TimeLord Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 What is the most promising area of research into time travel? Which, if any, of the following methods do you think can be used to achieve time travel to the past? Best time travel research area Rotating Magnetic Fields Rotating Electric Fields Electromagnetism Faster than light travel Plasma physics Wormholes or CTCs Static electricity Vibration Optics Other (please explain) I look forward to your replies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KerrTexas Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 I look forward to your replies. I selected other ( please explain ). The area of study that has attracted my attention are relative to the Telluric Currents.Telluric Currents - Lanzerotti and Gregori Introduction to Geomagnetics - Jeffery Love - USGS Geomag Real Time Station Display Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted December 8, 2010 Author Share Posted December 8, 2010 Interesting. :yum: According to Wikipedia: Telluric currents flow in the surface layers of the earth. The electric potential on the Earth's surface can be measured at different points, enabling us to calculate the magnitudes and directions of the telluric currents and thence the Earth's conductance. These currents are known to have diurnal characteristics wherein the general direction of flow is towards the sun. Telluric currents will move between each half of the terrestrial globe at all times. Telluric currents move equator-ward (daytime) and pole-ward (nighttime). If the current generally flows toward the sun, then it would appear to be a rotating electric current (or field) from our perspective. :DHow do you think telluric currents can be harnessed for time travel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KerrTexas Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 Still in the beginning stages of presenting this to the board, but what got me interested in the Telluric Currents was posted in the following thread : Rhythm of Time Post by KerrTexas : Rhythm of Time : Telluric Currents -12/02/10 01:13 PM ~~~~~ The area that is experiencing the anomalies, is also consistently exposed to opposing forces of the Telluric Currents. In reading the linked resources in the previous post, the location where the accounts are coming from is located within and/or around Trinity Bay, Texas. In tracking the real-time charts as provided by the USGS, I have already noticed that when there are environmental events, there are readable patterns in those charts. To go into depth in this thread would take up a whole lot of space, thus the links that provide more than I ever could are included in the previous post. It was mentioned that the Telluric Currents DO experience Temporal Folds, but have yet to find an explaination of what the author meant by that description. Time dependent, I got. Obviously, the currents would be time dependent, as far as any particular measurments go, since they are in a constant state of fluctuation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einstein Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 Time is a direction. Maybe it's just a basic force. That brings the count up to five basic forces. Throw in centrifugal force and that brings the count up to six basic forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paladius Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 I selected rotating magnetic fields (which I believe are also wormholes) for time travel, but I also believe that this technology can only move matter, not thought. It is a separate and distinct technology which can transport your consciousness. Without the two parts, the whole is going no where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted December 11, 2010 Author Share Posted December 11, 2010 So you subscribe to the philosophy of dualism? The idea that mind and matter are separate substances... What do you think consciousness is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael2 Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 I'm thinking faster-than-light-travel is the primary answer, but that would only scratch the surface. The reason I think it requires superluminal velocity is simple. What is the fastest moving thing in this dimension, the thing which nothing moves faster than, the thing which moves at the same speed relative to you regardless of how fast you're moving? Light. Now light has a velocity of 186,000 mph in this dimension, but it may have different velocities in other dimensions. However, we can only interact, we are only matter, in a dimension where the velocity of light is 186,000 mph. Therefore to be able to interact with matter from another dimension, we have to enter into a new frame of reference. I think that by exceeding the velocity of light in this dimension, we can enter into a new frame in which we are stationary wrt it and light in the new dimension has a constant velocity of 186,000 mph. The reason this only scratches the surface is that following the above process would have us merely experiencing a timeline unlike that of this dimension. We still need to find a way to travel to a specific location in the new dimension, which corresponds to a different period in this one. We also have to discover a way to return to, or at least interact with, this dimension; however I have a hunch that doing that may be far less complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darby Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 I think that by exceeding the velocity of light in this dimension ...which is a huge problem.We know, as a matter of experimental verification for the past century, that for massive particles they are limited to velocities less than c. At the speed of light their mass and momentum blow up to infinity. Mix in quantum mechanics and you know long before that can consider matching the speed of light you simply don't have sufficient local energy available to form the next quanta of energy for the accelaration boost to get to a velocity that is still less than c. Now you can imagine another universe where the laws of physics are different than they are in this universe. String Theory (or rather its current form, M-Theory) has literally billions of solutions that neither describe this universe nor violate the known laws of physics. They even allow for different laws of physics in different universes. The problem for us, even if we could somehow enter those universes, is that the laws of physics that allow for our form of matter would not apply there. If, for example, the strength of the electric charge was even slightly different in that universe our molecules would either collapse or disintegrate. If the strong force was different the atoms in our bodies could fly apart or collapse to black holes. If gravity was even slightly stronger stars in that universe would burn out long before sufficient time has passed for life to form. If it was weaker stars wouldn't form at all. Asking for different laws of physics involves all of physics and all of the effects that would result. A theory of time travel involving those universes means exploring the entirety of what would happen. Having your electrons, protons and neutrons individually stream off into the future/past might verify a time travel theory but (1) you wouldn't like the experience having died and (2) no one would know that it was a success because there would be no one to report back the results. As to possibly accelerating to some velocity near c in this universe and them transiting to a universe where the limit is lower - thus we exceed the speed of light in that universe...no go. It won't allow you to time travel relative to this universe. We can and do accelerate particles to velocities where they exceed the local speed of light. We do it all the time. The speed limit that you're talking about is the speed of light in a vacuum. We can't match that velocity with massive particles. But if you accelerate a particle in an accelerator to 99.999999% the speed of light and then direct the particle into heavy water, Viola! The particle is exceeding the local light speed limit - you'll even see Cherenkov Radiation if you shoot enough particles into the heavy water. That's the blue-green glow you see in reactors. Unfortunately, the particles stay rather firmly attached to this time and don't disappear into the past though they do, in fact, experience time dilation as described in Special Relativity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darby Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 There are other things that you have to consider when thinking about acceleration to the speed of light. Without refering to General Relativity and only considering Special Relativity and then placing you experiment in the real world rather than a special and well prepared gedankenexperiment you have some obsticles that cannot be ignored. If you are travelling at a velocity extremely close to the speed of light in the real world the very last thing that you want to encounter is a 1 microgram particle of space dust. The mass/momentum boost, which tends to infinity, means that the dust bunny becomes an artillery shell with a kinetic energy also approaching infinity. There's no possible shield that can be imagined that would protect your ship from the "hydrogen bomb" effect of striking the particle. The shock wave of the encounter would completely disentigrate your ship. Space-time contraction and extreme blue shift along your +X axis of travel causes a blue wall of energy to be directly in your path. From your perspective the entire mass-energy of the universe starts forming a singularity pointed directly at your nose. Last, from your perspective you see no problems with your clocks. They tick away at the correct rate. But you see the outside world aging and an accelerated rate. The closer to c you get the faster the universe outside your ship ages. At c, when your mass and momentum blow up to infinity, the outside rate of aging also blows up to infinity. Whatever the final state of the universe is, and we believe it to be an empty, cold universe with a temperature of 0 Kelvin +/- quantum fluctuations. you see a cold dead, dark universe with no local energy at all for you to utilize. The speed of light isn't the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael2 Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 you simply don't have sufficient local energy available to form the next quanta of energy for the accelaration boost to get to a velocity that is still less than c Absolutely. That's the problem, how to get enough energy.I disagree with your second paragraph. I think it's self-centered of us to believe that a universe with physical laws unlike our own could not survive and support life. Maybe it couldn't support our lives, but that doesn't mean we can't enter it. All I think it means is that we would have a hard time recognizing what's there. It would take some really advanced computer programs to figure things out. I don't believe you would die if you exceeded the light constant, not with the correct shielding anyway. A shield would be necessary not to protect you from other matter, but to prevent you from exploding during acceleration. Finally, I'm not talking about exceeding the velocity of light in some other dimension. I'm talking about hopefully entering a dimension that is at rest wrt light as it moves in a vacuum in this dimension. Why is it impossible, using current technology, to reach 100% of the light constant in this dimension? And why does light seem to travel away from you at the same speed regardless of your own velocity? The reason is that this dimension is not at rest wrt light in a vacuum in this dimension. You might not think it makes any sense, because how can you reach, let alone exceed, the light constant in this dimension if it's not possible to do in this dimension. That's where we need to pull energy from yet another dimension. But we're only borrowing it. It won't destroy the other dimension because in this dimension energy is neither created nor destroyed but returns to the origin. I realize that we are able to accelerate subatomic particles to very near the universal light velocity, but never actually achieve it. Why is that? Is it because it's just not possibe, or is it because there's not enough energy in the universe to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darby Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I disagree with your second paragraph. I think it's self-centered of us to believe that a universe with physical laws unlike our own could not survive and support life It's not so much a matter of not being able to support life at all as it is a matter of not being able to support physical life as the laws of our universe dictates it. Our physical existence is wholly dependent on the laws of physics as they exist in this universe (as explained in the previous post). We can't simply whistle away that reality on a whim. If your molecules cannot react to the physical laws in some other universe as they react to this universe then life as we define it can't exist. End of story. Having physical laws in another universe that don't allow you to process carbohydrates because the electric force is different isn't conducive to life as you know it. That even assumes that carbon is a stable molecule under differing physical laws. We have to remember that the physical laws of this universe allow, and just barely allow, molecules larger than hydrogen and helium. We live in a hydrogen-helium universe that has a whisp of "pollution" made from 96 or so other elements.Of course we could propose that physical existence is independent of physical laws but that's a matter of religion. If that's the case then there's no reason to talk about physical laws, the speed of light or any other issue concerning the laws of physics. If we're going to consider physical laws as the crux of the matter then we have to consider the consequences of a scenario of differing physical laws and introducing matter into that scenario that is governed by yet other physical laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darby Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I'm talking about hopefully entering a dimension that is at rest wrt light as it moves in a vacuum in this dimension. What do you mean by "a dimension that is at rest WRT light?" That statement makes no physical sense. There's no viable energy metric. You end up with E = mc^2 where c = 0 thus E = 0. Further, the equation implies mass-energy equivalence - mass must also be zero.Getting around the light speed limit isn't something that can be wished away. All of our physical laws depend on this limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael2 Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 Okay, all I mean is a dimension where everything has at least the amount of energy that a photon has. I know, I know, photons are pure kinetic energy with zero rest mass. How can there be a universe of pure kinetic energy? The answer is that it's a universe that's in constant motion relative to this one. The way I look at it, this universe, although it is in constant motion, is in a particular state of rest. I'm saying that because of the relativistic properties of light. So this universe, this dimension, is constrained in motion because of the energy gap. I guess the bottom line is, create enough energy to exceed the velocity of light in vaccuo and you can propel yourself into a whole new universe (dimension). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeCrime1986 Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Timelord. I know a little about you though I may have you at a disadvantage depending how well you know me. When you say time travel I take it you mean this current time line. But in doing that no matter how hard you try another time line is created I know this by experence by the way. So, I have a hard time answering your poll. So I want to give you the best answer I can which means a post instead of a poll. Complex energy fields is the answer I want to give you or time travel with information which you might know of if you hang around in the time travel circles. Here the information subject is a sore subject so I will drop it there. The time travel by complex energy fields means several electric and magnetic fields created which interact with emf fields to create a either which is the framework of our universe but the framework it creates would be a small universe outside of our normal space-time. Its a part of how ufos fly. There are other things like increasing mass with speed using angler momentum to create gravity but that is another subject all together. Well I could go on an on but this makes for my basic contribution to your thread. Good day. Timecrime out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted February 12, 2011 Author Share Posted February 12, 2011 TimeCrime, I would be glad if one were to know me; I feel most unknown at present; so alone. When it comes to information and time, I am aware of attempts to enumerate all possible values and link them to moments in time via a binary counter as one called it. Energy fields seem like a vague concept unless further expounded, but I am nevertheless interested. And I'm always interested in ufos, since I dreamed of one years ago. It was so vivid. Tonight I am attempting to derive time travel equations. It has been reduced to a complex algebraic equation. I shall do my best. Good night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted February 12, 2011 Author Share Posted February 12, 2011 Nevermind that first sentence there; I was a bit tipsy. lol But the rest of the post is true. And if anyone can help me solve a 4th degree polynomial I'll be happy. Edit: Well I found this. lol I can hardly wait to waste a few trees working all of this out. :yum: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darby Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Try here for some help with your quartic problem: http://www.karlscalculus.org/quartic.html There actually isn't any straight forward, simple formula to solve a 4th degree polynimal equation. If you get lucky and the problem just happens to have small numbers with obvious common factors you can solve it relatively "quick". If the numbers are large and the common factors aren't obvious then its hunt and peck, trial and error to find all of your common factors and solutions. It could take days, weeks, even years to solve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted February 13, 2011 Author Share Posted February 13, 2011 Thanks, Darby. I hope it won't take years, though weeks are not inconceivable at this point. lol I was about to post the equation in a generic form, but then my internet shut off. I guess it wasn't meant to be. I think whoever made the website at the link I posted put all the steps together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted February 15, 2011 Author Share Posted February 15, 2011 Well I'm slowly working my way through solving the equation. It's very tedious. I just noticed that it says "Addict" under my name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 I was forgetting the simple, direct approach to solving such polynomials. Suppose we want to solve the following equation: x^4 + bx^3 + cx^2 + dx + e = 0 The solution will take the form: (x-m)(x-n)(x-p)(x-q) = 0 So we're left with 4 equations and 4 unknowns after multiplying the second equation. It's just very long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darby Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Here's some help for you: http://www.sosmath.com/algebra/factor/fac12/fac12.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darby Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 TimeLord, Here's another method submitted by a friend who reads the forum but doesn't post: http://www.sosmath.com/calculus/diff/der07/der07.html Same math website, just another method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share Posted February 19, 2011 Thanks for the links, Darby. I need all the help I can get. I'm not too bad at math, but when it comes to something like this I definitely welcome shortcuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimeLord Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share Posted February 22, 2011 Quick question. What would an imaginary or complex value for mass physically represent? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts