Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 66
Like Tree13Likes

Thread: Space time question

  1. #11
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    807

    Default Re: Space time question

    Another way to think about it is, at the speed of light space time is dilated to zero value. This means that at the speed of light there is no space or time to move in. So you can easily see that faster than light travel really is a mute proposition. Now some might argue that FLT may equate to negative space time or time travel. But since this would break the fundamental laws as we know them, then it is highly unlikely to be a possibility, a sure bet it's an impossibility.

    There are many aspects of this universe that we don't understand yet. Black holes, space time and even gravity are just a few of the more common aspects that we have little understanding about their physical nature or their fundamental basis.

    Its good to have thought experiments and fun to play around with the what ifs, but the reality is magic is not real. There are many things we can imagine, but reality follows laws that as far as we know (which all the evidence we have indicates) cannot be violated.

  2. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    7

    Default Re: Space time question

    Many thanks for your comments I will be away for the next four days but keep them comming in.

  3. #13
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Space time question

    Quote Originally Posted by rbaynes View Post
    Many thanks for your comments I will be away for the next four days but keep them comming in.
    I will admit, I am curious about what you intend to do with your information. You had mentioned a religious text that you were critically analyzing.
    A child might ask,
    "Dad, why is the sky blue?"
    And we can give an answer explaining refraction and the EM spectrum.
    "Dad, why do people only seem to care about their friends and not everybody?"
    And we can give an answer explaining the Dunbar number and psychology.
    "Dad, what is the meaning of life?"
    And we can simply posit there is no meaning, the question is a fallacy by assuming its own premise.
    I don't know about you but that last answer is perfectly acceptable and accurate but somehow... unsatisfying.

    I could delve into the chemical composition of the brain, which combines electrical impulses, hormonal balances and chemical reactions to produce what we perceive as emotions. But in the end, we still feel things. There doesn't need to be a supernatural existence in order for us to have meaning in our lives, to have faith or to believe in things.

    Science is not an act of faith, nor does the process of the scientific method utilize blind faith. Yet, science does need some faith. It needs some belief. It needs our emotional responses to be met, too. We need to have meaning in order to have motivation.
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

  4. #14
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    807

    Default Re: Space time question

    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    I will admit, I am curious about what you intend to do with your information. You had mentioned a religious text that you were critically analyzing.
    A child might ask,
    "Dad, why is the sky blue?"
    And we can give an answer explaining refraction and the EM spectrum.
    "Dad, why do people only seem to care about their friends and not everybody?"
    And we can give an answer explaining the Dunbar number and psychology.
    "Dad, what is the meaning of life?"
    And we can simply posit there is no meaning, the question is a fallacy by assuming its own premise.
    I don't know about you but that last answer is perfectly acceptable and accurate but somehow... unsatisfying.

    I could delve into the chemical composition of the brain, which combines electrical impulses, hormonal balances and chemical reactions to produce what we perceive as emotions. But in the end, we still feel things. There doesn't need to be a supernatural existence in order for us to have meaning in our lives, to have faith or to believe in things.

    Science is not an act of faith, nor does the process of the scientific method utilize blind faith. Yet, science does need some faith. It needs some belief. It needs our emotional responses to be met, too. We need to have meaning in order to have motivation.
    The universe doesn't care, or does it...?
    I guess we (humans) being so inquisitive seek the satisfaction from revealing what we believe to be the truth behind things. There is certain amount of faith in science, we have faith in the scientific method, in test results and observations. We rely on this data to fulfill that need for the satisfaction we desire. Does the universe care about such things? or are we a manifestation of the universe that's seeking satisfaction? Is there always a why? or a When?
    Often these type of thought experiments (the o.p) ask questions that may not have an answer, or at least one that leads to a "satisfactory" definition. Often these questions may in reality be really mute in that though the question may seem quite a sensible ask, in reality the true answer renders the original question actually pointless, irrelevant or contradictory.
    Examples of these are common in science i.e :-
    Q what is smaller than a Planck length?
    A. we don't know, but nothing might be smaller.
    Q What is at the centre of a black hole?
    A. We think a singularity, but a singularity might not exist at all.
    Q What happens if you go faster than light?
    A. As far as we know its impossible to go faster than light.
    Q Who/ What created the universe? God?
    A. We don't know, maybe God created the universe maybe god doesn't exist, maybe the universe has always been, maybe it was just random, maybe its all an illusion, maybe only a game, maybe there is no meaning, maybe its all for nothing.

    We all desperately seek satisfaction in knowing the answers to all these questions and many more as well. But just maybe its the questions that really don't exist.

  5. #15
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Space time question

    I don't care if the universe doesn't care because I care.
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

  6. #16
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    807

    Default Re: Space time question

    Me too

  7. #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    7

    Default Re: Space time question

    Hi I’m back
    I think the quick answer to the question of “What do I intend to do with the information”? Is “not a lot”. Although the trigger for seeking the answer was a critical evaluation of the Jehovah’s Witness book “what the bible really teaches” which states that Christ ascended to some sort of throne in Heaven in 1914.

    What seems to be suggested here and other places is that all time exists but, we can’t reach it hence the following limerick that I heard on utube (read by many including Stephen Hawkins).

    There was a young lady called bright
    Who travelled much faster then light
    She set off one day
    In a relative way
    And returned the previous night

    If 1914 is just a speck in space-time that is moving away at the speed of light then 1914 still exists.
    Although we can’t reach it, to any Omni-present being (i.e. God) it would be just as present as today.
    As I said this was the trigger for the question and I don’t think this is the forum for theological discussion.
    But the premises that all time exists is fascinating if we look in the night sky an see stars many light years away but they are as they are this very second and if we could jump to them in a second (not possible) we would jump back in time.

    As for the concept the Universe don’t care. To care would indicate some sort of consciousness in which case the universe is God then we get into the concept of worshiping the Creation not the Creator (anybody wish to go there)

  8. #18
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Space time question

    Quote Originally Posted by rbaynes View Post
    What seems to be suggested here and other places is that all time exists but, we can’t reach it
    An interesting position and, if current models hold, accurate enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by rbaynes View Post
    If 1914 is just a speck in space-time that is moving away at the speed of light then 1914 still exists.
    1914 is not a speck in space-time that is moving away at the speed of light.
    Rather, 1914 is a State the Universe Was In at the point we call 1914.
    Wording it this way: Time is not a place you can travel to.
    Reference post #5 in this thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by rbaynes View Post
    Although we can’t reach it, to any Omni-present being (i.e. God) it would be just as present as today.
    I remember as a kid, being told by a preacher in church that God was so powerful, that he could count each and every atom in all of his creation. And this powerful being truly loved me.
    What a message... Sounds good to me! An all powerful atom counting being that puts my welfare first and foremost? An omnipotent being that can literally do anything at all is watching over me, has my back?
    But even as a kid, I wondered how the preacher knew that God could count every single atom. I mean... he can't seem to sort out evolution or figure out whether or not to wipe out all life on Earth or give Noah a rainbow. Not to mention that people are dying of horrifying tortuously slow disease while he's off counting atoms. I mean, if the good Believers seem to be suffering at the same rate as everyone else and don't show any resistance or immunity to Cancer and AIDS and car accidents... why believe that he is Omnipotent?
    Well, the omnipotence idea stems back to very, very long ago, before we had any idea what germs were. And that's a much more sensible answer than a rather extravagant conspiracy involving an Omnipotent being deliberately manipulating the Universe to cause terrible suffering in order to 'test our faith' in the most horrific and absurd ways possible.
    Quote Originally Posted by rbaynes View Post
    But the premises that all time exists is fascinating if we look in the night sky an see stars many light years away but they are as they are this very second and if we could jump to them in a second (not possible) we would jump back in time.
    No, if we could jump to them, we would see them in the state that they are currently in. For example, we are seeing the light from Alpha Centuri with a delay of about 4 1/2 years. But if we used Star Trek Transporters to Beam over there, we would see the star as it is today. Not as it looked 4 1/2 years ago. That delay is only because the light takes some travel time. The Sun is about 8 light minutes away.
    Now, if you want to look at it from a Relativistic point of view, if you got on a very fast starship and accelerated away from me on Earth approaching the speed of light, from your relative position time would pass at the same rate as always and it would appear the same to me, but on your return, you would find I grew old or died while you perceived much less time to pass... But that is not the same as either moving into the future or into the past. Because your mass and my mass are both still moving through the current state of the universe.
    Reference Post #5 in this thread.
    They merely moved at different rates. If I was old on your return, I still would not have traveled into your past... You would be less old, but still a bit older than you were.
    See, if time is a perception that is created by our matter moving through space-time, then time is not a separate function that can be navigated, or turned around. To move "backward" you would have to reverse spacetime itself, somehow.
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

  9. #19
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    807

    Default Re: Space time question

    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    An interesting position and, if current models hold, accurate enough.

    1914 is not a speck in space-time that is moving away at the speed of light.
    Rather, 1914 is a State the Universe Was In at the point we call 1914.
    Wording it this way: Time is not a place you can travel to.
    Reference post #5 in this thread.
    I agree

    I remember as a kid, being told by a preacher in church that God was so powerful, that he could count each and every atom in all of his creation. And this powerful being truly loved me.
    What a message... Sounds good to me! An all powerful atom counting being that puts my welfare first and foremost? An omnipotent being that can literally do anything at all is watching over me, has my back?
    But even as a kid, I wondered how the preacher knew that God could count every single atom. I mean... he can't seem to sort out evolution or figure out whether or not to wipe out all life on Earth or give Noah a rainbow. Not to mention that people are dying of horrifying tortuously slow disease while he's off counting atoms. I mean, if the good Believers seem to be suffering at the same rate as everyone else and don't show any resistance or immunity to Cancer and AIDS and car accidents... why believe that he is Omnipotent?
    Well, the omnipotence idea stems back to very, very long ago, before we had any idea what germs were. And that's a much more sensible answer than a rather extravagant conspiracy involving an Omnipotent being deliberately manipulating the Universe to cause terrible suffering in order to 'test our faith' in the most horrific and absurd ways possible.
    Though I agree entirely with you on this, you could take another view point which may help to make sense of what seems senseless.

    We, when thinking about all the above mentioned in your post assume that "God" thinks and experiences like humans do. Maybe because we assume, or rather, we take from the bible that God created man in the image of himself and that he intended for us to think and experience as he does. If God did exist (which by the way I don't believe one does) then to have true omnipotence God cannot be limited to our way of thinking and experiences.
    A popular quote - "We cannot know the mind of God"

    In fact if you really think about it there are no words in the Human language that can describe what God "experiences" Even the word "existence" may not accurately describe the presence of God.

    Rather than go too far off topic maybe its worth starting a thread on this?

  10. #20
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Space time question

    Quote Originally Posted by David M W View Post
    We, when thinking about all the above mentioned in your post assume that "God" thinks and experiences like humans do. Maybe because we assume, or rather, we take from the bible that God created man in the image of himself and that he intended for us to think and experience as he does. If God did exist (which by the way I don't believe one does) then to have true omnipotence God cannot be limited to our way of thinking and experiences.
    A popular quote - "We cannot know the mind of God"

    In fact if you really think about it there are no words in the Human language that can describe what God "experiences" Even the word "existence" may not accurately describe the presence of God.

    Rather than go too far off topic maybe its worth starting a thread on this?
    Any form of conscious awareness that, complex as it may be, finds babies born with HIV "ok" but is also described as all-loving toward said babies strikes me as a severe contradiction regardless of whether I understand his mind.
    See, such a being would understand MY mind just fine. And he would be well aware that I find "HIV babies" to be "not ok."
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •