• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Time travel = space travel?

2old4this

Honorary Admin
Messages
1,658
Likes
0
My Location
Cloud Cuckoo Land
#1
Most time-travel tales from HG-Wells' classic onwards all depict objects moving in time and then rematerialising in the same spot on the earth (or wherever).
But I think there's an alternative view.

In two dimensions, we can move left/right or forward/backwards. If we elect to move left/right we do not move any distance forwards or backwards at all. Or we can decide to move in both dimensions at once: two steps to the left and one forward, say.
In three dimesions the same thing applies. We can choose to go in any one given direction without moving at all through the other two. We can go three steps to the left. Or Three steps forward. Or climb three steps upwards. Or we can do a combination. Three steps upwards and one to the left, for example.

In the four dimensions of space-time, the same principles apply. We should be able to move through time alone, or through time and space in any given proportions.

Imagine we decide to move through time alone.

Where we end up at may not actually be where we started from spatially. This is because while we have been traversing the time dimension, the earth (or whatever is our starting point) has itself moved spatially. As well as the earth's rotation, there is also the earth's orbit around the sun to consider. And the sun's orbit around the galactic centre. And the galaxy's acceleration towards the so-called Great Attractor. And the entire universe's expansion to boot. All in all, we are whizzing about the universe along multiple trajectories at phenomenal rates.

So the question is: when we rematerialise at the different time, will we be somewhere in outer space, the earth having now moved thousands of kilometers around the galaxy?

Or will our current momentum through space have caused us to "keep up" while we were moving through time?

In the former case, where we effectively step off this moving universe without retaining spatial momentum and then reembark at a different time (and place), we might wonder whether we have violated the law of conservation of momentum. But I don't tyhink we would have. From the universe's perspective, upon rematerialisation at the new time coordinate, we retain the same spatial momentum we had previously but now it is being exerted at different spatial coordinates.

So such a scenario opens up the interesting possibility that time-travel would be exploitable as travel through space. If time travel could be achieved at low-cost then we have simultaneously developed a low-cost means of normal travel.

Thoughts?

2old
 

Channel Hopper

Suffering fools just so you don't have to
Staff member
Messages
23,925
Likes
4,981
My Satellite Setup
A little less analogue, and a lot more crap.
My Location
UK South East
#2
According to the Big Bang theory (Im not a believer of this one as I prefer to think the universe is already infinite, and all the material is simply filling out to a uniform medium), all particles are following the trajectory away from the initial point of creation (using this word only to describe the foundation of particles as we know and understasnd them today).

Regardless of the speed at which various planets and systems within our galaxy are travelling relative to each other - and the nearby clusters, the actual speed is almost minute relative to the distances that our part of space is travelling away from the others.

I also believe that because the universe is infinite, what we are seeing as the source of the creation of that we can presently observe via telescopes and other detection systems is only a tiny part of it.

In much the same way as liquids evaporate in a vacuum will fill a large chamber, our observable bit of this universe is just one bit of the evaporating fluid, becoming less dense as it changes state to 'fill' the space around it



Other parts of the 'liquid' are following a similar path of development, though not from the same point in space, and the paths travelled by the some of the expanding particles will be travelling our way.

Since we have (science fiction apart) in our world, a limitation of light speed, the ability to observe any of the particles travelling towards us at half the speed of light would be impossible to observe let alone detect.

The idea of 'stepping off' a moving platform and climb onto something that also occupying the same bit of space at a different time would be convenient if it could happen, as it would allow look at the parts that are impossible to perceive whilst travelling towards them.

The downside is that it would be impossible to return to let anyone know that it had been a successful trip.


Eventually though the intermixing of the particles from different take off points, by their gravitational interaction would ensure that the relative speeds would be slow enough, enabling some form of movement between them, and hopefully there would be enough material left in clumps to ensure what is within walking distance is interesting enough to warrant a search.



There are therefore more items aroud us than we could ever
 
Messages
13
Likes
0
My Location
pj::
#3
when we rematerialise at the different time, will we be somewhere in outer space, the earth having now moved thousands of kilometers around the galaxy?
This aspect is fergotten in almost all time travel stories.
I only know of 1 movie who did not.
In a experiment of sending something 2 seconds in the future is rematerialized 10 cm from the sending place. (because of the earth rotation).

Another way of time travel, but is not realy time travel is speed.
Time is not constand, it slows down when you make more speed and will stop when you reach light speed.

Supose you travel in space after breakfast up to lightspeed and slowdown to zero at lunchtime.
Then going back to earth at the same way and arrive at diner.
You would be 8 hours older, but on earth are 18 years past.
 

Channel Hopper

Suffering fools just so you don't have to
Staff member
Messages
23,925
Likes
4,981
My Satellite Setup
A little less analogue, and a lot more crap.
My Location
UK South East
#4
Then going back to earth at the same way and arrive at dinner.
You would be 8 hours older, but on earth are 18 years past.


The breakfast plates in the sink would have grown legs and taken over the kitchen as well as the house.

Heinleins Time for the Stars suggested that anyone travelling by normal spacecraft means to the stars would leave a planet and the advance of technology left behind, coupled with the suggested alteration of time on the planet Earth would mean the later generations should in theory overtake the first craft with whatever advanced mechanism theyve built to travel to the distant lands.

This uses the idea put forward by Einstein, but in my mind a spacecraft that is travelling at great speed but not aging, would appear to the earth observer as not travelling so fast (as Earth is gaining more years than the travelling vehicle), which somewhat conflicts with the thoughts of building a super fast craft in the first place

However in the greater picture of 2Old, the speeds at which the two objects (planet and spacecraft) are moving apart, is all relative when compared to all else around them, and so the ages gained by either side would appear to be identical. Einstiens idea even though its been proven in the local vicinity of this planet, doesnt seem to hold water when going into deep space

The beginning of a headache I think, unless someone can clarify
 
Messages
13
Likes
0
My Location
pj::
#5
However in the greater picture of 2Old, the speeds at which the two objects (planet and spacecraft) are moving apart, is all relative when compared to all else around them
Than lightspeed is also relative.
The sun sends light in oposite directions.
The speed difference is twice the lightspeed
 

Channel Hopper

Suffering fools just so you don't have to
Staff member
Messages
23,925
Likes
4,981
My Satellite Setup
A little less analogue, and a lot more crap.
My Location
UK South East
#6
Not true, the speed of light is the fastest that can occur, anywhere, so the speed of each object must be up to half the speed of light, relative to each other

Then of course the need to have a speedometer thats able to tell how fast you are approaching something, doppler effect (blue shift) would not work when the closing speed of objects is that approaching light

A migrane coming on now - wheres the aspirin