Keebs Posted December 9, 2004 Report Posted December 9, 2004 If you're discussing a discrete space, then there are discrete time units as well. They only viable increments I've seen for a discrete-spacetime so far would be the planck length and time, which give c as the fastest possible velocity. Neato.
alxian Posted December 9, 2004 Report Posted December 9, 2004 So when I look back towards the Sun what I would see is the Sun as it was 8 minutes ago, and my spaceship hovering above it for 8 minuts until the moment when I left with this revised scenario, yes you will see yourself. but its easiest to think of the effect as time shifting on a tv (or through cyberlinks dvd player when you accidentally hit pause) basic things like this point to discretion, even though your scenario smacks of string theory. no one answered my question though.. (i don't blame anyone since i posted so much to begin with) and yes i'm aware of the poll. what is the essence of the universe? information on the net of vibrating strings (the strings are stationary and one dimensional monopoles) or those monopoles are simply the smallest particles we can detect but the universe is like a huge fractal infinitely complex no matter what scale you osbserve it with. the intereaction of these ultra simple and universally ubiquitous (possibly the most ubiquitous element displacing hydrogen) and virtually identical particles make for the near perfect 'sandbox' element of our known universe. --------science has omitted something.. we know of quantum events all the way up to macro events like gamma ray burts and supernovae.. what happens when you have something on an equivelant order of magnitude? (quantum to gammaray burst) what if the event we call the big bang was in fact a big bang capable of generating z particles etc etc..its well known that many aspects of our universe points to it being either very old (preceeding the estimated big bang event) and also very young (they deserve to be heard as much as ID peeps but have your salt shacker ready) what if our range of view (defined by the radiation boundary and resolution of our current light processing technologies) was an extremelylimited view of the infinite whole.. or to bring relevence the active nature of the universe.. if ultra macro events like the big bang occur with predictable periods like suprnovae and gama ray bursts then perhaps our view of the cosmos would change no? no while you are on that scale imagine that there are billions of alien species within our current detention bubble.. imagine the energy it would take to travel between all those worlds. makes me wish that the universe is actually information on a string based system, information can be limitlessly modified with little harm done to the stream.. but matter based on quatum particles that have no connection one to the other other than bumping as they pass through powerful for lack of a better term 'gravity' fields...
Tormod Posted December 9, 2004 Report Posted December 9, 2004 with this revised scenario, yes you will see yourself. Why is it "revised"? :wink:
Tormod Posted December 9, 2004 Report Posted December 9, 2004 I can fix the Loop Quantum Gravity one, but I'm not sure how one may edit polls. Don't worry about it. :wink: Polls can't be edited after there are votes AFAIK. Also, 10 points on what? I'm confused. = ) - Alisa 10 points for you, pal, for making the poll in the first place (it's a saying over here in Norway). I was not criticizing you. The poll is fine, I was just voicing my opinion on it. ;)
DivineNathicana Posted December 10, 2004 Author Report Posted December 10, 2004 Oh hehe I'm not very familiar with Norwegian sayings... I can tell you though, you guys have awesome bands from over there! Good luck with your music and stuff, Tormod. = ) Also, my comment about Tormod's quote stemmed from me thinking that he meant to say that you would instantaneously travel to the sun, and then instantaneously right back to Earth, in which case you would have to wait 8 minutes for the light to reach you, and would see yourself only for an instant. If, however, you stay on the sun for over 8 minutes, yes, you will see yourself for 8 minutes through your telescope. Sorry for the misunderstanding. - Alisa
alxian Posted December 13, 2004 Report Posted December 13, 2004 Why is it "revised"? ;) true enough i meant clarified i had assumed tor meant he would be travelling at some point. but he in fact meant to travel instantaneously more by teleportation that matter translocation. i'd thought he meant to travel along the foreshortened distance of a wormhole or something, having little understanding for his possible use of a black hole to move between discrete points in space.
Qfwfq Posted March 3, 2005 Report Posted March 3, 2005 There is a Planck's length limit to the distance an object can travel.This is a conjecture which has spread quite a bit, all too much imv. There is really no point in it and neither QM nor RQFT lead to its necessity. Further, it would be exceedingly difficult to reconcile with the Poincaré group as being a physical symmetry, quite essential to SR. I don't know why so many people take such a conjecture seriously.
Recommended Posts