Is time travel possible based on theory?

[Write4U]

Of course you have proven that time is objective, haven't you?

A dimension filled with time, or a physical permission which allows for chronology of events and the emergence of an associated time line?

I see this as saying that "heat" is a seperate dimension where heat dwells. Of course this is not true. Heat has no independent existence apart from friction. And so does time not have an independent existence apart from change.

Is it not more correct to say that heat is an emergent measurable byproduct of friction and that time is an emergent measurable byproduct of change?

 

[exchemist]

A dimension filled with time, or a physical permission which allows for chronology of events and the emergence of an associated time line?

I see this as saying that "heat" is a seperate dimension where heat dwells. Of course this is not true. Heat has no independent existence apart from friction. And so does time not have an independent existence apart from change.

Is it not more correct to say that heat is an emergent measurable byproduct of friction and that time is an emergent measurable byproduct of change?

No.

 

[TheFrogger]

Time is a product of all living things.

Actually, Write4u, that's exactly what I'm saying. Potential does not actually exist, it's what could be.

It seems to me the question is this: why doesn't light traverse time, to the beginning? If travelling the speed of light reverses time, we must assume such a velocity still exists in the absence of light, so that when light travels so, it acts in reverse.

You're assuming only light can travel at that speed.

 

[Write4U]

Time is a product of all living things.

I agree. Time is an emergent property of all change. Without change there is no measurable time. Without time there is no measurable change.

Actually, Write4u, that's exactly what I'm saying. Potential does not actually exist, it's what could be.

Potential = That which may become reality.

It seems to me the question is this: why doesn't light traverse time, to the beginning?

Don't we receive light from the BB, the beginning?

If travelling the speed of light reverses time, we must assume such a velocity still exists in the absence of light, so that when light travels so, it acts in reverse.

I believe the equation say that time becomes immeasurable at the speed of light. Einstein's riding a light beam show reality as "standing still" without change and thus without time.

You're assuming only light can travel at that speed.

It is a universal constant.
However;

While this circumstance might just be just an odd incompleteness of our knowledge, it becomes a crisis if we imagine that we are not human observers but the differential equations of a local field theory. For, as we saw above, a basic function of those field equations is to take the present state of the fields and from them infer the rates of change of the field. Those rates of change then determine the time development of the waveform--whether it propagates or not and how fast it propagates. This essential function will not be possible in an emission theory, for the instantaneous state of the lightwave does not determine the rates of change of the field.

Hence, thanks to Einstein's thought experiment, we infer that an emission theory cannot be formulated as a local field theory.

We can summarize the problems brought by Einstein's thought experiment to an emission theory:
https://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/Goodies/Chasing_the_light/

 

[Write4U]

W4U said,
I see this as saying that "heat" is a seperate dimension where heat dwells. Of course this is not true. Heat has no independent existence apart from friction. And so does time not have an independent existence apart from change.

Is it not more correct to say that heat is an emergent measurable byproduct of friction and that time is an emergent measurable byproduct of change?

No.

I see heat as an expression of potential "energy" emerging from an unstable prior state or by the interaction of physical objects.

I believe this addresses the problem from a different perspective, but which nicely illustrates the "emergence" of spacetime from nothing, during the event of the BB.

Their admittedly controversial answer is that the entire universe, from the fireball of the Big Bang to the star-studded cosmos we now inhabit, popped into existence from nothing at all. It had to happen, they say, because "nothing" is inherently unstable.

This idea may sound bizarre, or just another fanciful creation story. But the physicists argue that it follows naturally from science's two most powerful and successful theories: quantum mechanics and general relativity.

Here, then, is how everything could have come from nothing.

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141106-why-does-anything-exist-at-all

Spacetime emerging from "nothing"! All subsequent physical patterns have emerged from the inherent potentials of spacetime.

Evolution = Beneficial qualities emerging from enfolded potential abilities. ("hierarchies of expression", David Bohm)

 

[TheFrogger]

Something cannot come from nothing. If there was nothing, there will be nothing forever...

 

[exchemist]

I see heat as an expression of potential "energy" emerging from an unstable prior state or by the interaction of physical objects.

I believe this addresses the problem from a different perspective, but which nicely illustrates the "emergence" of spacetime from nothing, during the event of the BB.

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141106-why-does-anything-exist-at-all

Spacetime emerging from "nothing"! All subsequent physical patterns have emerged from the inherent potentials of spacetime.

Evolution = Beneficial qualities emerging from enfolded potential abilities. ("hierarchies of expression", David Bohm)

What rubbish.

 

[Write4U]

What rubbish.

Can you do better?

 

[exchemist]

Can you do better?

Yes. Heat is the kinetic energy of the random motion of atoms and molecules. "Potential" does not come into it.

And the definition of evolution is rubbish too, suggesting, as it does, some sort of goal or purpose for which there is no evidence.

 

[Michael 345]

Been holiday
No internet on return
Just back up and running

From reading the waffle say the last 100 odd post

Reads like a can of exploded spaghetti

I cannot see a single piece of evidence

Will wait

Meanwhile will rest from holiday ready for next one in 6 weeks and take a bet not a single piece of evidence will appear before 1 December

Ready steady GO

Your on the clock

 

[Write4U]

Yes. Heat is the kinetic energy of the random motion of atoms and molecules. "Potential" does not come into it.

Potential in this context is very much a factor.

Friction creates heat because it is rubbing against another object. The atoms move more and more as they are contacted. Thus movement is energy released as heat.

When you rub two things together causing friction you are stretching the bonds between those atoms. When you move past, those bonds now relax back to their original state and have extra energy left-over which is heat.

In other words; When atoms are moved close together they store potential energy. When they move apart the energy becomes kinetic. The kinetic energy usually isn't enough to escape the object they are attached to so the energy is randomly distributed as kinetic energy between the atoms of the object or thermal energy ( heat ).

https://www.answers.com/Q/Why_does_friction_create_heat

A match is a tool for starting a fire. Typically, matches are made of small wooden sticks or stiff paper. One end is coated with a material that can be ignited by frictional heat generated by striking the match against a suitable surface.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match

Matches have the potential for starting fires, even when still in the match box!

Definition; Potential, an inherent excellence which may become expressed in reality.

exchemist said,
And the definition of evolution is rubbish too, suggesting, as it does, some sort of goal or purpose for which there is no evidence.

No motivated goals, as I made abundantly clear in previous posts. In my universe all functions are regulated by mathematical permissions and restrictions of the physical and dynamical potentials present and affecting the outcome.

What are three 3 types of potential energy?
Potential energy includes: Gravitational potential energy, Potential energy in an electric field, Potential energy in a magnetic field, Potential energy in a compressed (or expanded) spring, Chemical energy, Nuclear energy

Evolution and natural selection often result in greater complexity, adaptability and ability to cope with environmental conditions. The process which yields this "positive" result is the selecting out of weaker or less adapted varieties, leaving the better adapted varieties to procreate.

Evolution and natural selection combine to create better adapted speciation, including the increased virulence and immunities of viruses when exposed to radical "out-selection", i.e. kill the weakest organisms, leaving the best adapted and resistant viruses to survive and procreate. A positive outcome for viruses, a negative outcome for hosts.

 

[Michael 345]

Of course you have proven that time is objective, haven't you?

This gets a little special attention

Since my position is TIME DOES NOT EXIST

how would you like me to prove something which is none existent?

Just curious

 

[exchemist]

Potential in this context is very much a factor. https://www.answers.com/Q/Why_does_friction_create_heat

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match

Matches have the potential for starting fires, even when still in the match box!

Definition; Potential, an inherent excellence which may become expressed in reality. No motivated goals, as I made abundantly clear in previous posts. In my universe all functions are regulated by mathematical permissions and restrictions of the physical and dynamical potentials present and affecting the outcome.

BINGO again.

This is your usual confusing of the general meaning of the term "potential" with its more restrictive and precise meaning in physical science, in the context of energy. Several people, including me, have tried over the years to clarify the distinction for you, but you can't grasp it. I'm not going through this again. You have obviously decided it suits your purpose to talk crap. There's not much any of us can do about that.

 

[Write4U]

its more restrictive and precise meaning in physical science, in the context of energy

Oh, I grasp, and I have many times stipulated that the generic term "potential" is applicable to all "enfolded" properties, which may become "unfolded" in reality. I use several terms in the broadest possible context. I do have access to various definitions, in case you believe I just pull this stuff out of thin air.

Unrealized Potential is a "common denominator" of all things in the universe and it is nice to be able to identify common denominators. It saves time and endless explanations......

If you want to restrict your definitions to only what sets each potential apart from the others, then you're practicising fractured science, precisely what David Bohm rejected as it results in refusal to look at and understand the "Wholeness" principle.

 

[exchemist]

Oh, I grasp, and I have many times stipulated that the generic term "potential" is applicable to all "enfolded" properties, which may become "unfolded" in reality. I use several terms in the broadest possible context. I do have access to various definitions, in case you believe I just pull this stuff out of thin air.

Unrealized Potential is a "common denominator" of all things in the universe and it is nice to be able to identify common denominators. It saves time and endless explanations......

If you want to restrict your definitions to only what sets each potential apart from the others, then you're practicising fractured science, precisely what David Bohm rejected as it results in refusal to look at and understand the "Wholeness" principle.

Potential energy is not in any way "unrealised" or "enfolded". That is meaningless crap.

It is energy, just as real as kinetic or thermal energy. Potential energy is energy that is present due to a configuration of the system, a change in which will cause transformation to another form of energy.

But I don't know why I bother.

 

[TheFrogger]

Michael345, if time does not exist then how do you explain the continuous time-line I have shown in the above example? Z-N. It could be a series of "nows" (present moments) I suppose, however I believe in TIME (when you haven't died.)

Also, if life happens like that naturally then how do you explain the moment the decision is made (afterwards?)

As I've stated, without action nothing happens. It doesn't happen automatically: you must act, and the decision isn't made until afterwards.

 

[Write4U]

Potential energy is not in any way "unrealised" or "enfolded". That is meaningless crap. But I don't know why I bother.

Maybe you can learn something...

A mountain lake has potential for generating energy. It doesn't have energy, but if you run the lake water downhill and let the kinetic energy turn a turbine, you can generate energy that was not there before. The potential energy was "enfolded" in the water of the lake and can be "unfolded" as energy with some manipulation of environment.

The potential for energy was contained in the mountainlake, due to its location and gravitational forces.

Physics talks about two different types of energy. Kinetic Energy is the energy contained in motion, which Potential Energy is the energy of position.

Think about a large rock, still, stopped on the edge of a cliff. The rock has potential energy, based on its position above the ground.

https://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_an_example_of_potential_energy

 

[exchemist]

Maybe you can learn something...

A mountain lake has potential for generating energy. It doesn't have energy, but if you run the lake water downhill and let the kinetic energy turn a turbine, you can generate energy that was not there before. The potential energy was "enfolded" in the water of the lake and can be "unfolded" as energy with some manipulation of environment.

The potential for energy was contained in the mountainlake, due to its location and gravitational forces.
https://www.answers.com/Q/What_is_an_example_of_potential_energy

So, to you, a mountain lake "doesn't have energy". Yet you quote in support a source that tells you, quite explicitly, that potential energy is a type of energy.

To you, then, energy just appears, from something that does not have any. So that's the end of the principle of conservation of energy, right?

And you wonder why people like me think you talk out of your arse.

What you have done is what you always do: confuse the general or literary meaning of "potential", which indeed can mean something latent or unexpressed, with the specific meaning of "potential energy" in physical science, which is what I told you it was in post.155.

You do this all the time, but especially with the words "potential", "function" and "value", in spite of having had this pointed out to you repeatedly. I believe you do it deliberately, as it helps you to formulate the theology of your strange religion, which worships mathematics as the Creator. I think it's a kind of cargo cult: you worship what you do not understand.

Whatever it is, it is not science and often makes what you say ridiculous.

 

[Write4U]

So, to you, a mountain lake "doesn't have energy". Yet you quote in support a source that tells you, quite explicitly, that potential energy is a type of energy.

I see no conflict.The lake has no expressed energy, it has potential (unexpressed energy). Read the definition.

To you, then, energy just appears, from something that does not have any. So that's the end of the principle of conservation of energy, right?

Does the rock sitting still at the ledge have energy? If it falls it will have energy, but until it does fall it has no "expressed" energy, it is stationary. It's potential energy is contained and latent while it is stationary.

And you wonder why people like me think you talk out of your arse.

Because you have limited vision.

What you have done is what you always do: confuse the general or literary meaning of "potential", which indeed can mean something latent or unexpressed, with the specific meaning of "potential energy" in physical science, which is what I told you it was in post.155.

OK, finally you admit I was not wrong, but "confused". You did overlook the qualifier posed many pages ago, that I am not specifically speaking about the definition in physics, but in the broadest generic meaning. You missed that and came to a knee jerk conclusion.

You do this all the time, but especially with the words "potential", "function" and "value", in spite of having had this pointed out to you repeatedly. I believe you do it deliberately, as it helps you to formulate the theology of your strange religion, which worships mathematics as the Creator. I think it's a kind of cargo cult: you worship what you do not understand.

OK, continue with you ad hominem. Typical response of an ignoramous.

Whatever it is, it is not science and often makes what you say ridiculous.

So we have come to the point where you admit that logically speaking I am right but I don't know why I am right, because in your narrow perspective there is only the scientific definition which is pertinent under all circumstances.

I am using the term "potential" correctly in context of the discussion.

What you fail to see is that I look at the term potential and it's myriad of definitions and see an underlying "common denominator". A fundamental premise contained in all the definitions of the term potential.

Webster;
In science, however, the adjective has a special meaning: Potential energy is the kind of stored energy that a boulder sitting at the top of a cliff has (the opposite of kinetic energy, which is what it has as it rolls down that cliff).
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/potential

Bingo!

 

[Write4U]

potential, adjective
po·ten·tial | \ pə-ˈten(t)-shəl \

Definition of potential (Entry 1 of 2)
1: existing in possibility : capable of development into actualitypotential benefits

2: expressing possibilityspecifically : of, relating to, or constituting a verb phrase expressing possibility, liberty, or power by the use of an auxiliary with the infinitive of the verb (as in "it may rain")

potential, noun
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noun
Definition of potential (Entry 2 of 2)
1a: something that can develop or become actual a potential for violence
b: PROMISE sense 2

2a: any of various functions from which the intensity or the velocity at any point in a field may be readily calculated
b: the work required to move a unit positive charge from a reference point (as at infinity) to a point in question
c: POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE

Synonyms & Antonyms for potential
Synonyms: Adjective

implicit, possible

Synonyms: Noun

capability, eventuality, possibility, potentiality, prospect

Antonyms: Adjective

actual, existent, factual, real

Visit the Thesaurus for More

Choose the Right Synonym for potential
Adjective

LATENT, DORMANT, QUIESCENT, POTENTIAL mean not now showing signs of activity or existence. LATENT applies to a power or quality that has not yet come forth but may emerge and develop. a latent desire for success DORMANT suggests the inactivity of something (such as a feeling or power) as though sleeping. their passion had lain dormant QUIESCENT suggests a usually temporary cessation of activity. the disease was quiescent POTENTIAL applies to what does not yet have existence or effect but is likely soon to have. a potential disaster

Did You Know?
Potential can be either good or bad. Studying hard increases the potential for success, but wet roads increase the potential for accidents. But when a person or thing "has potential", we always expect something good from it in the future. As an adjective (as in "potential losses", "potential benefits", etc.), potential usually means simply "possible". In science, however, the adjective has a special meaning: Potential energy is the kind of stored energy that a boulder sitting at the top of a cliff has (the opposite of kinetic energy, which is what it has as it rolls down that cliff).

Examples of potential in a Sentence
Adjective

Doctors are excited about the new drug's potential benefits. Critics say the factory poses a potential threat to the environment.

See More

Recent Examples on the Web: Adjective

There are signs that markets and voters alike are growing warier of the potential for damage — raising the stakes for both parties.— NBC News, "Trump's China quagmire both an opportunity and cautionary tale for Dems," 13 Sep. 2019In other words, Waller has plenty of breakout potential this year and gets a prime matchup in Week 2.— Kevin Hanson, SI.com, "Fantasy Football: Week 2 TE Rankings," 12 Sep. 2019
These example sentences are selected automatically from various online news sources to reflect current usage of the word 'potential.' Views expressed in the examples do not represent the opinion of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback.

First Known Use of potential
Adjective

14th century, in the meaning defined at sense 1

Noun

1587, in the meaning defined at sense 1a

History and Etymology for potential
Adjective

Middle English potencial, from Late Latin potentialis, from potentia potentiality, from Latin, power, from potent-, potens