Consider this odd situation. At my feet are an Infinite number of baseballs numbered 1,2,3 and so on. In front of me is a door that leads into an infinitely large room. At exactly eight minutes to midnight, I throw balls 1 and 2 into the room. Immediately someone in the room throws ball 1 back out. At four minutes to midnight (half of eight minutes), I throw balls 3 and 4 into the room. Immediately someone in the room throws ball 2 back out. At two minutes to midnight (half of four minutes), I throw the next 2 balls,5 and 6, into the room, and Immediately ball three is thrown back out.
At one Minute, half a minute, a quarter a minute and so on, I throw the next two balls into the room, and Immediately one ball is thrown back out. Of course this presumes that I can keep throwing balls faster and faster in shorter amounts of time.
At exactly midnight, how many balls are in the room? Which of thses do you belive to be true and why?
1. An Infinite number
2. Half of Infinity
3. Zero
4. None of the Above First off, you can't have half of infinity. Infinty is not a number, and therefore cannot have a half. Infinity divided by 2 is still infinity.
I say the answer is infinity. Why, because it seems so. Might be zero as well. But who is to say it is some number that we haven't discovered yet? Zero. As soon as you break the speed of light, you will traverse back in time, and undo your own throwing.
Or, if you want to hold yourself to your silly little Zeno paradox, infinity.
Mr U Iam going to go with infinity because infinity is an endless amount of something and there for it can not be put in half. Well, according Zeno, who as I have previously stated I believe is full of shit, the answer will be none of the above, since according to him midnight will never arrive. That is probably the best proof to show he is full of shit actually. Reaching midnight is like reaching the end of the running track... doesn't happen apparantely only it does.
According to logic and common sense, midnight will arrive, but you will never stop throwing, which makes no sense whatsoever.
So the answer is still none of the above :p
There is no possible solution because the given facts about the situation contradict themselves. It's a faulty equation. You can't throw an infinite amount of balls an infinite amount of times in a set time...
HU, I don't know how you get the going back in time thing. The way I see it, when you pass the speed of light you will simply throw the balls too fast for the eyes to see, and it'll be like watching a recorded video..... Zero: Every ball thrown in is eventually thrown out before midnight, so no balls remain
Half of Infinity: Each time I throw balls into the room, the person inside the room throws half of Infinity back out , leaving half of Infinity inside (Of course half of Infinity is still Infinity)
None Of the Above: The question itself is flawed because there is a limit to the speed at which balls can be thrown. And if you keep halfing the time Miodnight would never reach.
This was a question in my previous physics class or was it calculus anyway, we had to provide an awnser on how each could be true. I would go with none of the above......but you already explained why.... Well, according Zeno, who as I have previously stated I believe is full of shit, the answer will be none of the above, since according to him midnight will never arrive. That is probably the best proof to show he is full of shit actually. Reaching midnight is like reaching the end of the running track... doesn't happen apparantely only it does.
Still sour at old Zeno, eh? Lol.
Here's a question: Is 0/0 an indeterminable number, or is it in fact equal to every fraction? 0/0 Is nothing at all. It cant be equal to every fraction if there is "nothing" to be equal with. Ah, but there is at least some logic behind saying that it is equal to all fractions. The chart below is an array of fractions. The lines extending across the chart intersect with familiar fractions that are equal of value, and all lines coincide at 0/0. With the lines connecting equal values of all fractions, it appears 0/0 is equal to every fraction. Originally posted by Helios
Zero: Every ball thrown in is eventually thrown out before midnight, so no balls remain
Half of Infinity: Each time I throw balls into the room, the person inside the room throws half of Infinity back out , leaving half of Infinity inside (Of course half of Infinity is still Infinity)
None Of the Above: The question itself is flawed because there is a limit to the speed at which balls can be thrown. And if you keep halfing the time Miodnight would never reach.
This was a question in my previous physics class or was it calculus anyway, we had to provide an awnser on how each could be true.
The logic behind zero is flawed. Zero will never happen. As you will throw in double the amount of what goes out, after a certain time, there will be balls.
Half of infinity is infinity, which is correct. An infinitely small amount of time before 12 'o clock, the amount of balls in the room, and outside are finite, however, as soon as it becomes 12 'o clock, the amount of balls on both sides are infinite.
None of the above? You yourself stated that you could keep accelerating. Coming back on this statement is also, a fault in your logic. Although the Zeno paradox has a flaw, the flaw does not come to light in this problem since you stated that you can keep accelerating, and thus you will eventually reach that infinitely small point before 12 'o clock. You bypassed the Zeno flaw by stating something impossible.
In any case, the only plausible and correct answer is infinity. Not zero, not half, not 'none of the above'. It's just infinity, any Math teacher claiming that is untrue should not be discussing this on levels of Zeno, but rather more advanced math, in which paraboles and hyperboles form circles, or cubes. In any case, if your math teacher told you what you posted there, he is awfully wrong, or you interpreted him wrong.
You are not allowed to divide by zero. It is quite possible, especially on more advanced levels of math, but you get all sorts of strange things.
Mr U This is Stephan Hawking-type puzzle; kinda like the old question of when you will arrive at the center of a black hole (Never).
I'll disagree with 'none', since midnight will arrive. I will say however that it is infinity, using calculus. Assumptions first. Firstly, the room at any one second before midnight cannot be infinity, since infinity only belongs to the room outside; the room inside has only half of what you throw in, and that (what you throw in) is not yet infinity. Also, since time's passage is impossible to halt or change(what speed of light?), midnight is thus inevitable.
That said, we first have to realise that the rate of change of the increase in balls follows an upward exponential curve. This curve has an asymptote of infinity at midnight; if we assume that either is possible - but since midnight is achievable, it is therefore logical for the rate to achieve infinity. And we know the integration of infinity is still infinity. I'm not sure your teacher is correct when he said all answers were right. Then again physics when combined with math's special numbers is always unprovable. But what happens if you do not conform to the concept of time? Of course, theoretically, for this problem it would work, but if you are unbound by time, then midnight would REALLY never arrive. The correct answer, as we all know, would happen to be 42, or tangerine if that's your speed. Correct, Mac, and even more correct DPD. The answer is and always will be 42.
Black Holes? That's not a paradox. It would be if Black Holes last forever, but they die out eventually. It would be cool though to be able to use black holes as a way of traveling. The vortex it leaves should be able to sustain travel (worm-holes), but as I stated somewhere else, we don't lack the knowledge in physics, but rather the technology to 'make it so', as Picard would state.
Mr U Originally posted by Helios
Half of Infinity: Each time I throw balls into the room, the person inside the room throws half of Infinity back out , leaving half of Infinity inside (Of course half of Infinity is still Infinity)
This is not a true statement, and by the conventions of math should never be stated that way. You never say half of infinity. That would be illogically ret@rded. It is just wat too tacky to write infinity over 2, as you said and I explained, because the answer is infinity. So as stated before, Half of Infinty is not an option. Hmmm....what's this about 42? Coincidentally, it's Hitman's codename. ;)
Well, maybe paradox may not cut it. The prob is that the Black Hole question has infinity as an answer (not counting the Hole's age, of course), which is definitely not satisfactory. Hence the paradox: it's impossible to reach a Black Hole's center. Here Is why I say its none of the above It cant be "Half of Infinity" because Half of Infinity" doesnt make sense, you could never have "Half" of anything Infinite because something cant just begin to be Infinite. Infinity by nature has no beggining and no end so it cant simply start when you start throwing the balls into the room. The pile outside will be infinite but the pile inside will not no matter how astronomical the numbers reach, because say a googleplex to the trillionth power is still just as "far" from Infinity as the number 1 is.
same with Infinity...
It cant be zero because in the beggining the person on the outside with the Infinite balls threw the first 2 in, but only one was thrown back out. So no matter how close you get to midnight and how "infinitly fast" the balls start get thrown there will always be at least 1 ball left on that exact moment of Midnight. I disagree. Infinity may be a pretty confusing number, but the situation here is that One has been subtracted from infinity in the first step. Thus we have infinity minus one outside, and one inside. Infinity minus one is infinity, so outside is reset to infinity. Each step of the way, this happens, and this happens an infinite amount of steps (from the maths I used). Thus we're not subtracting infinity or whatever from infinity: the outside number is irrelevant to the problem only except that it will provide an infinite number of balls if infinity is needed to be achieved, which it is.
Hmm. Apparently I have made a minor maths mistake though. The rate of the increase is not changing: it is constant. Unfortunately, the rate of increase of the rate of increase is following the exponential curve, which basically still adds up to my answer of infinity: just minutiae, lol.
Half of infinity: I don't even know why they put that answer in, except maybe just to show the difference in its line of thought than infinity, since they're the same. But I think everybody understands that by now. Well, said, Macleod. Half of infinity does exist, and it's quite real. It's infinity. Being difficult to grasp does not mean you can simply state 'None of the above'. Anyway, Zeno is boring, don't we have some other philosophical thing to debate about? :D
Mr U Originally posted by Helios
Here Is why I say its none of the above It cant be "Half of Infinity" because Half of Infinity" doesnt make sense, you could never have "Half" of anything Infinite because something cant just begin to be Infinite. Infinity by nature has no beggining and no end so it cant simply start when you start throwing the balls into the room. The pile outside will be infinite but the pile inside will not no matter how astronomical the numbers reach, because say a googleplex to the trillionth power is still just as "far" from Infinity as the number 1 is.
same with Infinity...
It cant be zero because in the beggining the person on the outside with the Infinite balls threw the first 2 in, but only one was thrown back out. So no matter how close you get to midnight and how "infinitly fast" the balls start get thrown there will always be at least 1 ball left on that exact moment of Midnight.
You woke up at 6:47am and came here to post? You were 407 minutes after infinity. Bah. I now realise that this is the brand of maths that isn't even supposed to be applicable in real life. Maths in the name of maths, or, as I have previously stated, utter bullshit.
If you throw balls into a room an infinite amount of times then what that means is that you will never stop throwing balls before midnight arrives - but there will always be a space of time between midnight and any time before midnight - the obvious conclusion to this is what Zeno concluded: Midnight will never arrive. Does anyone see my logic yet?
But hey, we know for a fact that Midnight must arrive... so what does that mean? That there's something wrong with the equation! It's like discussing what 7/0 equals. You could speculate all you want, but the fact remains that there is no possible answer because 7/0 is not a viable equation.
By the same logic, you cannot perform an act infinitely in a set time. You're pitting two terms from contradicting universes against eachother and you're not going to find an answer to that through mathematics because that's not what mathematics is about. Mathematics is about finding truth. This is about wasting my time.
Ah well, I didn't understand a word of what any one of you have said so you probably don't understand a word of this either. Let's just settle on 42 and discuss something more interesting. Like "Being John Malkovich". Somebody please explain to me what the hell that was. I'm sure there's an answer out there. Brrrr... I would rather not FYM lol. I would like to discuss which of you think that by going back in time you are either bound or not bound to wipe yourself from exsistence. Theoretically can it or can it not be done?
Originally posted by freeyourmind
Well, according Zeno, who as I have previously stated I believe is full of shit, the answer will be none of the above, since according to him midnight will never arrive. That is probably the best proof to show he is full of shit actually. Reaching midnight is like reaching the end of the running track... doesn't happen apparantely only it does.
LOL. Well said btw FYM. Time travel is possible, UT. The problem is, however, that a lot of people are using the wrong theories to explain it, and thus make it sounds ridiculous.
According to Quantum Physics, you should see 'time' as a tree. Since the 'creation' (I'll leave that matter to be discussed elsewhere) each statistical possiblitiy spawns a new Universe. What this means is, in one universe, you will drop your pen tomorrow, and it will cause the world to detonate, and in the other universe you won't drop it. Each and every statistical 'chance' is turned into a new universe.
Now, If I was to return in time, and change something, I would not be changing my past, but instead creating a new universe at the time I arrived. My very arrival, you see, is a statistical event and leads to a new universe. Thus, because I come from another timeline, there is no space-paradox. The paradox that was often asked "Can I kill my mother?", or something likely, is very simple. The answer is yes. By killing your mother you will prevent yourself from ever being born in that particular universe.
Now, there is a catch. The further you go back into the past, the more difficult it will be to travel back to the future, as the results of the new statistical universe will spawn even more universes, thus making it almost impossible to travel back correctly.
This is the phenomena john titor discussed. You see, the further you go back in time, the more chance there is that when you travel back to the future, it won't be your future, but an entirely different one. Perhaps even were time-travel was never possible.
Although Time-travel may seem hard to grasp in our minds, it is theoretically possible. The only problem is on how to create a buble to rip loose from normal space/time.
If you didn't understand anything I just told you, which I can imagine :D. I suggest you do a search on time travel. At least on of the articles should explain it in a normal, understandable way :).
Mr U Originally posted by HomoUniversalis
Time travel is possible, UT. The problem is, however, that a lot of people are using the wrong theories to explain it, and thus make it sounds ridiculous.
According to Quantum Physics, you should see 'time' as a tree. Since the 'creation' (I'll leave that matter to be discussed elsewhere) each statistical possiblitiy spawns a new Universe. What this means is, in one universe, you will drop your pen tomorrow, and it will cause the world to detonate, and in the other universe you won't drop it. Each and every statistical 'chance' is turned into a new universe.
Now, If I was to return in time, and change something, I would not be changing my past, but instead creating a new universe at the time I arrived. My very arrival, you see, is a statistical event and leads to a new universe. Thus, because I come from another timeline, there is no space-paradox. The paradox that was often asked "Can I kill my mother?", or something likely, is very simple. The answer is yes. By killing your mother you will prevent yourself from ever being born in that particular universe.
Now, there is a catch. The further you go back into the past, the more difficult it will be to travel back to the future, as the results of the new statistical universe will spawn even more universes, thus making it almost impossible to travel back correctly.
This is the phenomena john titor discussed. You see, the further you go back in time, the more chance there is that when you travel back to the future, it won't be your future, but an entirely different one. Perhaps even were time-travel was never possible.
Although Time-travel may seem hard to grasp in our minds, it is theoretically possible. The only problem is on how to create a buble to rip loose from normal space/time.
If you didn't understand anything I just told you, which I can imagine :D. I suggest you do a search on time travel. At least on of the articles should explain it in a normal, understandable way :).
Mr U
No HU, you more than eloquently put your point accross. Thanks and well said.
I too agree with this, however I normally use the term of a river that branches into another stream each time something new occurs in one timeline though not universe, but no matter, tree, river same thing:)
So in effect, by trying to change history/wiping your own exsitence (eg by killing your grandmother) you have then put yourself into yet another timeline, essentially with no way to go back to your own.
Thusly creating another split in the river and making another stream. That split being time travel. I hope that makes sense lol. It does to me.:) Well, since you won't actually kill your grandma, but kill the grandma of you in another timeline. It is impossible to kill your own grandma in this timeline, since when you kill her, you create a new one.
I'm not sure whether you can't go back to your own, but when you have an infinite amount of streams (since there is an unlimited amount of possiblities, and time does not end) it is rather hard to see which one is yours.
And the further you back 'upstream' the harder it is to find your trusty river.
Anyway, people who claim time-travel is impossible, are basicly uttering nonsense: we all travel through time at an unknown speed and location...
Mr U Great explanations guys.....
However listen to this, my brother -probably the smartest human on the planet- once told me that time travel is possible only forwards and not backwards, why?? well time is simply like an analog clock, it keeps moving as it should (supposing it has inifinte amount of energy) and the only way you could move the arms of the clock is if you are on the outside of the clock, meaning God...........which is backwards of forwards quicker.
But then how is traveling forward possible?
I cannot explain to you as fully as he did to me, but breifly its like this:
Everything we see is a result of light reflecting off an object and prjecting on our retna........and so we see accordingly to the speed of light, if it moves faster then light then we cannot see it, meaning that if you could move faster then light I would not be able to see until you stopped, but this is only moving, were talking about teleporting through time.
So if we could teleport through time we can only do it forwards, because behinds us is blocked and infront of us has not yet come but it is there....For example having two twins and being somehow able to teleport one of them forwards, he would disappear, the other would live normally and age, the other will instantly appear 50 yeas later in the same place, however for him it will feel like a second.......and so only are capabilities are preventing us from teleporting through time, however through time and space, well will let the scientects a hundred years from now think about that..... Originally posted by DPD
You woke up at 6:47am and came here to post? You were 407 minutes after infinity.
woke up ? lol I never went to sleep I would never wake up at 6:47 on a saturday (if i went to sleep) just like its 7:21am yet another Insomnia night. eh
Originally posted by HomoUniversalis
Time travel is possible, UT. The problem is, however, that a lot of people are using the wrong theories to explain it, and thus make it sounds ridiculous.
According to Quantum Physics, you should see 'time' as a tree. Since the 'creation' (I'll leave that matter to be discussed elsewhere) each statistical possiblitiy spawns a new Universe. What this means is, in one universe, you will drop your pen tomorrow, and it will cause the world to detonate, and in the other universe you won't drop it. Each and every statistical 'chance' is turned into a new universe.
Now, If I was to return in time, and change something, I would not be changing my past, but instead creating a new universe at the time I arrived. My very arrival, you see, is a statistical event and leads to a new universe. Thus, because I come from another timeline, there is no space-paradox. The paradox that was often asked "Can I kill my mother?", or something likely, is very simple. The answer is yes. By killing your mother you will prevent yourself from ever being born in that particular universe.
Now, there is a catch. The further you go back into the past, the more difficult it will be to travel back to the future, as the results of the new statistical universe will spawn even more universes, thus making it almost impossible to travel back correctly.
This is the phenomena john titor discussed. You see, the further you go back in time, the more chance there is that when you travel back to the future, it won't be your future, but an entirely different one. Perhaps even were time-travel was never possible.
Although Time-travel may seem hard to grasp in our minds, it is theoretically possible. The only problem is on how to create a buble to rip loose from normal space/time.
If you didn't understand anything I just told you, which I can imagine :D. I suggest you do a search on time travel. At least on of the articles should explain it in a normal, understandable way :).
Mr U
I understood it quite well actually I posted something similar in another thread, but I think your telling was much more understandable :p
Anyway, people who claim time-travel is impossible, are basicly uttering nonsense: we all travel through time at an unknown speed and location...
We travel through time at a rate of 1 second every second, and 1 day every day and so on. :D
Originally posted by tHe aRcHeItEcT
Great explanations guys.....
However listen to this, my brother -probably the smartest human on the planet- once told me that time travel is possible only forwards and not backwards, why?? well time is simply like an analog clock, it keeps moving as it should (supposing it has inifinte amount of energy) and the only way you could move the arms of the clock is if you are on the outside of the clock, meaning God...........which is backwards of forwards quicker.
But then how is traveling forward possible?
I cannot explain to you as fully as he did to me, but breifly its like this:
Everything we see is a result of light reflecting off an object and prjecting on our retna........and so we see accordingly to the speed of light, if it moves faster then light then we cannot see it, meaning that if you could move faster then light I would not be able to see until you stopped, but this is only moving, were talking about teleporting through time.
So if we could teleport through time we can only do it forwards, because behinds us is blocked and infront of us has not yet come but it is there....For example having two twins and being somehow able to teleport one of them forwards, he would disappear, the other would live normally and age, the other will instantly appear 50 yeas later in the same place, however for him it will feel like a second.......and so only are capabilities are preventing us from teleporting through time, however through time and space, well will let the scientects a hundred years from now think about that.....
I think thats just traveling at the speed of light, nothing can go faster than light. But that "technique" of time travel is time dilation. Like if you were to spend 40 years traveling at a hair below light speed when you stopped it would be 60,000 years later for the rest of the universe. The only problem with this method is that it could easily take a year to get up to this speed, and even longer to decelerate. Originally posted by Helios
I think thats just traveling at the speed of light, nothing can go faster than light. But that "technique" of time travel is time dilation. Like if you were to spend 40 years traveling at a hair below light speed when you stopped it would be 60,000 years later for the rest of the universe. The only problem with this method is that it could easily take a year to get up to this speed, and even longer to decelerate.
Incorrect, Helios. The formula to accurately measure the difference between the two times spend can be found in my sig:
It's the first one actually. ST means Spaceshiptime, while ET means Earthtime. v is velocity of the spaceship (measured vs speed of earth, but since we always do this (arrogant humans) this can just be done in km/s) and c is the speed of light. You might want to take the accurate though, and not just 300.000 km/s.
But then how is traveling forward possible?
I cannot explain to you as fully as he did to me, but breifly its like this:
Everything we see is a result of light reflecting off an object and prjecting on our retna........and so we see accordingly to the speed of light, if it moves faster then light then we cannot see it, meaning that if you could move faster then light I would not be able to see until you stopped, but this is only moving, were talking about teleporting through time.
I'll leave you in the desilusion that your brother is one of the smartest people. Traveling backwards in time is very possibe, although not in the Newtonian model, in which both you and your brother are reasoning. Space equals time, and matter equals energy. This means, that if there is no space, there is no time. More can be derived from this, however. It is possible to leave our space/time line by creating a mini-universe (in the Star Trek series this is called a Warp-Field. Warp itself is space travel, and when modified, it could be used for time-travel), a so-called bubble, and to travel to other points in the space-time.
If you can not imagine it, don't worry, because it is impossible for the human cerebro to think outside of the 3 dimensions in which we live (despite common believes time is not a physical dimension, but rather an effect formed by those three and the 8 others).
Ain't science great?
Mr U Originally posted by HomoUniversalis
Well, since you won't actually kill your grandma, but kill the grandma of you in another timeline. It is impossible to kill your own grandma in this timeline, since when you kill her, you create a new one.
Hence the paradox. I agree.
Originally posted by HomoUniversalis
I'm not sure whether you can't go back to your own, but when you have an infinite amount of streams (since there is an unlimited amount of possiblities, and time does not end) it is rather hard to see which one is yours.
Well said. And the more small streams you create each time you change more history hence you can try as you might to change your history, however you might never know if you've actually succeeded. Which brings me to your next statement..
Originally posted by HomoUniversalis
And the further you back 'upstream' the harder it is to find your trusty river..
Bingo. The axium lies on it continuously going downstream if you will, and unless you can hop out and find your way back up to where the first split origionated, then it's irrevocable to go to the origional point and undo what you have done.
Originally posted by HomoUniversalis
Anyway, people who claim time-travel is impossible, are basicly uttering nonsense: we all travel through time at an unknown speed and location...
So true. Ahh now if only Asimov were to come back to life to become president of the world, I would die a happy woman.:D Than perhaps you will find happiness in the thought that somewhere, in a different universe, he is president again, and you are his wife ;).
Basicly, in a different universe, everything is possible. Which, in itself, is also a paradox, but enough paradoxes for the day :).
Mr U If you didn't understand anything I just told you, which I can imagine . I suggest you do a search on time travel. At least on of the articles should explain it in a normal, understandable way
Bah, I'm interested, but I'm not going to sort through hundreds of links. If you know of a good article or good site (or good search engine :mad: ) then I'd be grateful if you shared it with me :)
I understood the claim about the multiple universes and timelines, but I still don't understand how you think time travel is achievable. Also why you think it must be...
I'm not sure whether you can't go back to your own, but when you have an infinite amount of streams (since there is an unlimited amount of possiblities, and time does not end) it is rather hard to see which one is yours.
Continuing on that train of thought, on the assumption that the actual act of traveling through time is achievable; if I went for a ride on another one of my timelines for, say, a week - would you say that if I felt like coming back to my previous timeline, I would go there and be considered missing a week? Just trying to see if I understand your logic correctly. Seems to me like timeline-travel doesn't have the paradox that time-travel has, but I still don't see why you think this is physically possible... this kinda thing would sorta cheapen life though wouldn't it? Reminds me a bit of "6th Day"... terrible movie that...
Anyway, people who claim time-travel is impossible, are basicly uttering nonsense: we all travel through time at an unknown speed and location...
Yeah, but we all travel at the same speed. The question is whether or not we can move against this speed (i.e. back through time) or faster than it, like Archie interestingly suggested...
It is possible to leave our space/time line by creating a mini-universe (in the Star Trek series this is called a Warp-Field. Warp itself is space travel, and when modified, it could be used for time-travel), a so-called bubble, and to travel to other points in the space-time.
You see, this is the point where I stop understanding how time-travel works; when people start speaking words neither they nor I understand. Please elaborate and explain... :p
Lets say that I agree with the general claim that creating a mini-universe would be very helpful. Now, how exactly are mini-universes created and if you have no clue in hell what makes you think that this is possible? Anything beyond Star-Trek? :D
Personally, I don't believe in time-travel, but that's largely because of my religion so you guys will probably have trouble agreeing with me since it's sort of a package deal :p Some things are enough to prove other things sorta thing... anyway, I believe that a human will not be able to change the past, at least not by his own power, but that the fact that something has happened does not mean it is unchangable - for instance, if you hear of some kind of a disaster where someone close to you might have been injured, the fact that the disaster has already happened doesn't mean you cannot do anything to affect the security of your loved one (and I don't mean like health, I mean the actual moment of danger - what's happened there...) - as long as you don't know what has happened you can do certain things like pray to try and safeguard your loved one.
Actually, now that I think about it this doesn't necessarily go against the separate time-lines theory. Actually, it has nothing to do with it. But I'll leave the last paragraph anyway just as a personal thought. Imagine you have two sheets of paper. Each represents a universe at one point in time (including time now would make the model incomprehensible). On these pieces of paper live 2D people. They leave their houses through 2d doors.
These two sheets of papers are aligned next to each other. See below.
[] []
Imagine them lying on a table in 3d space. There is no way one of the people living in 2d to travel, or even see anything that is going on in the other universe.
Now imagine one person on the right sheet is called HomoUniversalis and has just developed a time-travel device. He activates the device, and creates a bubble (in actual 3D!!! This mean we would create a 4D bubble if we would travel but I'm too tired to explain the complications). This bubble moves through 3d space, and his sensors detect the other piece of paper. He than crashes into the paper, and tada, he has traveled to the other sheet of paper.
I mentioned sensors in this model. This is one of the problems there would be. I have no idea how we should be able to detect where another universe is, and at what time it is.
What goes for 2D, also goes for us. We enter a 4D realm, and we can re-enter 3D. Read Flatlanders for more 2D humour.
Hope that helped :),
Mr U Some crazy theories going on here. I plan to study these, along with a Chemistry major, when I head to college this Fall. I enjoy reading all of your theories, but I have neither the energy or the time to reply my theories. Maybe later.
BTW, thread moved to Science and Technology. Finally I couldnt find this thread......
HU we may disagree on our theories on time travel, however if in the futur if it became possible, who in the world will be the person to use it, knowing that no matter who uses it the timeline will change futur or past, unless the timeline was meant for time travel to occur, which would explain why people keep knocking on my door asking if they can use the Sub-sonic frequency emmiter, Im geussing its some sort of communication device.... Whoa how this thread has changed!
Now FYM, there's this problem in your analysis of the original topic: the question of which rule to bend. On one hand you have an infinite number of throws and an infinite number of balls. On the other you have the inevitability of midnight. I must remind you however that the beginning of the question already put it in the purely hypothetical (and thus just plain fun) region of infinity by allowing for an infinite number of balls outside. Thus infinity is achievable both in throws and number of balls in the room, while midnight is still inevitable. Zero still cannot be an answer.
Now HU: you're also on shaky ground. While your points make sense, they are purely theoretical and belong in the same region as the Big Bang. For one thing, the multiple tree branches theory is hard to accept since it gets very close to the 'infinite universes' theory which is hard to entertain, practically, as more than a sci-fi idea. For all we know, Hawking might be right in his stand that nature would never allow time to be breached.
I'm also not sure of this travelling back in time thing, besides firstly the impossibility of countering the infinite mass needed to achieve lightspeed. Let's not forget tachyons: technically they'd be anti-time, if they exist.
But I digress. I still don't see how you go back in time instead of going through the time dilation effect. Basically the rate of time can be altered and is relative yes, but there is hardly any proof that it can go to zero and beyond. Everything I've read has not posited it before, even, if I recall, Hawking's book. Sorry for the double post...
To answer a few questions you raised, FYM.
Firstly the many questions you raised are the arguments against the 'Time is a Tree' theory. That's what keeps it, and all else, just theories. There's also this: the formation of the various branches in this tree also follows its own timeline: various branches are formed at various conflicting time, and at some point certain branches cannot be formed till another branch has been...but 'when' will this branch be formed? Intrigueing, no?
Warp field. I loved Star Trek for this: they used real physics as much as possible for their science. The problem with going to lightspeed is that you have to achieve infinite mass to do so: that is impossible. Thus, they utilise a 'warp field' consisting of a series of field layers peeling off the ship, formed by the (mainly) two blue-glowing thingies called Warp coils, to both reduce the Ship's theoretical mass and push it into a region of space called subspace. How and how fast the field layers (like that of an onion) peel off determine its speed. And like all forms of science this has its own limit in physics: the Warp speed curve follows an exponential extending to an impossible infinity at Warp 10 i.e. you are everywhere at once at Warp 10. As of now, only the Borg are capable of doing that, and in a limited fashion.
Lecture over. ;) Simple it will be infinity.
Infinity can not run out and infinity can not multiply.
Infinity has a sign of an 8 on its side.
Atleast it looks like an eight.
That means its endlessly looping no matter how many balls the dude throws back.
You can not run out of infinity.
Simple.
You cant have less than zero.
And zero times 2 is still zero.
Same with infinity but a little different.
Infinity is UNendable.
The definition of infinity is that it can not end.
Cheers
NXM I didn't make that up, Macleod. It are simply the laws of Quantum Physics.
However if time is indeed a 'tree'. There are an infinite amount of universes that lead to an event in which our universe is altered. Opposed to that, there is also an infinite amount of universes that halt this alteration, allowing nature to flow naturally.
If we could actively destoy one of these universes, we could actually change the history of our own universe, without making a branch. since infinitity minus infinitey plus one, is one. So there would be one universe leading to an alteration. Perhaps we are actively responsible for the creation of the Big Bang! :D
Traveling back through time is a pickle. We have no idea what practically happens at the speed of light. We just don't bloody know. Untill we know, however, I'm against experimenting. I'd rather not have 'Planet of the Apes'-scenarios :).
Mr U That's true indeed. Anyway I admit I've said it rather wrongly: your theory meaning the theory you've followed, not wholly yours, of course. I doubt none of us humble MM-ers can claim to be quantum physicists. (:p) In any account like I said, their theory (not law), has alot of flak, the first as I've said being the not generally accepted 'infinite universes' idea. Well you will be throwing into infinity cause you will keep deviding it.
If what HU says its true.
YOU SAW ENTERPRISE TNG YESTERDAY DIDN'T YOU.
With worf going crazy in a time jump between dimensions.
Cheers
XMc Argument-1: The question is missing critical details and is therefore ambiguous. Thus: An answer can NOT exist for it as stated. Thus: None of the first three answers can be correct as they are all non-ambiguous answers.
Argument-2: In order to throw an infinite number of balls through, the thrower would have to throw all the available balls through. By definition, the thrower has an infinite number of balls at hand. No matter how many balls he tossed through, there would still be an infinite number of balls left to throw! He could never throw all the balls through no matter how much time he has. So Infinite is the wrong choice. Half of Infinite is still Infinite so thats incorrect. Some balls do make it, so Zero is also incorrect. The answer is "None of the above"!
Argument-3: The correct answer is "None of the above" given the statement "Of course this presumes that I can keep throwing balls faster and faster in shorter amounts of time." There is still lots of missing information. The time limit will come about so the answer is finite and can have a true answer. That true answer is found by knowing the size of the balls, ball speeds, the distance from the door and the size of the door. Note: the entrance to the door can only be 2/3 used because 1/2 the balls must exit and needs the space to do so when it starts getting really crowded. If the thrower is some distance from the door then the balls must be lined up like a train because they can't occupy the same space at launch... thus the balls must enter in serial fashion of sorts. If close to the door then there is enough space to pass the balls through in near parallel fashion. Thus distance from the door is critical in defining the volumetric corridor. This problem becomes just a Time v.s. Volumetric calculation. The answer of Infinite can't be true because the volume of material (IE: ball-size) that must pass through a finite restrictive orifice, that is limited by finite speed, finite distance, finite time and finite corridor volume, must be finite. Infinite ball speed is also required, logically, to move all the balls in a finite time, but that means ALL balls must travel at infinite speed and this is precluded by the statement that successive balls travel faster. Faster than Infinite? Also note that an infinite ball speed is impossible because the ball in front is slower (by definition) and would slow the following ball, preventing infinite speed, no matter how much time the thrower had available. Anyway, if the missing details where supplied, then the answer would be finite. Infinite would be an incorrect choice because it isn't finite. Also.. Half of infinite is still infinite, so that's wrong. Also.. Zero is wrong because some balls are accumulated in the first few minutes. Thus.. A valid answer can exist if more details are given.. but with just the details given.. none of the first three choices can be correct.
We won't get into the issues of having an infinite number of balls in the area.. where would he stand? Dave :^)
View Full Version : Brain Teaser - Infinity
Perfect Health? - Scary Bionic Eye
|