|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...c=most_popular
"How to Build a Time Machine. It wouldn't be easy, but it might be possible. By Paul Davies" "For decades, time travel lay beyond the fringe of respectable science. In recent years, however, the topic has become something of a cottage industry among theoretical physicists." "Our best understanding of time comes from Einstein's theories of relativity. Prior to these theories, time was widely regarded as absolute and universal, the same for everyone no matter what their physical circumstances were. In his special theory of relativity, Einstein proposed that the measured interval between two events depends on how the observer is moving. Crucially, two observers who move differently will experience different durations between the same two events." "So travel into the future is a proved fact, even if it has so far been in rather unexciting amounts." "Clocks run a bit faster in the attic than in the basement, which is closer to the center of Earth and therefore deeper down in a gravitational field." "At the surface of a neutron star, gravity is so strong that time is slowed by about 30 percent relative to Earth time. Viewed from such a star, events here would resemble a fast-forwarded video. A black hole represents the ultimate time warp; at the surface of the hole, time stands still relative to Earth." "In science fiction, wormholes are sometimes called stargates; they offer a shortcut between two widely separated points in space. Jump through a hypothetical wormhole, and you might come out moments later on the other side of the galaxy. Wormholes naturally fit into the general theory of relativity, whereby gravity warps not only time but also space." "The wormhole was used as a fictional device by Carl Sagan in his 1985 novel Contact. Prompted by Sagan, Kip S. Thorne and his co-workers at the California Institute of Technology set out to find whether wormholes were consistent with known physics." "Assuming that the engineering problems could be overcome, the production of a time machine could open up a Pandora's box of causal paradoxes. Consider, for example, the time traveler who visits the past and murders his mother when she was a young girl. How do we make sense of this? If the girl dies, she cannot become the time traveler's mother. But if the time traveler was never born, he could not go back and murder his mother." "Suppose the time traveler goes back and rescues a young girl from murder, and this girl grows up to become his mother. The causal loop is now self-consistent and no longer paradoxical." "Consider the time traveler who leaps ahead a year and reads about a new mathematical theorem in a future edition of Scientific American. He notes the details, returns to his own time and teaches the theorem to a student, who then writes it up for Scientific American. The article is, of course, the very one that the time traveler read. The question then arises: Where did the information about the theorem come from?" "The bizarre consequences of time travel have led some scientists to reject the notion outright. Stephen W. Hawking of the University of Cambridge has proposed a "chronology protection conjecture," which would outlaw causal loops. Because the theory of relativity is known to permit causal loops, chronology protection would require some other factor to intercede to prevent travel into the past. What might this factor be? One suggestion is that quantum processes will come to the rescue." "Chronology protection is still just a conjecture, so time travel remains a possibility. A final resolution of the matter may have to await the successful union of quantum mechanics and gravitation, perhaps through a theory such as string theory or its extension, so- called M-theory. It is even conceivable that the next generation of particle accelerators will be able to create subatomic wormholes that survive long enough for nearby particles to execute fleeting causal loops. This would be a far cry from Wells's vision of a time machine, but it would forever change our picture of physical reality." Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
Pentcho Valev wrote: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...c=most_popular "How to Build a Time Machine. It wouldn't be easy, but it might be possible. By Paul Davies" "For decades, time travel lay beyond the fringe of respectable science. In recent years, however, the topic has become something of a cottage industry among theoretical physicists." "Our best understanding of time comes from Einstein's theories of relativity. Prior to these theories, time was widely regarded as absolute and universal, the same for everyone no matter what their physical circumstances were. In his special theory of relativity, Einstein proposed that the measured interval between two events depends on how the observer is moving. Crucially, two observers who move differently will experience different durations between the same two events." "So travel into the future is a proved fact, even if it has so far been in rather unexciting amounts." "Clocks run a bit faster in the attic than in the basement, which is closer to the center of Earth and therefore deeper down in a gravitational field." "At the surface of a neutron star, gravity is so strong that time is slowed by about 30 percent relative to Earth time. Viewed from such a star, events here would resemble a fast-forwarded video. A black hole represents the ultimate time warp; at the surface of the hole, time stands still relative to Earth." "In science fiction, wormholes are sometimes called stargates; they offer a shortcut between two widely separated points in space. Jump through a hypothetical wormhole, and you might come out moments later on the other side of the galaxy. Wormholes naturally fit into the general theory of relativity, whereby gravity warps not only time but also space." "The wormhole was used as a fictional device by Carl Sagan in his 1985 novel Contact. Prompted by Sagan, Kip S. Thorne and his co-workers at the California Institute of Technology set out to find whether wormholes were consistent with known physics." "Assuming that the engineering problems could be overcome, the production of a time machine could open up a Pandora's box of causal paradoxes. Consider, for example, the time traveler who visits the past and murders his mother when she was a young girl. How do we make sense of this? If the girl dies, she cannot become the time traveler's mother. But if the time traveler was never born, he could not go back and murder his mother." "Suppose the time traveler goes back and rescues a young girl from murder, and this girl grows up to become his mother. The causal loop is now self-consistent and no longer paradoxical." "Consider the time traveler who leaps ahead a year and reads about a new mathematical theorem in a future edition of Scientific American. He notes the details, returns to his own time and teaches the theorem to a student, who then writes it up for Scientific American. The article is, of course, the very one that the time traveler read. The question then arises: Where did the information about the theorem come from?" "The bizarre consequences of time travel have led some scientists to reject the notion outright. Stephen W. Hawking of the University of Cambridge has proposed a "chronology protection conjecture," which would outlaw causal loops. Because the theory of relativity is known to permit causal loops, chronology protection would require some other factor to intercede to prevent travel into the past. What might this factor be? One suggestion is that quantum processes will come to the rescue." "Chronology protection is still just a conjecture, so time travel remains a possibility. A final resolution of the matter may have to await the successful union of quantum mechanics and gravitation, perhaps through a theory such as string theory or its extension, so- called M-theory. It is even conceivable that the next generation of particle accelerators will be able to create subatomic wormholes that survive long enough for nearby particles to execute fleeting causal loops. This would be a far cry from Wells's vision of a time machine, but it would forever change our picture of physical reality." http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm Bryan Wallace: "I expect that the scientists of the future will consider the dominant abstract physics theories of our time in much the same light as we now consider the Medieval theories of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or that the Earth stands still and the Universe moves around it." Pentcho Valev |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
Causality can't be broken.
If you were able to leap back in time, you'd find "forces", or events would stop you from being able to break causality. "Things" would just happen around you to stop you. You might try to kill your own grandmother, but... somehow events would change that you were never able to. Perhaps the local sherif would round you up, or perhaps she'd be out that night, or perhaps she'd kill you instead (which wouldn't break causality!!), or another thing would happen. Basiscally, the laws of physics would stop you from breaking causality. The same thing goes for reading something you wrote yourself. Something would stop you. Or perhaps, you'd read it, then get struck on the head and forget it all, setting you back so many years that in fact it takes you LONGER to write the original article than had you not tried cheating causality |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
Pentcho Valev wrote: http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm Bryan Wallace: "I expect that the scientists of the future will consider the dominant abstract physics theories of our time in much the same light as we now consider the Medieval theories of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or that the Earth stands still and the Universe moves around it." Paul Davies is by no means the most talented perpetuator of Einstein idiocies; Tom Roberts (the Albert Einstein of our generation), Steve Carlip and John Baez are even better: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...5cd4c741adeb8? Pentcho Valev |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
oups.com... Pentcho Valev wrote: http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm Bryan Wallace: "I expect that the scientists of the future will consider the dominant abstract physics theories of our time in much the same light as we now consider the Medieval theories of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or that the Earth stands still and the Universe moves around it." Paul Davies is by no means the most talented perpetuator of Einstein idiocies; Tom Roberts (the Albert Einstein of our generation), Steve Carlip and John Baez are even better: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...5cd4c741adeb8? Pentcho Valev Sad case .. you keep posting nonsense and replying to yourself. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
On Jun 1, 12:31 pm, wrote:
Causality can't be broken. If you were able to leap back in time, you'd find "forces", or events would stop you from being able to break causality. "Things" would just happen around you to stop you. You might try to kill your own grandmother, but... somehow events would change that you were never able to. Perhaps the local sherif would round you up, or perhaps she'd be out that night, or perhaps she'd kill you instead (which wouldn't break causality!!), or another thing would happen. Basiscally, the laws of physics would stop you from breaking causality. The problems is that no such laws are known to act that way. One would rather say 'the laws of logic' but this, of course, would not fit. Perhaps it's simpler. If you travel to the past, you can change nothing in it because you have already been in that past doing exactly the same things you will do again. This view poses at least one peculiar difficulty for time travel: your body would simply disappear from the present and would not appear in any past time in which it was nor already. Most important, this alternative does not avoid cicularity in causation although it avoids contradiction. Regards |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
On Jun 1, 3:15 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
[...] Indeed... Ya don't have to be on their staff to see that both "Scientific American" and "Nature" let the circulation department have the last word on what gets in print. For the past 15 years I've been cross checking their articles for accuracy aginst the "Sun" and "Mirror". Except for a few issues surrounding Princess Diana's death the correlation is remarkable! :-) Sue... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
"LauLuna" wrote in message ups.com... : On Jun 1, 12:31 pm, wrote: : Causality can't be broken. : : If you were able to leap back in time, you'd find "forces", or events : would stop you from being able to break causality. : : "Things" would just happen around you to stop you. You might try to : kill your own grandmother, but... somehow events would change that you : were never able to. Perhaps the local sherif would round you up, or : perhaps she'd be out that night, or perhaps she'd kill you instead : (which wouldn't break causality!!), or another thing would happen. : : Basiscally, the laws of physics would stop you from breaking : causality. : : : The problems is that no such laws are known to act that way. : One would : rather say 'the laws of logic' but this, of course, would not fit. : : Perhaps it's simpler. If you travel to the past, you can change : nothing in it because you have already been in that past doing exactly : the same things you will do again. : : This view poses at least one peculiar difficulty for time travel: your : body would simply disappear from the present and would not appear in : any past time in which it was nor already. : : Most important, this alternative does not avoid cicularity in : causation although it avoids contradiction. : : Regards Causality is a law of Nature just as inertia is. Newton's 1st law contain the caveat "unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed thereon" and the forces impressed causes Every body not to persevere in its state of rest, or deviate from its uniform motion in a right line. Causality is the Zeroth law. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
Time travel is nonsensical therefore it is not respectable science.
Respectable science is the ability to deal with observables. The age of reason is being replaced by the age of commonsense. All those left behind, are rightly so. For the most part, most people I speak to still think the world is flat. If you go faster than the speed of light you will exit the solar system faster than light does. Simple. It takes 8 minutes for light to reach the earth from the sun. At the speed of light it takes about 20 minutes to be outside of the solar system. If you place an object faster than the speed of light into orbit around the earth then the force of gravity wont be able keep that object in orbit. That is unless Einsteins aether really exists, in which case you can use a rudder, like on a boat ! LMAO. Your watching too much Superman people. -y |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER?
One scenario.
If the observer succeeded in doing this, he wont be an observer of anything while in motion. The light will compress at the retina. If he slowed down he would be in the same place as he started orbiting around the earth (of which was still orbiting around the sun) and the dates and times would still be the same back home. Light does not create time. Light enables us to see the clock. We don't see anything other than light. Other Scenario. In the case that the object gained extraordinary mass by virtue of its speed, the object would circle into the earth and cause an impact disaster. Other scenario. In the case that the object gained extraordinary mass by virtue of its speed, but was able to maintain its distance from the earths center of mass it would cause permanent and irreversible 'time' damage to earth. All those on Earth may survive this event, but would see day a night in a very different cycle from then on. Why ? Universal law of gravity. The force of gravity of that object would affect the orbit of earth. You could return home and retire as pariah, since most of the survivors will probably lynch you, and cast you in epoxy resin as a monument never to mess with earths orbit. This would be a new 'age' indeed, (not time travel) where everyone else would still remember who you are, including the family who yo left behind for this experiment. I believe this event is mentioned in the bible as the end of times. Maybe then you will take a little guy 'Y' as a more serious warning. 'Oh yeah, that message a placed several distances ago'. -y |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Einstein was an atheist. ACTUALLY EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT | 46erjoe | Misc | 964 | March 10th 07 06:10 AM |
DOOM AND GLOOM FOREVER! | honestjohn | Misc | 38 | June 7th 06 04:40 PM |
Forever Young and Beautiful | [email protected] | CCD Imaging | 0 | February 21st 06 01:58 AM |
New Shuttle Forever Photos | [email protected] | Space Shuttle | 3 | January 10th 05 02:18 PM |