Theoretical Physics and the Quantum Mind - Page 5

# 61 06-05-2010 , 12:29 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

According to Hawkings new theory (as steve put) stwert you cant actually change your own past (to get around the 'grandfather paradox'). You could change some one elses but not your own. It gets a little heavy in there, I think I posted a link to it. But as steve said you create a parallel timeline where you could change your past because the future hasnt happened in that one, if I have this right.

If you cant get back to a timeline steve then does that mean 2 travellers cant meet?? If you peel off and make a new one and person B does as well you are then creating different timelines in different times etc etc????

So are you saying the Doctor isnt a Timelord and he is a fraud??.... user added image

Im am extremely upset now steve, my childhood has been irreversibly shattered and I cant go back to change your statement because I cant go forward back to this keyboard as now I dont exist.......cry..sob..oh oblivion awaits.

vanish............................................ .........................................

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 62 06-05-2010 , 12:38 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

To inject some humour into this riveting, mind bending course of everything, or was that something.....

not the original but still funny

the answer was 42 wasnt it?? but what was the question?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsK6aRuSBIc

poor old whale (Greenpeace do not watch this video), scenes of mishap to a CGI animal are included.

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 63 06-05-2010 , 01:03 AM

EduSciVis-er
Join Date: Dec 2005

Location: Toronto

Posts: 3,374

I believe the question was "What do you get if you multiply 6 by 9?"

-stwert

Website - Blog - YouTube - Vimeo - Facebook - Twitter

-->How to Effectively Ask Questions on Forums<--

Quote

# 64 06-05-2010 , 01:16 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

bahahahahahahahaha its a cracker of a show stwert. I read the books too, I was in hospital with a busted femur and the bloke across lent them to me. Jeez Im old!!!! That was 28 years ago!!!

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 65 06-05-2010 , 01:07 PM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Originally posted by bullet1968
According to Hawkings new theory (as steve put) stwert you cant actually change your own past (to get around the 'grandfather paradox'). You could change some one elses but not your own. It gets a little heavy in there, I think I posted a link to it. But as steve said you create a parallel timeline where you could change your past because the future hasnt happened in that one, if I have this right.

If you cant get back to a timeline steve then does that mean 2 travellers cant meet?? If you peel off and make a new one and person B does as well you are then creating different timelines in different times etc etc????

So are you saying the Doctor isnt a Timelord and he is a fraud??.... Im am extremely upset now steve, my childhood has been irreversibly shattered and I cant go back to change your statement because I cant go forward back to this keyboard as now I dont exist.......cry..sob..oh oblivion awaits.

vanish............................................ .........................................

Originally Posted by

I wouldn't label this as Stephen Hawking's theory... I'm not quoting him an anyway. According to Hawking time travel, backwards at least, is not possible. Forwards however we know is possible. We are in fact travelling forward through time as we type, it's simply just a case of speeding things up.

Unfortunately, with the theory I was talking about I don't think it's possible to meet another time-traveller. Unless you knew a point in your own time-line where he was... Then you could travel to that point and meet him, but of course you would be fractured off into another new time-line. You could travel together but all the same rules would apply.

And yes, I'm afraid, the Doctor is probably a fraud... but then again, maybe time is something we humans are not meant to comprehend, and our limited insights don't allow us to fully comprehend time-travel.

But with the way the human race is going, with ever expanding horizons, and pure curiosity, and an evermore hungry need to know EVERYTHING... I would be surprised if we don't end up being Timelords ourselves.... maybe the Doctor's race are humans from the distant future. That'll give you something to think about.

And something else for you to think about...

As all these parallel universes and time-lines travel along, ever expanding, each one different from the other, but all with the same destination. What happens when they meet? When they finally collide?

www.stevenegan-cgi.com

"Your weapons are no match for ours! People of Mars, surrender!"
"Um, this isn't Mars. This is Earth."
"Earth? Earth-with-nuclear-weapons Earth?"
"Yes."
[long pause] "Friend!!"

Quote

# 66 06-05-2010 , 01:41 PM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

The big bang steve, the big bang!! maybe you are onto something.

I still think that all of these things are possible, but as you have said not comprehendable yet.

Hawking must have changed his position or the reporter was incorrect steve. I did read somewhere that he thinks its possible just in alternate lines, didnt mean to rope you in on that, was just pointing out you were correct.

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 67 06-05-2010 , 02:44 PM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Originally posted by bullet1968
The big bang steve, the big bang!! maybe you are onto something.

I still think that all of these things are possible, but as you have said not comprehendable yet.

Hawking must have changed his position or the reporter was incorrect steve. I did read somewhere that he thinks its possible just in alternate lines, didnt mean to rope you in on that, was just pointing out you were correct.

cheers Ant

Originally Posted by

lol, I wasn't trying to say that I thought of this theory. This is just simply my thoughts on the multiple dimensions theory.

I'm sure Hawkings has his own theories on that subject. But he said in his latest doco "Into the universe", the one Jay worked on, that time travel backwards is probably impossible, due to paradoxes.

He also said that travelling through time in a wormhole would be impossible due to "feedback", radiation from both sides entering the wormhole would overload it.

But I don't think this discounts travelling via wormholes. As the wormhole wouldn't be occupying the same place at two different times.

I love thinking about this stuff...

Quote

# 68 06-05-2010 , 10:05 PM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

LOL yeh its good thinking even if it hurts the brain.

He did say it MIGHT be possible on alternate timelines somewhere (cant remember where). They had a doco on the other night where they said it might be possible, tied it in with blackholes somehow, I didnt get to see the whole doco (didnt know it was even on, I dont watch much TV).

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 69 06-05-2010 , 10:17 PM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

steve and g-man,

this might interest you, read it before heading off to work.

https://bigpondnews.com/articles/Tech...ng_459255.html

cheers Ant

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 70 09-05-2010 , 03:24 PM

As Zbrushiac sounds stupid!
Join Date: Nov 2007

Location: Derby

Posts: 1,241

Interesting Link Bullet.... I'm surprised G-man hasn't chimed in on some of this stuff.

Quote

# 71 09-05-2010 , 06:46 PM

Subscriber
Join Date: May 2004

Location: Bowling Green. Kentucky U.S.A.

Posts: 810

i plan too, i've just been a bit busy lately, son had surgery and a project i'm working on for a mate,
got behind on sleep with everything so just been to tired to think strait on physics. even my long winded ass started drooling last time i thought to post.

i'll post something before the end of the day tomorrow mates, i have to reread most everything since my last post anyway LoL..

g-man

Follow My Business
On The Web!
Or
On Facebook!

Quote

# 72 09-05-2010 , 10:50 PM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

yeh steve, it was a good quick read, would like to hear more on it. If the rate of decay is increasing it may change the way we think about the place??

c'mon g-man, bahahahahaha.

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 73 10-05-2010 , 06:43 AM

Subscriber
Join Date: May 2004

Location: Bowling Green. Kentucky U.S.A.

Posts: 810

Simple solution to the declination of the rate of star formation
Stars are primarily formed by Hydrogen( Here on out referred to by its periodic Abbreviation H )
They give off their energy through nuclear fusion, producing first Helium( Here on out referred to by its periodic Abbreviation He ) Then forming more complex elements such as Carbon, and Oxygen, all the way up to Lead ( heavier elements are formed during massive explosions such as super / hyper nova, or through long periods of continued pressure under a rocky body such as the earth )

Now as the universe grows older, and more stars form, and more H is turned into He, then you have less H to form starts with, So as the fuel for start burns out then at that point there will be no more star formation, it stands to reason that the formation of stars will gradually slow as this progression takes place.

And as we all know there was only a finite amount of H in the original soup that made up the universe. which in its self would dictate that due to the nature of universal progression ( stars form, starts fuse, stars die ) that eventually there will either A ( most likely ) be so little h in any given place that there will not be sufficient quantities to jump start a stars nuclear furnace, or B ( Less likely ) there will be no H left at all with which starts can form.

g-man

Follow My Business
On The Web!
Or
On Facebook!

Quote

# 74 10-05-2010 , 06:59 AM

Lifetime Member
Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Australia

Posts: 4,255

Ok g-man good point, my question is this then, what was/is the theoretical size of the original soup then? (It would have been one big booger old God threw out while fishin, for sure).

If stars are forming/formed/dying/dead then we dont know how many are actually left out there.

Now if blackholes are the cause of the fuel to be returned from another universe then we may not have this problem. I remember seeing a doco not long back which had the theory of the BH at the centre of the galaxy BUT instead of consuming alone it was also producing. I could be wrong and Im sure you or steve will kick me in the butt. It was on only recently, on FOX Discovery. It may have even involved Mr Hawking.

I vaguley remember stuff like 'jet streams' or something similar, where the BH was somehow giving birth so to speak to another galaxy whilst the old one was dying, theory only Im sure.

cheers bullet

bullet1968

"A Darkness at Sethanon", a book I aspire to model some of the charcters and scenes

Quote

# 75 10-05-2010 , 07:20 AM

Subscriber
Join Date: May 2004

Location: Bowling Green. Kentucky U.S.A.

Posts: 810

the streams you refer to old friend, are basically jets of super heated particles moving at barely sub light speeds away from the center of the black hole, being blasted away by the radiation emitted form the black hole its self. almost any spiral galaxy with an Active BH at its center of at least 10 million times the mass of our sun or more, ( especially super massive black holes) will have these jets emanating form them, though "dead" galactic cores as they are called, will not, meaning that the Super massive black hole at the center have already consumed all the matter in existence within its gravitational well.
g-man

Follow My Business
On The Web!
Or
On Facebook!

Quote

Posting Rules Forum Rules

Topics

Free Courses

Full Courses

VFX News