Sci/Tech Large Hadron Collider could be world's first time machine

[Jedimindtrixxx]

things changing?

thats what it is. just cuz humans put a qualitative value on it doesnt mean its a human invention.

 

[sqrage]

How can something have changed before it changed or after it changed though? Perhaps that's a question everyone would like to know the answer to.

 

[Darthfett]

How can something have changed before it changed or after it changed though? Perhaps that's a question everyone would like to know the answer to.

Just one of the many paradoxes in time travel. My theory is that there are infinitely many realities, or that the only possible time travelling that can occur will resolve themselves (AKA it would be impossible for any paradox to occur).

 

[xPass]

My god! Varine just seems to have HUGE knowledge of EVERYTHING! I'm so jealous lol

Back to the topic, well... I guess it's a mystery to all whether time exists or not until the truth unfolds sometime in future... (Where I think we're all dead by then)

 

[Dinowc]

I don't believe that time traveling is possible

some things make more sense to me when believed that they don't exist
our knowledge of physics is too limited to come up with such theories, try to understand them and prove them too others
that's the reason why I don't believe in god

like xPass said, those kind of questions are for future generations

 

[Nenad]

Time is and is not the 4th dimension. It doesn't actually exist if you think about it:

Lets look at time from a linear perspective. You exist through time, but time doesn't care if you exist or not. Hence time is independent of our existence. Time also exists at every point in time, but time itself (our existence) can only be measured through points, because future had not yet happened and the present is a memory of the past, not the past of the time itself. Hence time only exists as points in the present.

But since we know we are moving through time, time must somehow exist linearly. Therefore, time is an integral of the time points through which we exist. So we can only exist in the integral of time, which in itself is another quantity and not time.

Now, if we call the integral of time itself time, then we exist through time. Here we have to add in the fact that a particle moving at light speed does not age, or rather, this particle always stays the same. Since this particle always stays the same, no matter where it moves it will move "through time" because it will not age. I'm unsure how to prove the theory of moving BACKWARDS in time, but forwards is relatively simple. If the particle moves forward through time all it needs to do is rotate about an axis at the speed of light. Since the particle itself won't age it will literally move forwards in time, while the rest of us will age compared to the particle. Backwards, however, is another story. I can see no way to move backwards in time from a scientific perspective, unless you introduce new dimensions and relative perspectives, which seems like they did (fifth dimension).

All in all, this won't be available for humans anyway, we are too heavy and the force that will make us move through time would most likely rip our bodies apart in the process.

 

[xPass]

All in all, this won't be available for humans anyway, we are too heavy and the force that will make us move through time would most likely rip our bodies apart in the process.

Thank for the knowledge, but I have one comment:

You never know what the future holds.

 

[seph ir oth]

Just one of the many paradoxes in time travel. My theory is that there are infinitely many realities, or that the only possible time travelling that can occur will resolve themselves (AKA it would be impossible for any paradox to occur).

I always thought as time as just another parameter to the universe. Imagine a movie timeline, if you will. The movie is going to keep playing at a set speed based on the playback speed adjuster (in our case, gravity).

If you go out of your way to edit anything (time travel) you will technically be creating a whole new movie clip (a new universe?). Or, quite possibly, we just might be saving over the current movie clip.

 

[tom_mai78101]

I always think of time and space as two entities fighting over one another across a portion of the universe... But that's just me.

 

[sqrage]

>>I always thought as time as just another parameter to the universe. Imagine a movie timeline, if you will. The movie is going to keep playing at a set speed based on the playback speed adjuster (in our case, gravity).

But gravity doesn't influence the speed of time

 

[FireCat]

???
whats so funny? its pretty cool

Sure it's cool lol
But It's hilarious because it's simple bullshit!
Well, would it be something out there in the past even? hmm
Maybe it's Just a black hole?

Oh shit, Just not quite righ there. @sqrage

 

[thewrongvine]

This thread is full of confuse.

Anyway, if this works we need Michael J. Fox first.

 

[phyrex1an]

But gravity doesn't influence the speed of time

Yes it does. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation

 

[uberfoop]

If you trust pretty much anything your senses take in, you kind of have to allow for the existance of a "time" dimension. What people sometimes get tripped up on, I think, is that they don't realize just how similar it is to another "spatial" dimension.

If you take a bunch of two-dimensional cross sections of a 3-dimensional object, and then view them in order one by one, it's not much different than taking a bunch of 3-dimensional "cross sections" of a 4-dimensional object and viewing them in order one by one.

Two-dimensional cases work too. Suppose you construct a graph with the curve y=x*x on it. Now suppose that you can only look at the graph through a piece of paper that you can move around, and that this paper has a long vertical slit in it that you can see through. Through this slit, we can see 1-dimensional "cross sections" of the curve y=x*x; if we position the slit at a given x value, we can see the cooresponding y-value. As the x of the slit changes, the y changes with respect to that x.
Suppose that instead of treating "x" as a second spatial dimension, we rename it to "t" and say that it's a time dimension. How does the situation change? Not at all, except that we say that y is now changing with respect to time instead of a spatial dimension.

Human beings, however, are not limited to seeing through slits. We have two eyeballs, each of which can take in a 2-dimensional image, allowing us to create a stereoscopic 3d image of whatever we're looking at (and even with only one eyeball, our knowledge of the world seemingly allows our brains to construct imaginary 3d representations out of just one image. The mind is a cool thing.). At any given time, then, we can effectively see a 3-dimensional image. The "y" of the last example can be replaced by an "x", "y", and "z" of 3-d space (or whatever variable names and linearly independant basis vector orientations you choose, but whatever), and we observe objects in these 3 dimensions changing...with respect to at least one more dimension, at least one of which we choose to call "t" or "time".

//=====

As far as I can tell, the only way you could possibly argue that time doesn't exist is if you reject the idea that objects that exist in the three dimensions that humans refer to as spatial can't actually change with respect to any fourth parameter.

 

[seph ir oth]

>>I always thought as time as just another parameter to the universe. Imagine a movie timeline, if you will. The movie is going to keep playing at a set speed based on the playback speed adjuster (in our case, gravity).

But gravity doesn't influence the speed of time

Oooh ahhh.

Also, remember the test about how the clock that flew around the earth at high speeds was behind (in time) a clock that was set at the same exact times before the one clock was launched? Actually, I forget if it was behind or ahead. Hmm...

 

[Varine]

I told you: Look up Entropy. EVERYTHING in this world falls apart, we flow from order, to chaos. THAT concept is what time is, that flow to chaos, THAT is what you think you are going to try and tell me doesn't exist by using clocks.