MythBusters
Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Junior Member
Registered: 08-03-09
|
If you travel around the world in the opposite direction of it's rotation fast enough, can you go back in time?
|
Junior Member
Registered: 08-03-09
|
that would be inposible it would never happen  |
Senior Member
Registered: 02-18-08
|
Step 1. Turn off TV.
Step 2. Read a book.
|
Junior Member
Registered: 08-03-09
|
Step 1. Turn off TV.
Step 2. Read a book.
step 3. get your facts strait
|
Senior Member
Registered: 02-18-08
|
Speaking of getting your facts straight, a strait is a water passage connecting two bodies of water. :P
|
Senior Member
Registered: 06-20-09
|
It is not a stupid question, it is just rediculous. What the problem is is that first off, the speed super-sonic means faster than sound, so if the machine is muffled perfectly, you would only hear sound coming directly from the past which won't happen because the sound you race against will spread out and clear off. Secondly, if you meant faster than light, you could see images of the past because you raced against the visual traces of what was there before. Nothing you could do would change the past, but only give alternative knowlege of it to a third point observer who would see the past and your present at the same time. Any way, time travel is impossible by speed because time is one of the factors of speed. Because time can measure it, time is still able to out run you so speed won't cut it. Time is consistent. But feel free to time travel to the present.
|
Junior Member
Registered: 01-25-03
|
This is a "theory" they show on startrek once or twice.
It's impossible to prove on mythbusters.
|
Senior Member
Registered: 11-12-04
|
quote: Originally posted by The DocRegis:
It is not a stupid question, it is just rediculous. What the problem is is that first off, the speed super-sonic means faster than sound, so if the machine is muffled perfectly, you would only hear sound coming directly from the past which won't happen because the sound you race against will spread out and clear off. Secondly, if you meant faster than light, you could see images of the past because you raced against the visual traces of what was there before. Nothing you could do would change the past, but only give alternative knowlege of it to a third point observer who would see the past and your present at the same time. Any way, time travel is impossible by speed because time is one of the factors of speed. Because time can measure it, time is still able to out run you so speed won't cut it. Time is consistent. But feel free to time travel to the present.
No it's pretty stupid. It's confusing time travel with passing through local time zones. Changing time zones isn't time travel. If someone from NY makes a phone call to someone in CA, he isn't calling from the future. He can't call back to CA and tell him the lottery results before they're drawn in CA. Of course presented as a joke, it can be funny. |
Senior Member
Registered: 02-24-09
|
The closest you could get is a very tiny time dilation effect.
You can actually test this one by synchronizing two identical clocks/watches, leaving one 'stationary', and taking the other one on a drive or some such for a while. When you bring the two back together, the one you took along will be a tiny bit behind the one left behind.
The effect would be, as I said, extremely tiny, and isn't really time travel, but it's still interesting.
The tricky bit here is getting the timepieces synched up right.
|
Senior Member
Registered: 11-12-04
|
quote: Originally posted by BossMek:
The closest you could get is a very tiny time dilation effect.
You can actually test this one by synchronizing two identical clocks/watches, leaving one 'stationary', and taking the other one on a drive or some such for a while. When you bring the two back together, the one you took along will be a tiny bit behind the one left behind.
The effect would be, as I said, extremely tiny, and isn't really time travel, but it's still interesting.
The tricky bit here is getting the timepieces synched up right.
Sure, with super accurate atomic clocks looking for nanosecond differences between the stationary and the clock that took a commercial airline flight. |
Senior Member
Registered: 06-12-09
|
The question is not as stupid as some of you are saying it is.
The topic starter doesn't mention that the speed would have to be possible to reach with current day transport. If you could travel fast enough (not necessarily faster than light) you could create a big time dilation which could mean that when you return people on earth would have aged more than you did. It's not going back in time but quite a fascinating theory.
|
Senior Member
Registered: 11-12-04
|
quote: Originally posted by Nisei:
The question is not as stupid as some of you are saying it is.
The topic starter doesn't mention that the speed would have to be possible to reach with current day transport. If you could travel fast enough (not necessarily faster than light) you could create a big time dilation which could mean that when you return people on earth would have aged more than you did. It's not going back in time but quite a fascinating theory.
No, it's still pretty stupid. OP specifically is looking to go back in time. Even traveling close to the speed of light and experiencing a large time dilation effect doesn't make you travel backward in time. As already mentioned, time dilation has been demonstrated experimentally. We simply lack the technology to travel at velocities that would demonstrate the classic twins paradox where the stay at home is an old man when his now younger twin returns to Earth. |
Senior Member
Registered: 11-25-08
|
If an object can't travel faster than light, then that object would slow because it is nearing the speed of light, it would simply stop accelerating because it has reached the limits of speed it can physicaly travel at. To say there is a time dilation assumes the object keeps moving faster as it reaches near lightspeed travel but appears to be moving slower than it really is because of it's speed. If there is a time dilation, then an object can move at lightspeed or faster. There is either time dilation, or there is simply reaching physical limits of speed, only one of these can be true. At least thats what logic is telling Me.
|
Senior Member
Registered: 06-12-09
|
quote: Originally posted by srmarti:
No, it's still pretty stupid.
Well, as I see it the OP is only asking a question and it's far less stupid than a lot of other questions on these boards. So I wonder what people are allowed to ask without being called stupid. |
Senior Member
Registered: 11-25-08
|
quote: Originally posted by Myth_Buster_1382:
If you travel around the world in the opposite direction of it's rotation fast enough, can you go back in time?
Actually, you kind of can go back in time, and you don't need to go all that fast. 520-550mph is fast enough. When I fly to the philippines from Michigan, I actually lose a day, but then gain it back on the return trip. If we just kept fying all the way around, we wouldn't lose any time because we'd be back in the same time zone as we left. If that flight took 40 hours, it would just be 40 hours later when we retuned. |
Senior Member
Registered: 11-12-04
|
quote: Originally posted by JeffBro: quote: Originally posted by Myth_Buster_1382:
If you travel around the world in the opposite direction of it's rotation fast enough, can you go back in time?
Actually, you kind of can go back in time, and you don't need to go all that fast. 520-550mph is fast enough. When I fly to the philippines from Michigan, I actually lose a day, but then gain it back on the return trip. If we just kept fying all the way around, we wouldn't lose any time because we'd be back in the same time zone as we left. If that flight took 40 hours, it would just be 40 hours later when we retuned.
It's already been explained that traveling across time zones isn't really time travel. The only thing changing is the local convention of "what time is it?" You can't call someone on the other side of the international date line and get tomorrow's lottery numbers. They're in another timezone, not the future. |
Senior Member
Registered: 11-12-04
|
quote: Originally posted by Nisei: quote: Originally posted by srmarti:
No, it's still pretty stupid.
Well, as I see it the OP is only asking a question and it's far less stupid than a lot of other questions on these boards. So I wonder what people are allowed to ask without being called stupid.
Actually I didn't call the OP stupid. I disagreed with another's comment the it wasn't such a stupid question. Changing time zones is not time travel. I don't actually know if the person posting the question is stupid or not. Just that the question is. Maybe the question is a joke. Maybe the poster is too young to have sufficient education to know better. Flying around the world like in one of the Superman movies will not make time go backward and that's sort of what the original post seems to be asking. |
Senior Member
Registered: 11-25-08
|
quote: Originally posted by srmarti: quote: Originally posted by JeffBro: quote: Originally posted by Myth_Buster_1382:
If you travel around the world in the opposite direction of it's rotation fast enough, can you go back in time?
Actually, you kind of can go back in time, and you don't need to go all that fast. 520-550mph is fast enough. When I fly to the philippines from Michigan, I actually lose a day, but then gain it back on the return trip. If we just kept fying all the way around, we wouldn't lose any time because we'd be back in the same time zone as we left. If that flight took 40 hours, it would just be 40 hours later when we retuned.
It's already been explained that traveling across time zones isn't really time travel. The only thing changing is the local convention of "what time is it?" You can't call someone on the other side of the international date line and get tomorrow's lottery numbers. They're in another timezone, not the future.
You might take note that I stated "kind of go back in time" not actually go back in time |
Senior Member
Registered: 11-12-04
|
I realize that. But that just gives further confusion to those that can't tell the difference between traveling through time zones and time travel. There's no need to concede that in some sense someone can "kind of, sort of," go back in time. It's no more time travel than resetting your watch is.
|
Senior Member
Registered: 11-25-08
|
quote: Originally posted by srmarti:
I realize that. But that just gives further confusion to those that can't tell the difference between traveling through time zones and time travel. There's no need to concede that in some sense someone can "kind of, sort of," go back in time. It's no more time travel than resetting your watch is.
Ok, but what about super duper sonic time travel? sorry  |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
|
advertisement
|
