - Watch themselves appear form the future in the past

6 - Hail the other ship as soon as it arrives

7 - Both ships then travel back to the future together at the same time.

Explanation:
This theory assumes the alternate reality concept, the multiverse.
The reality you are returning to is not really your own, but that of the crew of the ship you just returned with

The other ship came form an alternate reality in which you didnt yet alter the time line.

You could kill them and take their place in the future, but that would be messy and unethical, not to mention the side effects of killing yourself in an alternate reality (The One - Jet Lee)

There may be subtile differences in the future, based on random chance, but for the most part it will be identicle to the future you left except for now there are 2 of you, 2 ships, and 2 of everyone else on board your ship.



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by One_Love_One_GOD
Time travel Is not possible because time itself does not exsist, it's just a measurement we use, only the present Is possble and the past only exsists In are minds as in memories. Not to mention the fact that matter can not be In anyone place at any given time and, also heres food thought through out history the matter that makes up the mass of your body was In some form or another on the Earth.

Im not to scientific as you can tell lol but If you think about it what I just said makes perfect sense


So based on that the holoccaust never happened, hitler was a rather nice guy actually, bush is a good president who never went to war, clinton never tried marijuana nor had an affair.

History is only our memories right? so in that case when we develop the tech to alter memories then we can change the past?
No.

History does exist
the future exists
it is like a cassette tape and player, the read head is now, however, just because the past has already played through the read head and is curling up at the end of the reel does not mean it never happened nor that is does not exist still, it is just not currently happening

It is entirely possible that when we reach the end of the reel the universe will rewind, collapsing in on itself and playing again



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrjones

Originally posted by One_Love_One_GOD
Time travel Is not possible because time itself does not exsist, it's just a measurement we use, only the present Is possble and the past only exsists In are minds as in memories. Not to mention the fact that matter can not be In anyone place at any given time and, also heres food thought through out history the matter that makes up the mass of your body was In some form or another on the Earth.

History does exist
the future exists
it is like a cassette tape and player, the read head is now, however, just because the past has already played through the read head and is curling up at the end of the reel does not mean it never happened nor that is does not exist still, it is just not currently happening.

I agree with 1love1god, there is no time but the present. There are a lot who also feel this is true. Scientific theories which support her points state that their is no absolute location and no absolute time. I cannot say that timetravel is not possible though, just that I do not agree with the reality of linear time. I say the past and future exist only in this moment, and that the very fact that something is not currently happening shows it does not exist.
'Today is always here - tomorrow... never.' Toni Morrison
'In the presence of eternity the mountains are as transient as the clouds.' - Ingersoll



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 08:52 PM
link   
That doesn't even make sense, you're just trying to sound smart and doing a poor job.
Granted, my tape reel analogy wasn't the best either.

[edit on 22-1-2006 by mrjones]



posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   
In school, they told me my IQ is in the upper 2% of the population, but I wasn't trying to sound smart. I don't believe IQ scores reflect intellect very well, though. And I know that my definition of time is incomprehensible to most people. But, then, convincing anyone to see it my way was never my goal anyway. Your definition of time makes no sense to me.
If I was trying to sound smart I would have written something like this:

Perforce & pro forma, henceforth & in perpetuity, implacably & without umbrage, this regulatory authoritarian aristocracy’s providential predilection for, & perennial proclivity to, punctilious parsimony has unanimously, unambigously & incontrovertably impelled the stringent elucidation in this preemptive promulgation. At our prerogative, without prejudice, pursuant to our aforementioned profligate perfunctory placation of portentious presuppositions substantiating polemic perfidy, this prima fascia proviso is a peremptory proscription to forthwith & heretofore advocate the insubstantiation of all preceding pontifications, this precis has precedent. Thus, we contumaceously & importunately requisition you to precipitously endeavour to ameliorate, repudiate & extirpate perfunctory, archaic, anomalous, incommensurable, egregious & extemporaneous prognostications individuating nebulous variegated conterminous physiological peripheral phenomena erroneously delineating a prodigious preponderance of incipient, spurious, specious, execrable, peripatetic, & equivocal differentiation inherently & indisputably exhibited by, & inseparably & irreparably incorporated into, the exceedingly minuscule percentile of pelagic, priapic protuberances demonstrably perceptible among the heterogeneous sub-genus of the aforementioned excessively infrequent population of anatomically atypical salamander zygotes inexplicably exhibiting distinctive sepia & sorrel epidermal striations. This inscrutible, enigmatic anthropomorphic transmogrification is ostensibly paradoxical to the obsequious, obfuscating prevarications of this vociferous assemblage of indoctrinated, anti-disestablishmentarianists whose implicitly supercilious, compensatory postulations appertaining to the ostentatious, audacious, vexatious & perspicacious endocentric stentorian iconoclasts with a penchant for self-edification, who invariably purport to be conciliatory adjudicators, decisively deduced to be in actuality acting antithetically, disclosing a diametrically opposed, contrasting comportment, contrarily, incongruently, surreptitiously, perniciously, capriciously & salaciously encumbering indistinguishable exascerbating existentialistic irrationalities expeditiously & efficaciously constructed expressly to insidiously & irrefutably corroborate the incorporeal sanctimonious polysyllabic sesquipedalian verbosities prevalent in this inordinately profuse, interminably & inexorably proliferating, multitude of disingenuous, pedagogical, semantic, pedantic, obfuscatorial, objectionable, indefensible, indubitably untenable, conspicously convoluted, pre-eminently ponderous, imperious, impenitent, preternaturally inculcated nomenclature.
Sometimes.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join