|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Time travel into the future
On Jul 16, 1:25 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
dkomo wrote: Wouldn't it be fun to journey ahead 4,000,000 years and see what becomes of the earth and the human race? Actually, it is possible to do this without violating the laws of physics. What one needs is what is known as a "relativistic rocket". This is a ship that can accelerate at a constant one g indefinitely. Such a ship will reach 0.9 times the speed of light in about 0.9 years. As it gets closer and closer and closer to the speed of light, time on board the ship, known as "proper time", slows drastically relative to the outside world. The details of such a journey are given he The Relativistic Rocket http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...SR/rocket.html As seen on the above page, such a ship could journey to the Andromeda galaxy and return, a total distance of 4,000,000 light years, in only 56 years of shipboard time, which is within a single human lifetime. Once it has gotten back to earth, 4,000,000 years will have passed. Are you ignoring the extemely low probability of surviving such a trip? Oops, sorry you got vaporized! There was a little grain of sand along your path... came at you close (very close) to the speed of light, so it was like a mountain hitting and vaporizing you... oh well nice try. And what about situation if your "imagined ship" travels so far into the future that God have not yet created that part of the Universe ready ??? Maybe some impossibilities follows ? This question is due one strange old memory picture of mine: I have one poor memory picture about those old H-M's drawings that I asked long time ago about existence of the future of the Universe and I remember poorly that H-M explained then that "future exists half". I don't understand clearly what that could mean ? I remember that I wrote in the net about this long time ago but unfortunately it is impossible to find this for me now [I checked that at least it was not mentioned in those three summaries readme.all, readme.mid, readme.see (ascii-texts, really type *.txt files, these were in my computer) which can be read by DOS-command edit.] Hannu |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Time travel into the future
On Jul 18, 9:40 pm, Hannu Poropudas wrote:
On Jul 16, 1:25 am, Sam Wormley wrote: dkomo wrote: Wouldn't it be fun to journey ahead 4,000,000 years and see what becomes of the earth and the human race? Actually, it is possible to do this without violating the laws of physics. What one needs is what is known as a "relativistic rocket". This is a ship that can accelerate at a constant one g indefinitely. Such a ship will reach 0.9 times the speed of light in about 0.9 years. As it gets closer and closer and closer to the speed of light, time on board the ship, known as "proper time", slows drastically relative to the outside world. The details of such a journey are given he The Relativistic Rocket http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...SR/rocket.html As seen on the above page, such a ship could journey to the Andromeda galaxy and return, a total distance of 4,000,000 light years, in only 56 years of shipboard time, which is within a single human lifetime. Once it has gotten back to earth, 4,000,000 years will have passed. Are you ignoring the extemely low probability of surviving such a trip? Oops, sorry you got vaporized! There was a little grain of sand along your path... came at you close (very close) to the speed of light, so it was like a mountain hitting and vaporizing you... oh well nice try. And what about situation if your "imagined ship" travels so far into the future that God have not yet created that part of the Universe ready ??? Maybe some impossibilities follows ? This question is due one strange old memory picture of mine: I have one poor memory picture about those old H-M's drawings that I asked long time ago about existence of the future of the Universe and I remember poorly that H-M explained then that "future exists half". I remember one other strange matter about those old H-M's drawings which could be related to this (I'am uncertain is it related to this): "One half of 'radiation periphery' is born during the 'year' of the 'small companion planet' of the 'great neutrino star' in center of the space and one half of 'radiation periphery' borns during the next 'planet's year'." So radiation peripheries are continuously born from this 'central structure' of the space. I think that no proper model of the Universe cannot be created if this 'central structure of the space' is not taken into account !!! I remember that I have mentioned this in some of my old writings. I remember also that time flows differently on the planet when comparing to our time flow here on the Earth (this and how slow time flows is also mentioned in some of my old writing, unfortunately I don't remember surely the value: Is it half an hour flow of time on the planet when it is an hour flow of time here on the Earth ?). I don't still clearly understand what these could mean due it is so difficult to me to imagine these old time explanations of H-M ? Hannu I don't understand clearly what that could mean ? I remember that I wrote in the net about this long time ago but unfortunately it is impossible to find this for me now [I checked that at least it was not mentioned in those three summaries readme.all, readme.mid, readme.see (ascii-texts, really type *.txt files, these were in my computer) which can be read by DOS-command edit.] Hannu |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Time travel into the future
Dear Hannu Poropudas:
On Jul 18, 11:40 am, Hannu Poropudas wrote: On Jul 16, 1:25 am, Sam Wormley wrote: dkomo wrote: Wouldn't it be fun to journey ahead 4,000,000 years and see what becomes of the earth and the human race? Actually, it is possible to do this without violating the laws of physics. What one needs is what is known as a "relativistic rocket". .... Are you ignoring the extemely low probability of surviving such a trip? Oops, sorry you got vaporized! There was a little grain of sand along your path... came at you close (very close) to the speed of light, so it was like a mountain hitting and vaporizing you... oh well nice try. And what about situation if your "imagined ship" travels so far into the future that God have not yet created that part of the Universe ready ??? Then you could not enter it, since you are the stuff of the Universe. Maybe some impossibilities follows ? With your first sentence, yes. This question is due one strange old memory picture of mine: I have one poor memory picture about those old H-M's drawings that I asked long time ago about existence of the future of the Universe and I remember poorly that H-M explained then that "future exists half". I don't understand clearly what that could mean ? Good question. What did it mean to you at the time? I remember that I wrote in the net about this long time ago but unfortunately it is impossible to find this for me now [I checked that at least it was not mentioned in those three summaries readme.all, readme.mid, readme.see (ascii-texts, really type *.txt files, these were in my computer) which can be read by DOS- command edit.] I suspect that "The Langoliers" was derived from such a flight of fancy as yours. David A. Smith |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Time travel into the future
On Jul 19, 5:56 pm, dlzc wrote:
Dear Hannu Poropudas: On Jul 18, 11:40 am, Hannu Poropudas wrote: On Jul 16, 1:25 am, Sam Wormley wrote: dkomo wrote: Wouldn't it be fun to journey ahead 4,000,000 years and see what becomes of the earth and the human race? Actually, it is possible to do this without violating the laws of physics. What one needs is what is known as a "relativistic rocket". ... Are you ignoring the extemely low probability of surviving such a trip? Oops, sorry you got vaporized! There was a little grain of sand along your path... came at you close (very close) to the speed of light, so it was like a mountain hitting and vaporizing you... oh well nice try. And what about situation if your "imagined ship" travels so far into the future that God have not yet created that part of the Universe ready ??? Then you could not enter it, since you are the stuff of the Universe. Maybe some impossibilities follows ? With your first sentence, yes. This question is due one strange old memory picture of mine: I have one poor memory picture about those old H-M's drawings that I asked long time ago about existence of the future of the Universe and I remember poorly that H-M explained then that "future exists half". I don't understand clearly what that could mean ? Good question. What did it mean to you at the time? In the net there have been some problems due my second posting appeared so late (copy below): "I remember one other strange matter about those old H-M's drawings which could be related to this (I'am uncertain is it related to this): "One half of 'radiation periphery' is born during the 'year' of the 'small companion planet' of the 'great neutrino star' in center of the space and one half of 'radiation periphery' borns during the next 'planet's year'." So radiation peripheries are continuously born from this 'central structure' of the space. I think that no proper model of the Universe cannot be created if this 'central structure of the space' is not taken into account !!! I remember that I have mentioned this in some of my old writings. I remember also that time flows differently on the planet when comparing to our time flow here on the Earth (this and how slow time flows is also mentioned in some of my old writing, unfortunately I don't remember surely the value: Is it half an hour flow of time on the planet when it is an hour flow of time here on the Earth ?). I don't still clearly understand what these could mean due it is so difficult to me to imagine these old time explanations of H-M ? Hannu " I remember that I wrote in the net about this long time ago but unfortunately it is impossible to find this for me now [I checked that at least it was not mentioned in those three summaries readme.all, readme.mid, readme.see (ascii-texts, really type *.txt files, these were in my computer) which can be read by DOS- command edit.] I suspect that "The Langoliers" was derived from such a flight of fancy as yours. David A. Smith I checked from wikipedia and I found that your mentioned "The Langoliers" is one part from Stephen King's book. My writings about those old H-M's drawings are not fancy. I hope that at least some of them could be verified in the near future with real experiments of physics. Hannu |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Time Travel Back From The Future in The Darkl Matter Galactic Halo? | Jack Sarfatti | Astronomy Misc | 0 | August 21st 06 04:51 AM |
Vision of future air travel system featured at Virginia event | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | May 27th 05 08:50 PM |
No future for space travel | Chris | SETI | 7 | May 5th 05 07:09 PM |
Future space travel | Falcon06 | Policy | 2 | April 2nd 04 05:03 AM |
Does manned space travel have a future?: Debate in London 6th December | Martin Earnshaw | Policy | 0 | October 7th 03 09:20 PM |