Time Travel
-
@billion57 (View Post) (theoretically) at S>C, movement becomes instantaneous, therefore, creating "teleportation." at S=C, time stands still. At S<C, depending on an object's velocity, the faster the object moves, the slower time goes for the object. time travel always occurs for any object (hypothetically all) moving at any speed in non-conventional time. if any object could get rid of it's mass, speed and all the gravitational force of the universe(s?), then the object would not time travel. the affects of an object's mass, speed, and surrounding objects all dilate time, therefore, we are always time travelling and can NEVER stop. so at S=0? , up to S=C, time travel occurs. at S>C, reverse time travelling does not occur, but the theory now is teleportation in the bulk, but we will probably never know unless we do accelerate particles faster than C and observe their behavior. if u move at C, time stands still, but light still takes up time to go places (8mins from sun to earth). if an object could move instantaneously, would time stand still? time stands still at C, which is not instantaneous, so S would have to be ? , which we perceive as impossible, but yet we theorize that a singularity would have ? mass and gravity would be quite intense. (crazy font from the symbol i copied from google) but what would happen at S>??? the partical should disappear. but would it re appear? and would this occur? even if S?C and never will, what would happen if it could?
-
This post is hidden because the user is banned
-
-
You may forget, that the faster an object moves, the more its mass is, so you cannot reach C. If you dont understand the basement of relativity theory dont do conclusions out of it. Your thing for me sounds like "banana is blue, so 2x2=5", sorry for offence, but...
Well, time travel is only possible if there are multiple timelines, otherwise it would create lots of paradoxes, and violate III thermodynamics law
our universe is quaternion-marked, where i,j and k are space directions and 1 is time direction. -
@mniip!194545did u see the "theoretically" at the beginning? I'm saying that's a theory of what would happen if S>C. not that's what does happen. people who say this don't think that things can go faster than C, and of course i know that S affects M. there are also paradoxes which further prevent us from reaching C
-
After reading this it makes one start to consider life itself, (not always a good thing) like if time travels possible why havent we gone back in time and told ourselves how to do it? But then again that would be another paradox. So why dont we tell ourselves how we figured it out? Yet again, another paradox. Its honestly maddenning, never knowing if its possible, slowly driving us to the brink of insanity. Then there are those who say they've time traveled but cant prove it, yet again MADDENNING!!!!!! The wait is killing us all, Doc brown, Doctor who, H.G Wells HURRY UP WE ARE IMPATIENT!!
-
To add to your post, m_shinoda, nothing in the universe is faster than light. Time dilation makes time go slower when you approach the speed of light. It's called relativity. in order to reverse time, you must be going faster than 186,000 mps, and guess whats faster than light? NOTHING.
