# TimeLord

Members

511

1

## Everything posted by TimeLord

Earth's temporal gradient Hi there. Just wanted to point out the obvious result of relativity's subtle effect on time on earth. As you all know, faster objects have their clocks slowed down, and a rotating object (such as earth) has a range of velocities from rest up to some maximum value, depending on radius. As such, we can define a few things v = r w dt*® = dt B = dt / sqrt(1 - (v/c)^2) = dt / sqrt(1 - (r w/c)^2) Sorry the notation is clumsy. We can see then that objects near the surface of the earth travel through time a little faster than those in the center. We also know that a spinning object experiences a centrifugal force. We might suppose that when adjacent spaces pass time at different rates a force is exerted on any objects present. Maybe force is the result of an object seeking the slowest clock pace (or the fastest possible rate through time). It makes sense if we think of dt in terms of some sort of energy level (I know, not properly defined in this context), and an object's clock relative to the rest of the universe becoming slower would be a lower and more stable 'energy' state. We might have to make a new term for this 'energy' or at least a formula to relate it to other forms of energy. Tell me what you think. :D
2. ## Is this real?

Where'd they get the video? From the rubble? From an off-site storage (if it were uploaded somewhere else)? Where is the fire & smoke? Why is the video so short? (I can guess) It would be cool if it's real, but there's no way to know for sure without more information.
3. ## Anthropogenic Global Warming is Bunk Science

Re: It's official: AGW Alarmists BROKE THE LAW! That gives new meaning to the term GREENhouse gases. Hmm.. This is getting worse. lol I should stop posting on this thread for a while. :yum:
4. ## Time Traversal

Well that's unfortunate. But it is common for people on the internet to take such an approach, assuming that real science can be "proven" with just a few poorly explained ideas. It's not necessarily a character flaw, just something that can be fixed with time and education. :)
5. ## Anthropogenic Global Warming is Bunk Science

Re: It's official: AGW Alarmists BROKE THE LAW! I wonder how much CO2 Mecha Streisand produces? :eek: :D
6. ## Anthropogenic Global Warming is Bunk Science

Re: It's official: AGW Alarmists BROKE THE LAW! Naturally. :yum:
7. ## Anthropogenic Global Warming is Bunk Science

Re: It's official: AGW Alarmists BROKE THE LAW! Don't worry, Barbara Streisand will come and eat the evil UFOs and save the day. :D
8. ## Time Traversal

Oh ok. :yum: I didn't know that. Wasn't he a decent fellow, though? No need to hide, unless there was some drama I missed.
9. ## Time Traversal

I understand what you're getting at, but you can't assume someone is one of the original cavemen just because they're reinventing the wheel. :oops:
10. ## Time Traversal

I only skimmed this thread, but the method you describe was actually attempted by someone on this forum before. I forget who it was, though. Maybe reactor or recall or.. r-something.. :confused:

Re: So Why Didn't Titor Tell Us About This? Quick question: The LHC is supposed to accelerate protons, right? How do they get single protons to accelerate, since hydrogen bonds to other hydrogen atoms to form H2? Just heat it up a whole lot or what? :oops:
13. ## Bye

I'm short on time at the moment, but I'll be sure to check it out later (11 pages!). :yum:
14. ## Bye

Thanks RMT. :D Did I miss any really good threads?
15. ## Bye

Thanks for the offers and advice all. I chose a less dramatic approach and turned out fine. I'm back. :)
16. ## Bye

It seems I'm getting kicked out of my house, for reasons I won't explain. Having no job and little money, I plan to buy a one-way ticket to somewhere. If any time travelers want to lend a helping hand, feel free. :) I'll be the rambling drunk shouting in the street outside the pub. lol
17. ## To those of the Emporium

Well he's in the right place for that! lol
18. ## Get Out Of This Paradox

Ok I'll help. :) Say you have a function m(t) describing all the mass in the universe at time t. Although m(t) can change at any given value of t, the integral of m(t) dt from negative to positive infinity remains constant. So you're just moving mass from one time to another, but it stops existing at the other time you moved it from. If time travel never occurred in all eternity, then (neglecting transformation of mass to/from energy) m(t) would be constant. That is, m(t) = M. If one were to graph m(t) as a function of time, then you would see the points where time travel occurred. This is because there will be an abrupt change in the value of m(t) between the destination time and the time travelled from. If you skip ahead in time, m(t) will decrease from now until the time you materialize in the future. If you go back in time, m(t) will increase from the time in the past you went to until the future time that you went back.
19. ## change in mass near light speed

lol I didn't even think about them representing a unit vector. You're right! Maybe we discovered a hidden 'feature' of the forum. (self-modifying math posts) :D
20. ## Get Out Of This Paradox

That actually DOES happen! :D

Antarctic territorial dispute
22. ## change in mass near light speed

lol I don't know where those A things came from. I guess the forum didn't like the squared signs. :yum: Is there a way to make dx, dy, & dz., imaginary? Then you could have: dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2 + dt^2 = 1 dt^2 = 1 - dx^2 - dy^2 - dz^2 dx^2 = (i DX)^2 = -DX^2 dy^2 = (i DY)^2 = -DY^2 dz^2 = (i DZ)^2 = -DZ^2 dx^2 = 1 + DX^2 + DY^2 + DZ^2 dt^2 > 1 Hmmm I don't know. What about dt^2 having 2 solutions? dt can be positive or negative.
23. ## To those of the Emporium

Word spellings have changed over time already, so why not expect that in the future? Also, english might not be his first language. Ahz longue ahz thier iz kleer kommunication itt deoz nott mattar. :)
24. ## Energy - does it require an intelligent creator

The big bang, black holes, timelines, wormholes, etc., are all there to distract curious people from real science, which is that with which you can actually experiment. Idle speculation is the hallmark of armchair "scientists", and it leads to nothing useful.
25. ## change in mass near light speed

Are you saying: dx² + dy² + dz² + dt² = c² Oops that doesn't work.... (dx² + dy² + dz² + dt²)/dt² = c² (dx/dt)² + (dy/dt)² + (dz/dt)² + 1 = c² ?
×
×
• Create New...