3 ltr water probs???

[BUSHWHACKER]

Flux capacitor??? That's SO last year!!
I use delithium crystals nowadays, they run on three aaa batteries instead of 1.21 giggawatts. Saves taking out a second mortgage to pay for the plutonium.

[shaggy]

Flux capacitor??? That's SO last year!!
I use delithium crystals nowadays, they run on three aaa batteries instead of 1.21 giggawatts. Saves taking out a second mortgage to pay for the plutonium.

are they the same as dilithium crystals?
the crystals are way to wastefull and you only get 50 light years from them!
its about time you oldies (tongue very much in cheek) got with the program

[BUSHWHACKER]

Yeah, dilithium, thats what I said. they've got plenty of power for me, as I only need to go back to last Saturday with the lottery numbers! Impulse power is retro cool!!

[shaggy]

Yeah, dilithium, thats what I said. they've got plenty of power for me, as I only need to go back to last Saturday with the lottery numbers! Impulse power is retro cool!!

just your spelling then?
lets not start with the time travel aspect please as it is IMPOSSIBLE to travel backwards but possible to travel forward that as we know it now is fact!

[Chillitt]

travelling forward in time? its easy, we call it 'waiting'

[BUSHWHACKER]

That sucks!! If I was to travel into the future, I wouldn't be able to get back to the present to tell people that I had done it. The only people I could tell is those in the future, and they wouldn't beleive me 'cos I would be dressed in old clothes and they would all laugh and lock me up! It's just not worth the effort if you ask me!

[Chillitt]

well put on new clothes before you do it then!

[BUSHWHACKER]

The forum clock is STILL five minutes fast by the way!

[andy]

That sucks!! If I was to travel into the future, I wouldn't be able to get back to the present to tell people that I had done it. The only people I could tell is those in the future, and they wouldn't beleive me 'cos I would be dressed in old clothes and they would all laugh and lock me up! It's just not worth the effort if you ask me!

Isn't that what happened to Gary Glitter.

[TonyN]

travelling forward in time? its easy, we call it 'waiting'

Bwahahaha!

[shaggy]

right
if you leave our solar system traveling beyond the speed of light then according to lots of brainy people time as we on earth know it will slow down for you (you with me so far?)
so you travel for a year at this velocity turn round and come back into our solar system you will have been gone for 2 years (still with me?)
but here on earth it will have been 3 years
well thats the theory anyway and just in case anyone wants to educate me as to the proper calculations then please do so as i have guesed the actual times above!
GOD ALMIGHTY you see this is what happens when you no longer have water problems on your surf to worry about
you end up worrying about einstein & that wierd little fella in the wheelchair

[BUSHWHACKER]

At speeds close to the speed of light, time is lengthened and distances
are shortened by a factor of the square root of (1 - v^2/c^2)
where v is the speed, and c is the speed of light.

[Chillitt]

The question whether the speed of light is a true physical limit has no definite answer yet. It depends on the real structure of the space-time continuum, which is presently unknown. If absolute time (and a preferred reference frame) exist, then faster-than-light speeds - and even faster-than-light travel - are possible, at least in principle. Although the theory of special relativity states against absolute time and superluminal phenomena, it does it not by proof, but only by assumption. If superluminal signals are to be discovered in the future, then the notion absolute time will surely have to be reintroduced to physics.
Are there indications that absolute time and faster-than-light processes exist? The opinion of the author is "yes"! It is the task of the next section to present some physical evidence.

Physical Treatise
For the description of physical phenomena it is sufficient to use only the first of Einstein's postulates [2]. Without loss of generality one may choose a reference frame R (with coordinates x, y, z, t) where the speed of light c is constant in all directions. The general coordinate transformation from this particular reference frame R to a general one R' (primed coordinates) reads


where the relative speed v of R' with respect to R is chosen to be parallel to the x-axis. The transformation properly expresses the apparent contraction of moving rods (Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction) and the slowing of moving clocks (time dilation). The function S(x') simply determines the notion of simultaneity in frame R'. Generally, S(x') can be an arbitrary function, but it is convenient to impose S(0) = 0 such that the clocks of the reference frames R and R' are synchronized at the origin (x,t) = (0,0) = (x',t'). Furthermore, in order to avoid acceleratory effects, one usually imposes that S(x') is linear in x', ie. S(x') = s x'.

Minkowski Space-Time
It can be shown that Einstein's second postulate is equivalent to setting S(x') = - v/c^2 x', so that one obtains the well known Lorentz transformation equations


with the speed of light c' = dr'/dt'(r=ct) = c constant in all frames. Thus, from the viewpoint of relativity, all reference frames are completely equivalent.

The first postulate ensures that physical phenomena have the same appearance in all reference frames, in the sense that one obtains the same result for all measurable quantities being but mean round-trip quantities (eg. the mean two-way speed of light). The second postulate states that there is no preferred reference frame and thus the physical laws (when expressed in formulas using global coordinates) appear equally in all reference frames. The space-time coordinates (Lorentz coordinates) are defined in such a way that the one-way speed of light is constant.

The success of the theory of relativity can be understood from the fact that the possibility to formulate all physical laws covariantly, ie. in a relativistically invariant manner, appears most tempting. One cannot deny that the involved mathematics is highly attractive from an esthetical point of view. For more information on special relativity and the principle of covariance one may consult eg. [3], [4].

Galilean Space-Time
Another possibility is to set S(x') = 0 leading to the affine coordinate transformation


It has to be emphasized that these equations are not equivalent although similar to the well-known transformation equations of Galilean relativity,



as the former equations contain additional time dilation and length contraction factors expressing the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction hypothesis.

In the Galilean framework the reference frame R (with unprimed coordinates x, t) has a special significance: It is the Newtonian frame of absolute time and space.

Although the one-way speed of light is not constant in general (ie. when expressed in an arbitrary reference frame), the mean-speed c of a round-trip is again constant [2], what is in accordance with all experiments (like Michelson-Morley a.s.o.). It should be emphasized again that there has been no experiment which determined the one-way speed of light [3], since this would require the possibility of synchronizing physical clocks by some other means than finite-speed signals. Thus, in fact, some "experimental proof" of the constancy of the one-way speed of light has not been given so far.

Remark: It has to be noted that H. A. Lorentz version of the ether theory (which is set in such a Newtonian framework), ie. Lorentz relativity, is a valid alternative to special relativity. It suffices to introduce the hypothesis that moving particles are contracted by some interaction with the ether (Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction), and that internal time is dilated by the same factor.

Which Space-Time Structure is Real?
Which conception of space-time is the physically correct one? Obviously, the covariant framework imposed by Minkowski space-time is the most attractive one to describe matter in electromagnetical and gravitational fields. However, it is surely possible that there exists an underlying absolute time preserving causality for superluminal phenomena. The theory of relativity does not offer an adequate framework for superluminal processes, at least not without refering to logical paradoxes, but a Galilean theory does. As is pointed out in the following section, several arguments can be found which indicate the non-generality of covariance and the existence of superluminal processes. The resurrection of absolute time in physics is therefore possible, if not even necessary

[shaggy]

$$$$ me chillit man you need to get out more

[BUSHWHACKER]

He does, he's a time traveller.