Don't read this blog, it's about science and not investing.
Just some random thoughts about time and space, but mostly about time.
Those of you not into physics should not read further, but those of you that are might help me with a couple of paradoxes that I've been pondering.
1) If I'm on a ship travelling as close as possible to the speed of light and I fire a gun, even though the bullet that I fire should add it's speed to the ship's speed, physics dictate that the bullet cannot exceed the speed of light and therefore it slows the bullet down in the overall universe. My observation of the bullet on the ship makes the bullet look like it's behaving normally. An outside observer looking at my ship and myself, if they can see me, see both my ship and myself squashed like an accordion. OK, so far, I think everyone that studies Physics agrees, but here come the questions...
a) If my ship appears compacted from the outside, then the space inside the ship should also appear compacted from the outside. The bullet should appear to have traveled a much shorter distance to the outside observer. In fact, it should look like the bullet just dropped out of the gun like an Elmer Fudd cartoon. Inside the ship, the forces controlling the gun behave as I would expect them to, but outside, the forces seem to change. In the above case, we already know that the speed of my ship is slowing down time, but at least to an outside observer, it would also appear to collapse space and at least observationally alter every other force that we can think of.
Question 1) The gravity of an object has been known for a long time to distort both space and time. Einstein has made sure to show that the motion of an object distorts time, but as far as I know, no-one has put forth that the motion of an object distorts space. In the above scenario to the outside observer, we distorted space, but I don't notice anything while I'm on the ship, so the known laws of physics appear unbroken to me. Since all science is based on observation, can it be that our observations of every force would change if we had a different mass and were moving at a different speed?
Question 2) If the answer to question 1 is yes, then there has to be an equilibrium. There has to be an average mass and speed for standard observation. Would the cosmological constant come into play here?
Question 3) What are we really doing in science? We are just observing things within the mass of our observation point and the speed of our travel. We do know that at the sub atomic level, we are observing things that are massless and move faster than light. Both of these things may be why we don't have a full grasp at the quantum level.
2) Time travel is possible.
a) If travelling back to the past is at all possible, than given enough time, it would happen. So if it is possible, either humanity ended before we could figure it out, or nobody found any point in history interesting enough to visit to this point, or we visited incognito to avoid altering history. I think that human nature would have made us bold enough to try to alter history, and even if we didn't want to, humans make mistakes. Also, there is the problem of radioactive feedback. If I open a wormhole to the past, it opens to a point in time. As long as that wormhole remains open, everything that enters, travels to that same point in time including all radiation. As long as that wormhole stays open, everything arrives at the same point in time. Imagine just the solar radiation of a wormhole open for a week hitting the same spot in the same split second in time.
b) If travelling to the future was possible, the future would have to exist before you left. Technically, you are just moving faster than observable time, but if you think about it, your movements effect time itself. Even in the void of space, you will displace particles that can alter the future. This would cause fundamental laws of physics to break down before an observer in real time could understand or react. If you actually look at time as a destination, you would have to have a place to go before you could create the wormhole to get there. This creates a few problems. Namely choice and conscious thought. The future can't be linear if you have choices and a brain. The destination to dial in for the wormhole can only take you to one point in time and space and if it took you 10 seconds to get there, a choice made by someone 3 seconds after you left could make it not exist at all and I'm not sure if you would exist at the end of the trip. So if you could travel to the future, all possibilities would have to exist at the same time to make it possible. If all possibilities do exist at the same time, travel to the future is possible, but in order for that to happen, you would need an infinite number of dimensions and string theory would be obliterated
Just some stuff bouncing around in my head. I would appreciate anyone that can provide shade to my blinding stupidity.