Can aeroplanes be technically used as time travel machines?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the misconception that traveling to a different time zone equates to time travel into the future. Participants argue that simply being in a location with a different local time does not mean one is actually living in the future. They emphasize that time is relative and based on standardized time zones, not just the local clock. The analogy of time zones is compared to temperature conversions, highlighting that different representations can indicate the same moment. Ultimately, the thread concludes with a moderator locking the discussion due to its lack of seriousness.
Jacinta
Messages
22
Reaction score
12
So I'm currently on holidays somewhere, and it's one hour ahead of where i live. Since i went on the areoplane and landed to a new country where the time is an hour ahead, this also means i technically landed into the future, right?
 
  • Like
Likes ISamson
Physics news on Phys.org
No.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and Bystander
Borek said:
No.

Why? Can you support your argument? :)
 
  • Like
Likes Jacinta
Borek said:
No.

But I'm technically one hour ahead of everyone back home, so I'm living one hour into the future.
 
No. Just like you won't be ahead of time if you just set your clock to time+1h without moving from home.
 
Borek said:
No. Just like you won't be ahead of time if you just set your clock to time+1h without moving from home.

But if you change the time on your phone that won't actually change the time, whereas I'm currently an hour ahead of everyone back home.
 
Jacinta said:
But I'm technically one hour ahead of everyone back home, so I'm living one hour into the future.
Call them on the phone and see if you have to wait an hour for a reply.
 
  • Like
Likes lekh2003, Bystander and phinds
russ_watters said:
Call them on the phone and see if you have to wait an hour for a reply.

They probably wouldn't even respond, but that's not the point.
 
Jacinta said:
They probably wouldn't even respond, but that's not the point.
Yes, it IS the point.
 
  • Like
Likes Bystander
  • #10
phinds said:
Yes, it IS the point.

i'm pretty sure the reason they wouldn't respond is not only due to time difference.
 
  • #11
It's the same time, but we need to write the time fully to see that.

Suppose Dorothy and her dog Toto are in Denver Colorado and it is 9AM.
We write it as 09:00 MST, where the 'MST' denotes Mountain Standard Time.
Or more fully as 09:00:00-07:00 in standardized ISO 8601 notation, which means we have subtracted 7 hours from Universal Coordinated Time (UTC).

Now she and her dog are magically transported to Kansas City (instantaneously), where it is 10AM, or rather 10:00 CST, with 'CST' for Central Standard Time.
Again more fully 10:00:00-06:00.
Both are also written as 16:00:00Z, which is the time that a clock at the zero meridian (Greenwich, England) shows.

So even though the local clock shows a different time than Dorothy's watch, which really represents the altitude of the sun, it really is the same (UTC) time.
It's similar to how degrees Fahrenheit are converted to degrees Celsius. It's a different number but the same temperature.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes newbz and Ryan_m_b
  • #12
Jacinta said:
They probably wouldn't even respond, but that's not the point.
I can see you are not being serious. Thread locked.
 
Back
Top