| |
| A Time Machine to Travel Back in Time |  Suppose with a Time Machine you could travel back in time and meet anyone one from history, Einstein, Hitler, Newton, who would it be? And perhaps more importantly, what would you ask them? Would you choose Hitler, and ask him why the Jews? Or maybe Julius Ceasar and tell him not to go to the Senate? Who knows. For each of us there's probably a different character and a whole multitude of different questions, from the sublime to the profoundly ridiculous. And anyway, if you could travel back in time, or forwards in time, could you really change anything? Could you truly rewrite history, mould and shape historical events for a more compassionate or more prosperous outcome? I doubt it. We might like to think the fickle hand of fate can transform a sequence of events, wars and famine could be avoided, plagues and starvation eradicated. But the truth is something totally different. What's done is done, and no amount of interference will alter the course of events or determine mankind's destiny. But more to the point, I can prove it!
Stephen Hawking wrote of Time Travel: "Time travel is not theoretically possible, for if it was they'd already be here telling us about it!" Stephen's observation is astute to say the least. It would seem logical. But just maybe there is other explanations, imponderable's and aberrations that forbid any future traveller from revealing the secrets of dimensional travel. Maybe they have a code. They're forbidden from telling us, and if that's the case and adventurers do travel back in time and alter the course of history, we wouldn't know it's been altered. History would still be history, and the view of it we see would be as realistic as any other history, for we'd have absolutely no knowledge of what the alternative events were. They would have been erased.
Yet there are some flaws in the theory. How can you have Time Travel when no one really knows what time actually is? Surely Time itself is no more than a conceptual facilitation to aid mankind's endeavours. And although it might seem obtuse to suggest you can't have time, perhaps by stripping time from the universe we might be able to make Time Travel work. It seems somewhat of a contradiction to suggest you can only have Time Travel by removing Time, but there are benefits to the hypothesis.
By rewriting Einsteinian special relativity, I managed to create a timeless universe. Rather than say, as Einstein did, that light first emits from a star and travels towards us, measured as light seconds, minutes, weeks, months and years, I chose to redefine the position where light first breaks. I placed it central to two bodies of mass, and allowed it to move two directions simultaneous. Therefore, two observers, around two stars, see the same pin-prick of starlight, equally at the same time. For neither, there is no recognition of a different point, place or time. To prove this, I locked in a measurable prediction. I said, if one of the bodies of mass fluctuates, the pin-prick of light must relocate its position, and subsequently the velocity of light must increase its acceleration so both observers still witness the said event equally and proportionately at the same time. And thus, regardless of their distance, or the duration light takes to reach each observer, if both checked their watch, they would both say the same time.
I expanded this thinking, and rather rebelliously insisted therefore, light doesn't travel anywhere, but gravity does. Indeed, what we get is the velocity of gravity, rather than the accepted velocity of light. The put the cat among the pigeons.
The reason I did this was to extrapolate Einstein's belief that we can only ever look longingly back down a proverbial tunnel of time. And with Time removed from a universal equation, everything becomes possible: other planets, spacecraft, ufos, intergalactic travel, Time Travel. Although Time Travel would merely be a repositioning of the volume of mass at any given juncture in its history. It wouldn't necessarily mean moving any within the universe itself.
To understand this, think how people talk of ghosts. As an example. We here people, the newspapers, the television talk candidly of hog the qld lady dressed from head to toe in grey is often seen climbing the castle steps in the dead of night. Curiously, most people don't ask why the old lady dressed in grey is always seen in the same place, climbing the same steps? There must be a reason for it: what?
Some people talk of the dead, an after-life, a restless soul. Which all makes for good stories. However, if this person is a restless soul why not vary the haunting a little. Why not do the castle steps Monday night and the local cinema on Tuesday? I think the explanation is fairly simple, what we see is not a restless soul, but an impression in Time. A window on the past if you like. Obviously science would contest this, even when they claim to see universes creating themselves by means of large telescopes. It wouldn't be unreasonable to say, science can see the past, but the layman isn't quite clever enough too. At which point must ask ourselves, what creates these visions?
God forward one page
|
|
| |
|
» 
