Time Travel

page: 3
8
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ErosA433
 


So we just throw Einsteins equations out the window, mass, velocity, speed and gravity are all relative, what does mass have to do with it if size is not relative, do you even have a basic understanding of Einsteins equation?




posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Well to throw a sarcastic tone back at you, for the one you gave... Do you have even a basic understanding of what I wrote?

What I wrote is about perception. Perception can be altered chemically, I am talking about the kinds of things that happen when for example people get a sudden rush of adrenaline and describe how time slows down. Obviously the passage of time didn't actually slow down, but how quickly the person/brain perceives the surroundings speeds up and such the apparent progression of time slows down. Like a frame rate... if you say you see the passage of time at 25fps... if you took chemical A that doubles it, you see the same passage of time at a frame rate of 50fps... to you time seems to slow down. Fast moving objects now move slower. Take chemical B and say it halves(ish) it to 13fps... suddenly that fast moving object seems to move even faster.

Perception and the actual march of time are two different things... was all that i was saying, no need to get upset and sarcastic because you didnt understand what i wrote.

So please before getting on your high horse please read and understand and comprehend that i wrote.

What i am saying is that an ant sees the passage of time differently to us because of chemical responses not because of any matter related relative effect.
edit on 21-8-2013 by ErosA433 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I would go back about 6,000 years ago. Apparently something happened at that time that changed the course of humanity. War betweens gods and all that....

What would I bring with me? Popcorn and a drink.



posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   
On the subject in hand i think some kind of time dilation device is possibly the only way to go, meaning you can 'sort of' transport yourself to the future. I guess the easiest way to do this would be a, lets fly really fast for a while and then travel back to the Earth. As simple as it sounds it is more technically challenging than it would appear.

Given that the above there is no going back... im not really sure where id like to go, since where ever i do go it will be forward... might be exciting to go 100 years into the future.



posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ErosA433
 


Yes I understand perception what does perception have to do with the fact that the farther you get away from a large mass you experience time different? Your perception is relative to your size that is why smaller things such as flies perceive time differently!



posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   
It truly is a small effect on the earth, experiments have been performed with atomic clocks, which suggested that clocks taken in aircraft sky showed the passage of time slowed in comparison to ones on the ground. Actually the results where mostly inconclusive as the effect was extremely small.

This actually meant that it was the velocity that effected the passage of time, not the distance.

An ant doesn't experience a slower passage of time because of its size or its proximity to the Earth in any real tangible way compared to that of a human.

Iv also watched time dependant phenomena in the lab in differently sized particles.. are you suggesting that if i have a big particle of radioactive material and a small one, the decay rates should be different? I can, in my experience say that it doesn't have any effect at all. (it shouldn't since the radio active atoms are al the same size)

This is where the issue breaks down... we are all made up of component atoms... so what? do those atoms all see time faster than we do as a whole? doesn't make logical sense on the scales you are talking about.



posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ErosA433
It truly is a small effect on the earth, experiments have been performed with atomic clocks, which suggested that clocks taken in aircraft sky showed the passage of time slowed in comparison to ones on the ground. Actually the results where mostly inconclusive as the effect was extremely small.

Because the Earth certainly isn't a big enough mass to have an effect on the experiment? What about if you get 11 billion miles away from the sun, will that have any effect on the atomic clock?

This actually meant that it was the velocity that effected the passage of time, not the distance.

You cannot get an accurate result being next to a very large mass!

An ant doesn't experience a slower passage of time because of its size or its proximity to the Earth in any real tangible way compared to that of a human.

How do you know for sure what an ant experiences?

Iv also watched time dependant phenomena in the lab in differently sized particles.. are you suggesting that if i have a big particle of radioactive material and a small one, the decay rates should be different? I can, in my experience say that it doesn't have any effect at all. (it shouldn't since the radio active atoms are al the same size)

Particles don't have any perception that I'm aware of that's not to say that they aren't aware, particle pairing suggests something different but I'm not here to postulate on what particles perceive!

This is where the issue breaks down... we are all made up of component atoms... so what? do those atoms all see time faster than we do as a whole? doesn't make logical sense on the scales you are talking about.


Again I'm not sure atoms are aware of anything, we certainly can't ask them!



posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 06:12 PM
link   
but that is my whole point... not completely sure why you are so confused/affronted or at least stepping up about this.

perception of the passage of time is in biology a purely electrochemical process, given that this takes place in the brain, why on earth would it have anything to do with your body mass or size or if you are flying high or not. There was no massive report of time dilation by the Apollo astronauts. The way you speak of it it is as if you suggest that there would be a huge relativistic difference between an ant and a human, and a human who is on an aircraft and one who is on the ground.

My only lack of understanding here is a lack of understanding your logic and your apparent lack of understanding how relativity works



posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by 19KTankCommander
 


John Titor is the best one I know of.
edit on 21-8-2013 by whatsecret because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ErosA433
but that is my whole point... not completely sure why you are so confused/affronted or at least stepping up about this.

perception of the passage of time is in biology a purely electrochemical process, given that this takes place in the brain, why on earth would it have anything to do with your body mass or size or if you are flying high or not. There was no massive report of time dilation by the Apollo astronauts. The way you speak of it it is as if you suggest that there would be a huge relativistic difference between an ant and a human, and a human who is on an aircraft and one who is on the ground.

My only lack of understanding here is a lack of understanding your logic and your apparent lack of understanding how relativity works


Okay the ant was a bad analogy I was talking more on a quantum level compared to human, I know quantum gravity is just theory but why wouldn't it be so? And I'm only saying the Astronauts would have to move a lot further away from the mass of anything to notice any real dilation, this is only my understanding and opinion as I understand it that because massive planets create a gravitational distortion, we feel that from Earth and from the sun, the sun being the big factor in time for us. The Voyager mission excites me a lot for this very reason, I'm anxious to know what's going to happen when it leaves the sheath!



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Sure it is known that a large amount of mass situated in a small-ish area, such as a planet or star cause a gravitational well. This well is the bend or bump in space-time. The potential has a fall off effect however just as anything else does. Now the only object in our solar system that requires 2nd order corrections for this space-time curve effect is mercury. This correction is quite a small one and is used to explain the fact that in newtonian motion you expect all planets to orbit in circles around the centre of mass (ie the sun), and in keplarian (sp?) motion everything can orbit stably in ellipses where you get a near and a far point with 2 focal points. Classically however this motion is fixed in place and any precession is determined by drag... (so like dust or general stuff that the planet sweeps through each year) so it is a very small effect!

Mercury on the otherhand is close enough to the sun that there is a space time curve effect which adds significantly.

Now, my point is that on the sales you are thinking of there is little to no dialation in any useful way between a object say in orbit or a space craft leaving our solar system. The pertubation or gravitational attraction to the sun at those distances for a small object is extremely small.

It is like the example of astrology (where I have read people saying) "Well its from gravitational effects, like when a baby is born, it feels the gravitational effect from jupiter"

when the truth is, the gravitational attraction from the mother and the midwife is higher than any that Jupiter has.


If the fall off of this effect is 1/r^2 which is a good bet... you will find any effect to be absolutely tiny for the sizes of objects we are talking about being 'man made'

Voyager leaving our solar system boundary has been very interesting in itself... its left about 20 times now haha which is a really good indication of how fuzzy that boundary is. Pretty awesome mission
edit on 23-8-2013 by ErosA433 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Only theorizing here but it is my thought that gravitational or time effects extend out a lot farther than we feel them in the form of electromagnetism, the suns EM field extends to that 11 billion miles is what I'm saying, maybe outside that EM field is something else all together that we obviously have no understanding of, but you have to consider EM waves to be relative!



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   

ErosA433


An ant doesn't experience a slower passage of time because of its size



Actually it does and science has now proven just that!

Small Animals See The World In Slow Motion



posted on Nov, 23 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Can I just say, if time travel (specifically into the past) is or will ever be possible, we would already know (Unless someone with the ability to do it is hiding it) hence why I said in my much earlier post that if time travel were ever to be possible it would only be possible to travel back to the point in which the time travelling machine was made, before that point the machine would not exist.



posted on Nov, 23 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   

hisshadow
well considering the key to bending spacetime is gravity... and to do that really good you need something the size of a star... or the energy equilivent of a star (e=mc2) ...

now that you can warp spacetime, the problem is howto contain that mass or power in a ship.


which i'll probably stop there, you'd more than likely need the mass of a black hole....


barring shortcuts and physics cheats



Exactly. Cern produces miniature black holes. All they need is a magnetic containment field to stop them from vaporizing. Although personally, I don't think they are vaporizing.





new topics
top topics
 
8
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join