Time travel is obviously possible. This thread proves it. I'm back in my college dorm room with some a bunch of guys, a couple of joints, and a bottle of Southern Comfort.
Does this mean I'm going to get lucky this weekend?
A SIMPLE EXPLANATION of why TIME TRAVEL doesn't work
by Terry 81 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
bebu
I was in a job interview and I opened a book and started reading. Then I said
to the guy, "Let me ask you a question. If you are in a spaceship that is
traveling at the speed of light, and you turn on the headlights, does anything
happen?" He said, "I don't know." I said, "I don't want your job."
-- Steven Wrightbebu
(speed of light is about the fastest I have heard anything to travel...)
-
earthly king
Time moves forward not backward. How can you place yourself into something that does not exist?
You cannot move into a house that was destroyed yesterday, but only move into a house that has been newly built the next day.
You cannot go back and visit people that have died because they are no longer there.......
-
uwishufish
There once was a lady from Bright
Who could travel faster than light
She left one day
In an Einsteinen way
Only to return the previous night
-
Jeffro
The matter conversion issue Terry raised does not necessarily represent an impossible situation, as matter is not being created or destroyed, but moved from one time to another, and the matter is taken from the originating time. When viewed "4-dimensionally", the total amount of matter has not changed.
Each particle that is in motion carries momentum from the previous instant to the present instant to the next instant. However, for time travel (other than at the normal rate) to occur, it would require that the motion of those particles - including at the quantum level - were either accelerated (in the concept of 'moving' through time at a different speed), or completely stopped and then resumed (in the concept of instantly 'appearing' at a different time). In either situation, even if it were physically possible, death would almost certainly result.
-
Jeffro
uwishufish:
There once was a lady from Bright
Who could travel faster than light
She left one day
In an Einsteinen way
Only to return the previous nightA limerick of temporal excursions?
Well I'm not one for casting aspersions...
But if she was faster,
Then how's a day passed 'er?
She should see tomorrow's diversions. -
Terry
Your dominoes analogy is flawed in that it fails to take into account the fact that the "time machine" domino parts no longer exist in the other time frame. Conservation of mass and energy are preserved.
You're almost there!
You say: "..the "time machine" domino parts no longer exist in the other time frame..." Okay, freeze frame.
Let's make it as simple as we can.
Our domino box is all the domino pieces that there are, was, and ever will be. (42) If we say "no longer exist" we subtract from our space-time continuum an irreplaceable part of its wholeness and constituency. Mass and energy are not conserved.
To go back in time the bookkeeping goes awry for the following reason.
1.The time traveller is made up of domino parts which must be subtracted from the time and place where the time traveller began his journey causing a deficit.
2.The arrival introduces those dominoes into the past where the pieces ALREADY EXIST as part of other things.
The math doesn't work.
You see, I'm attacking the problem on the most simple basis imaginable: the quantity of energy and mass which exist and cannot not exist regardless of the time period.
The time traveller must always consist of parts (some number of dominoes which we subtract from the total available). If the traveller is made up of (for the sake of illustration) 12 dominoes and goes back in time he only leaves 30 dominoes existing in his departure universe. When he arrives in the past there now is the untenable extra mass/energy of 52!
There is no need to examine the ramifications of any other facet of time travel because the constituency content is the built-in limit.
We only go FORWARD in the time stream by counting the deterioration of existing things and the re-emergence of those parts into "new" forms (which are actually only reconstituted pieces) in a bookkeeping method we call TIME.
There is no "time" per se. It is a handy way of keeping track of the atrophy cycle___into___current forms.
What once was whole we call the Past. What now is whole we call the PRESENT. What might become the new whole (through recycling) is the FUTURE.
-
Terry
First, your premise that something must be dismantled to leave 'spare parts' to configure the 'new thing' is logically flawed. A new 'event' or occurrence can simply involve a rearrangement (not wholesale dismantling) of pre-existing particles, matter or energy.
We are both saying the same thing. You call what I say "dismantling" and rename it a "rearrangement". This is a distinction without a difference.
May as well divide by zero and call it bad math.
-
Terry
Did you know that scientist have observed a particle in 2 places at the same time?
You may be confusing the metaphorical use of language with the actuality of a mathematical description.
In other words, Science uses a form of bookkeeping for measurement and description which consists of numbers, quantitites and sets. When non-scientists talk about this they resort to metaphor and the person reading it assumes it is literal rather than rough interpolation of numbers into words.
That is the problem non-scientists face when reading laymen-oriented works by professional "explainers".
-
Terry
I have found that the best form of time travel is a funnel, a bottle of scotch and a sense of nostaligia. The Funnel Solution?
HS
One night as I was sleeping (having trained myself over a period of time to remain lucid) I met the old actor Telly Savalas in my dream and he was in a mood to talk.
He told me that the reason people sleep is to provide a kind of virtual existence space for the non living like himself. He called it Dream Surfing! As long as there are people who are sleeping somewhere on planet Earth it allows the free use of "consciousness" to maintain rational existence.
In effect, Savalas was saying he surfed from dreamer to dreamer using the brainwaves, energy and the dormant conscious part of the sleeper's mind. This, he further explained, is why people dream in the first place. The low level sleeping part of the brain witnesses the use of the brain by dream surfers and re-interprets those events into a scenario upon awakening. The awakened sleeper claims the dream events as his own imagination.
When people die, in effect, they lose the power to use the hardward their body/brain provided. This is due to natural entropy of physical existence. At that point, the "dead" person rides the surf of everybody else's consciousness as a kind of rudimentary fragmented "signal" until and unless a sleeping person provides a way to experience (vicariously) wholeness in personhood again.
Thought I'd share that with you.