travelling forward in time

Yeah, but on startrek they're doing warp nine....the engine "cannae take any more captain".
 
Sponsored Links
To me, that programme was flawed, they explained close to pyramids (for whatever reason!), time close to mass is normal, but apart from it is speeded up, so the people on the train would not slow down, as time would be normal for them, they wouldn't move in slow motion.

And everyone knows that if you jump on a fast train/bus whatever, then you aren't suddenly stuck to the back of the carriage? Your motion is relative to whatever you are travelling in. But at 99.9% to the speed of light, what happens if you launch a missile off it? Does it hover in the air? Time passes naturally in that cell...

And the train arrived 100 years into the future...but the future isn't here yet, it doesn't exist, which according to the theory, they went forward into the future, which doesn't exist, which would suggest they either went nowhere, or blew up, or back in time. So rather than travelling in time, it's a stasis, a suspension of time? That Hawking wants to go out with a bang don't he?

Badly made programme.
 
Einstein says you can't go any faster than the speed of light!!


Just supposing you where in a vehicle doing the speed of light and on that vehicle is the loo. Say, you walk to the front of the vehicle. So, therefore you would be going at more than the speed of light.

When I used to go out jogging at 6am it used to stimulate my bowels and although I reckon I speeded up to warp speed 1, I never made it home to the loo. :confused:
 
Your speed relative to the vehicle means nothing. It's your speed relative to the speed of light that matters.
 
Sponsored Links
If you get to the bar before me, you are travelling fast,I have an excuse, I have a temporary limp.
 
You can't travel faster than light. Imagine hitting a grain of sand at light speed.
 
The funny thing is even when two light beams are travelling towards each other at the speed of light, their speed relative to each other is still only the speed of light not 2 times lightspeed. Work that one out, I haven't a clue but I believe it's been verified somehow. Maybe spacecat can enlighten us.
 
The funny thing is even when two light beams are travelling towards each other at the speed of light, their speed relative to each other is still only the speed of light not 2 times lightspeed. Work that one out, I haven't a clue but I believe it's been verified somehow. Maybe spacecat can enlighten us.

That is kind of where i was heading with this..... (well put btw!).
 
this is all cobblers and they've all got it wrong..

time does not slow down, only observation of it does..

if you travel away from point A towards point B at half the speed of light and you're looking at point B, then time on point B seems to speed up because you're seeing the light from point B 1.5x faster than it would otherwise reach you if you were stationary at point A.

If you were looking at point A then time would seem to slow down since the light from it would be reaching you slower than it would if you were stationary..
 
this is all cobblers and they've all got it wrong..

time does not slow down, only observation of it does..

if you travel away from point A towards point B at half the speed of light and you're looking at point B, then time on point B seems to speed up because you're seeing the light from point B 1.5x faster than it would otherwise reach you if you were stationary at point A.

If you were looking at point A then time would seem to slow down since the light from it would be reaching you slower than it would if you were stationary..

That's quite a challenge... challenging Einstein!
However, your logic seems to be embedded in three dimensions... whereas, we live in multi dimensions.....
 
we live in 4 dimensions and any more than that is purely theoretical and invented to explain the gaping holes in some of the more rediculous theories that these scientists come up with..

"this doesn't work in a 4 dimensional world, so we'll just invent another dimension and say that the bit that makes it work happens there.."
 
we live in 4 dimensions and any more than that is purely theoretical and invented to explain the gaping holes in some of the more rediculous theories that these scientists come up with..

"this doesn't work in a 4 dimensional world, so we'll just invent another dimension and say that the bit that makes it work happens there.."

isn't that a bit like saying the world is..flat? :eek:
 
Isn't it time that lazy Moody Mick got up?
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top