• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Time Travel & Anti-Gravity

Shadow

Scholar
S
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
86
I am fascinated with time travel and the effects of how it should work when practiced. My understanding is that gravity is caused by objects moving forward in time so I used simple deduction and figured that objects moving backwards in time create anti-gravity, this theory however seems to only be explored by me (if you find anything contrary to this let me know, I'd like to read on it)

Expanding on this here is what I have concluded, matter traveling backwards in time must have negative mass which therefore creates anti-gravity. However to the object traveling backwards in time anti-gravity has the exact same effects on it as gravity has on matter traveling into the future. This link explains the effects of matter with negative mass which I suggest is achieved when matter travels backwards in time which also causes anti-gravity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass.

If I am right then anti-matter does not create anti-gravity unless anti-matter is traveling backwards in time. I also conclude that matter traveling backwards in time can interact with matter traveling forwards in time because matter traveling in both direction of time simultaneously occupies the same single frame of time. Please by all means tear my theory apart or expand, but explain why.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can't yet posts links so you will have to use the ghetto link I posted and just put an http: in front. However it has the calulations and formula's written out for the effects of matter with negative mass, however take note that I'm not taking credit for the calculations I just find use them.
 
Last edited:
"My understanding is that gravity is caused by objects moving forward in time"

I've never heard this before. Aren't we all moving forward in time?
 
I'm not familiar with your initial claim that grativty is caused by objects moving forward in time. Clearly, every object we've come across has a gravitational force and is moving forward in time, but this correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation. The rest of your post is based on this assumption, so I will not comment further until you justify your statements.
 
Newton said:
I'm not familiar with your initial claim that grativty is caused by objects moving forward in time. Clearly, every object we've come across has a gravitational force and is moving forward in time, but this correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation. The rest of your post is based on this assumption, so I will not comment further until you justify your statements.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, light has no gravity. Doesn't it travel forward in time, just like everything else?
 
Shadow said:
I am fascinated with time travel and the effects of how it should work when practiced. My understanding is that gravity is caused by objects moving forward in time so I used simple deduction and figured that objects moving backwards in time create anti-gravity, this theory however seems to only be explored by me (if you find anything contrary to this let me know, I'd like to read on it)

Expanding on this here is what I have concluded, matter traveling backwards in time must have negative mass which therefore creates anti-gravity. However to the object traveling backwards in time anti-gravity has the exact same effects on it as gravity has on matter traveling into the future. This link explains the effects of matter with negative mass which I suggest is achieved when matter travels backwards in time which also causes anti-gravity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass.

If I am right then anti-matter does not create anti-gravity unless anti-matter is traveling backwards in time. I also conclude that matter traveling backwards in time can interact with matter traveling forwards in time because matter traveling in both direction of time simultaneously occupies the same single frame of time. Please by all means tear my theory apart or expand, but explain why.
Click to expand...

Are you theorizing that objects with regular mass can somehow be converted to objects with negative mass and vice-versa?
 
Shadow said:
If I am right then anti-matter does not create anti-gravity unless anti-matter is traveling backwards in time.
Click to expand...


I was rather puzzled by this statement. I thought it was common knowledge that anti-matter exhibits the same properties (as far as gravity is concerned) as "regular matter".

LLH
 
LordoftheLeftHand said:
[/COLOR]

I was rather puzzled by this statement. I thought it was common knowledge that anti-matter exhibits the same properties (as far as gravity is concerned) as "regular matter".

LLH
Click to expand...

Anti-matter has regular gravity, but since it has a negative mass, the gravitational force has a negative sign. This means it atracts other anti-matter and repels regular matter.
 
c4ts said:
As far as I know, light has no gravity. Doesn't it travel forward in time, just like everything else?
Click to expand...

I was a bit loose with my terminology. Light of course does not have mass, however it is affected by gravity on a relativistic scale, and it also has momentum. Both of these behaviors exhibit the characteristics of normal gravity and not anti-gravity.
 
Newton said:
Anti-matter has regular gravity, but since it has a negative mass, the gravitational force has a negative sign. This means it atracts other anti-matter and repels regular matter.
Click to expand...

Do you have a source for this? I honestly don't know which is true but that is not how I remember it. I did a little searching and found this:

http://www.science.ca/askascientist/viewquestion.php?qID=2397
There's no such thing as "negative mass", at least not in this context. Antiparticles have the same mass as the corresponding particles. This has been carefully demonstrated in experiments to check whether antiparticles "fall up". They don't. They fall down, just like particles.
Click to expand...

But hey maybe that is only true in Canada...

LLH
 
Newton said:
Anti-matter has regular gravity, but since it has a negative mass, the gravitational force has a negative sign. This means it atracts other anti-matter and repels regular matter.
Click to expand...

No, no ... anti-matter has positive mass just like regular matter, it just has oppositely charged particles (positrons, anti-protons, etc.). Therefore it has a gravitational attraction to all other matter and anti-matter. Anti-matter is not negative matter, nor does it have negative mass.
 
Last edited:
c4ts said:
As far as I know, light has no gravity. Doesn't it travel forward in time, just like everything else?
Click to expand...

A light beam does have a gravitational field associated with it, as it does have mass -- small as it is.
 
Shadow said:
... My understanding is that gravity is caused by objects moving forward in time ...
Click to expand...

How did you arrive at this conclusion?

(Note -- electrostatic attraction and repulsion both happen to objects traveling forward in time.)
 
Just thinking said:
No, no ... anti-matter has positive mass just like regular matter, it just has oppositely charged particles (positrons, anti-protons, etc.). Therefore it has a gravitational attraction to all other matter and anti-matter. Anti-matter is not negative matter, nor does it have negative mass.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification. I knew after the fact I had screwed it up and couldn't remember the details, but what you've posted is exactly what I remember.
 
Newton said:
Thanks for the clarification. I knew after the fact I had screwed it up and couldn't remember the details, but what you've posted is exactly what I remember.
Click to expand...

You're welcome ... these terms (if not used every day) can get confusing.
 
aw crap... speculation

Shadow said:
... My understanding is that gravity is caused by objects moving forward in time...
Click to expand...

I developed this understanding from reading on general relativity. I also just realized while looking for references that this was an assumption I made so long ago that I had forgotten I didn't read it anywhere I just assumed that space-time would only curve if mass existed in both space and time. This curvature or movement through space-time would be caused by matter moving through the 4th dimension as its not moving through space but yet is still moving. This link can help explain //math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/gravity.html not much though... I completely didn't realize that no one really explains what causes gravity since I can't seem to find any theories on the net(I might not be looking well enough)...

This is ALL speculation and I retract ever posting the comment academically, it is now open for debate and I have no evidence to back up any claims.

Alright I guess I'm on trial for two theories now... The other theory being that gravity is caused by matter traveling through time towards the future through the 4th dimension creating a curve in space itself. The more mass an object has the faster it falls into the future. Black holes with their mass don't just curve space but actually pierce it so therefore matter that makes up black holes is actually occupying the future. But based on this idea I formulated the previous idea...alot of speculation, ugh =\ at least its good discussion.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom