Jump to content

Before the Big Bang


Irving
 Share

Recommended Posts

And one thing no one brings up to my knowledge about time travel is this, since we're on the earth which is moving through space, to travel back in time to any date where the earth is in a different spacial position wouldn't that leave the time traveler out in space?

It's brought up a few times a year.

 

The answer is that you shouldn't, in theory, arrive out in space. You define your starting point by four coordinates x, y, z, t and your target by four coordinates x', y', z', t'. If you know where you want to go in 4D spacetime you should not arrive out in space unless you've miscalculated something.

 

The real problem is one of velocity & momentum. If you carry your velocity & momentum along with you (and you should) and hit your target in such a way that the Earth's velocity vector is at an angle with respect to your velocity and momentum vectors you're going to be in trouble. You could end up augering in, be slightly below the surface, skipping along the surface or shooting off into space at a velocity up to 3 times escape velocity (30 km/sec). At least your ashes would be doing so if you hit the atmosphere at ~ 1,000,000 mph. I guess the upside is that you would enter the stage with a bang (or a sonic boom).

 

You should be able to determine what direction the Earth will be moving with respect to your motion when you arrive but it's probably better to arrive in space and make any adjustments there. A time traveling society would be fantastically advanced but getting the calculations precisely correct based on a target that is impossible to observe from the starting point is asking a lot of even the most advanced society, not to mention asking a lot of the crew who would have no opportunity to make corrections before disaster struck when they arrive at the target.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 216
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A time traveling society would be fantastically advanced but getting the calculations precisely correct based on a target that is impossible to observe from the starting point is asking a lot of even the most advanced society, not to mention asking a lot of the crew who would have no opportunity to make corrections before disaster struck when they arrive at the target.

You're missing the obvious option: send an unmanned probe to test things before each "jump". Of course, I still think time travel will be a continuous change rather than a sudden jump. So I don't think the "appearing out in space" thing will be an issue. ;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Storm,

 

You're missing the obvious option: send an unmanned probe to test things before each "jump".

Yes, that would be helpful. Even with super computers many generations advanced from ours plotting the future position of the Earth with an accuracy great enough to be able to safely land on the surface of the Earth would still be extremely difficult. We can plot the future position with reasonable accuracy for most purposes. Over the course of several months we can get it down to a couple of kilometers. But the number of variables involved with getting that calculation down to a few centimeters makes it virtually impossible. The Earth's orbital path is extremely complex and is an elipse only in the general approximation. The Earth-Moon center of gravity is about 4600 km from the Earth's center or about 1800 km below the surface. The Earth-Moon system swings around like a bar bell with the center of rotation 4600 km from the Earth's center of mass as they orbit the Sun. But that too is an approximation that has no finite solution. The oceans are liquid and are subject to tidal forces. They slosh around and introduce more oscillations to the system that cannot be predicted or calculated. The Earth's crust rests on a liquid mantle that is affected by the tidal forces of the Moon which introduces yet more oscillations into the system. Jupiter and Saturn have perturbing effects on the shape and oscillations of the Earth-Moon orbit and they affect each other's orbital mechanics. If we are looking for cm accuracy the other planets come into play as they slightly affect the Earth-Moon orbital mechanics. Sending the probe for a look-see and then arriving safely in space is probably the best solution.

 

I did make a "slight" error in the V-max that an incoming TT vehicle might have relative to the Earth, BTW.

 

Meteors strike the Earth's atmosphere at ~30 km/sec because they are relatively at rest with respect to the Earth. They don't so much strike the Earth as the Earth runs into them as its orbital path crosses their paths. A TT vehicle on an opposing course could have a V-max of 60 km/sec, not 30 km/sec.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're making things too complicated. Time travel is really simple.

It's as simple as breathing...unless you want to significantly alter the rate that time passes relative to two arbitrary frames. Then it gets a bit more complicated and maybe even not possible at all if the displacement is retrograde relative to the thermodynamic arrow of time.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're making things too complicated. Time travel is really simple.

It's as simple as breathing...unless you want to significantly alter the rate that time passes relative to two arbitrary frames. Then it gets a bit more complicated and maybe even not possible at all if the displacement is retrograde WRT the thermodynamic arrow of time.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell me in a PM or an email?

 

My email is in my profile.

 

"Not now. Too many reading. Maybe later."

 

I honestly don't understand why it is important "when" you post it. After you post it

 

won't it always be there for everyone to read anyway?

 

uhhh that was not "did you pick it as your name" ..but "WHY did you". You need new glasses. lol

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darby,

 

Well I started out with "please explain it to US..."

 

and then when he said "too many reading..."

 

I thought well ..maybe he will tell me in private.??

 

I figure better to get it in private than not to get it at all!

 

Or have to wait for a long, long, long time to hear it.

 

It was worth a try anyway. I am eager to hear what he has to say

 

I can't help it. :)

 

I know....this is what got me into trouble with John.

 

But then again ...I did like John AND he was fun to talk to!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to interrupt,,

 

but to get back to the post,,

 

I am of the opinion, that any expansion..

 

has its own "time code"..

 

In effect,, there can be a 'wave theory' inside a larger system.

 

In fact, i would refer to it as a compression.

 

Of time.

 

this would be the simple,, an economic way, under the current "manifestation of time...as we understand it.."

 

-------------------------------->

 

There is simply no way , to collapse, the current, 'timeframe'

 

into a less cohesive structure.

 

Time will bend.. if everything---has less pressure.

 

Its the "flip side" to the coin.

 

But it cannot be done...without an absence of time.

 

AND I DON'T BELIEVE...that manufacturing one...out of thin air,, inside the current timeframe,, even using.. the current prescribed ideologies, or mathematics, will work.

 

without a complete absence of time..or pressure..

 

IN this universe... we will never see any form of time travel.

 

I don't know the hows or whys... but I have sat on this for a while...

 

and considered the mechanics of it.

 

no "opening of a dimensional wall will allow it."

 

Its not :just a distance thing"...and it where we fail.--I am of the opinion, that even using the scale..in this aspect...is a detriment.

 

Real, Honest time travel...and positional control? also?

 

Is way beyond anything,, that I have seen considered.

 

but I would welcome a link.

 

collaspsing time itself,, but not doing it, by sheer force.

 

but by, collapsing the energy in upon itself.

 

and manufacturing a technique to do that very thing...is almost beyond reason.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As more sticks are added to the stream, you can see that their spacing from each other is not changed as long as the water's speed remains constant.

That's not a true statement. The water can be swirling, twisting and turning all over the map and the speed can still remain constant but the interval between the sticks would not remain a constant.

 

BTW: what's simple about the term "force"? Maybe you should first explain force, an action at a distance without actual water as the medium, in simple yet accurate terms before moving on to an explanation of the term time.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. Thank-you for taking the leap and sharing.

 

I feel that there are some details missing from your explaination, at least as I can undertand what you have presented so far. Not your fault, but mine.

 

""" The river represents time..."""

 

""" The sticks represent force..."""

 

I can understand the point-of-view of the river representing time.

 

The stick's representing force...in what way are they "a force" ?

 

The stick's as I see them would be subject to the behaviour of other forces of the water, and other potential "forces", but, don't see the sticks themselves acting and/or affecting anything themselves.

 

If I am understanding this correctly, and excuse me if I am not, your explaination seems to fit into what I have as an idea of "time"...that "time" is not really a force in itself, but a passive "effect" of other forces.

 

The river itself would be just such a force, not necessarily "time" itself, but a combination of forces that move the sticks along. The sticks themselves are merely "along for the ride" as it were.

 

""" Time's construct is that of a series of forces passed from one level of matter to another."""

 

Can you expand on the above statement...a series of "what" forces ?

 

""" The spacing and information is never diminished, only our perception thereof."""

 

So we would be considered stationary, and only percieve that the "spacing and information" ( the sticks ) are behaving in a manner different than which is actually taking place ?

 

And even if our perception of the spacing and information is diminished, but the actual information is not...how does this premise help us define "time" in a way that provides us with "an ability" with time ?

 

And: Welcome Back Kanigo2 ! Good to see you posting again. :)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sort of as a side-line to what you wrote in your post:

 

In getting ready to view the meteor storm, it occurred to me that the Earth has traveled this way before in it's orbit around the Sun. Of course there are variations as to exact location due to perhaps a wobble and a slight movement towards the Sun.

 

However, how far off are we from the postion the Earth was in at this "time" ( not necessarily as per the calendar date ) and would you say based on your thoughts :

 

""" There is ever present a record of every force which has acted upon an object and contained within the object. Recalling these forces will recall the momentum and the previous state. """

 

that, in theory, there could be energy that still remains as a ghost from the previous passage of the Earth through this "region" of space ?

 

Closer to what you have expressed, is something the Druid's have mentioned in their discipline. That everything has a memory, living AND seemingly inanimate objects.

 

The memory, or energy of the information of the event is embedded within the inner structure of; At a cellular level, or even deeper.

 

Non-scientific explaination-- but seems similar to what I believe you are trying to convey.

 

Am I getting warmer or no ?

 

In the Key of Time Thread, I quoted from one the Tablet's of Hermes. Hermes is said to have figured out the secrets of "time", and it would be interesting to compare what Hermes wrote to that of your premise regarding time.

 

"""

 

1. In the beginning, there was eternal thought

 

2. For thought to be eternal, time must exist

 

3. INTO the thought grew the Law of Time

 

4. Time is movement that is in a state of fixation

 

5. Time is the FORCE that holds events seperate

 

6. Time is not in motion

 

7. Your consciousness moves from one event to another

 

8. Eternal One Existence

 

9. Even though in Time you are separate, yet you are still One in all times existent.

 

"""

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about druids. This is, however, not what I was talking about.

My fault, since I did not explain it in depth. However, from what you have said so far, it is something they have discussed for quite sometime, but in more of a esoteric setting. I will try to find what I have with what the Druid's have expressed that I feel are similar to what I have read so far within your posts..

 

I do not know your temperature. Are you serious?

 

Forget all your troubles, forget all your cares... so go downtown.. things will be great when you're downtown. Dont wait a minute more.. Downtown, everything's waiting for you...

A tad warmer than before reading this in your reply. And yes, I am very serious.

 

You are hoping to accomplish "what" with this approach in your replies to questions about your premise regarding time ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an analogy. Your confusion is planned. I do not like your hostility.

Errr...hostility? :confused: Because I didn't agree with your incorrect statement it is hostile? Come on, you've got thicker skin than that, don't you? It's a discussion forum not a glad hand, slap on the back coffee klatch.

 

Analogy or not, the statement about speed vs. constant interval was not correct. Because you stated, "I was going to write an entire time tutorial explaining the physics and math of time and space", I only assumed that you knew where the mistake was and would correct it yourself.

 

You said that we were making it too complex and then you threw in a statement about "forces". Forces in physics is an extremely complex situation. My suggestion was, if you're going to add forces to the mix, then it's proper that you explain in simple but correct terms what force is, given that in your analogy you used water rather than vacuum as the medium across which the action at a distance takes place. I don't see, and didn't intend, any hostility in that portion of my post either.

 

Surely you don't want this discussion to digress into one where people voice the opinion that this sounds a bit too familiar, meaning that the OP has begun to obfuscate when answering specific questions based on the OP's previous statements, do you?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time is not a dimension, but an effect.

Isn't time one of four orthogonal axes (dimensions) used to describe the evolution of a system contained in a volume of 4D spacetime with 8 degrees of freedom?

 

Earlier in your analogy you used the term speed. Speed implies time. If time is simply an effect rather than a dimension with two degrees of freedom in 4D spacetime, where is the effect of time in speed and how is speed defined without time as a dimension?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...