SCI: Time Travel 101: A How To Guide

page: 6
162
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Helghast1
great article. but the question i have is, will we ever use "time travel" as a means of traveling to other states/countries, almost like a teleport type means?


I just don't know. I guess only time will tell ( No pun intended)




posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Helghast1
 


That would be another thing altogether, something that would likely utilize the Quantum Entanglement principle.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by thefreepatriot
 


how is it proven though?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 
well i'm usually pretty nasty w/ most of the threads here on ats
but i really enjoyed this reading .some one added Michio kaku to seal it for me. i'll be looking for your next thread. hold that style man it makes for an easy read. well written. s&f



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Great work.

It's indeed true. The more massive you are from the more speed, the more gravity you have, and so the slower time goes for you.

You might be interested in stuff I wrote:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you want to go back in time, your best bet is to warp space so much so that you somehow have a reversal of space time. Some guy named Mantle or something is trying that much. I've always wondered that if you slow down so much so at a certain point, can you reverse and begin to go back.

Worm holes would probably be your best bet.

It's people like you, me, and many more here and elsewhere that have me convinced that we will break light speed within our life times and be in other solar systems in this century. People don't understand how fast innovation occurs. Star trek is off by a few centuries.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angelsoftheapocalypse
reply to post by tauristercus
 


I believe that nature does not prohibit backwards time travel (if time travel is possible at all) it only has to be perfect to be a true travel back in time. if not, you run the risk of going into different tangents of the "past" just as if you were to travel into the future, and have different tangents...


I think that by your reference to "different tangents' that you're actually referring to different time lines, which have at the moment ZERO proof of their existance.
So I think for the purpose of this thread that you need to restrict your backwards time travel theories to this single time line.


The reason that linear time travel either from the past to the future or from the future to the past hasn't been observed is for a very simple reason as I have already mentioned... nature absolutely prohibits it.

For time travel to be permitted into our own past or future (not talking about skipping dimensions or time lines) then we have to admit that the concept of free will is a complete illusion. Otherwise if we wish to preserve the concept of free will, then we must disallow time travel completely.

Here's a very simple example to illustrate the point.

Lets say that you walk into your lounge room at EXACTLY 5pm, pick up the tv remote control and then toss around in your head which channel to pick. After a few seconds, you decide on channel 5 ... so far so good ... you've exercised your option of free will and made an independent and unbiased decision to pick channel 5.

Now lets skip 10 years into the future and somehow you manage to invent the worlds 1st practical time machine. As a test, you jump into it and decide to travel back into the past to that very day that you chose channel 5. But instead of jumping back to exactly 5pm, you program your machine to take you back 5 mins earlier and also to appear in another room and not the lounge room.

So you press your buttons and pull your levers and it works, you rematerialize back in the past 5 mins before your previous self walks into the lounge room for a spot of tv relaxation. You now wait in hiding until your previous self enters the lounge room, sits down and picks up the remote control. In the meantime you've sneaked unobserved behind yourself whose sitting on the lounge and you watch him (you).
Now here's the problem ... if free will exists, then your previous self should be able to select another channel besides 5, say channel 10 ... and yet you KNOW he will select channel 5 because that's what YOU selected originally all those many years ago.
It doesn't matter how often you jump back to this earlier time from your future because you will ALWAYS see him select channel 5. In fact, arriving 5 mins before he even picks up the remote, you know EXACTLY which channel he will pick ... so therefore FREE WILL on his part was simply an illusion and he was predestined to select channel 5 and will always do no matter how many times you observe him.

So there's the problem ... allow time travel and you have to admit that free will doesn't exist and EVERYTHING is therefore scripted and you follow that script slavishly.
Otherwise, retain free will and give up time travel.

It has to be one or the other ... so tell me, which appeals most to you ?

Continued next post ...



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Continued from previous post

Here's another example that would destroy the quantumness of the universe completely.

Lets change the channel scenario slightly and instead of picking a tv channel, the original person decides to conduct a science experiment by watching a number of radioactive atoms until one of them spontaneously decays ... a simple and realistic experiment.
Eventually one decays ... lets say it's radioactive atom number 5 and is observed by the original person.

Ok, years pass ... blah, blah ... invent time machine ... travel back in time and arrive 5 mins before the atom decays. Now which atom is going to decay ? Why, atom number 5 of course ... and why do you know this ? ... because you saw it happen years ago when YOU did the experiment.

Now here's where quantum mechanics collapses in a screaming heap !

You watch (unobserved, of course) the experiment unfold and atom 5 decays ... no surprise there.

But wait !

The spontaneous decay of a selected atom is completely RANDOM, completely UNPREDICTABLE and completely governed by QUANTUM MECHANICAL PROCESSES.
And yet here you are able to state categorically and exactly which atom will decay next. In other words, every quantum mechanical event that happened in the entire universe would have just had to unfold EXACTLY as it did before for that one atom to decay ... the very atom that you knew would decay.

So travelling back in time and watching an event unfold exactly the way it did years ago means that even quantum events are predictable to the utmost degree ... and even worse ... are reproducible each time you travel back to the same point in time and watch the same event unfold.

Therefore, no matter how you "juggle" things around or imagine "what if's" ... there is simply no way around the 2 examples I just supplied that would permit time travel to be even
remotely possible using a single time line. But then it just gets even worse if you allow the existance of additional time lines.


Let me make say it once again ...

!!!! TIME TRAVEL IS PROHIBITED BY NATURE !!!!



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Thanks, I appreciate that. I am glad that I was able to meet your usually strict standards.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Anyway, You have me wondering now, if you already knew the answer to why time appears to stop during traumatic events, were you perhaps getting at something else that I did not catch?

[edit on 8-8-2009 by gimme_some_truth]


Actually it was something I read if I can find a link to it again, I will edit and post it here. I read it about 3 months ago and the part that made me think of this was towards the end of the article. I didn't give it much thought until reading your op and recalling what happened yesterday on the highway. That made me think of what I read in the article and how it might apply here.

If I can find it I will link it in this post.

lol that was easy enough it was the second link listed in the search engine.

What is time

Somewhere there he talks about the possibility of time being possibly in segments and not moving smoothly although he fails to provide any evidence for that. When I was reading your op I was reminded of the article and things like what I wrote in my original response about time almost standing still in life threatening situations.

[edit on 8/9/2009 by DarrylGalasso]

after re-reading some of the article I find that I was mistaken it is more towards the beginning of the article and not the end.

[edit on 8/9/2009 by DarrylGalasso]



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by DarrylGalasso
 


I look forward to seeing it



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   
I would love to travel back in time through my body, meaning I could go back to that time 2 years ago, into that body at the time etc and do something different.


[edit on 9-8-2009 by _Phoenix_]



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
I have to say this is one of the best threads I have ever been on... A very intelligent discussion with all of us adding something for us to think about...this is what ATS is all about.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   
"time travel" might work in space, but on earth you cannot travel back in time or we would have someone here from the future already



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 



The spontaneous decay of a selected atom is completely RANDOM, completely UNPREDICTABLE and completely governed by QUANTUM MECHANICAL PROCESSES.

But remember that wave function allows a certain probability to be known, so it is not completely unpredictable. Also once the wave function collapses it is no longer completely unpredictable, as the probability distribution becomes 100% at that point.



And yet here you are able to state categorically and exactly which atom will decay next. In other words, every quantum mechanical event that happened in the entire universe would have just had to unfold EXACTLY as it did before for that one atom to decay ... the very atom that you knew would decay.


But if you are travelling back on the same time line why would the point of wave collapse be different? Keep in mind that according to uantum theory every possible outcome does happen, just on different realities.





So travelling back in time and watching an event unfold exactly the way it did years ago means that even quantum events are predictable to the utmost degree ... and even worse ... are reproducible each time you travel back to the same point in time and watch the same event unfold.


See above post



Therefore, no matter how you "juggle" things around or imagine "what if's" ... there is simply no way around the 2 examples I just supplied that would permit time travel to be even
remotely possible using a single time line. But then it just gets even worse if you allow the existance of additional time lines.


Not really, quantum theory predicts an infinite number of universes (timelines) where each possible individual out come of every event happens. Each timeline is completely separate from the other, so in a sense reality is both singular (to each realities respected observer) and infinite (in respect to a world view). It works out fine.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
Here is how it has been observed
www1.nasa.gov...


distortions in space-time Einstein translated this principle into mathematical terms in his general theory of relativity. In this theory, matter and energy distort (change the shape of) space-time, and the distortion is experienced as gravity. A more common -- but less precise -- way of explaining the distortion is "Mass curves space." Einstein suggested that astronomers could make certain observations to test the general theory of relativity. The most dramatic of these would be a bending of light rays by the sun's gravitation. In relativity, mass and energy are equivalent; and, because light carries energy, it also is affected by gravity. The light-bending effect is small, but Einstein calculated that it could be observed during a solar eclipse. In 1919, the British astronomer Arthur S. Eddington observed it, thereby making Einstein world-famous. Gravitational waves General relativity indicates that gravitational waves transmit gravitational force, just as electromagnetic waves transmit electric and magnetic forces. Scientists have observed gravitational waves indirectly in a pair of neutron stars that orbit each other. Neutron stars are the smallest and densest stars known. A neutron star measures only about 12 miles (20 kilometers) across, but has more mass then the sun. By observing the pair of stars for several years, the scientists determined that the stars' orbit is becoming smaller. Calculations involving equations of general relativity show that the orbit is shrinking because the stars are emitting gravitational waves. Most gravitational waves produce such small distortions of space-time that they are impossible to detect directly. However, collisions between neutron stars and even more compact objects called black holes create tremendous distortions. Physicists are building observatories to detect the resulting waves directly. An observatory known as the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) has three facilities -- two in Hanford, Washington, and one in Livingston, Louisiana. Each facility is designed to detect gravitational waves by sensing their effect on two metal tubes that are 2 1/2 miles (4 kilometers) long. The tubes are built along the ground, and they are connected to each other in the shape of an L. When a gravitational wave passes through them, it changes their lengths by an amount much smaller than an atomic nucleus. A laser system detects changes in the lengths. Contributor: Michael Dine, Ph.D., Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Cruz. How to cite this article: To cite this article, World Book recommends the following format: Dine, Michael. "Relativity." World Book Online Reference Center. 2004. World Book, Inc. www.worldbookonline.com...



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:50 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 


And.... you just disproved your own theory. well, in a kind of sort of way.. ok, yes, i agree, that once you make that decision to change the channel to channel 5, and you travel back in time to watch yourself change the channel again, that you will select channel 5. BUT, thats only because your "free will" has become destiny only because you cannot change the past unless you travel to it. now, say that some way, some how, you distract your past self to go answer a door, or investigate a sound in another room, you can in fact change the "future" by selecting another channel, and also, you have changed the future already, due to the fact that you made yourself answer the door that was never knocked on in the first place.

So yes, unless you create a tangent (an alternate timeline off of the current timeline, kind of like branches off of a tree trunk) then what was once free will, will become destiny. But your arrival back in time, will almost certainly create a tangent in the timeline.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Helghast1
 


you never know.. we could, u just havent met her or him yet...



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by tauristercus
 



The spontaneous decay of a selected atom is completely RANDOM, completely UNPREDICTABLE and completely governed by QUANTUM MECHANICAL PROCESSES.

But remember that wave function allows a certain probability to be known, so it is not completely unpredictable. Also once the wave function collapses it is no longer completely unpredictable, as the probability distribution becomes 100% at that point.



And yet here you are able to state categorically and exactly which atom will decay next. In other words, every quantum mechanical event that happened in the entire universe would have just had to unfold EXACTLY as it did before for that one atom to decay ... the very atom that you knew would decay.


But if you are travelling back on the same time line why would the point of wave collapse be different? Keep in mind that according to uantum theory every possible outcome does happen, just on different realities.





So travelling back in time and watching an event unfold exactly the way it did years ago means that even quantum events are predictable to the utmost degree ... and even worse ... are reproducible each time you travel back to the same point in time and watch the same event unfold.


See above post



Therefore, no matter how you "juggle" things around or imagine "what if's" ... there is simply no way around the 2 examples I just supplied that would permit time travel to be even
remotely possible using a single time line. But then it just gets even worse if you allow the existance of additional time lines.


Not really, quantum theory predicts an infinite number of universes (timelines) where each possible individual out come of every event happens. Each timeline is completely separate from the other, so in a sense reality is both singular (to each realities respected observer) and infinite (in respect to a world view). It works out fine.



I Concur!



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Angelsoftheapocalypse
reply to post by Helghast1
 


you never know.. we could, u just havent met her or him yet...



no because it WOULD have happened already. at some point in time it would have happened. And since it hasnt yet, it is not possible.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Helghast1
 


im just saying, just because you havent heard of it, or seen it with your own eyes, doesnt mean it hasnt happened yet.





top topics
 
162
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join