Does time stop at the speed of light?

[mistled]

[Bighoss]

you know chances are we have no clue what were talking about and our race is too stupid to understand stuff this complicated.

[CockRoach]

this is probably all bs made up by a couple scientists who got stoned outa there minds and looked at the stars...


any who... its nice to see people thinking and not running on about how war is right or wrong

[Lexington_Steele]

Originally posted by {BOHICA}mistled
But what is it that the gravity is changing?? My point is that we can't know if gravity is affecting the atoms themselves, and thus making time appear slower..... or if the gravity is affecting time itself and thus the atoms are moving slower. Since we are 'in' time, we have no certain way to perform reliably accurate experiments on it.

Gravity's effects on time are similar to the effects of traveling at near light speeds.

Ask yourself what traveling at light speed changing? Gravity changes the same thing.

If you are in the high gravity you don't notice the fact that time is passing differently. You are in an inertial reference frame and time appears to pass the same way it passes for anytone else.

However if you campare any kind of clock (not just an atomic clock) from two radically different amounts of gravity you will see that time has been has been passing at different speed for each area.

If you spent one second in a black hole, it would seem like a normal second to you. However when you emerged from the black hole (one second later), millions of years could have passed for people on earth. This is due to a black hole's gravity's effects on time dilation.

[Doobz]

the baby born at the same time thing is a good example, but it makes you think....

your assuming that there is a relative point in time that these babies could be compared at, but since both exist in seperate time continuums, it is actually impossible to compare them after a certain amount of time, because you have to find a shared point between them, and when you think about that, there can only be a single instant in all of forever that these two time continuums share. a single instant, and that might not even be usable since time is always in motion at a set speed according to where it is in the universe, if you take 2 points and compare their time continuums, which are moving at different rates, and you look at this one point where they might be comparitive, since their rates are different, it makes the point completely non comparative. The only way for this point to be truly shared is if at this point, time in both locations completely stopped, or if it somehow readjusted to be equal rates at both locations.

Now, if you think about what i said above, you will realize that according to that, the universe exists in a different a different time at every location in the universe, because the number of factors affecting time in that location are infinite, leading to a different speed of time in every known point in the universe. Now, if a given point exists in a different time, it is in theory completely removed from the universe of all points not coinciding with the speed and location of the first point's time continuum.

Now, what i just said right there, is that every point in the universe is an independent plane of existence, a seperate universe, making the universe as we realize it, infinitely young and old at the same time, and is not in fact a single universe, but an infinite number of existences.

weird, huh?

(i have never read a book on quantam physics, nor taken a class of it. it was all based on my own theories without a formal education in the area. what i said above could be completely off) with all known theories)

[Lexington_Steele]

How about if I have the two babies born at the same hospital, in the same room (maybe even twins). I would say they have the same inertial reference frame. And this hospital will serve as our reference point in comparrison of the two chilren,

Next you take one baby to an extremely high gravity field to live.

Then you have both twins return to the same hospital.

One is 24 and the other is still an infant.

However you are right. Unless you are comparing events occuring at the same inertial reference point it is hard to guage time comparisons and catalogue the occurance of events.

Doobz, you seem to be doing very good thinking.

[Doobz]

yeah, my head felt funny after tht one

[Sputty]

You do realise Einstein was joking? It was a practical joke. BTW, all the "nuclear" weapons you see are just photoshopped in. Sorry to burst your bubble. Also, "space" is actually a thin layer of pudding. This was found out when the first satellites were launched. Also, the US is actually ran by kittens.

[Toimu]

Lexington_Steele,

I spoke to a chemist I work with that has a Ph.D. in Physics. He said most Physicians agree with your definition of time, while I agree with a Newtonian definition. We also got into a similar debate; I still prefer Newton�s definition.

Sorry if I offended you, without doing more research on the topic, I assumed you were talking from a Sci-Fi education. But I still don�t like that definition of time.

[Lexington_Steele]

It's all good, I'l forgive you this time.

BTW, what are you doing posting here. Episode 2 had begun!!!!!

Your supposed to be capturing sector for your squad.

See you in space.

[Toimu]

Originally posted by Lexington_Steele

BTW, what are you doing posting here. Episode 2 had begun!!!!!

Your supposed to be capturing sector for your squad.

See you in space.

Dude thanks, I didn't know. I just took down 50 C1's in off-line sim at once!

[dukeacem]

Do some web research you can find all the current scientific thought there is and then disagree with it

[Toimu]

If decreasing gravity decreases the rate at which an atom vibrates, and in turn, makes a clock read time slower, doesn�t decrease the speed of time in IMO. Time is just like length or liquid volume. If you decrease gravity so one liter of water now measures 1.1 liters, you didn�t increase the number of molecules, you just expanded the distance between them. But this is just a Newtonian way of thinking.

[Explosive17]

[JonnyK]

ok, i read the first page and about half of the second, then it got too confusing so don't flame me if someone already said this. they put an atomic clock at a space station and one on an appolo space ship, they made them exactly the same down to like 1 millionth of a second or some tiny number. they were different when the ship came back down, but only by a little bit. so, theoretically, if we could travel at say 1000 times the speed of light, someone went up into space and orbited jupiter for a week at that speed then came back to earth, time would have passed normally for him, but everyone on earth would have aged much more, i'm not really sure how much time difference that speed would produce but i know at a fast enough speed one can "time travel" to a degree.


*edit*
that sounds way too smart for a 15 year old lol