Discussion Time Travel - Page 10 - Science & Technology - HWzone Forums
adplus-dvertising
Skip to content
  • Create an account
  • About Us

    Hello Guest!

     
    Please note - in order to participate in our community, comment and open new discussions, you must join as a registered member.

    Our members enjoy many advantages, including the ability to participate in discussions, enjoy raffles and promotions for members of the site, and receive our weekly content directly by email.

    Do not like being harassed by email? You can register for the site but do not submit your registration to the weekly email updates.

Discussion Time Travel


Yoav Goldhorn

Recommended Posts

I'm sure there were those who thought it on television. It's like asking someone from the Middle Ages if he thinks we can ever talk to someone in real time if we're in France and he's in India.

Our understanding of the manipulation of time in space is no deeper than the understanding of a Roman gladiator about microwaves, or the understanding of concrete brick on Caucasian politics in the late 50.

Link to content
Share on other sites

  • תגובות 147
  • Opens on
  • Last comment

The logic lies in the abilities of the individual

so

I definitely believe there were people before 300 who dreamed of things we still did not dream of including speed machines, etc.,

The problem with time is the perception of the person forced on nature At the same time, the person is limited in his technological ability limited by his mind, I know that once the number of people unite we can reach the ideas and solutions that one person can not, just like the capabilities of one computer compared to Of computers.

Anything is possible if you can think of it!

Every idea that comes to man's mind is feasible. The idea itself is composed of parts of reality. After all, there is no way.

The Journey in Time If we can calculate the probability of a particular event becoming a reality, our sorrow and sorrow as human beings is not yet in this phase of mental development.

Link to content
Share on other sites

You can not compare a time machine to other inventions.

The universe has defined rules, among them there are many things to do, but the laws can not be changed.

Back in time is no more logical than 1 + 1 = 4-

In truth the infer is right. History shows that things that in the past seemed illogical, happened. If you were to tell a man in ancient Greece that the world is made up of more than 100 elements, and that they are all made up of a nucleus containing protons and neutrons, and electrons in specific orbitals that are the possible quantum states of the Schrodinger equation or that people can talk at the other end of the earth ( , He would probably tell you that you are crazy and need urgent care.

Why? Because the way of thinking of that period did not fit those descriptions. Greek philosophers believed in the theory of the Four Elements, which is probably light years away from quantum theory and modern chemistry. Cell phones could not exist if there is no electromagnetic theory, so it is clear that no one will believe such a lie that one day they will be able to talk on a device that will happen to a cellular phone, and that none of these devices will have any connection.

That's how it was and that's how it is now. Things that are now philosophy and talk in the air, like this discussion, can happen in the future. Paradoxes that people present to contradict ideas are irrelevant - it is clear that science as it is today is not suitable for time travel, just as the theory of four elements does not fit the modern atom model.

There is one law that does not fail - science always changes. We do not know whether it changes to the truth or not (we tend to believe it), but it always changes. So to assume that today we know what will and will not be, it is an insult to science.

Link to content
Share on other sites

In truth the infer is right. History shows that things that in the past seemed illogical, happened. If you were to tell a man in ancient Greece that the world is made up of more than 100 elements, and that they are all made up of a nucleus containing protons and neutrons, and electrons in specific orbitals that are the possible quantum states of the Schrodinger equation or that people can talk at the other end of the earth ( , He would probably tell you that you are crazy and need urgent care.

Why? Because the way of thinking of that period did not fit those descriptions. Greek philosophers believed in the theory of the Four Elements, which is probably light years away from quantum theory and modern chemistry. Cell phones could not exist if there is no electromagnetic theory, so it is clear that no one will believe such a lie that one day they will be able to talk on a device that will happen to a cellular phone, and that none of these devices will have any connection.

That's how it was and that's how it is now. Things that are now philosophy and talk in the air, like this discussion, can happen in the future. Paradoxes that people present to contradict ideas are irrelevant - it is clear that science as it is today is not suitable for time travel, just as the theory of four elements does not fit the modern atom model.

There is one law that does not fail - science always changes. We do not know whether it changes to the truth or not (we tend to believe it), but it always changes. So to assume that today we know what will and will not be, it is an insult to science.

The fact that there is no paradox that denies why matter must be composed of particles rather than water, earth and air fire, which, strange as it may seem, came to something long before everyone else. Ultimately everything in the universe exists as it is because of 4 forces, gravity, electromagnetic force, weak nuclear power, and strong nuclear power.

The point is that time travel is too paradoxical to be possible at any practical level, at least for poor human beings. We live in a three-dimensional concept on the cross-section with the fourth dimension, so for us time is abstract, we have no ability to really quantitate time , Are units that are blown up). While we have an excellent ability to understand what distance is, measure distance, space, or anything else consisting of the three dimensions of space, we have no problem. On the other hand we have to rely on periodic phenomena in the universe for the most basic ability to quantify time in some way.

Link to content
Share on other sites

If you told a man in ancient Greece that the world is made up of more than 100 elements, and that they are all made up of a nucleus containing protons and neutrons, and electrons in specific orbitals that are the possible quantum states of the Schrodinger equation, he would probably tell you that you are crazy and need urgent attention.

I'm not from ancient Greece andClick here to In a second I would need urgent attention!

Link to content
Share on other sites

The fact that there is no paradox that denies why matter must be composed of particles rather than water, earth and air fire, which, strange as it may seem, came to something long before everyone else. Ultimately everything in the universe exists as it is because of 4 forces, gravity, electromagnetic force, weak nuclear power, and strong nuclear power.

Yes, there is a paradox that denies this. If you limit the material to the limitations of the four-element theory, then there are materials created externally, such as a computer screen.

As for the standard model - it is what is now perceived as "true" reality (not going into details, not me and I believe that no one here has no formal knowledge about the standard model). Will 1000 years still be there? I do not know, but I do not. If we rely on science change in history, while 1000 year will hardly remain a trace of today's science.

I believe that this lecture will interest everyone who enters this discussion. The lecture is about the future of physics. The lecturer is Prof. David Gross, winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics for 2004:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Technion#p/c/8814C902ACB98559/4/iNmZqH01nX0

And written in Hebrew that includes parts of the lecture:

http://www.hayadan.org.il/gross-the-physics-have-future-2405084/

Link to content
Share on other sites

Yes, there is a paradox that denies this. If you limit the material to the limitations of the four-element theory, then there are materials created externally, such as a computer screen.

As for the standard model - it is what is now perceived as "true" reality (not going into details, not me and I believe that no one here has no formal knowledge about the standard model). Will 1000 years still be there? I do not know, but I do not. If we rely on science change in history, while 1000 year will hardly remain a trace of today's science.

I believe that this lecture will interest everyone who enters this discussion. The lecture is about the future of physics. The lecturer is Prof. David Gross, winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics for 2004:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Technion#p/c/8814C902ACB98559/4/iNmZqH01nX0

And written in Hebrew that includes parts of the lecture:

http://www.hayadan.org.il/gross-the-physics-have-future-2405084/

Again, what is the difference between the 4 theory and the theory of relativity and quantum theory?

Link to content
Share on other sites

The difference is that the four-element theory has been refuted and the rest is not yet. What answer do you expect?

The point is, you do not understand that the two theories have tried to explain the same thing, and quite similarly, again that everything in the universe is composed of the same things, which is true in the end. And the theory of 4 is never paradoxical, if it is too "simple", just like Newtonian mechanics goes into the trash the moment you enter something approaching the scale of relativity, it does not mean that incorrect neutron mechanics means that it is not broad enough, Is obviously wrong because quantum theory negates some of its assumptions.

On the other hand, any theory that tries to touch time travel enters internal paradoxes that obstruct it.

Link to content
Share on other sites

The point is, you do not understand that the two theories have tried to explain the same thing, and quite similarly, again that everything in the universe is composed of the same things, which is true in the end. And the theory of 4 is never paradoxical, if it is too "simple", just like Newtonian mechanics goes into the trash the moment you enter something approaching the scale of relativity, it does not mean that incorrect neutron mechanics means that it is not broad enough, Is obviously wrong because quantum theory negates some of its assumptions.

On the other hand, any theory that tries to touch time travel enters internal paradoxes that obstruct it.

The theory of the four elements is paradoxical. You can not, with the aid of earth, air, water and fire, create a computer screen for example, and the fact that a computer screen does exist. If you look at it under the assumptions of theory, it is an object made up of something that does not exist.

Regarding the "correctness of theories" - this is a philosophical discussion that can be debated for hours and in vain. The truth is that to this day there is no theory left from the dawn of history, all of which were replaced at some point, so I would not say that there is such a theory. Newtonian mechanics, for example, is not true at high speeds and in microscopic sizes (this field belongs to quantum field theory), you want to call it not broad enough, call it that. The theories that are currently likely to be replaced at some point once they are refuted in the experiment or find more compatible theories. The following theories can reconcile phenomena that today seem impossible or even predict new ones.

As for the journey in time I have nothing to add except what I said in the first response. The way we think today is adapted to the world we know, we can not think of time travel in a way that makes sense to us. And as for the theories that deal with time travel, really, except for a few users here with a bachelor's degree, no one even has the basic knowledge to begin to understand the complexity of theories, let alone deal with their paradoxes. This discussion is no more than a discussion that you can find in courses of philosophy of science in the Faculty of Humanistic Studies.

Link to content
Share on other sites

The point is, you do not understand that the two theories have tried to explain the same thing, and quite similarly, again that everything in the universe is composed of the same things, which is true in the end. And the theory of 4 is never paradoxical, if it is too "simple", just like Newtonian mechanics goes into the trash the moment you enter something approaching the scale of relativity, it does not mean that incorrect neutron mechanics means that it is not broad enough, Is obviously wrong because quantum theory negates some of its assumptions.

On the other hand, any theory that tries to touch time travel enters internal paradoxes that obstruct it.

I have no idea which universe you live in, and perhaps you will solve the debate if you can tell us how you get there, but the Newtonian doctrine is completely untrue. Is a total case of relativity.

For example: I can say that the earth is flat, just because I'm small against it and do not notice its curvature, and that does not make it right. So according to your logic, I'm right to say that the earth is flat, but my argument is simply not broad enough. So true, the earth is flat, but in the broad sense is actually a big ball. Stop talking nonsense.

And in case you're going to start fooling me: yes. Newtonian theory is incorrect. The only thing you can do with her today is to solve math problems in physics and the 1 physics course at the university. In fact, the theory itself presents such weak tools for problem solving (beyond the problem of the bodies and the harmonious oscillator, there is no problem with analytic reasoning), beyond the three laws of Neution and the leap of thought in them (especially in terms of mathematics and understanding of what energy is, momentum, etc.) ), Has no use.

Moreover, the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics do not come to describe the same reality, and there is no contradiction here. One describes the world on an astronomical scale, the other describes the world on a nanometer scale. The fact that humanity expects one theory to include everything is something else, and it has nothing to do with this discussion.

And as for the standard model, I have no idea how you got there. And, for those who raised the point, I have extensive knowledge in the standard model, this is one of the most complex subjects in physics today, and your Wikipedia knowledge on the subject please keep a different topik.

If I call the electromagnetic force fofo it will change something?

If I call a foot tail, how many feet will a dog have? 4. It does not matter if I call the foot tail, it's still a tail. What is the meaning of this reaction?

Link to content
Share on other sites

ארכיון

This discussion has been archived and new comments can not be added.


  • Latest news

  • Buzz-Zone: Everything hot on the net

×
  • Create new ...

At the top of the news:

new on the site