I have idea about it but l not know how to explain it. It is too difficult for 18 years old boy. As we know know, Time is not a absolute.
If yahoo give me some space for me to skatch my graph and............. mmm....
2006-11-24 13:59:52 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
I've have never heard of anyone giving anti-time any thought as something that is real. There are a lot of different types of time and time arrows, well, not a lot, about 6. There is actual time, entropic time, space time, universe time (these are simplified terms.) All time can never be negative - Entropy is always negative, never positive. And Einstein said, 'Of all the physical Laws there are, the Laws of Thermodynamics will be the last ones that will be broken." In other words, You will be able to float as if there was no gravity before you can have anti-time. If you study the Theory of Relativity, you will understand that the past, the future, and the present are all happening right now. All time has already been accounted for.
2006-11-24 14:11:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Time is a dimension not a particle.
One way of looking at time is as if we were all riding a current in a big river. The rate at which we move over the water (the rate that we experience the passage of time) is determined by our speed in this universe, but it is also relative to our frame of reference.
The faster you travel in this universe the slower time progresses for you (so on the river you would move closer to the bank where the currrent is less rapid). Time would slow down for you relative to my experience of time (if I were to remain stationary) because I'd still be in the middle of the river moving along faster than you.
If you went faster and faster and somehow you managed to achieve the speed of light (c), time would stop for you - you would have reached the bank of the river.
Theoretically, if you were to travel faster than (c) then time should reverse. In other words you're now travelling upstream against the current.
Personally I think of (c) as an edge. It's an edge of our universe. Perhaps it might be better explained that by achieving (c) it would take you to the edge of our Universe.
Travelling faster than (c) would propel you out of the universe, elsewhere. So going back in time by going faster wouldn't work.
This brings us back to the first line of this replay - time is a dimension rather than a particle. There is no anti-time, merely a slowing or possibly a reversal of movement in that dimension.
For anti-time to exist time itself would have to be particulate in nature which it is not.
And as for being able to create our own universes - apparently this is possible, but given the calamatous consequences should they have got the numbers wrong, I would suggest that any such experiment should be banned, until the end of time!
2006-11-25 08:50:18 · answer #2 · answered by Moebious 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Selamat petang. If you slam two heavy nuclei, like gold nuclei together with a particle accelerator only a little bit more powerful than the largest available today, Einstein's theory predicts that they'll be shortened in their direction of motion and much more massive than when they were at rest. So a huge amount of energy is concentrated in a very small volume and perhaps a tiny black hole will be created, and according to some theories it will expand into a new universe, separate from this one, just as our universe originated from a tiny concentration of mass-energy.
2006-11-24 22:29:00 · answer #3 · answered by zee_prime 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Anti time is possible. as a matter of fact I have acheived it. I was in Perth, Australia at 8am and travelled east to Hawaii and it was 12pm the day before. WOW what a time travelling experience!!
2006-11-25 07:36:00 · answer #4 · answered by sm3gol 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
time is an absoloute...... no matter what!
time goes on at the same pace no matter how quick you move, and no matter how far you travel. time carries on at 1= 1 second... because that how it is measured. time can never go backwards or stop. i dont believe some of the scientists that are published in the new scientist! Time= constant.
2006-11-24 22:04:23 · answer #5 · answered by Aled H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Time is not an absolute, it's a relative commidity.
2006-11-25 00:57:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Try solving something more simple first - like spell-check
2006-11-25 10:54:06 · answer #7 · answered by bwadsp 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
try reading the beano from now on.
2006-11-25 11:16:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
good heavens!
keep it simple kiddo!
2006-11-24 22:02:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋