Page 1 of 2 [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Sunshine7
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 218

04 Dec 2011, 2:49 pm

Proposition: we will invent invisibility before we invent time travel, or we will never invent time travel at all.

Nobody has ever actually seen a time traveler before, which could have a few explanations, not necessarily mutually exclusive:
- time travelers wear a cloak of invisibility or something, possibly for the very purpose of not affecting the past
- Our stretch of human history from the cavemen up till now just so happens to be so incredibly boring that no self-respecting time-traveler would bother to visit us. I don't blame them, I'd rather go see the dinosaurs.
- Nobody has ever identified a time-traveler, although they could be living among us. If they are not literally invisible, then they must be socially assimilated.
- Time-travel has been invented, but perhaps expressly prohibited by time police or something like that, which would be an incredibly cool profession.
- time-travel is never invented.



TreehuggerXXL
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 25

04 Dec 2011, 3:58 pm

I suspect they invented it, and the goverment made Albert E talk some jibberish so people wouldn't think it was possible. :)



so_subtly_strange
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 295

04 Dec 2011, 4:01 pm

policing is not necessary. time travelers are chosen by very rigid parameters. all time travelers are aware of the other members in the network, if such a situation were to arise which would require policing, another time traveler would perform the function, without need for additional administrative monitoring.



Burnbridge
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 971
Location: Columbus, Ohio

04 Dec 2011, 4:05 pm

Sunshine7 wrote:
Nobody has ever actually seen a time traveler before


I'd like to take a brief moment of unshifted temporality to point out that nobody has ever seen the invisible, either. If anyone had, then the invisible would, ergo, be the visible. I'd advise pondering this in the present, because if you wait and do it later, then it will still be the present, only later. Thanks for your time.


_________________
No dx yet ... AS=171/200,NT=13/200 ... EQ=9/SQ=128 ... AQ=39 ... MB=IntJ


DemonAbyss10
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,492
Location: The Poconos, Pennsylvania

04 Dec 2011, 4:08 pm

technology that isn't needed...


_________________
Myers Brigg - ISTP
Socionics - ISTx
Enneagram - 6w5

Yes, I do have a DeviantArt, it is at.... http://demonabyss10.deviantart.com/


Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

04 Dec 2011, 4:20 pm

invisibility is a reality in a hosty of different ways today, from optical illusion to the bending of radioation,

so can i have my time machine now?(what the deuce was the logic behind that proposition anyway???)


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,340
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

04 Dec 2011, 6:02 pm

Sunshine7 wrote:
Proposition: we will invent invisibility before we invent time travel, or we will never invent time travel at all.

Nobody has ever actually seen a time traveler before, which could have a few explanations, not necessarily mutually exclusive:
- time travelers wear a cloak of invisibility or something, possibly for the very purpose of not affecting the past
- Our stretch of human history from the cavemen up till now just so happens to be so incredibly boring that no self-respecting time-traveler would bother to visit us. I don't blame them, I'd rather go see the dinosaurs.
- Nobody has ever identified a time-traveler, although they could be living among us. If they are not literally invisible, then they must be socially assimilated.
- Time-travel has been invented, but perhaps expressly prohibited by time police or something like that, which would be an incredibly cool profession.
- time-travel is never invented.


Invisibility is actually a lot more feasible than time-travel. Cloaking has already been demonstrated as a practical possibility due to research into materials with a negative refractive index, which could be used to refract light around objects. On the other hand, it's highly unlikely that time-travel is even allowed by the laws of physics. For information on cloaking, see here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamaterial_cloaking



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

04 Dec 2011, 8:15 pm

Sunshine7 wrote:
Proposition: we will invent invisibility before we invent time travel, or we will never invent time travel at all.



"invisibility" devices already exist. The work by bending light from behind an object to the front of the object.

Backward time travel would imply speeds greater than light speed can be reached by material objects. Most likely not the case.

We are all forward time travelers.

ruveyn



Sunshine7
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 218

04 Dec 2011, 9:48 pm

Quote:
"invisibility" devices already exist. The work by bending light from behind an object to the front of the object.


Oh yeah I saw this documentary of a guy who was wearing 2 screens, one in front and one behind, and you could literally see through him (through the 2 screens).

Now we just have to make the screens invisible...

Quote:
I'd like to take a brief moment of unshifted temporality to point out that nobody has ever seen the invisible, either. If anyone had, then the invisible would, ergo, be the visible.
...
so can i have my time machine now?(what the deuce was the logic behind that proposition anyway???)


This one's my fault, I didn't clarify.
Nobody has ever seen a time-traveler before, so among the possibilities:
- Time travel will never be invented
- Time travelers are wearing an invisibility suit for some reason, e.g. legal mandate, personal preference to not risk dating your mom or something like that.

Expanding from the 2nd possibility: ergo, invisibility must have been invented before time travel.

You know how sometimes dogs start barking at empty space for no apparent reason? Maybe they're barking at invisible time travelers.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,340
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

05 Dec 2011, 3:19 am

Sunshine7 wrote:
Quote:
"invisibility" devices already exist. The work by bending light from behind an object to the front of the object.


Oh yeah I saw this documentary of a guy who was wearing 2 screens, one in front and one behind, and you could literally see through him (through the 2 screens).

Now we just have to make the screens invisible...


True invisibility is exactly what Ruveyn and I were talking about though. Just click on the link in my previous post. The guy wearing the 2 screens is really just a form of camouflage, not invisibility.



Burnbridge
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 971
Location: Columbus, Ohio

05 Dec 2011, 7:08 am

Well, to be truly invisible then, would one still cast a shadow? It that the difference between invisible and mere super-awesome camouflage?

-

Oh, and wrt to Faster Than Light travel, can someone explain to me how FTL takes one "back in time?" I mean, I understand that can see old photons from way back in the day, I can't wra my brain around the idea being able to see the past puts you back in the past or make you influence it.


_________________
No dx yet ... AS=171/200,NT=13/200 ... EQ=9/SQ=128 ... AQ=39 ... MB=IntJ


pete1061
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Nov 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,766
Location: Portland, OR

05 Dec 2011, 7:21 am

I think it's going to be discovered that time is not what most people think it is. That it's a non linear thing and traveling through it is going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than previously thought. We're talking about navigating many dimensions at once.

The perceived flow of time isn't even the same in any two places.

It's a LOT easier to refract & bend the path of some photons around something by comparison.


_________________
Your Aspie score: 172 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 35 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Diagnosed in 2005


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

05 Dec 2011, 10:11 am

pete1061 wrote:
I think it's going to be discovered that time is not what most people think it is. That it's a non linear thing and traveling through it is going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than previously thought. We're talking about navigating many dimensions at once.

The perceived flow of time isn't even the same in any two places.

It's a LOT easier to refract & bend the path of some photons around something by comparison.


The measure of time is dependent on relative velocities. Straight out of Einstein's theory of special relativity.

Newton got it wrong. Time is not an absolute.

ruveyn



DemonAbyss10
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,492
Location: The Poconos, Pennsylvania

05 Dec 2011, 11:01 am

ruveyn wrote:
pete1061 wrote:
I think it's going to be discovered that time is not what most people think it is. That it's a non linear thing and traveling through it is going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than previously thought. We're talking about navigating many dimensions at once.

The perceived flow of time isn't even the same in any two places.

It's a LOT easier to refract & bend the path of some photons around something by comparison.


The measure of time is dependent on relative velocities. Straight out of Einstein's theory of special relativity.

Newton got it wrong. Time is not an absolute.

ruveyn


The thing with my view on it, it really would only be possible on a quantum level. Not enough time to explain at the moment, but that is where you get string and 'brane' theories kicking in.


_________________
Myers Brigg - ISTP
Socionics - ISTx
Enneagram - 6w5

Yes, I do have a DeviantArt, it is at.... http://demonabyss10.deviantart.com/


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

05 Dec 2011, 11:57 am

DemonAbyss10 wrote:

The thing with my view on it, it really would only be possible on a quantum level. Not enough time to explain at the moment, but that is where you get string and 'brane' theories kicking in.


I assume you are aware that there is no empirical support for string theory or brane theory. They appear to be mathematically consistent but there is no practical way to corroborate them by experiment or observation.

ruveyn



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

05 Dec 2011, 12:34 pm

not yet at least,


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.