# Thread: The space time continueimnms mm... (rant)

1. ## The space time continueimnms mm... (rant)

That last words a doozy.

Anyways, so I remember in 8th grade when me and my friend use to bulls*** about "theories" related to science -- especialy space, time, and the travel of. Now, I've all ways considered myself a master b's'er, and I was just sitting here recalling some memories of "theories" I came up with.

First the the answer to probability: The odd thing about odds and probability is that there are possible outcomes, and rates of outcomes. Ideally you have a 50/50 chance of landing heads from the flip of a quarter. The problem is, it doesn't always work in a finite state. I've flipped a quarter four times before, and gotten tails four times in a row. Now the odds say that It should be 50/50, but I had 100/0 occurence. How can a universal rule not exist in a specific non universal situation? I mean universal implys all incompassing, so something incompassed - four flips- should be accounted for. I think the real, best answer for this is that of a dimensional paradigm. Any occurrance that can occur, must occur with all others at the same moment in order to balance out universal odds. That is to say, when I flip a coin and I see it land on heads, it too also landed on tails, and the edge. What actually occurs is a dimensional fracture. One continuum branches (kinda like a tree) into several new lines -- each with one of the 3 possible occurances as the bases for that new line.

On this theory, we can assume an infintessimal ammount of branches, and dimensions existing. Each dimension differentiated by a trees of probability.

That being said-I believe time travel is possible by simply navigating dimensions. With this theorem, the grandmother/father conundrum does not occur. That problem makes the assumption that we exist on a single looping space time continuum, and killing your parents parents will negate your existance, negating your act. If we rather instead consider the time continuum based on a fractured tree line the problem doesn't occur. Because by killing your parents parents you are adding a new occurence - fracturing the tree at a higher level- the result will be you not being born - but in a different dimensional time line. The original you is not affected.

Now, rather then actually traveling through time, you are traveling through dimensions that are offset by the possible occurance of when time started.... "wtf?" you ask. Well,
Let us consider an arbitrary beginning of time - lets say the big bang. Everything is nice and united into this ultra dense singularity, we will consider it the top of the tree. At this top of the tree, there are already an infinite number of probabilites (tree branches) that are fractured and created-all denoted by one event - when the big bang happened. Lets imagine for a moment a superceeding time line outside of this system just for us to picture the event. Kinda a stop watch, starting at zero seconds.
So at this big bang, there is an event - the bang, and the specific of it - when. It *could* happen at t = 0 (our superceeded time line), it *could* happen at t = 1, t=2, t=3, t=n. Because all occurances must occur, it happens at all t=n. A branch in this time space continuum is created at every possible infintesimle time incriment. So once branch would have a time of t = 1, while another would have a branch of t = 2038348023840234. Lets call these branch continuums line A, and line B respectively.

Lets assume for a second that by the infinite chance of happening-and therefore must happening, that for every event in either line, they shared the same outcome all except for one important one - when the big bang happend. Time line A has a lead on B, it is 2038348023840233 ahead of B. Lets say thats roughly in our imagined time line 20 years. Lets also say that JOE is a man that exists in Line A, and WILL exist in line B in about 5 years (from B relativly). Now, Joe decides to time travel-in order to accomplish this he simply shift phase with a dimension that has a time offset of the correct maginitude from the original point in time of the big bang. Say he goes to B. So now Joe is AT B, before he is born - automaticaly this causes B to diverge into two sub branches - one branch with the basis of JOE traveling and being iN B, and the other where Joe doesn't, and is not in B. The same thing happens in A, one line he is gone because he traveled, and the other line he is still there going about every day business because he did not go to B. Both lines have diverged and created sub branches. While Joe is at B, the B branch where he is there, he decides to kill the father of his father. B once again branches from the possible occurances, Joes grandfather dieing, and not dieing. From this point on, in the death divergence, Joe will not come to exist (as havin be born by the parents) but will continue to exist (as having travled from a different dimension where he does). No other branch in the continuum is affected by this event - A remains unaltered execept from the divergence of his actual traveling. The second divergence of B will be the only affected line - and things will spiral into complete difference because of this event.

The theory answers the question that you can "time travel", you can travel - but you can't affect your original reality.

So thats a breif rant about some ideas I had. Feel free to share, coment, critique, debunk, or even BullSh** with me. I've got lots of time. PUN N TENDED!!

2. My thoughts: That is simply too much to read. (I'm feeling lazy).

3. Don't post then? Yeah.

4. Ok, you want my opinion? The "big bang" is a load of rubbish and time travel is not possible. I aging can be affected by time spent in outer space (but then again, so is overall health), but beyond that, the discussion is moot. Theories exist, but I don't think it'll be within my lifetime that any of these theories will actually be tested.

5. Corrections:
Age isn't affected by being in space. What you misenterprited is that time is relative to speed, the faster you go, the less time passes relative to some one slower then you. It's not the being in space, its the moving at high speeds--that affects aging, and really it doesnt affect age - it just affects.. time...

Space only negatively affects one health- zero gravity is quite unhealthy for you-thats why astronaughts spend most of there days exercising.

And to your belief that it won't be in your life time that the theories are tested, perhaps they wont, and at the same time perhaps they will! It might be 1000 years before time travel is attempted and succeeded and while it isn't in your life time - if the traveler comes to now, it will be - wont it!

6. First the the answer to probability: The odd thing about odds and probability is that there are possible outcomes, and rates of outcomes. Ideally you have a 50/50 chance of landing heads from the flip of a quarter. The problem is, it doesn't always work in a finite state. I've flipped a quarter four times before, and gotten tails four times in a row. Now the odds say that It should be 50/50, but I had 100/0 occurence. How can a universal rule not exist in a specific non universal situation? I mean universal implys all incompassing, so something incompassed - four flips- should be accounted for. I think the real, best answer for this is that of a dimensional paradigm. Any occurrance that can occur, must occur with all others at the same moment in order to balance out universal odds. That is to say, when I flip a coin and I see it land on heads, it too also landed on tails, and the edge. What actually occurs is a dimensional fracture. One continuum branches (kinda like a tree) into several new lines -- each with one of the 3 possible occurances as the bases for that new line.
I read to this and realized you have a horrible grasp on probability, so I stopped.

7. >time travel is not possible

I disagree

>zero gravity is quite unhealthy for you

I have always known that to be true, but I have never known why it is true. Would you please care to explain?

>Age isn't affected by being in space. What you misenterprited is that time is relative to speed, the faster you go, the less time passes relative to some one slower then you. It's not the being in space, its the moving at high speeds--that affects aging, and really it doesnt affect age - it just affects.. time...

I have heard that, taking this account into effect, if we were to go to Jupiter and stay there for awhile, and then come back, much more time would have passed on earth than on jupiter or something like that.

8. [QUOTE=DavidP]>time travel is not possible

I disagree

>zero gravity is quite unhealthy for you

I have always known that to be true, but I have never known why it is true. Would you please care to explain?
[quote]
Bones grow weak. The body builds up defenciencies. I don't know technical medical reasons but I read about it in articles. Try nasa.com - maybe theres better information on it there.
>Age isn't affected by being in space. What you misenterprited is that time is relative to speed, the faster you go, the less time passes relative to some one slower then you. It's not the being in space, its the moving at high speeds--that affects aging, and really it doesnt affect age - it just affects.. time...

I have heard that, taking this account into effect, if we were to go to Jupiter and stay there for awhile, and then come back, much more time would have passed on earth than on jupiter or something like that.
It's very perplexing indeed. I had a hard time wraping my brain around the concept when I was taking my physics class. As far as the jupiter thing goes - I don't have the exact speed of the planets orbit on hand nor do I feel like searching for it. However, I can tell you that two clocks perfectly synchronized at the same spot on earth, if you took one and put it on jupiter and the other remained on earth for an extended period of time - the watches would have different times. But not a lot by what you are imagining. Remeber its porportionate to the speed of light - so you have to move incredibly faster then the object you are relating to to get a measurable time difference.

9. time travel is not possible
Yes it is.

aging can be affected by time spent in outer space
You misunderstand them, but the actual events occurring to individuals who travel to outer space prove that time travel is possible because it is itself time travel. Given it is not in the sense most people think of, but time travel is merely the ability to travel to a different point in time at a different rate than everyone else. If an astronaut travels outward from earth at the fastest speed possible for a few hours then straight back to earth, it may have been a few dozen hours, for example, but everyone on Earth may have lived through several days.

I have imagined the possibilities since I was a young boy and have thought about so many different quite possible ways time travel might be possible. Something to ponder: if you jetted around the earth in circles at the same speed the earth spins then landed at the same point, will you have travelled through time?

10. >Something to ponder: if you jetted around the earth in circles at the same speed the earth spins then landed at the same point, will you have travelled through time?

Are you jetting the same way the earth is rotating or jetting in the opposite direction of the earth's rotation?

If you had a spinning disc with an angular velocity of 5 m/s, and a toy rocket ship flying around the disc with an angular velocity of 10 m/s, the rocket ship is not traveling in time compared to the spinning disc....or at least as far as i know....

[/edit]

11. Originally Posted by LuckY
Something to ponder: if you jetted around the earth in circles at the same speed the earth spins then landed at the same point, will you have travelled through time?
How did you arrive at that conclusion? The earth doesn't travel fast enough for that, unless we're talking an EXTREMELY small scale. If that's the case, then geosynchronous satellites are time machines. Also, we travel through time just by walking, since we are moving faster that the earth is rotating at that point.

12. Flipping a coin is nowhere near 50/50... I read a study somewhere where strobe photography was used to watch coins when they were flipped. A good bit of the time, they never actually flipped once, they just wobbled and looked like they were flipping... Apparently people don't flip well.

Anyways, that's as far as I got with your post.

13. time travel is not possible
and then
Yes it is.
you can't say definitively either way - there are arguments that go for and against but you surely can't be so positive about either answer.

BTW, haven't we discussed this topic before? ... on many occasions?

14. ... ok.. so where to start.

How can a universal rule not exist in a specific non universal situation? I mean universal implys all incompassing, so something incompassed - four flips- should be accounted for.
What exactly do you mean by this?

I think the real, best answer for this is that of a dimensional paradigm. Any occurrance that can occur, must occur with all others at the same moment in order to balance out universal odds. That is to say, when I flip a coin and I see it land on heads, it too also landed on tails, and the edge. What actually occurs is a dimensional fracture. One continuum branches (kinda like a tree) into several new lines -- each with one of the 3 possible occurances as the bases for that new line.
This sounds very much like Everett's multiple world interpretation of quantum mechanics (infact it's identical to De Witt's variation). Which essentially states that every possible out come exists in a meaningfull way (it should be noted that this hypothesis was presented to solve problems in interpreting the meaning of quantum mechanics which is very different from the problem (which i'm not convinced exists) that you are attempting to solve.

Time travel - hmm who knows, i'm skeptical, both Hawking and Penrose don't buy it, and one wonders where all these time travellers are. But hey i really don't know enough about it.

Theories exist, but I don't think it'll be within my lifetime that any of these theories will actually be tested.
That is not necessarily true, Steve Weiner has shown that if non-linearity is present within quantum phenomena some of the different interpretations including the many worlds interpretations can be tested. Certainly there is evidence for the big bang, and several experiments which could in principle rule out or possibly confirm some of the bigger theories within theoretical physics will take place within the next decade, so i would certainly make no claims over what may or maynot occur within say the next 50 years.

I have always known that to be true, but I have never known why it is true. Would you please care to explain?
One reason is osteoperosis (sp?), basically your body forgets it needs bones and starts dissolving them, this can be combatted with centrifgues or chairs that rock you back and forwards but i'm not sure how effective these measures are. I'm sure there are other reasons but i don't know of them. (perhaps celluar replication gets a little screwy?) I do know that the amount of radiation you are exposed to is significantly more than down on Earth so that is a hazard involed with space travel but not directly due to the lack of gravity.

Something to ponder: if you jetted around the earth in circles at the same speed the earth spins then landed at the same point, will you have travelled through time?
No more so than you are travelling in time right now (which in a sense you are).

15. Are you jetting the same way the earth is rotating or jetting in the opposite direction of the earth's rotation?
Think about what happens in any situation. If you travel at 66,000 mph (which is roughly the speed of the earth's rotation) and land where you started, the location of the earth in orbit will be in the same place and the rotation of the earth will be such that the sun hasn't moved an inch from the pov of those on terra firma from the time when you left, yet to you a bit of time did pass, and thus, you travelled back in time.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? The earth doesn't travel fast enough for that, unless we're talking an EXTREMELY small scale. If that's the case, then geosynchronous satellites are time machines. Also, we travel through time just by walking, since we are moving faster that the earth is rotating at that point.
As to how I arrived at that conclusion, read above. The speed of the earth doesn't matter. The point is that the earth will seemingly stand still because, whatever its speed, you travel faster than it. Geosynchronous satellites travel with a fixed point over the earth, they do not outrun it. Do you walk at 66,000 miles per hour? If you did then you might be travelling through time, but however athletic you might be, I doubt you can walk that fast.

you can't say definitively either way - there are arguments that go for and against but you surely can't be so positive about either answer.
I can say definitively. It doesn't matter that there are arguments against, once something has been proven possible arguments stating it's not are meaningless. For proof, look again at the astronaut example. (but I suppose it does depend on your definition of time travel)