When people talk about time travel, they're usually thinking of it in terms of purposely traveling to a particular moment in time, not this time dilation stuff. To call the latter "time travel" merely because it involves both travel and the measurement of time is a bit ridiculous. Moreover, the measurement of time is a man-made thing. 2 am yesterday morning or tomorrow morning are conceptual, they are not places-in-time one could travel to as a destination. The ever-morphing theories of quantum physics strike me as bordering on being "smart people's religion". I don't care if you can "prove" the existence of wormholes or what happens in the event horizon of a black hole as a matter of theory. It has zero relevance to life in the here and now. When my 17x great-grand-nephew visits me some morning from the future, I'll take notice. Until then, I find the idea of time travel to be a ridiculous fantasy.
Who cares the idea pisses off the chines government http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/04/14/china-bans-time-travel-tv-shows/
Exactly. That is my whole point. If you don't understand that, then it's no wonder you think what I am saying is "irrelevant" and concentrating on "inconsequential minutia". So let me explain a little better. You said: "The clock that was on the plane will now be 10's to 100's of nanoseconds (depends on the speed and duration of the flight) behind the clock that was at rest." When I asked, why not the other way around, what I meant was, why isn't it the clock on the ground that is behind the clock "at rest"(the one on the plane), since the clock on the plane has just as much claim to being "at rest", since that is a relative term in the first place.
Well if a random guy on the internet seems to think that Stephen Hawking is stupid, that settles it. But what about Doc Brown? I think his practical application of the flux capacitor settles the science.
No, let me rephrase. I should have said, "not quite sure what you are referring to". At that particular point in the discussion, your question was a bit vague. Ok, now you're asking a relevant question. Before you were framing it as which clock has the label "at rest" being the point of contention, but here you are referring to why clock A is now ahead of clock B instead of vice-versa. To be more clear, the frame of reference matters (a lot, actually), but not which one is considered "at rest" and to whom. (EDIT: I should be specific and say that the concept of "at rest" does matter with respect to the frame of reference of the experiment, however, that's not what we were discussing. Perhaps there was some miscommunication.) Anyway, if you would have read the link I posted, your question would have been answered already. Basically, after the experiment, the clock in the air was behind the clock on the ground due to both kinematic and gravitational time dilation (you can look those up). Interestingly, because of the rotation of the Earth, the direction the plane is traveling has an affect on the results. If traveling east (as in the experiments), which is the same direction the Earth rotates, the clock in the plane will be moving faster than the clock on the ground. However, if the plane is flying west, the clock on the ground will now be moving faster. The Earth's angular momentum dictates that the frame of reference for this experiment is actually the center of the planet. As such, neither clock is considered "at rest". So, for the final time, my use of the phrase "at rest" in my initial post was not scientific, but only an arbitrary label used to distinguish the two clock in my explanation.
Why do you think is impossible? Do you know that you already are travelling in time? To the future, but travelling in the time. Travelling in the time means travel forward to future(for example 100 years in the future) and that is more possible, what is not known now how to go back, but in the future scientifically is possible, just there are the technological limitations to make this possible.
On a related (I think) note... why do people say that wormholes that allow travel across space would necessarily imply time travel? Surely, if you exist in two places at once at the same time, then its the SAME time, you haven't TRAVELLED in time, right?
Matter cannot exist in two places at the same time. To answer your original question, because time/space are parts of the same thing... jump space, you jump time.
Cool. You summed it up exactly. Tiny particles appear to travel backwards in time but it has no effect on the apparent movement of time. (this is me not knowing what the F I'm talking about) Anyway Steven Hawking thinks it is impossible because of a feedback effect. He says that you could create the conditions to do it but it would ultimately fail because everything would go BOOM when you tried. I do not like time travel fiction because it makes no sense to me. Period. But don't knock the big brains for thinking about it. It's a funny thing about genius, if you try to chain it down to reality it instantly evaporates.
That's what I've been getting at the whole time. Sorry if I didn't communicate it clearly. Well, you got me there. I didn't want to read a long-winded article, and ended up with a long-winded conversation instead. And there it is, the answer. The center of the Earth is "at rest", and the clock on the plane might be faster or slower than the clock on the ground, depending on direction of flight. I must say, a good deal of my confusion stemmed from the idea that the clock on the plane always moved slower, but I see now that that is not the case.
not so quick kid, this matter is historical. through time.... the next generations shall learn the difference between possibility and stupidity. moses and jc are both lies.
Short simplified answer: Acceleration can be experienced / measured. The clock that experiences no acceleration is "at rest".
Using string theory and parallel universes the potential is real. Physics can be altered in other realities depending on the speed and composition of things.
Hmmm... ... well den... ... Uncle Ferd better put one o' dem black hole sensors... ... on his way-back machine.
I cannot teach you relativistic physics in a thread. I can analogise the concept only. The reason they call it the fabric of time/space is because the two are woven inextricably together. They are relative, to all that exists within their dimension. Their relativity is why their rules can be broken in certain cases, theoretically. I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you.
All analogies break down at some point of course. That space and time are inextricably linked, I already knew - but it doesnt explain why time travel may be possible if wormhole travel is. If it would take too much of your time to explain it then don't worry about it. But maybe you know of a website that would be a good place to start looking for information?
I don't think that's right. Acceleration and velocity are two different things. Light moves at the highest possible speed, therefore never has any acceleration. Neither is it "at rest" relative to anything.
"It was a dark and stormy night... In her attic bedroom Margaret Murry, wrapped in an old patchwork quilt, sat on the foot of her bed and watched the trees tossing in the frenzied lashing of the wind. Behind the trees clouds scudded frantically across the sky. Every few moments the moon ripped through them, creating wraithlike shadows that raced along the ground."
hey kid, the signature "Moses and JC are both lies" are more than relevant. time travel and moses and jc being both lies are historically linked. when this species was labeled as human , this human started creating lies, like the story it created upon moses and jc. since then this human never stops creating lies, like this "time travel" moses and jc are both lies. stephen hawking is stupid in his belief in time travel. both statement above are linked.
I have a strong suspicion that you are not the least bit embarrassed by posting that. However just in case you reconsider and got back and edit your post, I wanted to quote/reply for posterity. so thanks!
there is nothing for me to be embarrassed with my personal beliefs. we are just this species who are processing these false beliefs about life on earth and the origin and existence of this universe with gross stupidy. Man is claiming "god" as the creator. Man is claiming this black hole etc.... and with these claims he wants me to belief in it. Man is so full of rubbish. eliminate this species, and absolutely all these Man made claims would be of no existence and the whole thing would be in peace. How dare this species try to own the whole earth and the whole of the universe. This species should fully consider SELF EXTINCTION. if and only if this Man labeled "universe" could talk back it might angrily issue this statement. "Hey stupid species...leave me alone."
