Time Travel

Origin,

On this one we tend to agree but for different reasons. I don't see Relativity as being valid or based on actual facts and data but a mis-interpretation of data.

I believe we will one day be able to achieve relavistic speeds. At that time we will learn if our biological clock is dilated in the same manner that mechanical or atomic clocks appear to be.

If so then what you say should be true and I hold a simular view.

However, I do not see time as a physical enity or the 4th dimension. It is not something that can be manipulated or traveled in the normal use of the term.

Time as far as I am concerned time is nothing more than the information about motion induced by energy transfer - An illusion of energy flow.

In that view to go back in time one would be required to reverse all energy flow throughout the universe and to not violate conservation would include the operator and time machine such that the instant the machine was switched on it would revert to the instant before it reversed entropy in the universe.

To go forward one would have to accelerate energy flow and likewise would also accelerate ones own aging.

Therefore the only method would be as you say to slow down our aging in a universe where time itself is not being traversed but the energy flow of the universe would continue to flow normally while the operator slowed (dilated) his matabolisim. In that respect it is the same thing as being frozen and brought back alive centuries later or being in suspended antimation.

There is no clock that actually measures time and the claim of time dilation data is flawed if for no other reason than that. Clocks are processes and the slowing of a clock only shows that a process has been altered, not that time has been affected much less that it even exists.

My favorite example is to make a clock aout of a pan marked up the side and use it to tell time as the water evaporates. If doesn't take much understanding to see that if I heat the jpan my clock will accelerate and in a matter of minutes I would have moved into the next century (even though my beard hadn't grown noticably).

Clearly affecting the clocks process has not altered time.



"Imagination is more important than Knowledge" -- Albert Einstien

that is so very true. time is such a relative thing. do you believe in any of the parallel universe stuff to maybe explain being able to into the past somehow? I'm not sure i do. Dang there are so many paradoxes when dealing with time travel

Marks of wisdom can come from even the most unlikely sources.

Mac gave a good response. I don't see how one can travel to the future unless
there is a predetermined future already which would then make travel to the
future (unpredetermined action) a contradiction. Where can you go if there
nowhere to go yet?

I don't
think even SR or GR's time dilation stuff is about time travel. It's more
like saying that if you are in a frame whose clock rates are faster( or slower)
than another frame, when you go from that frame to the other, your clock
will show less time than the other. Yes, you would have travelled to
your future if you compared the local time in your new frame with the
time on the clock from your place of birth. But you did not really travel
to the future, just to a frame where the clocks run faster(or slower).



Imagine that today we asked Buzz to bring a clock to the yellow Moon. On Earth, we
have an identically manufactured clock. We synchronize the Earth and Moon
clocks from time 0 and tell Buzz to come back to Earth. After 2 years have
gone by on our Earth clock, we ask Buzz to go back to the yellow moon, bringing the
Earth clock with him, to compare with the time on the Moon clock. When
he gets there, he sees that the moon clock reads 12 years have gone by.
(I'm exaggerating the time dilation effects to demonstrate a point).

Now, Buzz's Earth clock shows that only 2 years have gone by on Earth, so
did he travel 10 years into the future by virtue of landing in a
different gravitational potential? I think when he gets back to the
Earth his loaf of bread won't be a day older. (But if he had any
doubts that this wasn't a result of him traveling back to the
past, he could've made a collect call to his mom from the moon
to make sure).

I don't think this fits our usual notion of time travel, do you?

To really travel through time, we would have to first assume
an absolute time for the universe. Time travel then is actually
going to 1 possible evolution of universe in an infinite permutation of possibilities. Seems that you would need a time machine that
can change the whole universe.

123....,

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b>Seems that you would need a time machine that
can change the whole universe. </b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

ANS: My point exactly.


"Imagination is more important than Knowledge" -- Albert Einstien

Which brings us back to the issue of relative simultaneity in
SR, which also applies to GR if SR can be derived
from GR: How can we even walk up and down a staircase or
even remain in one piece if there is no absolute simultaneity?

If when I stand upright, my head is not simultaneous in time with my toes,
I'd expect my head to fall off. GR's time dilation is just as silly as SR, really.

Mac,

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Clocks are processes and the slowing of a clock only shows that a process has been altered, not that time has been affected much less that it even exists.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

There is nothing for me to add.

Origin,

Space warping and time travel are esoteric consequences of relativity theory. Time travel cannot be accepted as a serious possibility by anyone.