# A time door

A time door

Lets say you have invented a quantum travel device, one which can potentially travel to any location in time and space. Something like a Tardis then.

Let’s say you wanted to travel to any given star, you observe it, set coordinates and it wont be there when you arrive at said coordinates due to the time differential. That is to say, the light you are observing is old. You would have to calculate the trajectory of the star, + its speed, + the length of time the light has taken to arrive at our location now.

If we visualize this machine and simplify it into a ‘time-door’, we could say that potentially you can take one step forwards and be in another world anywhere in the universe. However, if we factor in the analogy of the location of the star, where things were located in past times - like the light origins purport them to be., those locations would always be a step away. In other words because all the old locations of the stars are no longer there, the only steps in time and locational space, would be in the now. All steps would be converse to relativity, be in theirs and our now. We are simply taking one step to anywhere, and the only places that exist are in an universal now moving forwards in time.

If the clockwork if the above machine is correct, then when we make an observation, that act is taking the third party perspective. And that is where relativity comes in. Thing is both of these things are occurring, there must - I state, exist both the single step to anywhere, and an ability to bend that up to approximately the speed of light.

However the machine only manifests a door to anywhere…?

_

@ Amorphos - Ok I need some help on this. I need you to answer my questions as YOU see fit and in turn if I am still confused I will counter with a question. Are you OK with that?

Perplexing. Maybe I am just getting too old to comprehend it by myself.

Why is it that we only remember the past and not the future? Or is it that we are only remembering the present?

The past and the future come together to meet at the present. Can you see how this includes at least one more dimension?

So it seems our memory can play these types of tricks - if they are indeed tricks. But our eyes, ears et cetera are a step ahead of us.

Curious. The speed of light to our eyes? And we collapse the wave.

Are we bending the step?

So it is not space/time?

Hi sry for late reply. The future doesn’t exist yet imho, but I agree we only remember the present, because when we call up a memory it is always experienced in the now.

What other dimension do you mean? I am seeing a ‘now’ whereby if you could travel to anywhere instantly, it would be in theirs and our concurrent present.

An observation is taking the third party ~ you are looking at something [works better with particles]. So that is not the same as the thing as it is when in the first person perspective.

That’s the tricky part. I guess that motion puts an object into the third party, then the faster you go the greater that line becomes. I doesn’t make any sense when you could potentially get to any now location with the machine instantly, and then relativity wouldn’t matter. Perhaps its a bit like a chess board [the present], with all the present times are squares on the board, and motion is like flying over the board. - still doesn’t make sense to me though, I would imagine that there must be limits to how much relativity can pull us away from the present. With quantum travel you could move to locations in the now, along side a ship traveling through normal space-time, so mathematically it doesn’t make any sense that you could travel vast distances in time, compared to the normal flow of time [like with light-speed spaceship scenarios]. you could in theory step one at a time in the qm device and keep up with the ship, which must mean it can’t be more than a short moment ahead in time. ?

_

Amorphos

The future does not exist yet. I know what you mean.

I often consider this - space/time - where does old time go when the future arrives?

Time has displacement - I say you can not put something where something already exists - yet the memory of the previous time remains - so there is a past displacement of some sort and the future itself must displace something.

I am not trying to get off topic - but there is something to consider in all of this.

I am happy to clear up what I mean if you need me to.

I brought this issue up to James S Saint today that observant people can catch the displacements now knowing where they go is another story, it seems like content is lost. It’s curious that I’ve had dreams of my future that have come true, literal nighttime dreams that I remember that actually play out down the road, so what does that say about the future? Are we sure it hasn’t already happened?

I’m probably getting off topic too, it’s my forte.

Dimensionality - this is not going to be immediately clear - there is nothing I can do about that.

It makes me wonder all the time - where do they go? It is definitely another story - I guess it is that story that keeps us asking. The content is lost to us I guess - lost from the mind and leaving an imprint(displacement(memory maybe)).

Exactly - if we remember the past then we can have a little certainty that it happened but . . . if we don’t remember the future then how can we have any certainty that it didn’t happen.

Maybe we are getting a little off topic but . . .

I say to Amorphos:

The past and the future come together to meet at the present. Can you see how this includes at least one more dimension?

Anywhere must include anytime too . . . space/time.

Excluding relativity for the moment . . .

Which would include anytime. Future already existing . . .

You don’t have to see the actual dimension to know is is there - because the data is sparse enough to determine, that for us then, it is hinting at being there - Occam’s razor in a sense. I would suggest that the dimension is the present. Time itself must have three dimensions like space - telling us of a 6D space/time.

If space is governed by a 4D principle then time must also be governed by a 4D principle and time’s principle maybe the present. Is space’s principle time?

Back on topic:

Yes . . . this is the next thing I will ponder.

For now I am thinking that relativity is a partial illusion . . .

absolutely. its very nature concerns an partiality to objects, so it itself may be a partial effect. laws are composed ad hoc, the same as objects are!