Is time travel possible? At first i ....

I recall reading somewhere that matter becomes 'energy' at that point. Hypothetically at least.

 

Well, that is another argument. We could argue that and I may agree because I subscribe to Godel and Einsteins version or reality. There are two kinds of time that physicists recognize. One, intuitive time is denoted by a lower case 't'. The other, space-time or time in reference to its merging with space as a coordinate is denoted as an uppercase 'T'. I would claim that T surely exists. However t is a measurement of entropy and I also feel comfortable saying that both exist. Physicists also claim there is also an arrow of time (best to Google it, its too complicated to explain in this reply). But there should not be. In other words a glass should unbreakable as easily and as often as it breaks. There is no physical law that prohibits a glass from spontaneously reassembling itself. So we are certainly missing something eh? Trust me I gave up on science as the messenger of truth. Its at best the a good guess for the time that a question is asked of it. Its also a remarkable tool when used as 'applied science'. However I am interested in real truth and that is why I study both science and metaphysics/religion. Anyway you might be interested in a little book called ;

A World Without Time: The Forgotten Legacy of Gödel and Einstein
www.ams.org/notices/200707/tx070700861p.pdf
by J Stachel - Cited by 1 - Related articles
Book Review. A World Without Time: The Forgotten Legacy of. Gödel and Einstein. Reviewed by John Stachel. A World Without Time: The Forgotten Legacy of ...

I read it years ago and it was very enlightening, and I bet it will also cover much of what you are claiming. Its a easy read with very little technical stuff in it, just as I like it!

reva

 

Time travel has already been proven. The effects of time travel are evident to an unaided observer only at very high velocities ie around 99% light speed. In miles per hour that is around 660 million miles per hour. However time travel has been proven by putting atomic clocks on two plodding jet aircraft traveling at 600 mph and another stationary. The Jet flew across the USA and back. Atomic clocks can cut a second up in to more than a billion pieces. The stationary clock was a few billionths of a second older than the clock on the jet. In another similar experiment the space station was used. It is orbiting at more than 17 thousand mph. The results were the same. In still another experiment one clock was suspended a thousand feet higher than the clock on the ground, yep the clock on the ground was older than the clock a thousand feet high. Anyone know why? It was because the clock on the ground was closer to the center of the earth and gravity was stronger. Gravity stretches ie slows time. That is why time stops in the singularity of a black hole. So the question of time dilation aka time travel has been PROVEN. That is old news really, however you guys do not seem to believe me so here are some resources that confirm what I have claimed;

Hafele–Keating experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele–Keating_experimentThis effect called time dilation was confirmed in many tests of special ... That is, clocks at higher altitude are ticking faster than clocks on Earth's surface. ... tests of general relativity, such as the Pound–Rebka experiment or Gravity Probe A. ... using more precise atomic clocks during a flight from London to Washington, D.C. ...

Pair of aluminum atomic clocks reveal Einstein's relativity at a ...
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100923142436.htmSep 23, 2010 – ... comprehensible scale than previous measurements made using jet aircraft. ... The moving ion acts like the traveling twin in the twin paradox. ... NIST physicists compared a pair of the world's best atomic clocks to demonstrate ... (Oct. 20, 2011) — General relativity, the joint theory of gravity, space and time ...

NOVA | The Fabric of the Cosmos: Ser...
www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/fabric-of-cosmos.htmlOur perceptions of time and space have led us astray. ... Space. It separates you from me, one galaxy from the next, and atoms from one another. ..... BRIAN GREENE: For over a year, Gravity Probe B orbited the earth, while the team nervously ...... To do this, all you need are a couple of atomic clocks and a jet airplane.


reva

 

Sorry for the naivety but i suck in physics .
The earth is moving fast , i don't know the exact speed but let's say 60.000km/h if you go 1 hour back in time wouldn't you end up 60.000km away from earth ?

 

I suck in all math and it was torture to learn it by rote over and over and over while my friends seemed to get it the first time. If I had not had been so curious I would have burned my math text books...Its like playing chess or checkers or a vid game though. After you learn the basics which drive you nutty it gets real easy...

Anyway I think you are talking about light speed. The earth is orbiting the sun in relation to a stationary object in the solar system at about 67,000 mph. However the sun in relation to a stationary object is moving at over 500,000 mph! Then there is the speed that our galaxy is moving in relation to the other galaxies....but I digress....

So even at the incredible speed of 500,000 mph, its not even a light second (a light second is how far light travels in one second, which is about 186,000 miles per second) or about 186,000 times 60 a min. But to answer your question in a ball park fashion (sorry I am in a hurry and lazy too) if you went back in time one second you would be in another universe! (backwards time travel is not possible but we will say we have learned to travel back in time by going faster than light). The reason being is to avoid a paradox. But that is all speculation and barley theory. The universe you entered would be nearly the same as this one according to our best minds....

reva

 

Thinking about the connection between matter and the speed of light... even matter sped up to 0.999c will nevertheless be rapidly overtaken by a photon at the full speed of c, appearing to the matter as going 1.999c using classical assumptions, but to an observer, the matter and the photon would be neck and neck, with the photon only slowly pulling ahead. This is very difficult to make sense of.

If the speed of light were established to be valued at zero, then the important figure in relativity calculations would not be the speed of light, but the speed of everything else relative to light. Is this a more workable conceptual approach? Is mass itself traveling so fast... maybe falling into itself... and the photons emitted by the mass sit perfectly "still" as our material universe sinks into itself at the speed we call c? What we think of matter is this sinking condition, which is why it's nonsense to talk about speeding it up to the speed of light. We're actually talking about bringing it to a dead stop and letting it slip back into the "real?" universe which gives us our notion of "energy." Mass is like a little knot of energy forever being tied tighter and tighter. And then a knot being tied in the other direction meets it and they untie each other which is the annihilation.

I dunno.. Help me get my head straight folks.

 

E M equals C two squared. ha ha ... there is not enough energy in the universe to drive a softball to 100% light speed, nutty eh?

reva

 

Your just measuring the effects of perceived time, not time itself.

 

look up intuitive, as I said Physicists deal with intuitive time ie the kind of time that feels like its flowing represented by 't' and spacetime indicated by 'T', which is the very real fourth dimension. Maybe a forum is not the best place to attempt to describe/explain this, eh~?

reva

 

Wrong.

 

Possible, but not in the way of you or someone else going somewhere in time and walking amongst ancient or future people and doing things. A "time snapshop" of a small contained area can be "projected" into its space more like a ghostly picture. Just like a torch' spot at night.

 

I disagree.

Time moves faster at lower gravity than at higher gravity. It is not percieved time but actual time. That is why they used atomic clocks to measure it.

But it is all relative...time would move slower at low gravity relative to high gravity. But either place a person would percieve time moving at the same rate.

In other words...a minute would be a minute no matter where you are.

If a person on earth lived a hundred years a person on a very high gravity planet would only see a year pass.

But...a year would be a year for both.

 

I agree.

 

not necessarily. I travel at the speed of light all the time. Your speed is relevant to what object you are comparing yourself to. If I stand still and a beam of light goes by me, I passed that beam of light at the speed of light.
I also believe we would have to leave our physical bodies, and what "we" are composed of, might not have any drag while traveling at all.

 

Hmmm, I cant remember if my memory is faulty or not,
so I decided to go to the procrastonators anonymous meeting, but everyone was late, so I was early and am no longer a procrastonator.

I really dislike when a scientist proclaims things impossible. The only things I accept as impossible, are when you have restrictions on a relationship between two entities. Like, If im standing on the earth, relative to the earth, can I be going both up and down at the same time?

I think we can travel at the speed of light and more, but I think our actual form would be more like pure energy or spirit, and not the clunky bodies we have that force us to go to meetings, like gamblers anonymous, but I didnt have to go to that either cuz I won a bet with my buddy and my prize was not having to go.

 

time exists because we think of it.

time is a concept that tells us information about relationships of objects. Since objects cannot exist in two places at once, or past or future, then I think once something happens, it happened and its over with.

But at the same time, pun intended, what Im experiencing right now, is somebody elses future. Like when Im on a phone and I hear thunder, and I tell the person in a few seconds you are going to hear thunder.

 

first, I should not have said I can prove it, just that I have ideas that seem like they could work.
I also dont believe that any of the laws of nature or God can ever be broken. We simply dont have all the information about all the objects that exist.
Just like the round earth vs. flat earthers of days gone past. (in a way, I would have loved to experience those flat earth days, which is why Im searching for a method of time travel ! ) for those who believed the earth was flat, when magellon sailed off and came back from the other side, the flat earthers thought, wow, he defied gravity and didnt fall off the end of the earth. when in reality, they just didnt have the info that the eart was round.

I dont think I can go backwards into my past, but I can go backwards into your past that is , your present time is present to you, but it could be the past to me, your present is my past.

To go to time travel, we really need to toss out a lot of preconceived ideas.

 

aww, as those words were spoken to Magellan.!

 

This certainly is an interesting thought. But then there is the question of why the universe prefers to have anything exist at all.

Another thought about why there is the ammount of matter in the universe that there is. The presence of more matter in the universe automatically would increase rest mass (since the energy associated with matter is actually the potential gravitional energy of all the matter in the universe falling together). That means that more matter would exponentially rest masses for each particle. And increased rest mass would increase gravitational attraction.
So there is likely some ideal point at which is most preferrable.

 

I think we are overly fixated with the speed of light. We only use that scale because we view the world in things we "see" hence light. What if we were blind? We could measure distance in the speed of sound.

Now suppose we have some senses we dont use, because the element to make them useful is not around us. Like, if I had functioning eyes, but was born underground in a cave, pitch black, and died there, I would never know I had eyes or vision.

Not only do I think we can pass the speed of light, I think we can obliterate it. Einstein didnt think we could travel faster than light, but he proved to be wrong. there may be gadzillions of particles flying by us right now, going so fast, we cant detect them.
this could be part of the spiritual realm.
think of yourself being in water, there is tons of oxygen around you, but you cant sense it.

 

I helped a kid who had all "A's" except math, an astounding D, he now gets an A AND ENJOYS MATH. first thing, math is not problems, equations and numbers, it is a language, learn the language, listen and speak it, then you are on your way to einsteinien speak. !

 

Exactly, but there have been even more interesting experiments since then.

Most people participating in this thread are probably already familiar with the double-slit experiment (I'm not going to explain the whole thing here, so if not, Google it first). However, there is a more recent variation of it that is even more intreguing. We know that an unobserved particle behaves as a wave. If we change the point at which the electrons/photons are observed until after they pass through the slits, but before they contact the collector, the state still changes back to a particle, but in a manner that seems as if the were never a wave at all.

In other words, it appears (though more testing is necessary) that observing a wave-state at this specific point of travel causes the quantum state of the electrons/photons to travel back in time to the point they were fired and behave as if they were always particles (not waves).

Just think about that for a minute.

 

I beleive there are ways to speed up time relative to the universe around you ( astronauts have proven this ). If you could go fast enough, near the speed of light, you could land on earth 10 years of your time later to find the time on earth has elapsed at a much greater rate.


However, I do not think it is possible to travel BACKWARDS in time.

 

To be honest I too am not so sure light is the ultimate speed in the universe, that is just a hunch with no supporting evidence, I just do not like absolutes. However, as a christian minister eyebrows already raise when I begin speaking about science, so I need all the creds I can muster...ha ha. Its silly how a scientists career can be destroyed because he dare think out of the box, by that I mean go against the established science. For example the geologist who suggested that plate tectonics (he did not call it that) may explain why the continents are so similar in certain areas etc. He was ridiculed and laughed at...until decades later when yep he was proved right. By that time the damage was done. Anyway ideas are a good thing...

reva

reva

 

If an object in outer space were to be moving faster than the speed of light wouldn't it be invisible. Therefore if we can see it it's not moving faster than light.