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.

 

Breaking the Time Barrier

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 11:54 AM
link   
When looking at time, you can say it is totally impossible to measure because it doesn't physically exist. But time has to exist in another dimension which we can't understand yet. The dimension we understand now is reality. We can understand things that we can see, touch, smell, taste, and hear. In addition, we use our dimension of reality to express the other dimension, time by using clocks. Thus, reality parallels with time.

So, if reality (clocks) can be used to "see" time, can it be vice versa? Can time be used to "see" reality? I'd like to know from someone if we are able to manipulate the speed of light or sound. If we can do that, we would be one step closer to being able to manipulate the dimension of time. For example, if we can manipulate our own dimension (reality) to advance 5 seconds per 1 second in the other dimension (time), we would be advancing at 5 seconds/second.

It is impossible to say that time is a speed. We know there is a speed for sound, light, and basically anything that is made up of mass or energy. But, time isn't matter or energy so there is no way it could have a speed. Thus, time should not be considered a speed but a dimension that coexists with reality.




posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Time is created do to the fact that information can only travel so fast. In order to alter the "speed" of time I guess you would have to manipulate the speed of which information can be shared relative to all you want to be affected by the new time "speed". Perhaps we can do this with quantum entanglement.

Einstein looked at time as a part of space-time, a mixture of 4 dimensions, 3 spacial and the one being time. Doesn't this support that time already is a integrated part of reality? Since, it is already deeply woven into the space that makes up our reality.

You mention using time to see reality. Isn't it already used for that? If there was no time, we couldn't perceive reality because, the universe would be one static frame. Plus, all speeds for all objects are measured by space traveled divided by time, we already use time to note parts of our reality.

Just my too cents and speculation.

[edit on 10-9-2007 by halfmask]



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by halfmask
 


When I meant using time to "see" reality, I meant manipulating the dimension of time to "see" a different dimension of reality. As time goes by, so does reality. So maybe there are multiple reality dimensions that coincide with the time dimension. Every 1e-infinity second, the time dimension "creates" a new reality dimension. Thus, multiple reality dimensions could exist in the past and the present. However, since the time dimension hasn't "created" a reality dimension that takes place in the future, it is impossible to "travel" into the future.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Dan5647
 


Oh I think I see what you mean.

For example; lets let "world" be our reality, time is moving left to right, so we read "w" "o" "r" "l" "d" giving us our "world" or reality.

So, you want to find a way to read; world
------------------------------------r
------------------------------------i
------------------------------------t
------------------------------------e

down to get "write" to see another reality created by a different order of time.

Or that time goes faster and we skip every second letter getting "wrd" as a reality.

So, basically you suggest changing the polarity, I guess is a way of describing it, of time to unlock the perception or the ability to see different realities that currently we only see as static.

This sounds like and interesting branch of science based on string theory or quantum braid theory. Maybe a whole new science in its self.

[edit on 10-9-2007 by halfmask]

[edit on 10-9-2007 by halfmask]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dan5647


So, if reality (clocks) can be used to "see" time, can it be vice versa? Can time be used to "see" reality?



Very interesting concept, but clocks are used to measure time, not to see it. And really, to take it further, the reality in which we reside is relegated to time's passage. That would inherently leave us unable to utilize something that we can not contain (time) in order to use it as a measuring force. We would have to find a way to stop time's passage and analyze it outside of it's effect upon us if we were ever to realize a usage for it as a tool.
Does that make sense?
Seriously, I can't tell. The subject matter is so evanescent that I'm not sure I can delineate my thoughts properly. Nice thread though. This is interesting stuff.



posted on Sep, 13 2007 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Goosenapper
 

So to take it simple, we would have to alter matter instead of focusing on the time dimension. For example, in the near future, we could alter some matter's atom structure and enable it's "lifetime" to speed up or slow down or maybe even reverse itself. But then this rises to a problem. It wouldn't influence it's surroundings (space). We would have to somehow alter the existence of space and mater so that they were to be like what they were at an earlier time. It would be like deja vu, but without changing the time frame. Right now, it is entirely impossible to do this. Even in 500 years, I believe we won't have this technology yet.



posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Dan5647
 


Exactly. I don't see how it's possible, with our current understanding of our place in the universe to do this. In fact, I wonder even if technology is the answer here. Maybe we have to look at some mental or astral enlightenment in order to circumvent time's passage.
Either that, or we need to find a way to generate the 1.21 gigawatts needed to activate the flux capacitor. In short, predicting lightning strikes is probably more likely than us humans figuring out how to traverse time. I'm still interested to see where this thread goes and read the different ways that people look at this.
By the way, I dig your avatar. I haven't see that Alternative Tentacles image in a long time.



posted on Sep, 16 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   
fascinating thread... my 10 cents..
maybe time is relative (excuse irony) to the situation you are in and percieve. for example, a common house fly can avoid our pathetic swatting efforts because we appear slow and cumbersome to them, hence their avoidance, wheras a large, lumbering beast like an elephant, we appear to be positively zipping along at a fair old speed, in their frame of reference.
so to us, our measly existance in the classic 3-score-and-10 years scenario could appear as a mear blink of the eye in the whole cosmos scheme of things, our observing of the known universe is measured by almost impossible to imagine quantities of light years etc, a far away observer watching us may see our civilisation come and go in 'seconds'.
"oh look son, that brown rock went blue and then bang real quickly"

new here and enjoying the insights and information...
im off to lie in a dark room and put my brain back together....


[edit on 16-9-2007 by dogtag]



posted on Sep, 16 2007 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Rather than be concerned about going back in time, why not consider going back in virtual time?

This would involve a massive computer project in some future time, in which a ST-like holodeck would be built.

At first certain high points would be virtually reconstructed, but eventually finer and more detailed historical records would be programmed in.

Now you might not only be able to go back and watch Washington cross the Delaware in full 3-D sight and sound you could also step into your old neighborhood donut shop and have a 'virtual conversation' with the husband and wife owners just as you remember them.

I think they could get to a 90% or better veracity and reproduction of almost any time in the past.

Though it might seem like a lot of data, look how big the 'Net has become in only a few short years? That's what computers excel at - handling large numbers of data sets.

Obviously you wouldn't be able to go back and find that box of baseball cards you buried in the back yard, but you could relive various periods in time in a general sense.

How close this experience might be to actually going back in time would only be limited by the technology, and most expect 'virtual realities' to get much better as computing power improves.

Likewise, as computers got smarter - smart enough to design themselves (and do a better job than we do), we could even travel to the 'virtual future'. Projections and simulations could be run and a reasonably entertaining version of life in the future could be experienced. It probably would seem even more real than the past since there wouldn't be anything to compare it to, istm.

Just a thought.


[edit on 16-9-2007 by Badge01]



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Has anyone ever heard of God's Debris by Scott Adams? Very, very interesting book, and, I say, a must read. You can read it for free online here. It really makes your head spin.

In it, the main characters talk about time as a human invention. It is all relative. If time stopped for everyone except for you and a pocket watch, time for you would keep going. If a day passed according to your pocket watch, and then everyone reappeared, the people would feel no time has passed and see you instantly age. I believe that's the gist of it.



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 11:30 PM
link   
From what I understand. There are many ways you can slow or stop time, but it would have no effect on you. As if you were contained in a bubble of your own events while time passed beyond it.

It's a dimensional thing.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 08:52 AM
link   
time is measured by the decay of cesium atoms. time does not move at the same speed in all parts of the universe. right now satellites orbiting over head are moving at a different time than us down here. they are running fast. this has to do with the speed they move through space and the distance they are from the center of the earths gravity. right now i think time travel to the past has something to due with frame dragging around black-holes.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dan5647
When looking at time, you can say it is totally impossible to measure because it doesn't physically exist. But time has to exist in another dimension which we can't understand yet. The dimension we understand now is reality. We can understand things that we can see, touch, smell, taste, and hear. In addition, we use our dimension of reality to express the other dimension, time by using clocks. Thus, reality parallels with time.


Our senses are what makes it possible for us to perceive reality in such a way that our bodies can interact with true reality. It's THROUGH our perception of physical reality that we are able to observe time, which is either a product of something that does exist on another dimension, or something that exists only in the physical reality as a means to comprehend the reality in which we are currently aware.


Originally posted by Dan5647
Can time be used to "see" reality? I'd like to know from someone if we are able to manipulate the speed of light or sound. If we can do that, we would be one step closer to being able to manipulate the dimension of time. For example, if we can manipulate our own dimension (reality) to advance 5 seconds per 1 second in the other dimension (time), we would be advancing at 5 seconds/second.


If time is a product of some other action on another dimension, then we should not be abe to manipulate it because it is out of our grasp, given the limitations imposed by the senses that aid us in perceiving reality. Speed is a measurement of light or sound, and the ability to manipulate that speed shouldn't result in the ability to manipulate time.



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by some_stupid_name
 

They always say that you can travel in the past if you get sucked in a black hole in science fiction movies. I really doubt that could happen since we have no clue of what happens to matter when it gets sucked in black holes. Maybe matter and energy change into dark matter while they are being sucked in.

IMO, time should not be looked at as a speed, but rather as one dimension out of two. I believe that the two dimensions (reality and time) are dimensional circles which overlap in the middle. Space, matter, and energy is what is made up in the middle of the two overlapped dimensions. Thus, we have no clue of what it looks like in the "time" dimension or the "reality" dimension unless we somehow "travel" to these dimensions.

If time was a loop in its own dimension, it would explain the reason we are "passing" through time. When something spins on the outskirts of a circle and we reside in the outer part of it, the part where the reality and time dimensions (circles) overlap, will look as if time was "progressing".

Here is a picture representing the two dimensions:




[edit on 18-9-2007 by Dan5647]



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 04:26 PM
link   
the reason time travel and black-holes are linked together is because frame dragging is literally space-time being dragged around the outer edge of a black-hole no sci-fi stuff just good old steven hawking stuff. time is a dimension because it is a measurement t = duration. if you would like better explanation on high dimensions you should research m - theory.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Dan5647 i don't know if you are still interested, but i'll talk time with you.
the first question you ask was about altering the speed of light. i've heard of a few experiments that have claimed to do that. scientist shot a laser through something called a Bose–Einstein condensate, this enabled them to slow light down to 38 miles per hour. now i thought to myself what happened did the light gain mass? so i emailed to a website "ask a particle physicist" and her response was no that the light had to travel a greater distance from point a to b, at least i think thats what she was saying. so there went that idea for breaking the time barrier. so if we take your diagram and leave the time side they way it is and call the reality side spatial dimensions i think we will have a better picture. now on the sd side we need to make 3 spacial dimensions overlap were the t side intersects or inside the area marked space, matter, energy we should call this area space-time, which is defined as 3 spatial dimension + 1 time. ok i need sleep. i'll try to post more later someone might want to hammer this stuff out. great topic Dan5647.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 10:15 PM
link   
To be faster than light, you have to have zero mass, or ways to "trick" gravity into thinking you and your craft have no mass.
For now that means, you go only as consciousness. This will also means you are mere observer, not having any means to alter physical reality in the past, or future. No hands, no touchie!

We barely understand gravity, we are bogged down by a crude science that is closed-minded, and grounded in study of physical matters. It will be eons before human attain the wisdom to time travel.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 07:20 AM
link   
why no touching? where is your consciousness at? if i were to travel in time i would want interact. prof. ron mallot has a good idea using a circulating laser beam to twist space along which he hopes to send particles through to the past. he says sending people would require more power than we currently have, but particals mean information and this could be very useful. so here is a good question will time travel cause paradox's or do we live in a multi-verse?



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 07:38 AM
link   
ok a small experiment.

Put a guy on a bar stool that spins, whip him around so at 1 foot radius the speed he is going is 99% light speed. The inside of his body ages faster then the outside.

He could have a 50 year old brain and a 20 year old face.

/TILT/


oh I forgot to add, you absolutly must give him sea sick pills first, that is essential. The near infinate mass of the projectile vomit would be a real problem.

[edit on 21-9-2007 by Redge777]



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join