posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 03:43 AM
as far as the time/motion being relative thing... let's do a little experiment.
look around you. everything still? nothing moving? aside from the kids, or the cats, or what have you? nothing flying across the room? or off into the
so you'd say everything around you is still, and unmoving, right?
you're right from your own frame of reference, but from a truly 'objective' frame of reference, we're all rocketing through space at an insane
speed while spinning ludicrously, not unlike a top. we're still beings on a spinning planet, which is further spinning around a sun, which is also
spinning around the middle of our galaxy, which is, itself, drifting through space. so, really, it IS all relative. you look at your computer, and to
you, it's not moving, but to a truly objective observer, it's moving incredibly fast. all relative.
now, as for time... there are different ways you can view it, really, and which view you work with depends on how you should view time travel.
the fad right now is to see time as a fourth dimension, the same as our 3 physical ones. if that's the case, scientists hypothesize that eventually,
since we're clearly moving in the dimension of time anyway, it's only a matter of time(heh) until we learn to control that movement. one good (but
rudimentary) visual diagram I saw explaining how time travel might be accomplished under this model is, in the same way that a piece of paper (time)
can be folded in half, and a pin pushed through so that, relative to the flat sheet (regular flow of time) the pin occupies two points 'at once', so
might someone who can move freely through time pop in at two separate points in time 'at the same time' (in their perception). this is all rather
sketchy, in my opinion.
another way to look at things is that time has to do with kinetic energy. as mentioned above, we're all moving at incredible speeds, and since
relative changes in speed seem to affect local time, this has some merit. this would mean that as opposed to being a fundamental quality of our
universe, time is simply a byproduct, function, or side effect of movement, momentum, kinetic energy, or what have you. this intrigues me mostly
because I haven't heard it discussed as much as the 'time is the fourth dimension' theory.
i'm sure there are other models and theories (both amateur and professional) out there, but these are the two that spring to mind for me,
you also need to consider the implication of quantum mechanics when discussing time travel in a serious manner, though. there's been hefty evidence
that time is meaningless when you consider things on a quantum scale, as is space, which leads to some pretty interesting theories about time-space in
the quantum arena.