If we had an independent variable of time

I have been thinking about higher dimensions lately, and so one thing leads to another and now I have an idea. Let's throw relativity out the window. Imagine a universe where if you go lightspeed with everyone having lightspeed be from the same reference frame. So going near lightspeed, light instead of having the same constant speed in every reference frame but its own, it has the speed we know today in one frame: the absolute frame, an imaginary space where we have something that is still in all reference frames. That would mean that traditional time travel would not be possible. Going really fast won't cause any time dilation. However, what if we add a second dimension of time, this time-dependent. Now in this way, we have 2 ways of time travel, by going really fast in space or going really fast in time. Backward time travel is still not possible, nor will it be unless time is directionally dependent on space. Let us say that organisms on the planet Earth have grown to evolve with this in mind, and so has all other matter in the universe. It would still take a TON of energy to go forward in time on time axis prime (from now on, the independent axis is TT'). If you were to use enough energy to be traveling really fast in TT', you would travel forward in TT. If moving through TT' doesn't negate the ability to travel in space, you could theoretically teleport through space, as you would be dilating time in one axis by going really fast in the other. Imagine you are walking in a hallway. The person in front of you dilates in T’. To us, they go really really fast. To them, they are moving at an average walking speed, just through time fast. Basically, I supposed a universe where relativity doesn’t really exist, but yet still functions. If someone stops time on axis T’ for themselves, what we see of them is teleportation if they move, however they don't age. If they do that and don't move, they will stay unaging. In this state, no chemical reactions could happen in your body, so you might die after using up all that energy.

Any thoughts?

Note by Christian Colangelo
1 week, 3 days ago

No vote yet
1 vote

  Easy Math Editor

This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.

When posting on Brilliant:

  • Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
  • Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
  • Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
  • Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.

MarkdownAppears as
*italics* or _italics_ italics
**bold** or __bold__ bold

- bulleted
- list

  • bulleted
  • list

1. numbered
2. list

  1. numbered
  2. list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
paragraph 1

paragraph 2

paragraph 1

paragraph 2

[example link](https://brilliant.org)example link
> This is a quote
This is a quote
    # I indented these lines
    # 4 spaces, and now they show
    # up as a code block.

    print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
MathAppears as
Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3 2×3 2 \times 3
2^{34} 234 2^{34}
a_{i-1} ai1 a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3} 23 \frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2} 2 \sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3 i=13 \sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta sinθ \sin \theta
\boxed{123} 123 \boxed{123}

Comments

Sort by:

Top Newest

Wouldn’t this put a traveller in two points in time under two reference frames? T and T’?

There’s no reason why an object can’t exist in two independent reference frames, I’m just wondering if they co-exist within the universe somehow and therefore the element of time travel puts them in their origin time reference and their future time reference at the same moment so they can experience both circumstances.

Duncan Wright - 1 week, 3 days ago

Log in to reply

Yes. The time T is our normal time axis, on which we observe, and T’ which we move. Where you can change speeds of T’ like time dilation in T. That is how time works in our dimension, only relativity based.

Christian Colangelo - 1 week, 3 days ago

Log in to reply

So is your model proposing that T’ prime is effectual on the rate of passage of time in T? Basically you can control the speed of time in T by changing your velocity in T’ but your velocity in T remains unchanged. What would acceleration in T’ do in this model?

Duncan Wright - 1 week, 2 days ago

Log in to reply

@Duncan Wright Honestly, I haven't thought of that yet. I will get back to you when I think of it. Got it now. So, when you increase speed in T’, you scale the speed of acceleration. However, the force is the same. So, mass decreases, as you are converting it to energy to maintain the time speed.So when you fall, it is the same force, and higher acceleration

Christian Colangelo - 1 week, 2 days ago

Log in to reply

@Christian Colangelo Figured it out

Christian Colangelo - 1 week, 2 days ago

Log in to reply

@Christian Colangelo So if you have a velocity in T’ this directly relates to your rate of passage of time in T.

Then if you accelerate or decelerate in T’ the velocity is changing so your rate of passage of time increase or decreases respectively, and the vector of acceleration in T’ affects your mass where a positive vector decreases mass and a negative vector increases mass to conserve energy?

It’s an interesting model and I’m sure it could be used to describe travelling at high speeds. I’ve often considered travelling faster than the speed of light would effect time travel because if you consider it in classical mechanics, you’re catching up with things from your past as they propagate through the universe so going back in time in a sense, but simultaneously you’re meeting things from where you are heading sooner than you should, so going forward in time from that perspective.

Duncan Wright - 1 week, 1 day ago

Log in to reply

@Duncan Wright Got it, check bellow

Christian Colangelo - 1 week, 2 days ago

Log in to reply

Who downvoted you?

Christian Colangelo - 1 week ago

Log in to reply

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...