Star Trek technologies and real physics
posted on November 8th, 2004, 9:44 am
The new season is definitely coming along better than the last one - and I agree - it's because the "screwing with the timeline and boring the audience to death" campaign is over! Now Brent Spiner's on the show - this should be interesting! He died as Data in 2381 (Nemesis) and came back 226 years earlier as a mad doctor - wow - maybe the whole timeline thing isn't over! 
The whole problem I have with the time travel thing is based on the infamous "Grandfather Hypothesis" - which says, "if you go back in time and kill your grandfather, you will not exist - ever." Well, let's analyze that for a moment - shall we? If you killed your grandfather, you wouldn't exist - that's correct. But, since you didn't exist, you would not have traveled back in time and killed your grandfather - making sense now? You see, turning back time like that is just insane - it ends up with repeat after repeat of the same thing happening over and over again. Now, it's true, someone else can go back in time and kill your grandfather and then you wouldn't exist, but it wouldn't matter if you weren't the person who went back in time to kill your grandfather - so maybe that could alter the timeline. But if a person kills their own line before they were born, then it would have never even happened. And if time travel does ever become possible, then if you go back in time and screw with the past too much, you could always kill someone in your gene-line (considering you traveled to a time before you were born) and that would make it as if it never happened, since you would never have existed to go back in time in the first place. Now if you go back in time to a past where you were already born (like, say, 20 years), and if you screw up the timeline in such a way as to cause a catastrophe in the future, you could reverse it by killing your past self (then you wouldn't have existed to change time in the first place). There's always a way around time travel.
As a law, I state that travel through time in the future is possible - if you go very very fast, you can go into the future (going at light speed to Alpha Centauri would take you there in 4.3 years, and then coming back it would total 8.6 years - when you get back home, everyone would have aged 8.6 years - going light speed will take you there instantly - because according to the laws of relativity, anything that travels at light speed is travelling everywhere in the universe at once - to the person inside the ship going light speed). To people on Earth, observing an object going the speed of light, the object moves at 300,000 kilometers per second - definitely not covering every part of the universe. But to the person on the ship, time does not exist if you're going light speed. I have found a direct correlation between time, energy, and motion - all three are results of each other. Matter does not exist without energy (because matter can become energy and energy can become matter). Time is a manifestation of energy - motion is a manifestation of energy. Existence is a manifestation of motion. Time is the unverse's way of not making everything happen at the same time, or not making anything happen ever. That said, if time doesn't exist to the person going light speed, then energy doesn't exist (the amount of energy it takes to go light speed in our dimension is infinite - and if you get to that point, energy as a value is undefined and is in flux between existance and non-existance, meaning something going that speed can exist and at the same time disappear completely - since time becomes useless, energy and motion become useless - the bounds of the universe are 0 - that's why one would cover the entire universe at that speed (in this dimension of normal space).
Apparently, going faster than the speed of light has yet another affect - reversal of time - going back in time. To do so would violate every single rule of physics you could think of - reverse time (not to be confused with anti-time) means reverse existence, if energy and time are directly correlated. Doing something like that would either put the person travelling back in time out of existence or do something wierd to the universe or the space-time continuum.
Now - this is how Trek can get away with these apparent violations of space-time. And it isn't science fiction anymore, since it has been MATHEMATICALLY proved that hyperspace exists, and it is just another dimension of our universe. Hyperspace, or subspace, is a way for ships to go at or faster than the speed of light, as subspace is a portal into a sub-dimension that connects two points in the universe - the more energy your ship has available, the further apart these points are and the "faster" you go. But the ship is not going "faster" - faster would indicate it is traversing distance in our dimension, something that's only possible at sub-light speeds. Instead, the ship is moving through another dimension (or the dimension is moving the ship along - either way, it's pretty much the same effect). This is possible. Now how can this tie in with time? I'm not saying it isn't possible - it is just something that is foolish to do (and that's where some of the more interesting time-travel plots come from - like Back to the Future). I'm glad I mentioned Back to the Future because there was an explaination of different realities - going back in time and changing the timeline produces a new reality - one based on the new changes in the timeline (in fact, the other timeline that is unchanged still exists). If this were true, it may be a way around the great paradox that is travelling back in time. In a way, it would seem logical - going back in time like that is pretty much like creating a new universe - and the universe's way of sorting through all that is to create another reality based on new changes in the timeline. If this were true, then maybe all this b.s. that is Enterprise's third season could be possible - they did get back to their normal timeline eventually and circumvented a catastrophe of not only biblical propertions, but temporal proportions (apparently, that's even worse than biblical).
I think in the end what I was complaining about with Enterprise's "timeline stuff" is that it was totally confusing and I just couldn't keep track of what was happening from episode to episode. Thank God in the end, I was able to understand it all. My explaination of time travel above is long and confusing, but I love to get all philosophical about everything. Hey, if you guys got into a discussion about religion, I'd probably write a 5000 word essay about how energy and God are related - yep, I've found a tie between religion and physics (a theory, nonetheless). In short, it says that since God can be everywhere and is indestructable and that energy can neither be destroyed nor created, then that means energy may be God and vice versa. God can't be destroyed or created - energy can't be destroyed or created. There is no other form of elemental material that can say that about itself - even photons can be destroyed, since they are packets of energy and energy can survive on its own. Quarks can be destroyed as well - energy can't and God can't. I just wanted to put that idea out there as well - there are tons more theories I have, but I'll stop now!
The whole problem I have with the time travel thing is based on the infamous "Grandfather Hypothesis" - which says, "if you go back in time and kill your grandfather, you will not exist - ever." Well, let's analyze that for a moment - shall we? If you killed your grandfather, you wouldn't exist - that's correct. But, since you didn't exist, you would not have traveled back in time and killed your grandfather - making sense now? You see, turning back time like that is just insane - it ends up with repeat after repeat of the same thing happening over and over again. Now, it's true, someone else can go back in time and kill your grandfather and then you wouldn't exist, but it wouldn't matter if you weren't the person who went back in time to kill your grandfather - so maybe that could alter the timeline. But if a person kills their own line before they were born, then it would have never even happened. And if time travel does ever become possible, then if you go back in time and screw with the past too much, you could always kill someone in your gene-line (considering you traveled to a time before you were born) and that would make it as if it never happened, since you would never have existed to go back in time in the first place. Now if you go back in time to a past where you were already born (like, say, 20 years), and if you screw up the timeline in such a way as to cause a catastrophe in the future, you could reverse it by killing your past self (then you wouldn't have existed to change time in the first place). There's always a way around time travel.
As a law, I state that travel through time in the future is possible - if you go very very fast, you can go into the future (going at light speed to Alpha Centauri would take you there in 4.3 years, and then coming back it would total 8.6 years - when you get back home, everyone would have aged 8.6 years - going light speed will take you there instantly - because according to the laws of relativity, anything that travels at light speed is travelling everywhere in the universe at once - to the person inside the ship going light speed). To people on Earth, observing an object going the speed of light, the object moves at 300,000 kilometers per second - definitely not covering every part of the universe. But to the person on the ship, time does not exist if you're going light speed. I have found a direct correlation between time, energy, and motion - all three are results of each other. Matter does not exist without energy (because matter can become energy and energy can become matter). Time is a manifestation of energy - motion is a manifestation of energy. Existence is a manifestation of motion. Time is the unverse's way of not making everything happen at the same time, or not making anything happen ever. That said, if time doesn't exist to the person going light speed, then energy doesn't exist (the amount of energy it takes to go light speed in our dimension is infinite - and if you get to that point, energy as a value is undefined and is in flux between existance and non-existance, meaning something going that speed can exist and at the same time disappear completely - since time becomes useless, energy and motion become useless - the bounds of the universe are 0 - that's why one would cover the entire universe at that speed (in this dimension of normal space).
Apparently, going faster than the speed of light has yet another affect - reversal of time - going back in time. To do so would violate every single rule of physics you could think of - reverse time (not to be confused with anti-time) means reverse existence, if energy and time are directly correlated. Doing something like that would either put the person travelling back in time out of existence or do something wierd to the universe or the space-time continuum.
Now - this is how Trek can get away with these apparent violations of space-time. And it isn't science fiction anymore, since it has been MATHEMATICALLY proved that hyperspace exists, and it is just another dimension of our universe. Hyperspace, or subspace, is a way for ships to go at or faster than the speed of light, as subspace is a portal into a sub-dimension that connects two points in the universe - the more energy your ship has available, the further apart these points are and the "faster" you go. But the ship is not going "faster" - faster would indicate it is traversing distance in our dimension, something that's only possible at sub-light speeds. Instead, the ship is moving through another dimension (or the dimension is moving the ship along - either way, it's pretty much the same effect). This is possible. Now how can this tie in with time? I'm not saying it isn't possible - it is just something that is foolish to do (and that's where some of the more interesting time-travel plots come from - like Back to the Future). I'm glad I mentioned Back to the Future because there was an explaination of different realities - going back in time and changing the timeline produces a new reality - one based on the new changes in the timeline (in fact, the other timeline that is unchanged still exists). If this were true, it may be a way around the great paradox that is travelling back in time. In a way, it would seem logical - going back in time like that is pretty much like creating a new universe - and the universe's way of sorting through all that is to create another reality based on new changes in the timeline. If this were true, then maybe all this b.s. that is Enterprise's third season could be possible - they did get back to their normal timeline eventually and circumvented a catastrophe of not only biblical propertions, but temporal proportions (apparently, that's even worse than biblical).
I think in the end what I was complaining about with Enterprise's "timeline stuff" is that it was totally confusing and I just couldn't keep track of what was happening from episode to episode. Thank God in the end, I was able to understand it all. My explaination of time travel above is long and confusing, but I love to get all philosophical about everything. Hey, if you guys got into a discussion about religion, I'd probably write a 5000 word essay about how energy and God are related - yep, I've found a tie between religion and physics (a theory, nonetheless). In short, it says that since God can be everywhere and is indestructable and that energy can neither be destroyed nor created, then that means energy may be God and vice versa. God can't be destroyed or created - energy can't be destroyed or created. There is no other form of elemental material that can say that about itself - even photons can be destroyed, since they are packets of energy and energy can survive on its own. Quarks can be destroyed as well - energy can't and God can't. I just wanted to put that idea out there as well - there are tons more theories I have, but I'll stop now!
posted on November 8th, 2004, 2:20 pm
Last edited by Anonymous on November 8th, 2004, 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
posted on November 8th, 2004, 2:54 pm
Last edited by DOCa Cola on November 8th, 2004, 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
posted on November 8th, 2004, 3:40 pm
posted on November 8th, 2004, 4:24 pm
posted on November 8th, 2004, 6:26 pm
posted on November 8th, 2004, 7:14 pm
posted on November 8th, 2004, 8:43 pm
posted on November 8th, 2004, 10:59 pm
posted on November 9th, 2004, 12:11 am
posted on November 9th, 2004, 1:15 am
posted on November 9th, 2004, 2:35 am
posted on November 9th, 2004, 11:21 am
Last edited by Anonymous on November 9th, 2004, 11:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
posted on November 9th, 2004, 4:29 pm
posted on November 9th, 2004, 6:53 pm
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests