Post number #261409, ID: 89b8b1
|
is some point that a human can go through time from time to time?
Post number #261436, ID: d32956
|
into the future yes. into the past, probably not.
Post number #261517, ID: 17b99a
|
>>261436 Into the future, how yes?
Post number #261534, ID: 4a6b9d
|
Cryogenic sleep probably? Not technically travelling through time though. Just a thought.
Post number #261549, ID: 80a1e6
|
If you build a spaceship wich travels the speed of light, time will go slower inside the ship than everywhere else. This makes it possible to travel decades into the future spending only a few years in the ship
Post number #261550, ID: 80a1e6
|
Even when youre in a car youre traveling to the future but the difference is so small that its unnoticeable
Post number #261554, ID: 80a1e6
|
And thats because its a law of nature to never pass the speed of light wich is the ultimate maximum speed. So time is slowed down
Post number #261557, ID: 80a1e6
|
I guess when time is slowed down that gives the illusion of going faster than light?
Post number #261562, ID: 80a1e6
|
Its technically possible to go to the past/alter the past if you create a parallel universe in the progress, just like in re:zero and steinsgate. Ofcourse no-one knows how and if thats possible
Post number #261563, ID: 80a1e6
|
But when time traveling is used in the same universe in tv shows and other media.... its just... horribly frustrating to watch
Post number #261567, ID: 4f8960
|
>>261549 This would have been easy if the ship were massless, and you can't have a massless ship. Only massless particles can ever get to that speed — anything with mass require infinite energy to get to light speed.
Post number #261577, ID: 4f8960
|
Time is slowed down because of your acceleration. To light, you are nothing. If you are moving at the same speed, 'when' becomes 'whenever' — and to observers looking at you, well, you're nothing either.
Relativity dictates this. To someone moving, those unmoving, or at a slower speed, appears to be static — but if you were the one unmoving, you'll see them.. well, moving. This is greatly exaggerated at light speed, where everything is static, in light's PoV.
Post number #261579, ID: 4f8960
|
>>261562 We're relying on eye-ball proof of the multiverse theory, and we're also assuming a lot of things here. Plus 'creating universe' sounds like a task virtually impossible to do — but hey, I'm not a multidimensional deity with the ability to poop out universes. What do I know?
Post number #261580, ID: 4f8960
|
You want to go to the future? Just sit. You are already moving at a speed to crawl to the future. We're all time-travelers.
Post number #261584, ID: 80a1e6
|
>>261567 oh.. sorry, im not so knowledged of this things ^^"
Post number #261586, ID: c20b19
|
>>261567>>261584 Technically it would be possible in the future, you don't need to hit the speed of light, just get close enough. It's more than likely if we can get a full fledged spaceship we could get it to go 2x10^8 which would be good enough.
theoretically we could also travel trough a 4th dimension (if there is one) to take a short cut. Nothing to do with time travel but still an interesting idea.
watch this; https://youtu.be/N0WjV6MmCyM and some VR 4th dimension videos and you will kinda get what I mean.
Post number #261603, ID: 4f8960
|
>>261592 That 'dimension' is usually time, but some misty-wooby people would call me out and say it isn't.
>>261586 Nothing in my post indicates the idea is impossible for near-light speed. Energy requirement becomes exacerbated the closer you are to light speed — and in light speed, you are basically facing an infinite amount of energy requirement, thanks to those mass you, and the ship, would have.
Post number #261605, ID: d32956
|
>>261603 oh shit waddup you must be watching rick and morty.
You know what I mean big brain wojak.
Post number #261606, ID: 4f8960
|
>>261586 To accelerate a mass as massive as a ship to 0.1% the speed of light, you need a lot of energy. I'm talking about hundred of terawatts of energy. It's not that it's impossible, no, no — it's just the number doesn't line up for a foreseeable future.
You can be optimistic, but sometimes having a rain check does help.
Post number #261612, ID: 4f8960
|
>>261605 That's constructive, and surely adds to the conversation we're having. I hope your post made you giggle, and thus you doesn't need to contemplate the very fact that not all conversation needs to devolve to a meme slap.
Post number #261643, ID: d32956
|
>>261612 you must be fun at partys
Post number #262229, ID: 42e105
|
>>261606 I mean it's not gonna happen in my lifetime but it's bound to happen in 10,000 years time
Post number #262352, ID: cb6389
|
It should be possible to travel time since time is not linear. But to travel time you would have to give up your physical form, so, no, no human can ever travel time, as if they do, they stop being human.
Post number #262355, ID: cb6389
|
>>261549>>261586 Well, you don't really need speed to slow down time, you need gravitational force, like a black hole. Make a ship orbit around a black hole, close enough to be able to escape, and that ship will perceive time to be slower. Funny thing is, if you throw an apple into a black hole, that apple will not reach the core of the thing within your lifetime.
Total number of posts: 25,
last modified on:
Fri Jan 1 00:00:00 1524963993
| is some point that a human can go through time from time to time?