• Time Travel
    204 replies, posted
Wait is this a discussion than warping the curvature of space-time only causes relative increases in speed from an outside perspective? Same thing as worm holes or is it something different we're talking about here?
[QUOTE=Darkcoder;22368398]I understand this, and using a photon was perhaps a bad example, but if we instead used a point light source(some sub-c mass that just emits light), at no point when passing through the ergosphere would it be moving through space faster than light relative to itself. So are we talking about this object would appear to have gone back in time when it exits the ergosphere? Or that from an outside observer there would appear to be two light sources? I can perhaps understand the second, but the first makes no sense to me.[/QUOTE] I don't think your photon-emitting particle would have traveled back in time because, even though it has traveled through highly stressed space-time that has been traveling faster than the speed of light, the particle itself would still have not exceeded SoL.
who watched the time machine a few hours ago?
[QUOTE=bravehat;22368516]Wait is this a discussion than warping the curvature of space-time only causes relative increases in speed from an outside perspective? Same thing as worm holes or is it something different we're talking about here?[/QUOTE] Yeah, more specifically they're talking about an ergosphere, or the region outside of black hole in which space-time travels faster than light yet where data can still be retrieved.
I used to think it was the other way around, the faster you go time goes faster for everyone else, meaning if the journey takes 10 years to travel, it take 10 years on the ship and far longer on the outside world.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;22368596]I used to think it was the other way around, the faster you go time goes faster for everyone else, meaning if the journey takes 10 years to travel, it take 10 years on the ship and far longer on the outside world.[/QUOTE] That's correct relative to the traveler.
[QUOTE=billeh!;22368589]Yeah, more specifically they're talking about an ergosphere, or the region outside of black hole in which space-time travels faster than light yet where data can still be retrieved.[/QUOTE] The fuck? :byodood: but isn't that beyond the event horizon if it's moving faster than the speed of light, and I assume in the ergosphere the escape velocity would be higher than light speed as well so how would data be able to be retrieved?
Well you can't really say it goes faster for anyone as I demonstrated in my thought experiment. Time goes slower to accommodate that the speed of light apparently increases. Since there's no absolute 0 point of motion, we can actually conclude two things: You can easily exceed the speed of light, there's no hard limit, I'd like to know how modern science got another idea because obviously my understanding is incomplete. We can't assume the universe to be still and the spaceship to be the one in motion, the effect is the same both ways. There cannot be one that goes faster and one that goes slower. It's relative. I suppose time speeds up when you are travelling towards each other. Like some kind of temporal doppler effect.
Apparently they reckon its possible to travel in time but you would have to move faster than the speed of light, if this WAS possible surely the human body couldnt survive it?
As far I know Einsteins theory only speeds up the vision of time of those who are moving at time speed. You can`t travel back
[QUOTE=TheUnDeadGod;22368835]Apparently they reckon its possible to travel in time but you would have to move faster than the speed of light, if this WAS possible surely the human body couldnt survive it?[/QUOTE] Speeds don't kill people, it's the accelerations and decelerations so if we somehow managed to get to the speed of light without the laws of physics having a fit, then we could be okay.
[QUOTE=billeh!;22368619]That's correct relative to the traveler.[/QUOTE] I was thinking travel 19 lightyears at 95% of c so 20 earth years travel time. I thought it would be 20 years for the people travelling and 64 years for the observer. Some kind of paradox how traveling closer to the speed of light caused you to slow down, really shows I didn't understand it.
[QUOTE=bravehat;22368757]The fuck? :byodood: but isn't that beyond the event horizon if it's moving faster than the speed of light, and I assume in the ergosphere the escape velocity would be higher than light speed as well so how would data be able to be retrieved?[/QUOTE] Nothing is traveling faster than the speed of light, only the fabric of space-time. The Wiki explains best: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergosphere[/url] [editline]10:41AM[/editline] [QUOTE=BmB;22368790]Well you can't really say it goes faster for anyone as I demonstrated in my thought experiment. Time goes slower to accommodate that the speed of light apparently increases. Since there's no absolute 0 point of motion, we can actually conclude two things: You can easily exceed the speed of light, there's no hard limit, I'd like to know how modern science got another idea because obviously my understanding is incomplete. We can't assume the universe to be still and the spaceship to be the one in motion, the effect is the same both ways. There cannot be one that goes faster and one that goes slower. It's relative. I suppose time speeds up when you are travelling towards each other. Like some kind of temporal doppler effect.[/QUOTE] As Einstein demonstrated in his theory E=m(c^2), energy and mass are the same thing except in different forms. Now, Einstein stated that something travels faster and faster, the object behaves as if it has more and more mass because energy is being converted into mass. As a result, to accelerate an object at SoL or faster, you would require and infinite amount of energy. Conclusively, there is a definite limit to the speeds of objects.
[QUOTE=billeh!;22368925]Nothing is traveling faster than the speed of light, only the fabric of space-time. The Wiki explains best: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergosphere[/url][/QUOTE] AHHHHHHH!!! So the object moves at its same speed in the same direction continuously from its perspective but from ours it would be dragging backwards with the fabric of space time, kinda of like a boat trying to escape a huge whirlpool yeah?
But we also established you can never approach the speed of light because it will always be at the speed of light regardless of how fast you are going compared to the rest of the universe. In fact if anything the problems will be with the rest of the universe from your perspective since these objects will apparently begin to approach the speed of light.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;22368886]I was thinking travel 19 lightyears at 95% of c so 20 earth years travel time. I thought it would be 20 years for the people travelling and 64 years for the observer. Some kind of paradox how traveling closer to the speed of light caused you to slow down, really shows I didn't understand it.[/QUOTE] You seem to have a fairly good grasp of time dilation, although I'm really no judge. Here's a fairly good analogy to explain time dilation that I posted earlier in the thread: Let's assume your collective momentum (meaning the overall momentum of all your particles regardless of time) is 100% the speed of light. If you are moving at 1% the speed of light, your momentum through time is 99% that it was previously. If you are moving at 99% the speed of light, your momentum through time is 1%. Thus, the faster you are moving, the slower your perceive time, and vice versa. [editline]10:45AM[/editline] [QUOTE=BmB;22369006]But we also established you can never approach the speed of light because it will always be at the speed of light regardless of how fast you are going.[/QUOTE] This is only true because of time dilation. Light will always be traveling at the same speed relative to the observer because time will compensate for the observer's speed. [editline]10:45AM[/editline] [QUOTE=bravehat;22369000]AHHHHHHH!!! So the object moves at its same speed in the same direction continuously from its perspective but from ours it would be dragging backwards with the fabric of space time, kinda of like a boat trying to escape a huge whirlpool yeah?[/QUOTE] I'm just as lost as you on visualizing this. :v:
So there is an absolute 0 speed then.
[QUOTE=BmB;22369050]So there is an absolute 0 speed then.[/QUOTE] Yes, in theory. Although according to quantum theory, nothing is ever really at rest. But some things come close enough.
I think I get it now. The more time slows down, the more mass will "exist" for that duration of time, thus you will increase in mass at the expense of the energy needed to further accelerate a mass that exists in a timespace that increasingly approaches 0. [editline]04:50PM[/editline] But to you that would only appear as the rest of the universe grinding to a halt. Since you experience time, and thus mass the same as before. The rest of the universe would be what appears to become infinitely massive.
I remember the immovable object paradox stated that something would need infinite mass to be immovable and infinite speed and energy to be unstoppable. If they are that closely related, an immovable object and an unstopable force are the same thing.
Well if there is an absolute 0 speed it must be measurable. Has anyone found out how fast we are going?
[QUOTE=BmB;22369100]I think I get it now. The more time slows down, the more mass will "exist" for that duration of time, thus you will increase in mass at the expense of the energy needed to further accelerate a mass that exists in a timespace that increasingly approaches 0.[/QUOTE] Uh, I think you're confusing two different things. The more energy you put into an object, the more mass the object has. Time dilation occurs at high speeds because as you move through the fabric of space-[b]time[/b], time (and this is a very archaic analogy) becomes compressed to the observer and our observer experiences time differently. [editline]10:56AM[/editline] [QUOTE=BmB;22369183]Well if there is an absolute 0 speed it must be measurable. Has anyone found out how fast we are going?[/QUOTE] Speed is measured in relation from one object to another. You have to have a point of reference to fetch speed data. Zero speed means that relative to the observation point, the object is immobile or moving at the same exact speed in the same direction as the observation point.
Do you understand it or are you just rolling off buzzwords? Because it sounds like buzzwords to me. [i]"The more energy you put into an object, the more mass the object has."[/i] This is an absolute non sequiteur. There needs to be a medium for converting it, I understand that as the apparent timespace. You have nothing here. [editline]05:01PM[/editline] [QUOTE=billeh!;22369185]Uh, I think you're confusing two different things. The more energy you put into an object, the more mass the object has. Time dilation occurs at high speeds because as you move through the fabric of space-[b]time[/b], time (and this is a very archaic analogy) becomes compressed to the observer and our observer experiences time differently. [editline]10:56AM[/editline] Speed is measured in relation from one object to another. You have to have a point of reference to fetch speed data. Zero speed means that relative to the observation point, the object is immobile or moving at the same exact speed in the same direction as the observation point.[/QUOTE] Look man, we just established that in order for there to be a limit at the speed of light there needs to be an absolute speed of light, and conversely an absolute zero speed relative to that absolute speed. If time dilation is an artefact of that absolute speed then you must be able to measure how dilated time is locally and determine how fast you are going, absolutely.
[QUOTE=BmB;22369259]Do you understand it or are you just rolling off buzzwords? Because it sounds like buzzwords to me. [i]"The more energy you put into an object, the more mass the object has."[/i] This is an absolute non sequiteur. There needs to be a medium for converting it, I understand that as the apparent timespace. You have nothing here. [editline]05:01PM[/editline] Look man, we just established that in order for there to be a limit at the speed of light there needs to be an absolute speed of light, and conversely an absolute zero speed relative to that absolute speed. If time dilation is an artefact of that absolute speed then you must be able to measure how dilated time is locally and determine how fast you are going, absolutely.[/QUOTE] E=m(c^2) According to quantum theory, mass IS energy.
Only in the sense that they can be converted to each other so far as I understand. You still need a conversion process. Even between energies. Like a knife and a fork, they may be made from the same stuff but they are not the same thing. I figure that anyways.
[QUOTE=BmB;22369259]Do you understand it or are you just rolling off buzzwords? Because it sounds like buzzwords to me. [i]"The more energy you put into an object, the more mass the object has."[/i] This is an absolute non sequiteur. There needs to be a medium for converting it, I understand that as the apparent timespace. You have nothing here. [editline]05:01PM[/editline] Look man, we just established that in order for there to be a limit at the speed of light there needs to be an absolute speed of light, and conversely an absolute zero speed relative to that absolute speed. If time dilation is an artefact of that absolute speed then you must be able to measure how dilated time is locally and determine how fast you are going, absolutely.[/QUOTE] The speed of light is always the same to any observer. You don't need a specific observation point to measure the speed of light because the speed of light will always be the same. [editline]11:04AM[/editline] [QUOTE=BmB;22369343]Only in the sense that they can be converted to each other so far as I understand. You still need a conversion process. Even between energies.[/QUOTE] Thus, E=m(c^2) Which means mass is just a measure of energy in a body.
We also established that that was because of time dilation and not because of the speed of light being variable. If what you just said was true you could never approach the speed of light and there wouldn't be a limit to how fast you can go. [editline]05:05PM[/editline] The point is, the blanket statement "The more energy you put into an object, the more mass the object has." includes no conversion process. I figured this conversion process would be the locally compressed timespace.
[QUOTE=BmB;22369375]We also established that that was because of time dilation and not because of the speed of light being variable. If what you just said was true you could never approach the speed of light and there wouldn't be a limit to how fast you can go.[/QUOTE] You're leaving massive chunks out of your thought process here. How is the fact that the speed of light is a constant due time dilation destroy the inability for objects to exceed SoL? [editline]11:07AM[/editline] [QUOTE=BmB;22369375]We also established that that was because of time dilation and not because of the speed of light being variable. If what you just said was true you could never approach the speed of light and there wouldn't be a limit to how fast you can go. [editline]05:05PM[/editline] The point is, the blanket statement "The more energy you put into an object, the more mass the object has." includes no conversion process. I figured this conversion process would be the locally compressed timespace.[/QUOTE] Define conversion process.
Read it again.
Mass is compressed and cooled down energy.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.