Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Time Travel. Is it possible?

  1. Oct 12, 2004 #1
    Time Travel. Is it possible?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 12, 2004 #2
    so far i've learnt in my special relativity class that you can only slow time down if you travel (which is very difficult) close to the speed of light (within 0.1c and 0.9c)

    Time travel is only possible if you travel faster than the speed of light in which case you have contradictions like

    lets say your spaceship travelled in a straight line at speed 0.9c and then accelerates to 1.2c then you will actually see the past i.e., you will pass the light that your spaceship radiated from itself. So you can see the past. You may not see time pass backwards if yo were on the ship, but if you stood still watching this ship, you would actually see things go backward.

    i could be flawed in this thinking though!
     
  4. Oct 13, 2004 #3
    Time travel is possible!

    Time is not a Universal quantity.

    space and time are two dimentions that are relative to another. If you travel at fast speeds, you will be bending the space, therefore you will strech the time dimention. and as it streches, the length that was to be 1 sec, would be at a diffrent rate ( a lot slower that 1 sec) 1 sec for you would be more than 1 sec for others.

    Imagine SpaceTime as AirPresure.

    As a airplane passes through the air, the wings are going through the air, due to its shape the air that passes through tht top part has to travel a longer distance, the longer the distance the lower the presure. because the bottom of the wing has more pressure it allows the airplane to lift off.

    SpaceTime work in similar yet diffrent way.
     
  5. Oct 13, 2004 #4
    I bet 1...(how many 0 u want)$ that it's not possible!

    blue
     
  6. Oct 13, 2004 #5
    This is not correct. Any differential in spatial motion will result in temporal differences. What you have learned is that significantly and easily measurable differences require large enough variances such as you described.

    I disagree. If there is a differential in spatial motion, then two objects have a temporal differential. The object with the greater spatial motion moves more slowly through time. It therefore moves into the future of the other object.

    Not possible.
     
  7. Oct 13, 2004 #6
  8. Oct 13, 2004 #7
    With all due respect, you're taking a relativity class and are talking about accelerating to faster than c? At any rate, even hypothetical FTL speeds don't translate into translate into time reversing. Just undefined equations, or imaginary numbers.
     
  9. Oct 15, 2004 #8
    Travel to the future is possible and happens all the time for particles, but it would require unheard of amounts of energy to produce the effect for a human. But in principle, you only have to travel extremely fast in any direction and come back. When you have come back, if your watch has advanced a minute, the place's clocks will have advanced 2 minute, 3 hrs, or 60 years, depending at how fast you were going. this is elementary special relativity.

    Travel to the past belongs to advanced relativity, has never been observed, involves paradoxes, unverified hypothesis, is highly questionable, and in order to remain sane, I personnally keep away from those who seriously believe in it.
     
  10. Oct 15, 2004 #9
    Let me rephrase what you said:

    Travel to the future is possible and happens all the time. We are always moving into our future. We can also move into the future of people around us, for example. All we have to do is to move with respect to the earth around us.
     
  11. Oct 15, 2004 #10
    That make a lot of sense to me

    blue
     
  12. Oct 16, 2004 #11
    Not to me. I am not sure what is implied. I reinstate what I said word for word, adding what's in [] in an attempt to be clearer :

    Travel to the future is possible and happens all the time for particles, but it would require unheard of amounts of energy to produce the effect [on a common timescale] for a human. But in principle, you only have to travel extremely fast in any direction and come back. When you have come back, if your watch has advanced a minute, the place's clocks will have advanced 2 minute, 3 hrs, or 60 years, depending at how fast you were going. this is elementary special relativity.
     
  13. Oct 16, 2004 #12
    Repeating what you said makes no more sense to me than before.

    I still disagree with it. Why not expand your thinking, to see a wider scope of possibilities? Rather than repeat what you said, why not address what I wrote, as I did for what you wrote? You do not need to agree with me, but repeating something that I challenged will not make the point more surely.
     
  14. Oct 17, 2004 #13
    Ok this makes sense, some austronauts have been through this effect.


    What do u mean "move with respect to the earth around us"?

    Doesnt that mean just travel very fast in any direction?
     
  15. Oct 17, 2004 #14

    Fredrik

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    No astrononaut has ever moved at velocities that are close close to the speed of light. I don't think they've ever moved faster than a few km/s, and the speed of light is 300000 km/s.

    What he said means move at any speed in any direction. Actually you don't have to move at all. As you're sitting on your chair reading this, you're "moving" forward in time. In a second you'll be in the future...

    ...and now you're there.
     
  16. Oct 17, 2004 #15
    Ok maybe im mistaken, but ive read that one guy spent 9 months in space (in a spacestation travelling some 18.000km per hour around earth if i remember correctly) and it took him a few seconds into the future(compared to ppl on earth).


    Yeah thats obvious, but when people refer to time travel, they usually mean travelling faster or slower through time than they already do. But ur quite right, this whole world is one big mess of time travelling creatures!
     
  17. Oct 17, 2004 #16
    Not really. The difference is the word fast. If we move at all with respect to the earth, then there is a time differential with respect to the earth and all things that are stationary with respect to the earth. There is also a time differential with all things that are moving with respect to the earth at a rate different than ours.

    The use of the word "fast" is irrelevant, in my opinion, and its use suggests that perhaps there is an implication that reflects a misunderstanding.
     
  18. Oct 17, 2004 #17
    Excellent. The difference is that with a differential in spatial motion, it is possible to move into the future at a different rate than another person, and therefore to "move into his future", so to speak.

    If you define the speed of light in purely spatial terms, as you do, then I agree. However, if we define the speed of light in spatial-temporal terms, then everyone always moves at the exact same speed, the only possible speed, the speed of light.
     
  19. Oct 17, 2004 #18

    jcsd

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Again you are trying to define speed in terms of four-velcoity; why? infact it does not even make sense in this context as the four velocity of light is undefined.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Time Travel. Is it possible?
Loading...