Time travel

*lightspeed

>>18374533
Although there has been great conjecture as to the travel of time, it is commonly held that due to the nature of the laws of thermodynamics traveling "backwards" in time is essentially not possible

>>18374599
Heard that before... Entropy always increases. Never decreases.

Interstellar style homie

>>18374611
Sure it does. Entropy increases all the time. It's just that--theoretically, unless new techniques are developed in the public sphere--predicting when these increases are going to occur requires more entropy than the increases in entropy themselves.

Think about dude. If entropy *always* decreased, you could then use that certainty to predict the entropy of a system in such a way as to sustain perpetual motion. I think maybe you forgot that entropy means number of possible states.

Imagine a deck of cards. If you randomize it forever, eventually it's going to reasssemble itself in the original order again. It *must* do this. If it didn't, you could use that fact to predict the randomizing the cards, and therefor it wouldn't really be random, now would it?

The crap about entropy always only ever decreasing is some very old 17th medieval theory that's long since been disproven. If you're going to be discussing things like energy, it might be worthwhile to catch up to the modern century.

>>183746411
They said entropy always increased, never decreases.

Did you read that wrong?

>>18374654
I guess he did

>>18374641
Bruh, they said always increases.

>>18374533
There's no "time", there are processes.
The only way you can is going into "simultaneous" reality which process been slower than our but same in its content(same exact processes to that point with the you added into it and few other not that affecting up to that point) to that point. and yes such phenomenon does exist.
however it is a one way street when you're crossing between the realities(systems).

How to create such a wormhole?
Well there are a few ways, easiest of which would be to create or find a close to 100% similar(almost to the point of being 100% identical, to the atoms and deeper) synchronized resonance point, between both realities then poke a hole between them with a condensed electromagnetic force needle(made out of the waves) then expand that needle into tunnel/door/2-sided hole. (things like that are very hard to keep stable for long enough unless they were naturally created so you would have only 1-2 seconds to enter them at most, in most cases)

For the trolls who will say that I use "seconds"/time there yet saying time doesnt exist..
Well "Time" is a figurative term used to measure difference between processes and other processes or processes and space.
It does not exist by itself, it is just a figurative byproduct of noticing a difference.

Most obvious way is to find a time traveler or find time travel technology left from the future.
I assume that if this isn't possible, you're screwed. Think about trying to build a smart phone a thousand years ago. You can't just bring the phone, have some guys look at it, and build it from scratch. You need tons of supporting technology to create the materials and tools necessary to build it. Time travel will likely require the same sort of infrastructure that doesn't exist.
If you're one of the lucky ones who survive 2017, you might get one. You can't have mine, motherfucker.

>>18375533
>If you're one of the lucky ones who survive 2017
w-what?

>>18374641
You put a shit load of effort into proving the statement he already made.

>>18375570
Good luck, bro. If you score the tech, make sure to jump before 7/20/17.
Shouldn't be hard to find. We're currently in the third iteration of 2016, so there are several thousand of us here.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (38KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1280x720px

>>18376175

>>18376203
You are welcome.

>>18376175
What happens on 7/20/17?

>>18376257
In this reality, Nothing.

>>18377210
>>18376257
>>18376175
nifty rolepay.

>Do you believe in time travel?

I don't really now. I really want it to be real, but I believe it won't happen (at least not in the next 500 years)

>Any theories on how to achieve it? (apart from light-speed travel)

Black holes are pretty cool, aren't they.

>>18377244
know*

Similar to the Fermi paradox/Dyson dilemma (where are all of the Aliens).
Where are all of the time travelers, imagine Time travel is commercialized 1 million years from now. Then for the next 10 million years anyone has the capability to time travel, theoretically we would have millions of time travelers in our time right now just due to sheer volume, basically it would be impossible to hide. Time trave by humans on earth will never exist, we would know about it by now.

>>18374533
Astrophysicstfag here.

>>Do you belive in time travel?
Yes.

>>Any theories on how to achive it? (apart from lightseep travel

Time travel into the future is easy via the Time Dilation (Google "Twins Paradox").

Time travel into the past would be possible if exotic matter (mass with a negative sign, meaning average negative energy density), were to be thrust into the mouth of a wormhole, jamming it open long enough to slip through. Then if you come immediately back, the equations say you arrive before you left.

Think of it this way:

Speeds slower than Light = Forward in time.

Speeds faster than Light = Backward in time.

Light Speed = Time ceases to exist. (Singularity.)

>>18374611
>Heard that before... Entropy always increases. Never decreases.
Correct. Entropy always increases globally, that's how we know the arrow of time points into the future.

You can have local decreases in entropy (locally increased order, like cleaning your room) at the expense of MUCH GREATER global entropy (Killing and eating the cow that fed you and gave you the energy to clean your room).

Total disorder must always increase, yes.

>>18374533
First you have to find or make a wormhole. If you want to go back in time, you'd better hope it's been around long enough; if you want to go forward, you can make it yourself.
Then you have to tow one end into a heavy gravitational field to alter the flow of time around it. Bring them back together and you'll have a time machine.

>>18375338
>There's no "time", there are processes.

Incorrect. Space and time form a continuum known as Spacetime. You can't have one without the other. Gravity is the curvature of Spacetime.

Think of it this way. Everything that exists must be moving. Why? Because even one degree above absolute zero has some heat, and heat is average kinetic energy, and kinetic energy is due to motion (K = (mv^2)/2)

Absolute zero is unachievable because there heat doesn't exist, therefore motion doesn't exist, therefore Spin doesn't exist, therefore particles don't exist, therefore matter can't exist. So everything that exists, exist above absolute zero, therefore has velocity.

V = D/T --> (Speed equals distance over time.)

In order to have motion, you must have speed, and in order to have speed you must have both space (D) and time (T).

Time is a real physical dimension, as real as space ever was.

>>18377373
prove to me that there is a fabric called spacetime, and that it can indeed curve.
because i am rather confident it does not exist, and can not be curved, and also how does a curvature of the medium of space produce gravity? shouldn't it increase the relative density of the space causing it to further increase mass in an infinitum.
and what happened to equal and opposite reaction, would space not fold back in on ins self as an object moves creating wormholes in the wake of movement?

>>18377397
>prove to me that there is a fabric called spacetime, and that it can indeed curve.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity

>because i am rather confident it does not exist, and can not be curved
Sorry but you're wrong.

Here's a good conceptual demonstration of (link above).

https://youtu.be/MTY1Kje0yLg

>>18377373

>>18377459

also neither distance nor time are existent dimensions. both are measurements of comparison.
distance is a measure of the difference between two points of space and time is a measure of change in a given space
speed is the relative difference covered i a given set of oscillations within a closed system in space.

what you perceive as the dimension of time is actually the the process of the movement of energy, when energy stops flowing there is no motion, no appearance of time.
lets say we have two identical circuits but we have a variable supply for them. we give them both the same current and voltage, but we oscillate one at 10 hertz and the other at 100 Hertz
now to the now the one operating at 10 will only have 1 oscillation to 10 of the one at 100
so we can simplify it and just say it moves at a tenth of the speed, now this number basically represents the difference in relativity or represents the factor of difference of change. this causeing one to be affected at a rate ten times the of the other.
lets just pretend watches count purely oscillations of a circuit and not seconds
now if you were that charge flowing though the slow circuit and had a watch and you could see the watch of someone in the fast circuit since one tick would be one oscillation, you would see ten ticks on the watch of the faster circuit. but since that faster circuit is oscillating faster its composition will decay at a factor relative to the oscillations or speed if you will. giving it the appearance of going through time faster relative to the slow circuit and this is why people commonly mistake time for a dimension when it is a measure

>/x/ - Science & Math
For real though, looks good to have a time travel thread that isn't total trash.

>>18377459
i see nowhere accounting for the reaction of the curvature of space?
there has to be an equal and opposite reaction, otherwise it defies one of the most fundamental laws of our universal. also any model i have seen portrays a 2d fabric(i know it is only a portrayal to give people an understanding but even if space didn't have to have an equal reaction shouldn't mass accumulate at a certain point where space is most curved and not disperse evenly over bodies? why doesn't one pole of earth hold most of its weight?

you can link me to all the bullshit on relativity you want, but it doesn't change the fact it relys upon flaws to justify some of the most important forces in the universe, and covers it up with math reverse engineered from the flaws

>>18377546
>what you perceive as the dimension of time is actually the the process of the movement of energy, when energy stops flowing there is no motion, no appearance of time.

Incorrect. There is always a progession from order to disorder. Always. And that increase in entropy is empirical evidence of time even if there is no energy or mass moving or flowing. Entropy always increases, even if just in information-space (see Shannon's Theorem).

Your model is basically a Newtonian model that does not take in to account the past 75 years of Modern Physics. It works in the limit of slow speeds, but breaks down at Relativistic speeds.

>>18377607
>there has to be an equal and opposite reaction

The curvature IS the reaction, itself, to the presence of mass. Mass tells space how to curve, then space reacts by telling mass how to move, in the next moment.

Then, after the next timestep ticks off in the discrete-event simulation, a new curvature is computed in reaction to the new mass distribution, and the cycle is repeated.

>>18374641
I think you misread that, he was agreeing with you.

>>18377622
>here is always a progession from order to disorder. Always.
>even if there is no energy

lol wut nothing can exist without energy, literally nothing because all exists from energy and entropy is the return of energy to a potential, and that potential being the medium of space.
>Your model is basically a Newtonian model
no actually it is not, it is based of teslas, and has the medium of space closer to a liquid than a ball of elastic bands.
movement through space can be attributed to a hydraulic motion. mass creates displacement in the medium as a boat in water, mas is a measure of universal buoyancy. now say we have a bodies filled with water, and we place some spheres in this water now if one of those spheres was spinning, it would create a pocket of low resistance around it, and also a field of resistance proportional to the speed mass and governing resistance of the body of water. due to the resulting polarization of flow around the field of resistance we see an attractive force one might attribute to gravity.
no curvature because you cant curve a liquid, only displace it
same goes for any form of energy, and logically the force or fabric or medium binding our universe

>>18377607
>even if space didn't have to have an equal reaction shouldn't mass accumulate at a certain point where space is most curved and not disperse evenly over bodies?

It does. That's why objects orbit. That;s why Hydrogen "clumps" into big balls of gas that ignite from friction and make stars. Etc...

>why doesn't one pole of earth hold most of its weight?

For any closed massive body, if you are outside the boundaries of the body you can treat the body mathematically and physically as if all the mass is concentrated at one point located at the Center of Gravity. This is why you can balance a pencil on a fingertip placed in the middle of the pencil.

>>18377459
Hey, retard here.

If I'm correct as most documentaries I've seen. Is that why somebody's voice can become high or lowed pitch? Depending their state of gravity?

Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm a retard

>>18377636
that still doesn't explain how it doesn't fold back in on its self, have you seen how a wake acts? why should the wake of space be different to any other medium. curvature should create wormholes were the fabric of space falls in on itsself

>>18377669
>lol wut nothing can exist without energy, literally nothing because all exists from energy and entropy is the return of energy to a potential, and that potential being the medium of space.

Not exactly. Spacetime exists without matter or energy. In fact, that;s a huge problem in physics, what is the zero point energy if it even exists? As of now, there is zero evidence that it does, therefore spacetime itself appears to lack mass/energy.

>no actually it is not, it is based of teslas, and has the medium of space closer to a liquid than a ball of elastic bands.

It's Newtonian in that it neglects Relativity, which has been conclusively proven to be valid.

>movement through space can be attributed to a hydraulic motion. mass creates displacement in the medium as a boat in water, mas is a measure of universal buoyancy. now say we have a bodies filled with water, and we place some spheres in this water now if one of those spheres was spinning, it would create a pocket of low resistance around it, and also a field of resistance proportional to the speed mass and governing resistance of the body of water. due to the resulting polarization of flow around the field of resistance we see an attractive force one might attribute to gravity.

I'm sorry but that model is incorrect.
>no curvature because you cant curve a liquid, only displace it
>same goes for any form of energy, and logically the force or fabric or medium binding our universe

>>18377687
>>>18377459 (You)
>Hey, retard here.

Same. Just an educated one.

>If I'm correct as most documentaries I've seen. Is that why somebody's voice can become high or lowed pitch? Depending their state of gravity?

Not exactly, the pitch of the voice has more to do with resonance than gravity, which means the way sound waves arrange themselves inside the throat and voice box. If someone has a large voice box, as with males, there is more room for longer waves to resonate which are low-frequency (wavelength = 1/ frequency). With females the inverse.

>Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm a retard

You're fine.

>>18377550
I started the thread here due to time travel being considered by most just science fiction. Im pretty sure im getting better replys here than in /sci/

OP here.

So far most of the replies have been very useful but please... concentrate on how to achive time travel. This thread is turning more into a "what's the correct model of the universe and gravity" debate.

>>18377839
>I started the thread here due to time travel being considered by most just science fiction. Im pretty sure im getting better replys here than in /sci/

I studied Time Travel and retrocausality for almost twenty years. I was trained at first by Joe Hafele'. The man who proved Einstein's proposal that time travel into the future was possible by using atomic clocks onboard international flights.

>>18377892
And you are on /x/.
Also, i would love to hear more about your investigation.

>>18377698
>curvature should create wormholes were the fabric of space falls in on itsself
Many cosmologists would kind of agree with you

>>18377909
>And you are on /x/.
>Also, i would love to hear more about your investigation.

I'm on /X/ because occasionally you get a legit UFO story here. My investigations tend to deal with how one might exploit spacetime geometry to effect interstellar travel, and how that effects time. Personally I concentrate on electromagnetics, and my personal research deals with unifying gravity and EM field theory. Also Quantum mechanics, specifically with time travel into the past considered as Quantum mechanical "tunneling" of a particle into a classically forbidden region of _time_ instead of space.

>>18377698
>that still doesn't explain how it doesn't fold back in on its self, have you seen how a wake acts? why should the wake of space be different to any other medium. curvature should create wormholes were the fabric of space falls in on itsself

You're correct, the wake is known as a Gravity Wave, and they were just detected by the LIGO experiment.

In order to create strange effects, though, you'd need black-hole size masses. The math says that vacuum fluctuations of the quantum mechanical potential near an event horizon can create "exotic matter" (that has a negative mass and can antigravitate), due to wake effects near the horizon.

Exotic Matter is also known as "Dark Energy". It's just mass with a negative sign (average negative energy density). Dark Energy is NOT antimatter, which has positive mass.

>>18377717
i had a reply ready to go, but my laptop shit its self as i was trying to post... figures.
and im slack to type it all out again
but the medium of space acts as the circuit board, the potential acts as a battery, and and mass as a load. mass applied on space polarizes the the potential causing a current to flow producing momentum in a closed circuit.


long story short the universe is a circuit not a elastic band

>>18377849
you need a correct model to achieve time travel and that is why we cant, because it technically doesn't exist and that is what i am trying to get though to people. what you can do instead is access the potential i speak of which its self houses what we know as quantum entanglement, the universe has 1 potential and all energy in the universe originates and returns through space to this potential, allowing the entanglement of energies outside of our perception. its like getting feedback in your circuit. anyway to go back in time, you in theory with my theory, isolate yourself from the load earth, with a machine to produce a unified field, then all you need to do, is match your field to the oscillation or time that your after. this works because a field is just energy, a unified field breaks you off from the medium of space which returns you to a potential, then the alignment of your field determiners where you end up, if you don't just become part of the potential eternally

File: 1479498103813.jpg (33KB, 454x454px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 454x454px

no.
workaround: change dimensions, when you do choose time.

>>18377373
Space doesn't require time to be in any way or form. can also curve as just space.

However, "Gravity" does not exist either,
What you call "gravity" is an 'illusion'/figurative term of the noticed 'figurative' byproduct of the laws of Density.

The current science is very flawed and disappointing, its approach to laws of nature/universe is extremely wrong too.
It does not approach even 1-2% of the science of ancient times.

>>18374533
>Question for scientist fags on /x/
Do you ask occult questions on >>>/sci/ ?

>>18377373
Also "Speed" does not require "Time", while what you call "time" does require different speeds/movements.

Speed is a quality of movement, movement of processes happens due to synchronicity and the need for balance to keep a stable form.

>>18378232
Already addressed this.

>>18377972
Another science nerd that is in for sightings here, glad I am not the only one of our kind lol, hello to other nerds too.

What do you think about harnessing dark matter/energy for propulsion? Seems that the universe is made up of a lot of it by current models. I've seen a ufo or two that I would describe as moving in a manner like Alcubierre's warp drive idea. Being able to move through space-time faster than light without time dilation would actually be an incredibly useful characteristic for creatures with short lifespans like ours. Wouldn't be much fun to go out exploring the universe for a few years only to come back to earth and everyone is a decade older when you are not a year older.

>>18378236
>Also "Speed" does not require "Time", while what you call "time" does require different speeds/movements.

Speed does require time.

V = deltaX / deltaT

No time, no speed.

>>18378119
>long story short the universe is a circuit not a elastic band

Modern physics does not support this analogue.

>>18378297
No it doesn't, synchronicity/balance can happen at any speed and any distance.

And it can be more than one set of infinitely fast, and more than one set of infinitely slow too. or even both at more than one set of infinitely different angles(of process/possibility), and more than one set of infinitely different directions(of the process).

Time of a process can be slowed down and it can be sped up, stopped or even skipped.
Process can move backward in its own process too, giving the illusion of time going backwards.

Time does not create motion.
While motion creates "time".

>>18378229
>What you call "gravity" is an 'illusion'/figurative term of the noticed 'figurative' byproduct of the laws of Density
Can you ellaborate on this? How is density a factor here?
Unless you actually mean "mass", in which case it would be exactly what the laws of gravity are already saying.

>The current science is very flawed and disappointing
What is flawed? What is "extremely wrong"? Why do you think so?

>>18378318
How do you define velocity without time then? The formula includes time. You cant say speed doesnt require time without presenting an alternative mathematical definition in which this statement makes sense

>>18378297
speed is redundant.... again it is a measure not an existing force.
everyone here failed to produce sufficient evidence of time being a dimension. only stating speed requires time. it very well may do, but thats because thats how we measure the current of momentum, as a measure of speed, made up of distance traveled(difference) over the time taken(oscillation measure)
>>18378300
modern physics also doesn't support the ability to receive an FM signal on a crystal radio but you can, through i suppose must be witchcraft then if modern physics knows it all. and i suppose the human race should stop researching because... low and behold modern physics knows it all.
this all reminds me of this one time, the scientific community thought the world was round, and this one fella had a crazy idea that maybe it wasn't, but they called him a mad man, and for hundreds of years shunned any notion the the world could be round. then after the scientific community had gone through a few generations they actually realized the fella hundreds of years ago was right, but it was still their discovery because the fella in the past was a crazy man.
history my friends and that includes your science and religion is written by the victor. doesn't necessarily have to be correct just has to be the image they have to cast, the average man has no choice but to accept what they are taught because disproving such theory requires evidence which requires experimentation which requires equipment which requires resources which now require money and large sums of it for anything that could be used to measure and produce tangible evidence to back up your theory. that and you have to have two witnesses for it to be legally accepted

>>18378531
>this all reminds me of this one time, the scientific community thought the world was round
i mean they thought the world was flat not round

>>18377328
You have to assume that time travel WILL be commercialized.

And you might then answer that there's no way it isn't, but that's only because in our current society it seems unlikely something like that wouldn't be commercialized, if human society goes back to being more totalitarian and less about freedom (and it most likely will) then the idea that technologies such as these might be kept away from the public aren't that hard to conceived. Hell, some nutjobs think that's what's currently happening.

Regardless, a lot of scientists are looking at the issue very seriously, and there is a lot of evidence supporting the idea that at least information could be theoretically send forwards or backwards in time.

>>18378531
I mean, you're not wrong, but at the same time, you can't really just claim things without proof and expect people to just accept it either.

>>18378518
Layers of density + bio-electromagnetic attraction/resonance/synchronicity.
Work of those states and forces create what you call gravity.
Notice in different density gravity works differently.

I will explain this much, however, I will not give you a formula for it. (if you really want to understand how it works you will figure out yourself. I suggest you to not go out with the formula you'll find because there are severe consequences to attempting to publicly destroy the current science with proof)

The idea of "velocity" requires "time" because it is based on the theory that already includes time in it.

Speed is not velocity. (velocity is limited to "speed" however)

Speed is a Quality/Effectiveness/Motion rate of a 'process'.
It can be per stillness of space/non-movement(without time), or per other observed present process's movement, creating difference between them in "time" and "speed" at the same time.

Again this should be enough to help you find out the formula yourself if you think and maybe experiment with it enough, but I recommend to not try go out in public with those formulas for obvious reason I've stated above.

>>18378541
Look up "Vector".
We don't really know if it flat or round, nor do we know how big the earth really is. Heck, We don't even know if there's something beyond Antarctica or if its the way they say it is. We are denied access to cross Antarctica in a straight line, through the dead-center of it(without the use of compass, because compass curves the path), without any reason given other than that its a security threat to the bases there 'somehow', that should tell you enough already.

>>18378518
<What is flawed? What is "extremely wrong"? Why do you think so?
The approach is flawed.
Science keeps hitting a wall and having to breakthrough it.
If the approach is correct then there are no walls, everything is possible, nothing is "complicated" either. It requires MANY details but all of those details are simple, and they are configured in a simple way. there's no flaw in anything that's done with the right approach.

The right approach is understanding the laws BEHIND the processes we observe, as in, how these processes exist/become and be.
For example, if you understand the law of magnetism, you can make anything and everything magnetic to anything and everything you desire, or you can nullify magnetism towards anything of anything that is magnetic towards that something. simply by using the laws which create the process of magnetism in anything. Are you still following?

With the right approach you can make anything reach any result you want. All it takes is enough understanding of the true laws of nature(/universe).

Understanding these laws means the ability to create/destroy and manipulate/control them in something(anything).

File: 67b.jpg (71KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 600x450px

>>18378662
>Unironically flat earther

>>18378648
Thanks for ellaborating

But I still dont really see how this is a good explanation.

>Layers of density + bio-electromagnetic attraction/resonance/synchronicity
Doesnt bio-... imply, that it only affects "living matter"? It is also clearly demonstrated, that electromagnetism is something different from "gravity".
What does "layers of density" even mean? Density can be homogenous among an object, can undergo fluent variations or change quite drastically from one area to another. What layers?

> however, I will not give you a formula for it
This is unfortunate, since math is a very effective way to communicate a concept without room for misunderstanding or different interpretations/semantics.

>It can be per stillness of space/non-movement(without time)
"stillness of space" is a meaningless concept

>or per other observed present process's movement
But thats just how velocity is defined. In relation to reference point.

I dont see how you define velocity/speed, which is basically a rate of change, without time

>>18378677
How would you change the scientific in order to get a better "understanding of the true laws of nature(/universe)"?

>>18378823
*scientific method

>>18378816
Bio-electricity is natural electricity that exists in all matter.

The difference is that it is in an active state in a "living matter", while in a passive state in a "non-living matter".

Gravity is just a byproduct, it is not a force.
Look at how "Density" works, and calculate using just taking account of "density" without "gravity", you will get the same results.

>"stillness of space" is a meaningless concept
It is simply space. 'frozen'. timeless.

>I dont see how you define velocity/speed, which is basically a rate of change, without time
When you count "time" into it, it will look as if the process/matter is 'teleporting'.


>>18378823
>How would you change the scientific method in order to get a better "understanding of the true laws of nature(/universe)"?

First of all you gotta understand how numbers and math really work. currently they are limiting it too much and misunderstanding how it works.

Math/Numbers follow the same laws of nature(/universe) as does our universe.

It is just expressed through numeral/mathematical symbols, instead of through space and matter.

Once you have a better understanding/comprehension of how the numbers/math really work(an idea of how the laws work), you will begin to understand the right approach to 'science'.

its simple, just kill yourself!

>>18378567
This is assuming time is a single linear path.

If time travel is commercialized in the future traveling, If you were to travel back into the past, it could possibly create a separate timeline where that person now existed in that time period while leaving the original intact.

File: The_Scientific_Method_as_an_Ongoing_Process.svg.png (168KB, 800x659px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 800x659px

>>18378970
>Bio-electricity is natural electricity that exists in all matter
What? All electricity is "natural". What does electromagnetism has to do with gravity? Objects are affected by gravity regardless of their electromagnetic properties.

>it is not a force
we can agree on that one

>Look at how "Density" works
Ok. Desity is the ratio between mass and volume. Observations indicate that the total mass of a body is the important part rather than its density. So what are you on about? Why do things fall "down"? How does density explain this?

>It is simply space
Yeah, but "space" isnt a reference point. It doesnt make sense to say "I moved 3 space". There is no absolute reference point.

>When you count "time" into it
you NEED to this, as velocity is a rate of change. It has no meaning without time. Thats like saying a polaroid has 60fps

>First of all you gotta understand how numbers and math really work
But that doesnt answer my question. The current scientific method doesnt say anything about math.
Exactly what step of the sm do you have a problem with? What is the flaw? Where exactly does it hinder people to understand the universe better?

Math is just an abstraction. A tool/language to express logically coherent concepts. There is literally nothing wrong with it. It just has the luxury to show that something is objectively wrong or right

>>18379129
Bio-electricity does not have a 'discharge' as long as its a bio-electricity.
Not all electricity is "natural".
Electric discharge is an "unnatural" electricity.

>Objects are affected by gravity regardless of their electromagnetic properties
As Ive said, "bio-electromagnetic", not "electromagnetic", they are 2 different things.

>Why do things fall "down"? How does density explain this?
Things fall THROUGH density, because of "density". Also "density" is not just about the "ratio" nor just between "mass" and volume.

>It doesnt make sense to say "I moved 3 space"
"I moved 3 'distance' in 'space'.(in 0 'time')" -> I teleported 3 'distance' in space.
You don't need time to do that, electrons* can do that too.
Change can happen without time. Again, Electrons* do it sometimes.
* when you count them as particles.

>Exactly what step of the sm do you have a problem with? What is the flaw? Where exactly does it hinder people to understand the universe better?

The WHOLE method approach is flawed. starting from "make observations".
You need to looks and try observe whats behind the nature/process you see. to do that you need to understand why that pattern occurs, with no hypothesis. without looking for the visible cause but for the laws behind it.
If we limit it to a base-10 numeral system lens, then there are 8 laws of nature(/universe) you can use to try to understand the process/phenomenon/pattern/nature you see happening.
With a Base-10 system, 8 laws of nature which results in 64 states and qualities, you can try understand the process/phenomenon/pattern/nature even better.

If you do it right, you will have complete control over the process, as you will know what you need to change it in any way you want, or even replicate the creation of that process/phenomenon/pattern in nature in any way you want.

If you use the true laws to control/create the processes then all you create and do to the process will be 100% "natural"/in tune with "nature"(/universe).

>>18379192
>Not all electricity is "natural"
yes it is.

>Electric discharge is an "unnatural" electricity.
how?

>they are 2 different things.
well, the bio- part doesnt seem to be the seperating factor and the natural part seems to be arbitarily applied. Electromagneticism can exist without there being a discharge. So I dont know what the exact difference is really.

>Things fall THROUGH density, because of "density
You said that already. I asked you how and why. Thats just circular reasoning and not an answer to my question.
And why do things still fall down in a vacuum? Why do things of different density at the same rate?

>Also "density" is not just about the "ratio" nor just between "mass" and volume
Thats literally how it is defined. But please enlighten me. What did I miss?

>Electrons* do it sometimes
fair enough, there is quantum teleportation.
Thats irrelevant to the concept of velocity.
You still need time to define the velocity of a macroscopic object with mass. You havent yet demonstrated how you can do otherwise

>You need to looks and try observe whats behind the nature/process you see. to do that you need to understand why that pattern occurs, with no hypothesis. without looking for the visible cause but for the laws behind it.
AGAIN: what exactly is it you want to change? You just desribed how it works. You make an observations and then follow the process to get an understanding of the laws behind/patterns behind observations.
How exactly does the scientific method fail at accomplishing exactly what you are saying here?
What is the alternative that leads to a better understanding and why does it do so?
You cant just say the WHOLE approach is flawed without saying why it falls apart. How is it flawed?

Also: changing the base, doesnt really change anything about the math. You just write the number in a different way. Thats it. It doesnt let you do more or less with math. It is merely a matter of convenience/tradition, that base10 is the norm.

>>18378662
we do actually know it is round, because to build the apparatus we used to pick up gravitational waves a few months ago is so large it was build higher on each end than the middle because of the curvature of earth. and that is just one example
>>18378597
yeah i know, that is why i portray basic concepts of my theory. there will be math and tangible evidence to back it up oneday, its just a hard process to swim against the current of mainstream science
>>18379192
>Not all electricity is "natural".
>Electric discharge is an "unnatural" electricity.
wrongo, all energy originates from one source therefore can only be natural, i think your actually thinking bio not natural

>"bio-electromagnetic", not "electromagnetic", they are 2 different things.
thats debatable, they can only be different propitiation of the same wave. its either an electromagnetic wave or its not. the field emitted by living this is due to their inherit connection to the source potential, often emitting raw potential though the electromagnetic fluxuations
>With a Base-10 system, 8 laws of nature which results in 64 states and qualities
although your logic is solid theres only 6 laws, in a base ten system because they require a governor of opposing laws. so you have 6 laws 3 governors and the one reality they reside over, creating a base 10 decimal system. this can be seen in the development of a cell, the arrangement of a flower, the inverse square law and the list goes

>access state of universe at specified time
>create new universe from this snapshot
>switch to newly created universe
No paradoxes, no problems whatsoever. Sounds easy enough.

>>18380179
>spacegods playing with "time"
>implying i dont let the entire universe end, force everyone after the change im going to make to be controllers of underlying forces of the universe[or kill them] and then destroy the old copy of the universe[even though it already ended] and then create a new, entirely identical universe before stepping in at the time i want, forcing the people from the old universe to enter their life in the new universe, essentially killing them and causing them to destroy all memory of the inbetween.

File: sharkrepliestodeliciousbait.gif (16KB, 125x125px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 125x125px

>>18380203
>>18380179
i guess i "COULD" let the future people create their own new universes in the way you proposed, but FUCK TANGENTS, theres enough entropy without them.

-with the warmest regards,
satan, prince of darkness and king of all evil.

so I have done a lot of research on my own into this. I started with Einstein and how he mentioned time travel was impossible, though time viewing was not. This seemed to be tied to his quantum theory of how the universe works, especially with quantum entanglement. Two particles, no matter the separation between them in terms of distance (and time), they would spin at exactly the same speed and react the same when the other changed speeds, the first would react.
So this led me to Da Vinci and his mystical cave. There were rumors that Da Vinci would travel to a cave in Italy and disappear for several days, upon his return he would come with new inventions. These inventions were primitive in terms of an actual theory, instead they were drawings of items being used in the future. Helicopters, scuba gear, parachutes, and much more. It would appear that Da Vinci was peering into the future, and drawing what he witnessed.
Next I looked into the Bible, and it's Revelations and Jesus, when they would peer into the future. Everytime they did, they would enter the 'spirit'. Which was linked to the Holy Oil they mentioned.
This led to Odin, and the flask of knowledge. Which Odin was a master military strategist, knowing what would occur at the battle before it happened, despite his many other attributes.

File: steins-gate-face.jpg (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

just use a microwave lmao

>>18380608
this.

>>18378531
>modern physics also doesn't support the ability to receive an FM signal on a crystal radio but you can, through i suppose must be witchcraft then if modern physics knows it all.

Modern physics is what created the FM crystal radio, broski.

File: vlcsnap-2016-10-25-16h28m30s250.png (212KB, 576x448px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 576x448px

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Titor

File: 64c149af4275c6facb0b1907a3a1d41f.jpg (74KB, 960x828px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 960x828px

>>18378531
>modern physics also doesn't support the ability to receive an FM signal on a crystal radio but you can

My fucking God. This is why no one even pretends to take you seriously, /x/.

>>18377336
I know jack shit about anything but that sounds like it fills in the holes on my theory.

>>18379582
>theres only 6 laws, in a base ten system

In base ten system there are 6 types of laws of nature, 8 laws of nature, 7 natures, 5 elements of nature, 1 fixed axis, 1 switching axis thats everywhere between, 4 not fixed natures and 1 origin point or perfection/nothing/everything(when its perfection its 'complete', when its not there then its nothing)

>>18374533
Impossible. Consider this moment Y. All of existence prior to Y is more or less finite, not getting into the possibility of a reality prior to the big bang (or god or whatever farting existence out). So no evidence of time travel from BB to Y.

All of time from Y to the end of existence is infinite. We can guess how long the universe will last but we've vastly misjudged things over the span of decades, much less eons. So let's call it infinite.

So. If time travel were possible it would have to be from Y to infinity. Let's assume for kicks it's invented 1000 years from now. So Y+1000 to infinity is the time frame for it to be used to come to Y. It would take only ONE instance of some jackhole giving it to the past to cut that time. Over the course of infinity this is guaranteed to happen since it only takes one. Say they go to Y+900. It resets. Y+900 to infinity for ONE slip up. Then Y+800, etc until it exists today.

The nature of time travel and guaranteed probability means if it ever exists in the future it exists today. Guaranteed. Sinceit doesn't, it won't. The only two ways it could are existing but not being used enough to have a slip up before mankind dies out or existing just before the end of time. Neither is likely because each means it would be used to DELIBERATELY give it to the past.

>>18381228
That doesn't consider a fractal universe with infinite alternative universes being constantly spawned from the prime.

Start your theorizing over once you understand the nature of quantum mechanics.

>>18381238

Why is the assumption that the prime continues to spawn them, rather than the universe spawning other universes, which spawn their own, etc.

Makes a lot more sense given the inter-relative dimensional paradox.

>>18381243
>Why is the assumption that the prime continues to spawn them, rather than the universe spawning other universes, which spawn their own, etc.
It's both, but they all originate from Prime so it's easier to explain it that way

X happens in Prime, so X happened in 1 and 2
Y happened in 1, but not 2 or Prime, and creates 3
Z happens in 1, but not in 2, 3 or Prime, and creates 4, and so on

File: carrotbomb1920.jpg (99KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1920x1200px

Well, it is possible you have to create a gravity field around your body/ machine/ tech, you might be using, and well you got to rip into space and time and virtually fold time itself, because if time is a straight line, you could possibly bend time back in a warping/ worm-holing into a certain point in time if you follow the flow and calculate where the earth or planet will be at that time period, because
1 > we are a rotating mass of rock and water circling, a even bigger rotating mass of fire with even bigger rotation in our solar system toward a black hole which would be the center of the milky way. So where we are in relativity to where you even want to go say, prehistoric era or the birth of Crist you have to come up with the numbers of how far our system and planet traveled so good luck calculating the numbers...
2 > not to mention making a craft that will and has to survive a fall of a few feet to thousands of miles in case you end up in the stratosphere that would mean has to be airworthy, airtight, and capable of small space flights and re-entys.
3rd and lastly > the manpower and energy needed to power a create device in the first place
I'm not saying it can't be done just i dont think its practical or ethical unless your trying to retrieve lost knowledge or observe and record the lost history of the world

But if any one does try to do so good luck and godspeed

OP here

Haven't read anything on the thread for a a day and things are getting a little too tangled here... Why are we talking about primes now?

>>18374533
I believe its possible. But I also believe that if you travel back in time you will cease to exist or cause a black hole in doing so.

>>18379100

And become some faggot like Thor instead of hidden Godking Baldr with mad bitches?

Stupid nigger.

File: 1477629627427.png (157KB, 780x800px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 780x800px

>>18383446
>implying.
when you die, you become one with the godhead, and can make all choices and decisions; why would you wait, why would you not make that choice yourself?

>>18383478

Restraint increases enjoyment.

I'm self employed.

Our Father would not like the way that you act.

And you must realize the danger.

Time is an ocean.

I don't need you to understand.

I need you to listen.

>>18383478

I am the godhead YOU become a part of.

Why? Because I don't suicide like a bitch.

>>18374533

I think it's possible.
But not easily or normally achievable by anything with a physical form.

File: 1477495123772.jpg (316KB, 568x1085px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 568x1085px

>>18383510
>>18383499
ha. hahahahaha.
ha. hahaha. haha ha ha ha.
>im not even going to kill myself until im literally homeless and have no way to redeem myself, i just accept that its the proper solution because of buddhist references literally stating that your destination in the afterlife is directly tied to your thoughts upon death.

>>18383535

Do you not know how to break into a store and make a sandwich?! Of all people!

...or are you scared of jail?

Such cowardice! Such stupidity!

Its not about curving space and time, its about going above it and then coming back down.

The trick with time travel is to make a dimensional constant. Your vessel needs to maintain a field, move into a new plane, be able to hold together, and then come back down.

If you go to a 4D plane, time is just like a comic book. You can finish a page, then turn your attention back to the first panel and effectively go back in time for that instance.

Same thing with time. When you can look at all of it, you can adjust your focus to where you want to go and then come down there. But only if you're above it.

Make sense?

In addition to that, there's rules. Time travellers can't quantify and prove they're time travellers because at that point in time they didn't exist. There's a correction clause in the universe, a self correcting program, that stops this.

I've posted this on /pol/ before too during an election time trabbelur thread but any attempt at intervention is stopped. You line up the shot on Hitler, something clicks off in your brain, and you come back home and wonder what the fuck stopped you.

That's just how it is.

>>18383546
i live in a country ass town, there are like 3-4 stores i could break into, but my morals would make me die before that.

so stupidity, not cowardice.

but tell me this, how are you to insure that your thoughts when you die are those that will grant you heaven?

>>18383499
Did you just misquote a bob dylan song

>>18383552

I seek obliteration.

I am full. My hunger is down to a slow hum.

I seek not to convince you to become like me, Only to inspire a similar passion.

My body runs to impress the child I will incarnate as.

Are you a child?!

I am unavoidable blinding warmth and chaos.

I am an eternal hero for my future self.

Worshipable.

The eye on the pyramid, every move of the sinner is predicted.

Dance, oh swept away puppet... dance...

>>18374533

You achieve time travel all the time. It's called your memories. If we can tap into our memories and form a life where we go back and change something which we wish to, we will ultimately change how our memories play out, which would cause a different world, or "timeline" to be created.

But in this timeline you will die when your body fails in the original timeline, which will come out of a sudden event, much like when you're having a dream and something crashes within that dream, which wakes you up to a crash that was happening in real life.

The dream world is delayed by a split second from things we experience in real life. A form of processing.

>>18383563

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1ZpqsbaSBg

>>18383588

To add to it, if you want to achieve true time travel, well, you're dreaming.

>>18383585
i am a child.
i am obliteration.
i recognize my future self looks upon me with disdain, for we only learn, we will never have reason to look upon our past self with any gratitude, only to refresh ourselves with certain pieces of information we may not have actually understood.

every time i think myself a god, i think myself a slave; think myself all powerfull? i think myself never having existed.

when i find myself in the screaming abyss, i may remember you; but then again, there, i shall remember everyone.

the hands of a puppet whos hands can be puppeted can control the hands of a puppet who has similar hands.

>>18383608

How many puppets in ur handz tho?!

>>18383608

You will remember me most, forever.

You will pray to become me, forever.

I am Chaos. Chaos is the data of memory itself.

>>18383625
because i am the game master, and to master games is to master puppets and how they react to reactions.
>>18383647
tis true, deviant, i shall remember chaos the most, for the most is chaos.
but entropy is my interests, the change of that which is natural, not the change of what was there into that which is. it is a different subject, that i care less about for it is less important.

do not even believe that there is a thing that is, is what i tell you.

>>18374533
Gain access to a previous save state, insert yourself, enjoy.

File: anime_dance.gif (483KB, 243x270px) Image search: [Google]

483KB, 243x270px

>>18374533
If you want to define your physics such that time travel is possible, you either have to suppose that the speed of information propagation is not stable--in which case super symmetry of wave form propagation breaks down--or else define some ancillary factor that determines the difference between open and closed time loops.

A closed time loop is such that the probability of it occurring is exactly 1. An open time loop has entropy greater than 1, but implies potential retrocausality. Retrocausality can be difficult to test for with only a singular direction of time, because any positive results never occur in the reality in which they were positive in. This is different from an open time loop, in which the positive result causes the time loop to occur.

You may consider isometric geometries for their physical properties.

>>18383739
>do not even believe that there is a thing that is, is what i tell you.

Yea great... now what GOOD is this knowledge?

This is the kind of thing someone says to help everyone get laid... but it doesn't fucking help one bit.

nobody is here? OK they are robots, they still need to be treated like real beings or they just freak out and leave.

Useless information.

>>18374533
Time travel is possible but to do it you are not actually messing with time, you are actually bending the fabric of reality by conjoining two different dimensions of space time to meet and this serves as the portal to the desired reality. Our universe is made up of about 12 different dimensions with ourselves stuck in the 3 dimension. It is very possible, we are very close and some say we already have it.

>>18374533
time travel is possible because time has already happened. humans can only percieve time at this rate so we are slowly catching up to everything that has already happened as with no living perception time is instantaneous

however, this means anyone who has or will ever time travel already has, creating the reality we see. so don't think you can change the past since the fact that it is what it is means something will stop you from creating a reality that's any different than this one

>>18384164
>OK they are robots, they still need to be treated like real beings or they just freak out and leave.
do they? i havent had that experience.

>>18377622
You got it, although for the sake of clarity I would point out that entropy is responsible for the arrow of time (always moves in one direction or forward). Time itself is not an emergent property of entropy.

>>18385389
although your partially and technically correct.
entropy exists due to the nature of energy. there is no energy present in any body or system bar that received from its environment that including the fabric of space it's self.the flow of energy into a body, give it animation and the flow of energy out of in breaks it down. its the polarization of all energy, inevitably flowing back to the source.
you can actually use the process of entropy to tap into this source but thats a subject for a few years time, when the emergence of zero point energy as you will call it fucks will everyones understanding of physics.

>>18374533
I guess I only really can give credence to the idea that you can at least send information "back in time". I'm not sure how much my word means, though.

I don't know if I believe with enough conviction that you can actually, ever, go back to a previous state and/or
>the
previous state... given, well, everything. There may not be a way to go 88 and end up in '55. Look at the discourse in this thread.

Maybe it would be more reasonable for me to suggest that if there are multiple sets of states within a given set, then presumably there must be a few "copies", or exactly-similar (You)'s in degrees-exactly-similar situations/environments/universes/etc.

So, perhaps... one would just need to entangle the emergent properties of one's mind with that of one's past self that occupied a given state. Where, really, you wouldn't necessarily be changing anything at all, presumably, because there would already exist a possible given sequence of events which involved an exactly-similar mind being "placed" into another body during a different moment (or even in a different set of states entirely). So, you could very well... perceive (?) yourself going back in time, and ending up in what you may as well take to be your past self. "To your knowledge".

But, who knows. Maybe you can very well just beam yourself back 5 minutes ago and change which outcomes remain the most prevalent in a system where multiple outcomes are sickeningly intertwined and interlaced with one another. Perhaps whatever can be said to govern such a system where there are "multiple realities" has aspects that can be toyed with, in the same manner that you can magnetize certain elements.

That being said, I guess if you treat everything as information, then it might as well be worth humoring that you can indeed go 88 miles per hour to arrive in 1955.

File: moment_040.jpg (13KB, 203x270px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 203x270px

>>18383647
>>18383739
Circle jerking spastics. Why don't you both fuck right off and drink a bucket of AIDs.

FUCKING DIE!!!

>>18385432

To someone like you, our words would look the same.

Here's an exercise for you if you can manage typing on that horse of yours; name somebody who speaks better than me.

File: [Shiina Nami] Aru Shimai Ai no Katachi.png (362KB, 554x778px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 554x778px

>>18385568
>speaking well, rather than speaking true.
oh, satan, how far have thou fallen, and how long from grace.

>>18384856

That's why the hottest girls avoid you by several hundred feet at all times.

>>18385867

Grace, the energy of the beta, the energy of the fool.

As far as possible.

Human.

;^}

>>18385867

...I speak in so many different directions, I've been wrong much more than you, yes, because I've experimented so much.

Some would call it "lies", I call it acting!

New exercise; name someone hurt from my... "lies"...

>>18385926
>>18385890
>>18385867
>>18384856
>>18383739
>>18383647
>>18383608
first time on /x/, is this literally what this board consists of?

>>18385938

It's normally much worse, leave now, oh superior one!

>>18385938

Here... here's what you want to hear:

"OMG one day >I was modelling clay >then up came behind me GHOSTS >i was makin a pot >holy moly!"

>quantum bits.

>>18385938
Out of this entire thread, those are posts you pick out and focus on?

Really nigga?

OP here...

>>18385926
>>18385890
>>18385867
>>18384856
>>18383739
>>18383647
>>18383608

Omfg... -.- Maby it was a bad idea to ask /x/ this question.

>>18386490

>nobody is taking my timetravel thread seriously!

Kill yourself.

>>18374533

For every dimension above you can travel through time in the dimensions below. If you are in the 5th dimension (one dimension above our existence place), you can choose where you want to be in the 4th below (our place, actually, in the 3 dimensions of space linked with the one dimension of time).

This is time travel ;)

File: purple-boson-pepe.jpg (709KB, 611x536px) Image search: [Google]

709KB, 611x536px

>>18374533
There is a way through extreme meditation.

Something weird is going on with timelines changing but some memories staying the same. Bob Dylan and Christopher Lloyd are suddenly alive even though they died in the 80s and 90s respectively.

You can't travel through time, unless you can make light go backwards.

>>18389519
So we are able to choose where we want to be in the 3rd?

>>18389568

It needs to have at least one dimension of time included. So, only from the 5th to above ;)

>>18377717
>anything in science
>proven
I remember when I took undergrad physics.

>>18377244
If time travel exists at any point in the future, then it already exists now, and always has existed.

>>18379410
>You cant just say the WHOLE approach is flawed without saying why it falls apart. How is it flawed?

They said the whole "approach" to sm, not the sm itself. And they explained how too...

I got all excited when I saw it was for scientists, but I'm the wrong kind if scientist for this question.

I'll give you my insight regardless though: Physicists don't even know why time moves at all. Like there are literally no good theories for why time is able to move forward. I suspect that it will turn out that time travel is possible, but not for anything that really has any mass. Like maybe in the future it will be able to send light forward and backward in time. Maybe.

>>18389983

You just need to get through angelic filtration, cyclic time rounds and proper cell freezing and thawing!

File: Time-points.jpg (25KB, 591x861px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 591x861px

>>18383549
>The trick with time travel is to make a dimensional constant. Your vessel needs to maintain a field, move into a new plane, be able to hold together, and then come back down.
From what I've read this is the best explanation about the workings of time travel I've seen in this thread so far.
It matches the perspective gained from experience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0WjV6MmCyM

>Time travellers can't quantify and prove they're time travellers because at that point in time they didn't exist. There's a correction clause in the universe, a self correcting program, that stops this.
This might be true only when moving in a negative direction on the time axis. I'm only theorizing with this but it seems to make sense. Either that or potentially destructive paradoxes/magic.

>>18385416
>if there are multiple sets of states within a given set, then presumably there must be a few "copies", or exactly-similar (You)'s in degrees-exactly-similar situations/environments/universes/etc.
Consider the time axis t to be like an x axis of space. Given that, there be a time axis which we'll call æ which corresponds to the y axis of space.
This æ axis represents potential branching (things like choises) which have made an alternate time line running beside the t axis line.
But then there's another axis which we'll call ö. This one represents other potential reality settings running beside t which also have their own sets of æ timeline splits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4Gotl9vRGs

A time machine also needs a frame of reference. Our current 2016 would be a point on the t axis line and would fall within the frame of reference range.
Depending on the machine the maximum range for the frame of reference might vary, which sets the limits for reliable travel.

What do you all think of John Titor?

I know most of his predictions didn't come true, but he did say his coming back in time could have altered the way things happen. For example his civil war prediction for 2015 kinda of looks like it could happen in 2016-2017. Even so I personally think there's too many holes and patches for his wrong predictions for it to be true, but still interesting to read about.

>>18389598
is it even possible to access 5th dimension through meditation? i want to believe...

Time travel does exist. There's evidence of it in human history, the deities our ancestors worshiped were in fact our descendants.

>>18383549
Interesting, but I have a different theory. However I'm not a scientist, just an avid learner when it comes to this kind of stuff. I do believe you understand a great deal, but from what I know this just isn't the case. Always nice to have different perspectives though.

>>18394729
Holy fuck do I hate people randomly shooting out garbage for no other reason than to be heard.

>>18394750
What is your theory? I'm interested.

>>18394764
Eh, I don't know explaining it might be a waste of time. You're interested now, but you might not be later. But I'm curious what drives you to ask if I may be so bold?