Time Travel is Science Fiction

paddoboy said:
Here is another scientific paper on time travel and its possibilities.....Plenty of squiggles etc for the more advanced among you, while at the same time, a reasonably simple explanation....It presents a spacetime geometry that would make retrograde time travel possible....A time machine no less....... http://arxiv.org/pdf/1310.7985v1.pdf
Click to expand...
This is the fairy-tale. These guys are allegedly at Gallifrey Polytechnic Institute and they're describing a Traversable Achronal Retrograde Domain In Spacetime. A Tardis. It's popscience woo for suckers and kids. And the moot point is that there's no motion through spacetime. It’s a static “all times” mathematical model. It isn’t space. You don’t actually travel up a worldline, and you can't travel round a closed timelike curve. I’m sorry paddoboy, but you’re in love with a fantasy here. And you haven't read the OP, have you? Or maybe you have, and you know you can't counter it.
 
Hawking and his achievements are well know and he is much respected in physics circles.
Pray tell, what are your achievements? Other than being able to type messages on a keyboard, partake in a science forum, that is open to any Tom, Dick and Harry and the useless baseless unsupported claims some of them are apt to make.
I'm waiting...this should be Interesting. :)
 
Farsight said:
I’m sorry paddoboy, but you’re in love with a fantasy here. And you haven't read the OP, have you? Or maybe you have, and you know you can't counter it.
Click to expand...

No, I'm giving acceptable speculative science from a reputable source. at...http://arxiv.org/pdf/1310.7985v1.pdf
What you write off as fairy tales holds no water, and will get you nowhere either in the short run or the long run.
This is just a science forum, open to any Tom Dick and Farsight.
If you had anything you would not need to be here.
That my dear friend just about sums it all up.
 
Here's another reference...an Interview with the late great Carl Sagan......
from:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/Sagan-Time-Travel.html

where in part he says.....

Q: Do you think that backwards time travel will ever be possible?

ANS: Such questions are purely a matter of evidence, and if the evidence is inconsistent or insufficient, then we withhold judgment until there is better evidence. Right now we're in one of those classic, wonderfully evocative moments in science "when we don't know", when there are those on both sides of the debate, and when what is at stake is very mystifying and very profound.

"Maybe backward time travel is possible, but only up to the moment that time travel is invented."

"Time travel into the indefinite future is consistent with the laws of nature."
 
Farsight said:
I'm an IT guy who is considered to be an "amateur physicist".
Click to expand...
Ah, so someone who works with computers who has no credentials as a physicist.
And when it comes to time, some professional physicists consider me to be the expert. Not Hawking. Me.
Click to expand...
Right. I am sure you are worshiped as much as Joseph Le Conte was. He was a natural historian and an amateur engineer; I am sure he thought that many engineers of his time considered HIM to be the expert. His claim that man would never fly is as valid as your claims that man will never travel through time.

Let's hope you can get over to the UK and straighten Hawking out one of these days. I am sure you would find the experience . . . illuminating.
 
an amateur physicist is what is normally called an apprentice.
trainee, somebody being trained by a skilled professional in an art, craft, or trade
or
an inexperienced person a novice or amateur
 
So I'm having my morning coffee and checking my forum alerts and opening a few other tabs off-forum when I see this:
Time Travel Is Real. Here Are the People and Spacecraft Who Have Done It
All right. I'm very opened-minded, or like to suppose I am, so I click the link... and it's good that I did because, guess what, the headline is a totally misleading bit of the old bait and switch routine. If you care to click the link, you will see that it's a Wired.com :rolleyes: light pop-sci piece about time dilation. For those who have been following this thread and refuse to accept that time dilation is not time travel, this article ought to show you how travel and dilation differ.

Also note that it says of time dilation,"it means that when [visitors who have made long visits to the ISS] return they’re a bit younger than they would have been—as if they’ve traveled into the future. (The effect is very small—it would take more than 100 years on the ISS to warp ahead by just one second.)"
 
krash661 said:
form california to manhattan, there's a three hour difference.
at this point i have traveled three hours into the future[new york's time].
from califorina to china is a twelve hour difference.
so from this point i have traveled 12+ hours into the future[china's time].
from china to califorina, i have traveled 12+ hours back to califorina's time [past].
china's future is califorina's past, simultaneously.
Click to expand...
Landau Roof said:
If what you were saying is true, you could go to China, get the latest baseball final game scores for California, email me, in L.A., and I could win us some money making safe bets on the games outcomes. Hey! Sounds like a plan.
Click to expand...
krash661 said:
you also have only shown your misunderstanding about the concept and ramifications of time.
nothing more.
Click to expand...
Landau Roof said:
So explain then please.
Click to expand...
You have yet to offer an explanation. Please do so at your earliest possible convenience. o_O
 
Landau Roof said:
Also note that it says of time dilation,"it means that when [visitors who have made long visits to the ISS] return they’re a bit younger than they would have been—as if they’ve traveled into the future. (The effect is very small—it would take more than 100 years on the ISS to warp ahead by just one second.)"
Click to expand...


Sure, but if I travelled off in a ship at 99.999% "c" and returned 12 months later, according to my on board mechanical clocks and my own biological clocks, I have undoubtable aged 12 months, but retrun to an Earth 230 years in the future, with you long dead and buried.
That is time Travel in anyones language!!
 
Farsight said:
Er, but people had been flying in balloons for a hundred years?

You said all this. And I said that in 1888 the Montgolfiers had flown in a balloon over a hundred years previously. So what this guy said was obviously rubbish. He was a natural history professor, not an engineer. Any engineer even then would have told you that powered flight needed an adequate engine, and the three or four hundred pounds weight limit was popscience rubbish.

Where are you getting this stuff from? Popscience magazines? The Montgolfiers flew in a balloon in 1783.
Click to expand...

So what, re-read the quote:
billvon said:
No, it was "proven" by experts that birds represented the largest things that could ever fly. Anything larger was just science fiction.
=============
Put these three indisputable facts together:
One: There is a low limit of weight, certainly not much beyond 50 pounds, beyond which it is impossible for an animal to fly. Nature has reached this limit, and with her utmost effort has failed to pass it.
Two: The animal machine is far more effective than any we can hope to make.; therefore the limit of the weight of a successful flying machine can not be more than fifty pounds.
Three: The weight of any machine constructed for flying, including fuel and engineer, cannot be less than three or four hundred pounds.
Is it not demonstrated that a true flying machine, self-raising, self-sustaining, self-propelling, is physically impossible?

-Joseph Le Conte, Professor of Natural History at the University of California, Popular Science Monthly, November 1888.
===============
Click to expand...

"Is it not demonstrated that a true flying machine, self-raising, self-sustaining, self-propelling, is physically impossible?"

He's not talking about hot-air balloons, which work by being lighter than the air they displace (hence, lighter than air flight).

He's talking about heavier than air flight.

Your objection is bunk.
 
Landau Roof said:
All right. I'm very opened-minded, or like to suppose I am, so I click the link... and it's good that I did because, guess what, the headline is a totally misleading bit of the old bait and switch routine. If you care to click the link, you will see that it's a Wired.com :rolleyes: light pop-sci piece about time dilation
Click to expand...

You'd label experiments done with the LHC investigating the possibility of time travel as "pop-sci".
 
Landau Roof said:
So I'm having my morning coffee and checking my forum alerts and opening a few other tabs off-forum when I see this:
Time Travel Is Real. Here Are the People and Spacecraft Who Have Done It
All right. I'm very opened-minded, or like to suppose I am, so I click the link... and it's good that I did because, guess what, the headline is a totally misleading bit of the old bait and switch routine. If you care to click the link, you will see that it's a Wired.com :rolleyes: light pop-sci piece about time dilation. For those who have been following this thread and refuse to accept that time dilation is not time travel, this article ought to show you how travel and dilation differ.

Also note that it says of time dilation,"it means that when [visitors who have made long visits to the ISS] return they’re a bit younger than they would have been—as if they’ve traveled into the future. (The effect is very small—it would take more than 100 years on the ISS to warp ahead by just one second.)"
Click to expand...

So what happens when you pass through a wormhole where one end is time dilated relative to the other?
 
Beer w/Straw said:
You'd label experiments done with the LHC investigating the possibility of time travel as "pop-sci".
Click to expand...
What's that? An unfounded accusation? I called the LHC article you spoke of earlier and the article above mentioned popular science articles. Clearly you have understood nothing.
 
Trippy said:
So what happens when you pass through a wormhole where one end is time dilated relative to the other?
Click to expand...
I won't pretend to understand wormholes. Who could? However, the fact that you yourself used the word 'dilation' in your question speaks volumes. Would you care to tell us what you think happens?
 
Landau Roof said:
What's that? An unfounded accusation? I called the LHC article you spoke of earlier and the article above mentioned popular science articles. Clearly you have understood nothing.
Click to expand...

Except that you just proved my point.

Besides, the LHC article was from a university.
 
Beer w/Straw said:
Except that you just proved my point.

Besides, the LHC article was from a university.
Click to expand...
I didn't realize you had a point beyond provocation by making false remarks. I don't get it.

The LHC article was obviously for the masses. It was not any sort of (online version of a) published scientific paper sharing research results.
 
Landau Roof said:
I won't pretend to understand wormholes. Who could? However, the fact that you yourself used the word 'dilation' in your question speaks volumes. Would you care to tell us what you think happens?
Click to expand...
What do you think might happen if you had two connected points in space-time that were of different ages (IE separated both in space and time).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top