Time can dilate- Can it constrict as well?

[OroborosEmber]

When a mass is moving at high enough velocities, time slows down.

Why is only forward slowing motion allowed through spacetime?

I'm no mathematician but I thought Newton's & Einstein's equations were time reversible as a consequence of t^2

Wave functions in quantum mechanics evolve in a reversible deterministic manner unless a measurement alters the behavior irreversible.

So if your spaceship had a invisibility cloak, no measuring devices, you wore a blindfold and somehow mastered a conscious telepathic connection to pilot the ship, could you travel the backwards arrow in time?

If so would this only be measurable by a clock or would our pilot also actually age faster?

[Strange]

28 minutes ago, OroborosEmber said:

When a mass is moving at high enough velocities, time slows down.

Any velocity, actually. 

28 minutes ago, OroborosEmber said:

Why is only forward slowing motion allowed through spacetime?

I don't understand the question. The direction of motion doesn't make any difference to how much time is slowed.

29 minutes ago, OroborosEmber said:

Wave functions in quantum mechanics evolve in a reversible deterministic manner unless a measurement alters the behavior irreversible.

This is irrelevant as relativity is a classical theory. Measurement doesn't;t change the outcomes.

Quote

So if your spaceship had a invisibility cloak, no measuring devices, you wore a blindfold and somehow mastered a conscious telepathic connection to pilot the ship, could you travel the backwards arrow in time?

If so would this only be measurable by a clock or would our pilot also actually age faster?

There is no known method for travelling backwards in time. (If you could, the pilot would get younger rather than age faster.)

[OroborosEmber]

Yeah i worded that poorly, i apologize.

Mostly I want to know about the nature of time. I'm still missing something. It's not a normal dimension. 

When i said move forward i meant in time. Times the only thing you CAN move forward in. Which is real not even forward, its just one way only. Poor word choice. In space any direction is forward, if that's the way your facing.

Thanks for the responses. I got to sleep though. I look forward to going over them later.

[Strange]

1 minute ago, OroborosEmber said:

Mostly I want to know about the nature of time. I'm still missing something. It's not a normal dimension. 

It is a normal dimension in GR (but maybe that depends on what you mean by "normal"). It is just different in some ways from spatial dimensions.

[curious_mind]

so I am also curious about this question, and here is my theory, which is supported by Einstein's special theory of relativity about how the closer an objects velocity is to the speed of light (c=299,792,458ms^-1), the perception of time for that object (relative) to other objects, slows down.

assuming this is true; which evident supports it, muons which using conventional science shows that it should be impossible for them to travel as far as they do with their half life and all that, do it regardless, why not the opposite. I'm not suggesting going back in time, simply constricting it a bit, same as dilating time by speeding up, why not constrict time by slowing down?

so here's my theory: if the closer you get to the speed of light(speeding up), your perception of time slows down, so then if the further you get to the speed of light(slowing down), your perception of time speeds up.

also a fun fact for anyone who enjoys this and doesn't already know, but if an object could travel at the speed of light, in theory, in its own time reference no time would have passed from the moment it started moving at that speed, until it slowed down. so it would be instantaneous for the object, but for outside observers it still takes time. 

sorry if there's mistakes in this, its currently 2:33AM as I'm writing this sentence and I probably need sleep.

 

[Halc]

On 1/24/2018 at 5:54 AM, OroborosEmber said:

When i said move forward i meant in time. Times the only thing you CAN move forward in.

Motion is a change in coordinate spatial location over time. 'Motion through time' isn't really a defined thing. Under a 3D model, a thing evolves in place as time progresses. In a 4D spacetime model, a thing traces a worldline through spacetime and is everywhere present on that line. There is no motion, no progression in such an abstraction.

 

42 minutes ago, curious_mind said:

so I am also curious about this question, and here is my theory, which is supported by Einstein's special theory of relativity about how the closer an objects velocity is to the speed of light (c=299,792,458ms^-1), the perception of time for that object (relative) to other objects, slows down.

42 minutes ago, curious_mind said:

so here's my theory: if the closer you get to the speed of light(speeding up),your perception of time slows down,

Both of these are worded like speed is some kind of absolute property. Remember to word it as "relative to a given frame, the closer an objects velocity is to the speed of light, the coordinate time for that object relative to said frame, slows down". So say relative to the frame of a muon, Earth is moving at near light speed and clocks on Earth run much slower than the clock on the muon. Yes, it has a clock. Note that I also removed the word 'perception' from your sentence since the time dilation is a coordinate effect, an abstract computed thing, not actually perceived by anything anywhere (per the first postulate of SR). Your 'theory' violates this explicitly and contradicts empirical evidence. Perception is always of proper time, not of coordinate time.

 

42 minutes ago, curious_mind said:

assuming this is true; which evident supports it, muons which using conventional science shows that it should be impossible for them to travel as far as they do with their half life and all that, do it regardless, why not the opposite.

Yea, why not the opposite?  Or rather, why do you think not the opposite?  I referenced the muon just above.

 

42 minutes ago, curious_mind said:

I'm not suggesting going back in time, simply constricting it a bit, same as dilating time by speeding up, why not constrict time by slowing down?

Not sure what is meant by this. Proper time (that which clocks measure) is a measure of a time-like interval. It isn't something that slows, not for anybody.
 

42 minutes ago, curious_mind said:

also a fun fact for anyone who enjoys this and doesn't already know, but if an object could travel at the speed of light, in theory, in its own time reference no time would have passed from the moment it started moving at that speed, until it slowed down. so it would be instantaneous for the object, but for outside observers it still takes time. 

This is a popular concept, but is wrong. It essentially says "If [something impossible], I can conclude anything I like" since it's not even wrong, sort of like asking how long Earth's orbit would take to change if the sun suddenly ceased to exist.

 

 

On 1/24/2018 at 3:17 AM, Strange said:

There is no known method for travelling backwards in time. (If you could, the pilot would get younger rather than age faster.)

Actually, I did it just now, and you're right, you get younger.  I have photographic evidence of it. Anyway, I'm back so I could post this.

I do balk at the term 'pilot', which makes it sound like I needed an aircraft or something.

Edited yesterday at 04:35 PM by Halc