Well Flexor, I see 2 problems off the top of my head with your theory.

1. (this has already been mentioned) It only works if you use sphere or similar objects, It does not work with a cube.

2. While time may get smaller it does not "start turning back". While the size of the field reduces, you never see the same point again. Do not confuse the same size of intersection with the same intersection.

------------------
Have Lightsaber Will Travel JK Editing tips, troubleshooting information, resources and more.
www.swgalaxies.net For all your Star Wars Galaxies needs
The Massassi A SW Galaxies Player Association

1- I was only assuming that the entity was a sphere.

2- A very good point, I hadn't thought of that. Perhaps then time would fall back following a series of events that never actually took place.

------------------
When bread becomes toast, it can never go back to being bread again.

Oh.. well I meant Scare Tactics. *shrug*
Oh, and Nauree, what if you hit the speed of light? Some physisists (s?) believe that time would stop. So, if you went faster than light, wouldn't it make sense (using that logic) that time would go backwards?

------------------
MadQuack on Military school: Pro's: I get to shoot a gun. Con's: Everything else.
"I'm going to beat you until the laws of physics are violated!!" ! Maeve's Warcry

RIP -MaDaVentor-. You will be missed.

I just saw the movie Paycheck.

------------------
"So, how much for those 2,500 lb engines in aisle 2?"

So did my friends. They said it sucked.

------------------
MadQuack on Military school: Pro's: I get to shoot a gun. Con's: Everything else.
"I'm going to beat you until the laws of physics are violated!!" ! Maeve's Warcry

RIP -MaDaVentor-. You will be missed.

Yah uh well Nauree, you may not be able to go backwards, but you're thinking too narrowly. I'm too tired to give thought to explain that. But uh Flexor, you're talking about entropy? Asimov's "The Last Question".

------------------
There is no signature

Can anyone create a perfect sphere?

------------------
MaxisReed
AIM: MaxisReed
ChatOp, EC administrator, and "some sort of god!"

Not with this planet.

Maybe in space, where there is no gravity. like melt metal blobbs and let them cool while they pull together and form a sphear.

Maybe...just maybe.

------------------
"Did you just say.....Birthday Party?...."

Actually, a lot of people believe that time exists as a point, not a line, so there'd be nothing to go back to.

------------------
All you need is love.

Except another point.

------------------
MadQuack on Military school: Pro's: I get to shoot a gun. Con's: Everything else.
"I'm going to beat you until the laws of physics are violated!!" ! Maeve's Warcry

RIP -MaDaVentor-. You will be missed.

So it will be almost like climbing a mountain, right? Only that when the top is reached, we climb down the other side. That would be tripped out - the entire course of history would change in a matter of seconds...

Cant create a perfect sphere, unless its a single atom i guess.

and what if time doesn't exist and is just another theory of man, what i'm getting at is that the only thing that exists is the "now" and time was just invented to keep track of crap.

------------------
mmm, smells like something burning.

Yeah.. paycheck sucked.. one of the worst movies Ive ever seen

------------------
Happy "Diseased" dud: You said I'd be like this guy. Boycotting everything..
Happy "Diseased" dud: ted kazcnisky. That's who it was.
Happy "Diseased" dud: Wait, That's the unibomer.
Happy "Diseased" dud: Wrong guy.

[This message has been edited by fishstickz (edited January 04, 2004).]

Oh please, it was pretty good. You don't have to hate movies because Ben Affleck is in them!

------------------
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.

::checks progress of thread::

Such an incredibly frivolous arguement, made more so by the fact that at least 95% of the people here either don't understand or just don't care.

Are you part of the 5% that does understand what is going on? Do you have something relevant to say to this thread? If not, then I hand you a nice cup of STFU.


------------------
<scribbly handwriting barely resembling name>

Your theory assumes that time exists in superior dimensions. And collision would assume that two entities exsist in a state of being able to collide as we see in our normal space-time not actually space and time itself. Also I guess this "collision" depend on the range of the inferior to the superior entity, but everything I know about space-time tells me that this is not possible. Anyone else have any ideas?

I think it is imposibble to understand space-time when currently in space time. Like if you are inside a building, you can't fully understand and know about the outside of the building as a whole unless you actually leave it.

------------------
I munch C code for breakfast and have enough room left over for a kernel debugging.

[This message has been edited by Freyr (edited January 04, 2004).]

Gandalf must be the only guy in the world with PMS. Sheesh.

And yes, I understand the theories here. I just think it's stupid as no one could ever benefit from this.

Um.. No.

Anyway, Freyr, I'm not quite sure how well your building analogy fits. If you have the blueprints of a building, and you spend enough time understanding them, as well as exploring the building, you can learn more about it than just looking at the outside of the building. Or am I missing the point?

------------------
MadQuack on Military school: Pro's: I get to shoot a gun. Con's: Everything else.
"I'm going to beat you until the laws of physics are violated!!" ! Maeve's Warcry

RIP -MaDaVentor-. You will be missed.

I always thought of time as the 4th dimension. If the 1st dimension is an infinite number of 0-dimensional points, and the second dimension is an infinite number of 1 dimensional lines, and the 3rd dimension is an infinite number of 2d planes, why can't the 4th dimension be an infinite number of 3 dimensional spaces? And then we happen to experience them in a secquence that we call time... i dunno, it's obviously flawed, but it's interesting to think about anyway.

I don't know too much on the subject, BobTheMasher, but isn't that what the, or one of accepted theories is?

------------------
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.

Think about time for a second.

Is time just the same stuff being reorganized, and traveling in time would just be changing the organization of things to the way they were in a specific time period?

Is time actually the recreation of everything continuously, and there's actually a proverbial 'paper trail' to head back to?

The answer to the above is, "nobody knows."

------------------
Duel Zero : Released the beta. Probably the end of it. Not to worry though, I'm working on Randsaber, which is a lot better.

I don't know, Emon. I kinda reasoned it out on my own. It's not complicated. (so i doubt it's accepted as right. )

But really, i might have heard that somewhere...

Yeah. Time is accepted as the 4th dimension.

------------------
MadQuack on Military school: Pro's: I get to shoot a gun. Con's: Everything else.
"I'm going to beat you until the laws of physics are violated!!" ! Maeve's Warcry

RIP -MaDaVentor-. You will be missed.

They were wrong. It was awesome.

Flexor, the problem with your theory is that if the four-dimensional equivalent of a sphere "intersected" with our three-dimensional space, all we would see would be a point expanding into a three-dimensional sphere, which after reaching its largest size would contract again. The four-dimensional shape (in your theory, time) would not itself expand or contract, only its three-dimensional manifestation, much as a sphere intersecting a plane doesn't actually expand or contract.

------------------
"Why aren't I'm using at these pictures?" - Cloud, 4/14/02

[grammar nazi]etc. It's etcetera.[/grammar nazzi]

Nauree- just because we do not yet have evidence of a way to do it doesn't mean there isn't a way to do it. There is still so much abut the world we don't know. And many of the theories we base these assumptions about our universe on is just theory,so what's to say that we can really even go 'fast-forward' in time. Atleast at a rate that even makes a difference (a few fractions of a second doesn't count).

------------------
Clarinetists, unite!

-writer of Bloodwing: Fallen Soldier
(no site up yet...)

It was an analogy. I said you couldn't understand the outside of the building unlesss you actually existed outside it. Your blueprints suggestion was a little strange but think of a box instead:

If you are inside the box how can you tell what color the box is on the outside if you can only see the insdie and are bound by the limits of the walls.

------------------
I munch C code for breakfast and have enough room left over for a kernel debugging.

How do you know that what is going on now is actually backwards, and what originally happened was 'effect->cause', and we're actually living in a 'time' where time is shrinking? ANSWER ME THAT!

------------------
GhostOfYoda - General doer of stuff.

You can't prove it either way.

Cause->Effect = Effect->Cause

------------------
I munch C code for breakfast and have enough room left over for a kernel debugging.