Time Travel is Science Fiction

Billy T said:
the link in your link would not open for me, but in your link I read this:
"Students should learn methods to mathematically describe the physical world rather than answer word questions that rely on opinion and non-scientific ideas."

I was reminded of the fact that the math of post 28 has been ignored in favor of opinion.
Click to expand...
You are living in a fantaasy world about what thread this is.

It is a mathematical fact that the entire universe can be describe with no reference to time as shown in post 28.
Click to expand...
Your poor post in that other thread shows nothing, it does, however, make grand claims far beyond the scope of what can actually be achieved. Sticking to the poor references and argumentation in that post in that other thread don't help your case.

As I have more than half a dozen times admitted that "no need for time in physic" does not prove time does not exist. Only adding Newton's first rule of philosophical reasoning (now commonly call Ockhams's rule) can one say that time does not exist. (but it may as Ockham's rule is a suggestion, not a law.)
Click to expand...
You are poorly misreading Newton.

Newton was quite clear that the "t" in his equations was NOT sensible, but some "absolute mathematical time" and recommended that what we now call sidereal time (his "astronomical time" an observable that can be sensed) be used as the best approximation.
Click to expand...
Sure, but he was also quite clear that absolute time existed given his rules of reasoning. Regardless of whether or not he was correct, these are the facts.

I have abandoned that other thread because it is little but sticking to personal opinion without reasoning.
 
Billy T said:
No. Farsight's two drawings makes time dilation clear for most. just as these two drawings explains why light bends in a gravity field:
Left is for the rocket accelerating "observer A".
image1620.gif
Here is the associated text:
Click to expand...

My response to Farsight's post was to the use of the mirror example as analogy or simplified example, without the added commentary explanatintion. Note in the commentary you included it becomes apparent that the illustration is hypothetical... Farsight presents the light mirrors and light clocks as if they are real, and thus proof of the underlying theory... When the light path in his post is a hypothetical illustration of the implications of relativistic velocity, on how a ray of light which cannot be observed by the outside observer might appear, if it could be observed.

You say the example he posted makes time dilation clear for most. I question that, but even if it is the case it does not do so as presented. As presented it is a hypothetical and impossible to test graphic, without any supporting disscussion.
 
Billy T said:
I have asked you before if you call suspended animation "time travel" - no reply yet, but I'll wait. There is no logical or rational reason I can see /understand why only one of these two methods of slowing the aging process should be called "time travel" and not the other. If you can tell me one, please do.
Click to expand...

The majority of your post is no more than the usual opinionated denial and a cop out.
With the above, it's worth noting that you have said you have asked me numerous things so far, which you claimed I have not answered. In all cases that was false.
Unlike you, I do not avoid questions.
The present one you have raised maybe one I did miss.
My opinion, and my opinion only, is that yes, it is a form of time travel.
Though completely different to the fact of the non absolute nature of time, and a situation with two clocks ticking at different rates.


Billy T said:
It is not that the laws of physics do not prohibit time travel (or dozen of the other concepts in science fiction) - it is the simple fact that there is no where to travel too as neither the future or the past exists ANYWHERE now.
Click to expand...

That's your opinion and one in general not shared by most physicists today.
It is a relevant fact despite your objections that .....
TIME TRAVEL IS NOT FORBIDDEN BY THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AND GR:

I have said that many times now, and I'll say it as often as it seems necessary to say...
Theoretically time travel could be achieved by
[1] Time dilation effects as already mentioned.
[2]Alcubierre Drive type of arrangement in line with Einstein's field equations in GR.
[3] Worm hole:
[4] My own speculative scenario is by means of manipulation of the Higgs particle and field, to reflect a perception of "no mass" and so be able to achieve FTL travel.

All difficult, all uncertain, and all beyond present technological capabilities, but all would be achievable by any sufficiently advanced civilisation, as the laws of physics and GR do not forbid it.

The only thing factual in this thread is the title that "time travel is science fiction" is certainly correct at this time in our advancement.
But that could and may change in the near or distant future.
 
Motor Daddy said:
paddoboy, What do you mean when you say "time travel"?
Click to expand...


This thread is about the erroneous title that time travel is impossible.
All I have said is that it is not forbidden by the laws of physics and GR, and that any sufficiently advanced civilisation, could achieve it.

What do I mean by time travel? If it is possible, I mean that which is illustrated in the famous "twin paradox" as a result of time dilation....Or worm hole traversing, if they exist, and if we were to find a worm hole.
 
paddoboy said:
What do I mean by time travel? If it is possible, I mean that which is illustrated in the famous "twin paradox" as a result of time dilation....Or worm hole traversing, if they exist, and if we were to find a worm hole.
Click to expand...

So you think it might be possible someday to go back to 1970 and buy a new 1970 GTO?
 
paddoboy said:
I'm saying time travel is not forbidden by the laws of physics and GR........and any sufficiently advanced civilisation may just find that possible.
Click to expand...

So again, you think GR doesn't specifically prohibit going back and buying a new GTO, and if we were only advanced enough it may be possible to do that? To buy a new 1970 GTO that just rolled off the assembly line a few months ago?
 
Billy T said:
We all do. "Forward in time" is the ONLY way we can as the past does not exist. Likewise you can not time travel into the future, as it does not yet exist.
Click to expand...
In a sense neither exists until you get there. But keep in mind that you do not observe the present; you observe things that happened some time ago and just call it (with some accuracy) "the present."

In a larger sense both the past and future have a real and specific existence. Science as we know it would be impossible if the present was not based on the past, and we can predict the future with some accuracy because we know that previous states result in states that follow in time. However we have also learned that there are quantifiable limits on our abilities to both observe the past and predict the future.

This, however, does not make them unreal, any more than Barnard's Star is unreal because we can't see much of it, and what we do see is incomplete.
 
paddoboy said:
... My opinion, and my opinion only, is that yes, it {Suspended animations slowing aging rate so you die at later date} is a form of time travel.
Click to expand...
OK that is consistent with your claim the traveling twin DID "time traveled" as he dies later than this brother - lives to see his 150th birthday on earth's calendars.

You are not actually claiming (are you?) the traveling twin does anything that a hibernating bear does not do to a lesser extent. I.e. not claiming that News Eve of 2015/ 2016 exists somewhere we could in principle travel to and visit that Time Square "ball drop" celebration now.

Obviously not as IF the first second of 2016 does now exist somewhere, then so does the 2nd second exist some where else. I. e. A different location for each site in the US for each second in just 2016 is 365.25x24x 60x 60 = 31,557,600 copies of the US* existing somewhere NOW and waiting for me to visit.- That is much more than the entire surface of the earth, just for one year split into seconds, but my time machine is the expense model, with destination arrival time precision not specified in seconds, but in nano-seconds. So I can visit the future that is now existing in any of the 31,557,600,000,000,000 copies of the US all in different locations now awaiting my visit!

So many choices - so little time, as you don't think I can keep coming back and make many different choices for my next trip into the future, do you?

* Hell, lets not be provincial - think only of the US. We have an entire universe! Duplicated / existing now in more than 31,557,600,000,000,000 copies to visit!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Billy T said:
OK that is consistent with your claim the traveling twin DID "time traveled" as he dies later than this brother - lives to see his 150th birthday on earth's calendars.
Click to expand...

Sure the travelling twin would have time travelled....100% correct. But there are other methods, other than your nonsensical example of a bear hibernating, which is nothing more then metabolic suppression.

Don't you and Farsight think its about time you forgot all the red herrings you two keep dragging up, such as clocks, candles and hibernating bears?
 
paddoboy said:
Now that's not very scientific is it? In fact it's rather childish and juvenile.
Click to expand...

You're the one that claims that GR doesn't forbid time travel, and that if I were advanced enough I could go back to 1970 and buy a new GTO.

I countered with, does GR forbid ghosts?

Now how is asking if GR forbids ghosts childish? It's on par with God and the FSM, surely??

Answer the question. Does GR forbid ghosts?
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-m-wilde/time-travel-quantum-physics_b_4426900.html

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/time_travel.html


http://mkaku.org/home/articles/the-physics-of-time-travel/


http://www.livescience.com/39159-time-travel-with-wormhole.html


http://www.umich.edu/~engtt415/science/


Motor Daddy said:
You're the one that claims that GR doesn't forbid time travel, and that if I were advanced enough I could go back to 1970 and buy a new GTO.

I countered with, does GR forbid ghosts?

Now how is asking if GR forbids ghosts childish? It's on par with God and the FSM, surely??

Answer the question. Does GR forbid ghosts?
Click to expand...


Motor Daddy my dear fellow, if you want to accept ghosts, be my guest.
Time travel has many theoretical possibilities and applications governed by GR
Ghosts do not...Neither is God, and that's why that is also a non scientific answer.
But if you chose God, then once again, be my guest. I prefer science.
 
paddoboy said:
.
TIME TRAVEL IS NOT FORBIDDEN BY THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AND GR:

I have said that many times now, and I'll say it as often as it seems necessary to say...
Theoretically time travel could be achieved by
[1] Time dilation effects as already mentioned.
[2]Alcubierre Drive type of arrangement in line with Einstein's field equations in GR.
[3] Worm hole:
[4] My own speculative scenario is by means of manipulation of the Higgs particle and field, to reflect a perception of "no mass" and so be able to achieve FTL travel.

All difficult, all uncertain, and all beyond present technological capabilities, but all would be achievable by any sufficiently advanced civilisation, as the laws of physics and GR do not forbid it.

The only thing factual in this thread is the title that "time travel is science fiction" is certainly correct at this time in our advancement.
But that could and may change in the near or distant future.
Click to expand...


I failed to add to that list of methods, a Kerr metric BH....or a spinning BH and its ergosphere, from whence escape is possible, and also the subsequent ring singularity, in which we could safely pass through, if we calculated the correct trajectory, so that the gravity pull from all sides canceled itself out.
That sufficiently advanced civilistion would be handy though. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top