Theory Travel Faster than Light and Turn Back View of Time

[VishnuXXX]

Theory Travel Faster than Light and Turn Back View of Time
---------------------------------------------------------------------

When We Travel In Star Trex Ship in 99.99999% of c speed, the light frame stopped.
So when You go Over The Speed of Light, all that You view Behind You(nova) will go back, like when you rewind VIDEO.
This Principle Used by my Civilization to make Review all people doing in past.
All Picture Frame(light) from Earth spread out to all UNIVERSE field.
So when You want to see the past of your friend, you must make that SpaceCraft travel faster than light.
And Go To position when The Light From Earth go out side.

Example Like this.

JFK died in 19xx. Write and calculate the time, so you get Billion of Seconds.
This Billion of Seconds is Position of Picture Frame of JFK go out side UNIVERSE or else.
(Light Years more easy heh heh).
This used, when you go to anywhere position in less second.
Example, your teleportation speed is 10.000 lights year / second. so you can over take the light frame

Try To Over take the Picture Frame with Teleportation Tech to another position outside EARTH, how many light years.
And use Super TELESCOPE to see EARTH in past.

And USE this EVIDENCE to tell who KILL JFK, or Search your friend that overtake your Girlfriends.

My Civilization already doing this. In Extra Terresterial Planet heh heh heh.
Try To see at year 3000.


Hoho you cannot see the future, but you can make make future.
You can Go Over The C speed, the sign is you see time turn back in your eyes. Or You see the supernova become star. But when You stop the nova normal again.

It's all about your position.

[jinydu]

First of all, I believe that VishnuXXX is using a translator, based on the title of this thread: http://tetraspace.alkaline.org/forum/vi ... .php?t=185

Now, I will do my best to interpret the thread:

When We Travel In Star Trex Ship in 99.99999% of c speed, the light frame stopped.

I think he is trying to say that when a Star Trek Ship travelled at 99.99999% the speed of light, light seemed to stop.

This is incorrect, since it violates both postulates of Special Relativity (SR). First, all observers measure the speed of light as having the same value, regardless of their relative motion. Thus, there is no reference frame where the speed of light is measured as zero. Second, it is meaningless to say that we are moving at 99.99999% the speed of light. Moving with respect to what? All observers measure themselves as stationary (with respect to themselves), and no observers will see anything wrong with their own clocks.

So when You go Over The Speed of Light, all that You view Behind You(nova) will go back, like when you rewind VIDEO.

Again, he has specified a speed, but not a reference frame that measures that speed. However, SR also claims that it is impossible for you, or any other object with nonzero mass, to reach the speed of light. Doing so would require an infinite amount of energy. However, it is true that if an observer was travelling faster than light with respect to us, we would observe him travelling back in time. On the other hand, he would claim that he was travelling forward in time while we were travelling back in time.

This Principle Used by my Civilization to make Review all people doing in past.

I think he's trying to say that he can see what people were doing in the past. However, there is no universal time. Still, its possible to do this: Go to Earth. Synchronise your clocks with those on Earth. Now, you want a picture of the Earth, such that the Earth clock reading on the picture is earlier than the your clock's reading when you look at the picture. This is not difficult. Simply travel away from the Earth, so that light takes some non-negligible (in both reference frames) time to travel from the Earth to you.

All Picture Frame(light) from Earth spread out to all UNIVERSE field.

I assume that he means that light travels away from the Earth and spreads out through the entire Universe. This is correct.

So when You want to see the past of your friend, you must make that SpaceCraft travel faster than light.
And Go To position when The Light From Earth go out side.

I think he means seeing seeing the past of an object that is right next to you. I'll try to explain this using an example. Suppose that a balloon pops right next to you. From your frame of reference, at the moment the balloon pops, a "light sphere" forms and expands out into the Universe at a speed c. All observer within the light sphere at any moment in time (from your frame of reference) can, in principle, know that the balloon has popped. In particular, if they observe light coming directly from the balloon, they will get the information as soon as the light sphere reaches them (again, from your frame of reference). Now, suppose you want to see it pop again. You can do this by travelling away from the spot where the balloon popped (from your frame of reference) faster than the speed of light (from say, the frame of reference of someone else who was standing next to the balloon and hasn't accelerated). As already mentioned, this is impossible, because it would require an infinite amount of energy. However, ignoring this impossibility, suppose you do manage to do this. Then, it would be possible to escape the light sphere. Once this is done, simply decelerate to less than the speed of light (relative to that other observer) and wait for the light sphere to catch up with you (again from that other observer's reference frame). Then, you should see another image of the balloon popping. Perhaps more importantly, before you see that image (your own reference frame), you will see the balloon before it has popped. Thus, you are, in some sense, seeing things from the "past".

Example Like this.

JFK died in 19xx. Write and calculate the time, so you get Billion of Seconds.
This Billion of Seconds is Position of Picture Frame of JFK go out side UNIVERSE or else.
(Light Years more easy heh heh).
This used, when you go to anywhere position in less second.
Example, your teleportation speed is 10.000 lights year / second. so you can over take the light frame

Try To Over take the Picture Frame with Teleportation Tech to another position outside EARTH, how many light years.
And use Super TELESCOPE to see EARTH in past.

And USE this EVIDENCE to tell who KILL JFK

I think he is trying to apply what I said to the case of John F. Kennedy's assassination. Perhaps he is trying to say that the light sphere corresponding to JFK's assassination is by now billions of light seconds from Earth. The reference to going outside the Universe is a translation mistake (I hope). He's correct in saying that a telescope would be needed, since when you finally manage to do the (impossible) task of catching up with the light sphere, you will already be quite far from Earth. "Teleportation" is definitely not the right word to use for this (impossible, in SR) feat. Teleportation, as I understand it, is encoding information in a light beam, then sending that beam to a distant location where it is then "decrypted". Thus, teleportation travels at the speed of light, not faster.

Although this is offtopic, I'm quite sure we already know who shot JFK. Its just an alleged "wider conspiracy" that is a mystery.

or Search your friend that overtake your Girlfriends.

Perhaps he means: "Investigate your girlfriend's past history"?

My Civilization already doing this. In Extra Terresterial Planet heh heh heh.
Try To see at year 3000.

He seems to be saying that aliens are already doing this. The previous sentence, however, is meaningless from the viewpoint of SR, since there is no way to synchronise clocks between distant observers (I'm assuming he's not referring to some secret alien civilization on the Moon). As for the last statement, I can think of two interpretations. One is that we will meet such advanced aliens in the year 3000 (our time, presumably). The other is that the aliens want to see what will happen to us in the year 3000. According to General Relativity (GR), this can be done by hovering near a massive object, such as a neutron star or black hole. The aliens would then observe our clocks running fast relative to theirs. If the gravitational field was intense enough, they could soon observe our world in the year 3000 (our time).

Hoho you cannot see the future, but you can make make future.

A philosophical statement. In any case, it is contradicted by my last paragraph (if we adjust the meaning of "future").

You can Go Over The C speed, the sign is you see time turn back in your eyes. Or You see the supernova become star. But when You stop the nova normal again.

This contains two impossibilities and one error. As already mentioned, it would take an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light. However, it would also take an infinite amount of energy to get below the speed of light if you are already above it. Thus, both are impossible. Also, as before, it is incorrect to state your speed without also stating (or at least implying) the reference frame that is measuring your speed.

It's all about your position.

If he means "whether you will see a given event in the past or the future (your frame of reference)" and "position" is from the event's point of view, then yes.

[RQ]

I think in star Trek they used antimatter reactors which canceled out the mass of the ship and its crew, this meant they could accelerate to whatever speed they want. Perhaps this is possible, but don't relate fiction to reality from books and movies. :wink:

[jinydu]

No, antimatter doesn't cancel out mass. Antimatter has positive mass, just like regular matter. The "anti" simply refers to the opposite charge. For example, an anti-electron (positron) has positive charge and an anti-proton has negative charge.

Even if we could find some matter with negative mass that exactly canceled out the positive mass, it would NOT allow acceleration to any possible speed. In fact, according to Special Relativity, objects with 0 mass can travel at only one speed, the speed of light!

[shill]

The only way the antimatter could "cancel out" the mass of the ship and its crew is if it encountered matter of an opposite charge within the ship, but then that matter would unfortunately be destroyed, releasing one photon for each atom involved.

[RQ]

Yes, what shill is saying is true, and you can accelerate faster than light if you have 0 mass. Proof of this is the fact that light is affected by gravity. You're confusing yourself with "c", in which the speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all electromagnetic forces in a vacuum. Antimatter means the opposite of matter and it would cancel out the matter. Proof of this is Hawking radiation which allows particles to escape a black hole when a pair of an antimatter and a regular matter particle get created right at the event horizon of the black hole causing the particle to escape while the antiparticle goes and cancels out a particle in the black hole. Although this is indirect, and directly black holes cannot be escaped, this shows that antimatter is the opposite of matter as the name suggests and is given.

[jinydu]

I think I mentioned in another post that it is impossible to accelerate a photon to a speed faster than c. If you try shooting one into a gravitational field, its speed will not increase. Instead, it gains energy by increasing in frequency (ie, blueshifting) according to the equation E = hf (where h is Planck's constant). Try searching for "gravitational redshift" (the opposite of blueshifting, where light loses energy escaping from a gravitational field) online for more information.

As for antimatter, please see http://particleadventure.org/particlead ... eface.html. As it says, antimatter is the "opposite" of matter in the sense that it has opposite charge. It does NOT have negative mass. If it had negative mass, collision with a corresponding matter particle would not produce energy. Instead, as we know, the (positive) mass of both particles are converted into energy. Quoting from the link above:

"Gravity affects matter and antimatter the same way because gravity is not a charged property and a matter particle has the same mass as its antiparticle. "

[RQ]

antimatter does have the opposite charge of matter, and that's why when it collides with matter they annihilate (not sure I spelled it right) as Hawking mentions in his Universe in a Nutshell.

Im not sure about the light situation, so I'll just look stuff up about it and see what comes up.
Interesting site about faster than c:
http://www.metaresearch.org/home/viewpo ... 010824.asp