Time Travel Continued

[Maxy]

Here you go Rolin.

My reference to quantum theory was to do with photons. According to quantum theory, photons can travel anywhere: forwards, backwards, left, right, even back and forward in time. The odds of a photon doing something you don't expect are tiny, and when viewed in mass the position is almost 100% predictable. Essentially what I'm saying is quantum theory allows for sub-atomic particles to travel through time. This is accepted theory. I understand that this doesn't make it true, it's merely leading physicists across the world agree that this theory is more likely than any other we have today.

My reference to special relativity I could expand to include general relativity too. If an object is travelling at speeds near to the speed of light then they will experience time dilation. Equally, if an object is near a large body of mass, such as a Black Hole, time dilation will occur. Time is relative to the observer, just like a lot of things in the universe. This is a tricky effect to explain without using a fair bit of maths - essentially time will pass at different rates (assuming we're measuring from a non-inertial frame of reference) inside a spaceship compared to the rest of the universe. The same laws that govern time dilation also say that it IS possible to travel back in time.

How can you claim that time is just an invention of man? It IS a dimension; objects are time dependant. Unless you're talking from a philsophical point of view, you're speaking nonsense. If you are talking from a philsophical point of view you're talking nonsense by default. We do not travel back in time, but forward through it instead. As far as physics goes there is no law or theory that rules time travel out completely.

It is very hard to stomp on what I've said. Quantum theory, General and Special Relativity may well be wrong but they are universally accepted, seems they predict phenomena that no other theories can.

[TranceRolin]

The speed of light varies, it's been proven time and again. Dilation of time when nearing the average speed of light is complete theory and has never been proven.

The only reason that it is still a theory is because it is designed much like deity-worshipping religions; That which cannot be proven scientifically cannot be proven wrong.

If you scale down the theory then it is proven false, just as when an omnipotent god scaled down to gods controlling the elements have been scientifically proven false. If an object stops moving entirely, even vibrations, hence being at Absolute Zero, then does it stop travelling through time? No, because it still exists in time as time progresses until its matter changes form. Also, saying that the non-constant variable that is the speed of light is a constant is contradicting itself entirely. This states that all of the laws that govern time-space change with every second, which in and of itself changes upon itself which would mean no change when change is required.

The entire Quantum Theory is based on, as Placnk (sp?) put it, a constant that cannot be described nor defined. So your entire arguement is based upon complete faith, while science in and of itself is the art of finding truth via the scientific method, which bases answers upon proven fact.

And calling philosophy blasphemy is completely rediculous. Philosophy is the science of logic, and by calling it meaningless is calling anything to do with science a farse.

[Maxy]

Speed of light does vary, yes, but only when going through a medium. The speed of light in a vacuum is absolute. Where ever I have stated "speed of light" I was referring to in a vacuum, as is the convention. Time dilation has been proven. I don't know what you're talking about. Time dilation is greatest at near the speed of light, but is occurent everywhere.

The experiment was conducted using two aeroplane travelling around the world, in opposite directions, each using atomic clocks. Because of the relative speed of the planes against the earth, a difference in time was recorded:

59 ns eastward
273 ns westward

Scientists have detected subatomic particles with half-lives of a few seconds which have travelled for years across the galaxy which would have decayed without time dilation.

Need more? Check out "Was Einstein Right?" - Cliff M. Will.

Time dilation has been proven. It is relative to the speed of an object, the faster an object travels the more time dilation.


What is this nonsense about absolute zero? A particle at absolute zero has no energy, so it does not move in the first 3 dimensions. Energy isn't required to move through time. What have these things got to do with each other? When have you ever seen an atom at absolute zero anyway? No-where in the universe is at 0K.

There is no faith about Quantum mechanics. It accurately predicts all areas of mechanics. There is no better theory today that produces better results than quantum theory. Are you denying the existance of Quantum Theory? If you are, that is fine - one day there may be a better theory that works to a higher degree of accuracy - but based on what, exactly? Why do you deny Quantum Mechanics. It is an excruciating concept and even the leading theorists such as Richard Feynman never understood it, but why does this make it wrong? It works and works with ever other accepted theory. It predicts things to a higher degree of accuracy that we can get from experimental evidence.

Philosophy is a joke. It is based on speculation. Physics is applied mathematics. Where would we be without physicists? Probably just stabbing each other with swords I guess. Where would we be without philosophers?....exactly - philosophy doesn't achieve anything.

(sp. Planck)


EDIT: I've just looked at your profile and discovered you're 15. Sorry, it's not your fault I guess, you can't know anything. Please, don't discuss physics with me, you really are operating from a level far beneath me. You don't know enough about the concepts you're discussing to argue effectively. I'm living in a house full of physicists and none of us know what you're talking about. I won't hold it against you, I thought I knew everything when I was your age.

[TranceRolin]

Riiight . . . Who's being childish? Within a couple of years you'll realize how childish you were at this age, just as you realize now just how childish you were at this age.

You don't want to continue the discussion anymore, then that's fine. But don't make lame excuses like age.

And how can you argue against that which you don't understand? Obviously, at least SOME of you DO understand what I'm saying to disprove it at all.

[SleepyTemplar]

MAXY:

Only people ignorant about philosophy call it a joke. It's not your fault I guess, you can't know anything. You don't know enough about the concepts you're discussing to argue effectively.

Silly cookie-cutter ad hominem aside, your precious science is indebted to philosophy in more ways than you imagine. Logic, which allows you to argue at all is the philosopher's tool. Inductive reasoning, the basis of the scientific method, comes from epistemology. Those are just two major aspects of philosophy you take for granted besides a priori knowledge, causation, empiricism, etc- not to mention the numerous metaphysical and epistemological assumptions you make everyday. Without philosophy, you'd have no means of claiming knowledge, much less being able to understand the world around you!

And how is speculation a bad thing? Last I recall, speculations in science was how the scientific method works.

That said, there's nothing logically impossible about time travel (that is, under a four-dimensionalist position, which most philosophers accept).

[Maxy]

I apologise. I admit I know nothing about philosophy beyond the teenage angst style, which really does achieve nothing except make teenagers more depressed. I can't argue with you, Sleepy Templar because most of what you said I didn't understand, but what I do know is Physics.

Rolin, I attacked your age not because being 15 automatically makes you stupid, which, of course, it doesn't, but because the concepts you're discussing are not those taught to someone of your age. Even if they were it would not be to the same standard as you'd get from studying physics full time. Even A level Physics (I don't know what the American equivalent is) only the surface is scratched. To know anything about these subjects would require a great interest in the subject, university standard teaching and textbooks and beyond A level standard maths. For all I know you may be an extremely intelligent person, but I really do believe you cannot have a firm understanding about these subjects at your age.

It was hypocrictical to made a blanket statement about Philosophy being utter shash, I take it back.

[SleepyTemplar]

No problems, just pointing out that philosophy is actually quite important.

[theblakeman]

oooh, Maxy got pwned. Philosophy isn't a joke; philosophy changes your life; it changes the way you look at the world and the reasons for what you do. Much more important than figuring out how things work to me, since I'd rather enjoy my life than spend it on the quest for scientific knowledge. And as ST said before, philosophy is what started us on the path to science, such as the basic question of why we are alive. I don't think we'd know anything about the human body without that original need to understand.

As for time travel I was wondering what people thought: if you go back in time and kill yourself as a child, would you die too as a result? I don't think so. Because if you are there in that time and place, you'd be a physical and mental member of that time. To argue that you would die would be to argue that you have some sort of spiritual connection to the time period you are from. So if you did that, it would only change the future of the time you travelled back to.

[SleepyTemplar]

The Grandfather paradox leads to the idea that you can affect the past, but you cannot change the past, otherwise the paradox comes into place invoking a contradiction.