Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of object

  • Thread starter VishwasG
  • Start date
7
0
Hi!
I always wonder, why "Time Travel" equation make use of velocity of an object ( speed of light etc.) Why not it is related to the state of objects constituting the universe.



Say, in my tiny imaginary universe, that just consists of me and a road from point A to B.

A. ---(me)--------------------------------- B. @t1

Then if i am standing at point A at time t1 then, t1 should be better called as state of objects A, B and (me)

Now suppose, (me) travels from point A to point B in time t2 . Then t2 should be better called as state of objects A,B and (me) .

A. ----------------------------------(me)--- B. @t2



My Time Travel Machine based on above text :

Whenever i wanna go to past, i would place (me) again on point A. Like this :

A. ---(me)--------------------------------- B. @t3

In the above case (me) has gone into past, where t3 = t1. Isn't it ?
 
1,283
0
Re: Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of ob

Hi!
I always wonder, why "Time Travel" equation make use of velocity of an object ( speed of light etc.) Why not it is related to the state of objects constituting the universe.



Say, in my tiny imaginary universe, that just consists of me and a road from point A to B.

A. ---(me)--------------------------------- B. @t1

Then if i am standing at point A at time t1 then, t1 should be better called as state of objects A, B and (me)

Now suppose, (me) travels from point A to point B in time t2 . Then t2 should be better called as state of objects A,B and (me) .

A. ----------------------------------(me)--- B. @t2



My Time Travel Machine based on above text :

Whenever i wanna go to past, i would place (me) again on point A. Like this :

A. ---(me)--------------------------------- B. @t3

In the above case (me) has gone into past, where t3 = t1. Isn't it ?
I am a bit confused of your hypothetical time travel machine. But to answer your question of why time travel equations make use of speed of light...

Once you reach the speed of light, you are essentially going through the future. Because you are moving (much) faster than everything else. So by the time you might be able to accelerate at the speed of light for 7 years, the rest of the world would have reached 400 years old (non-accurate numbers).
 
7
0
Re: Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of ob

I am a bit confused of your hypothetical time travel machine. But to answer your question of why time travel equations make use of speed of light...

Once you reach the speed of light, you are essentially going through the future. Because you are moving (much) faster than everything else. So by the time you might be able to accelerate at the speed of light for 7 years, the rest of the world would have reached 400 years old (non-accurate numbers).
No.. actually your explanation from the beginning has taken the term "time" as something that can be raced with. As if you can see time running or walking before you. I cannot see anything running called as time. So on the first place you cannot take time in comparison to something that is running ( say photons in the light ) .

In support of my explanation :

Suppose you are 25 right now.... and by some means ( say plastic surgery ) i change you into a 3 yrs baby. ( I changed your state), so didnot i make you travel time ?

You say: What nonsense... what about the other people who are living with me...how come i would be seeing the same events to happen which i saw when i was 3 yr baby.

me : Ok, i accept that. So in addition to the state change i did with you, i also change the state of sun, moon and everything in the universe to the state that was existing at the time you were 3yr old baby. After this the events would follow the same as you saw when you were a 3 yr old baby.

( After this please again refer to my 1st post )
Thanks.
 
1,283
0
Re: Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of ob

No.. actually your explanation from the beginning has taken the term "time" as something that can be raced with. As if you can see time running or walking before you. I cannot see anything running called as time. So on the first place you cannot take time in comparison to something that is running ( say photons in the light ) .

In support of my explanation :

Suppose you are 25 right now.... and by some means ( say plastic surgery ) i change you into a 3 yrs baby. ( I changed your state), so didnot i make you travel time ?

You say: What nonsense... what about the other people who are living with me...how come i would be seeing the same events to happen which i saw when i was 3 yr baby.

me : Ok, i accept that. So in addition to the state change i did with you, i also change the state of sun, moon and everything in the universe to the state that was existing at the time you were 3yr old baby. After this the events would follow the same as you saw when you were a 3 yr old baby.

( After this please again refer to my 1st post )
Thanks.
You can race with "time" sort of speak. Time is relative to motion. An atom moving from point a to b is time. What I said was, the faster you go, is the faster you go through time (accelerating close to the speed of light), while everyone else stays at their regular motion.

That is the only way we know that you can go into the future. Or as oddcitations has said, there are ideas that you can jump through wormholes.

Your hypothetical story only confused me more on your idea of time traveling. Maybe you should try to be more concise on your explanation.
 
7
0
Re: Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of ob

3 posts are missing in this thread... where they have gone ?? :( :/
 
Re: Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of ob

Beats me. :/ I was kind of disappointed to see them gone.
 
7
0
Re: Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of ob

Anyways, i repeat one of my missed posts


@oddcitations

1) Giving the quote of one of your posts ( where you said that, because if one travels more than speed of light, then that would mean he would be travelling than any other thing in the universe..... amm...something similar, i am not able to remember that post in full)

So, can you provide me a similar example with speed of sound. If suppose all the people on the earth were deaf, and one of the deafman could travel more than the speed of sound. Then would that deaf man would see himself travelling ahead of the time of other people on earth ?
 
Re: Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of ob

Anyways, i repeat one of my missed posts


@oddcitations

1) Giving the quote of one of your posts ( where you said that, because if one travels more than speed of light, then that would mean he would be travelling than any other thing in the universe..... amm...something similar, i am not able to remember that post in full)

So, can you provide me a similar example with speed of sound. If suppose all the people on the earth were deaf, and one of the deafman could travel more than the speed of sound. Then would that deaf man would see himself travelling ahead of the time of other people on earth ?

I meant, if you travel close to the speed of light, it's not possible(Einstein said so) to travel at the speed of light.
Well, I guess, mathematically it's 'possible,' but once you do, you mess up a lot of things in the space-time continuoum for both you and the space time continuoum.

My long post on speed of light is really just a perspective thing.
Lets say I'm living an average person's life, and I happen to have a friend who invented time travel.
Lets say you've invented time travel and you are traveling near light speed(like atoms in an atomic accelerator!). Now time has slowed down for you, you have a clock with you and that clock's second has slowed down significantly compared to when you're not travelling close to light speed. Now after travelling for a while, you come back and visit me. I'll be long dead and you'll see a whole new techno-world.

Another way to explain this:
To me, Time for you is moving slower in that fancy time machine.(To you its going the same. This is ALL perspective) Time for me is going normally to me, but going fast to you. Ergo, time travel into the future to you.


Here's why you mess things up when you travel AT light speed:
You have a sense of time, that it's going by and such, when you reach light speed, according to Einstien's equation, that "sense" of time goes to zero and you're stuck ageless and fast.
Also, to me watching you go at light speed from my yard, you'd disappear to me because you're travelling so fast in one direction.
Now, you know that Energy = Massxspeed of lightx speed of light.
As you go faster, your energy increases and your mass increases. Once you've hit an 'infinite' speed you will have an 'infinite' mass and an inifinite amount of energy needed to move it. (Come to think of this, maybe this is how wormholes potentially could be formed.)



I have to go and attempt to have a life, but when I come back I'm going to tackle that deafguy scenario! I <3 talking about this topic, it's just so cool! Merci boucoup!
 

Related Threads for: Time Travel: Isn't it more related to state of objects rathar then velocity of object

Replies
17
Views
7K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
26K
Top