scientist in pursuit of creating the world's first time machine

[Jerry_111]

it's pretty interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWnoMaSgYPY&eurl=

And yes, this is legit:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&q=Ronald+Mallett+time+machine

 

[Beerdude26]

Oooh, interesting

 

[alehm]

I am going to laugh when they turn it on it creates a black hole half the size of a centimeter which promptly falls through the floor and sinks to the earths core in a matter of seconds and instantly starts sucking the earth into it's chaotic point of singularity.

Scientists calculate the earth has less than 48 hours left of existance.

"Well, we tried" the time machines creators are quoted in the newpapers.

 

[Pauly]

I saw this on TLC before. Good show.

 

[Asknoone]

I am going to laugh when they turn it on it creates a black hole half the size of a centimeter which promptly falls through the floor and sinks to the earths core in a matter of seconds and instantly starts sucking the earth into it's chaotic point of singularity.

Scientists calculate the earth has less than 48 hours left of existance.

"Well, we tried" the time machines creators are quoted in the newpapers.

 

[DeusExMachina]

I am going to laugh when they turn it on it creates a black hole half the size of a centimeter which promptly falls through the floor and sinks to the earths core in a matter of seconds and instantly starts sucking the earth into it's chaotic point of singularity.

Scientists calculate the earth has less than 48 hours left of existance.

"Well, we tried" the time machines creators are quoted in the newpapers.

That would require multiple centimeter size black holes to sink to the earth's core and end our existence.

 

[Tyguy]

THey dont explain it as it would relate to the real world....its like, i see a ring of light, but how exactly can you compare that to the world?

 

[Cole]

I don't see how time travel is possible.

Not due to free will(as such is non existant) or anything. Everything is atom's(or quarks if you wanna keep on goin lower). Atoms react. Thats not the problem.

The problem lies in how. In order to go forward in time you would have to increase the speed that these atoms are reacting. To go backward in time you would have to reverse the atomical reactions. I don't see how this can be done to every single action that is happening.

Going faster than the speed of light wouldn't do it either. While you may percieve the light quicker than say someone else who is stationary, you are not going forward in time because what your seeing is something that has already happened. There is a difference between time and perception. Using einsteins train model. If there is a lightning bolt that flashes between two people. One person is going away from it, one person is going toward it. The lightning bolt happened at one specific point in time, however it gets percieved by the individuals at different points in time. Thereby we can only increase how fast we percieve things that already happened or use mathimatical guesses to predict the future(although that'd be technically impossible considering how fast chemicals are reacting). If you were 1,000 light years away from earth, you could see what earth is like 1,000 years before this momment, however you are only percieving the past and have not gone backward in time.

I simply can't see how you can go forward or backward in time.

 

[Direwolf]

The university here is actually pretty proud of this guy. It's great PR since this is a research school. Fortunately they stick him out on the depot campus so if (when) something explodes hopefully he'll just kill the grad students.

 

[MiccyNarc]

I don't see how time travel is possible.

Not due to free will(as such is non existant) or anything. Everything is atom's(or quarks if you wanna keep on goin lower). Atoms react. Thats not the problem.

The problem lies in how. In order to go forward in time you would have to increase the speed that these atoms are reacting. To go backward in time you would have to reverse the atomical reactions. I don't see how this can be done to every single action that is happening.

Going faster than the speed of light wouldn't do it either. While you may percieve the light quicker than say someone else who is stationary, you are not going forward in time because what your seeing is something that has already happened. There is a difference between time and perception. Using einsteins train model. If there is a lightning bolt that flashes between two people. One person is going away from it, one person is going toward it. The lightning bolt happened at one specific point in time, however it gets percieved by the individuals at different points in time. Thereby we can only increase how fast we percieve things that already happened or use mathimatical guesses to predict the future(although that'd be technically impossible considering how fast chemicals are reacting).

I simply can't see how you can go forward or backward in time.

Wow, one post has totally just disproven the theory of time travel in spite of the many scientists and researchers that have been working on this project for years! Surely one guy on the internet is smarter than those scientists!

 

[TCfromBN]

You don't relate it to "your" world. They are talking about "space" in general.

 

[Cole]

Wow, one post has totally just disproven the theory of time travel in spite of the many scientists and researchers that have been working on this project for years! Surely one guy on the internet is smarter than those scientists!

I love your sarcasm. I do not post that to sound smart or anything. However that is how I think, and I'd like to be disproven and corrected. I want to know how my thinking is flawed, therefor I must present how i'm thinking. I like to learn.

 

[xcellerate]

Only the last minute is worth watching.

 

[tehsolace]

I love how the scientist is like

"Well my dad died and so I wanted to discover time travel because I want to go back and save his life!!"

Hasn't anyone told this guy about paradoxes? If he started the research because his dad died, then he can't use it to save his dad's life because then he will stop the chain of events that started the time traveling in the first place. Paradox.

 

[Muffin Man]

Wow, one post has totally just disproven the theory of time travel in spite of the many scientists and researchers that have been working on this project for years! Surely one guy on the internet is smarter than those scientists!

I thought the whole theory of science was to put everything on display and let people try to disprove it. That way, when people try to disprove something and fail, it only cements the earlier theories/result, but if they fail, we know we messed up and have to start over. I don't see how one post questioning something warrants such a sarcastic response. It's just food for thought; I don't see what's so bad about that.

 

[tehsolace]

The way I see it, you can't time travel. This is particularly because of how I view time and space (not because I just don't believe it... I just find it hard to understand how considering my perception).

Time is merely a 4th dimension.

You can be in one place at one point in time and another place in another point in time, just like a square can be in one Z-point in the Z-axis and can be in a different Z-point.

The problem is trying to move that square to Z-point, lets say 3, to Z-point, lets say 10, without crossing the Z-points in between, which would be a point like Z-point 5. If you move it across the Z-axis from 3 to 10, its going to cross 5.

So the same should apply with time. If you try and move from 5pm to 10pm of some particular day, then you're going to have to cross 7pm.

Of course I am hoping that my perception of time will change... its just right now its hard for me to imagine because it seems like a limitation to me.

 

[CyberPitz]

Dorks, it's already been done.

 

[theotherguy]

I don't see how time travel is possible.

Not due to free will(as such is non existant) or anything. Everything is atom's(or quarks if you wanna keep on goin lower). Atoms react. Thats not the problem.

The problem lies in how. In order to go forward in time you would have to increase the speed that these atoms are reacting. To go backward in time you would have to reverse the atomical reactions. I don't see how this can be done to every single action that is happening.

Going faster than the speed of light wouldn't do it either. While you may percieve the light quicker than say someone else who is stationary, you are not going forward in time because what your seeing is something that has already happened. There is a difference between time and perception. Using einsteins train model. If there is a lightning bolt that flashes between two people. One person is going away from it, one person is going toward it. The lightning bolt happened at one specific point in time, however it gets percieved by the individuals at different points in time. Thereby we can only increase how fast we percieve things that already happened or use mathimatical guesses to predict the future(although that'd be technically impossible considering how fast chemicals are reacting). If you were 1,000 light years away from earth, you could see what earth is like 1,000 years before this momment, however you are only percieving the past and have not gone backward in time.

I simply can't see how you can go forward or backward in time.

Travelling forwards in time is easy. The faster you move, the slower time goes to you relative to the outside world. You go forward in time every day just by moving relative to the Earth. If you were to go at the speed of light, an infinite amount of time would pass before you stopped going the speed of light (another reason why going that fast is impossible) but if you went at .98 times the speed of light for a few minutes, you would travel forwards in time several hundred years.

It is not about atoms or reactions or anything like that, it is about relativity, one of the strangest and most fundamental features of our universe.

Travelling backwards in time is much much much more difficult (if anything can be more difficult than travelling the speed of light, this is it) The only way to travel back in time is to theoretically find a wormhole somewhere to another place in time. These wormholes can actually be man made. If you were to somehow create a wormhole (which is indeed possible, with enough energy), and then tow one end to the surface of a neutron star or black hole, the time difference due to gravity would make one end of the wormhole farther in the past than the first. Going into one end of the wormhole would move you into the past, but you could never go farther back than when the wormhole was created.

EDIT: actually your ideas of relativity are incorrect. By moving almost at the speed of light, time literally slows down for you. There is no universal present moment and time does not "flow". It is not a difference in perception or an illusion, but a literal change in time.

 

[Cole]

The problem is trying to move that square to Z-point, lets say 3, to Z-point, lets say 10, without crossing the Z-points in between, which would be a point like Z-point 5. If you move it across the Z-axis from 3 to 10, its going to cross 5.

I'd agree it has to cross that point at sometime. The only way to go forward in time faster than we are would be to speed up the chemical reactions that are happening so we would cross that point in time incredibly quick.

However even if you did go backwards in time, who says the time that happened previously isn't also the future? In other words, even if you go backward in time, time could still be going forward and in fact never went backwards.
It's like, heres a time line:
A happens.
B happened 7 seconds later.
Everything resets 7 seconds earlier.
A happens.
B never happens to do an interferance.

Even when you go back in time the timeline still moved forward.

Travelling forwards in time is easy. The faster you move, the slower time goes to you relative to the outside world. You go forward in time every day just by moving relative to the Earth. If you were to go at the speed of light, an infinite amount of time would pass before you stopped going the speed of light (another reason why going that fast is impossible) but if you went at .98 times the speed of light for a few minutes, you would travel forwards in time several hundred years.

It is not about atoms or reactions or anything like that, it is about relativity, one of the strangest and most fundamental features of our universe.

I still don't understand. What your talking about still sounds like the perception of time and not time itself. Because you still have not gone into the future using your scenario any differently than I am going into the future now. Your perception is that you moved 700 years later almost instantly. However that is not time travel any more than am I sitting on the desk and am moving forward with time. Simply you percieved all the chemical reactions around you going much more quickly than someone else.

Travelling backwards in time is much much much more difficult (if anything can be more difficult than travelling the speed of light, this is it) The only way to travel back in time is to theoretically find a wormhole somewhere to another place in time. These wormholes can actually be man made. If you were to somehow create a wormhole (which is indeed possible, with enough energy), and then tow one end to the surface of a neutron star or black hole, the time difference due to gravity would make one end of the wormhole farther in the past than the first. Going into one end of the wormhole would move you into the past, but you could never go farther back than when the wormhole was created.

Still, I am only seeing you talking about the perception of time and not time itself. Because once something happens, it has happened right then and there. The only difference is when you percieve the event to happen.

 

[tehsolace]

I think some of us are getting confused with time traveling by SKIPPING points in time, and "time traveling" by traveling faster or slower through time (by reaching the speed of light).

 

[Cole]

I believe time is a set constant flow. I believe you cannot go faster or slower in it, just percieve it faster or slower.

Well time traveling by changing your perception of how quick events happen is well then completely possible and probably occurs quite often. Simply percieving an event before someone else is time traveling relative to the other person.

 

[theotherguy]

I'd agree it has to cross that point at sometime. The only way to go forward in time faster than we are would be to speed up the chemical reactions that are happening so we would cross that point in time incredibly quick.

However even if you did go backwards in time, who says the time that happened previously isn't also the future? In other words, even if you go backward in time, time could still be going forward and in fact never went backwards.
It's like, heres a time line:
A happens.
B happened 7 seconds later.
Everything resets 7 seconds earlier.
A happens.
B never happens to do an interferance.

Even when you go back in time the timeline still moved forward.


I still don't understand. What your talking about still sounds like the perception of time and not time itself. Because you still have not gone into the future using your scenario any differently than I am going into the future now. Your perception is that you moved 700 years later almost instantly. However that is not time travel any more than am I sitting on the desk and am moving forward with time. Simply you percieved all the chemical reactions around you going much more quickly than someone else.


Still, I am only seeing you talking about the perception of time and not time itself.

Yes, you perceive yourself to go instantly to the future, yet you are still experiencing those 700 years. But in those 700 years your particles and everything about you would be moving extremely slowly. Protons and neutrons would last much much longer, your cells would never die. By travelling that fast, you are literally in a slower state in time. Interstellar particles travelling near C last much much longer than they usually do. Experiments have shown that particles which decay within a few nanoseconds may take several seconds to decay while going near the speed of light. These fundamental quantites of atoms are the same across all of the universe. The only way for these particles to not decay in that time frame is for time itself to have changed for the particle.

For the wormhole, time dialation is cumulative, and the wormhole curves throught he fourth dimension. Travel through it would be instantaneous and an observer would witness the traveller first leaving the wormhole (from the future), and before the traveller could get back to where he started, his past self would enter the wormhole.

Very strange things happen with relativity, but we must accept that time is not the old classical newtonian constant we thought it was, but a dynamic and constantly changing entity, like space.

 

[Remus]

I have to say Cole that you're the first person I've heard that has the same thoughts as I do regarding the theory of relativity. The thing is I think the time distortion when reaching the speed of light is only a perception of the person going at that speed and not "real" time distortion.

"time traveling" by traveling faster or slower through time (by reaching the speed of light).

And that would only be possible if time could be "bent" or warped, which I don't think is possible because I believe time exists only in our minds and is not something that can be manipulated.

Of course you (and anyone else for that matter) are welcome to prove me wrong, as Cole said I too am willing to learn...

 

[tehsolace]

This is a simple example of another way I perceive time (which goes along with the concept that time is relative to your speed):

T = C/S

T = Time you witness/perceive/experience
S = Your speed
C = Speed of light (constant)

As you approach C by increasing S (your speed), T decreases (The time you experience slows down).

And (remember this is just my perception) according to this equation, the only way to experience time backwards (negative) is to make S negative, which of course you can't do because you can't have a negative S (speed).

 

[Remus]

And (remember this is just my perception) according to this equation, the only way to experience time backwards (negative) is to make S negative, which of course you can't do because you can't have a negative S (speed).

You basically just proved my point...

So in other words it is possible to experience the past or the future, however it is impossible to physically go there and go all ninja on Hitler's ass or some crazy shit like that.

 

[Direwolf]

If you ever dive really deep into relativity and quantum theory you'll realize that you might as well just go do something productive before you end up with bits of your head all over the walls. The math involved is just numbing.

 

[15357]

Mr. Einstien will kill with his bare now zombified hands.

 

[Cole]

Yes, you perceive yourself to go instantly to the future, yet you are still experiencing those 700 years. But in those 700 years your particles and everything about you would be moving extremely slowly. Protons and neutrons would last much much longer, your cells would never die. By travelling that fast, you are literally in a slower state in time.

I see what your saying. However, I still would not clasify that as time travel. If that is what is considered time travel... thats seem quite basic and I must have been overlooking it simply do to the fact that I had believed it was some-what-more-complex. Because time is still relative to the person. While yes that person may have gone 700 years forward in time. Everything else still happened at "normal" perception to everyone else.
What I considered time travel is this:
-A is happening
-B is going to happen
-C will happen eventually...
-D is far ass away from happening...
Going from A to D, by "exiting time" and "entering it" at the new point. However from the way you presented it you are still part of time and by my definition of time you are still part of time. Everything that you just did was part of the insane-amount-of chemical reactions going on in the universe at any given moment and you have not really moved forward in time differently than I would be doing otherwise except the speed-subatomic link.


I honestly don't see time as an "entity" or "dimension". I see it as a way for us to organize all the chemical reactions going on at any given moment. Of course we broaden it out to events and make it relative. Simply this happens, therefor this must happen, and then this must happen. We use the idea of time to record when these events happen in sequence. However I don't consider time to have anything to do with how fast they happen. Simply "quark A reacts to Quark B therefor this happens at this speed" then when it happens we use the idea of time to record it. Time travel therefor is simply altering your perception of when these actually happened. Thats just how I think of everything anyway.

For the wormhole, time dialation is cumulative, and the wormhole curves throught he fourth dimension. Travel through it would be instantaneous and an observer would witness the traveller first leaving the wormhole (from the future), and before the traveller could get back to where he started, his past self would enter the wormhole.

Wormholes are still hypothetical and completely depends on if Einstein was correct. Don't forget that there are other thoeries. I do not fully believe in the theory of general relativity.

However my personal belief is that something is wrong somewhere. If you know the mechanics that work on a sub-atomic level you should be able to apply that knowledge to "our level" which then should be applied galaxies and etc.. From my knowledge our understanding of the sub-atomic level, "our level", and the galaxy level are not yet quite unified theories. They are not built off one another. Something is wrong somewhere.

 

[Reginald]

Pfft. Morons.

But actually I feel like an ass giving that answer because I have great faith in this guy's research and am really enjoying reading the posts in this thread, especially considering I understand a fair bit of it.

Personally I am convinced that it is possible, but not with the knowledge we have at the moment. Although perhaps we do now, what with this guys research and stuff. It is simply another dimension that can be broken, like a black hole breaks the third... I think...

 

[hool10]

Yeah this guy and the people who think the world is flat. It's over nine-thoooooooouuusand! How do you expect to stop yourelf and go in endless loops Einstein?

 

[Lucid]

Impossible.

Going backwards in time and bringing back a T-Rex?

Going forward in time and getting yourself a flying DeLorean?

Just even thinking, even for a second, that time travel is possible is idiotic, imo.

 

[Pauly]

I love how the scientist is like

"Well my dad died and so I wanted to discover time travel because I want to go back and save his life!!"

Hasn't anyone told this guy about paradoxes? If he started the research because his dad died, then he can't use it to save his dad's life because then he will stop the chain of events that started the time traveling in the first place. Paradox.

Thats only a theory. That theory does not exist if he uses the super string theory.

 

[Dan]

I time travel pretty much every day. I just lie down in my comfortable time machine at night and I will find myself 7 or 8 hours in the future when I get up.

 

[Dalamari]

If Star Trek (original series) has taught me anything, if you save somebody in the past from death, everyone becomes nazis

 

[Geogaddi]

I've spent the last few months building my own time machine. It's a a masterpeice. At the moment it only goes forward at regular speed though.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

Wasn't there an experiment with a plane or something that was sent faster than the speed of light (or close to it) and it had a watch the same as another one on the ground and the plane's watch was like a minute ahead after like a second of travel?

 

[Remus]

Wasn't there an experiment with a plane or something that was sent faster than the speed of light (or close to it) and it had a watch the same as another one on the ground and the plane's watch was like a minute ahead after like a second of travel?

Yes there was, but I can't remember in which episode...

 

[tehsolace]

Yes there was, but I can't remember in which episode...

lol exactly.

FASTER than the speed of light? a PLANE? I hope he was being sarcastic :]

 

[ailevation]

lmao at a plane being even near the speed of light.


Light travels at 299,792 km/s

 

[theotherguy]

What I considered time travel is this:
-A is happening
-B is going to happen
-C will happen eventually...
-D is far ass away from happening...

But here you're assuming a universal present moment. Nothing "is happening". Stuff merely "happens". The time we perceive is merely an illusion created by causality. All things are happening and have happened at the same instant. When looking at all of time, you would see every moment together at once. We exist in all times at once, and we perceieve "the present" and "the past" and "the future" merely because we logically assume cause precedes event, and it is only possible for us to experience one moment at a time. In truth there is no universal present for anything.

The present for you is different for the present of someone on the other end of the universe, and it is different for someone living in 1836 or 2098. Time is a property of the universe; it is different for every square centimeter of the universe because it is a property and not a quantity.

Travel into the future is possible because travelling very fast literally warps space and time, and makes it totally different for the object that is travelling it. It is not a matter of perception, it is literally completley different. So while you're travelling at the speed of light, nobody witnesses stuff "happening" to you, because the present is different for the observer and the traveller, whose present is actually in the past for the observer.