Page 2 of 18 < 1 2 3 4 ... 17 18 >
Topic Options
#208695 - 12/16/06 02:12 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: LightAngel]
Mr Sam Offline


Registered: 07/18/06
Posts: 776
Loc: Somewhere in the UK.
It has been proposed that travelling at near light speed would cause you to travel faster in time, so you might experience an hour whereas the rest of the world would experience many hundreds of years. Of course we wouldn't know if it worked as this does not suggest a way to go backwards in time. I personally don't believe that time is a physical property in this way, I believe that time as we know it is constant. An hour for me is an hour for everyone.

Top
#208696 - 12/16/06 05:10 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: Phineas]
Lust Offline


Registered: 11/02/05
Posts: 4214
I have always enjoyed this essay. I find it interesting how this can come so natural for some, yet others can't seem to be able to exist without the newest cellphone, fasion, or video game system. Just another example of how Dr. LaVey was way ahead of his time.

Edit: I would bet that you have some of the people here who has 'The Devils Notebook', scratching their heads, and asking themselves "Where is it?".


Edited by Tier_Instinct (12/16/06 05:40 PM)
_________________________
�Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.�
Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Top
#208697 - 12/16/06 05:43 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: $lesk]
redheadgrl Offline


Registered: 09/24/06
Posts: 273
Quote:


But, what if time is merely an illusion?




This is a great question and going off of empirical evidence alone I'm positive time is not linear, which opens up the possibility for it to be an illusion. At the very least there are more dimensions than the static ones currently accepted by the herd.

Top
#208698 - 12/16/06 06:10 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: $lesk]
Carkosa Offline


Registered: 07/17/02
Posts: 359
Quote:

I plan on not dying.




I hate to break it to you, but everyone does. Nothing lives forever.

Top
#208699 - 12/16/06 06:42 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: Carkosa]
Alia Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 10/31/06
Posts: 228
Loc: At Sorrow's End
Quote:

Quote:


I plan on not dying.




I hate to break it to you, but everyone does. Nothing lives forever.




It depends. What's "forever"? (Especially if time doesn't exist.)
_________________________
~Alia~

Carpe Noctem

Top
#208700 - 12/16/06 07:11 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: LightAngel]
unholy_dragon Offline


Registered: 11/26/06
Posts: 47
Loc: london, england
Time travel to me is inpossible as time is constant throughout the universe. Time only exists in nature as seasons, Man has added time of day and day of week.

The theory of travelling throught time by going faster than the speed of light is logically flawed. Einsteins theory that going faster than the speed of light, time will travel backwards.

If you travel ten light years away you will see earth ten years ago but you will never step foot in the past.
So the only fact is you can only see the past but never enter it.
_________________________
To simply exist is one thing but to live is to embrace reality.

Top
#208701 - 12/16/06 07:51 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: LightAngel]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 12571
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
Been there.

Done that.

Top
#208702 - 12/16/06 07:58 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: Carkosa]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 12571
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
I can understand this common suppostition as we look at most complex creatures on this world and they all seem to age and die.

However many unicellular creatures merely divide and live on. Most human cancer cells are functionally immortal as well.

The supposition that things will not change in this area requires one to ignore the advances happening almost daily now that the human genome project has been completed.

So to tie this back to the thread subject again, everyone seems to be traveling though time one second per second.

Keep that up and you will keep the tax collectors very happy indeed!

Top
#208703 - 12/16/06 08:00 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: Alia]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
I would not say that time is an invention of the mind, but rather as being able to be conceived and crudely perceived by the mind.

The mind excluding the biological brain and body can travel through time, although not very refined at this point in its evolution. One can recall what they looked like as a child, where they grew up, how old they generally are, ect.

One can also strategize one's action in manipulating their own
future existence. The mind can travel to the future and in a specific possibility(what some refer to as the 5th dimension).

Thinking of the consequences of one's actions is basically seeing the most likely possibilities of the future. As I mention before though, the mind's perception of time is very limited and narrow compared to what it would be like to exist in the 4th dimension and view time as one views 3-dimensional objects in the 3rd dimension.

My input on physical time-travel:

Because the fundamental laws allow time to move in the direction one sees as "forward" it is easier for one to physically travel into the future by the means or ability theorized by time-space's dialation when it approaches the speed of light.

To physically travel to the past would theoretically involve reversing the spins of the fundamental particles that are theorized in the composition of all matter in this dimension.
In my understanding one would have to reverse the spin(referred to as "forward") of the fundamental particles making up their own matter, thus turning their material make-up into the existence of matter where time moves in the opposite direction.

It is then now in the "reverse-universe" that time-space would have to be dialated or folded around the traveler to the desired position in the past. Last the traveler's reverse-matter would have to be converted back to matter.

Either that, or the time traveler's vessel would have to enter the "reverse-universe" while suspending the traveler in their own bubble of the "forward" universe.

Time traveling to the past will be more difficult than traveling to the future.

Top
#208704 - 12/16/06 08:30 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: LightAngel]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2334
Loc: East Coast, USA.
Time travel does not violate any laws of physics. However, that does not mean it will happen, nor does it mean that it won't.

Presently our technology is not up to the task. Although science is exponential and the principle for time travel is already known, so I think it's very likely to enter the realm of reality, eventually. In fact, it's theoretically conceivable that it already has.

The following is an interview with notable astronomer Carl Sagan:
------------------------------------------------------------------

Sagan on Time Travel

Carl Sagan, the astronomer, Pulitzer Prize-winning author, and legendary popularizer of science, gave this interview during the making of "Time Travel." True to form, he discusses arcane aspects of the fieldfrom how you define time to what it might look like inside a wormholewith flair and a refreshing dash of humor. Sagan was David Duncan Professor of Astronomy and Space Sciences and director of the Laboratory for Planetary Studies at Cornell University when he died in 1996.


NOVA: Let's start with the crux of the matter. What for you is time?

Sagan: Ever since St. Augustine, people have wrestled with this, and there are all sorts of things it isn't. It isn't a flow of something, because what does it flow past? We use time to measure flow. How could we use time to measure time? We are stuck in it, each of us time travels into the future, one year, every year. None of us to any significant precision does otherwise. If we could travel close to the speed of light, then we could travel further into the future in a given amount of time. It is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition.

NOVA: Do you think that backwards time travel will ever be possible?


Sagan: Such questions are purely a matter of evidence, and if the evidence is inconsistent or insufficient, then we withhold judgment until there is better evidence. Right now we're in one of those classic, wonderfully evocative moments in science when we don't know, when there are those on both sides of the debate, and when what is at stake is very mystifying and very profound.

If we could travel into the past, it's mind-boggling what would be possible. For one thing, history would become an experimental science, which it certainly isn't today. The possible insights into our own past and nature and origins would be dazzling. For another, we would be facing the deep paradoxes of interfering with the scheme of causality that has led to our own time and ourselves. I have no idea whether it's possible, but it's certainly worth exploring.

NOVA: Would you like it to be possible?


Sagan: I have mixed feelings. The explorer and experimentalist in me would very much like it to be possible. But the idea that going into the past could wipe me out so that I would have never lived is somewhat disquieting.

NOVA: On that note, can you describe the "grandfather paradox?"


Sagan: The grandfather paradox is a very simple, science-fiction-based apparent inconsistency at the very heart of the idea of time travel into the past. It's very simply that you travel into the past and murder your own grandfather before he sires your mother or your father, and where does that then leave you? Do you instantly pop out of existence because you were never made? Or are you in a new causality scheme in which, since you are there you are there, and the events in the future leading to your adult life are now very different? The heart of the paradox is the apparent existence of you, the murderer of your own grandfather, when the very act of you murdering your own grandfather eliminates the possibility of you ever coming into existence.

Among the claimed solutions are that you can't murder your grandfather. You shoot him, but at the critical moment he bends over to tie his shoelace, or the gun jams, or somehow nature contrives to prevent the act that interrupts the causality scheme leading to your own existence.

NOVA: Do you find it easy to believe the world might work that waythat is, self-consistentlyor do you think it's more likely that that there are parallel universes?


Sagan: It's still somewhat of a heretical ideal to suggest that every interference with an event in the past leads to a fork, a branch in causality. You have two equally valid universes: one, the one that we all know and love, and the other, which is brought about by the act of time travel. I know the idea of the universe having to work out a self-consistent causality is appealing to a great many physicists, but I don't find the argument for it so compelling. I think inconsistencies might very well be consistent with the universe.

NOVA: As a physicist, what do you make of Stephen Hawking's chronological protection conjecture [which holds that the laws of physics disallow time machines]?


Sagan: There have been some toy experiments in which, at just the moment that the time machine is actuated, the universe conspires to blow it up, which has led Hawking and others to conclude that nature will contrive it so that time travel never in fact occurs. But no one actually knows that this is the case, and it cannot be known until we have a full theory of quantum gravity, which we do not seem to be on the verge of yet.

One of Hawking's arguments in the conjecture is that we are not awash in thousands of time travelers from the future, and therefore time travel is impossible. This argument I find very dubious, and it reminds me very much of the argument that there cannot be intelligences elsewhere in space, because otherwise the Earth would be awash in aliens. I can think half a dozen ways in which we could not be awash in time travelers, and still time travel is possible.

NOVA: Such as?


Sagan: First of all, it might be that you can build a time machine to go into the future, but not into the past, and we don't know about it because we haven't yet invented that time machine. Secondly, it might be that time travel into the past is possible, but they haven't gotten to our time yet, they're very far in the future and the further back in time you go, the more expensive it is. Thirdly, maybe backward time travel is possible, but only up to the moment that time travel is invented. We haven't invented it yet, so they can't come to us. They can come to as far back as whatever it would be, say A.D. 2300, but not further back in time.

Then there's the possibility that they're here alright, but we don't see them. They have perfect invisibility cloaks or something. If they have such highly developed technology, then why not? Then there's the possibility that they're here and we do see them, but we call them something elseUFOs or ghosts or hobgoblins or fairies or something like that. Finally, there's the possibility that time travel is perfectly possible, but it requires a great advance in our technology, and human civilization will destroy itself before time travelers invent it.

I'm sure there are other possibilities as well, but if you just think of that range of possibilities, I don't think the fact that we're not obviously being visited by time travelers shows that time travel is impossible.

NOVA: How is the speed of light connected to time travel?


Sagan: A profound consequence of Einstein's special theory of relativity is that no material object can travel as fast as light. It is forbidden. There is a commandment: Thou shalt not travel at the speed of light, and there's nothing we can do to travel that fast.

The reason this is connected with time travel is because another consequence of special relativity is that time, as measured by the speeding space traveler, slows down compared to time as measured by a friend left home on Earth. This is sometimes described as the "twin paradox": two identical twins, one of whom goes off on a voyage close to the speed of light, and the other one stays home. When the space-traveling twin returns home, he or she has aged only a little, while the twin who has remained at home has aged at the regular pace. So we have two identical twins who may be decades apart in age. Or maybe the traveling twin returns in the far future, if you go close enough to the speed of light, and everybody he knows, everybody he ever heard of has died, and it's a very different civilization.

It's an intriguing idea, and it underscores the fact that time travel into the indefinite future is consistent with the laws of nature. It's only travel backwards in time that is the source of the debate and the tingling sensations that physicists and science-fiction readers delight in.

NOVA: In your novel Contact, your main character Eleanor Arroway travels through a wormhole. Can you describe a wormhole?


Sagan: Let's imagine that we live in a two-dimensional space. We wish to go from spot A to spot B. But A and B are so far apart that at the speed of light it would take much longer than a generational time or two to get there as measured back on world A. Instead, you have a kind of tunnel that goes through an otherwise inaccessible third dimension and connects A and B. You can go much faster through the tunnel, and so you get from A to B without covering the intervening space, which is somewhat mind-boggling but consistent with the laws of nature. And [the theoretical physicist] Kip Thorne found that if we imagine an indefinitely advanced technical civilization, such a wormhole is consistent with the laws of physics.

It's very different from saying that we ourselves could construct such a wormhole. One of the basic ideas of how to do it is that there are fantastically minute wormholes that are forming and decaying all the time at the quantum level, and the idea is to grab one of those and keep it permanently open. Our high-energy particle accelerators don't have enough energy to even detect the phenomenon at that scale, much less do anything like holding a wormhole open. But it did seem in principle possible, so I reconfigured the book so that Eleanor Arroway successfully makes it through the center of the galaxy via a wormhole.

NOVA: What do you think it would be like to travel through a wormhole?


Sagan: Nobody really knows, but what Thorne has taught me is that say, for example, you were going through a wormhole from point A to point B. Suppose point B was in orbit around some bright star. The moment you were in the wormhole, near your point of origin A, you would see that star. And it would be very bright; it wouldn't be a tiny point in the distance. On the other hand, if you look sideways, you would not see out of the wormhole, you would be in that fourth physical dimension. What the walls of the wormhole would be is deeply mysterious. And the possibility was also raised that if you looked backwards in the wormhole you would see the very place on world A that you had left. And that would be true even as you emerged out of the wormhole near the star B. You would see in space a kind of black sphere, in which would be an image of the place you had left on Earth, just floating in the blackness of space. Very Alice in Wonderland.

NOVA: Your inquiries about space travel for Contact sparked a whole new direction in research on time travel. How does that make you feel?


Sagan: I find it marvellous, I mean literally marvellous, full of marvel, that this innocent inquiry in the context of writing a science-fiction novel has sparked a whole field of physics and dozens of scientific papers by some of the best physicists in the world. I'm so pleased to have played this catalytic role not just in fast spaceflight but in the idea of time travel.

NOVA: How do you feel being responsible for bringing time travel perhaps a step closer?


Sagan: I don't know that I've brought time travel a step closer. If anyone has it's Kip Thorne. But maybe the joint effort of all those involved in this debate has at least increased the respectability of serious consideration of the possibility of time travel. As a youngster who was fascinated by the possibility of time travel in the science-fiction novels of H.G. Wells, Robert Heinlein, and others, to be in any way involved in the possible actualization of time travelwell, it just brings goose bumps. Of course we're not really at that stage; we don't know that time travel is even possible, and if it is, we certainly haven't developed the time machine. But it's a stunning fact that we have now reached a stage in our understanding of nature where this is even a bare possibility.
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a persons faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#208705 - 12/16/06 08:57 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: Nemo]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2334
Loc: East Coast, USA.
If I might be so bold as to add on top of what you have already said, certain mammalian and reptilian creatures are in fact immortal for all intents and purposes; also known as "negligible senescence."

The problem that some people make, is mistaking life expectancy for life span.

Life expectancy measures how long a thing is expected to live according to statistical probabilities. Life span on the other hand is the actual biological limit of a thing, according to all known biological criteria concerning it.

So it is in fact known that the aging process is not a universal state that effects all living organisms.

For further study of this wonderous topic, I refer anyone interested to look here.

This is just one of the MANY new and emerging ideas and very real possibilities associated with death and the attempt to defeat it. For the astute lover of life, the vista of opportunity is WIDE open and there for your taking, but it's going to require that you do away with your understandable, if somewhat unfortunate, notions that death is an absolute.

Note: This is not directed at you Magister Nemo, but rather a perfect opportunity to build on what you've said.
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a persons faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#208706 - 12/16/06 09:25 PM Conquest of Death [Re: Carkosa]
Discipline Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 08/25/03
Posts: 6796
Loc: Forever West
Currently.

What if you had a choice of an option path to a much longer life? Would you take it?

But let us not delve too far off the topic. This has been discussed many times before.
_________________________
"I've learned . . . that life is like a roll of toilet paper. The closer it gets to the end, the faster it goes." ~Andy Rooney

"At last I shall have time to devote myself seriously and freely to the destruction of all my former opinions." ~Descartes

The first principle is that you must not fool yourselfand you are the easiest person to fool. ~Richard Feynman

Top
#208707 - 12/16/06 10:50 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: Nemo]
RandomStranger Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/09/05
Posts: 2770
Loc: Here.
Now you're just showing off!
_________________________




Top
#208708 - 12/16/06 11:12 PM Re: Time Travel [Re: LightAngel]
tovasshi Offline


Registered: 02/16/05
Posts: 1415
Loc: Banana, Canada
I don't think you can travel into the future, but merely have the time around you go at a faster pace than your own. When your time speeds up to the time of everyone else, you haven't really time traveled. You were just living a lot slower than everyone else.

Time travel assumes that the time line you are traveling on includes you in it and you jump forward to see what happened to your life as though you lived it through since then. When really you never left the time line, you were always in it, just moving faster.

Moving back intime would be impossible unless time were circular, as in a donut rather than a line. However you cannot see yourself ever, because you carried all those molecules that make up you with you. You may meet someone who looks like you and has your name and genetics, but they are not you. You could do anything to this version of you, but it will not effect you in any way. In conclusion, even if time were a donut, you are not traveling back in time, rather forward in time to when everything repeats itself.
_________________________
Hi.

Top
#208709 - 12/17/06 12:28 AM Re: Conquest of Death [Re: Discipline]
Carkosa Offline


Registered: 07/17/02
Posts: 359
Quote:

Currently.

What if you had a choice of an option path to a much longer life? Would you take it?




Of course I would take it. I would do anything to extend my life, I would even sign up for Cryonic suspension. That doesn't qualify as living forever though. It only buys you lots of time. This planet isn't even going to last forever.

Top
Page 2 of 18 < 1 2 3 4 ... 17 18 >


Forum Stats
12198 Members
73 Forums
43974 Topics
406003 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 06:49 AM
Advertisements