In the future we will be able to cross the galaxy at a speed close to the speed of light when the people inside the spaceship will only have 80 years. A journey to the future will solve the problem of paradoxes
Physicist Stephen Hawking is considered the smartest man in the world, yet he devotes his time and energy (and an episode of his show series on the Discovery Channel) to the subject of time travel. Hawking even believes that time travel is possible, but only in one direction - to the future. This is after about a week ago he expressed caSupports the existence of aliens (although not in connection with them).
Evidence that this is possible includes elements of quantum theory, inferences from Einstein's theory of relativity as well as evidence provided by the particle accelerator at CERN.
In an article published this week in the British "Daily Mail", the cosmologist Stephen Hawking proposed not one but three realistic and theoretical ideas for time travel, one of which, he says, is even practical. First, he states, one must agree to the idea that time is a dimension, just like width, height and length.
Hawking uses the example of driving a car: you drive forward. It's one way. You turn right or left, that's the second direction. You are driving up the mountain road, this is the third dimension. The fourth dimension is time.
Movies about time travel show cars consuming energy. The machine creates a route through the fourth dimension - a tunnel through time. The brave or reckless time traveler prepares for who knows what, and steps into the time tunnel to appear who knows when. This concept is far-fetched, but in the proposals it is possible that there will be a completely different form of time travel and the idea is not so crazy." Hawking said.
The laws of physics actually allow the idea of time travel, through gates called wormholes.
"The truth is wormholes surround us from all sides, only they are too small for us to see them. They are in hidden corners of space and time," writes Hawking. "Nothing is flat or solid. If you look closely enough at anything you will find holes and wrinkles. This is a basic physical principle and can be extended to time as well. Even something as smooth as a billiard ball has lots of cracks and voids.
Quantum foam and tiny wormholes
"Down at the smallest scale, smaller even than molecules, smaller than atoms, there is a place called quantum foam. That's where the wormholes are. Tiny tunnels of shortcuts in space and time that are constantly created, disappear and re-create in the quantum world, and they actually connect two separate places in two different times."
The tunnels, unfortunately, are so small that humans cannot enter them, their diameter is a billionth trillion trillionth of a centimeter - but the physicists believe that they will be able to capture a wormhole and make it big enough for humans or spaceships to pass through." Hawking writes.
"Theoretically, a time tunnel or wormhole could do even more than take us to other planets. If both sides are linked to the same place but separated in time we can launch a spaceship that will go near the earth but reach the far distance. Maybe the dinosaurs witnessed her landing?” Hawking writes.
In the end, the scientists may discover that travel only to the future is possible, the laws of nature may make the journey to the past impossible due to the need to preserve the connection between cause and effect. For example the grandfather paradox - you can travel in the past and do something that prevents yourself from being born. How can you exist in the future and travel back in time?
"Time flows like a river, and it seems as if each of us is constantly carried along the current continuum of time. But time is like a river in another way. It flows at different speeds in different places, this is the key to traveling into the future" writes Hawking.
Albert Einstein proposed 100 years ago the idea that there are places where time slows down, and others where time speeds up, notes Hawking. "He is absolutely right." The proof, says Hawking, lies in the Global Positioning System (GPS) network, which, in addition to helping us navigate the Earth, also reveals that time passes faster in space.
"Inside the spacecraft, every clock is very accurate. But despite being so accurate, there is a gap of about a third of a billionth of a second each day. The system needs to be fixed to avoid drifting, otherwise these small differences will disrupt the whole system and cause every GPS device to deviate by 10 kilometers every day." Hawking said. The clocks are not to blame - it is the earth's pull that causes the deviation.
Einstein realized that matter attracts time and slows it down like the slow parts of the river. The heavier the object, the more it pulls back time, writes Hawking and "it is this amazing reality that opens the door to the possibility of time travel towards the future."
Black holes and flying at the speed of light
The key to time travel lies in black holes, objects so dense that not even light can escape their gravitational grip. “A black hole ... has a dramatic effect on time. It can slow him down far more than anything else in the galaxy. Something that makes it a natural time machine", Hawking writes.
Imagine a spacecraft orbiting the supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy, 26,000 light years away. From Earth, it would look like the ship makes one orbit every 16 minutes, Hawking writes. However, for the brave crew members on board, time will slow down and they will only experience the entire coffee for eight minutes. If they persist in this for five years, ten years will have already passed on Earth. This scenario does not produce the paradox inherent in wormhole flight, but it is still impractical," Hawking said. But there is one more option: super fast travel.
"This is due to another strange property of the universe," writes Hawking - the cosmic speed limit: 300,000 kilometers per second, or the speed of light. "Nothing can exceed the speed of light because this is one of the basic principles of nature. But according to Hawking traveling at a speed close to the speed of light is a fast travel into the future."
"Imagine a train track circling the Earth. On board are passengers with a one-way ticket to the future. The train starts to accelerate, faster and faster. And in the end it circles the earth again and again and again. To approach the speed of light would mean circling the Earth seven times per second. But no matter how much power the train has, it cannot really reach the speed of light, as the laws of physics forbid it.
"Instead, let's say it's getting closer," Hawking writes. "Something unusual is happening: time begins to flow slowly on the board relative to the rest of the world, just like near the black hole, only stronger. Everything on the train is in slow motion."
Speed of light protection
"Imagine that the train will leave the station on January 1, 2050 and move in circles around the Earth over and over again for 100 years. When it arrives and stops on January 1, 2150, only one week has passed for the passengers because time has slowed down a lot inside the train. When they leave they will find a world very different from the one they left. In one week they traveled 100 years into the future," Hawking writes.
Currently, the fastest movement on Earth takes place in the circular tunnel of the world's largest particle accelerator at CERN, in Geneva.
"When a force is applied to the particles, they accelerate from zero to 60,000 km/h in a fraction of a second. The force is then increased forcing the particles to fly faster and faster, until they are racing around the tunnel 11,000 times a second, which is almost the speed of light. But just like the train, they will never quite be able to reach terminal speed. They can only reach 99.99 percent of the limit. When this happens, they also begin time travel. We know this because we discover some extremely short-lived particles called pimesons. They usually decay after 25 billionths of a second, but when they are accelerated to almost the speed of light they live 30 times longer.
To accelerate humans to this speed we would need to be in space, Hokig says. So far the highest speed achieved was 40 thousand km/h on board Apollo 10.
"To travel in time, we would have to fly more than 2,000 times (than Apollo 10). And to do that we would need a much bigger ship, it would have to be huge to carry enough fuel to accelerate it to near the speed of light. Reaching the maximum allowed speed will require six years of propelling the spacecraft at full power. "We can, theoretically, shorten distances and make it possible to enter them in one lifetime" Hawking writes. "A journey to the edge of the galaxy will take exactly 80 years."
Although he explicitly ruled out time travel to the past, Hawking was asked what he would do if he had a time machine that allows travel to the past at this moment and he replied: "I would visit Marilyn Monroe in her rise and fall and watch Galileo when he looked for the first time through a telescope at the stars."
For an interview with the Daily Mail
The program "Stephen Hawking's Universe" Will be broadcast on Monday, May 9 at nine in the evening on the Discovery HD channel. (in the link excerpts from the various chapters)
Interview with Stephen Hawking on the Discovery Channel website
More on the subject on the science website
119 תגובות
Suppose a person runs at the speed of light in a circular place
He is enough to come to himself before leaving and manages to see his own back
That means he looks at himself from the past
If he doubles his running speed and passes himself then he becomes the future to himself from the past
I would appreciate feedback on the idea
I like to research about time.
This is an interesting topic
Everything happens and happens all the time
Let's say if someone claps now then it always happened even in two decades if you go back in time you see that the other person is clapping
And in the future as well
Everything happens and happens
Moses
Only two scientists traveled through the time tunnel - Tony and Doug.
In the aforementioned time travel, the travelers leave their destination and return to it, and during all this time the universe did not change its weight (mass).
In the Time Tunnel series, 5 or 6 scientists left a certain date and moved to another date.
This is a completely different situation than what is said in the article.
In this situation (date A) the universe weighed x less than the scientists' weight.
And they moved to date B - and instead the universe weighed x + the weight of the scientists.
Now I understand why sometimes time goes by fast and why sometimes crawling is the small wormholes from Hopkins's worm
In Israel they found a solution how to go back in time instead of going forward. The method should be reported.
The solution to the paradox was already found by Nietzsche, even before physics was invented.
The journey is possible to the future as well as to the past, but since time is a sequence of events, when you travel backwards or forwards in time, everything happens exactly the opposite, and therefore whoever travels to the past will have everything that has already happened to him, therefore he will not remember the journey nor the present, and when he returns from there he will not remember anything different because everything This has already happened in the journey to the future...
After all, we are all on such a journey to the future all the time.
I accept the idea of the repetitiveness of time (Nietzsche, Kurt Vonnegut, Slaughterhouse 5 ... ) the idea that time moves in an infinite circle and everything will repeat itself exactly as it was.
The mechanism, in my opinion, is this - the universe expands and then contracts until it becomes a singular point again and with it all space and time shrink to zero, and everything starts again exactly as it was before.
Time will be re-created and re-spread, therefore the events from the largest to the smallest will repeat themselves...
The big bang, the solar system, the earth will be re-created exactly as before and everything that happens will happen again, including humans, our thoughts and our memories will repeat themselves in exactly the same way and God forbid, an infinite number of times.
Of course it will take a lot of time, billions of years... the circle of time is big and we are only pips of a second in this circle. Regarding Milan Kundera - I don't think he fully understood the idea, because if the oil repeats itself, the synapses in our brain will also repeat the exact same connections, so we won't remember anything because all the oil repeats itself, so all the events repeat themselves, and our memory will also be erased and written Again exactly the same…
Of course you can travel in time, unless you decided to go out with the woman at 20:00 but she is just deciding what to wear.
Wowwww - this is really a fascinating topic... I never really understood these topics, but the above article makes me wonder how many have asked... for example: like the energy to accelerate my spaceship to the speed of light should be equal to the amount of energy in regards to stopping (???).
Another thing - I expect Mr. Hawkins to build us something more sophisticated than these travels at the speed of light and the movies gave us a great five-year plan: press a button and get (somehow) to... 2210 or alternatively to the day and time when the library in Alexandria burned down or maybe better a week before...
When I thought about it, about time travel in a click, the whole thing seemed a little unclear. In order to explain myself I will try to stretch the boundaries a bit.
Let's assume that the universe (or Rod Haratz) weighs 100 kilos and I weigh a kilo.
When I leave the 2000s and go (by clicking) to the year 600 (to have a conversation with Muhammad) I find myself in a world whose mass is 101 km while I leave the Earth of the year 2000 with only 99 kilos....
And what if I leave not for 1400 years but for... let's say 360 seconds... (?)
It may be that time is not a dimension but is derived from waves on space that move only at the speed of light:
http://www.rapidtables.com/tmol/physics.htm
https://sites.google.com/site/usustempus/our-vision
Sagman laughed:
It seems quite amazing to me that while I am working hard to explain to people that time moves at a different rate in different reference systems, others will come and tell me that it is difficult to convince me of this.
After all, the whole idea of the journey to the future discussed in the article is based on the same differences in the rate of progress of time and I want to remind you that the one who opposes what is said in this article is you and not me
Michael- I know the twin paradox and I referred to it in the previous answer when I gave the example regarding those who will fly in a spaceship and those who will stay on Earth. You call it the twin paradox. it's the same. Today it is already a proven fact that the times are different for those who will fly at great speed and those who will stay on the surface of the earth.. It seems to me that it is difficult to convince you that is why we have already said: every man shall live by his faith. Thank you.
Yitzhak Segman:
As I said, the article explains exactly what kind of future it is talking about and it doesn't seem to me that you really tried to understand what it claims or what I tried to draw your attention to.
No one who "travels" to the future is traveling to his own private future.
In the future he reaches, the rest of the universe still exists, and if it's not too far away, the enzyme he left behind when he left also exists.
In principle, it can move forward in time to a distance of fractions of a second as has already happened in practice or to a distance of billions of years as may still happen in the future.
Read on Wikipedia about the twin paradox and ask yourself if the person who meets his twin in the future when this twin remembers his departure has traveled to his own future
To Michael Rothschild - I mentioned that the theory of parallel worlds was born from quantum theory. This Torah does not refer to the past or the future, but to a given present state in which the energy is in its initial state before the transition to materialization in the material world. It is true as you mentioned that we are marching second by second into the future. However, the intention of Hawking's theory is not to test the future, it will be said in a week, but it will be said in a thousand years. From here I return you to my previous response, which referred to your analogy regarding a trip abroad. Regarding the theory of relativity you mentioned, it is indeed an interesting point that actually makes time travel in the future difficult. To what future will the journey take place? To those who remained on Earth or to those who flew in a spaceship whose time was miraculously shortened compared to those who remained on Earth?
L. R. H. Refai.M - regarding your specific question, according to the theory of parallel worlds when such a world is created it is a duplication of our reality in all its components. That is, there is matter and energy there as there is in our world. Simply the occurrence of reality on the stage of the parallel world, according to this theory, takes a kind of turn/ a different set of events. For example, in one of these worlds there was no holocaust for the Jewish people. The amazing thing about this theory is that the big bang that we perceive is a defining event, this bang is a matter of routine. It happens/happened all the time in all the parallel universes. I will point out that according to the superconsciousness there are alternative worlds that are different from the parallel worlds. An alternate world was created as an outgrowth of human consciousness. As the person has a greater consciousness and understanding of the reality around him, more alternative worlds are created for him, than for a person with a lower consciousness and understanding. Regarding the higher versus the lower consciousness, it's like looking at the environment and understanding what happens when a person is on the ground floor or the tenth floor of a building. According to the superconsciousness, alternate worlds are automatically created for every person in his life in which creation examines situations that (with emphasis) were not realized in life as a result of an important decision he made.. Since in life we realize only one path, creation explores the other paths that we decided not to realize in our lives. Unlike our world where we actually experience life, in the alternative worlds the test is only energetic without physical realization. What would have happened if you had chosen a different decision than the one you chose. In this way, the entire spectrum of the important possibilities of human life is examined as a result of the awareness and understanding of it. In the online book that I already mentioned in my first response "The hidden reality behind the scenes" there is a chapter that explains in detail, as much as possible, the alternative worlds which, as mentioned, are different from the parallel worlds that science refers to today. Science does not (with emphasis) refer, as of today, to human consciousness as a factor in creating reality. The superconsciousness says, as strange as this may sound, that the overall human consciousness is the basis and catalyst for the creation of life and its development. I will point out that in the total weighting of the total human consciousness (not private) there is significantly more weight for positive thinking and actions compared to the negative. Hence there is reason for optimism……
Yitzhak Segman
Regarding reality - if in our reality there are diverging worlds then this is our reality. And no "more" reality.
Our universe has been "traveling" in time towards the future since it was created.
Besides, you didn't answer any of the questions I asked.
Yitzhak Segman:
Parallel worlds (actually diverging) is just one of the interpretations of quantum theory.
It is one of many and they are many because operatively there is no difference between them and their predictions are the same.
Even for the purpose of predicting the future, it really doesn't matter if we were thrown into one of the possible trajectories while our double was thrown into another trajectory or if we don't have a double at all and the collapse of the wave function only directed us to one of the possibilities.
Quantum theory does not have any interpretation that allows predicting the future, so it is not clear why you are caught in Everett's parallel worlds.
On the other hand - this does not rule out a journey into the future and in fact such a journey, as I mentioned, is made by each of us at every moment, at the rate of one second to the other.
More than that, the theory of relativity shows us that anyone who accelerates enough manages to move into the future faster than others (such as the twin paradox where one of the twins flies for one year and when he returns he finds that his brother has 60 years).
Here we are not talking about a pure theory but facts that have been tested experimentally (and in nature, as we know, there are no logical contradictions).
This is the kind of thing the article talks about and there is no contradiction in it either.
I was referring to Hawking's new theory about time travel in the future. From reading the article I saw that this approach conflicts with another physical theory called parallel worlds. That's why I responded. Regarding the theory of the parallel worlds itself, you can find a lot of information on the Internet. Today there are leading physicists in the world who have literally built a complete theory in this field and even have physical supports for it, for their understanding. The basis for all this is the quantum theory which caused and is still causing a revolution in everything related to the understanding of reality. That is, what is the true reality. This Torah tells us about a world/dimension of the tiny particles from which our world is also built. In this world the behavior of matter is chaotic with an internal order that is not always understood by us even though this is a description that has existed for about 80-90 years. If you are interested, I recommend writing in Google "the two-crack experiment". will give you a certain explanation about the complexity of reality. That is to say that our reality is not necessarily the only reality. That is why the theory of parallel worlds also grew out of quantum theory. Beyond that, if you are open enough, I invite you to download the online book "The Hidden Reality Behind the Scenes" published by "Mandeli". The download at this stage is free. Good luck and have fun.
Yitzhak Segman
A universe - by definition - is a space that contains all matter and energy.
Therefore, what is a parallel universe? What does a parallel universe contain? Also matter and energy? Does it contain the same physical conditions? If so - how is it different from our universe, and where does the parallel universe connect to our universe?
Unlike the example of the past which has already been created in our world, the future is a creation in continuous creation. It's not like abroad that contains a clear and known picture of options and I have to choose where to go. Since, according to the parallel worlds theory, new worlds are created all the time and we are not aware of them, the correct analogy would be similar to a very complicated maze that I have to get from point A to point B. I have to go through endless intersections and I have no direction map. It's like I'm driving with my eyes closed. Therefore, according to my analysis, there is an internal contradiction between the journey to the future according to Hawking and the parallel worlds. It should be remembered that both are still only at the theoretical level. However, when there is a contradiction between two theories, one of them is incorrect. There will be those who will say that both are incorrect. Of course the future….. will decide.
There is no internal contradiction in Hawking's words.
When he talks about a journey to the future - he is talking about a journey to one of the possible futures and not to all of them.
After all, you won't claim, when someone goes abroad, that there are many countries that are abroad and therefore he can't go abroad.
By the way - we travel to the future all the time and we do it at the rate of one second per second
Following the famous physical experiment of the two cracks, science understands that we live in a reality that is derived from a higher dimension. The experiment that has been tested countless times tells us in short that the electron or the photon is in a state of "multiple possibilities" which is called superposition. When we introduce a measuring device into the experiment or we intervene in it, a situation arises that out of the chaos of the dimension in which the electron/photon is in a chaotic and unstable state, as soon as we intervene in the process the basic energies of the electron/photon become particles. That is, they move from the chaotic dimension to the material dimension of our world.
Among other things and on the above background, the theory of parallel worlds grew in physics, where at every important decision point of ours a parallel world/worlds is created. In a parallel world we materialize and manifest in a different way. This is a broad and revolutionary topic that is gaining momentum among important physicists today.
In my opinion, in Hawking's approach there is an internal contradiction between the existing physical theories. If Hawking believes that time travel in the future is possible, then his theory conflicts with the theory of parallel worlds. In the parallel worlds theory, reality splits like an inverted pyramid into different realities in different worlds. After all, what future is Hawking referring to and in what world? Since the theory of parallel worlds says that at important decision points our reality diverges. That is, even in our future in our world nothing can be predicted. The line of the future is not a clear line of reality and time. The future is a constant splitting of reality and time into different worlds. .
I recommend readers to be exposed to a "theory" called "superconsciousness", which is the cosmic computer where all the information that humans have done and will do during the lifetime of humanity, including in alternate worlds, is stored. Superconsciousness devotes an entire chapter to the topic of astrophysics. Includes references to the big bang, dark matter, dark energy, string theory, black and white holes and more. There is an internet book called "The hidden reality behind the scenes". The book was published by "Mandeli Mocher Books Online" and is currently free to download. There is a whole chapter there that relates to science and spirit based on the information of the superconsciousness. Recommended for those who are open minded.
I travel through time every night,
I go to sleep and when I get up I'm 8 hours in the future!
What else? Did you think that time travel is also possible backwards?
All the "Back to the Future" films are riddled with unsolvable paradoxes, which I have a hard time understanding how the screenwriter/director chose to include them anyway. You have to understand: Marty McFly, the traveler to the future, is on the road to life again. He will become an image/present when the world continues on its way until a certain time, and then when he exits the machine it will become clear to him that his children (who supposedly appear in the film Haim and Exist) were not born at all, since he has retired from the world by now - and the future is of course not affected by his absence but continues in a different way.
Fingers crossed for Andrea Rossi, but I believe very little in science conspiracies.
If I were Russian, I would settle for even 20 billion out of the trillion potential, not to mention the scientific achievement and honor. His resistance to objective examination is suspect. I don't understand enough in the field, but after the bitter experience of the scientific community on the issue of cold fusion and other inventions, one can certainly understand the cold attitude that Rossi encountered.
So come on Rossi, open the facility for any possible external inspection. If there is something in your idea, the criticism will not detract from it.
Israel
I will only refer to the ecat issue because it is a very important issue.
Two years ago I first came across this subject and according to the reactions of most people I thought it was a freak or a scammer. At the end of May this year I read about the experiments in his facility that were done from October 2012 to March 2013. These are serious experiments done by serious researchers. Then my eyes were opened. I am a skeptic by nature, but an intensive reading of pros and cons convinced me that there is a significant chance that this is a real discovery. If I had to throw out a number, I would say that there is a 5 percent chance that a cold nuclear process of a type unknown to science will be discovered, a process that can be utilized as a cheap energy source and an alternative to fossil fuel and normal nuclear fuel. The chance that this is an act of fraud or a gross mistake in understanding the process is said to be 90 percent (in addition, there is said to be a 5 percent chance that this is not a nuclear reaction but another very useful reaction even though it is not nuclear).
In my opinion, Ehud's deviation is due to several reasons.
Reason 1. The Fleishman-Pons experiment in 1989 on cold fusion that turned out to be a fluke, apparently. Since then, most physicists treat attempts at a cold nuclear reaction with great suspicion, to the point of dismissing them outright. See English Wikipedia article.
Reason 2. If it is a nuclear reaction, it is a completely different type of reaction than what is known in physics, physicists do not know how to eat it. That is, if the reaction is nuclear, it is a paradigm shift regarding how a nuclear reaction may occur. A change in paradigm is often met with objections in the scientific establishment (as opposed to minor changes that the scientific establishment is able to digest).
Reason 3. Such a nuclear discovery, if real, has enormous financial value. At least a trillion dollars in my opinion. In this situation - the inventor Andrea Rossi is convinced that if he openly publishes the details of his process, he will be robbed of the discovery and no patent protection will help him. Therefore it only agrees to external inspections of ecat facilities. (In other words: he agrees that the testers will measure the investment of electrical energy in the device, compare it to the energy that the device emits, they will find that the energy emitted is, for example, 6 times the energy invested). The tests will be in a time sequence of at least 6 months, yield. The numbers mentioned above are for a device that produces heat in a megawatt hour. The extended test times are to prevent Andrea Rossi from introducing latent energy into the device. The reluctance of physicists is because Andrea Rossi adamantly refuses to allow her to be tested beyond the energetic test I mentioned.
Who is looking for a good life? Who is looking for mental satisfaction? All we asked for was to move back and forth in time. Is that so much to ask?
Great satisfaction...
My dear friends, any attempt to get mental satisfaction from physical theories is doomed to failure.
Therefore, please do not think that the universe in your hands and the whole world in the twisted spirit of man is possible.
But what is important, why is there the desire to move in time, forward or backward?
The answer to this is more than simple, because life is not enough for him now, it is not as good as he wanted.
And if he returns in time to the future, he will manage to solve his dissatisfaction, God forbid, nothing will change! That's why it's a huge secret for the whole community
The subversive for cracking the cosmic possibilities - everything is already near you, everything you really need, please open your eyes and see that the good and the bad are laid before you.
skeptic
Wait patiently, the reaction will come.
Maybe we'll try a little enzyme: And Moses struck the rock, and they came out of it...
Ehud says that ecat is eye contact.
point
I said my words would sound puzzling. And certainly to someone like you who, instead of delving deeper, gives a hasty "response" off the cuff.
What is described in your words is not a journey into the future but only a speeding up of the local time clock. Not sure you will understand this difference either. Regarding the acceleration of the local time clock there is nothing new, it was said in the theory of relativity, it was never called a leap into the future.
I have no more to add. I brought things as food for thought, whoever doesn't want to think is his problem. Off the cuff reaction is not thinking.
Skeptic, stop brainstorming.
Time travel to the future means a simple thing, if I grow up in one year and the universe returns to the way it was 100 years ago then it is a journey to the past.
Time travel to the future means a simple thing, if I mature one year and the universe ages 100 years then it is a journey to the future.
Israel
I don't know what hydrogen oxide is (perhaps you alluded to water), but in the coming year there may be an indirect confirmation of a cold nuclear reaction with the help of nickel doping.
The nickel alloy is a mysterious substance, because the discoverer, the Russian inventor, wants the invention confidential. The machines he built to exploit the nickel (or similar material) are called ecat. A successful attempt, or perhaps a scam, with a small ikat machine was made between the months of October 2012 and March 2013. Due to the doubts of various parties about the truth of the operation of ikat, the inventor Rossi offers a prolonged demonstration of a machine that will run continuously for a long time, at least 6 months, which will prove that the nickel Generates energy in commercial quantities from the conversion of nickel to copper or a similar reaction. Such an extended run should begin within 6 months from today, if there are no unplanned delays.
The statistics prove that a reaction of the hydrogen oxide will soon take place...
point
Moshe is right in that a journey to the future is only a journey that allows for a return. A return in any way, not necessarily a return in the simplistic sense that the sent body returns.
Why is repetition required? Because without repetition the concept of future is emptied of its contents, future according to its content must be defined according to its interface with the present, otherwise it may be time but not future time.
I know my words sound a bit puzzling, but if you dig deeper or ask a professional mathematician you will come to a similar conclusion or answer. Physicists are not always precise in defining basic concepts, so they make logical errors such as the one I mentioned.
Moshe, time travel to the future is possible. (But only in one direction, therefore not so suitable for the word journey with the nuance that you return to the point of departure).
Moshe Shalom,
Why are you so adamant that time travel is impossible?
There are studies that believe this can be done using black holes. Maybe today it is not possible, but it is impossible to know what the future holds. It is possible that other theories could lead to such a possibility. If we were so skeptical, how would we arrive at all the wonderful inventions so far?
Friends time travel to the past is called memory and travel to the future is called imagination.
There is no other way and there never will be. If you understood a little about the laws on which the universe is based, you would understand that this is not possible
I personally think that even though I'm still a child, a situation could arise where Steve Hawking is right in his claim, but talk is easy, you have to do it in action, and by the way, Steve Hawking is not appreciated as far as I'm concerned, he doesn't like Jews because of rumors and forgot who made him the device with which he spoke, ok, I think it's possible and me too I won't be shocked if in my lifetime we discover it but what I always wanted to know if it is possible is a force field I have always been interested in it I read a book by a professor of theoretical physics named Michio Kaku who basically claims that in the future we will discover many things that great scientists say is impossible
And of course if time travel is indeed possible it will cause many disruptions therefore everything has to be calculated I quite support the claim of the wormholes it is simply amazing how we are progressing if we continue at the rate we are advancing technologically in these 100 years we will discover amazing things even in the past there was a scientist I don't remember exactly name His that simply everything he claimed would happen in the future happened one by one, remember my words I'm pretty sure you will get to see some more amazing things in your lifetime.
I think time travel is possible
If you will only believe…
Thanks
Correction to my example - time travel to the future endangers many people because a person who travels in time to the future arrives at a time he does not belong to, should not be in.
In such a situation, the butterfly effect or wormholes, black/white holes...
I think time travel is not possible, not even into the future. The future has not yet happened and cannot be predicted. If time travel to the future becomes possible, it could endanger a great many people because we are changing the lifespan of a person, that is - a person born in 1980, for example, who traveled in time to the year 2150... How exactly did he live 170 years? It is not possible.
Then one of these wormhole, black/white hole and butterfly effect scenarios will happen.
Time travel is impossible!
Well, I will put my words in a very simple way when we return to our time there will be no amount and therefore we too by the way cannot exceed the speed of light!!!!! Traveling to the future is not possible because: the future is not as subtle and again it is not possible to exceed the speed of light
In my eyes, Amos looks like a smart, stupid teenager with a bit of intelligence and a rich vocabulary
Nothing more.
Rothschild will stop waking up because of every mosquito.
Amos:
You're a doppelganger and I wouldn't be surprised if you're also a ghost.
Why do you treat the fact that I express my opinion as a national endorsement of a theory?
It seems that we both understand - you are the one who authorizes me as the national approver of theories (and on the same occasion - yourself - as the national approver).
After all, all the theories that are presented here are conjectures upon conjectures and some will even say more and less informed guesses, so who exactly crowned you the national approver of theories....?
Amos:
I share your sadness that you couldn't find anything to say.
Maybe when you grow up you will do better.
Rothschild, you are one of the most dignified people I've come across and you think being arrogant makes you look smart - it's not...
The train method is the slowing down of time and not time travel.
As someone said here, human freezing technology is already easier to come by than train technology that flies at fantastic speed.
Besides, it seems to me that everything in this article is recycled and chewed.
The wormhole thing also sounds like a fantastic story to me.
What amazes me about the wormhole is the direction of the wormhole and how far it goes.
Let's assume there is a wormhole and a probe or robot can be pushed into it.
So we pushed the object wherever it is - so where will it go?
I would be happy to explain.
🙂 You are funny
And here is a parody of our hero:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIS5n9Oyzsc
Every time I read a ghost comment, I instinctively turn back and start looking for the hidden camera and Yigal Shilon.
I hope that in the end he will reveal to us where she is - here or in a parallel universe...
The skeptic:
A disturbed spirit is an enigma already I solved long ago.
The problem is that we still - neither I nor anyone else - have succeeded getting rid from him.
He shows a lot of stickiness in his goal (the letter "y" is not a spelling mistake. I really didn't mean to write stickiness)
Michael, please don't involve anything, not God or anything else related to spirits...
Let him live in his ignorance, there is nothing to do, tried everything...
Except that there are more interesting puzzles than a ghost 😉
As usual, as I expected from you, from Cal.
"Of course you didn't answer anything, but I didn't expect you to either."
I wrote you once:
"Do not rebuke a man, lest he hate you. Prove to a wise man and he will love you" (Book of Proverbs Chapter XNUMX, Verse XNUMX)
https://www.hayadan.org.il/underground-search-returns-uncertain-results-2212096/#comment-258003
And please don't start involving God here (which you love to argue about).
A whirlwind:
Indeed, your talent in spewing nonsense, lies and brain confusion exceeds the estimated.
Continue to wallow in your garbage and be disturbed by it (as much as it is possible to smell garbage) - I will no longer interfere.
The 'wise' Rothschild
Arguing with you makes me tired (probably that's what you mean).
As I mentioned (and I was right) you did not ask me a question in response 41.
In response 48 I answered (pay attention - because this is what you are trying to explain to me) not to your 'question' but I answered you in response to your response.
In response 54 you asked me questions that I think you can answer yourself, but I will answer you anyway:
A - I did not quote - because the article is short and it would be better if you read the whole thing that way you can also see that what I write is very similar (almost word for word) to what is written in the article.
B - You certainly don't have to agree with everything that is written, I just wanted you to argue (but you already know this) that there are people smarter than me who do understand areas that I don't understand, and yet, my claims are similar to their claims.
For example, if a 4-year-old child tells you that 1+1=2, it will be ridiculous if you answer that he is stupid, and 'how can you know that if you haven't studied mathematics?' Pay attention - the child is right in any case!
A time machine - if it will really exist in our universe, and on condition that our universe has a twin universe (note - 'twin.' But the change in it exists because it is not our universe). But, in a universe parallel to ours and one that is in the past tense - where the machine will appear/replicate itself only after it first appeared with us. This creates a situation where a time machine appears in all universes and all this in chronological order, first in the universe parallel to us which is in future time, from there to our universe and our location to the universe which is in past time in terms of our universe, and so on.
Regarding parallel universes - you're just trying to put me in a bad light, I'm not talking about absolute certainty of the existence of parallel universes. And I have already mentioned it more than once. I do think that there is a significant probability (even if it is small) mathematically, for the possibility of the existence of parallel universes.
I'm not saying 'there is a parallel universe', I'm saying that 'I assume that parallel universes exist' - and they exist in my opinion not only on a philosophical basis. And all my assumptions about this arise from the possibility and not from the certainty.
And all these 'maybe' are written because I don't know those things for sure, but can only speculate or assume my opinion about them in my comments.
Understand, in order for someone like you to understand me too, the conversation between us needs to be more detailed and clear and more frank and frank - which is not possible through the Internet and certainly not through the comments here on the site.
Chutsamza, you assume our (humans) solutions.
In my opinion you are wrong, I don't think we will know all the answers and I am also sure that there will be a time machine
There will only be humans (at least not those who resemble us) who will admire it.
Your claim, that it would take humans so long to move from one location to another in the universe that it is impossible, is incomprehensible to me.
How are you so sure that humans will use a time machine?
Regarding your last 'even':
Right. We will not reach our past or future.
We will reach, for example, a past that is not ours. But this past will be almost 100 percent similar to ours.
No universe is 100 percent similar, but each universe is slightly different from the corresponding universe.
All existence that exists is a product of interaction (interaction that causes the formation/cooperation between matter and energy in our universe and parallel universes) between those parallel universes, including our universe (which is the parallel of the past universe and the future universe). To make it easier for you to understand me, I will also add that I think that the universes that exist, including ours, are all inside some kind of 'envelope'.
In conclusion, we can reach the past or future, but not ours but the parallel universe, which is similar to ours but not XNUMX%, i.e. a little different. And the universe is different because the reality in it is different than it was in the place where those 'reality seers' came from. Not the universe has changed. but reality.
As you can see you were wrong again, I answered you about the things, but you can continue to treat them with disdain.
A whirlwind:
First of all - I never said I asked a question.
I said you didn't answer anything because you are expected to also answer claims that refute your nonsense.
By the way: didn't you know that?
If so - then why did you write in response 48 that you answered me?
First you answered and now you claim you didn't find any question marks?
You remind me of the one who when they came to ask him why he returned an urn that was loaned to him intact - broken, he answered:
1. First of all, you didn't lend me a pitcher at all
2. Already when you lent it to me it was broken
3. I returned it intact
In response 54 I also asked some questions but of course you didn't answer them either.
And now for your "answers":
There is no scientist who thinks there are parallel universes but many think there is such a possibility.
I know you don't understand the difference but that's the way it is.
There's no point in making statements that you don't know and there's certainly no point in making statements that you don't even have a clue how to check.
It is not true that if there is a time machine in our universe at some point then this is necessarily the case in a parallel universe.
This is an unfounded claim and in the current situation - when you don't even know if there are parallel universes and even to the extent that there are - if they share the same time dimension with us - even delusional.
Now, as I explained in the response you didn't understand: even if there are parallel universes and even if they share the same time dimension with us and even if one of these trillions of universes has a time machine already in the past and even if we knew how to move from one location to another (note how "even" the probability of even one of them to exist is small to zero and the probability that all of them will exist is almost non-existent) still - we would have no way to identify such a universe without visiting all of them and staying in each of them long enough to find out if there is a time machine in it - time probably - if your fantasies would take you to another place - we would be attacked there by the natural inhabitants of those dimensions as it is written for example in the encyclopedia "surfers in time" and in the horror story "trimming the tongue".
So let's add to the list the "even" that has a probability that almost doesn't exist, another "even" that has zero probability and we say that we survived our search in all the parallel universes and found one that has an older time machine and the inhabitants of that universe were nice enough to allow us to use it - still The problem remains that you are returning to the past of another universe and not your own (and by the way - since this universe is far from us on the timeline - it is possible that its past looks like our future - but I will not confuse your mind on this matter because I assume that you have been confused by things for a long time and your response will probably refer So and so only for one word of them - when it is disconnected from the context in which it was said.
So you know.
I did not add any questions or any claims in the last response.
I was just reiterating what I already said.
And yet it is clear to me that you will not answer the things and just write some nonsense and say that you did.
Ro*ch R*faim, let me explain something to you and please don't offend. The reason you get mockery is because it just doesn't work that way. You can't come and build a theory of maybe and maybe. And maybe not, have you thought about it?
Pay attention to the following sentence you wrote:
"Perhaps we as humans are only at the beginning of the evolution of the 'living'. Perhaps it is still too early for us humans to meet beings from the future. Maybe these will be other organisms that will develop on Earth that will meet a being from the future." maybe and maybe The question is, what are you basing your claims on?
You compare yourself to others who claim that parallel universes may exist but the difference is that they start with an unsolved question, for example why is the universe accelerating? What is the nature of dark energy? And hence they offer solutions based on mathematical models that try to explain the strange observations.
You, on the other hand, do not solve any problem with your theories and you also do not offer any experience or observation that can confirm or refute the theories, so how do you want a serious reference?
There is for example Yehuda Sabradmish here on the site who also comes with a rather weak theory but to his credit he tries to solve existing problems, he relies on mathematics and the laws of physics and he even offers observations in favor of his theory, which of course does not make it correct but at least provides a basis for a substantive debate .
incidentally,
Take for example Oron (who explained about the entangled photons), see how he knows how to explain the material well.
It will not hurt you to take an example from people like him, it is even recommended for you. 😉
Like 'the brain' Rothschild
If in your response 41 you asked me a question, then you could have at least inserted a question mark somewhere so that someone like me would understand the genius of your question.
I will try to answer you in the hope that I did understand what you 'asked':
I don't know for sure if parallel universes exist, but I suspect they do.
I'm not the only one who thinks so, and you know better than me who the people are who also think twin universes exist.
But for some reason you choose to treat me like I'm wrong, when I can't be wrong or right about it.
If I was wrong or right, it will be possible to know only in retrospect - and we are not one of those who knew the answer to that.
Regarding a time machine - I answered you that if a time machine appears in our universe (let's say in a million years) then a time machine must also appear in a parallel universe (provided it really exists). For example, in a parallel universe which for us will be in 'past' time - where the time machine will appear only after it first appeared in our universe.
In our universe the time machine will appear only after the parallel universe - which for us is in 'future' time - has taken place
Operation of going back in time by the machine. We have no way of knowing that.
Perhaps we as humans are only at the beginning of the evolution of the 'living'. Perhaps it is still too early for us humans to meet beings from the future. Perhaps these will be other organisms that will develop on Earth that will meet a being from the future. If this is the case, then it only strengthens my hypothesis that we have not yet met with beings from the future because in our parallel universe in 'future' time a time machine has not yet appeared - from the parallel 'future' universe
to the 'future' universe which is parallel to our universe.
That is, our universe - as the counterpart of the universe which is in the future time for us - is in the 'past' time.
In other words, our future is the past of, the future that is not ours. And our past is the future of the past that is not ours. ('Not ours' - can be interpreted as being in a parallel universe in past/future time).
Just what, the transition between the universes does not have to be for astronomical distances, it can also be the other way around for distances that are smaller than 'small', think of the universes as if they were 'entwined photons'
And the interaction between the universes is carried out as if they were one big universe.
Feel free to respond with your learned and educated claims and your super-genius knowledge of all kinds of things that you have acquired over many years of living on this planet,
I promise I will read them.
And another thing, the concept of time - more philosophical than physical or mathematical. So I don't have to know physics or mathematics or be a great philosopher to understand what time is.
A whirlwind:
You can't be taken out of the fog and I won't waste my time on it.
You are welcome to read the things again - they are written in response 41, without engravings and in a way that is completely clear to anyone with more than two neurons in their brain.
To No. 3
This is exactly the point, you can't move back in time
And there is no one who exists at such moments in the future
Machal *and his parrot* Noam
You two are clowns.
Machal, maybe from most of your 'sketches in the fog' I couldn't understand what you asked.
So what did you really ask? I will answer you if you ask me a serious question.
Sincerely,
R.H. Rafai.M
Michael,
The truth is that ghosts are one of the strangest cases I have come across. He declares that we do not know mathematics and physics, yet develops delusional theories, which indeed prove his premise. I'm not sure he underestimates science - it seems to me that he underestimates himself more, and doesn't differentiate between scientists and storytellers.
Ghosts - we understand that you don't understand, and there is no need to illustrate this every time.
Ghost:
If you wanted to quote a few words from the article then why did you hold back and not do it?
Besides - should I accept things just because they are written in some article?
You were talking nonsense, I tried to let you clarify things by asking a few questions but you chose not to answer those questions and when I said you didn't answer you came at me with claims as if I was laughing at you when your behavior in general makes me cry.
Good time.
Machel
I wanted to quote a few words from the article (in the link), but it's better if you read the whole thing, it's strange that you mock what I write, because the things I wrote are similar to what is written in the article.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/schrodinger-291202/
Noam:
It's not weird anymore.
All a ghost does here since the day he cursed us is to belittle science and people.
Unfortunately my father didn't block him but I really think you should try to ignore him (apart from some sting here and there).
ghosts,
It's strange that you despise other people's ideas, which are no less fascinating and no less grounded than your bullshit.
Can you share with us how you think my ideas are nonsense and yours words of wisdom?
What mistakes did you find in me that do not exist in yours?
Or, in your example you will have to wait 150 years until the train stops. They will feel like a week has passed and you will feel like 150 years have passed.
I saw the episode where he talks about the same topic of time travel,
According to what he says, if we build a train that will travel close to the speed of light at the speed he specified for a week, then the people on the train after a week of travel will leave and be in the future 150 years later.
Now let's say I'm standing in the present tense and looking at the train traveling for a week as they say and circling the earth 7 times a second, I look at it for a week, when the train stops after a week I continue to get frustrated and wait for the people to get off, what will happen to them? Aren't they supposed to be in the future including the train?
I will probably see them, I mean - they are not in the future, so where is the trip to the future?
Naan, you can continue insulting your Koch with your protons and nonsense. When you get serious, talk to me, maybe I'll answer you.
Machel
I answered your comment. You didn't watch it? I can't understand you, at least I hope you sleep well at night too.
R.H
same as above
Bye
Noam, I refrain from judging if your ideas are less good, which I am sure are clearer...
Ghost:
Of course you didn't answer anything, but I didn't expect you to either.
Sweet dreams
ghosts,
I was really offended. What flaw did you find in my logical ideas?
Why do you think they are less good than your ideas?
Noam
You're just trying to tease.
If you were serious, before you wrote down what you wrote you would ask me to clarify my words.
Machel
I don't want to waste your precious time nor mine, so I will answer you in a short sentence:
If a time machine appears in this universe - even if it will be another billion years - it is necessary that it also appear in the parallel world (provided the latter exists).
(R. H. R. Faim)
ghosts,
There was an error in the previous response:
The particle that came from the parallel universe is of course not a photon but an anti-gruyton.
ghosts,
Another in-depth consideration, led me to the conclusion that in the parallel universe, the particle interacts with another photon that arrived from a parallel to parallel location, as a result, an anti-proton, a proton and a pi food are emitted. Because of energy considerations, an additional unknown particle must probably be emitted. I'm working on it trying to identify it
And of course you know that there is a parallel world and that there really is such a machine in it and you also know how to reach it and receive it and then - when you finally travel through it - you will not reach your direction but the past of that world.
I answered you by accident.
Don't take this as a sign of things to come.
I still think you are wasting my time and the time of other readers with your uneducated comments.
Machel
Regarding your response 11:
"All the physicists who talk about time machines only talk about those that are able to bring us back in time to the moment of the machine's manufacture but not beyond that."
It is true that theoretically it would be possible to return to the past, but only to the moment when the machine was built,
And it is true that it will not be possible to determine a longer period of time (beyond the moment of production of the machine),
But theoretically if a time machine exists, it is necessary that it also exist in the parallel world,
And a mechanism is needed that can determine the period of time to which one wants to return (like in the movie Back to the Future or something like that if I remember correctly).
Hence, if there exists a machine with a mechanism capable of reversing in time
It will also exist in the parallel world, and if it also exists in the parallel world, then - in simple words - we can go back in time, say, a million years, and from there with the help of the machine we arrived at, we will direct it and go back in time another million years, as if in leaps and not in a straight line, that is, it will be possible To go back in time, to any time, but only by 'skipping' certain periods of time.
(All this only exists in the case of multiple universes)
(R.H. R.A.M.)
Noam
At the moment I cannot know with absolute certainty what happens to a particle when it reaches a parallel universe.
I can assume that the particle decays into a positron which is then swallowed by an electron and becomes photon 2 (and everything in the parallel universe), but I'm not sure about the proton.
I think the particle decays into a certain antiparticle, the latter becoming a proton.
What a mistake, Amir Peretz is the smartest person in the world.
ghosts,
In my opinion, you are wrong.
The particle interacts with a photon and the hadrons, but this process is only carried out to 'launch' the particle into a parallel universe where it will become ** a proton + anti-electron **, and not a photon as you wrote.
I repeat my suggestions from the last paragraph - this is my main opinion
deer
Many strange and strange particles will be discovered, a few years ago they discovered the pentaquark (which is still disputed because it was not discovered in all experiments), more exotic baryons will be discovered, perhaps the discovery of the Higgs boson will contribute to a better understanding of the photon, also a better understanding of the graviton and the gluon , I believe, will better explain the connection between gravity and the photon.
I'm not talking about particles like a pheon (although the particle I suggested could belong to the same family) but about extremely heavy particles that interact with a photon and electromagnetic force and the particle I suggested. The particle that I proposed is special, because it is not heavy but has no mass similar to a photon but interacts with the hadrons, at least.
In other words, in the big picture, the particle interacts with a photon and the hadrons, but this process is only carried out to 'launch' the particle into a parallel universe where it will turn back into a photon with a minimal change (photon 2).
I'd be glad to hear your opinion.
Unfortunately, at the moment he is able to communicate with the help of a computer and blinks at the level of 20 basic words and let alone write long articles.
All the articles are written by a public relations office to the level of popular science for the masses,
And he hasn't written a serious scientific paper in 10 years.
Of course I made a mistake - the pion is indeed food, but the food is not a subclass of the baryons but of the hadrons (the baryons are the second class of the hadrons)
Max,
I accepted your claim - it may have a negative connotation although I am not sure that it is true - in any case the intention is clear.
Ghost,
An antiparticle is a particle with the same mass, same spin, same isospin, opposite electric charge and opposite ionic charge (I think that's all) - also, of course, they must participate in the same interactions.
Therefore, since a photon has 0 barionic charge and 0 electric charge, you can see that the photon is its own anti-particle - and there is no debate about that, the only debate that can be had is whether it is even worth defining it that way and this is not a debate because it really doesn't matter.
By the way, the photon is not the only one in this, the graviton is also its own antiparticle and if you are not only interested in force carriers, then the pion 0 (food - a type of baryon) is also its own antiparticle and I am quite sure that it is not the only one (in fact, every food in its own style - which includes mixed states of corresponding quark and antiquark should hold this).
Your claim that due to conservation of energy there is only one photon left and not two is not clear to me - what? Why? In what process? - In cases of annihilation (which I think you are talking about because they are discussing antimatter) actually at least two photons are created in order to respect both the conservation of energy and the conservation of momentum.
Regarding the continuation of your argument - each electron does not have a specific anti-electron that is its twin, so the rest of the story is not clear to me and I don't think it is to you either.
The fact that you have not studied mathematics or physics is quite noticeable and in my opinion these are quite relevant requirements from those who claim to develop new theories on these subjects. I will therefore offer you the same proposal that I offered to Hazi in our correspondence about general relativity (see an article that appeared not long ago about Jupiter's moon Callisto) - start with high school physics (including mathematics) and from there progress to a bachelor's degree, then a master's degree (focusing on the favorite subject on you) and then, if you still think you're right, you might have the tools to convince someone else besides yourself.
For commenter 12 Mr. Tzvi why "Einstein and his fellow scientists" a fellow scientist has a negative connotation, we should say Einstein and his fellow scientists.
gam ahora ba zman nisa al tidagu
http://bezalel.secured.co.il/8/unaa12.htm
deer
Regarding the 'time', it is also clear to me that they said it before me.
Regarding the photon or rather what I called an anti-photon, I want to make the matter more clear:
First of all I admit that I was wrong when I called a certain particle an anti-photon, it should be called by another name.
As far as I know there is a dispute about whether the photon is its own antiparticle or not.
The accepted claim is what you claim.
But there is no proof that the photon is an anti-particle of itself, apart from that I would appreciate it if you could please explain to me how the photon becomes an anti-particle of itself.
According to what I know, due to the law of conservation of energy, only one photon is created instead of two, and that's why they calculate that the photon is also its own antiparticle.
I claim that if the first photon is in our universe then the second photon (its twin) will be in a corresponding/parallel universe.
The process is carried out through an interaction between photon 1 and photon 2 with the help of the same particle (which at first I called an anti-photon) that performs a calibration between them, when this happens at that moment the law of conservation of energy is violated and other forces/laws act on it (ones that have not yet been discovered). The particle interacts with the photon and the hadron.
The same calibration particle - its minimum speed is above the speed of light in a vacuum. (Or rather, but, not the most accurate - at least 299,792,459. In other words, a new value should be invented that would be something like C+1 or something similar if you understand what I mean. You can probably see that I did not study mathematics).
Its mass is zero but the energy increases as the particle moves between universes. and resets to the 'speed of light in a vacuum' when the particle reaches a compatible universe and 'hits' a hadron (in a compatible universe) and becomes photon 2.
If it doesn't sound crazy to you, then I'm ready to continue and answer your questions.
Actually - the photon paradox is also like that
The truth is that the paradox of the balls is of the type I described - that is - a "self" paradox
I don't know what the reason is.
The truth is that a closer possibility is to travel back in time a day and kill himself before he could get out.
Michael
Just out of curiosity, why is Paradox called Grandfather Paradox? After all, it is enough for the traveler to go back and kill his father before he gave birth to him. Perhaps killing a father has precedents and complexes associated with it (Oedipus). Both the ball example and the photon example are parent paradoxes.
sympathetic:
The example with the photons is nice although my grandfather was also a physical entity.
In Kip Thorne's book - Black holes and time warps there is another version of a bullet entering a wormhole and exiting it just in time to hurt itself before it enters the hole and divert itself from the path that will put it into the hole.
A vivid example of this phenomenon appeared in one of Galileo's papers when someone brought up the idea that Kip Thorne was talking about and described it as his own idea.
In my response to this claim I said that apparently someone who read his idea in Galileo traveled some thirty years back in time and told it to Kip Thorne.
alexds9
It is clear to you that if I take two electromagnetic sources so that destructive interference is obtained at every point in space, it means that the energy of the electromagnetic field in space is zero. Since the sources produce photons, which means they invest energy, there are two possibilities a) this is impossible b) this will cause the electromagnetic sources to burn (as happens in another context when you put metal into a microwave - don't try it at home!).
If you have an idea for a third option I would love to hear it.
Lahud, regarding the paradox you proposed. If you take two normal photon sources and place them in such a way that you get a destructive entanglement between them. Have you created a world energy destruction machine? No, then your "paradox" is also not acceptable.
Several cosmetic fixes from one who has the problem himself:
In offers = in reality
and it would be desirable to call the pimesons
Pi-meson or pi-meson since their name is derived from the ionic letter pi.
Regarding the grandfather's paradox, I prefer my own version, which I think is much more physical:
Suppose that we have a source of photons at a certain frequency, we will send the photons back in time
With such a phase difference we will get destructive interference with the source and thus no photons will be emitted
from the source, but in doing so we violated the law of conservation of energy.
Hawking is really not considered the smartest man in the world
Rah:
Just because solutions have been proposed does not mean that the solutions make sense.
For example: if I disappear - then who killed my grandfather?
Going back in time that causes a transition to another reality does not deserve the name "going back in time" because it is a transition to another reality where different things happen than in the reality in which I lived.
Note that Hawking also thinks like me.
It's a tall tree (perhaps a little bent and twisted but still tall)
Shmuel
You mentioned that the human race will be successful in its journey to the future, since it is highly likely that it will be able to exceed the speed of light.
Note that there is a small but significant difference -
In order to succeed in reaching the future using the method Hawking points out, you need to build something fast enough - no change in the laws of physics is required. On the other hand, passing the speed of light does require a change in the laws of physics (which is something quite different....)
The solution of reaching another universe where the speed of light is not finite (or can be exceeded) is also somewhat problematic - since it is not at all certain that there are other universes.
To K. from an anonymous (unidentified) user:
Hawking asked about you.
Do you have any idea what he wanted?
The bad news or the good news that if man succeeds in his journey to the future, according to the same theory, he will not be able to return to the past. In our eyes, if man succeeds in his journey to the future, he will also be able to exceed the speed of light with a high probability because he will reach universes where the laws of physics are different and unknown to us, like a void without dark matter or Jumps with the help of universes whose gravity is unknown to the laws of our puddle. In relation to Hawking and Monroe this will not work either, if he could reach the past she would surely escape to the future and save her heartache.
Michael, ever since the well-remembered Fantasia 2000 and long before that, several solutions were proposed that would solve the grandfather paradox. For example, reality is dynamic and when you kill the grandfather it will simply disappear (the end of Asimov's time for example). Alternate realities that killing the grandfather for example or any other decision will create another "Ilo" universe. So the paradox probably does not at least philosophically limit the possibility of such a journey.
Regarding the identification of the time travelers, it's easy, they'll probably like reality shows, crappy music and only talk via SMS, right?
"time is flowing like a river"!
The current published article does not contain any new information.
Hawking could have said the same things in his second year at university, since all of them are overwhelmingly based on special relativity or at most on general relativity (since the same spaceship will have to accelerate and decelerate). By the way, there are theoretical time machines capable of returning us to the past, but these will always require wormholes.
Note that the mention of wormholes in this section is only intended to confuse the listener, since the journey to the future does not require it at all - both according to the prevailing physics and according to Hawking's innovative speech.
Commenter 1 (Michael called you a ghost - he probably recognizes the arguments)
About the 'time' which is like a space, not only you wrote to you, Einstein and a friend of his contemporaries preceded you in this. By the way, it is not quite like space - there is a quite significant difference even in the aspects of the theory of relativity (♠ there is a minus difference).
An anti-particle of the photon already exists and has been known since the photon was known - and this is the photon itself, so save yourself the effort of finding it - it is already here!
Rah:
Also in the current article it is said that traveling backwards in time - probably won't be possible, and the argument presented in it (the grandfather paradox) is a generalization of the argument you put forward.
Why is this a generalization?
because he says that traveling back in time will never be possible (this is a claim that I also claim and for the same reasons and I already wrote about it - I don't remember if here but probably in "Galileo") while what you say is limited to the assumption that you are able to identify the travelers in time and under this assumption it is only Shows that it will never be possible to return to our time but not to the "closer" Hebrews.
All the physicists who talk about time machines only talk about those that are able to bring us back in time to the moment of the machine's creation but not beyond that.
Ghost:
There is not one (one!) thing said in this article that I didn't know long ago.
Therefore it is not possible that I said "nonsense" about something you said and that appears here.
By the way, you have to remember that the journey to the future is a journey we are constantly making, at a second-by-second pace.
Instead of slowing down time in the spaceship, isn't it better to freeze the passengers?
ghosts,
You didn't understand, the (justified) misunderstanding was not about the words you used, but about the connection between them.
Error (at least one) in the article: "The cosmic speed limit: 186,000 kilometers per second".
The speed of light is, of course, 300,000 kilometers per second in a vacuum, or alternatively, 186,000 miles per second.
Even smart people sometimes talk nonsense.
to 4 the physicist. Of course he is not smarter than you. So you are the smartest in the world.
Hawking is considered the smartest in the world?! You have greatly exaggerated! (and also a mistake)
Let's say there will be time machines in the future, why don't we see them visiting us in the Nablus and the Arabs?
It seems to me that Michael was mocking the nonsense you wrote...
You wrote so much, it is clear that some of what you wrote is true. That doesn't make all the things you said ridiculous
Yes, yes, I wrote too
About 'time' which is like space (past present future like height length width)
I was talking about a time machine,
and about the particle (anti-particle of a photon) and about the fact that it is related to hadrons which can actually be involved in the 'attraction' (gravitation) of matter in space.
And all kinds of other 'nonsense' about which, like the 'genius from Israel' Rothschild, giggled and laughed.