The Science of Intimidation

[HarpPlayerGene]

Ahhhh, Hollywood.

In order to travel back in time, millions upon millions of years, I lie flat on my back and gaze up at the sky on a starry night and see just how they looked oh so long ago.

 

[Rachael]

...but the stars are different now.

 

[Ethan Bentley]

Hasn't it been suggested that Thomas Edison was a time traveler? He wasn't of course, but if you've ever thought, "if I could just go back to around 1870 and take what I know with me, I'd "invent" the phonograph, the light bulb, the motion picture camera, the electric generation industry, portland cement, the stock ticker.... and make a MINT!"

I've often thought that would be a good idea, also you could go back and pass of great poems and songs as your own. Maybe even a book, if you take it with you. I think there once a TV show where a chap went back to 1940's London and passed off Beatles songs as his own. Nice little scheme that.

 

[Rachael]

Edison wasn't a time traveller, he was an opportunist. My favorite time travel scenario has to be the Yankee in King Arthur's Court.

 

[HarpPlayerGene]

...but the stars are different now.

"now" is not time travel.

 

[Subvet642]

As I understand it, one of the reasons against time travel is that the energy state of the Universe cannot be changed. This means that one cannot increase the energy state by the addition of matter/energy not can it be decreased by the removal of matter/energy. If one were to travel in time, the energy state would be decreased in their time, and increased in the time they travel to, making it impossible. Furthermore, Einstein stated that the closer that one gets to the Speed of Light, the slower time moves. The problem is, that when you accelerate a particle, you increase it's mass (E=MC2 means that energy and matter are interchangeable, the same thing). The more mass something has the more energy it takes to accelerate it further. Therefore, nothing with mass can reach the Speed of Light, because as the particle accelerates it will eventually become too massive to accelerate with the remaining energy left in the Universe. In other words, when you accelerate something, you apply energy and therefore the mass of the object. Then it requires more energy to accelerate. More energy is applied, the object gains more mass, and so forth, until there is no more energy left in the Universe and the particle has yet to reach the Speed of Light.

 

[PADDY]

Boy-oh-Boy..!!

I've just read and 're-read' this thread, and boy does my head ache:eusa_doh: There's certainly loads to think about in this one, but with this sore head of mine I think I'll just have to time-travel back to my little cosey Speakeasy to numb the pain (Don't worry, it's a sort walk next door to the cocktail cabinet).

 

[Undertow]

As I understand it, one of the reasons against time travel is that the energy state of the Universe cannot be changed. This means that one cannot increase the energy state by the addition of matter/energy not can it be decreased by the removal of matter/energy. If one were to travel in time, the energy state would be decreased in their time, and increased in the time they travel to, making it impossible. Furthermore, Einstein stated that the closer that one gets to the Speed of Light, the slower time moves. The problem is, that when you accelerate a particle, you increase it's mass (E=MC2 means that energy and matter are interchangeable, the same thing). The more mass something has the more energy it takes to accelerate it further. Therefore, nothing with mass can reach the Speed of Light, because as the particle accelerates it will eventually become too massive to accelerate with the remaining energy left in the Universe. In other words, when you accelerate something, you apply energy and therefore the mass of the object. Then it requires more energy to accelerate. More energy is applied, the object gains more mass, and so forth, until there is no more energy left in the Universe and the particle has yet to reach the Speed of Light.

And although I don't disagree with your reasoning, I must still say that, as unlikely as it may seem, nothing is impossible.

 

[Creeping Past]

The quantum computer is just around the corner (as it was, as i recall, circa 1990)!!!!

It's always just around the corner... when you're looking for it.

 

[Creeping Past]

I like this thread.

Thinking about this on another level, conscious thought, including dreaming, gives us the ability to take a step back from and outside the present and view things from beyond time — that is, beyond the immediacy of present action informed by experience.

With imagination engaged, we can be said to be time-living (experiencing ourselves beyond time) as well as time-travelling (living through things called 'moments').

That got me thinking.

 

[vitanola]

And although I don't disagree with your reasoning, I must still say that, as unlikely as it may seem, nothing is impossible.

"NOTHING" is impossible?

Did you mean to say that a perfect vacuum is unobtainable?

 

[SamMarlowPI]

intimidation...watch a cagney film...

 

[DavidVillaJr]

"NOTHING" is impossible?

Did you mean to say that a perfect vacuum is unobtainable?

What about the Dyson?


Robert Heinlein has an interesting point to make in his story "The Door Into Summer" - one of my FAVOURITE RLH stories by the way - about time travel in and of itself.

Short explanation - a scientist has discovered how to travel in time, protagonist of story wants to use the time travel machine to return to the past, scientist explains that even though his machine works, it's useless because there's no way to AIM it.

Point to last Thursday - where is it, which direction does it lie?

So, while it may be possible to generate the power, how do you calibrate it, and how can you tell if you are travelling forward or backward - how do you tell the machine where to go?

A date is an artificial construct imposed by humans - nature (the real world) don't know from February 20, 2009....

dv

 

[reetpleat]

I've often thought that would be a good idea, also you could go back and pass of great poems and songs as your own. Maybe even a book, if you take it with you. I think there once a TV show where a chap went back to 1940's London and passed off Beatles songs as his own. Nice little scheme that.

I dare say, a guy trying to sell beatles songs in the 1940s would be in for a rude awakening. The beatles couldn't even sell them in the early sixties.

 

[vitanola]

What about the Dyson?

dv

Tee hee!

Actually, I prefer my Electro-Hygene.

 

[MrNewportCustom]

...but the stars are different now.

Yes, but the light we see from them has been traveling toward us for millions, if not billions, of years, so we truely are looking at how they were "oh so long ago."

 

[dhermann1]

I've always thought that time travel would happen this way: You'd be able to go back in time, but you'd have no material existence there. You'd be able to see and hear what was happening, but you wouldn't be able to touch anything, interact with it, or affect it in any way.

 

[Miss 1929]

...but the stars are different now.

But you are not seeing the stars now, you are seeing the light the stars threw off millions or thousands of years ago, depending on how far off they are...so it is sort of like "time voyuerism" if anything...
Edit: Mr Newport Custom beat me to it...