nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Time travel is real… except they haven’t perfected it yet

mad muffin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1D2ynASqe4

Looks like they overshot by a few decades?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Hector Savage

rossie1977 wrote: »

It's a legit photo as is this one from 1917

What am i missing ?
The woman with the "phone" ? that could just as easily be a notepad ?

James Brown

Some 1990's grunge looking slackers will be the first time travelers* so

(*'dat's moy fadder!')

Wheety

Hector Savage wrote: »

What am i missing ?
The woman with the "phone" ? that could just as easily be a notepad ?

Domhnall Gleeson siting behind her in shorts and a t-shirt.

NIMAN

Wheety wrote: »

Domhnall Gleeson siting behind her in shorts and a t-shirt.

Why when were shorts and tshirts invented?;)

NIMAN

Photo's are very easily photoshopped these days.

A general rule of thumb I employ, never believe anything you see on the internet.

chazbat1

I wonder if season 4 of Rick and Morty is out yet where they traveled from....

James Brown

I see a ventriloquist on the bottom right.

arctictree

Time dilation is a weird concept when you think deeply about it. The closer you get to light speed the slower time passes. At light speed time stops. (But you can never have enough energy to reach light speed.). In effect this means that from the point of view of a light photon, it takes zero time to reach its destination. Think about that.

TheValeyard

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Time travel is as real as Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

Lol. You weren't saying that 15 years from now.

Fiftyfilthy

NIMAN wrote: »

Photo's are very easily photoshopped these days.

A general rule of thumb I employ, never believe anything you see on the internet.

I saw a programme a couple of years ago regarding that pic. They were able to find all clothes ,sunglasses and camera that the man was wearing in the shops for that time period

Working class heroes

arctictree wrote: »

Time dilation is a weird concept when you think deeply about it. The closer you get to light speed the slower time passes. At light speed time stops. (But you can never have enough energy to reach light speed.). In effect this means that from the point of view of a light photon, it takes zero time to reach its destination. Think about that.

So, if I'm getting my head around this correctly, if you could travel at light speed for a distance of one light year and then returned, at light speed, you would be instantly two years into the future?

ohnonotgmail

Fiftyfilthy wrote: »

I saw a programme a couple of years ago regarding that pic. They were able to find all clothes ,sunglasses and camera that the man was wearing in the shops for that time period

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/time-traveling-hipster/

James Brown

arctictree wrote: »

Time dilation is a weird concept when you think deeply about it. The closer you get to light speed the slower time passes. At light speed time stops. (But you can never have enough energy to reach light speed.). In effect this means that from the point of view of a light photon, it takes zero time to reach its destination. Think about that.

They've theorised about that for a long time. The idea that you can be everywhere at the same time is trippy not to mention blasphemous

rossie1977

NIMAN wrote: »

Photo's are very easily photoshopped these days.

A general rule of thumb I employ, never believe anything you see on the internet.

Neither of those are photoshopped. The last one I posted appeared in the book 'The Great Cape Scott Story’ – a tale of the Canadian region’s history published in 1974

There is likely an explanation for them as there is likely an explanation of this from a Charlie chaplin movie in 1928..

arctictree

Working class heroes wrote: »

So, if I'm getting my head around this correctly, if you could travel at light speed for a distance of one light year and then returned, at light speed, you would be instantly two years into the future?

Got for broke. If you travelled at light speed and back to a point a billion light years away, you would be instantly 2 billion years in the future. ( Although you can't as you can't travel at light speed ).

A light photon though leaving a star a billion light years away, instantly arrives here from its point of view.

If you had a spaceship that could travel at close to the speed of light, you could travel around the galaxy in a few years and visit hundreds of planets - just like star trek. Only problem would be that millions of years would passed on earth by the time you get home.

NIMAN

They prove nothing.

Re: the picture in book, see post #41.

As for the film, you can't see a phone in that womans hand, but its the action of the hand being to the ear that we now associate with a mobile phone that makes you assume she must be carrying one.

You and I both know she isn't on a mobile phone and she isn't a time traveller.

The people who believe this sort of stuff are loons, end of.

seaking

the real one thing that i have studied is the assassination of JFK i have read all the story,s and still can,t make that one out . i was just watch a programme last week about it they were saying that there had to be a magic bullet that could turn corners . i know this has nothing to do with time travel sorry if i am out of order by mentioning the JFK story .

RebelButtMunch

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

I don't know a lot about the subject so I'm wondering if:

Time dilation = time travel ?

If not what's the difference between the 2 and what's the relevance of time dilaton?

We're all time travelling 1 second at a time into the future

rossie1977

arctictree wrote: »

If you had a spaceship that could travel at close to the speed of light, you could travel around the galaxy in a few years and visit hundreds of planets - just like star trek. Only problem would be that millions of years would passed on earth by the time you get home.

Even light speed is quite slow in terms of attempting to traverse our galaxy. Nearest star system would take 4.3 years to reach at light speed.

seaking

sure there is proof now that the first landing on the moon photo is fake . ??? that never happened in was all done in a studio . ????

rossie1977

seaking wrote: »

sure there is proof now that the first landing on the moon photo is fake . ??? that never happened in was all done in a studio . ????

Working class heroes

rossie1977 wrote: »

Even light speed is quite slow in terms of attempting to traverse our galaxy. Nearest star system would take 4.3 years to reach at light speed.

From the prospective of someone still at the point of origin, yes. But from the travelers point of view it would be instantaneous, I think.

seaking

rossie1977 wrote: »

you believe what you believe everyone has there own opinion on thing,s . but time travel really . beam me up scotty .

ohnonotgmail

seaking wrote: »

you believe what you believe everyone has there own opinion on thing,s . but time travel really . beam me up scotty .

knock yourself out
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=576

seaking

great reading cheers for the link .