time machine is it possible?

[Myuncle]

Myuncle that means everyone inside the ship will become literally slow? The biological aging even the brain's response is delayed? It's very hard to imagine it that way.

 

Yes, that's what I understand, you would think slower, be happy slower, and be sad slower. Imagine also hibernation, you are not travelling in the future, but just postponing things. By the way, I wonder if hibernation would become possible when travelling near the speed of light.

[Delbert]

 

By the way, I wonder if hibernation would become possible when travelling near the speed of light.

There is no such thing as absolute speed, only relative speed.

 

Just ask yourself: what speed am I doing right now? I suggest you could come up with anything from zero to a cat's whisker from the speed of light - or possibly the speed of light! So you have your answer.

 

Clark Maxwell's equations are based on physics, and nothing to do with what we might call absolute speed. There is nothing in Maxwell's equations that takes into consideration what speed you might be doing already. So whatever you do the speed of light will be the same for you - whether you say you're travelling near the speed of light or not. So, to say travelling near the speed of light - or even at the speed of light - is an irrelevance in terms of your physiology.

Edited August 20, 2013 by Delbert

[NATO]

We are moving around on a planet that is moving, in a moving belt, part of many spiral belts, in a moving galaxy, moving through empty space, in a soup of other moving galaxy's.

 

How can you measure absolute speed if nothing in the universe is standing still to use as a point of reference?

 

I think if we could ever pin point the exact location the "Big Bang" erupted from, it would be a logical point to base absolute velocity. Since the point of detonation isn't a physical object, it doesn't move. The trick is how to you rewind the clock, and put Humpty Dumpty back together to find where it all began.

 

How do you locate the point of origin?

[PureGenius]

Time is the motion of energy measured by a clock a tick and a tock measured by human biological duration . If one enters a black hole time flows in jumps of 10 Xs the speed of light 100Xs the speed of light, 1000 Xs the speed of light , these are the internal operating speeds of a black hole . Also this rotational time differential is reversed midpoint in the plasma tunnel so one would experience deceleration then a return to the aforesaid 10 to 1000Xs velocity. I postulate that the lowest speed inside a black white hole is exactly 186,000 miles per second and the fastest speed is 1000 Xs the speed of light.

[ajb]

Also Ajb I don't think any exotic matter is needed to create a time machine just a perfectly balanced number of variables controlled with precision.

They are needed to support wormholes and create warp drives and similar things. It maybe possible to create other kinds of time machine without these.

[PureGenius]

So your referring to anti matter and dark matter I'm not aware of the wormhole correlation I'll have to do some research thanks Ajb . Also yes I think it would cost around 100000 dollars to build a time machine one or two acres to operate it safely. The key is creating an electromagnetic black or white hole, this nullifies the danger of dooming our solar system to being lunch for an uncontrollable space time vortex.

[ajb]

So your referring to anti matter and dark matter...

Exotic matter is matter with negative mass, it is needed to create negative energy densities that can support things like worm holes.

Edited August 21, 2013 by ajb

[PureGenius]

Ajb do you think it's possible to create a machine that could create the physical affects of traveling at the speed of light without having to accelerate . I used to speculate along those lines and found it to be fruitless . Is the term electromagnetic black hole not in use is this what you call a wormhole ? From what I've discerned there is a combination of factors that create electromagnetic black or white holes these are completely invisible to the naked eye except for if the observer is parallel to the opening, then the time differential coordinates will be visible to the observer, I.e. the other side of the electromagnetic black hole white hole complex. the crossover point would not even be physically noticeable except for possible temperature variance between time space coordinates.

Edited August 21, 2013 by PureGenius

[ajb]

Ajb do you think it's possible to create a machine that could create the physical affects of traveling at the speed of light without having to accelerate.

Warp drives would be a bit like this. You compact and stretch the space-time around you meaning that you can have faster than light speed motion, while still having locally your velocity always less than the speed of light.

 

Is the term electromagnetic black hole not in use is this what you call a wormhole ?

Black holes can have electromagnetic fields and if I remember you have to take care of all the boundary conditions here. I don't recall all the details here.

[bradpitz]

@ajb do exotic matters exist if yes where can we possibly find them?

[ajb]

@ajb do exotic matters exist if yes where can we possibly find them?

None has been found.

 

But be aware that at the quantum level negative energy densities are common. It is said that finding classical field theories that violate the energy conditions of GR is difficult, finding quantum field theories that that do not violate the energy conditions is just about impossible!

[Delbert]

How can you measure absolute speed if nothing in the universe is standing still to use as a point of reference?

There is no such thing as an inertial observer. And no such thing as absolute speed.

 

You cannot travel at the speed of light no matter at what rate and for how long you accelerate. For you the speed of light will still be the speed of light for you wherever you are and at whatever 'speed' you think you are doing. Like trying to locate the end of a rainbow, mayhap.

 

The problem seems to be in trying to analyse the universe using Classical Physics. The universe doesn't conform to Classical Physics.

 

It seems to me that if for some reason the universe really did conform to Classical Physics with inertial observers and absolute speeds, like one really could 'catch up' and travel with a beam of light, we really would have a very difficult - nay, impossible - job in explaining anything about the universe.

I think if we could ever pin point the exact location the "Big Bang" erupted from, it would be a logical point to base absolute velocity. Since the point of detonation isn't a physical object, it doesn't move. The trick is how to you rewind the clock, and put Humpty Dumpty back together to find where it all began.

 

How do you locate the point of origin?

Point relative to what?

 

There's no point somewhere in the vast out-there where the universe started, like (say) the the location of an explosion. Time and space didn't exist before the big bang. It seems to me humankind has got a bit of a hang-up over reality and Classical Physics. Classical Physics do not apply to the universe.

 

If you or me set off towards a black hole (think I've mentioned this elsewhere) whilst flashing a torch (say every second) back to those on Earth; and at the same time they similarly flashed a torch to us, we would see the frequency of their flashes increase as we neared the black hole. Whereas those on Earth would see the gap between our flashes get ever longer. In other words we would see Earth (and the rest of the universe) speeding up, but those back on Earth would see us slowing down. In other words wherever we are in the universe we'd feel normal, it would be the other party that was wrong. And vice versa.

 

Or to put it another way, travelling towards the black hole we would travel into the future. And I think it can even be argued that should we get as far as approaching close to the event horizon (ignoring the crushing and stretching) we would approach far enough into the future to the end (end as in death) of the universe.

Edited August 21, 2013 by Delbert

[swansont]

Ajb is right that is not time travel but a form of time modification

To have actual time travel one must create a electromagnetic black hole these can be caused by extreme weather.The variables are nothing more than the combination of several electrical factors I.e. ionization and vortex rotation due to wind factors.Also I think time travel will be possible soon if anyone takes me seriously . Ajb has already had an offer to help me with the math but declined . The persons on earth age as we do now ie 80 year average life span .The individuals on the ship will have aged 20 years, those on earth one hundred years. So time flow affects aging there is no doubt. So if the pilot was 20 when he left he would be 40 when he returned if he had a twin brother his age would be 120 .So yes the clock on the ship ticks slower but only when observed from earth.

 

!

Moderator Note

Non-mainstream speculation is not appropriate for this discussion.

[bradpitz]

@Delbert sir I've been hearing a lot of this big bang theory I thought it was only applicable to our solar system but you were talking about the universe .if anything is non of existence even space and time then what causes the big bang and where did that huge energy come from?

[zapatos]

Yes, that's what I understand, you would think slower, be happy slower, and be sad slower. Imagine also hibernation, you are not travelling in the future, but just postponing things. By the way, I wonder if hibernation would become possible when travelling near the speed of light.

Remember that you are only moving slower relative to a specific reference point, such as the earth if that is where you began your high speed journey. But relative to something else you may have no apparent change at all, for example from a spacecraft that is traveling along side you.

 

If hibernation becomes possible when traveling near light speed, you can test it out right now, because you are right now traveling near light speed relative to something.

 

 

I think if we could ever pin point the exact location the "Big Bang" erupted from, it would be a logical point to base absolute velocity. Since the point of detonation isn't a physical object, it doesn't move. The trick is how to you rewind the clock, and put Humpty Dumpty back together to find where it all began.

 

How do you locate the point of origin?

As it turns out, you are at the point of origin right now. The Big Bang began everywhere at once. Therefore where you are now, and everywhere else that exists, is at the point of origin.

[Delbert]

@Delbert sir I've been hearing a lot of this big bang theory I thought it was only applicable to our solar system but you were talking about the universe .if anything is non of existence even space and time then what causes the big bang and where did that huge energy come from?

I don't think I said I was an advocate of the big bang. It's a conclusion from observation (microwave background and all that). But like all science it is possibly subject to modification with future findings.

 

As for energy, I understand the total energy of the universe ads up to zero. I think we need to remember that we can't see the universe as it is today, all we can see is the past. I for one find it something difficult to get my head around. Like doubtless some of the distant stars we see in the night have perhaps exceeded their sell buy date and no longer there. So what would I see should I undertake a journey to one (forgetting I'd die on the journey!)? I'll stop there because it's doubtless off subject.

 

As for the subject, we are travelling though time all the time. And we can alter that rate by being in a different place. Like the space station for example, whereby I understand time runs a tad faster. Apparently, if I stand on a ladder I'm ageing faster because I've moved into a slightly lower gravitational field. Even my head is ageing faster than my feet! Or if I go for a ride on my bike I'm ageing slower than someone who isn't.

 

I suppose it all depends on how much time travel you want. Although going backwards in time I understand is a bit more difficult.

If hibernation becomes possible when traveling near light speed, you can test it out right now, because you are right now traveling near light speed relative to something.

That's right. And light is still travelling at light speed for us!

[Ihcisphysicist]

Physically travelling to time is not possible but time, future, past and present could be viewed on an advanced particle code breaking computer.

Physically travelling to time is not possible but time, future, past and present could be viewed on an advanced particle code breaking computer.

Physically travelling to past and future is not possible but time, past , present and future could be viewed through an advance particle code breaking computer.

[Deidre]

Theoretically, wormholes could serve as "bridges" into time travel but I don't think humans will ever be able to successfully travel through one because of the risk of making it through one alive. Even if we advanced considerably with technology, the dangers of wormholes are incredible.

 

 

Time and electricity are connected if you generate a black hole , then the size has to be modified to attain the correct variable then, the electrical conditions must be regulated to an exact degree. At this point a time window will open, step through at your own discretion.

 

That's a lot of speculation!

Even if one could create this scenario, black holes are dangerous!

I don't mind having "what if" discussions, but you can't pretend the basic properties and laws of science don't exist.

Edited September 7, 2013 by Deidre

[Cryptonix]

Its possible to travel in time but only forward.

[Deidre]

Its possible to travel in time but only forward.

yes, and only theoretically.

[swansont]

yes, and only theoretically.

No, we really are moving forward at one second per second.

[ajb]

No, we really are moving forward at one second per second.

Methinks that not everyone on the forum will agree with you (LOL)

[swansont]

Methinks that not everyone on the forum will agree with you (LOL)

Quite true, but we're in the physics section, rather than philosophy or speculations.

[balarao]

a concept of parallel universes and mutiverses could be useful in this concept

[Sensei]

If time travel would be possible within single Universe, we could travel to our past, then our atoms would be in two places at the same time. Then we and our own copy could enter time machine again, and travel again to our past, and there would be 4 "clones" of our atom, etc. etc. Repeat it infinite number of time, and Universe mass and energy would go to infinity.. It would violate the all known conservations of energy, mass, momentum, baryon and leptons..

Please note that atoms used for our body now, exist in nature all the time, they are in air, ground, other animals, or even Sun, or other stars, at any time (f.e. some proton 1 milion years ago was emitted by star, traveled through whole galaxy, and ended up on Earth, then joined with some O-H ion forming H2O, and ended up in our body that started traveling in time), so we don't need literally meet our own clone. Our atoms during time travel to past might be anywhere in the planet or anywhere in galaxy/Universe at that time.

 

If time travel would be possible in multi-universe, one Universe would be loosing energy-mass, and other Universe would be increasing its energy-mass.

It would violate conservations as well. Matter would disappear and appear from nowhere in space from point of view of single Universe.