I Think Time Dilation Semantics Are Incorrect?

[antoine]

Based on Einstein's model:

 

 

Many have dreamed of figuring out how to travel in time—and dismissed it as impossible. Now, researchers have proposed a mathematical model that makes time travel possible, using concepts of Einstein’s theory of general relativity coupled with the hypothesis that time is not a separate dimension.

 

Regarding the math on this, which I have provided in the PDFs:

 

https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/hires/2012/specialrelat.jpg

 

These negatives could refer to anti de sitter space but they do refer to transtemporal dimensionality within rescaled regions of spacetime, which is another way of speaking of acausal symmetry.

 

@ Daedalus, you should share your model as it pertains to special relativity beyond the speed of light, which was what this thread was intended to falsify.

An interesting idea, but an impossibility.   We could never time travel period in a way that is imagined.   We could time travel in a sense of going to a younger planet than the Earth or an older planet than the Earth, but time travel itself is of the imagination.   We could never  devolve time and rewind the ''hands of time''.    Now is continuous, memories are our past.  We can not return to a time of a past memory although we can '''time-travel'' in our minds back to that memory.  

 

Time travel is subjective and always will be. 

[Super Polymath]

An interesting idea, but an impossibility. We could never time travel period in a way that is imagined. We could time travel in a sense of going to a younger planet than the Earth or an older planet than the Earth, but time travel itself is of the imagination. We could never devolve time and rewind the ''hands of time''. Now is continuous, memories are our past. We can not return to a time of a past memory although we can '''time-travel'' in our minds back to that memory.

 

Time travel is subjective and always will be.

 

No need for us to do it, according to these models the linearity of spacetime reverses where the higgs field gets resized & c is no longer a speed limit.

 

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/05/update-the-higgs-boson-and-a-new-physics-could-make-the-speed-of-light-possible.html.

 

At least, our speed of light. Unless you're of the mind that spacetime is discrete.

Edited August 4, 2017 by Super Polymath

[antoine]

No need for us to do it, according to these models the linearity of spacetime reverses where the higgs field gets resized & c is no longer a speed limit.

 

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/05/update-the-higgs-boson-and-a-new-physics-could-make-the-speed-of-light-possible.html.

 

At least, our speed of light. Unless you're of the mind that spacetime is discrete.

Quite clearly somebody is not very good at dimensional and vector analysis to come up with such an absurd idea about time.   Let me explain something , The Earths spins anti clockwise, moving forward in time, now even if the Earth was to spin clockwise, it would still be moving forward in time.  Likewise for vectors, moving forward in time can not be undone..  If you ''turn around '' time you are still moving forwards in time. It does not matter, the direction of time is subjective, there is no forward line, there is only a history line created.   The history line created is the confusion being used to make something look like and seem like something it is not. Exactly the same mistake Einstein and Lorentz did, using a line that isn't  there.

 

Time passed is directional proportional to the history created.  I have drew you an objective model of the time arrow to help you understand time. 

 

 

 

The future part of the time line is actually all in the present and does not exist. 

 

Einstein did not consider time passing at small scales and he also never considered  photons travel both directions between points, simultaneously.  

 

 

A photon travels from observer one to observer Two

 

A photon travels from Observer two to observer one.

 

 

If you consider the above instead of using just the one way of light , like Einstein did, we can draw very different conclusions than Einstein did. 

Edited August 4, 2017 by antoine

[Super Polymath]

Spacetime goes in reverse, this is not thr same as saying a stellar object spins in the opposite direction. Lmao

 

All Einstein said was that surpassing TSoL equals going back in time.

 

I said you either need to be an object whose radius surpasses around 5 billion light years (such as galactic superclusters) to produce superluminal gravitational ways, or the gravitational interactions of bits of scattered proton beneath the Planck length.

 

Consider a photon, due to its velocity it experiences frozen time, it does not age. If you surpass c(v) then you must experience time in reverse.

 

The velocity of gravity is the same as the velocity of light, you follow? So now consider the double slit experiment & the observer effect from a non-QM interpretation involving tired light. A proton splits into a wave function of pieces of scattered proton, each with a radius beneath the Planck length. Fire photoelectrons at the tracks of these proton beams & the gravity of these photoelectrons recombines the pieces back into one whole proton. This is what we call the observer effect that collapses the wave function. Now, if a beam of photons lack the velocity to hit the protons directly, & can only hit their tracks, but the gravity wave they generate is fast enough to make it to the proton. This is what's known as The Addition of Velocities. Gravitational waves propagate at c, photons propagate at c, the gravity of photons or the sub-Planck pieces of their wavelength, is added to the velocity of the photon, allowing for superluminal interactions like the observer effect. & as I explained earlier in this very post, superluminal motion equates to negative time.

Edited August 4, 2017 by Super Polymath

[Maine farmer]

Spacetime goes in reverse, this is not thr same as saying a stellar object spins in the opposite direction. Lmao

 

All Einstein said was that surpassing TSoL equals going back in time.

 

this very post, superluminal motion equates to negative time.

Here is one place where I think clarification is in order. If you could experience negative time, which you can't, I don't think it would be like in the movies where you go back to before you were born and meet your parents before they met each other.  You would be  the only one to experience the negative time,  so you wouldn't really end up in the past, because throughout your travels, the rest of the universe, in which you are travelling, would still be experiencing positive time.  It's all relative, isn't it?

[Super Polymath]

Here is one place where I think clarification is in order. If you could experience negative time, which you can't, I don't think it would be like in the movies where you go back to before you were born and meet your parents before they met each other. You would be the only one to experience the negative time, so you wouldn't really end up in the past, because throughout your travels, the rest of the universe, in which you are travelling, would still be experiencing positive time. It's all relative, isn't it?

No,relative to the time traveler (the person whose positive linear timeline is opposite to ours) the rest of the universe (that ticks in positive time relative to us) is experiencing negative time. That time traveler is just experiencing positive time from his perspective. Edited August 8, 2017 by Super Polymath