Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#94 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
I need further explanation from someone who know's what he's talking about.

What this figure represents is(as far as I understand, correct if wrong):
->Horizontal 1/2/3 dimension(aka number 1) current
->Vertical 4th dimension(aka time or number 3)
->Horizontal 1/2/3 dimension(aka number 2) past
->3 unexplained dimension/twist in dimension I'd like explained

Light loops through a hole(please explain how they shaped one)in the 1/2/3 dimension which leads to the time dimension. Which it then again leaves in an earlier stage of our 1/2/3 dimension whereafter it returns to it's former dimension. How does this current work? Why does it return to it's former time?

#115 to #94 - camerel (06/21/2014) [-]
ok let me explain it super easy. Picture you have an ant on a piece of paper. That ant walks its little ant body to the very edge of the paper. Before it falls off, you bend the paper over and the ant jumps onto the folded part, now when you unfold the paper the ant is all the way on the other side of the paper.

This is how wormholes work, they bend the flat plane that is Space onto itself, form a tunnel between the now two planes (they are both the same plane, but one is on top of the other like in your picture).

Einstein coined the term Space-time because they are related to each other, As you move faster through space, time speeds up around you as well. With Wormholes, your jumping from one point in space to another, the same happens with time. wormholes are effectively time travel tunnels.

what they are trying to say is that they have managed to get a proton through the tunnel created by folding the Space paper over. This is actually really cool because even being able to create a wormhole in the first place is extremely difficult.

Naturally this is the internet, so don't quote me, But Ive done research on these ideas so i know more than the average person. I hope that helps.
User avatar #121 to #115 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
*don't know if time is flat. We don't know if our plane is flat either. We cannot even create something in the fourth dimension yet, or manipulate it in any way. This only makes the claim 'we have done it' more dubious.
User avatar #119 to #115 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
We don't know whether time is flat. That's a claim done without any evidence to support it. We don't know whether you can bend space. We have barely any knowledge on wormholes, you cannot state 'this is what wormholes do'. We only have very loose data to support some very dubious claims. Most top notch scientist would state 'I'm not going to make any claims about wormholes as we lack data to support anything that could be said about them'. I'm going to consider that statement useless(not meant offensive though).

You're right. Time is your speed compared to a relative object. But that does not explain how wormholes work.

The folding paper example does not make sense. Not only for one cannot state time is flat but also for we don't know what depth it would have. We can neither explain how the current works, the article does not either and there is no data to support or explain anything.

The edge of the paper is also a paradox. That would mean that if we travel away from earth with speeds not fitting within our current laws, and we would reach this 'edge' we would reverse without reversing by the power of pure void(which is a contradiction) and we would move back at earth. Which then, very dubiously, would be in a past state. And we do not know in what state for that is not explained by the picture. If we would leave the edge we would move into something we cannot explain and thus cannot accept it to exist. The whole picture this article uses to support these claims are filled with paradoxes and contradictions.

I think this is just another one of those 'WOA timetravel!!1111!' articles. The lack of data or links to the actual research already made me suspicious. Shame though. I hope as hard as you do that something like this would be true.

I'm going to mark this article as ******** and non scientific.

User avatar #123 to #119 - camerel (06/21/2014) [-]
Thank you smart man, You make the internet a better place.
User avatar #125 to #123 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
Thanks alot. I just apply the theories I have been taught to judge claims. Man I once saw a perfect video I could show you but I lost it. It was about how you have to judge scientific claims. I'll message you if I find it. You seem interested, and I'm glad you are. We need more people like you
User avatar #128 to #125 - camerel (06/21/2014) [-]
With science I'm a bit too idealistic and i tend to believe most of what I hear. I free think about science. I have done some research into astrophysics and things of that nature, but I can never make the math work for me. But please send me that video if you ever find it, i would really enjoy watching it.
User avatar #131 to #128 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
Found it!!

Baloney Detection Kit,   (Dr. Michael Shermer)
User avatar #117 to #115 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
Gonna read now, first I wanted to tell you I've studied artificial intelligence and I have wide knowledge of physics and theories we globally support nowadays. Will reply soon(probably with a wall of text)
User avatar #103 to #94 - zomaru (06/21/2014) [-]
Not sure what you are trying to say. But the flat plane is our dimension with a standard progression of time.
The cylinder is a wormhole to a previous point in the liner timeline.
So the proton is in an infinite loop of sorts.
The arrow isn't explained though.
User avatar #106 to #103 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
well?
User avatar #105 to #103 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
If the flat plane is our current dimension with standard progression of time(our plane is 1/2/3 dimension btw. The fourth dimension is time. 1=horizontal,2=vertical,3=depth,4=time,5=????)then why does the current move into the current of past time? As 1 continues into 2. Why do we need the hole to reach it? What is the hole filled with?
User avatar #114 to #105 - zomaru (06/21/2014) [-]
You are overcomplicating this.
User avatar #113 to #105 - ahmetbyrm (06/21/2014) [-]
idk what you understand by looking at this. 4th dimension is not time that doesn't make sense at all saying that makes it sound like theres no time in 3rd dimension. the top flat plane represents present and bottom plane represents past and the curve that connects both is immediate past. and the hole is a wormhole created from present to the past.
User avatar #116 to #113 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
"In modern physics, space and time are unified in a four-dimensional Minkowski continuum called spacetime" Sorry for using the word time, that's not entirely correct but I meant the same thing.

The part marked with '?' is what would be the connection between current and past according to your intepretation. That does not make sense, there is no evidence or data to support that claim. Never has there been an edge between the past and the current. That would mean you could move away from earth and at one point or anothr reach that 'end' then move back to earth without changing direction and you'd be back in the past. The past has no layers so it's not defined how much time you would travel(making the entire picture even more dubious for it's lack of explanation).

The gap inbetween those 2 is filled with something we do not know, have no evidence for. So it's only rational to state that is probably just made up. What is the inside of the plane? Why does the current flow through an artificially created hole which is not explained how it's made while the article clearly stated it has been done.

Nothing this picture visualizes makes sense, even with my physical knowledge. Not only is there no supportive data, there also are EXTREMELY many contradictions in this picture alone.
#124 to #116 - ahmetbyrm (06/21/2014) [-]
"Never has there been an edge between the past and the current. That would mean you could move away from earth and at one point or anothr reach that 'end' then move back to earth without changing direction and you'd be back in the past." idk what your trying to say here but i never said there was an edge. if i had or know how to use a 3d program i could create how time work as we know it. what ever your saying i don't understand but The hole could be filled with dark matter and no one fully understands how **** work. 4th dimension and time etc. are the type of things we cannot fully understand it because our brains cannot just imagine a 4th dimensional object.
User avatar #129 to #124 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
'Could be filled with dark matter' is a claim without evidence. That's a claim that I cannot accept without further evidence. Also dark matter is actual mass, so it would be super dangerous to use the wormhole. Why does the wormhole suck things in? It does not for there is no reversing current on the other side which is more empty than the upper side. The theory is just, so filled with paradoxes.

Plane 1 and plane 2 are connected in your picture. That makes for an edge. That edge can be passed, that should be possible within our current laws. That means you can reach the end of time and then return. Hyperspace is something with no support. It's an 'assumption'. An assumption proper scientist will not and not ever accept as there is no data to support the claims.

The picture you show me here is probably as much ******** as the one OP posted. It's not only a wrong interpretation, they're also lying about things being true which are probably not.
User avatar #133 to #129 - ahmetbyrm (06/22/2014) [-]
i think you gotta imagine it as if it was a bagel tho. also you can think of the wormhole as if it was an hour glass you get sucked in and go into another universe or time line. idk if that makes sense.
User avatar #134 to #133 - atomicman (06/22/2014) [-]
What? no it does not lol.

biggest problem with these claims are, there is no evidence to provide them thus no reason to believe any of them.
User avatar #135 to #134 - ahmetbyrm (06/22/2014) [-]
they are not claims. they are theories. Theres a million theories out there so until you can prove them wrong theres no reason to believe if they are right or wrong.
User avatar #136 to #135 - atomicman (06/22/2014) [-]
lol. I hope you're not serious saying this.
User avatar #95 to #94 - atomicman (06/21/2014) [-]
Whoops. With the question mark I mean my fourth point:
'unexplained dimension/twist in dimension I'd like explained'
 Friends (0)