Time travel?

[moonjelly<3]

Okay so my theory on time travel is; when approaching the event horizon of a black hole( if you can even make it that far without whatever space craft your traveling in being stretched to it's absolute limit then being torn apart and swallowed) time seems to slow down untill it eventually almost seems to stop, but in reality, in the event horizon times seems to move at normal speed inside of it.But, on the outside looking in it looks as if your not moving at all. The laws of space time break down at the event horizon breaks down becuase there virtually is none. So, when you got back to earth you'd be in the future because you were basically in a place where time stopped or just didn't really exist, but on Earth, everything was still moving and time did work. I'd really like to hear opinions on this topic!

[Joatmon]

Sorry - please ignore!

Edited March 8, 2012 by Joatmon

[moonjelly<3]

excuse me? is there something wrong, i asked for opinions not stupid comments telling people to ignore my post!

Sorry - please ignore!

[zapatos]

excuse me? is there something wrong, i asked for opinions not stupid comments telling people to ignore my post!

I think he was apologizing for what he had written and asking us to ignore his post, not yours. He took out what he had originally written.

[Joatmon]

excuse me? is there something wrong, i asked for opinions not stupid comments telling people to ignore my post!

Very, very sorry. I entered something in the wrong topic which I deleted. You cannot enter a completely empty post so what I meant was ignore the fact that I had entered nothing. Sorry again - I definitely did not mean ignore you or your topic.

 

 

 

[moonjelly<3]

Ohhhh, it's totally fine!

[md65536]

Okay so my theory on time travel is; when approaching the event horizon of a black hole( if you can even make it that far without whatever space craft your traveling in being stretched to it's absolute limit then being torn apart and swallowed) time seems to slow down untill it eventually almost seems to stop, but in reality, in the event horizon times seems to move at normal speed inside of it.But, on the outside looking in it looks as if your not moving at all. The laws of space time break down at the event horizon breaks down becuase there virtually is none. So, when you got back to earth you'd be in the future because you were basically in a place where time stopped or just didn't really exist, but on Earth, everything was still moving and time did work. I'd really like to hear opinions on this topic!

 

Sounds okay to me. But I am an idiot!

 

"You'd be in the future" doesn't quite make sense but I think you mean that Earth's clocks will have advanced some huge amount relative to yours. You age normally; Earth ages extremely quickly.*

 

I think this is correct because from Earth, if we saw you get near a black hole we'd see your clocks slow down. So suppose we spent a century watching your clock age a day, and then you were able to return to Earth. Neglecting travel time (including related special relativistic effects), you'd have experienced ageing a day while Earth aged a century.

 

You're correct in that if you remain wholly inside a local frame of reference (not spaghettified where some parts of you will age differently than others) then you experience local time passing at a "normal" rate. ---I doubt this is possible with an extreme example like this.

 

 

* Actually I don't know where you'd measure Earth's advanced ageing. If you were receiving timing signals from Earth the whole time, would you receive them in rapid succession while hanging out near the black hole? Or would Earth appear to age rapidly as you escaped the black hole?

Edited March 8, 2012 by md65536

[moonjelly<3]

Again, assuming you can make it into the event horizon wihtout being mutilated and swallowed, I believe that you would recieve them in a rapid succesion. But to be honest, I doubt that it's even possible to be able to recieve a signal. The reason for this is that the gravity is so great it swallows evrything including light! So you probably wouldn't be able to see it especially because you would be in a place of clouded gases and things so you wouldn't be able to really see anything anyway becuase it be like your in a fog.

[Airbrush]

Okay so my theory on time travel is; when approaching the event horizon of a black hole( if you can even make it that far without whatever space craft your traveling in being stretched to it's absolute limit then being torn apart and swallowed) time seems to slow down untill it eventually almost seems to stop, but in reality, in the event horizon times seems to move at normal speed inside of it.But, on the outside looking in it looks as if your not moving at all. The laws of space time break down at the event horizon breaks down becuase there virtually is none. So, when you got back to earth you'd be in the future because you were basically in a place where time stopped or just didn't really exist, but on Earth, everything was still moving and time did work. I'd really like to hear opinions on this topic!

 

You can approach the black hole if you are going very, very fast, orbiting a safe distance outside the event horizon, and your clock will slow down. You cannot go inside the event horizon and then return to Earth.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Airbrush

[moonjelly<3]

I guess that makes sense becuase of the gravity is so intense you cant just turn around and fight your way out of it. I hate black holes becuase the laws of physics break down. But I also love them becuase again, they dont follow the rules

[IM Egdall]

Okay so my theory on time travel is; when approaching the event horizon of a black hole( if you can even make it that far without whatever space craft your traveling in being stretched to it's absolute limit then being torn apart and swallowed) time seems to slow down untill it eventually almost seems to stop, but in reality, in the event horizon times seems to move at normal speed inside of it.But, on the outside looking in it looks as if your not moving at all. The laws of space time break down at the event horizon breaks down becuase there virtually is none. So, when you got back to earth you'd be in the future because you were basically in a place where time stopped or just didn't really exist, but on Earth, everything was still moving and time did work. I'd really like to hear opinions on this topic!

 

A similar kind of time travel happens whenever you change altitude here on Earth. Per general relativity, time runs slower on the surface of the Earth than it does on the top of a mountain (by a very small amount). So if you live at sea-level, when you go to the top of that mountain you arrive there a little bit into the future.

[emilievak]

We are often traveling in time. Present is only a motion from past to future.

No serious theory describes a possible time travel and it only science fiction.

You should try this:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/dw

[michel123456]

We are often traveling in time. Present is only a motion from past to future.No serious theory describes a possible time travel and it only science fiction.

You should try this:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/dw

 

Bolded mine.

Yes, I thought it was evidence.

But some other people told me it is not at all comparable to motion, that objects "persist" in time, with backup the whole scientific community as it seems.

I really 'd like to know why on one hand it is commonly accepted as a language figure that we are continuously "traveling in time" from the past to the future, and on the other hand when it comes to put this "travel" into diagrams one encounters such a resistance.

[JohnStu]

Okay so my theory on time travel is; when approaching the event horizon of a black hole( if you can even make it that far without whatever space craft your traveling in being stretched to it's absolute limit then being torn apart and swallowed) time seems to slow down untill it eventually almost seems to stop, but in reality, in the event horizon times seems to move at normal speed inside of it.But, on the outside looking in it looks as if your not moving at all. The laws of space time break down at the event horizon breaks down becuase there virtually is none. So, when you got back to earth you'd be in the future because you were basically in a place where time stopped or just didn't really exist, but on Earth, everything was still moving and time did work. I'd really like to hear opinions on this topic!

 

No one will be able to look and see outside once inside a blackhole because eye balls won't exist by then.

[MigL]

JohnStu, most of your posts make no sense and violate many physical laws, this one being a perfect example.

 

Upon crossing a large black hole's event horizon nothing much will happen. You will be subjected to tidal forces which won't rip you apart for some time/distance ( depending on the size of the black hole ). Your eyes will be fine for the limited time/distance until you are torn apart to view the outside universe age billions and billions of years ( possibly tothe end of time ).

[Airbrush]

JohnStu, most of your posts make no sense and violate many physical laws, this one being a perfect example.

 

Upon crossing a large black hole's event horizon nothing much will happen. You will be subjected to tidal forces which won't rip you apart for some time/distance ( depending on the size of the black hole ). Your eyes will be fine for the limited time/distance until you are torn apart to view the outside universe age billions and billions of years ( possibly tothe end of time ).

 

An episode of The Universe stated that upon crossing the event horizon for a supermassive black hole, you would survive until you got close to the center (which seems to me will take less than a microsecond) then you would be killed. Only a stellar black hole spaghettifies. Anyone remember that episode?

[Temporocitor]

Okay so my theory on time travel is; when approaching the event horizon of a black hole( if you can even make it that far without whatever space craft your traveling in being stretched to it's absolute limit then being torn apart and swallowed) time seems to slow down untill it eventually almost seems to stop, but in reality, in the event horizon times seems to move at normal speed inside of it.But, on the outside looking in it looks as if your not moving at all. The laws of space time break down at the event horizon breaks down becuase there virtually is none. So, when you got back to earth you'd be in the future because you were basically in a place where time stopped or just didn't really exist, but on Earth, everything was still moving and time did work. I'd really like to hear opinions on this topic!

 

Is that Smucker's Moon Jelly or Kroger Cost Cutter? (Sorry... couldn't resist... )

 

What would you think about creating then adding controlled amounts of mass to a micro-black hole? Some of us have this crazy notion that one can be created within the right magnetic conditions with very little energy. I would believe, though, in your example time would be in a gradient magnitude, thus you would not be limited to say "in and out," but within a range. If we imagine an arc and its chord as a trajectory to simply cross over the event horizon, the arc would descend into the black hole along with any space attached to it. If we take a straight course along the chord, our space will be younger than the space emerging from the arc, thus the chord space is in the future of that space relative to the arc

[JohnStu]

JohnStu, most of your posts make no sense and violate many physical laws, this one being a perfect example.

 

Upon crossing a large black hole's event horizon nothing much will happen. You will be subjected to tidal forces which won't rip you apart for some time/distance ( depending on the size of the black hole ). Your eyes will be fine for the limited time/distance until you are torn apart to view the outside universe age billions and billions of years ( possibly tothe end of time ).

 

What laws did I violate? The law of unproven hypothesis by Stephen Hawking or something?

[Airbrush]

What laws did I violate? The law of unproven hypothesis by Stephen Hawking or something?

 

Even though you may survive crossing the event horizon for a supermassive black hole, you will get accelerated to near light speed in a tiny instant moving towards the singularity, which will make it very hard to see anything. Our brains don't work that fast.

Edited April 9, 2012 by Airbrush

[A Tripolation]

* Actually I don't know where you'd measure Earth's advanced ageing. If you were receiving timing signals from Earth the whole time, would you receive them in rapid succession while hanging out near the black hole? Or would Earth appear to age rapidly as you escaped the black hole?

 

I can't quite remember what I read in my textbook, but I think it was to the effect that if light pulses were used to communicate Earth-to-ship (like one pulse a year), but many of the pulses would "disappear" to reflect your locality.

 

And the Earth would age rapidly while you were in the gravitational field of the black hole. Time would appear to pass by normally for you.

[MigL]

Black holes don't behave any different than any other gravitating mass.

For our purposes Newton's gravity will suffice, and that's what you violated JohnStu.

 

From the moment you are released into free fall near a black hole you will experience an acceleration dependant on your distance from the centre of the black hole and the mass/energy of the black hole, just like any other gravitating body.

The event horizon is a mathematical construct and you don't instantly accelerate to the speed of light upon crossing it. As a matter of fact you continue at a constant acceleration, just like when you free fall on the earth. You would still never reach light speed Airbrush as the energy for your acceleration is supplied by the black hole and would need to be infinite and I don't think that would be possible as the infinite hole would swallow the universe. The point being that all physical laws still apply well into the event horizon and only totally break down at the possible singularity.

 

For a small black hole the (possible) singularity is reached too quickly for any appreciable speed to be acheived. For a large black hole where the distance to the (possible) singularity is much greater, the acceleration is much more leisurely as the differential gravity ( tidal force ) is much less.

Edited April 10, 2012 by MigL

[Airbrush]

MigL, I asked this question on a different topic. If we discovered a mini black hole with the mass of the Earth, it would be the size of a walnut. How close could we get to it with our current technology? We could orbit it safely from a distance comparable to the distance of the space station from Earth's center. But how close could we safely orbit this mini black hole?

 

The closer you get to it, the faster your orbital speed needs to be to not fall into it. My guess is that we could not get much closer than 4 thousand miles from it.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Airbrush

[Temporocitor]

Why do we necessarily need to restrict our comparisons to a naturally occurring black hole? As Airbrush pointed out, although in analogous terms, energy increases as we approach zero radius. This is synonomous to energy in a vortex as simple as 2 planes, upper and lower, where velocity = energy/PIr^2. At zero radius, energy will equal infinity, thus velocity also will equal infinity.

 

Where the topic query comes in, we might actually be able to endure the entire journey through the singularity because the forces are still in equilibrium between the central velocity and the energy required to maintain the black hole as an open entity. A singularity is merely arbitrary, because at zero radius, the mass would become infinite and thus engulf the entire mass of the universe. To compare, once again, to the fluid vortex, we would factor in the volume of fluid, say a flask with a magnetic stirrer versus the drain in a swimming pool.

[MigL]

Sorry Airbrush, I'm at work and can't do the calculation but it should be simple enough to google an formula which would give required orbital speed at given distances.

 

Temprocitor I don't understand your reasoning for the mass becoming infinite at zero radius ?

 

 

[Temporocitor]

Sorry Airbrush, I'm at work and can't do the calculation but it should be simple enough to google an formula which would give required orbital speed at given distances.

 

Temprocitor I don't understand your reasoning for the mass becoming infinite at zero radius ?

 

 

 

 

If energy increases as we approach 0 then, per energy-mass equivocation, mass follows.