Time Travel is Science Fiction

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Farsight, Feb 17, 2014.

  1. river

    Messages:
    16,952
    Inotherwords you have no idea of the cause of change , from my last post , " what is the cause of change " ( post#99)
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    No, in other words, you have an excellent record of this type of trolling.
    I answered your first question, out of good grace...you have shown I was in error with that tolerance.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river

    Messages:
    16,952
    I asked a question , which you cannot answer .....
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534


    You have claimed numerous times now, that you agree with Einstein. Taking words out of context is dishonest.
    Einstein would be rolling in his grave at the thought.


    lbert Einstein and the Fabric of Time

    Surprising as it may be to most non-scientists and even to some scientists, Albert Einstein concluded in his later years that the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. In 1952, in his book Relativity, in discussing Minkowski's Space World interpretation of his theory of relativity, Einstein writes:
    Since there exists in this four dimensional structure [space-time] no longer any sections which represent "now" objectively, the concepts of happening and becoming are indeed not completely suspended, but yet complicated. It appears therefore more natural to think of physical reality as a four dimensional existence, instead of, as hitherto, the evolution of a three dimensional existence.
    Einstein's belief in an undivided solid reality was clear to him, so much so that he completely rejected the separation we experience as the moment of now. He believed there is no true division between past and future, there is rather a single existence. His most descriptive testimony to this faith came when his lifelong friend Besso died. Einstein wrote a letter to Besso's family, saying that although Besso had preceded him in death it was of no consequence, "...for us physicists believe the separation between past, present, and future is only an illusion, although a convincing one."


    http://everythingforever.com/einstein.htm
     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    Friedmann universe, model universe developed in 1922 by the Russian meteorologist and mathematician Aleksandr Friedmann (1888–1925). He believed that Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity required a theory of the universe in motion, as opposed to the static universe that scientists until then had proposed. He hypothesized a big bang followed by expansion, then contraction and an eventual big crunch. This model supposes a closed universe, but he also proposed similar solutions involving an open universe (which expands infinitely) or a flat universe (in which expansion continues infinitely but gradually approaches a rate of zero). See also Edwin P. Hubble.


    http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/220165/Friedmann-universe



    Any model of the Universe, closed, open, flat, dynamic, static, will all see the advent and passing of time.....Which shows Einstein was 100% correct in formulating a concept even closer to reality with space/time, and which can be measured as with GP-B.
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    16,952
    But what does the " passing of time " really mean

    Of course time " passes "

    My point is this , we have to define time or understand what time really is

    Time is a measure , nothing more , nothing less , of any objects movements from point A to B

    But what is the cause of any objects movement , is what I asked

    Or what is the cause of change

    Hence in order to understand time , the essence of time , is to understand objects in the macro and micro
     
  10. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    So if I sit in my computer chair at point A at 12:00 and I don't move towards point B in the kitchen, no time passes if no movement occurs?
     
  11. river

    Messages:
    16,952
    No

    The Earth has moved though , threw space
     
  12. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    So earth has absolute motion in space?
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    16,952
    Doesn't matter , whether its Newtonian or Einstein space

    The point is WHY does the Earth move in space at all

    What is the CAUSE the Earths movement in space , or any object for that matter
     
  14. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    We are not talking about cause, we are talking about time.

    You said, and I quote,
    You weren't talking about what causes the movement, you were talking about time being the MEASURE of an object's movement from point A to point B. Now you want to change the story and say you are talking about what causes the earth to move?
     
  15. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,104
    Some philosophical quandaries in regards to a Simulated Universe:

    If tomorrow some scientists started building a simulation to make the universe, they would likely start from the very beginning and incorporate what science already suggests in regards to how the universe came about. As they build this simulation, they might not run it at the same speed as the universe we currently perceive, it's possible that the simulation could run many times faster and over time would "unfold" into creating many of the proposed choices in direction to our own (after all if it was fed the correct information [in it's full], it would duplicate all events in regards to our "timeline")

    Eventually at some point the simulation and the real world timeline's would reach a point where both are in the present and then if the speed difference was maintained, things would get "really weird" in the sense that the simulation would become a predictive system of our own universe.

    The point is that as a simulation it's no longer bound to the same physical constraints that we currently apply to the world we see. Time doesn't have to follow a linear passage, it doesn't necessarily have to be a continuity of a passage of events, it doesn't even have to run in the same direction, the reason for this is once it's virtualised/simulated it can be malformed and distorted to near almost any extent.
    (Just look at the difference between processing a file with one computer versus processing the same file with a cloud of computers. One computer will get the job done, albeit a lot slower; a cloud of computers will do it a lot quicker but will require a lot more effort to make it work, maintaining synchronised copies, allocation and pathfinding and heuristics with redundancy schema's in case one machine breaks down and a block has to be redone.)

    Would time travel be possible with this? Well that's dependent on if you could walk into a simulator booth and have your energy translated in the virtual universes virtual version (I doubt the translation would be lossless)
    but again things would get "really weird" as the "Real" world would be no more real than the "Simulated" one (and vice versa).
     
  16. river

    Messages:
    16,952
    Yes we are talking about time

    But since time is a measure , a measure of movement , then there is a cause , a fundamental cause of time
     
  17. river

    Messages:
    16,952
    In order to talk about time , or to discuss time , one has to do both , examine the time as a measure of movement and the cause of the movement itself on which time is based
     
  18. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    Again, We aren't talking about cause. Cause is not the topic at hand, so we don't care what causes time (if that even means anything) for right now. We know that there is a computer chair at point A. We know there is a piece of candy at point B in the kitchen. I look at my clock and it reads 12:18:14 PM.

    Are you saying that if I sit in the chair and remain in the chair that my clock won't eventually turn to 12:19:00 if I don't move towards the Candy in the kitchen at point B??

    Ps. Don't worry about what causes me to move to point B, it might be a wheel chair, it might be roller skates...
     
  19. Undefined Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,695
    Hi paddo. Rash and simplistic. That 'hypothesis' you favor is effectively positing ONE SINGLE PREFERRED UNIVERSAL ABSOLUTE FoR for 'time passing' philosophical concept, isn't it?

    According to all the relativity experts here, there can be no absolute singular preferred frame of reference for anything in RELATIVITY and SPACE-TIME constructs/universes.

    According to Relativity, each FoR associated with some space-time feature/process's RELATIVE motion (SR) and GRAVITY POTENTIAL INTERACTION (GR) will determine their respective 'time/timing' states/rates.

    That Relativity perspective further implies that even in a whole universe where NO motion/differentiation between states/events takes place, there can BE NO such conception/occurrence of 'time/timing', since there is nothing for any postulated 'event' to have 'reference to' without any extant differentiated 'event' FoRs. Yes?

    Enthusiasm for others' hypothetical work/perspective (whether from professional or 'other' source) does not remove the onus on the enthusiastic 'admirer/regurgitator' to actually understand fully that work/perspective before making pronouncements based on same. Be more careful, paddo; else you will do more damage to 'mainstream/mainstreamer' credibility/understandings than all the 'cranks' you see 'generically and without due discernment' everywhere (or so it seems from your incessant opinionated posts on the subject of 'cranks and trolls' you don't like all over these threads...while you ignore the silly and anti-open-discourse cranks and trolls you apparently do like?). Take it easy, fellow Aussie...Chill with the zealotry and 'personality cult' stuff; and avoid forcing people to comment on YOU because you keep raising the person instead of arguing the the point scientifically, and not 'by regurgitation' and 'links' ad nauseam. Just discuss the SCIENCE not the PERSONS, so this 'personal BS stuff' can be a thing of the past once for all while we ALL discuss like grown-up SCIENTISTS, hey? Good luck.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. river

    Messages:
    16,952

    The clock movement is not based on your movements

    What the clock does is completely separate from what you do or don't do
     
  21. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    Is that something more or less? You said MEASURE OF MOVEMENT. Did I not understand you properly, or do you wish to make a change to that statement?
     
  22. Undefined Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,695
    Careful, friend. Whether or not any linear-translation-across-space motion can be said to be absolute or not, it is still true that in any model of the universal 'spatial' metrics/phenomena/theory, a ROTATION of an extended object represents an ABSOLUTE motion referencing its spin to its own central component's states/locations angles, coriolis forces, torsions, stresses, etc.
     
  23. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, Friend. Could you reword it a bit for me. Thanks.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page