Thursday, November 17, 2005 7:05:21 PM
I had a physics teacher that actually did experiments that are now books that are in the library of Congress.....so I already knew a lot of this and could keep up...and yes, I kept an "A" in physics.
Monday, October 24, 2005 5:00:33 PM
Jimbo - The "Twin Paradox" is what I think you're referring to, but that`s unrelated to time travel. If you have two twins and one flies around at relativistic speeds for a while he will indeed be younger than the one that stays at earth. The "Twin Paradox" name turns out to be a misnomer, as it is not actually a paradox, and has actually been confirmed in scientific experiment (they flew atomic clocks around in airplanes, I believe).
Sunday, October 23, 2005 7:28:06 AM
medic1971: you're right. That`s the idea behind the time travellers paradox. I`m not sure if you would be able to see yourself take off, but if you had a friend the same age as you, you took off, did a lap of the moon and came back, you`d be younger than your friend when you got back.
Technically speaking, if you were to live at the top of a mountain, you`d also grow older slower than your friend at the bottom of the mountain. By a tiny tiny tiny amount. :D
Saturday, October 22, 2005 11:35:59 PM
Medic1971: I have pondered the same idea. Theoretically, if travel at speeds above the speed of light were possible you could travel a distance - turn around and view history. However, by returning at speeds faster than light you would not be able to arrive before the light emitting event occurred. In your example you would spend 10 minutes travelling away from the event at 10 X the speed of light and 5 minutes returning at 20 X the speed of light. So by the time you made it back to the event, 15 minutes would have elapsed. With the speed of light at 299,792,458 meters/sec, the light emitted from the event would have already travelled 269,813,212,200 meters from the event that emitted the light.