Suppose you represent time on a straight line. Like in geometry when finding the absolute value between 2 points. OK so lets say R equals the rate of time, and its set at 0 on the line. R is in constant motion. Never slowing or speeding up. And the constant motion of R is equal to U, the rate at which the universe expands. So F is the positive number line and P is the negative number line. F representing time to come, and P representing time passed. If you wanted to relive a point on the line, how would you? In my theory, to go back in time or to go into the future is to move forward at a speed to which the universe's expansion is the same at which you started to travel. You move so fast that when you reach the point it's like going there the same time twice. Time creates a dimension with every little bit of expansion of the universe. The smallest amount possible. Which also could be infinite, saying that something is nothing. Coming back to where you started would be hard.
2006-08-30 12:12:59 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Mathematics
oww my brain hurts
the funny part is that I really tried to read that a few times and understand it and well, it just didn't work
2006-08-30 12:15:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are making a couple of assumptions, based on the common knowledge, based on QRT. First, you assume that Time is somehow connected to everything else, rather than merely being an invention to determine the sequence of events. Second, the expansion rate of the universal spacetime is a mathematical trick to explain some wierdness to the correlation between the present universe, the assumed Doppler shift, and the majority acceptance of the Big Bang as fact. All of these things are dependent upon the assumption of Relativity as gospel, which was originally based upon the Michelson-Morley 'proof' that there was no fixed ether in space.
Now, if you back up the Maxwell Equation bus to 1880 or so, and smack Einstein upside the head with the theory of a fluid ether, then you end up in Area 51, watching lights in the sky, and realizing that Time is an illusion; lunchtime, doubly so.
2006-08-30 19:33:39 · answer #2 · answered by auntiegrav 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
But you'd have to go faster than the speed of light, because that's the rate at which the universe is expanding, in order to move forwards into the future
Does that mean that the rate of time equals the speed of light (299 792 458 m / s), by your theory?
2006-08-30 19:21:27 · answer #3 · answered by Pete Like 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your description of the expansion of the Universe is completely off-base, my friend.
But the answer to your question? The speed of time is c, the speed of light.
2006-08-30 19:25:40 · answer #4 · answered by poorcocoboiboi 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
go back in time and erase that question, it's giving me a headache
2006-08-30 19:15:52 · answer #5 · answered by a_blue_grey_mist 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1 sec/ time
2006-08-30 19:16:19 · answer #6 · answered by WELL R.S. 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it's in all the movies. Therefore it will happen.
2006-08-30 19:15:52 · answer #7 · answered by jimjones3 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
does time even exist?
2006-08-30 19:19:02 · answer #8 · answered by Marketia 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋