ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Trek XI Broke The Law of Conservation of Energy

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Nov. 22 2009, 4:24 pm

Really though they cannot exist together in a singular time line. We know this because this young Spock will not become prime Spock. However this can happen in the new view of time travel with quantum theory.

Admiral_BlackCat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1048

Report this Nov. 22 2009, 5:37 pm

In "We'll Always Have Paris" there were multiple versions of the Enterprise crew that could interact with on another. Non-linear time I guess.

orlandorays

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 399

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 8:22 am

If you're wondering how he eats or breathes, or other science facts, (la-la-la)
Just repeat to yourself, "It's just a show. I should really just relax."


:logical:

:p

God_in_an_Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4538

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 9:55 am

Quote (TheChronicOne @ Nov. 22 2009, 1:05 pm)
Spock couldn't meet his older/younger self in person..... not because it would make the universe explode or some other dumb stuff... but because it breaks the law of conservation of energy.

No matter can either be created or destroyed.. only altered. So, if somehow there were suddenly two Spocks that would mean either A: something else was "converted" into one of the Spocks, or B: The law of conservation of energy is proven false!!

:D

No matter is created. No matter is converted. No law is broken.

[/thread]

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm

I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 12:51 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:43 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm)
I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.

Prove it...

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist temptation. I'm weak. The devil made me do it....

;)

:laugh: I can't prove it!  

It's just that it's obviously violated every time there's time travel if you look at the entire universe as an isolated system.  I mean, you have a mass that wasn't there showing up, so mass is added to a universe, along with energy and momentum.  

That's the best I can do!
:laugh:

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 1:43 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:56 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:51 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:43 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm)
I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.

Prove it...

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist temptation. I'm weak. The devil made me do it....

;)

:laugh: I can't prove it! ?

It's just that it's obviously violated every time there's time travel if you look at the entire universe as an isolated system. ?I mean, you have a mass that wasn't there showing up, so mass is added to a universe, along with energy and momentum. ?

That's the best I can do!
:laugh:

Oh, the urge is so powerful... It's like trying to quit smoking...

I think my next post is supposed to be something like, "It's only your opinion," "Time travel is only theoretical," "It's all fiction, anyway," some nonsense about quantum mechanics or Orci's interview, etc...

How 'm I doin'?

The power of the dark side is strong....

:laugh:

Resist the dark side! :laugh:

God_in_an_Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4538

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 2:41 pm

Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 9:51 am)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:43 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm)
I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.

Prove it...

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist temptation. I'm weak. The devil made me do it....

;)

:laugh: I can't prove it! ¿

It's just that it's obviously violated every time there's time travel if you look at the entire universe as an isolated system. ¿I mean, you have a mass that wasn't there showing up, so mass is added to a universe, along with energy and momentum. ¿

That's the best I can do!
:laugh:

Whoever said that the overall mass of the universe requires temporal linearity? Just because we naturally travel one way through time does not mean that the universe itself does. It could very well be that, despite someone traveling back or forward through time, in the big scheme of things the mass of the universe remains constant. Take a box of ping pong balls. One end is "the future." The other end is "the past." Move one ball from the future to the past, or vice-versa, and does the number of balls change? Nope.

God_in_an_Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4538

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 2:59 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 11:50 am)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:41 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 9:51 am)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:43 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm)
I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.

Prove it...

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist temptation. I'm weak. The devil made me do it....

;)

:laugh: I can't prove it! ?

It's just that it's obviously violated every time there's time travel if you look at the entire universe as an isolated system. ?I mean, you have a mass that wasn't there showing up, so mass is added to a universe, along with energy and momentum. ?

That's the best I can do!
:laugh:

Whoever said that the overall mass of the universe requires temporal linearity? Just because we naturally travel one way through time does not mean that the universe itself does. It could very well be that, despite someone traveling back or forward through time, in the big scheme of things the mass of the universe remains constant. Take a box of ping pong balls. One end is "the future." The other end is "the past." Move one ball from the future to the past, or vice-versa, and does the number of balls change? Nope.

Doesn't work that way...

Take your full box of ping pong balls. It sits there for two days. Take one of the ping pong balls and go back in time one day and try to fit that ping pong ball in that box...

Thus is the volume in the singular universe - the box...

I believe that's what Chronic and spacetherapist were getting at.

You obviously didn't get the metaphor...

God_in_an_Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4538

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 3:47 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:18 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:59 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 11:50 am)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:41 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 9:51 am)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:43 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm)
I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.

Prove it...

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist temptation. I'm weak. The devil made me do it....

;)

:laugh: I can't prove it! ?

It's just that it's obviously violated every time there's time travel if you look at the entire universe as an isolated system. ?I mean, you have a mass that wasn't there showing up, so mass is added to a universe, along with energy and momentum. ?

That's the best I can do!
:laugh:

Whoever said that the overall mass of the universe requires temporal linearity? Just because we naturally travel one way through time does not mean that the universe itself does. It could very well be that, despite someone traveling back or forward through time, in the big scheme of things the mass of the universe remains constant. Take a box of ping pong balls. One end is "the future." The other end is "the past." Move one ball from the future to the past, or vice-versa, and does the number of balls change? Nope.

Doesn't work that way...

Take your full box of ping pong balls. It sits there for two days. Take one of the ping pong balls and go back in time one day and try to fit that ping pong ball in that box...

Thus is the volume in the singular universe - the box...

I believe that's what Chronic and spacetherapist were getting at.

You obviously didn't get the metaphor...

Sure I did. At each point in time, the universe has a set mass - the ping pong balls filling the box.

Your metaphor is non sequitur in comparing the set mass of the universe having mass from another time added to it to moving ping pong balls in a box at one point in time.

The mass from the future does not move another mass to another place in the universe.

If that's what you got out of it, then, no. You did not get the metaphor.

I'm not saying anything about a specific point in time. I'm saying that to the universe as a whole, time is irrelevant. Moving a person from the future into the past would have the same effect on the universe as moving my pen from the left side of my keyboard to the right side.

God_in_an_Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4538

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 4:09 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:58 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 3:47 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:18 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:59 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 11:50 am)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:41 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 9:51 am)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:43 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm)
I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.
Prove it...

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist temptation. I'm weak. The devil made me do it....
:laugh: I can't prove it! ?

It's just that it's obviously violated every time there's time travel if you look at the entire universe as an isolated system. ?I mean, you have a mass that wasn't there showing up, so mass is added to a universe, along with energy and momentum.

That's the best I can do!
:laugh:
Whoever said that the overall mass of the universe requires temporal linearity? Just because we naturally travel one way through time does not mean that the universe itself does. It could very well be that, despite someone traveling back or forward through time, in the big scheme of things the mass of the universe remains constant. Take a box of ping pong balls. One end is "the future." The other end is "the past." Move one ball from the future to the past, or vice-versa, and does the number of balls change? Nope.
Doesn't work that way...

Take your full box of ping pong balls. It sits there for two days. Take one of the ping pong balls and go back in time one day and try to fit that ping pong ball in that box...

Thus is the volume in the singular universe - the box...

I believe that's what Chronic and spacetherapist were getting at.
You obviously didn't get the metaphor...
Sure I did. At each point in time, the universe has a set mass - the ping pong balls filling the box.

Your metaphor is non sequitur in comparing the set mass of the universe having mass from another time added to it to moving ping pong balls in a box at one point in time.

The mass from the future does not move another mass to another place in the universe.
If that's what you got out of it, then, no. You did not get the metaphor.

I'm not saying anything about a specific point in time. I'm saying that to the universe as a whole, time is irrelevant. Moving a person from the future into the past would have the same effect on the universe as moving my pen from the left side of my keyboard to the right side.

Then I got exactly what you meant and you obviously do not understand the law of the conservation of energy.

You were talking about time and mass. Moving a ping pong ball from one place in the box to another or moving the pen from the left side of your desk to the right side of your desk is not the same as a person (or any other mass) moving from one point in time to another.

Considering that you keep referring to the box of ping pong balls as a box of ping pong balls rather than an analogy for the universe, then, no, you still don't get it.

Quote
The universe has a set mass (ignore virtual particles). A mass coming from another point in time would attempt to add to that set mass and the law of conservaton of energy allows no room for it.


Mass disappears from the 30th century.
Mass from 30th century appears in 20th century.
Total mass differential: 0.

captbates

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 12614

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 4:40 pm

Are we not always told that time is not linear? if so the idea of an object or person moving though time wouldn't cause a problem. As God said total mass would still be the same.




EDIT

Sorry TB I'm with God on this one, if we assume that time is part of the universe in the same way as matter etc, then it shouldn't make any difference "when" an object is. The total mass still doesn't change, as time is irrelevent.

Although, what do I know?  :laugh:

God_in_an_Alcove

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4538

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 4:43 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 1:24 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 4:09 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:58 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 3:47 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:18 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:59 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 11:50 am)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:41 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 9:51 am)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:43 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm)
I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.
Prove it...

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist temptation. I'm weak. The devil made me do it....
:laugh: I can't prove it! ?

It's just that it's obviously violated every time there's time travel if you look at the entire universe as an isolated system. ?I mean, you have a mass that wasn't there showing up, so mass is added to a universe, along with energy and momentum.

That's the best I can do!
:laugh:
Whoever said that the overall mass of the universe requires temporal linearity? Just because we naturally travel one way through time does not mean that the universe itself does. It could very well be that, despite someone traveling back or forward through time, in the big scheme of things the mass of the universe remains constant. Take a box of ping pong balls. One end is "the future." The other end is "the past." Move one ball from the future to the past, or vice-versa, and does the number of balls change? Nope.
Doesn't work that way...

Take your full box of ping pong balls. It sits there for two days. Take one of the ping pong balls and go back in time one day and try to fit that ping pong ball in that box...

Thus is the volume in the singular universe - the box...

I believe that's what Chronic and spacetherapist were getting at.
You obviously didn't get the metaphor...
Sure I did. At each point in time, the universe has a set mass - the ping pong balls filling the box.

Your metaphor is non sequitur in comparing the set mass of the universe having mass from another time added to it to moving ping pong balls in a box at one point in time.

The mass from the future does not move another mass to another place in the universe.
If that's what you got out of it, then, no. You did not get the metaphor.

I'm not saying anything about a specific point in time. I'm saying that to the universe as a whole, time is irrelevant. Moving a person from the future into the past would have the same effect on the universe as moving my pen from the left side of my keyboard to the right side.

Then I got exactly what you meant and you obviously do not understand the law of the conservation of energy.

You were talking about time and mass. Moving a ping pong ball from one place in the box to another or moving the pen from the left side of your desk to the right side of your desk is not the same as a person (or any other mass) moving from one point in time to another.

Considering that you keep referring to the box of ping pong balls as a box of ping pong balls rather than an analogy for the universe, then, no, you still don't get it.
Two of my posts ago, you quoted and supposedly read, I said:
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 4:09 pm)
Quote
The universe has a set mass (ignore virtual particles). A mass coming from another point in time would attempt to add to that set mass and the law of conservaton of energy allows no room for it.

Mass disappears from the 30th century.
Mass from 30th century appears in 20th century.
Total mass differential: 0.
The universe has a set mass at any given point in time - the ping pong balls in the box. At any two points in time that amount of mass will be the will be the same, but they are two separate points in time. If a portion of mass, X, is taken from one point in time and moved to another point in time, the total would equal total mass plus X and the time from which the mass came would be total mass minus X. According to the law of conservation of energy, that can not happen.

Yes, yes, you keep saying the same thing over and over, and I keep replying that time is irrelevant to the universe and you keep not getting it. Got anything new to add?

captbates

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 12614

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 5:05 pm

Quote (Yanks @ Nov. 22 2009, 9:17 pm)
Yanks grabs box of popcorn... (all kernals from one time-line of course...)

:laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

NICE

rocketscientist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10054

Report this Nov. 23 2009, 5:09 pm

Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 4:43 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 1:24 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 4:09 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:58 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 3:47 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:18 pm)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:59 pm)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 11:50 am)
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 2:41 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 9:51 am)
Quote (trekbuff @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:43 pm)
Quote (rocketscientist @ Nov. 23 2009, 12:24 pm)
I think it's a given in time travel that conservation of mass, momentum, and energy on a universal scale all can be violated.
Prove it...

I'm sorry. I couldn't resist temptation. I'm weak. The devil made me do it....
:laugh: I can't prove it! ?

It's just that it's obviously violated every time there's time travel if you look at the entire universe as an isolated system. ?I mean, you have a mass that wasn't there showing up, so mass is added to a universe, along with energy and momentum.

That's the best I can do!
:laugh:
Whoever said that the overall mass of the universe requires temporal linearity? Just because we naturally travel one way through time does not mean that the universe itself does. It could very well be that, despite someone traveling back or forward through time, in the big scheme of things the mass of the universe remains constant. Take a box of ping pong balls. One end is "the future." The other end is "the past." Move one ball from the future to the past, or vice-versa, and does the number of balls change? Nope.
Doesn't work that way...

Take your full box of ping pong balls. It sits there for two days. Take one of the ping pong balls and go back in time one day and try to fit that ping pong ball in that box...

Thus is the volume in the singular universe - the box...

I believe that's what Chronic and spacetherapist were getting at.
You obviously didn't get the metaphor...
Sure I did. At each point in time, the universe has a set mass - the ping pong balls filling the box.

Your metaphor is non sequitur in comparing the set mass of the universe having mass from another time added to it to moving ping pong balls in a box at one point in time.

The mass from the future does not move another mass to another place in the universe.
If that's what you got out of it, then, no. You did not get the metaphor.

I'm not saying anything about a specific point in time. I'm saying that to the universe as a whole, time is irrelevant. Moving a person from the future into the past would have the same effect on the universe as moving my pen from the left side of my keyboard to the right side.

Then I got exactly what you meant and you obviously do not understand the law of the conservation of energy.

You were talking about time and mass. Moving a ping pong ball from one place in the box to another or moving the pen from the left side of your desk to the right side of your desk is not the same as a person (or any other mass) moving from one point in time to another.

Considering that you keep referring to the box of ping pong balls as a box of ping pong balls rather than an analogy for the universe, then, no, you still don't get it.
Two of my posts ago, you quoted and supposedly read, I said:
Quote (God_in_an_Alcove @ Nov. 23 2009, 4:09 pm)
Quote
The universe has a set mass (ignore virtual particles). A mass coming from another point in time would attempt to add to that set mass and the law of conservaton of energy allows no room for it.

Mass disappears from the 30th century.
Mass from 30th century appears in 20th century.
Total mass differential: 0.
The universe has a set mass at any given point in time - the ping pong balls in the box. At any two points in time that amount of mass will be the will be the same, but they are two separate points in time. If a portion of mass, X, is taken from one point in time and moved to another point in time, the total would equal total mass plus X and the time from which the mass came would be total mass minus X. According to the law of conservation of energy, that can not happen.

Yes, yes, you keep saying the same thing over and over, and I keep replying that time is irrelevant to the universe and you keep not getting it. Got anything new to add?

What the hell do you mean time is irrelevant to the universe? I'm sorry, but conservation laws, whether its mass, energy, momentum, charge, etc., are some of the most fundamental principles of physics, especially classical physics.

Time is irrelevant?!@?!?  What about the second law of thermodynamics?!??!? If time was irrelevant to the universe, then, on the whole, a snapshot of the universe shortly after the big bang would be insdistinguishable from one near the end.

And what about the ongoing expansion of space-time?

The universe is clearly affected by the passage of time.  Time is not irrelevant to the universe at all.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum