Do Tachyons can really exist?


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Do Tachyons can really exist?

Previous · 1 · 2
Author Message
Profile tullio
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3403
Credit: 345,196
RAC: 96
Italy
Message 1142153 - Posted: 18 Aug 2011, 17:42:58 UTC - in response to Message 1142145.

Yes, and they can move backwards in time. When a physics professor who had made some research on tachyons sent me a note announcing his marriage, which arrived to me after his marriage, I sent him a note saying best wishes and that, if I had some tachyons to carry it, he would have received it before his marriage.He never answered, however.
Tullio
____________

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1142168 - Posted: 18 Aug 2011, 18:01:11 UTC - in response to Message 1142153.
Last modified: 18 Aug 2011, 18:03:42 UTC

Yes, and they can move backwards in time. When a physics professor who had made some research on tachyons sent me a note announcing his marriage, which arrived to me after his marriage, I sent him a note saying best wishes and that, if I had some tachyons to carry it, he would have received it before his marriage.He never answered, however.
Tullio


Ah, that's because it's not possible to know of an event before
that event has occurred. If time travel was to be possible it has been
agreed that you will not be able to go back further than that time when
you first were able to time travel. i.e. if you discover time travel
today then if you use this discovery tomorrow you will only be able to
go back as far as yesterday, currently today...(ho-hum)

Profile Dr Imaginario
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 11
Posts: 172
Credit: 22,735
RAC: 0
Portugal
Message 1142292 - Posted: 18 Aug 2011, 21:30:52 UTC

Bu are we aware of how time is made? what is the present for us, is the past for in another part of the universe.
When we look to the stars at night we are looking in to the past....
maybe someone is doing it to us also in a galaxy far away

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1142438 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 3:31:42 UTC - in response to Message 1142292.
Last modified: 19 Aug 2011, 3:50:47 UTC

Bu are we aware of how time is made? what is the present for us, is the past for in another part of the universe.
When we look to the stars at night we are looking in to the past....
maybe someone is doing it to us also in a galaxy far away


Well, I will stick my head out above the clouds and state
that time does not exist. At least I know I'm not on my own with this
statement. Time has no dimensions to it, what's happening now is occurring
on the same spot as what occurred before it. The gap in between was not time
otherwise we could measure it, since time has no dimensions so it can not be
measured....what can not be measured can not exist. Remember, a clock does not
measure time, no it actually measures a movement of a mass in relation to
another mass. This movement is an event i.e. as Earth rotates it's the event
of this rotation that we pass through. We then use controlled angular movement
within a clock to record how many rotations of a certain cog occurred as we
passed through the event of the Earth rotating. These rotations of the clocks
cog we label as seconds in time but I say all we have witnessed/experienced
is the event of this clock unraveling under motion. Motion I think is the key
word in describing what we consider to be the sensation of time. For as we
move through events so we move through space both together, is this time
space or is this actually event space?
Nothing occurs in the future and nothing occurred in the past for everything
that has occurred or is occurring is all housed in the now. Ah, but man landed
on the moon 40 years ago? That's correct but there is no 40 years ago..
..We passed through the event of man landing on the moon and the difference
between that event and the event now occurring with you reading this is that
we have moved further along in space and the moon landing event has been
left in that space we occupied as that landing event unfolded.
If time exists how
can it do so by annihilating itself as soon as it is produced. To produce itself
then then must be something around that generates it first. How can you exist
in time if as soon as it is generated so at the same time it annihilates the previous
bit of generated time. If it was not annihilating the previous
bit of time then you'd have a dimension within it. Therefor it can be seen
that if there was time then it would be totally unstable. So for time to
truley exist then it would have had to be already produced enmass without
any form of annihilation going on. It would have had to be laid down as a
platform for us to move through. A platform has a dimension and where you have a
dimension so you have the ability to move within this dimension but we can't do this with time though.
If time does exist it then has to be in the fourth dimension.
It can't be higher, say the 5th, otherwise we would be experiencing
the effects of the 4th dimension and know about it too.

The object of these mad ramblings is for it to be pulled a-part!
Does time exist or does it not. If it does why then can we not move
around it.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13307
Credit: 27,859,522
RAC: 15,762
United States
Message 1142451 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 3:51:50 UTC - in response to Message 1142438.

The object of these mad ramblings is for it to be pulled a-part!
Does time exist or does it not. If it does why then can we not move
around it.


Of course time exists. As explained in the video I linked, we are three dimensional creatures, so we can only travel through the fourth dimension the only way we can experience it: in one direction.

This is the same way a two dimensional creature cannot observe the third dimension, but can still travel through it unknowingly.

All possibilities are contained within the 10th dimension.

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1142525 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 6:41:44 UTC - in response to Message 1142451.
Last modified: 19 Aug 2011, 7:37:36 UTC

Of course time exists. As explained in the video I linked, we are three dimensional creatures, so we can only travel through the fourth dimension the only way we can experience it: in one direction.


The video did not actually prove that time exists if it had then the person responsible for this video content would be in receipt of a Nobel Prize.
The problem is that no one in the scientific field has actually been able to prove whether time does or does not exist. No one has yet been able to prove that there are more than three dimensions to our universe. They suspect through calculations that there are possibly eleven in our universe in total but still can only prove those three we experience. The mystery surrounding time is that if it truly exists then there are no laws in quantum physics that stop us from moving around it. If time does exist then it exist's completely independently of physics and their defining laws. It is stated that the laws defining the makeup and construction of our universe do not contain time as a component. The universe does not need time so why has it created it then, that's if it has. Yet this does not disprove the existence of time though for one thing if it truly does exist then it's created and then destroyed simultaneously creating the present, the now, sensation that we experience so this would explain why we can not move around in it and certainly not go back in it since the past time-time has been destroyed. Because time is open to pure conjecture by all then you can ask, "What is the purpose of time" for if it is here what is it here for. The universe has no need of it yet if it did create it as a dimension then there must be other universes where the time dimension was not created. Would this
mean then that universes without time would not be able to support life. Not according to the known laws of physics in our universe would this be the case.
Universes without time, well, our universal laws of physics permit this. Could it be in actual fact that no universe has the need for time or actually has time at all. But it's man himself who creates it and dose so wholly within his mind because he is the odd-ball he is the only thing in the universe that observes and on observing he creates a dimension of time inside his brain. This effect enhanced due to the brain requiring time periods to function intelligently. Our brains require the function of time a function that the universe does not itself require to exist. Is it this function of the human brain that gives man the intelligence advantage over all other species?

But time as a dimension I am not convinced of, but it don't mean it ain't true.
Ozz, I'm more inclined to believe it's a function generated by our brain for our brain does need it for I think without it we would loose our intelligence. But
of course it could all be the other way around and that time does exist and our brains have gained the ability to use it in such a way that other spices can not. This results in us having superior intelligence above that of all other living creatures.

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2349
Credit: 1,160,997
RAC: 185
United States
Message 1142558 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 10:12:09 UTC - in response to Message 1142525.

Time can be traversed in a sense since a person taking a rocket ship to another world and traveling at an appreciable percentage of the speed of light will find that he has returned to Earth far into the future as far as his calendar tells him.

Time is an illusion by which we order events in our lives.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13307
Credit: 27,859,522
RAC: 15,762
United States
Message 1142581 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 11:54:09 UTC - in response to Message 1142525.

Of course time exists. As explained in the video I linked, we are three dimensional creatures, so we can only travel through the fourth dimension the only way we can experience it: in one direction.


The video did not actually prove that time exists if it had then the person responsible for this video content would be in receipt of a Nobel Prize.


I never said the video proves time exists, I merely said it was explained in the video. It is, after all, only theory since we have no way of testing it for fact.

The problem is that no one in the scientific field has actually been able to prove whether time does or does not exist. No one has yet been able to prove that there are more than three dimensions to our universe. They suspect through calculations that there are possibly eleven in our universe in total but still can only prove those three we experience.


You are, of course, free to believe whatever you want. Your arguments are akin to "We don't really know the Big Bang happened, its just that through calculations and other minor observations we think it happened", and you are right.

The universe does not need time so why has it created it then, that's if it has.


Of course universe needs time to exist. Just like all other dimensions, the universe simply could not exist without it.

Yet this does not disprove the existence of time though for one thing if it truly does exist then it's created and then destroyed simultaneously creating the present, the now, sensation that we experience so this would explain why we can not move around in it and certainly not go back in it since the past time-time has been destroyed. Because time is open to pure conjecture by all then you can ask, "What is the purpose of time" for if it is here what is it here for. The universe has no need of it yet if it did create it as a dimension then there must be other universes where the time dimension was not created. Would this
mean then that universes without time would not be able to support life. Not according to the known laws of physics in our universe would this be the case.
Universes without time, well, our universal laws of physics permit this. Could it be in actual fact that no universe has the need for time or actually has time at all. But it's man himself who creates it and dose so wholly within his mind because he is the odd-ball he is the only thing in the universe that observes and on observing he creates a dimension of time inside his brain. This effect enhanced due to the brain requiring time periods to function intelligently. Our brains require the function of time a function that the universe does not itself require to exist. Is it this function of the human brain that gives man the intelligence advantage over all other species?


All of this is pure conjecture. Time is not needed by our brains, but since man has decided to keep track of things, he has noticed that, and has memory of, things he's done in the past, which makes him think about things he will do in the future, ergo man has noticed that time exists and the universe requires it.

But time as a dimension I am not convinced of, but it don't mean it ain't true.
Ozz, I'm more inclined to believe it's a function generated by our brain for our brain does need it for I think without it we would loose our intelligence. But
of course it could all be the other way around and that time does exist and our brains have gained the ability to use it in such a way that other spices can not. This results in us having superior intelligence above that of all other living creatures.


I think you're on the right track with this last thought process.

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 29507
Credit: 8,931,868
RAC: 26,247
United Kingdom
Message 1142608 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 15:08:43 UTC

Well, I will stick my head out above the clouds and state that time does not exist


Well try telling that to the pub across the road at 11pm closing time!

The word that is missing here is elapsed. We don't measure time, we measure elapsed time. Or more accurately we measure elapsed time in some arbitary units, which may or may not, have a link with the rotation and orbit of the earth.

We say its been 40 years since man first walked on the moon. What we mean is, since that time 40 years have elapsed, which is the equivalent of 40 orbits of our planet around the sun. Any people living on Jupiter might say, oh yes we remember that, that was 3829.74 Yingtongs ago.

You can't measure time, but you can measure elapsed time with a mechanical contrivance. History of seconds, minutes, and hours here
Time divisions
We also use 60 seconds for a minute of arc, and 60 minutes for a degree of arc. 360 degrees in a circle comes from the Babylonians base 60 numbering system which equates roughly to the 365 revolutions of the earth in one orbit around the sun.

You can't see time, you can't hold it in your hand, but because of that, you can't say it doesn't exist.

Time is a part of the measuring system used to sequence events, to compare the durations of events and the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change such as the motions of objects. The temporal position of events with respect to the transitory present is continually changing; future events become present, then pass further and further into the past. Time has been a major subject of religion, philosophy, and science, but defining it in a non-controversial manner applicable to all fields of study has consistently eluded the greatest scholars.

Profile Dr Imaginario
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 11
Posts: 172
Credit: 22,735
RAC: 0
Portugal
Message 1142627 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 16:11:28 UTC

Time is a part of the measuring system used to sequence events, to compare the durations of events and the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change such as the motions of objects.[1] The temporal position of events with respect to the transitory present is continually changing; future events become present, then pass further and further into the past. Time has been a major subject of religion, philosophy, and science, but defining it in a non-controversial manner applicable to all fields of study has consistently eluded the greatest scholars. A simple definition states that "time is what clocks measure".

Time is one of the seven fundamental physical quantities in the International System of Units. Time is used to define other quantities — such as velocity — so defining time in terms of such quantities would result in circularity of definition.[2] An operational definition of time, wherein one says that observing a certain number of repetitions of one or another standard cyclical event (such as the passage of a free-swinging pendulum) constitutes one standard unit such as the second, is highly useful in the conduct of both advanced experiments and everyday affairs of life. The operational definition leaves aside the question whether there is something called time, apart from the counting activity just mentioned, that flows and that can be measured. Investigations of a single continuum called spacetime bring questions about space into questions about time, questions that have their roots in the works of early students of natural philosophy.

Two contrasting viewpoints on time divide many prominent philosophers. One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe, a dimension in which events occur in sequence. Sir Isaac Newton subscribed to this realist view, and hence it is sometimes referred to as Newtonian time.[3][4] Time travel, in this view, becomes a possibility as other "times" persist like frames of a film strip, spread out across the time line. The opposing view is that time does not refer to any kind of "container" that events and objects "move through", nor to any entity that "flows", but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz[5] and Immanuel Kant,[6][7] holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be travelled.

Temporal measurement has occupied scientists and technologists, and was a prime motivation in navigation and astronomy. Periodic events and periodic motion have long served as standards for units of time. Examples include the apparent motion of the sun across the sky, the phases of the moon, the swing of a pendulum, and the beat of a heart. Currently, the international unit of time, the second, is defined in terms of radiation emitted by caesium atoms (see below). Time is also of significant social importance, having economic value ("time is money") as well as personal value, due to an awareness of the limited time in each day and in human life spans.

by the way i'm quoting wikipidea :) I'm a man so i don't have enough brains

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1142656 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 17:53:54 UTC

That's generated some response, working nights so will take a little time to respond. One thing on my mind regarding time "Can it only ever occupy the
4th dimension in any universe"?

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 11732
Credit: 5,969,877
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1142807 - Posted: 19 Aug 2011, 22:23:01 UTC

We seem to all be made of stuff that travels at velocity c in four dimensions. If we move in X, Y and/or Z then we move slower in T.

____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2349
Credit: 1,160,997
RAC: 185
United States
Message 1143031 - Posted: 20 Aug 2011, 11:21:31 UTC

i thought tachyons were simply annoying infinities that pop up in the Standard model or in efforts toward a unified field theory. They are said to represent particles going back in time or traveling faster than the speed of light. Perhaps they represent a unique view of where mathematics no longer fits our understanding of reality.

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,796
RAC: 794
United Kingdom
Message 1143042 - Posted: 20 Aug 2011, 12:02:35 UTC - in response to Message 1142926.
Last modified: 20 Aug 2011, 12:06:20 UTC

... Maybe the Universe is Analog and not Digital.
Maybe Planck's Units are just epistemological limits of resolution within our paradigm.


Those are very good comments and questions. We see many effects that appear to be quantized...


Is the effect of quantization just an example of preferred stable states in our universe? Or is our universe indeed "digitized" at the extreme scale of the Planck length?

Do you get continuous ("analog") transitions between quantum states? Or are transitions between states discrete ("instantaneous" or "digital")? Or do you get neither and we merely observe a probability distribution to say which state is the most likely to be observed at any instant? Is that just an observational limit and there is a physical/mechanical reality that is completely uniquely defined that we merely cannot observe?

Is time itself 'quantised' so that our universe resolves itself into moments of stability along a series of discrete steps of time? Thus, does our universe 'tick' like a mechanical clock whereby there is no stable or discernible existence mid-tick?

And all with no absolute frame of reference for time?

Due to quantisation, do you get detectably discrete 'time shells' around suitably super-massive bodies? Could an 'interference pattern' be noticed for particles grazing along the boundaries of those discrete time shells (if they were to exist)?



That's all I have time for for the moment!

Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Dr Imaginario
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 11
Posts: 172
Credit: 22,735
RAC: 0
Portugal
Message 1157053 - Posted: 29 Sep 2011, 11:57:11 UTC

Maybe we should consider the variable speed of light (VSL) concept states that the speed of light in a vacuum, usually denoted by c, may not be constant in most cases. In most situations in condensed matter physics when light is traveling through a medium, it effectively has a slower speed. Virtual photons in some calculations in quantum field theory may also travel at a different speed for short distances; however, this doesn't imply that anything can travel faster than light. While it is usually thought that no meaning can be ascribed to a dimensional quantity such as the speed of light varying in time (as opposed to a dimensionless number such as the fine structure constant), in some controversial theories in cosmology, the speed of light also varies by changing the postulates of special relativity. This though would require a rewrite of much of modern physics, to replace the current system which depends on a constant c.

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1157217 - Posted: 29 Sep 2011, 20:27:27 UTC
Last modified: 29 Sep 2011, 20:29:39 UTC

If I could travel backwards in time I could go back to yesterday and shake my own hand. I could even hold a conversation with myself we would be twins if someone else were to see us together. Which one of us would be me though? the one travelling back in time or the one I greet when I go back? Which one of me would be conscious of this time travel event, me the one travelling back in time or me being visited by myself from tomorrow. We can't both be conscious of this time travel event as we stand in front of each other for both of us are me and I can only have one conscious presents hence I can't be consciously present in two different places at one time....especially where I am confronted by my time travelling self. To this end you simply can not travel backwards in time, full stop! Oh well, I suppose I'd best go and do something useful with my time rather than sit around here typing out a load of old baloney?

Profile Dr Imaginario
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 11
Posts: 172
Credit: 22,735
RAC: 0
Portugal
Message 1157398 - Posted: 30 Sep 2011, 9:35:27 UTC

Long time ago, if you all remember that TV show presented by Carl Sagan called cosmos, he spoke in one episode about the grandfather paradox.

In a nutshell it works like this, I travel in to the past and I kill my grandfather before he meet my grand mom, so as consequence my dad was never born or neither me.

So how can I be there?

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,432,110
RAC: 163
Korea, North
Message 1157427 - Posted: 30 Sep 2011, 12:49:56 UTC - in response to Message 1157398.

that's a timeline paradox. Watch any of the Back to the Future movies for a decent explanation. One has to assume that interaction with a previous time could and would alter future events. This would alter the future you knew.

This has also be a plot to many alternate future books where a specific event didn't occur in the past which alters our present time. D-Day was a failure, the Romans were successful at defeating the Germanic tribes, Ghengis Khan lived to conquer Europe, etc.
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1157970 - Posted: 1 Oct 2011, 18:40:25 UTC - in response to Message 1157398.

Long time ago, if you all remember that TV show presented by Carl Sagan called cosmos, he spoke in one episode about the grandfather paradox.

In a nutshell it works like this, I travel in to the past and I kill my grandfather before he meet my grand mom, so as consequence my dad was never born or neither me.

So how can I be there?


Yes, so if you could travel backwards in time then you most certainly would not
be able to interact with anything or anyone around you.

Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Do Tachyons can really exist?

Copyright © 2014 University of California