new guy talks science

[Danny Hernandez]

how do you think time travel can be possible? i think that if you could find a way to go through a black hole you can travel hundreds or thousands of years into the future unfortunately if you could go through a Black hole you would not know where you would end up at you can be in another part of the galaxy or on the other side of the universe! whats your opinion?

[dirka dirka]

how do you think time travel can be possible? i think that if you could find a way to go through a black hole you can travel hundreds or thousands of years into the future unfortunately if you could go through a Black hole you would not know where you would end up at you can be in another part of the galaxy or on the other side of the universe! whats your opinion?

do you know what a black hole is?

[Medemia]

Let's suppose that you do fall into a black hole or even fly into one to see if you can travel through time. Now if a black hole is strong enough to even trap light, imagine the gravitational pull. Theoretically, anybody, anything that flew into a black hole would be reduced to the size of a grain of sand from the immense pressure exerted from all sides. So, if time travel was possible through a black hole, you would be a grain of sand 2,000 years from now :)

[dirka dirka]

The gravity not only crushes you, it also pulls you apart. There is no telling what would happen, however survinving would be greatly unlikely. Blackholes have an insane amount of matter on the inside, therefore creating the gravity. So if you think you are going to travel through time, tell me this, why hasen't that matter traveled threw time?

[Jonspen]

Let's suppose that you do fall into a black hole or even fly into one to see if you can travel through time. Now if a black hole is strong enough to even trap light, imagine the gravitational pull. Theoretically, anybody, anything that flew into a black hole would be reduced to the size of a grain of sand from the immense pressure exerted from all sides. So, if time travel was possible through a black hole, you would be a grain of sand 2,000 years from now :)

Meh. Life's a beach, Surf it up baby!

[meat.eater]

I Love Danny! New Guy with a god thread! Halielujia! I find the space-time continuom intriguing. If we were to be able to travel millions lightyears away in a matter of days, weeks, months, even years, when our explorers returned, it would be 1000 years later here on earth. Freaky.

[Megabyte]

Doesn't the density of matter increase as you approach the speed of light?

[S_K_O_F]

Theoretically, It is impossible to travel through time.
but, if you could manage to reach the speed of light or surpass it(both theoretically impossible) you could look in to the past if you could find a way to interpret the light signals that you are travelling along side

I do not believe that time travel will ever be possible

[dirka dirka]

SKOF, they have already PROVED time travel into the future is possible.

[S_K_O_F]

SKOF, they have already PROVED time travel into the future is possible.

only if you can find a way to propel yourself near the speed of light(which is impossible)

[dirka dirka]

Not true, you are thinking extremely relative.

They placed two atomic clocks on two separate planes flying at the same altitude. The one was flying twice the speed of the other, and both flew for 12 hours. The one clock was off by thousandths of milliseconds.


Edit: Also, only to our limited view on science is traveling at the speed of light impossible.

[S_K_O_F]

Not true, you are thinking extremely relative.

They placed two atomic clocks on two separate planes flying at the same altitude. The one was flying twice the speed of the other, and both flew for 12 hours. The one clock was off by thousandths of milliseconds.


Edit: Also, only to our limited view on science is traveling at the speed of light impossible.

yes yes yes...everyone knows about this

but you cannot forego the laws of physics that say that as you approach the speed of light, your mass begins increasing infinately

[Megabyte]

yes yes yes...everyone knows about this

but you cannot forego the laws of physics that say that as you approach the speed of light, your mass begins increasing infinately


what i said

[dirka dirka]

Thats if you have mass in the first place, limited science. Who says we can't change into another type of being, or maybe an energy, that can be converted back into matter.

[Megabyte]

u use the phrase limited science, I ask, as opposed to what?

[Medemia]

Ok, let's suppose you do manage to make it to light speed. Isn't the theory of relativity saying that time for you goes at a different rate than time for someone not going the speed of light? So while it seems you are gone for 30 seconds, the world has aged 30 years. So you have "gone to the future" although you really just skipped time. And in the same way, you can't go negative light speed to get back... once you skipped the time, you missed it and can't go back. That is, unless you have a flux capacitor.

[Megabyte]

ur not really skipping time since u exist in all that time.

Otherwise, we're all time traveling right now..see, I'm 15 seconds in the future *waves hand ominously*

[dirka dirka]

ur not really skipping time since u exist in all that time.

Otherwise, we're all time traveling right now..see, I'm 15 seconds in the future *waves hand ominously*
He is saying mentally, not physically.

[dirka dirka]

u use the phrase limited science, I ask, as opposed to what?

Any scientist will tell you our outlook on science is VERY limited. We can't determine the state of an object unless it is observed. This proves we are limited.

We simply are extremely limited, like it or not. As opposed to what is out there.

[Aro23r]

dirka dirka, just because you sound quasi-intelligent, doesn't mean you are. Time travel in quantum mechanics requires one to surpass the speed of light, which has been deemed impossible. (As SKOF said earlier)

[dirka dirka]

dirka dirka, just because you sound quasi-intelligent, doesn't mean you are. Time travel in quantum mechanics requires one to surpass the speed of light, which has been deemed impossible. (As SKOF said earlier)

Uhm, I am just telling people what i have learned, go google it, it does not require one to surpass the speed of light, and thats not impossible. Limited science, maybe in the form we are in its impossible, but who says there isn't another form we can take? A form of pure energy instead of matter.

You starting off with an insult kinda has me questioning your integrity... Why did you do that? Its a harmless debate\discussion thread.

[meat.eater]

Not true, you are thinking extremely relative.

They placed two atomic clocks on two separate planes flying at the same altitude. The one was flying twice the speed of the other, and both flew for 12 hours. The one clock was off by thousandths of milliseconds.


Edit: Also, only to our limited view on science is traveling at the speed of light impossible.


oh great. so if we can travel 1000 times faster then an airplane then we'll get 1 second into the future. Whoopee. And it would have taken 12 hours still to go 1 second into the future. I think i would rather die.

eater

[Aro23r]

I'm sick of idiots. This forum has been and currently is infested with people who believe themselves to be geniuses, yet have no idea what they're talking about.

Now, think simply here. If our "limited [as you say]" science is incapable of time travel by any and all rules of quantum and newtonian mechanics, what makes you think it is possible; especially when all laws of quantum mechanics (some newtonian laws only work under certain circumstances, however) have been verified and yet to be proven otherwise.

[dirka dirka]

oh great. so if we can travel 1000 times faster then an airplane then we'll get 1 second into the future. Whoopee. And it would have taken 12 hours still to go 1 second into the future. I think i would rather die.

eater


Those numbers arn't even exact, it just proved that it is possible.

[Aro23r]

Also, with normal mechanics, the faster you go, the greater the force exerted on you becomes. Therefore, friction increases proportionally (as friction is a force). This causes things to exert more energy to do the same thing.

This may explain why clocks move "slower" at high speeds.

EDIT: While it is only acceleration that actually provides such extreme forces, one must accelerate to reach the high speeds necessary for time to "slow".

[dirka dirka]

I'm sick of idiots. This forum has been and currently is infested with people who believe themselves to be geniuses, yet have no idea what they're talking about.

Now, think simply here. If our "limited [as you say]" science is incapable of time travel by any and all rules of quantum and newtonian mechanics, what makes you think it is possible; especially when all laws of quantum mechanics (some newtonian laws only work under certain circumstances, however) have been verified and yet to be proven otherwise.


Light, in essanse, travels threw time. A star could burn out and we won't see it for 300 years. Fact is, it IS possible, and traveling at the speed of light is NOT required, because thats just silly to say sciense has some some built in switch that says if speed = lightspeed then timetravel = ok...

[Aro23r]

Light does not travel "threw" time as you suggest. It travels like we do when we walk, like cars do when we drive them. However, the difference is, all things we perceive (including time) occur [through] changes in light. How else do we perceive time but this way? We know "time is changing" because the light bouncing off of something hits our eyes differently, indicating change, and humans have come to know that it does not happen instantaneously, therefore showing that this time that we call "time" has passed.

EDIT: Dinner, I'll be back in 20 minutes.

[dirka dirka]

Light does not travel "threw" time as you suggest. It travels like we do when we walk, like cars do when we drive them. However, the difference is, all things we perceive (including time) occur [through] changes in light. How else do we perceive time but this way? We know "time is changing" because the light bouncing off of something hits our eyes differently, indicating change, and humans have come to know that it does not happen instantaneously, therefore showing that this time that we call "time" has passed.

EDIT: Dinner, I'll be back in 20 minutes.

Saying that we can observe time because of light, and what we see, is just misfounded. Blind people still have a perception of time.

We know time is changing because of differences, say your computer freezes, you don't know until you move your mouse, or the song thats playing stops.


Light indeed travels threw time like i said, we don't see something that happened 3 lightyears away, until 3 years after it happened.

[dirka dirka]

Sorry, double post maybe.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/time-travel1.htm

We have been both half right and half wrong. I just read that entire thing, and have found some of the stuff i said is false, and some is not.

[Jonspen]

That site rocks.

Im bookmarking it.

[lostandconfused]

I have no scientific point to make, your spelling is just bugging the shit out of me.



Johnny threw the ball.
I wish I could travel through time.

[Aro23r]

I'm reading it now.

However, with your 3 lightyear / 3 year analogy. I'd rather refer to that differently. Something travelling at 3.0 * 10^8 m/s needs 3 years to travel the required distance to our universe. However, that three years is not really the "time travel" that you are referring to in the traditional sense. If a car leaves my house to travel to your house, and it needs two hours to do that, you would not say that that specific two hour time period is travelling through time.

However, I believe this whole thing works with a working definiton of time. What is your definition of this? If it is in that article, sorry, I'm only on the second page right now.

EDIT: Yea I know, you'll notice the "threw" I said was in quotes. :)

[Aro23r]

Double post.

Remind me to kill you for showing me that site. Now I have about ten pages there I want to read.

[dirka dirka]

I'm reading it now.

However, with your 3 lightyear / 3 year analogy. I'd rather refer to that differently. Something travelling at 3.0 * 10^8 m/s needs 3 years to travel the required distance to our universe. However, that three years is not really the "time travel" that you are referring to in the traditional sense. If a car leaves my house to travel to your house, and it needs two hours to do that, you would not say that that specific two hour time period is travelling through time.

However, I believe this whole thing works with a working definiton of time. What is your definition of this? If it is in that article, sorry, I'm only on the second page right now.

EDIT: Yea I know, you'll notice the "threw" I said was in quotes. :)

Yea, i guess it could be looked upon as actual traveling. Time is hard to define, and i really can't find the words. However if you look at it, 4 demensions, x y z and time, maybe, i don't know. Because x y z have to be relative to something, therefore time also has to be relative to something.

I think this whole topic was about the black holes thing, with the singulatiry and that other kind.



Double post.

Remind me to kill you for showing me that site. Now I have about ten pages there I want to read.


Lol.

[Aro23r]

On the black hole page, it talks about centrifugal force. This doesn't exist, so I'm assuming that he meant centripetal.

However, this would not disprove the possibility of a singularity, rather it would prove it, because all of the centripetal forces would bring it to one point (assuming it is constantly rotating, and constantly losing momentum / inertia somehow).

EDIT: I'm out for the night. I take back what I said earlier. You DO know what you're talking about. I'm very happy.

[dirka dirka]

On the black hole page, it talks about centrifugal force. This doesn't exist, so I'm assuming that he meant centripetal.

However, this would not disprove the possibility of a singularity, rather it would prove it, because all of the centripetal forces would bring it to one point (assuming it is constantly rotating, and constantly losing momentum / inertia somehow).


Right, so really black holes dont have the ability of time travel? Correct?


EDIT: I'm out for the night. I take back what I said earlier. You DO know what you're talking about. I'm very happy.

Thanx :)

[Danny Hernandez]

hey guys all i am saying is possibly even though you can not enter a Black hole cause the Gravity is to great. Ijust enjoy the thought of it like meat.eater. true they have proven time travel is possible and you must be going quite fast to do so it is nice to think you can go hundreds of years into the future.

[BoBo The Fool]

Time travel IS possible... in fact, i'm doing it right now... in fact, we're all doing it right now. Just because we can't control how fast and which direction we go in time doesn't mean we can't/aren't travelling through (in/on/with) it.





*smacks himself for trying to be a smart-ass

[old_man_killer]

*smacks him again for good measure*

[Office_Shredder]

Ok, on white holes: We have no reason to believe they exist. Yes, there is mathematical suppport for a white hole, but don't you think we would have detected them if there was a white hole somewhere in the universe? I mean, surely it spits out SOME sort of signal, since it spits everything that enters a Kerr hole out of it. Unless we're special or something (no religious references!). Also, if a white hole spat out everything this kerr hole sucked in, the kerr hole wouldn't last very long

I'm not going to comment on wormholes because they really are based on abstract abstract physics. Also, even if we *could* make this rip in space time, and carry it around (again, if a wormhole existed, wouldn't we see it? I would assume matter disappearing and reappearing would be noticeable). And even if they existed, nothing says that the speed of light still doesn't hold as the fastest form of travel... it could merely take longer to travel through this fourth dimensional medium than through normal three dimensions. *still assuming this somehow exists*

[Lordofzrings]

I was waiting for OS to come out with something like that:

Heres my thaught:

we would waste more years learning about time traveling, than traveling Further in time.

And by that time itd be at least 300 years from now, i dunno about u, but if they dont come uo with a "Life Pill" or something, id be dead by then and Not have a mind.


And this whole 4th demension ur talking about enrtrting when u enter a black hole, its called Death.

When u DIe Time is non-existant, actually everything is non-existant because u cant think, oh man tonights gonna be one of thoose nights where i think myself to sleep about DIeing.

havbe u ever had one of thoose?

[dirka dirka]

Ok, on white holes: We have no reason to believe they exist. Yes, there is mathematical suppport for a white hole, but don't you think we would have detected them if there was a white hole somewhere in the universe? I mean, surely it spits out SOME sort of signal, since it spits everything that enters a Kerr hole out of it. Unless we're special or something (no religious references!). Also, if a white hole spat out everything this kerr hole sucked in, the kerr hole wouldn't last very long

I'm not going to comment on wormholes because they really are based on abstract abstract physics. Also, even if we *could* make this rip in space time, and carry it around (again, if a wormhole existed, wouldn't we see it? I would assume matter disappearing and reappearing would be noticeable). And even if they existed, nothing says that the speed of light still doesn't hold as the fastest form of travel... it could merely take longer to travel through this fourth dimensional medium than through normal three dimensions. *still assuming this somehow exists*


This is a good point, however, the concept of there being no singularity means that matter has to go somewhere. Just because we haven't seen it, doesn't mean it isn't there. However, remember, that the non-singularity blackholes are only theory.

[Office_Shredder]

This really comes into the point of applying purely theoretical, mathematically structured physics into the real world. And while it works up to a certain point, but you eventually reach a point where you are creating entities which physically are EXTREMELY unstable.

It's like trying to form hydrogen from helium using only chemical reactions.... it's theoretically possible, but you simply can't do it (ignore nuclear reactions, since it's tough to make a good analogy).

[dirka dirka]

and back to the limitations, what we understand, and what we can control. We will most likely die not knowing.

[Foundation]

hehehe all these talk about holes are making me laugh XD

[lostandconfused]

omg all these talk about holes are making me laugh XD
Erm..you scare me.

[Foundation]

And this whole 4th demension ur talking about enrtrting when u enter a black hole, its called Death.

havbe u ever had one of thoose?

ahahahahahahaAHAHAHAH

[Office_Shredder]

Better analogy! This is analogous to early attempts to slow down light through the ether that permeated all vacuums.

[meat.eater]

ahahahahahahaAHAHAHAH

imature moron. and "XD" is the wost face EVER!!!! agree? disagree?

[Serge]

Have any of you ever read the book Flatland?