new member

Grayson

Conspiracy Cafe
Messages
1,117
new member

Originally posted by baryn@Aug 20 2004, 12:18 AM
Let me start out by thanking everyone who replied...I honestly didn't know if my theory would fly. Again, I only signed up today because I woke up this morning with this \"theory\" in my head. I don't study this, I have never read about it, and most of what I know comes from seeing Donny Darko and what little info I have in my brain about Einstein.

In light of all that...Grayson, thank you very much for your reply, and though I don't follow much of it, it's greatly appreciated. Cary, thank you for making me feel welcome and because of you, I definetly see myself coming here again and again. Oh, and, Cary, as you can see, I don't really follow the scientific commentary ahaha. So thanks again! Rob, I loved what you had to say, I love your ideas and as soon as I am done writing this I am reading your post.

So yeah, Ima dork...but anyhow, thanks again to everyone!

Baryn


Hey. hey, hey Baryn. Ignore me, as I don't have a clue about this TT stuff myself. I'm here to learn.

That's just me trying to wrap my head around this stuff. Normally, in the heavy TT threads, I just post a *splutch* type of sound as my head implodes. I struggle with the concept of genuine Time-Travel as I believe the Boffiny-bits that are simplistically contained within that reply.

Satan, Pheonix or Starlord could rip it to bits.

I'm surprised you didn't. :huh:
 

John

Member
Messages
317
new member

Baryn,
Welcome to the community bro. I apologize for not posting sooner, I have been a bit busy lately.

If all one had to do was to go faster than light to time travel, your theory is pretty sound. However, based on my limited knowledge of Einstein, the speed of light and time travel, your theory would not cause any actual time travel to occur. Here is why:

Steve Hawkins in his book "Black Holes and Baby Galaxies", discusses particles that speed at rates faster than the speed of light. He talks about them in relation to black holes. As you know a black hole is a singularity whose gravity is such that not even light at it's tremendous speed can escape. However, some radiation does manage to escape, and therefore must be moving at rates faster than light. However, though obsevervable, no time travel occurs.

Here is, what I believe would happen applying your theory. Let's say that you could slow the speed of light to 1mph in a vacuum. You begin walking(lets say you walk at a rate 1.5 mph), time does not slow noticeably enough for you to know the difference nor does it appear that you are moving slower to an outside-the-vacuum observer. Why you might ask? Because you slowed light, rather than speeding up to it's original speed.

The speed of light has been, in the past, considered a "benchmark" for relativity physics. However, it is not the "magic" speed at which all miracles become possible. You could just as easily say I went 299,792,458 m/s. But it is at the increased speed, not necessarity the particle (i.e. light, radiation) that makes the difference.

(to be continued)
 

John

Member
Messages
317
new member

EDIT CONTINUED
Now lets say that you slow the speed of light down to a snales pace across the universe. Does that mean that time changes or that the whole universe will now reverse time? No. Why? Because light (the particle) is not the key to time travel per se (I will explain the exeption in a sec), it is the speed you are wanting. Basically using this model, the only noticable difference is that whereas now when we look through a telescope and see events from millions of years ago, we would see events from even longer ago.

What you are saying is mildly based on what Einstein speculated in his Relativity theory. The thought here is that when you begin accelerating towards the speed of light, things appear to be moving slower, and the speculation is that if you reach the speed of light you might view things moving backwards. However, it is just that, viewing light. You can only view the light that is traveling at X speed. So, in your case the only light change you would notice would be the light you managed to slow down, but not the high speed light that is common to us all. Once again this is due to the fact that the speed, not the particle, is what matters. When Einstein used the speed of light, he merely meant it as a reference to the fastest thing known. However, we now know that light is not the fastest thing out there. He referenced its speed, not the particle.

Now there is an execption when dealing with the tremendous speed of photons and time travel. Let's say that you could open a wormhole. You give one person one end and you shoot off away from them at a high rate of speed, you can use the speed of light or whatever here. Your time and speed begin to have a noticable inverse effect on one another (noticable to the 3rd observer outside the vacuum of our experiment). To the third observer there is a change in time, being that your time moves slower and slower and the person at the origin's time moves at a constant and seemingly unchanging rate.

You travel say 1 year at velocities close to 299,792,458 m/s. While you look in your end of the wormhole, you see time speeding past, as though you are watching a vcr tape on high speed. The orgin observer views you through the wormhole as moving extremely slow. When you come back to the point of origin much more time has passed there than has with you. Now rewind for a sec all the way back to when you are travelling very fast. You look through the wormhole and see things at the origin moving really fast. You step through, to you this would appear that you have gone back in time. If the person at the origin steps through to you, he will have gone forward, somewhat, in time. Is this time travel? Yes and now. I prefer to call it shifting time frames, since you cannot go back in time to an event you witnessed in the wormhole and change it. Once the event has passed, you cannot accelerate faster than light and go back and change Y event. Simply put, you can't "rewind" the tape from either end.

Now, the question arises, what if I keep accelerating towards infinity will events ever go backwards or stop? The answer is no. The reason why is as you approach infinity, your time slows towards 0, but never reaches 0 nor does it go to negative. The light may appear to reverse once you pass the particle's given speed, but time never stops or goes in reverse. So if you step through the wormhole you will be in the timeframe of the person holding the wormhole end, not in their past. Theory is based in the fact that you can continue to accelerate at a speed that time will continue to half it's original rate whilst never reaching 0. I.E. take one inch and divide it in half, divide that half into halves, and so forth and you will never reach zero. The same principle applies to the inverse relationship between the rate of speed and time.

Well, that is my take on your theory. It is very logically thought out. I look forward to reading your insights in the future.
 

baryn

New Member
Messages
9
new member

Satan, thanks for your reply and very clear explanation of why my theory wouldn't work. I could actually understand it! I get what you're saying and why it wouldn't be actual time travel but, bare with me while I try to defend my case a bit (yeah right!).

When you say that time travel wouldn't occur because I am slowing the speed of light so no one would be affected, you're right. But isn't that only if I slowed the speed of light down in all of space, for everyone? If I slowed it in just my little vacuum, everyone else would see me as moving at normal speed, yes. But when I exit my vacuum wouldn't time have still moved faster for everyone else?

Also, about not being able to reach negative speeds and you sais "time never stops or goes in reverse". Does that mean you don't believe in traveling backwards in time?

One more thing, thanks for welcoming me, just one thing though, I am female ;)

Grayson, again, thank you...you're crackin me up. Only cause I still don't understand your terms.

opmmur, I am excited to have some discussions with you and learning from you all that I can. I will be checking out your website for sure.

sosuemetoo, I will heading to that link right now. Thanks again!

Baryn
 

John

Member
Messages
317
new member

When you say that time travel wouldn't occur because I am slowing the speed of light so no one would be affected, you're right. But isn't that only if I slowed the speed of light down in all of space, for everyone? If I slowed it in just my little vacuum, everyone else would see me as moving at normal speed, yes. But when I exit my vacuum wouldn't time have still moved faster for everyone else?

No, time would not have changed by anymeans. Mainly because time and space are tied. It has to do more with velocity than it does with the particular particle. If you slowed light down it would not affect your time frame. You just slowed light in a vacuum. Everyone would witness the slowed light, either by technology measurements, or if you REALLY slowed it down by viewing. Looking in on you one would see the slowed light and you moving the same speed as them. When you got out, nothing would have changed. Think of it like this, you merely slowed light. You didn't accelerate in order to slow your time. Your speed is the key, not the light particle.


Also, about not being able to reach negative speeds and you sais \"time never stops or goes in reverse\". Does that mean you don't believe in traveling backwards in time?

Not using the "light-based" method you proposed. I however believe in super strings, and multiple timelines, etc.
 

John

Member
Messages
317
new member

Superstring:
http://superstringtheory.com/

Oh, and what you describe would be neat to witness. You could step outside the container and see yourself inside. However, you couldn't get back in and stop yourself from doing anything because you'd just be watching the latent light slowly travelling (that is if you slowed the light down enough).
 

iooqxpooi

Member
Messages
173
new member

Originally posted by baryn@Aug 19 2004, 03:19 PM
Hi! I joined this forum today because I woke up with a theory in my head. A theory that could make time travel possible. Maybe it's not new and you have all heard it before, either way, here it goes...

We all know that Einstein said that the speed of light is always constant and to time travel you would need to move faster than the speed of light. We also know that Einstein's theory was proven false, and that the speed of light is slowed down when passing through objects like glass, crystal, and even water.

My theory is, if there was a way to create an enviroment that can slow down the speed of light enough that a \"time machine\" of sorts could move faster than the speed of light, we would be able to move foward in time in this enviroment.

Now, the enviroment, that I am not sure of. Because it could be as simple as building a submarine to move through the ocean at an incredibly rapid speed (because water slows light). My theory is flawed of course in many ways but then again, it is perfectly logical.

What if we build a craft to move through water made of crystal and glass, as to slow down the speed of light so dramatically that we wouldn't even have to move unthinkably fast.
Time travel seems so easily accessable. Then again, I am new and maybe you will lovingly school in me and my theories.

I'm sorry...I don't know that the speed of light was proven a non-constant...could you explain it to me or give me a link?

And anyway, we'd have to move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum. Even if we had a photon moving at 1 m/s, we'd still have to pass a photon at c.

Maybe with gravity? ;)
 

iooqxpooi

Member
Messages
173
new member

Originally posted by Grayson@Aug 19 2004, 05:40 PM
Here's my thoughts on TT, coincidentally talking in a round about fashion to your theory.

If Entropy has anything to do with it, the Universe is slowly dying. This is because systems inherently break down at both the macro, micro and sub-atomic levels.

Space is not infinite, it curves back on itself, giving the impression of being infinite, but not actually being so. We live on a Stellar mobius strip.

Space can only hold so much of itself, so much matter at any given time. So, matter decays into heat, light, radiation, sub-atomic gubbinsey-bits and so on. If that were not so, the Universe would either A) increase in mass, or B)stay the same size, which is not the case as the Universe is losing weight. Dietus Galacticus.

The time I had a second ago, is gone. There can't be two times at once as the Universe would double in weight. So, Entropy has destroyed that time and the Universe obviously regenerates on a squintillionth of a second-by-second basis.

Imagine that the Universe is therefore a hard-drive with 1 sectors/clusters/whatever. We are at sector/cluster/whatever 1 and a second ago sector/cluster/whatever 1 was erased to make way for the new Universal Data Imprint of the new sector/cluster/whatever 1, because the har-drive can only store one second at a time. The next second has yet to be written to the hard-drive.

I cannot go back in time, because it has been erased to make way for the current time. I cannot go forward in time, as it has yet to be written. This time is the only time, unless the Universe is backing itself up onto tape somewhere.

Just having some fun. ;)
Mass is a form of energy, so the energy is just converting. Thus, we are losing energy? I think not.

You say that mass is converting into energy and such, and thus energy is converting into mass- so, we do not lose mass in this universe, nor do we lose weight, because weight is the force of gravity on an object. ;)

I cannot tell you if there is a universal hard-drive or not, but it seems impossible, unless we are a disk in a comp of a higher being or such...I believe that there is a 'world'(universe) for every moment, and that one is one moment behind, etc. This allows time-travel to be possible forward and backwards. Time is infinite, space is infinite(space-time is infinite :p ), thus giving and infinite number of 'world's, forward an backwards. We are just one of them.
 

Grayson

Conspiracy Cafe
Messages
1,117
new member

Originally posted by iooqxpooi+Aug 21 2004, 08:18 AM--><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Grayson@Aug 19 2004, 05:40 PM
Here's my thoughts on TT, coincidentally talking in a round about fashion to your theory.

If Entropy has anything to do with it, the Universe is slowly dying. This is because systems inherently break down at both the macro, micro and sub-atomic levels.

Space is not infinite, it curves back on itself, giving the impression of being infinite, but not actually being so. We live on a Stellar mobius strip.

Space can only hold so much of itself, so much matter at any given time. So, matter decays into heat, light, radiation, sub-atomic gubbinsey-bits and so on. If that were not so, the Universe would either A) increase in mass, or B)stay the same size, which is not the case as the Universe is losing weight. Dietus Galacticus.

The time I had a second ago, is gone. There can't be two times at once as the Universe would double in weight. So, Entropy has destroyed that time and the Universe obviously regenerates on a squintillionth of a second-by-second basis.

Imagine that the Universe is therefore a hard-drive with 1 sectors/clusters/whatever. We are at sector/cluster/whatever 1 and a second ago sector/cluster/whatever 1 was erased to make way for the new Universal Data Imprint of the new sector/cluster/whatever 1, because the har-drive can only store one second at a time. The next second has yet to be written to the hard-drive.

I cannot go back in time, because it has been erased to make way for the current time. I cannot go forward in time, as it has yet to be written. This time is the only time, unless the Universe is backing itself up onto tape somewhere.

Just having some fun.? ;)
Mass is a form of energy, so the energy is just converting. Thus, we are losing energy? I think not.

You say that mass is converting into energy and such, and thus energy is converting into mass- so, we do not lose mass in this universe, nor do we lose weight, because weight is the force of gravity on an object. ;)

I cannot tell you if there is a universal hard-drive or not, but it seems impossible, unless we are a disk in a comp of a higher being or such...I believe that there is a 'world'(universe) for every moment, and that one is one moment behind, etc. This allows time-travel to be possible forward and backwards. Time is infinite, space is infinite(space-time is infinite :p ), thus giving and infinite number of 'world's, forward an backwards. We are just one of them.
[snapback]7372[/snapback]​
[/b][/quote]

I never claimed to be smart, if my complete lack of understanding here makes me look stupid, so be it. ;) Now I have another cross to bear, the Forum -Stupid One-.
 

Top