Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

What if...II

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Mark Kapcala

unread,
Nov 26, 1997, 3:00:00 AM11/26/97
to

Time travel can and never will be possible because there isn't enough power in the entire universe to make something move that fast. The calculations were done bout a year ago by some guy in russia and he concluded that not even the power of an exploding
star would make an object move the speed of light...there fore idf the speed of light is not broken..time travel is impossible

Mark Kapcala

Chris Brown

unread,
Nov 26, 1997, 3:00:00 AM11/26/97
to

Mark Kapcala (dv...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:
> Time travel can and never will be possible because there isn't enough
> power in the entire universe to make something move that fast.

Move how fast? Who says you have to move fast?

> The
> calculations were done bout a year ago by some guy in russia and he
> concluded that not even the power of an exploding

That doesn't mean there isn't some alternative than we haven't discovered yet.

> star would make an object move the speed of light...there fore idf the
> speed of light is not broken..time travel is impossible

Unless there's another way.

--
glassshatteringbreakingshiningnewthoughtconclusionendoftimeclimaxsexinabottle
thunderinglightningflashbrightnesscontrasttelevisioncathoderaytubemessage
receivedantennametalrodrobotslargemachinesgrindingrustingpollutingcloudsrain
killspoisonmediacamerasworldviewsattelitespacejunkcomescrashingdown ba930


William Demmery

unread,
Dec 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM12/3/97
to

Bruce MacDonald (an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:
> Mark Kapcala (dv...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:
>> Time travel can and never will be possible because there isn't enough

>> power in the entire universe to make something move that fast. The


>> calculations were done bout a year ago by some guy in russia and he
>> concluded that not even the power of an exploding

>> star would make an object move the speed of light...there fore idf the
>> speed of light is not broken..time travel is impossible
>>

>> Mark Kapcala
>>
>
> Consider the other great theory of this century--Quantum.
> Essentially, everything is possible with Quantum Theory.

No, that's not so. Quite the opposite, in fact; quantum theory places rather
strict limits on what is possible. Even in those instances where amazing
phenomena _could_ occur (eg: tunnelling), sheer astronomical probabilities
come into play. And quantum does not argue with Einstein, who postulates that
any object with mass cannot be accelerated to the speed of light, let alone
beyond, as it would require infinite energy to do so.

As a side note, another prediction of General Relativity (so-called frame-
-dragging, a result of time-dilation in a gravity well) has recently been
verified by observation.

Cheers,

-WCD- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Running, astronomy, radio DX'ing: http://www.entrenet.com/mizar/


Bruce MacDonald

unread,
Dec 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM12/3/97
to

Mark Kapcala (dv...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:
> Time travel can and never will be possible because there isn't enough power in the entire universe to make something move that fast. The calculations were done bout a year ago by some guy in russia and he concluded that not even the power of an exploding
> star would make an object move the speed of light...there fore idf the speed of light is not broken..time travel is impossible
>
> Mark Kapcala
>

Consider the other great theory of this century--Quantum.
Essentially, everything is possible with Quantum Theory.

Cheers, B.


--
Bruce MacDonald -- an...@freenet.carleton.ca
Research/Writing/Editing


Jim Poushinsky

unread,
Dec 3, 1997, 3:00:00 AM12/3/97
to

William Demmery (ag...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:
> Bruce MacDonald (an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:
>> Mark Kapcala (dv...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) writes:

>>[del]

>> Consider the other great theory of this century--Quantum.
>> Essentially, everything is possible with Quantum Theory.
>

> No, that's not so. Quite the opposite, in fact; quantum theory places rather
> strict limits on what is possible. Even in those instances where amazing
> phenomena _could_ occur (eg: tunnelling), sheer astronomical probabilities
> come into play. And quantum does not argue with Einstein, who postulates that
> any object with mass cannot be accelerated to the speed of light, let alone
> beyond, as it would require infinite energy to do so.
>
> As a side note, another prediction of General Relativity (so-called frame-
> -dragging, a result of time-dilation in a gravity well) has recently been
> verified by observation.

We know there are 2 kinds of things - those with rest mass that cannot
be accelerated to the speed of light, and those that are travelling at the
speed of light. It is perfectly compatible with Einstein's Theory to
consider a 3rd kind of thing which always travels faster than the speed of
light. As beings with rest mass we have already figured out how to use
things travelling at the speed of light to transmit information. Perhaps
we will find a way to communicate by using things travelling faster than
the speed of light as well. Those who are having OBEs and precognitive
dreams may have already opened that door. Telepathic contacts with faster
than light beings (time-travellers so to speak) do not violate any
physical laws because only information is transmitted, there is no
physical manifestation. The information is also imprecise, so it is not
possible to change future events in any significant way with this
foreknowledge - only to change our mental preparation and the effects it
has on our thoughts. Again, no contradiction with General Relativity or
Quantum mechanics.

Cheers
--
\.!./
Jim Poushinsky . _: * o :_ . I seem to be a verb.
ae080@freenet. :. v .: - Buckminster Fuller
carleton.ca / : \


0 new messages