UPSB v4
Serious Discussion / Time Travel
-
Date: Sun, Nov 13 2011 15:10:31
so I thought I might give you my theory of Time Travel. IF you travel faster than the speed of light then you will move from present day there fore seeing the light of the past. Because everything we see is a reflection of light, we will therefore be seeing the past. So say if you traveled at the speed of light for 50 years (the math on this is not correct) therefore since you have been moving away from the light of present day for 50 year you will see things that are say 20 years ago. An example is that a building got demolished 10 years ago. You would still see this building but you would not be able to touch it and it would not really be there. However, this have been disproven by the History Channel (screw them) who say it would be the opposite way around (but that makes no sense).
-
Date: Sun, Nov 13 2011 20:49:31
great "discussion"
-
Date: Tue, Nov 15 2011 20:23:09
yo i think you should study your physics
-
Date: Fri, Nov 18 2011 04:47:25
I don't think this is mentioned in physics...besides this was actually proven by the history channel but I got it backwards...
-
Date: Sat, Nov 19 2011 06:47:58
midniteferret wrote: I don't think this is mentioned in physics...besides this was actually proven by the history channel but I got it backwards...
Hahahaha... I think I internally lol'd through that whole post -
Date: Sat, Nov 19 2011 18:05:52
This is a truly great finding. You should submit it to a journal.
-
Date: Sun, Nov 20 2011 11:19:41
Check this out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPoGVP-wZv8
-
Date: Sun, Nov 20 2011 21:14:18
If you moved faster than light, 1 second for you would be like 10 later here on Earth. I think you're really confused.
-
Date: Sun, Nov 27 2011 17:09:57
@Mike yah that is true if you consider the sense of touch to be a wave... but if you only consider light and sound to be a wave then only your sight and sound would be off
-
Date: Sun, Nov 27 2011 17:26:39
Faster than light in four dimensional space time simply does not make sense. Let's take a look at why: So we all know that speed = distance travelled / time or v = s / t (where v - velocity/s - displacement/t - time). This equation can be written as: v = s / t t = d / s d = s * t All this is the same equation, just written in a different way. From this we can conclude that for example at 10ms-1 (10 metres per second) we travel 20m (20 metres) in 2s (2 seconds). We know speed and displacement, so we write: t = 10 (speed, v) / 20 (displacement, s) = 2s Okay, so now we have a particle travelling faster than light. The speed of light is 299 792 458 ms-1. Let's see a particle travel 1 metre at a speed of 299 792 459 ms-1: So first of all, since we are travelling faster than light, time goes in the opposite direction and will have a negative value, albeit, a very small one. Let's say -0.00000000001s s = v / t 1 = 299 792 459 / -0.00000000001s The equation is no longer correct. The displacement should be -2.99792459 × 10^19m. No matter what negative value goes there, this equation cannot be correct. This is surely because if a particle travels from point x to point y in negative time, it's velocity must be beyond infinity. HOWEVER, if other dimensions exist however, then we need a new equation that holds up in all directions, if particles are entering them (good candidate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaluza%E2%80%93Klein_theory).
-
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2011 01:41:02
@Mats ... wow man... well I really don't consider time to be a forth dimension. I am just imagining things in waves.
-
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2011 01:57:43
.
-
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2011 03:06:42
animals make sex juice#
-
Date: Tue, Dec 27 2011 17:43:36
i.suk wrote: .
? -
Date: Tue, Dec 27 2011 20:03:24
midniteferret wrote: @Mats ... wow man... well I really don't consider time to be a forth dimension. I am just imagining things in waves.
YOU might not, but science does. I would suggest going against a fundamental thing in physics, based upon no evidence would be ludicrous at best. -
Date: Wed, Dec 28 2011 07:36:26
Calling it a 4th dimension is actually pretty wrong ... It's in very few ways like the 3 spatial dimensions The two are actually two different aspects of the same thing, "spacetime" Just like electricity and magnetism are two aspects of the same thing, "electromagnetism" Considering it a 4th dimension is fine, but telling people that science says it is and that it's a fundamental of physics is just plain incorrect lol
-
Date: Thu, Dec 29 2011 10:24:41
Watched Stephen Hawking's Into the Universe documentary. There was this bit where it's impossible to travel at the speed of light, only 99.9% of it and once you achieved that speed 1 day on board that ship would be like 100 years of earth.