Turning back time

[eagleboy]

Re: Turning back time

That is complete bull**** but ok.
Time isnt something that is a particle. Its just a concept. You cant travel through time it doesnt really exsist.

Time is considered be some to be the "fourth dimension." ((Madeleine L'Engle, "A Wrinkle In Time", yes?)) We have length, width, and height, but our lives take place upon a consistently moving thread: time. Without time, we have no movement, no history, nothing. So technically, time travel would basically be breaking that "4th dimension." And, in all fairness, we cannot really "break" a dimension, therefore rendering time travel illicit through the laws of physics and matter.

[Kekiz]

Re: Turning back time

Well Madeleine L'Engle sounds like a very very stupid man.
Thats like the most generic fake descirption ever.

[Kiro51]

Re: Turning back time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madeleine_L'Engle

Madeleine L'Engle (born November 29, 1918) is an American writer best known for her children's books.

Hahahaha...

[MixMasterLar]

Re: Turning back time

Time is considered be some to be the "fourth dimension." ((Madeleine L'Engle, "A Wrinkle In Time", yes?)) We have length, width, and height, but our lives take place upon a consistently moving thread: time. Without time, we have no movement, no history, nothing. So technically, time travel would basically be breaking that "4th dimension." And, in all fairness, we cannot really "break" a dimension, therefore rendering time travel illicit through the laws of physics and matter.

QFT (- L'Engle)

Time does exist, I dont know what it's made up of but something has to be keeping us moving to the future.

Ok the way I wrote that sounded lame, but it's something like that.

[RandomPscho]

Re: Turning back time

Time:

the fourth coordinate that is required (along with three spatial dimensions) to specify a physical event

Yes time itself exists, but it is dependent on the viewpoint of the observer and the motion of its surroundings.

[waffydude]

Re: Turning back time

Well Madeleine L'Engle sounds like a very very stupid man.
Thats like the most generic fake descirption ever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madeleine_L'Engle

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Madeleine L'Engle (born November 29, 1918) is an American writer best known for her children's books.

Hahahaha...

wow, good job totally missing the point.

I'm guessing the concept of time as a 4th dimension was used by L'Engle in "A Wrinkle In Time", which eagleboy was just referencing as an example. Guess what though, the general scientific community DOES consider time to be a 4th dimension! (ever hear of spacetime? look it up.) So, maybe you shouldn't bash someone's points if you don't what you're talking about yourself.


Like I said before- do a little research. Wikipedia will do. The notion of time as the average person thinks of it is NOT necessarily the same as how the scientific community sees it.

[eagleboy]

Re: Turning back time

wow, good job totally missing the point.

I'm guessing the concept of time as a 4th dimension was used by L'Engle in "A Wrinkle In Time", which eagleboy was just referencing as an example. Guess what though, the general scientific community DOES consider time to be a 4th dimension! (ever hear of spacetime? look it up.) So, maybe you shouldn't bash someone's points if you don't what you're talking about yourself.


Like I said before- do a little research. Wikipedia will do. The notion of time as the average person thinks of it is NOT necessarily the same as how the scientific community sees it.

Actually, I looked it up, and it doesn't say to a specific POINT that time is the 4th dimension, but it does deal somewhat with quantum physics, which ties together themes relating around time and movements.

One thing the Wiki article mentioned is that nothing, now or ever, is faster than light, because it moves through space but not time. Also according to to "quantum decoherence," parallel universes are inaccessible to us.

Time traveling requires at least one of the following:

1. Traveling faster than the speed of light
2. Using "cosmic strings" and "black holes."
3. "Wormholes" and "Alcubierre 'warp' drive" (the latter resembling that of the Series "Star Trek")

If you need help, Wiki the terms put in quotation marks.

[Reach]

Re: Turning back time

Actually, I looked it up, and it doesn't say to a specific POINT that time is the 4th dimension, but it does deal somewhat with quantum physics, which ties together themes relating around time and movements.

Time is referred to the 4th dimension because when talking about space time mathematically, there is a required 4th dimension of time to encompass all of the other 3 dimensions. Otherwise, things just don't work out; you cannot have things moving through space time, logically, if you do not have a reference frame from which you can observe these events. In fact, that is all time is; the passing of events in space time.


I cannot personally dismiss or prove that time travel is possible, but I do not believe it is for a few general reasons. 1. It personally is not logical if you can go back in time in a 'straight line' sense, as doing so would change the past. 2. I do not think you can go forward for the same reason; traveling through time in itself is going to change the course of history to where it is different than had you not done so.

You may be able to pass through time relatively, but in doing so you would probably throw out the whole 'fate' idea, because of what I said above. If you can in fact travel into the future, and in doing so change the future itself, then fate cannot exist (unless there is no freewill, which is another issue entirely ^^;;



Other than that, most people understand that you can change your perception of time by speeding up (or gaining mass) -> Special relatively. This does not qualify as 'true' time travel, though You are not physically traveling to another time in this case, but just changing your perception of the natural flow of time.

Also, everyone here changes their perception of time on a constant basis. You 'Time Dilate' when you move around, when you drive in your car, etcetera. The reference frame change is just too small your eye and brain to take notice of.

[eagleboy]

Re: Turning back time

Time is referred to the 4th dimension because when talking about space time mathematically, there is a required 4th dimension of time to encompass all of the other 3 dimensions. Otherwise, things just don't work out; you cannot have things moving through space time, logically, if you do not have a reference frame from which you can observe these events. In fact, that is all time is; the passing of events in space time.


I cannot personally dismiss or prove that time travel is possible, but I do not believe it is for a few general reasons. 1. It personally is not logical if you can go back in time in a 'straight line' sense, as doing so would change the past. 2. I do not think you can go forward for the same reason; traveling through time in itself is going to change the course of history to where it is different than had you not done so.

You may be able to pass through time relatively, but in doing so you would probably throw out the whole 'fate' idea, because of what I said above. If you can in fact travel into the future, and in doing so change the future itself, then fate cannot exist (unless there is no freewill, which is another issue entirely ^^;;



Other than that, most people understand that you can change your perception of time by speeding up (or gaining mass) -> Special relatively. This does not qualify as 'true' time travel, though You are not physically traveling to another time in this case, but just changing your perception of the natural flow of time.

Also, everyone here changes their perception of time on a constant basis. You 'Time Dilate' when you move around, when you drive in your car, etcetera. The reference frame change is just too small your eye and brain to take notice of.

I wasn't talking about the Wiki for Time itself; I was making the mention about the book "A Wrinkle in Time." AWiT doesn't mention time as a 4th dimension directly, from what I can remember.

But you're right: Time is kind of an illusion in a sense, but tangible enough to be accepted.

[Reach]

Re: Turning back time

Fair enough.

Time itself isn't really an illusion, just something we don't understand very well. We can grasp what we actually do understand about it, but most of our knowledge on the subject is pure speculation.

[Kekiz]

Re: Turning back time

My chemistry teacher was telling us about atoms and how the orbitals change when they gain energy go through an unknown demension to get there. Probably not related to time but w/e.

[Hachi86]

Re: Turning back time

Not related to time whatsoever.

You guys are saying that in order to turn back time you have to make everything as it was in the time you are trying to go back to. If time is a constant, wouldnt the position of things be irrevelant? The objects would be where they were, but time (which is always moving) would still be going on.

For instance, if everything in the entire universe went to where it was five minutes ago, "time" would still be "now", only we would be where we were. That doesn't mean we went back in time, we just moved backwards.

[MixMasterLar]

Re: Turning back time

Not related to time whatsoever.

You guys are saying that in order to turn back time you have to make everything as it was in the time you are trying to go back to. If time is a constant, wouldnt the position of things be irrevelant? The objects would be where they were, but time (which is always moving) would still be going on.

For instance, if everything in the entire universe went to where it was five minutes ago, "time" would still be "now", only we would be where we were. That doesn't mean we went back in time, we just moved backwards.

That's what I said, at best Time repeated itself

But I think Reach and EagleBoy have advanced the thread beyond that thoery. Im speechless...

[RandomPscho]

Re: Turning back time

People aren't saying that moving everything back to how it was is going back in time, it would simulate it though.

[Hachi86]

Re: Turning back time

Well whats the fun with simulation?

I was thinking at work yesterday and i came up with the analogy of moving things backwards against time as a constant.

Say time is a river. And everything else in the river is the universe. If we put things back where they were upstream, the river still flows right?