@peterdonnis
I just wrote out a nice reply in which I agreed with you and said I think we were saying similar things but you explained it better than me!
E.g. I missed your emphasis on the word 'proof'.
I hit post and it didn't post and I'm struglinng for time to rewrite it (pun not...
Within a second according to their watch and the clocks of the place they left behind.
Just because the place they left behind doesn't see them appear 100,000 light years away until 100,000 years later (assuming they had a telescope to see the other side of the galaxy) doest mean they...
Hi,
The reference to the light cone thing was because last time I voiced these opinions they were put forward as an explanation of why they were wrong.
I wasn't aware of the rest of your points, I'll do some digging. Thank you :-)
As for the proof bit... Relativity is a theory, and...
I really do believe we have the whole concept of superluminal anything and time travel completely wrong.
E.g a person hops in a wormhole and instantly travels across the galaxy nearly 100,000 light years away. The clocks at the place they left don't stop ticking, they carry on moving...
I was going from Nugatory's comment.
He says that you were right and that special relativity predicts that effect before cause is possible.
I was wondering if there have been and validations by experiment of this (although not sure how??) The only effect before cause I can find relates to...
Thank you :-)
I have done some googling and further reading. I can find quite a few references to effect before cause but they all seem to be based on quantum effects which don't seem to have anything to do with traveling at or past the speed of light. For example...
**[SIZE="5"]BOOM**
That was the sound of my head exploding :confused:
Ok, let me mull over that for a bit.
Edit:-
So (please correct me if I am wrong!) what you are saying is that nothing actually happens until it is observed to happen?
Is this just a prediction of theory or is there...
Thank you :-)
That is really helpful and puts it into a language I can understand. I do understand light cones, as per my example in the original post I just didn't use the words :-)
So if someone refers to faster than light travel leading to time travel should I just take it that they...
Thank you for the response. I'm afraid I don't follow though?
If I understand you correctly (which I probably don't, probably more down to me than your reply)doesn't accounting for the finite speed of light in this frame of reference account for everything? Leaving nothing un-accounted for...
Hi,
I would be really grateful if someone could help me with two questions I have, both have puzzled me on and off for years. I have read what I can regarding these points, but a lot of it I don't understand (the maths specifically). I would love it is someone who understands this more than...