Time Travel

[Vegitto4]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Char-Char,Mander-Char! [/i]
[B]..............Forget Einstein's whole relativity thing, that's a bunch of phooey.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Explain to me how its " a bunch of phooey" as you so delicatley put it

[Guest NirFan72]

Ok,Here's my theory on the subject.I belive that there is no such thing as the future.Because,Everything is happening now,and time is still being written.Now,on Time Travel,here is my theory.(Give me feedback,i've been working on it since 12/3/01)
You need to travel faster than the speed of light.Last time I checked,this was around 300,000 km/sec,or 186,000 mi/sec.Prettty Fast,but possible.Now,I've had people come up to me and say,why not just use a black hole.Well,a black hole is not really a hole,more of a collapsed star turned into a ginormous vacuum.It sucks things in,and flattens them out of exsistence.So,Black hole is out of the question.But,I think we could use Wormholes,as they are,imo,dimensional holes,that allow travel.And,I belive every nanosecond of our life is a dimension.Now,I've heard people saying you can go back and kill yourself,but,i think that when you travel,you replace yourself with the you from the dimension you go through,and so on until you reach your destination.This is where Deja Vu comes from.Thats my theory.So,what do you think.

PS:Go here for futher info [URL=http://www.time-travel.com]http://www.time-travel.com[/URL]

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by NirFan72 [/i]
[B]Ok,Here's my theory on the subject.I belive that there is no such thing as the future.Because,Everything is happening now,and time is still being written.Now,on Time Travel,here is my theory.(Give me feedback,i've been working on it since 12/3/01)
You need to travel faster than the speed of light.Last time I checked,this was around 300,000 km/sec,or 186,000 mi/sec.Prettty Fast,but possible.Now,I've had people come up to me and say,why not just use a black hole.Well,a black hole is not really a hole,more of a collapsed star turned into a ginormous vacuum.It sucks things in,and flattens them out of exsistence.So,Black hole is out of the question.But,I think we could use Wormholes,as they are,imo,dimensional holes,that allow travel.And,I belive every nanosecond of our life is a dimension.Now,I've heard people saying you can go back and kill yourself,but,i think that when you travel,you replace yourself with the you from the dimension you go through,and so on until you reach your destination.This is where Deja Vu comes from.Thats my theory.So,what do you think.

PS:Go here for futher info [URL=http://www.time-travel.com]http://www.time-travel.com[/URL] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=royalblue]Interesting theory, but I'm going to have to ask you to watch your post quality a little (ie: please use the spacebar). :)[/color]

[asar]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by NirFan72 [/i]
[B]Prettty Fast,but possible[/B][/QUOTE]

Possible??? Not in this century. Keep in mind the incredible amounts of pressure that travelling at high speeds put on objects, and then times that by several million! An atom has something like 100,000 pounds of pressure per square millimetre on it, though that figure isn't exactly right.

[Sui Generis]

I'm new to this whole entire thought train here so if I am completly wrong sorry...here's my really short theory...

Time Travel is possible and even slowling time down is...according to the 4th demension time it self..(don't want to explain it...gives me a headache everytime I do) I think all we need to do is learn how to slow down the affect lines/rays whatever you wanna call them...and slowing them down would mean you would slightly be going into the past and slowing down time....

And of course if you could slow something down...eventually you can slow it down enough that it goes backwards (Or so my teacher says) So once we learned how to control the speed of the 4th demension I think we will be able to travel through time...untill then...you better think REAL hard on your decisions ;)

Ow...my brain hurts...

[Gavin]

[color=teal][I]Does the Mister Burns phrase Exelent[/i]

Well since I have totally screwed up most posters mind except for James dammit I was hop[ing to screw up a moderators or administrators but anyway the answer is yes and no hahaha

ok i draw this conclusion rom the following ideas

You cant if:
You have gone back to change something you did because if you go back in time and stop yourself from doing it you will never build a time machine to travel back in time and so rip the fabric of space and time apart and kill everything in existance

You can if:
You go back to do something that affects you in [b]no way[/b] if it does well look up and see
-------------------------------------------------
I have come upwith a new puzzle to inflect even more pain can you kill yourself in the past or future be in mind there is nly one answer[/color]

[phoenixflames]

I really don't know. It all depends on the quantum physicists out there. sure, I graduate in may, but I'm just a marine biologist! Don't look at me for quantum stuff.:lecture: :help:

[KyJaUn~FuLlEr]

Dang yall r talking like scientist.Well um i think time travel is possible but let me ask this if u travel back to the past how r u suppose to get back to the present?

[Defcon5]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Red XIII [/i]
[B][color=teal][I]Does the Mister Burns phrase Exelent[/i]

Well since I have totally screwed up most posters mind except for James dammit I was hop[ing to screw up a moderators or administrators but anyway the answer is yes and no hahaha

ok i draw this conclusion rom the following ideas

You cant if:
You have gone back to change something you did because if you go back in time and stop yourself from doing it you will never build a time machine to travel back in time and so rip the fabric of space and time apart and kill everything in existance

You can if:
You go back to do something that affects you in [b]no way[/b] if it does well look up and see
-------------------------------------------------
I have come upwith a new puzzle to inflect even more pain can you kill yourself in the past or future be in mind there is nly one answer[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

No you cannot. If you killed your self in the past then the same concept would would apply for changing a mistake you made. If you killed your self then you wouldn't be alive to go back in time.

[Gavin]

[color=teal]OK Defcon has answered his question right you can't travel back and kill yourself because even before you fire the bullet you've ceased to exist no try the second one can you kill yourself in the future[/color]

[Defcon5]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Red XIII [/i]
[B][color=teal]OK Defcon has answered his question right you can't travel back and kill yourself because even before you fire the bullet you've ceased to exist no try the second one can you kill yourself in the future[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

No you can't because you would know that you where going to kill yourself and would be able to stop it.

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by asar [/i]
[B]

Possible??? Not in this century. Keep in mind the incredible amounts of pressure that travelling at high speeds put on objects, and then times that by several million! An atom has something like 100,000 pounds of pressure per square millimetre on it, though that figure isn't exactly right. [/B][/QUOTE]

yeah, but atoms are very small, and are generally spaced out. An atomic nucleus's density is very large... something in the region of.... I forget... very big though, but the nucleus is incredaibly small, the radius of the nucleus (the bit with the actual weight in it) is 1/10000th of the radius of the whole atom, and apart from the nucleus, it's just emptiness apart from electrons, which no one really has a good explanation as to [i]what[/i] they are just yet... plus- pressure is not due to speed, pressure is due to force. If something moves at high speed in a vacuum, no pressure will be on it, pressure only exists if you accelerate the object, by putting a force on it.

[Vegitto4]

Spoken like a true genius. If I was as smart as most of you ppl, then I would put a good argument in, but I am busy formulating it.

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by NirFan72 [/i]
[B]
You need to travel faster than the speed of light.Last time I checked,this was around 300,000 km/sec,or 186,000 mi/sec.Prettty Fast,but possible.[/B][/QUOTE]

OK... I'll give a decent explanation as to why you can't easily go faster than the speed of light but first you're gonna have to just accept a few things..

Firstly.. Speed is due to [i]ENERGY[/i], kinetic energy in fact, meaning the greater energy you give an object, the faster it will go, but the speed is not just related to energy, the energy(kinetic) of an object is given by [i]ENERGY = MASS(kg) x SPEED squared[/i].. this formula was devised long ago, and is not technically accurate due to relativistic effects

Secondly... E = M x C squared, meaning [i]ENERGY = MASS x SPEED OF LIGHT squared[/i] what this means is that as you give large amounts of energy to an object, it appears to increase in mass. When I say 'appears', I mean that it acts completely as if it has this extra mass, even in the first formula.

Thirdly, by combining the two, you can see that as an object's kinetic energy becomes very great, it gains a lot of mass, meaning that ENERGY = MASS x SPEED squared, still applies, but the 'MASS' has gone up significantly, while the ENERGY stays the same, meaning that the SPEED must drop to make the equation stay correct...

Now, if we make the object's speed C, the speed of light, then the object's mass increases, as it's rest mass (at speed = 0) is E = MC squared, and if you add the energy for an object to move at C (in classical, or pre-relativity physics), then it's energy is 2E = MC squared, hence if you use the larger value of M in the original equation it can be seen that the object is not moving at the speed of light at that given energy

Lastly, Working out the objects actual speed at higher and higher energies will reveal that an INFINITE amount of energy is required to reach the speed of light, or a mass of zero (light particles have no mass, which is how light travels at the speed of light)... hence you can see that in this universe, it is impossible to travel at the speed of light by accelerating an object, even if that object is a black hole.

[Vegitto4]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Deus_Ex_Machina [/i]
[B]

OK... I'll give a decent explanation as to why you can't easily go faster than the speed of light but first you're gonna have to just accept a few things..

Firstly.. Speed is due to [i]ENERGY[/i], kinetic energy in fact, meaning the greater energy you give an object, the faster it will go, but the speed is not just related to energy, the energy(kinetic) of an object is given by [i]ENERGY = MASS(kg) x SPEED squared[/i].. this formula was devised long ago, and is not technically accurate due to relativistic effects

Secondly... E = M x C squared, meaning [i]ENERGY = MASS x SPEED OF LIGHT squared[/i] what this means is that as you give large amounts of energy to an object, it appears to increase in mass. When I say 'appears', I mean that it acts completely as if it has this extra mass, even in the first formula.

Thirdly, by combining the two, you can see that as an object's kinetic energy becomes very great, it gains a lot of mass, meaning that ENERGY = MASS x SPEED squared, still applies, but the 'MASS' has gone up significantly, while the ENERGY stays the same, meaning that the SPEED must drop to make the equation stay correct...

Now, if we make the object's speed C, the speed of light, then the object's mass increases, as it's rest mass (at speed = 0) is E = MC squared, and if you add the energy for an object to move at C (in classical, or pre-relativity physics), then it's energy is 2E = MC squared, hence if you use the larger value of M in the original equation it can be seen that the object is not moving at the speed of light at that given energy

Lastly, Working out the objects actual speed at higher and higher energies will reveal that an INFINITE amount of energy is required to reach the speed of light, or a mass of zero (light particles have no mass, which is how light travels at the speed of light)... hence you can see that in this universe, it is impossible to travel at the speed of light by accelerating an object, even if that object is a black hole. [/B][/QUOTE]

So baisiclly, you have to reduce the mass to almost nothing, for a object to travel at the speed of light, and not just put more speed into, or onto it. Am i correct?

[Guest Apokronos]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Deus_Ex_Machina [/i]
[B]

OK... I'll give a decent explanation as to why you can't easily go faster than the speed of light but first you're gonna have to just accept a few things..

Firstly.. Speed is due to [i]ENERGY[/i], kinetic energy in fact, meaning the greater energy you give an object, the faster it will go, but the speed is not just related to energy, the energy(kinetic) of an object is given by [i]ENERGY = MASS(kg) x SPEED squared[/i].. this formula was devised long ago, and is not technically accurate due to relativistic effects

Secondly... E = M x C squared, meaning [i]ENERGY = MASS x SPEED OF LIGHT squared[/i] what this means is that as you give large amounts of energy to an object, it appears to increase in mass. When I say 'appears', I mean that it acts completely as if it has this extra mass, even in the first formula.

Thirdly, by combining the two, you can see that as an object's kinetic energy becomes very great, it gains a lot of mass, meaning that ENERGY = MASS x SPEED squared, still applies, but the 'MASS' has gone up significantly, while the ENERGY stays the same, meaning that the SPEED must drop to make the equation stay correct...

Now, if we make the object's speed C, the speed of light, then the object's mass increases, as it's rest mass (at speed = 0) is E = MC squared, and if you add the energy for an object to move at C (in classical, or pre-relativity physics), then it's energy is 2E = MC squared, hence if you use the larger value of M in the original equation it can be seen that the object is not moving at the speed of light at that given energy

Lastly, Working out the objects actual speed at higher and higher energies will reveal that an INFINITE amount of energy is required to reach the speed of light, or a mass of zero (light particles have no mass, which is how light travels at the speed of light)... hence you can see that in this universe, it is impossible to travel at the speed of light by accelerating an object, even if that object is a black hole. [/B][/QUOTE]

Hey, thats NOT true. It has been proven that things can go faster than light, go read a goddamn popular science magazine, they had an article with proof on it. Second, even if the mass increases in my theory it wouldnt matter. And if anti-gravity is actually created mass wont matter. Third, light is energy, which came from mass. And fourth, Its e=mc2, which means energy equals matter squared by the velocity of light. Which was einsteins theory that if mass reachs or exceeds the speed of light, it becomes energy.

[Spikey]

[COLOR=seagreen]I think that you could go back in time somehow. I meen someway. I doubt it i s possible to go into the futre, because if you did, everything would just be frozen.

I think that you could go back in time, somehow. It might just lead to that there it is just frozen and all it is-is justa your past. Just everything frozen.

I think that there are two ways you could do it. My first way is like writing a big math coverd on a chalk board. I meen just spread out.

Another thing is a machine, mad out of brains, just people giving technolegy. Then they operate on the brain stuff. Just, I know this will sound weird but, they will have a person read the brain. After that they will have them take out all the stuff they learned, except for the math. And yes, that is possible.

They will put the stuff in like a machine thing, and work and electricute it and, wallaw, you have a time travel machine. Yes that is my theory. I know, I am weird aren't I?

P.S Hey deus or son goten, how did you get your words to look like that.[/COLOR]

[Delian]

You know, there's a movie that's coming out on time travel. I think it's called the Time Machine....Looks pretty good

Just a thought!!!;) :D ......ummm.....o.k...hehehe

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Vegitto4 [/i]
[B]

So baisiclly, you have to reduce the mass to almost nothing, for a object to travel at the speed of light, and not just put more speed into, or onto it. Am i correct? [/B][/QUOTE]

nope. Almost nothing won't do. It has to be at exactly nothing to travel at the speed of light. The main problem is, that you don't exactly put speed onto something, you put energy onto it, and the more energy an object has, the more it needs to go a bit faster. Either you have to have something with no mass [i]at all[/i] (in the case of a light particle for instance) or an infinite energy.

Now, onto this one..

[quote][i]Originally posted by Apokronos[/i]
[b]Hey, thats NOT true. It has been proven that things can go faster than light, go read a goddamn popular science magazine, they had an article with proof on it. Second, even if the mass increases in my theory it wouldnt matter. And if anti-gravity is actually created mass wont matter. Third, light is energy, which came from mass. And fourth, Its e=mc2, which means energy equals matter squared by the velocity of light. Which was einsteins theory that if mass reachs or exceeds the speed of light, it becomes energy.[/b][/quote]

OK, first, what I said IS true. Yes, [i]things[/i] can go faster than the speed of light, but do you even know what those things are? thought not. Not your everyday thing. But the point is, nothing with mass can go AT the speed of light. Light manages it because it has no mass at all, but anything with mass needs an infinite energy to get to this speed. Faster than light, however is a different story. people have known for a while that it is possible in theory to go faster than light. It works like this: It is possible for something to go faster than light, or slower than light, but it is not possible for ANYTHING, except for particles with zero mass, to go AT the speed of light. So next time, read what I write. I never mentioned anything about going faster than light, I just said that if you're gonna try to go faster than light by accelerating past the speed of light, it's not gonna work.
In summary: Read a goddamn science [i]book[/i], or study the subject. Then you can argue properly about it.

Now, your second point. About antigravity: [i]MASS is not the same as WEIGHT. GRAVITY does not increase mass.[/i] This may be difficult for you to grasp, but gravity is just a force. A force accelerates things in accordance to their mass. Mass is exactly the same in zero-gravity, or antigravity, as it is in a gravitational field. So once again, you know nothing of what you talk about. Also: what is this 'theory' in which a mass increase won't matter? Read my last post again, [i]properly[/i] and you'll probably find a flaw in your 'theory'.

OK, I've read your theory. It would make great science fiction, but it wouldn't work in practice. why? because even a black hole can't give you the infinite energy to go faster than light, secondly, as you will see in a few paragraphs, mass is the same as energy anyway, so you won't magically turn to energy and avoid death. Instead, the extreme difference in gravitational potential energy will rip you apart. what I mean here is-- the bottom of the capsule will be pulled a lot stronger than the top, which will rip your little capsule to peices.

Your third point 'light is energy, which came from mass'.. Yeah, light is something that has no mass, but has energy, hence it travels at the speed of light. Sometimes it does come from mass, but do you understand how?

your fourth point:
[quote]'And fourth, Its e=mc2, which means energy equals matter squared by the velocity of light. Which was einsteins theory that if mass reachs or exceeds the speed of light, it becomes energy'[/quote]
... yes, it's E = M C squared... I write squared because it's a little hard to do the 2 above the C, and I wtote it E = M x C squared because 'x' means 'times' or 'multiplied by'... so it's exactly the same.
Do you even know Einsteins theory? NO! you don't! that is the most incorrect interpretation ever... firstly, his theory is 'Mass cannot reach the speed of light', and secondly it is 'MASS [i]IS[/i] ENERGY, the two are interchangable', this is not just at the speed of light.

In summary: Don't act like you know it all, unless you actually know something.

[Gavin]

[color=Teal]Hmmm in response to most peoples post i'm saying that if it were possible could you travel forward and kill yourself now Defcon 5 has given the final correct answer because your future self knows everything you know and can anticipate you every move. But feel free to keep posting on the subject of time travel[/color]

[Guest Apokronos]

There is no "future self", you create time as you go along or the paralell universe theory.

[Guest Apokronos]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Deus_Ex_Machina [/i]
[B]
... yes, it's E = M C squared... I write squared because it's a little hard to do the 2 above the C, and I wtote it E = M x C squared because 'x' means 'times' or 'multiplied by'... so it's exactly the same.
Do you even know Einsteins theory? NO! you don't! that is the most incorrect interpretation ever... firstly, his theory is 'Mass cannot reach the speed of light', and secondly it is 'MASS [i]IS[/i] ENERGY, the two are interchangable', this is not just at the speed of light.

In summary: Don't act like you know it all, unless you actually know something. [/B][/QUOTE]
I do "actually know it all" ***. And you dont need infinate energy. Yes, I do know einsteins theory, mass is not energy. And the transformation is not "magical" but its physics and thats the way it happens. In summary: Dont act like YOU know it all, unless you actually know something. I already understand scientists theories on why you cany go faster than light. But there are a million loopholes in it. Trust me when I say I know more about physics then you do. I didnt want to be an ***, but your acting like one. You read a fukin science book, and come back to me when you have the correct answers.

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Apokronos [/i]
[B]
I do "actually know it all" ***. And you dont need infinate energy. Yes, I do know einsteins theory, mass is not energy. And the transformation is not "magical" but its physics and thats the way it happens. In summary: Dont act like YOU know it all, unless you actually know something. I already understand scientists theories on why you cany go faster than light. But there are a million loopholes in it. Trust me when I say I know more about physics then you do. I didnt want to be an ***, but your acting like one. You read a fukin science book, and come back to me when you have the correct answers. [/B][/QUOTE]

Right... OK.. let me tell you what I'm doing at university.. Physics, and Biochemistry.. right.. biochem has nothing to do with this at all, but physics does, and last semester, one of the modules i studied was 'mechanics, gravity and relativity'.. so not only do I know about this, but I have studied it. The only loophole in the theory is that people want to believe that they can go at the speed of light, and yes, you DO need an infinite energy to reach it. Einstein not only proved that nothing but light can go at that speed, he also proved that nothing can go faster than the speed of light in any inertial frame.. Meaning that if two light particles move towards each other at the speed of light, then they each would see the other coming at the speed of light, rather than double that (Yes, I know that light particles can't see).. the only way to get around this is for the thing to actually be going faster than the speed of light from the start...
Oh and.. matter and energy ARE interconvertible.. what the hell do you think E=MC squared means? you see.. matter can be turned to energy.. as in the case of colliding matter with antimatter.. and energy can be turned to matter.. as in the case of creating matter and antimatter with high energy photons... but matter doesn't just turn to energy. The same as energy doesn't just turn to matter either. That's not what the old E=MC squared means, it means that mass has a certain energy, and energy has a certain mass.. which slows the matter down. You ever heard of conservation of momentum? One of the things it means is that if you take a moving object, and increase it's mass, it will slow down... and if energy has mass, and high speed objects have high energy, then that means you're adding mass to the object, so guess what? it slows down. Do you have any idea the amount of energy that is needed to make even a slight increase in speed when you're close to the speed of light. No.. well, you need a lot. I know, I've studied it. I've done the calculations. Have you? obviously not... come back and argue when you've studied something on the subject. Preferably at university level.

Oh, and you want me to go read a science book, eh? I already have... let me make a few recommendations:

1: University Physics- by H.Benson
2: Relativity- by Albert Einstein

That's about all that are relavant to this topic, but you could also include

3- [i]QED- by Richard P. Feynmann,
4- Six Easy Peices- by Richard P. Feynmann[/i]
and various others, not to mention the fact that I regularly buy [i]New Scientist[/i] and [i]Scientific American[/i].

Oh and... if you think I'm acting like an arse.. look at it from my view... here is someone talking to me, a physics student, about physics, and this guy obviously knows nothing of what he speaks, and still thinks he knows more than me...

[Guest Apokronos]

Look, Im too pacisfist right now to argue with you. If you want to think you are more experienced in physics then I, then go ahead. I just feel sorry for your university because they have such moron.

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Apokronos [/i]
[B]Look, Im too pacisfist right now to argue with you. If you want to think you are more experienced in physics then I, then go ahead. I just feel sorry for your university because they have such moron. [/B][/QUOTE]

Right... this is the guy that said 'The reason scientists said you couldnt travel to the speed of light or faster is because as you approach the speed of light, the mass of the object gains weight, thus requiring even more energy to push it. But with my method it works out.'.. well here's a little tip: Scientists know more than you. Don't question what they say just because of some theory that has no real explanation.. according to your theory.. when something reaches the speed of light, it turns to energy. I have no idea where you get that from, maybe it's the fact that matter glows as it's being pulled in towards a black hole. But note: that's not the matter turning into energy.. that's the matter [i]emitting[/i] energy.. there is a difference... I've already said enough to actually show that matter can not go at the speed of light, if you actually read through it carefully, however your 'theories' are just wild speculation.. I'm afraid that you don't really [i]know[/i] any of this, whereas those scientists that you refuse to listen to know alot more than you ever will. Give me some actual evidence that your theories may be correct and I will believe it, but at the moment all you seem to be doing is saying that all of what I know is correct, and that I am a moron. A moron, you say? I'll have you know that not only did I take that relativity module, but I passed it, and a good pass, too. You are the one who refuses to accept the proven theories here, that mass increases with speed.. yes.. it [i]has[/i] been proven. Do you think particle accelerators are just there for fun? Here's a thought.. how about if you actually take the time to read [i]why[/i] scientists say that we can't go faster than light. And while your at it, read up on why scientists think that time travel could be possible through a ''worm hole'' rather than your theory. Personally, I find quite a few problems in your theory too. Namely the facts that 1) no one has ever turned to energy before, so how do you know you'll survive the process? 2) Nothing states that things turn to energy at the speed of light 3) I know I'm repeating myself, but you can't go at the speed of light 4) The gravitational strength difference will tear you apart 5) how do you intend to escape from the black hole?

Now: Instead of just critisizing without proof, and calling me a moron, do you think you could actually prove that my ideas have a problem? As in: what exactly are these loopholes of which you speak?

Personally, I think you have a big attitude problem. I've seen a few of your other posts and I find you just generally disrespectful. And I'm not talking about the ones in this thread.