I have read those astronomical articles about how the stars we see in the sky, some are no longer there because they are already destroyed. What we are seeing now is a delay image because of the traveling of light.
So I want to ask, if one day we manage to achevie faster than light traveling devices, are we essentially travelling back in time? Since by all accounts we will be moving faster than light.
2007-01-09 20:14:20 · 8 answers · asked by wraithrune 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
No and Yes
No: We are only able to see the past because we travel so slowly. Actually, right now we are so far in the past that the stars that died long ago are still visible to us.
If you manage to travel faster than light, you will be living in the dark, and would never see the past. You would be going into a far future, IMO, and would see light as a small spark as you pass it, if you see it at all.
But, Yes, I see what you mean. If we had been able to travel so fast that we would have been there when the star in question died, and the Earth could still see it thousands of years later, we would certainly seem to be in the extreme past to people on Earth.
2007-01-10 00:38:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess that no one on Earth can really answer this question. However I theorise that the time dilation measured by Apollo missions was the effects of velocity slowing the motion of electron orbits around the nuclei of their atoms. I think that electrons travel at a set speed, and when they travel through space subject to cosmological magnetic energy their speed of travel is deducted from the speed of the travel, and thus you experience time in the rest of the universe "appear" to speed up. I think that the "Back to the future" movies that show history changes due to a machine is wishful. I think that if you could go faster then light or jump to a distant place you would be able see the past but there would be no way of interacting with the past, because what you are seeing would be just a light transmission. Be like asking your radio to play a song without a telephone...
2007-01-09 20:48:14 · answer #2 · answered by Al 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hi even if you travel faster than light you cant catch back a lost minute since eventually everything gets destroyed as its energy is burnt out. But when u travel with the velocity of light your mass will become infinity is a known fact. But in reality can you move a 2 tonne material by hand, then how will you move an infinite mass and where will you so much fuel for it.
2007-01-09 20:30:17 · answer #3 · answered by alex 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd only be guessing, but when a "jet" breaks the "sound barrier", traveling faster then the speed of light, in all respects you are moving "ahead" in time. I suppose if you travel fast enough,you would be back at the beginning! Like a circle. But I think you can get the exact answer by going to Google.com and searching in Astronomy. When you find the correct answer, please send us the answer. Good Luck, and this was a good question. It made us THINK!
2007-01-09 20:30:10 · answer #4 · answered by peaches 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, it's quite the opposite: the faster you travel relative to an object, the slower time goes by for you, relative to the time on that particular object. In other words, if you would travel at near-light speed, relative to most of the universe, you would travel into the future, not the past...
2007-01-09 20:29:03 · answer #5 · answered by JohnyD 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. IF we could somehow manage to reach the speed of light (relative to people around us) it would appear to us as the people and things around us are moving at a slower rate... WE would be able to see them, however they would not be able to see us. As the speed of light is relative man,(if we were moving faster than light then their eyes would not be able to see us where we were, we would be somewhere else ... So where they believed us to be would be where we were , not where we would currently be.) If you are truely interested in the stuff man , you should take a physics class, it is pretty fun.
2007-01-09 20:29:03 · answer #6 · answered by Joe G 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
According to the theory of relativity, as speed increases so does mass in such a way that it approaches infinity as speed approaches that of light, so an object with nonzero mass can't reach the speed of light.
The relativity equation for distorting time (slowing of clocks, it's called) only takes into account speeds less than that of light, and couldn't be applied to speeds greater than light. I don't think anyone can give a meaningful concept of a speed greater than light, in fact we may not even know whether our present equations apply near the speed of light.
2007-01-09 20:28:31 · answer #7 · answered by Hy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
essentially if you travel outwards in the universe you are going back in time, if go the the edge of the universe you will see it's beginning, the problem is we can't go that fast nor can anything in the whole universe
2007-01-09 20:21:11 · answer #8 · answered by DeepBlue 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋