Time (and existence) - Page 3

cooke71892 · 08-13-2009, 04:33 PM

well, i believe that time is nothing more than our perception of the passage of events as our own consciousness passes over and through them. in truth, time is nothing but the speed of light that each of us personally manifests in our minds. because we all move at the speed of light, and to "time travel" is to get somewhere before your image, so therefore we consider faster than light travel to be time traveling. In truth, though, we have done nothing more than beat our image.

**Reach** · 08-13-2009, 08:57 PM

Our consciousness passes through events? What does this mean?

How is time the speed of light we manifest in our minds? Explain. Also, how is the speed of light something manifested in our minds when it is a physical, and not a mental phenomenon?

How do we all move at the speed of light? Last time I checked, there are some major physical problems with any object having measurable mass reaching a velocity of c.

Anyway, if you haven't gotten the picture yet, your post doesn't make any sense, so I think you've got some explaining to do.

ledwix · 08-14-2009, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cooke71892

well, i believe that time is nothing more than our perception of the passage of events as our own consciousness passes over and through them.

Time, however, has well documented physical relations to the world and is part of an even more fundamental physicality. (spacetime) Just as the image of a rabbit isn't the rabbit itself, our perception of passage isn't the passage (time) itself.

Quote:

in truth, time is nothing but the speed of light that each of us personally manifests in our minds. because we all move at the speed of light,

Time isn't the speed of light; more accurately, but maybe still not very accurately, you could say that we travel through spacetime at the speed of light, and since we don't usually experience relativistic speeds, we normally travel through time at about the speed of light.

Quote:

to "time travel" is to get somewhere before your image, so therefore we consider faster than light travel to be time traveling. In truth, though, we have done nothing more than beat our image.

Time travel is possible without exceeding the speed of light. We can get to the future without "beating our image." But really, study the theory of relativity; you will learn that you can never beat your image, because no object can be observed to be traveling fast enough to beat its image.

korny · 08-14-2009, 04:34 AM

Care to elaborate on what makes you so certain time travel is possible without it being proven?

ledwix · 08-14-2009, 04:37 AM

Are you referring to my claim on time travel or his, or both?

korny · 08-14-2009, 05:36 AM

Yours. I would've quoted you but wii internet can be dumb.

**devonin** · 08-14-2009, 07:25 AM

Get in a spaceship, travel away from the earth at some fraction of C, turn around, come back at some fraction of C. More time will have passed for those on earth than for you. You will have travelled into the future. 5 years go by for you, 50 go by for everyone else.

korny · 08-14-2009, 08:04 AM

I guess I should have elaborated clearer. Traveling -back- in time was what I thought he was referring to.

**devonin** · 08-14-2009, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by korny

I guess I should have elaborated clearer. Traveling -back- in time was what I thought he was referring to.

Quote:

Time travel is possible without exceeding the speed of light. We can get to the future without "beating our image."

Yeah, pretty sure time travel to the past isn't really feasible by science as we know it (unless....can we slingshot around the sun?)

**Reach** · 08-14-2009, 09:59 AM

Well yes Devonin, it is most likely that time travel into the past isn't possible. As I pointed out earlier, Space can be equated to time, because time is a property of space, so if you wanted to travel back in time you'd have to reverse space, and I'm not sure this makes sense to anyone here. I mean, it's the same reason why if you went into the future using the method you described, you aren't coming back.

Quote:

Time travel is possible without exceeding the speed of light. We can get to the future without "beating our image." But really, study the theory of relativity; you will learn that you can never beat your image, because no object can be observed to be traveling fast enough to beat its image.

You can beat your image to a destination, actually, if I recall correctly, using quantum entanglement techniques. Photons can be blasted through cesium gas tubes, and those photons appear to reach the end of the tube before even leaving the start, with measured velocities of more than 300 c.

However, none of the photon packets ever actually travel faster than the speed of light. No time travel occurs. The reason we observe this effect is because of quantum effects at the level of the photon, distorting it's behavior in the cesium medium. The phase velocites never exceed c, though. Very cool 8)

cooke71892 · 08-15-2009, 01:41 PM

well, what is heat?? heat is light in the infrared spectrum,meaning, that we, humans emit photons. and photons are sub-atomic particles sped up to the speed of light. yes, they gain infinite mass,but in doing so they become light, and when they vibrated they create what we call heat. and what i mean when i say we manifest it, i mean simply that time is the passage of events. we put a label on it, we try to measure it, time is nothing more than a word we made up. allit represents is the passage of micro events everyday through our five senses.

cooke71892 · 08-15-2009, 01:45 PM

well, what i meant when i said that was that the general consensus of time travel is nothing more than beating your image. and yes, obviously it can't be recorded, because you can only record the image. the closest thing we could get to time travelling is going out on a spaceship at sub-light-speed, then turning around. you would arrive some time in the future at a later period than the time you spent on the ship. sorry, i didn't think i would run into a challenge

stargroup · 09-3-2009, 12:15 PM

I find it fascinating that some people here are actually trying to argue against the laws of physics.

Also, since I am inexperienced and probably stupid I'll give my two bits based off of my experiences and observations. If I'm wrong someone correct me ASAP.

Time travel to the past is not feasible (and barely plausible) because it contradicts the definition of time. In order for time travel to be possible, we have to assume that there are 3 dimensions of time (imagine a timeline as 1 dimension of time), or else there is no way to jump from one point to another. However, we can bend time slightly to make it appear as if we were traveling into the future. This is definitely plausible.

EDIT: wow I should've read the freaking posts right before me all I did was state was already said wonderful

Izzy · 09-3-2009, 12:29 PM

The first three dimensions don't really exist let alone an actual dimension of time. Just because as people we claim an object to have a height and a width doesn't mean that the object actually holds that property outside of our own understanding of what height and width should be.

cooke71892 · 09-6-2009, 01:23 AM

outside our understanding is something we will never understand. and why doesn't it?? even if you draw a dot on a blackboard it still has the weight if the chalk dust, and in the space time continuim it holds a minute width and length. if not then there would be absolutely nothing, and if that were the case, this conversation also would never have happened.

Izzy · 09-8-2009, 07:54 PM

Length and width aren't actually things beyond our own definitions of them.

cooke71892 · 10-14-2009, 09:25 PM

they are in quantum terms. you see, length is but what we make it, it is the total mass of a line going any given distance throughout space-time. i say mass because the longer the line, the heavier

08-13-2009, 04:33 PM	#41
cooke71892 FFR Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: newportnews Age: 31 Posts: 12	Re: Time (and existence) well, i believe that time is nothing more than our perception of the passage of events as our own consciousness passes over and through them. in truth, time is nothing but the speed of light that each of us personally manifests in our minds. because we all move at the speed of light, and to "time travel" is to get somewhere before your image, so therefore we consider faster than light travel to be time traveling. In truth, though, we have done nothing more than beat our image.

08-13-2009, 08:57 PM	#42
Reach FFR Simfile Author Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Canada Age: 37 Posts: 7,471	Re: Time (and existence) Our consciousness passes through events? What does this mean? How is time the speed of light we manifest in our minds? Explain. Also, how is the speed of light something manifested in our minds when it is a physical, and not a mental phenomenon? How do we all move at the speed of light? Last time I checked, there are some major physical problems with any object having measurable mass reaching a velocity of c. Anyway, if you haven't gotten the picture yet, your post doesn't make any sense, so I think you've got some explaining to do. __________________ Last edited by Reach; 08-13-2009 at 08:59 PM..

08-14-2009, 04:34 AM	#44
korny It's Saint Pepsi bitch Join Date: May 2004 Location: Dallas, tx Age: 34 Posts: 4,385	Re: Time (and existence) Care to elaborate on what makes you so certain time travel is possible without it being proven?

08-14-2009, 04:37 AM	#45
ledwix Giant Pi Operator Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: California Age: 33 Posts: 2,878	Re: Time (and existence) Are you referring to my claim on time travel or his, or both?

08-14-2009, 05:36 AM	#46
korny It's Saint Pepsi bitch Join Date: May 2004 Location: Dallas, tx Age: 34 Posts: 4,385	Re: Time (and existence) Yours. I would've quoted you but wii internet can be dumb.

08-14-2009, 07:25 AM	#47
devonin Very Grave Indeed Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Ontario, Canada Age: 40 Posts: 10,098	Re: Time (and existence) Get in a spaceship, travel away from the earth at some fraction of C, turn around, come back at some fraction of C. More time will have passed for those on earth than for you. You will have travelled into the future. 5 years go by for you, 50 go by for everyone else.

08-14-2009, 08:04 AM	#48
korny It's Saint Pepsi bitch Join Date: May 2004 Location: Dallas, tx Age: 34 Posts: 4,385	Re: Time (and existence) I guess I should have elaborated clearer. Traveling -back- in time was what I thought he was referring to.

08-15-2009, 01:41 PM	#51
cooke71892 FFR Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: newportnews Age: 31 Posts: 12	Re: Time (and existence) well, what is heat?? heat is light in the infrared spectrum,meaning, that we, humans emit photons. and photons are sub-atomic particles sped up to the speed of light. yes, they gain infinite mass,but in doing so they become light, and when they vibrated they create what we call heat. and what i mean when i say we manifest it, i mean simply that time is the passage of events. we put a label on it, we try to measure it, time is nothing more than a word we made up. allit represents is the passage of micro events everyday through our five senses.

08-15-2009, 01:45 PM	#52
cooke71892 FFR Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: newportnews Age: 31 Posts: 12	Re: Time (and existence) well, what i meant when i said that was that the general consensus of time travel is nothing more than beating your image. and yes, obviously it can't be recorded, because you can only record the image. the closest thing we could get to time travelling is going out on a spaceship at sub-light-speed, then turning around. you would arrive some time in the future at a later period than the time you spent on the ship. sorry, i didn't think i would run into a challenge

09-3-2009, 12:15 PM	#53
stargroup FFR Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 974	Re: Time (and existence) I find it fascinating that some people here are actually trying to argue against the laws of physics. Also, since I am inexperienced and probably stupid I'll give my two bits based off of my experiences and observations. If I'm wrong someone correct me ASAP. Time travel to the past is not feasible (and barely plausible) because it contradicts the definition of time. In order for time travel to be possible, we have to assume that there are 3 dimensions of time (imagine a timeline as 1 dimension of time), or else there is no way to jump from one point to another. However, we can bend time slightly to make it appear as if we were traveling into the future. This is definitely plausible. EDIT: wow I should've read the freaking posts right before me all I did was state was already said wonderful __________________ (´･ω･`)

09-3-2009, 12:29 PM	#54
Izzy Snek Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas Age: 34 Posts: 9,192	Re: Time (and existence) The first three dimensions don't really exist let alone an actual dimension of time. Just because as people we claim an object to have a height and a width doesn't mean that the object actually holds that property outside of our own understanding of what height and width should be.

09-6-2009, 01:23 AM	#55
cooke71892 FFR Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: newportnews Age: 31 Posts: 12	Re: Time (and existence) outside our understanding is something we will never understand. and why doesn't it?? even if you draw a dot on a blackboard it still has the weight if the chalk dust, and in the space time continuim it holds a minute width and length. if not then there would be absolutely nothing, and if that were the case, this conversation also would never have happened.

09-8-2009, 07:54 PM	#56
Izzy Snek Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas Age: 34 Posts: 9,192	Re: Time (and existence) Length and width aren't actually things beyond our own definitions of them. Last edited by Izzy; 09-8-2009 at 07:56 PM..

10-14-2009, 09:25 PM	#57
cooke71892 FFR Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: newportnews Age: 31 Posts: 12	Re: Time (and existence) they are in quantum terms. you see, length is but what we make it, it is the total mass of a line going any given distance throughout space-time. i say mass because the longer the line, the heavier __________________ see you in t.v. land! http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...miley/Razz.gif

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)