Are these the 8 reasons why people from the future have not come back in time?

  • 42 Replies
  • 6490 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline memoryerase1

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 11
    • View Profile
.... to visit us. Can you think of more than these 8 reasons.?

After thinking about time travel, and the grandfather paradox for a long time its just impossible to get around the causality problem, like in this quick experiment.
Say you have a time machine, and you moved a grain of sand out of place on a beach 5000 years from now, even a atom in the grain of sand, or even a quark, and everything in human history from that point changes instantly.
With the grandfather paradox you would not even have time to point the gun at your grandfather, because as soon as you tear the fabric of space and time time the past you would just vanish, this is how fast causality would affect you.
So if people in the future have achieved time travel why are they not here.
Here is my eight reasons why, can you think of more:
1. They never did it, they could not even do it with a googolplex years from now, with the amount of human progress in technology.
2. They have done it but they put some kind of causality lock on the time period they come from, keeping them safe from causality changes through time.
3. They create another dimension to go to the past in, exactly like our own in every way, so there is no causality effects on them.
4. They can just view the past but not interact with it, as they travel through time backwards, or even view it on a television monitor.
5. They have achieved time travel but are not interested in visiting our time period.
6. they can only go back in time short term like a few seconds, and they cannot go back in time before the time machine was built, or before they were born.
7.They can only send information back in time, and again short term or there is going to be causality problems.
8. Even short term maybe they cannot send people, or information back because they instantly get thrust somewhere else, or either killed, or even create a infinite paradox loop that they can never escape.
Can you think of a 9th reason.
Thank you for your help with this question.
« Last Edit: 11/01/2016 09:06:49 by chris »

*

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 400
    • View Profile
Can you think of a 9th reason.
They created time travel lots of different times in the future, but no one ever got back to tell them it worked.
even if you go back to yesterday you would find yourself in empty space as yesterday the Earth was in a different set of cosmic coordinates than it is today. Even if they tried to return within one second of arriving in the past, by the time you account for all the relative movements through space, that is exactly what would meet them. This planet when all is said and done has a phenomenal combined orbital speed around the "Great Attractor".
We are made of Spacetime; with a sprinkling of Stardust.
Matter tells Spacetime how to Flow; Spacetime tells matter where to go

*

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 1933
    • View Profile
10. The whole universe reverts to the state of the time the machine is set to (every particle travels back in time to the "same" point in time)

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
1. They never did it, they could not even do it with a googolplex years from now, with the amount of human progress in technology.

Considering the rate at which technology progresses, that may be a rash prediction.  My own feeling is that something more fundamental than technology will prevent past directed time travel.
 
2. They have done it but they put some kind of causality lock on the time period they come from, keeping them safe from causality changes through time.

Even J Richard Gott, who argues for the possibility of past directed time travel, points out the difficulty and expense.  Would it not seem pointless to go to that trouble and do nothing with the results?

3. They create another dimension to go to the past in, exactly like our own in every way, so there is no causality effects on them.

That’s a lot more complicated than it sounds.  There have been many attempts to use the multiverse idea to achieve PDTT, some of them seem to work, but, I suspect, only because they are not thought through completely.

4. They can just view the past but not interact with it, as they travel through time backwards, or even view it on a television monitor.

Is that really TT, or just retro-viewing?

5. They have achieved time travel but are not interested in visiting our time period.

I’ll pass on that one, as we have no way of knowing, unless they change their minds. [:)]

6. they can only go back in time short term like a few seconds, and they cannot go back in time before the time machine was built, or before they were born.

Going back just a few seconds would lead to all the problems of “full scale” PDTT.  Some of those might be averted if it were not possible to go back beyond the invention of the machine, but it would be only temporary.

7.They can only send information back in time, and again short term or there is going to be causality problems.

Who would receive the information?

8. Even short term maybe they cannot send people, or information back because they instantly get thrust somewhere else, or either killed, or even create a infinite paradox loop that they can never escape.

Lots of problems here. The biggest, I think, is the inescapable loop.

3, 6 and 8, especially, need more comment/explanation, but on the principle that the length of a post is inversely proportional to the number of people likely to read it, I will leave out those comments unless someone wants them.
There never was nothing.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4180
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
You would actually decrease the entropy of the universe which would violate the second law of thermodynamics. If you could send one particle then in principle you could send a whole solar system back. If you could send a whole solar system back then in theory you could send the whole universe back. Thus you could decrease entropy indefinitely.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote from:  SF
They created time travel lots of different times in the future, but no one ever got back to tell them it worked.


To justify that, you would first have to show how PDTT could be achieved.
 
Quote
even if you go back to yesterday you would find yourself in empty space as yesterday the Earth was in a different set of cosmic coordinates than it is today. Even if they tried to return within one second of arriving in the past, by the time you account for all the relative movements through space, that is exactly what would meet them. This planet when all is said and done has a phenomenal combined orbital speed around the "Great Attractor".

That’s a bit like arguing against predestination by saying: “If I am predestined to be run over by a bus this evening, what happens if I don’t go out?” 
It misses the point.
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote from: Chiral
10. The whole universe reverts to the state of the time the machine is set to (every particle travels back in time to the "same" point in time)

I assume that if this were the case, no one would be aware that anything out of the ordinary had happened. 
There is still another problem though, isn’t there?  Point A ( the departure point) and B, (the point to which the Universe returns) are unique spacetime events.  B cannot happen, first without, then with the “return” of the Universe.
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote from: Jeffrey
You would actually decrease the entropy of the universe which would violate the second law of thermodynamics. If you could send one particle then in principle you could send a whole solar system back. If you could send a whole solar system back then in theory you could send the whole universe back. Thus you could decrease entropy indefinitely.

One of the great things about this sort of discussion is that someone often thinks of an angle you have overlooked.  I hadn’t thought about PDTT decreasing entropy. Thanks Jeffery.

My initial (poorly considered) response is that entropy would not be decreased beyond the level it was at the point to which you return.  Using points A and B, as above: the entropy at B will never decrease beyond its original  level.
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Reason 11: (anthropic reason); we are here, so the Universe must be a place in which rational beings can survive.  PDTT would make it impossible for rational beings to make any sense of life in the Universe.  We could not survive in such a universe, so PDTT cannot be possible.
There never was nothing.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4180
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Quote from: Jeffrey
You would actually decrease the entropy of the universe which would violate the second law of thermodynamics. If you could send one particle then in principle you could send a whole solar system back. If you could send a whole solar system back then in theory you could send the whole universe back. Thus you could decrease entropy indefinitely.

One of the great things about this sort of discussion is that someone often thinks of an angle you have overlooked.  I hadn’t thought about PDTT decreasing entropy. Thanks Jeffery.

My initial (poorly considered) response is that entropy would not be decreased beyond the level it was at the point to which you return.  Using points A and B, as above: the entropy at B will never decrease beyond its original  level.

OK. Say we take the sun back 100 million years. We now have two suns at different stages in the life cycle. Each having produced its own amount of entropy. Past sun p has entropy generation S_p, while the future sun f has entropy generation S_f. It has to follow that S_f > S_p. If the life expectancy of the sun at time t in the past is t * n and the point at which the sun was sent back is t * m then we find that m < n so that the sun sent back to the past will still exists at time t * m. The resulting life cycle of this sun, although shortened due to travel through time, will contribute less to increase in entropy in its new future than would have originally occurred. The original sun now no longer exists in this time-line. What actual effect this will have on the universal entropy I don't know.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Jeffrey, we are probably thinking of different interpretations of PDTT.

Consider: 1, in which you go back and meet a younger self.
2, in which you go back and are your younger self, but with “memories” of the future.

Both bring serious problems. 
In interpretation 1, if you take back the entire universe, you have, in effect, doubled the mass/energy of the universe, which is, sort of, frowned on.  You also run into a major problem involving the inescapable cycles of reason 8, above.
In interpretation 2 you are at the point to which you return, first without, then with memories of the future.
I think interpretation 2 should avoid the entropy problems, though. 
There never was nothing.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4180
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
But interpretation 2 adds information to the system. Since information itself is an ordered sequence, although not physical, it can still be considered a lowering of entropy. Especially if we are considering a holographic nature for the universe where information IS the universe.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Point taken, but can we argue that information has lower entropy than no information, in any specific scenario?
There never was nothing.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4180
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
I was stretching a point a bit there.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
 ''Are these the 8 reasons why people from the future have not come back in time ?''


There is one reason only , the future does not exist, the past does not exist , only the now exists and the now is always the now and the past is a memory of the now which is now the future.


*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote from: Thebox
There is one reason only , the future does not exist, the past does not exist , only the now exists and the now is always the now and the past is a memory of the now which is now the future.

That seems OK as an intuition-based belief, but unless you can come up with a well defined supporting theory, it is probably a bit dogmatic for a science discussion.

Are you, for example, saying that time does not exist?

Do you equate the present with some concept of infinity/eternity?
There never was nothing.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1452
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
... the future does not exist, the past does not exist , only the now exists and the now is always the now and the past is a memory of the now which is now the future.
One wonders how - if the past or future don't exist, but only an instantaneous now - there can be causality and change.

Just asking...

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
... the future does not exist, the past does not exist , only the now exists and the now is always the now and the past is a memory of the now which is now the future.
One wonders how - if the past or future don't exist, but only an instantaneous now - there can be causality and change.

Just asking...

Because the next moment is a new moment of now.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
Quote from: Thebox
There is one reason only , the future does not exist, the past does not exist , only the now exists and the now is always the now and the past is a memory of the now which is now the future.

That seems OK as an intuition-based belief, but unless you can come up with a well defined supporting theory, it is probably a bit dogmatic for a science discussion.

Are you, for example, saying that time does not exist?

Do you equate the present with some concept of infinity/eternity?

A theory? why would I need a theory to observe that the next ten minutes are not written until our moment of now, gets there.  Tomorrow is only there if your moment gets to tomorrow, where today becomes a memory of a past moment.  There is no future moment , only moments and memories.
« Last Edit: 05/01/2016 17:28:13 by Thebox »

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote
A theory? why would I need a theory to observe that the next ten minutes are not written until our moment of now, gets there.

You don't need a theory to make that observation.  St Augustine made some very astute comments along these lines, without a mention of mathematical proof.  In those days, it was philosophy, today it becomes science, so different kinds/levels of proof are needed if you are to move beyond personal belief, without slipping into solipsism.

You didn't address the questions in my last post.
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
Are you, for example, saying that time does not exist?
''Are you, for example, saying that time does not exist?''


I am saying time only exists in the moment.


''Do you equate the present with some concept of infinity/eternity?''


I equate the present to the now, infinity could only be immortal like space.



''The earliest reference we have to the moment is from the 8th century writings of the Venerable Bede.[2] Bede describes the system as 1 hour = 4 points = 10 minutes = 15 parts = 40 moments. Bede was referenced four centuries later by Bartholomeus Anglicus in his early encyclopedia De Proprietatibus Rerum (On the Properties of Things).[3] Centuries after Bede's description, the moment was further divided into 60 ostents, although no such divisions could ever have been used in observation with equipment in use at the time.[2]''


Our moments of time write a past, there is no future only  the now moment writing the past.


*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
We could continue to bandy conflicting quotes from Bede, Augustine and other historical greats, but interesting as that might be, I doubt it is what the OP was looking for. 

Quote
I am saying time only exists in the moment.

Are you defining a moment as 1/40 of an hour, or do you have another definition?

Quote
Our moments of time write a past, there is no future only  the now moment writing the past.

Where do these moments come from?
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile



1.Are you defining a moment as 1/40 of an hour, or do you have another definition?

2.Where do these moments come from?

1. No, I am defining a moment as precisely ''how fast the brain works'', consciousness ''moving on''

2. The work in the brain, neurological moments, a rock is not conscious so time is negligible to a rock, 


2.
« Last Edit: 05/01/2016 21:00:10 by Thebox »

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote
1. No, I am defining a moment as precisely ''how fast the brain works'', consciousness ''moving on''

Can you be more precise? 

Are you saying all brains work at the same speed, or that a moment is purely subjective?

There never was nothing.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
Quote
1. No, I am defining a moment as precisely ''how fast the brain works'', consciousness ''moving on''

Can you be more precise? 

Are you saying all brains work at the same speed, or that a moment is purely subjective?


I do not know if all brains work at the same speed, I know sight works at the same speed as light.  I presume Neurons ''fire'' at the same speed and maybe all  brain wavelengths are the same.


Time is subjective to an individual, if there was no us  or life with a brain, time would simply ''vanish'' and be immaterial , the universe does  not need time to exist, we do not need time to exist to exist, time is subjective invention in the aim of immortality. Time is no more than a measuring aid.

There can be no future to come back from, and personally i think the ancient Egyptians and their search for Elixirs of life are testament to the invention of ''why'' time.


Consider that space is timeless, you could re-arrange all the matter in the visual universe and this would not effect the dimension of space.

A '' 1 year '' orbit clockwise would still be ''1 year'' if it was anti clockwise.

If the Universe was a ''cluster'' and not ''expanding''  , ''50 billion years'' would still be ''50 billion years''.


The expansion has no purposeful meaning to time. Simply the big bang and the distance of expansion is meaningless to ''time''.


The Universe is based on the scale of the earth relative to other bodies, but nobody on Earth could actually factually say how big the Earth is, it could be a microbe size relative to an observer.

The earth is ''big'' relative to us, the Earth is ''massive'' relative to an Ant, the Earth is an Universe relative to ''bacteria'', but all of this could be on a swab/in a box, relative to an observer. 

[attachment=20731]


This is logically expands for infinity.


Now if I wanted to view something small, that was to small to observe, I would either have to shrink myself or make the smaller thing ''bigger'',  I am concerned that we , us , may be a creation of type nano-bots, and we are here trying to work out some complex problem for ''somebody else'' on a microbe scale. (really small).


We think , thats all we seem to do, well most of us.


p.s Bio-logical Neuro-bots?

« Last Edit: 06/01/2016 10:17:04 by Thebox »

*

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 400
    • View Profile
I am concerned that we , us , may be a creation of type nano-bots, and we are here trying to work out some complex problem for ''somebody else'' on a microbe scale. (really small).
Douglas Adam:
It was the mice that made us. And we are not looking for an answer, that is 42.
We are looking for the question.... [:)]
We are made of Spacetime; with a sprinkling of Stardust.
Matter tells Spacetime how to Flow; Spacetime tells matter where to go

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote from: Thebox
I do not know if all brains work at the same speed, I know sight works at the same speed as light.  I presume Neurons ''fire'' at the same speed and maybe all  brain wavelengths are the same.

Unless you knew that your presumption in the second sentence was correct, the statement: “I know sight works at the same speed as light” is meaningless.

Quote
Time is subjective to an individual, if there was no us  or life with a brain, time would simply ''vanish'' and be immaterial , the universe does  not need time to exist, we do not need time to exist to exist, time is subjective invention in the aim of immortality. Time is no more than a measuring aid.

Time is a measure of change.  Surely you cannot be saying that there was no change in the Universe before there was consciousness to be aware of it.

 
Quote
There can be no future to come back from, and personally i think the ancient Egyptians and their search for Elixirs of life are testament to the invention of ''why'' time.

What is “why” time?

Beyond this point in your post I am at a loss to find any relevance to the question of time travel.
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile


Time is a measure of change.  Surely you cannot be saying that there was no change in the Universe before there was consciousness to be aware of it.


What is “why” time?

Beyond this point in your post I am at a loss to find any relevance to the question of time travel.

''Time is a measure of change.''  - the change happens even if it is not measured, time is irrelevant to the change.

''Surely you cannot be saying that there was no change in the Universe before there was consciousness to be aware of it.''-  Change does not happen of the past, change is happening right now, for every word I write, is a different now, the words that proceed the words you are reading now, is history of the now. By time you read this, it is different moment to now 3pm precisely, change is the now leaving a past,



''What is “why” time?''  science often does not care about the why, why time? for what purpose was it created/invented? 

We don't need time  and the universe does not need time, events happen whether it is timed or not timed, we time, time itself is not anything,


*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote from: Thebox
We don't need time  and the universe does not need time, events happen whether it is timed or not timed, we time, time itself is not anything

I think you are confusing "time" with "our concept of time".

"Time is nature's way to keep everything from happening all at once."
                                                                                       John Wheeler. 
 
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
Quote from: Thebox
We don't need time  and the universe does not need time, events happen whether it is timed or not timed, we time, time itself is not anything

I think you are confusing "time" with "our concept of time".

"Time is nature's way to keep everything from happening all at once."
                                                                                       John Wheeler.

'timing'' is natures way of stopping all things happening at once when talking process, but all things happen in the same moment leaving a history.  My view of science is very simple, if it physically exists or has physical presence , it is a real thing, things like time are border line God theory.

« Last Edit: 07/01/2016 09:43:31 by Thebox »

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Quote from: Thebox
if it physically exists or has physical presence , it is a real thing

What do you mean by "physically exists"; for example, does intelligence physically exist?  Does mathematics physically exist?
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
Quote from: Thebox
if it physically exists or has physical presence , it is a real thing

What do you mean by "physically exists"; for example, does intelligence physically exist?  Does mathematics physically exist?
''does intelligence physically exist?''  a great question Bill,, intelligence exists in us, of us, and we physically exist, but as a thing with distinct and independent existence, I do not think so.   Maths does not physically exist, maths represents things and process of physical existence.


Physically exists to me means something that can be held in the hand as such and things  including gases air, where physical presence to me means like photons, energy, magnetic forces,gravity

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Using your reasoning, every intelligent being experiences what we all refer to as the passage of/through time. It's what allows us to make sense of life.  Probably every mathematician works with the concept of time.  We, including mathematicians, are physical beings, and the concept of time exists in us.
There never was nothing.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
Using your reasoning, every intelligent being experiences what we all refer to as the passage of/through time. It's what allows us to make sense of life.  Probably every mathematician works with the concept of time.  We, including mathematicians, are physical beings, and the concept of time exists in us.

Yes the concept of time exists in us and we travel an increment of time, there is nothing to say that the experience we have is not being written has we experience it and the future does not exist based on that once we as an individual stop our experience memories and die, relative to us time stops and the future is not there.
There is no possible way to know that in ten minutes time, for the entire ten minutes from now, there is anything there because it is being written as we experience the time at the moment, moments from now might not exist, moments are an experience of now that writes the past, future is not even plausible by any logic in my opinion.



''like''  a computer simulation program that continues to write new frames that have not been written.


4 dimensions of xyz and time being us and our experience, the 5th dimension is something we do not experience, N-dimensional space.

*

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 596
    • View Profile
If you go back into time, this will take energy to run the machines needed for the transport. Machines can never be 100% efficient, which means that the second law will be in affect. The second law states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. The result of machine inefficiency on is to add entropy to yourself and the past, which will alter the future.

Time and entropy are uniquely similar in that both spontaneously flow in one direction. The entropy of the universe has to increase, while time has to move to the future, Since change of state are the means by which we gauge time, time has an intimate connection to entropy. Entropy constantly makes  change; increases, for a constant flow of time.

Entropy is a state function, which means any given state of matter defines a specific entropy level. The entropy of water at 1 atmosphere and 25C has a specific entropy value, that is the same no matter which lab measures it. That being said, the past defines a very specific universal state and therefore level of entropy.

In this state called the past, there was less time for the entropy of the universe to increase; it defines lower entropy. One will need tools to reverse the 2nd law to get there. Since entropy is a state variable, this is theoretically possible, since all we need is energy and clever machines to form the other state. But as we add energy and tools to work the past landscape, since nothing is 100% efficient, we will add entropy and alter the past.

Also since entropy is lowering to the past, this will catalyze an exothermic energy pulse that release the energy in the entropy of the present. Now you need to develop containment for yourself, so this energy does not add entropy to you; you become atomized. Although, sci-fi often uses this atomization entropy and then reassembles in the past.
 
Say you wish to go from the past, back to the future, to share the data, this change of state requires a huge entropy increase, proportional to the amount of landscape we had altered. This will take a huge amount of energy, to define the entropy increase. Where does this huge source of energy come from in the past, where such technology is not available? Now we need to transport the entire lab, which sort of stands out like a sore thumb, thereby altering the past.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4180
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Physically exists to me means something that can be held in the hand as such and things  including gases air, where physical presence to me means like photons, energy, magnetic forces,gravity

If I write down a mathematical equation I can then hold it, via the piece of paper, in my hand. Therefore proving that mathematics has a physical existence.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
Physically exists to me means something that can be held in the hand as such and things  including gases air, where physical presence to me means like photons, energy, magnetic forces,gravity

If I write down a mathematical equation I can then hold it, via the piece of paper, in my hand. Therefore proving that mathematics has a physical existence.
Lol nice try, the paper exists, the ink from the pen or carbon from the pencil exists, the equation you write is simply a formation of the carbon/ink onto the paper.

*

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4312
    • View Profile
Continuing the thought experiments with absolutely no evidence on which to base our guesses...
Quote from: theBox
I am defining a moment as precisely ''how fast the brain works''
Experiments have shown that the brain takes about 100ms to process images.
(I exclude the reported 13ms to recognize images, since this is more of a pipelining rate, rather than an elapsed time).

Quote from: TheBox
I presume Neurons ''fire'' at the same speed
There appears to be some effect due to the myelin (insulation on axons), which determines how fast nerve pulses travel.

Quote from: Puppypower
If you go back into time, this will take energy to run the machines needed for the transport. ...The result of machine inefficiency on is to add entropy to yourself and the past, which will alter the future.
I don't think that the entropy of energy would strictly forbid time travel.

If it takes (say) 10 GigaJoules to transport someone back in time, that energy must come from somewhere: perhaps Solar power, burning coal, or nuclear fusion. But that is all energy (entropy) generated at the "future" end of the trip. It does not require that this energy be drawn from the "past" end of the trip.

So I suggest that if time travel is possible, it will certainly affect the entropy past the "future" end of the trip, but need not necessarily affect entropy immediately past the "past" end of the trip.

This energy pales into insignificance if you consider the energy equivalent of an Arnold Schwarznegger (even without clothes). But what if you swapped the same mass from the past into the future, to balance the mass/energy of the universe?

The entropy of information is another thing entirely. Taking back a book of football statistics does transfer information into the past.

*

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 596
    • View Profile
Material entropy and information entropy are different. In the chemistry of materials, entropy is a state function, which means a given state of matter will define a given value of entropy. An entropy increase will result in a new state. If water goes from 25C to 26C we have a new state with a new entropy value, that all labs will measure as being the same.

With digital information, this information is not a state function, but rather increases in entropy will create noise and loss and not a unique new state. If we ran an experiment over and over with computer memory, the same amount of entropy will always lead to a different loss or noise.

The brain's function is based on the interaction of chemicals and chemical structures in water, therefore its information is based on material states. The result is an entropy increase is not necessary noise or loss, but can result into change into a new chemical state of information.

The reason this is so is our brain evolved from basic chemicals which are define by states. These built up into higher and higher states that are connected and integrated. Unlike digital information which humans have assigned priority through convention and logic, the brain assigns information priority via chemical states. This allows for collective human propensity; things that are the same for all. It also allows entropy to add up to useful change. In evolution, the entropy in mutations and natural selection, allows entropy to become useful.

In digital storage media, we have a uniform semi-conductor material on which are many binary switches. Since all these switches are the same, changes in entropy among all the chemical switches; new chemical state, does not necessarily equate to the information priority. The switch on the far left does not define the placement of very specific information, so these state changes can add up to something useful. Rather the information comes first and can be placed anywhere.

If we flip the binary switches with some type of chemical state order, but without any logical connection between the chemicals and the binary information, we get loss and noise. With the brain, chemical states are how the hierarchy of memory is laid out. This allows life to benefit by entropy and use it for useful change. There is no waste, since even noise is something that the brain can learn from; new state.

Future digital media might benefit by watching how blank media changes with entropy, and then use this for information placement. For example, put all the switches on; higher energy, and then watch as they randomly flip back to lower energy. This will tell us the new states of higher entropy. Next, information hierarchy will be designed to roll with these punches, so the new state is a new state of information. This is easier said than done.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3252
    • View Profile
Material entropy and information entropy are different. In the chemistry of materials, entropy is a state function, which means a given state of matter will define a given value of entropy. An entropy increase will result in a new state. If water goes from 25C to 26C we have a new state with a new entropy value, that all labs will measure as being the same.



Not quite in my opinion, entropy is the volume/amount of a system,the total amount of energy a system can contain, systems have an equilibrium entropy like a ''capacitor''/battery.    A system releases energy equal to gain, but if the system is exposed to a higher magnitude of energy, the system can't release the energy fast enough so the system alters, becomes an unstable state .

Imagine a finite space, that was contained in a imaginary boundary, like a ''balloon'', the more + energy you add to the volume of space contained, the more the space expands, positive repelling positive, remove the energy increase and the space then contracts, - attracted to -.


Makes sense to me if nobody else.

*

Offline Noah Håkansson

  • First timers
  • *
  • 5
    • View Profile
The fact that you can only travel forwards in time and not backwards.

*

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1880
    • View Profile
Hi Noah, thanks for bringing the thread down to earth, and, perhaps, back on topic.

At this point, I think it would be good to hear from Memoryerase1, just to see if his/her original question has been addressed. 
There never was nothing.