Spatial dimensions

[Harte]

Proven? It's not.

Then how is it that you feel you can simply dismiss the current paradigm? Some of the most intelligent people that ever lived on the planet have worked on this for over a century. All under the onus of actual evidence. All under the onus of peer review.

You deride scientific theory for lack of proof, then accept some words that came out of the mouth of some dude that claims he's a time traveler.

Ah. I see now.
Never mind.

Harte

 

[Harte]

Hartey, you say there used to be, "actual intelligent conversations here about time-travel 10 to 15 years ago"...Can you bring forward a couple of postings from 10 to 15 years ago that show those "intelligent conversations" YOU used to share about Time-Travel please?..

Half of this site is missing. There's a thread about it.

Besides, I'm doing what I can about it right now in the present.
You hadn't noticed?

In order to have one of those good conversations, the particular theory concerning how time travel is accomplished must fit itself into current theory in some way, even if that way involves some fiction (and it usually does.)
It can't be "some dude told me there's 12 time dimensions so a century's work in cosmology is all wrong."

Harte

 

[TimeFlipper]

Half of this site is missing. There's a thread about it.

Besides, I'm doing what I can about it right now in the present.
You hadn't noticed?

In order to have one of those good conversations, the particular theory concerning how time travel is accomplished must fit itself into current theory in some way, even if that way involves some fiction (and it usually does.)
It can't be "some dude told me there's 12 time dimensions so a century's work in cosmology is all wrong."

Harte

Yeah Yeah Yeah Hartey, how convenient for you that half this site is missing!!, full of BS!!....You cannot find ANYTHING to substantiate what you said, Zilch, Zero, nuffin ....Anyways, i dont believe you would have been involved in any discussion about your so called "intelligent time-travel" because you have never believed in time travel ...

 

[Harte]

Some of my best posts here are long gone. hundreds of entire threads are gone. This is not "convenient" for me. It's the reason I don't run a search on the ones I remember. It's most likely pointless and there's not enough rational conversation here to make it worth the effort.

The fact is, there's nothing known in Physics that could prevent a handful of time travel methods.
Those methods include some currently unattainable initial conditions though.

It's usually those unattainable things that are speculated on. For example, had you enough Dark Energy, you could travel into the past in a manufactured "time-like loop."
Of course, time travel into the future has been proven. It's the past that's a problem.

How about speculating as to some technological tweaks to the Alcubierre drive? I mean, it too requires Dark Matter AND it's not "Some dude told me."

Harte

 

[Trithinium]

According to String Theory, our universe is 11-dimensional, two of which are time dimensions.
One of the time dimensions is the one we know. The other time dimension is perpendicular to it and thus cannot be used to travel into the past OR the future.
If only members here would explore current understanding before posting crazy, impossible drivel.

Harte

But time could be perpendicular right? Future heads up, past goes down. If the second time dimension is a time dimension but time doesn't use it for time, what good is it? Are you sure?

 

[Trithinium]

Then how is it that you feel you can simply dismiss the current paradigm? Some of the most intelligent people that ever lived on the planet have worked on this for over a century. All under the onus of actual evidence. All under the onus of peer review.

You deride scientific theory for lack of proof, then accept some words that came out of the mouth of some dude that claims he's a time traveler.

Ah. I see now.
Never mind.

Harte

OK. What actual evidence that you yourself feel certain it is right about time travel? I am interested in learning it.

 

[Trithinium]

Some of my best posts here are long gone. hundreds of entire threads are gone. This is not "convenient" for me. It's the reason I don't run a search on the ones I remember. It's most likely pointless and there's not enough rational conversation here to make it worth the effort.

The fact is, there's nothing known in Physics that could prevent a handful of time travel methods.
Those methods include some currently unattainable initial conditions though.

It's usually those unattainable things that are speculated on. For example, had you enough Dark Energy, you could travel into the past in a manufactured "time-like loop."
Of course, time travel into the future has been proven. It's the past that's a problem.

How about speculating as to some technological tweaks to the Alcubierre drive? I mean, it too requires Dark Matter AND it's not "Some dude told me."

Harte

Time travel to the future has been proven on paper? Well then, what are they waiting for? Travel. How was it proven if there are unattainable "things"? What things. Just briefly please.

 

[Trithinium]

Half of this site is missing. There's a thread about it.

Besides, I'm doing what I can about it right now in the present.
You hadn't noticed?

In order to have one of those good conversations, the particular theory concerning how time travel is accomplished must fit itself into current theory in some way, even if that way involves some fiction (and it usually does.)
It can't be "some dude told me there's 12 time dimensions so a century's work in cosmology is all wrong."

Harte

Half of this site is missing. There's a thread about it.

Besides, I'm doing what I can about it right now in the present.
You hadn't noticed?

In order to have one of those good conversations, the particular theory concerning how time travel is accomplished must fit itself into current theory in some way, even if that way involves some fiction (and it usually does.)
It can't be "some dude told me there's 12 time dimensions so a century's work in cosmology is all wrong."

Harte

You won't concede that what someone else says may be true? You listen to others only? Did you try at one point to tell people about time travel with all your articles and I come along with a contradiction? Why does it bother you so much what I type here? It's because I hit a nerve but I don't know why.

 

[Trithinium]

Some of my best posts here are long gone. hundreds of entire threads are gone. This is not "convenient" for me. It's the reason I don't run a search on the ones I remember. It's most likely pointless and there's not enough rational conversation here to make it worth the effort.

The fact is, there's nothing known in Physics that could prevent a handful of time travel methods.
Those methods include some currently unattainable initial conditions though.

It's usually those unattainable things that are speculated on. For example, had you enough Dark Energy, you could travel into the past in a manufactured "time-like loop."
Of course, time travel into the future has been proven. It's the past that's a problem.

How about speculating as to some technological tweaks to the Alcubierre drive? I mean, it too requires Dark Matter AND it's not "Some dude told me."

Harte

Who and how do you manufacture a time "like" loop please?

 

[Harte]

Because I see that you don't know much (if anything) about the actual time travel possibilities that Physics allows, you should start with the predictions made by General Relativity that have been shown to be correct. These predictions were made over a hundred years ago.

First, time travel due to time dilation.
Time dilation occurs anytime you move with respect to the inertial frame you were at rest in. Obviously, the effect is minuscule for ordinary velocities, but increases exponentially when your velocity approaches about half of light speed.
This prediction was confirmed over half a century ago by measuring the half-life of particles in an accelerator. The half lives of the particles (as they gained velocity) increased exactly as predicted by time dilation.

General Relativity also predicted the same effect due to gravity. This prediction was also proven to be correct, to the finest detail - the furthest decimal that they can measure to (significant figure.)

Gravitational waves, which were only first observed a few years ago, is another century-old prediction that has proven correct, but there's not much time-travel action in them (as far as I know.)

One prediction from General Relativity that hasn't been shown to be true is called an "Einstein-Rosen bridge." You may recall Jane Foster talking about them in the Thor movies. We usually call them wormholes. Here's a pdf about them: http://u2.lege.net/cetinbal/pdfdosya/EinsteinRosenBridge.pdf

This should be more than enough for you to see that there are ways of time travel forward and backward that are allowed by the current paradigm in Physics.

PS:
Regarding a time-like loop, didn't I say that you'd need dark energy? Maybe it's negative energy. Dark energy, negative energy, whatever. LOL
You're not asking me to google these things for you, are you?

Harte