# Time Travel is Science Fiction

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

1. ### Farsight

Messages:
3,492
That isn't trolling, that's pointing out the repercussions of paddoboy's ridiculous claim that hibernation is a form of time travel.

No you aren't. You give free rein to trolls. You preside over shameful abuse that makes this forum a laughing stock and a disgrace. You aren't doing your job. Now either shape up, or ship out, and I'll do the job.

The trouble is, that I can refer to Einstein and the evidence to back up what I say. So you aren't being a moderator are you? You're just some chemist who knows f*ck-all physics playing thought-police and siding with the woo-mongers. God help this forum with a "moderator" like you.

3. ### Farsight

Messages:
3,492
Note that I said you aren't really travelling to the future. Paddoboy thinks you are. He just doesn't get it because he doesn't want to, because he loves his woo like a piglet loves its teat, and he just doesn't want to let it go.

5. ### Farsight

Messages:
3,492
Not true, and it's always been civil, and I don't poach.

7. ### StryderKeeper of "good" ideas.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
13,101
An Oven increases entropy through temperature, some Freezers (including Einsteins design) cool based upon a vacuum which is the reduction of entropy. It has little to do with time itself. Although the suggest of one MIT experiment involving the "Stiffening of Spacetime" to slow a photon down to rest involved increasing electromagnetic entropy.

This mean the measurement of time can be altered by the viscosity of the volume of spacetime. This could allow the altering of how time is viewed on two independent clocks, but doesn't change the frame of time in relationship to the universe that such a experiment was conducted.

8. ### Farsight

Messages:
3,492
Do you have a reference to that MIT experiment, Stryder? I'm interested because gravity is all about the coordinate speed of light varying, wherein a concentration of energy in the guise of a star "conditions" the surrounding space, altering its metrical properties. Your measurements of space and time are then not uniform, such that your plot exhibits space-time curvature.

9. ### PhysBangValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,422
As always, this is a lie. You never ever address any of Einstein's physics, just a few cherry-picked quotations taken out of context. Also, you never address any evidence; e.g., we have all been waiting for years for you to provide evidence for your claim that there is a proper way to calculate galaxy rotation curves that you know but no scientist working in astronomy or astrophysics does.

10. ### krash661[MK6] transitioning scifi to realityValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,973
according to you, no one is trolling. as it appears, everyone has only " pointing out the repercussions of farsight's ridiculous claim ".

if you would not contaminate the site then it would not be " preside over shameful abuse that makes this forum a laughing stock and a disgrace. "

typical mentally disabled comment. nothing more.

11. ### StryderKeeper of "good" ideas.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
13,101
The information was from 2001, Most of the old links are dead now but this is part of the pressing:
http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/01/25/delaney.debrief/

(Incidentally It's not MIT, it was Harvard but I'm pretty sure there was MIT involvement)

On the topic of "Gravity" I have to admit I do have a pet theory that implies that Mass, Gravity and Spacetime aren't just codependent but interchangeable. Namely a planetary body doesn't necessarily create gravity and bend spacetime, but a manipulation of spacetime could generate a gravity well which then influences to condensing spacetime to mass. (It would explain how a star could form, however we'd still have the questions in regards to how such a manipulation would come about in the first place)

Last edited: Dec 13, 2014
12. ### krash661[MK6] transitioning scifi to realityValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,973
why is it called a continuum ?

13. ### QuarkHeadRemedial Math StudentValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,557
Consider this. Suppose that $x_!,\,x_2,\,x_3$ denote spatial coordinates and that $x_4$ denote a time coordinate.

Then corresponding to coordinate transformations $x_j \mapsto x'_j$ one has locally that $x^2_1+x^2_2+x^2_3 \ne x'^2_1+x'^2_2+x'^2_3$ and $x^2_4 \ne x'^2_4$. This is of course length contraction and time dilation, respectively.

However, it turns out that generally $x^2_1+x^2_2+x^2_3 -x^2_4 = x'^2_1+x'^2_2+x'^2_3- x'^2_4$, from which one extracts the invariant line element $ds^2=dx^2_1+dx^2_2+dx^2_3 -dx^2_4$.

Do you know why this becomes $ds^2 =g_{jk}dx_jdx_k$? as usually written?

Last edited: Dec 13, 2014
14. ### OnlyMeValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,914
Here is a link to Lene Hau's publication at Harvard. I did not read through to find the specific paper, but from the titles it should be there. http://www.seas.harvard.edu/haulab/publications/HauPublications_All.htm

15. ### Farsight

Messages:
3,492
Thanks, I'll take a look at that.

That sounds a bit like Inhomogeneous and interacting vacuum energy by David Wands and others. A gravitational field is inhomogeneous space typically caused by a planetary body. But with no planetary bodies around, space might be inhomogeneous anyway. The energy density of space varies from place to place. This then gets us into things like non-uniform expansion and dark matter. Interesting stuff.

16. ### PhysBangValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,422
Everyone, please bear in mind that, "A gravitational field is inhomogeneous space typically caused by a planetary body," is strictly Farsight-fantasy and that he can't actually do any physics with this idea. (Ask him to demonstrate, if you would like, he won't produce anything one can use.)

Worse, he is clearly lying about the content of that paper, as anyone can see by simply reading the abstract.

17. ### Farsight

Messages:
3,492
No. In SR the thing that’s invariant between two events can be likened to the light path length being the same in both the stay-at-home and the out-and-back parallel-mirror clocks. You stay at home and inside your clock light moves some distance back and forth like this ǁ t times. Then when you go on the out-an-back trip t is reduced because the light moves like this /\/\/\/\ instead. However light moved the same distance. But people talk about the spacetime interval being zero for a photon, which throws the baby out with the bath water. Then we have a distance squared because we’re employing something akin to Pythagoras’s theorem, and people say things like s²=x²-c²t². But really, what does it mean? What is the reality of s²? I think this is where people start to lose touch with the reality, and before you know it they’re into time machines and chronology protection conjectures. Sorry, did I miss the point of what you were getting at?

18. ### Farsight

Messages:
3,492
Can we please moderate this dishonest abusive troll please? I'm not lying, the Einstein quotes are a matter of public record:

File size:
287.9 KB
Views:
2
19. ### OnlyMeValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,914
Part of the problem with this is that for it to be even remotely coherent, you need to clearly define the word space, as you understand it. You directly and indirectly refer to it as a medium.., an inhomogeneous space, or ether like or a gin clear medium or a continuum ..., but you never provide any fundamental description of exactly what that it is, aside from abstract ideas.

When you collect all of your conceptual misinterpretations and try to put them back into the underlying theoretical model.., GR.., you cannot recover the predictive success of GR in its original form! Thus you keep being asked to demonstrate how your theory predicts or explains anything we can observe or prove!

Basically, your conceptual changes break the currently functional theoretical model of gravity, the rest of us know of as general relativity.

20. ### OnlyMeValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,914
They are also 100 years out of date. It is as if you believe nothing of significance has been accomplished sinse!

21. ### OnlyMeValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,914
BTW Farsight, even though that reference, includes the following, Mach's idea finds its full development in the ether of Gerneral relativity... Einstein was never able to incorporate Mach's principle into his field equations.

I believe I know why, but that is not a subject associated with this thread on, Time-Travel!

22. ### QuarkHeadRemedial Math StudentValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,557
Ya know, this is either gibberish, made up, irrelevant or all three.
Well, be careful talking about "distance" in spacetime. How about $s$ is spacetime separation - i.e. the spacetime "distance" between, say, the Boston Tea Party and the Battle of Waterloo.
Now you contradict yourself. $s^2$ is the generalization of the "hypotenuse" in the hyperbolic Pythagorean which can only be given a value, as per Pythagoras, by squaring all terms and taking square roots of their squared sums.

Did you know that Einstein placed enormous emphasis on the invariance of the line element? (Briefly described in my last post) It formed the key to his insistence on General Covariance

PS I just remembered I ended my previous post with a question: Why is the line element $ds^2 = dx^2_1+dx^2_2+dx^2_3-dx^2_4$ usually written (by physicists) as $ds^2=g_{jk}dx_jdx_k$.

Just as I am not expecting Hell to freeze over anytime soon, so I am not expecting Farsight to even attempt an answer to this (Lest there be any doubt, I do know myself)

Last edited: Dec 13, 2014
23. ### PhysBangValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,422
Why are you referencing Einstein when you were just lying about a paper about vacuum energy by someone else? Can't you keep the lies straight anymore?