>37 years!!!
okay, explain this bullshit:
if they had the internet on that planet and were livestreaming to someone in space or earth for example, somewhere where time runs slower, would the video be super slowmo to the people in space or earth? I'm calling bullshit. nice try tho.
>>69721796
Christ that might be the stupidest thing I've ever read. I don't even care if you're being serious or not, that is just straight fucking retarded.
lmao
>>69721796
You sound exactly like a dumb nigger in my community college English class
>>69721796
I'm so fucking retarded I think your right m8
>>69721796
I dont know.
The signal would just take a lot more longer to reach them, right?
>>69721796
>being this retarded
Can't even make this shit up.
TARS set stupid to 99%.
posting in epic thread
>>69721796
You wouldn't notice the difference.
>>69721796
Live-streaming data between two distant points would mean that the video would play the rate it was recorded but streamed with delay
Hey guys I actually dont know
somebody explain the OP right NOW
>>69722147
So it would take 37 years for that livestream to get to the other side, right?
>>69722147
At least one person is polite.
>>69722173
its actually really confusing and most people just seem to be parroting each other
considering the time distortion is from a black hole and not distance, the stream would be fucked somehow since the steam isnt all traveling at the same speed
like how light is distorted and twisted by gravity
>>69722196
yes, that's what it means. It's like watching a video from 37 yes ago.
>>69721796
just in case you are serious and not trolling, there would be a delay in receiving the signal itself, not the speed of the things happening on the planet.
for example if they were livestreaming the stream would not start for 37 years, and then one day the stream would start and you would see everything that happened in normal speed, long after everyone had left the planet.
>>69722249
you are asking like three different things at once
just be really specific, where are you watching the stream
>>69722312
i didnt ask anything at all actually and im not the OP so ask him
>>69721796
The distortion in time would cause a 37 year (Give or take) delay on the stream. You'd see it as it happened in realtime, but there would be a massive delay on it. Just like how you can look up at the stars now, and see them twinkling, there's a huge delay on that. You're essentially seeing something which happened in the past, but has only just reached you.
>>69722281
>you would see everything that happened in normal speed, long after everyone had left the planet.
what? so you're saying they could be back on earth and possibly watch the stream of them being on the planet because of the delay? you've only made it worse.
>>69722406
>>69722281
>>69722147
it wouldnt play perfectly because it would be distorted by the gravity of the black hole. the same reason the planet looks all wonky, the light is being bent and screwed with by the black hole (although why everything is perfectly normal on the planet i dont know its a movie)
>all these people saying you'd get a two hour movie downloaded just in time to watch it with the returning crew
It must be a trollercoaster, people this sure of their stupidity couldn't have possibly identified three lakes to post.
>>69722476
>so you're saying they could be back on earth and possibly watch the stream of them being on the planet because of the delay? you've only made it worse.
no because they would have to travel faster than light to get back in time anyway since the message and them would be racing against each other and both be under the effects of the extreme gravity
but yes if you travel faster than light you could turn around and look at yourself. like if a star teleported to earth it could look into the sky and it would still appear to be there
>>69722538
you are one dumb redditor
>>69722489
It would only be distorted on the trip there. It would reach it's destination (Likely) completely intact. It would just take a long time to get there.
If an hour on the planet = 7 Earth years, then the beginning of a one hour stream would reach you seven years before the end of it. Therefore, you'd have to wait days just to watch a few seconds of the stream.
>>69722570
what would only be distorted? as it leaves the planet it would experience different strengths of gravity because the "front" of the cast is ahead of the "back"
gravity weakens with distance
for instance the earth is pulled unevenly by the moon and makes it ever so slightly oblong because the closest parts of the earth to the moon experiences stronger gravity than the far side
Its a "/tv/ pretends they know shit about physics" episode
>>69721796
If you left a 2016 quarter there for 20 years. Would it technically be a million year old relic and increase in value?
>>69722673
>he doesn't know half of tv posters are nasa employees
hello, you're new here?
>>69722673
well its not much worse than actual physicists publishing their fan fiction on parallel universes and time travel
>>69722638
As in, it would only be distorted and fucked up if you tried to watch it while it was on its journey. It would reach its destination just fine.
>>69722580
The only correct answer
let's try this then: if romiliy had a CSI tier satelite that lets him zoom in on the planet so close he can litearlly see in real time whatever was happening down there, would it look super slow or not? mind you this is not a stream anymore, it's just a giant telescope.
Jesus you people have no idea
The computer with them would be broadcasting bits at a slower rate equivalent to the time distortion. The stream would therefore appear at an nondistorted location in likewise proportionately distanced data blocks. It would be like trying to stream a 4K video with dialup. Not even that. It would be like watching a movie by having someone process a frame at a time from film and hand delivering that frame, one by one, frame by frame from beginning to end.
So in short in wouldn't be slowmo (you retard), it would be extremely choppy.
>>69722756
oh yeah thats what im saying. thats not what other people were saying though
>>69722856
What if you dowloaded more ram?
>>69722406
But wasn't the ship in the planet's orbit? Would it take light 37 years to travel such a short distance?
>>69722888
>RAM
You dumb nigga. You need to install some blue LEDs, that's what makes your computer faster.
>>69722888
Well they couldn't do that without deleting System32
>>69722895
Because of the relative distortion of time (And the way light travels) between the surface of the planet and the ship in orbit around it.
>>69722856
Both the idea that any information would be able to get that far, which is absurd, and the idea that it would be able to get there unaltered and be used in any usable form, which is just plain stupid, show that the stream just wouldn't work
>>69722895
It most likely took the lander years to land. People observing from the space station would see the lander slow more and more the closer to the black hole it got.
>>69722823
Yes, it would look super slow.
>>69722895
>>69723061
well the actual planet part makes no sense because they would all be turned into a stream of atoms from the gravity of the black hole
>>69723202
Well, super-massive black holes actually have gentler gravity forces than smaller ones. It's not outside the realm of science.
>>69723202
They weren't close enough for that.
What advantages to everyday life and technology would a system like this produce?
Obviously a starving crew with no concern for earth time could plant an apple tree, go fuck off on the planet for 5 mins and come back to a fully grown tree with tons of fruit.
>>69723249
>>69723261
well its close enough to distort light by that much so its obviously strong enough to fuck with people. humans would be crushed on large planets much less black holes
i think youre reaching too hard just because black science man said he liked the movie and that it was scientific
>>69723303
It's not distorting light. That was an accretion disk in the movie.
>>69722823
>>69722856
goddamnit you guys are either trolling or just got hit in the head with something
go in your backyard, point your telescope at Cygnus, look at Deneb, look at how bright it is! see how it isn't choppy, see how the "signal' isnt breaking up? What you are seeing is what Deneb looked like 2600 years ago, because the light took 2600 years to get to your eyes because Deneb is 2600 light years away.
Now your friends went on a trip to Venus. Point your super telescope at them. They are having a picknick and waving to you. See them? See how the visual isn't distorted or choppy and see how they are not moving in slow motion? The only thing is you are seeing them 2 minutes in the past, because thats how long light takes to travel from Venus to earth, 125 seconds. So even though everything looks normal and they are waving and it looks like real time maybe a venusian muslim just walked into the middle of their picnic and suicide bombed them. Maybe they are all dead now. But when you look at your telescope they will still be fine and eating sandwiches because the venus-muslim, from your point of reference, will not walk into the middle of the picnic for another 125 seconds. Even though in reality he already blew all your friends up, that signal, that information, will not reach you for another two minutes. Then, after those two minutes are up, you will see your friends get blown up.
>>69723373
Time moves slower in areas with greater gravity, though. Yes, time is literally moving slower. It's not just a distance.
>>69723355
its a shit movie that doesnt make any sense. of course it is distorting light because if it wasnt it wouldnt be distorting time
the situation youre describing means i can look down on the planet with a telescope and see what the people do with no time delay but for some reason there is a 37 year time delay on transmissions and travel?
the movie makes no sense (which is fine its just a movie) but whats not fine is people saying its scientifically legit. black science man is a fucking reddit idiot
>>69723373
>friends
>>69723426
>the situation youre describing means i can look down on the planet with a telescope and see what the people do with no time delay
What? You can't, though. I never said this. You're mixing up your posts. You would literally see the people on the planet moving slower and slower the closer they were to the black hole.
>>69723460
>You would literally see the people on the planet moving slower and slower the closer they were to the black hole.
which is a distortion of light you dingus
you said it wasnt distorting light
>>69723498
It's impossible to distort light? Are you talking about lensing?
>>69723426
To you, the people would slow down and eventually seem to stop even though they would just be moving super super slowly.
For them they would all be moving at normal speeds and everything would be normal.
That's because the flow of time that you and they are experiencing is RELATIVE for each of you and you are within different frames.
>>69723373
You're not talking about what we are talking about.
>>69723426
>The theory of relativity doesn't make sense!
>Quantum mechanics doesn't make sense!
>Observations don't make sense!
Your post doesn't make sense.
>>69723527
kek oh shit time for the back peddling. as long as you know you fucked up. next time you could just say you slipped up
so to finish what we started. the gravity would kill them
>>69723549
those different frames are caused by gravity, which in this case is so incredibly strong for the people on the planet that it would kill them. which is what this argument was about
>>69721796
What if there was a LAN cable between earth and the other planet? What would happen then?
>>69723555
It is exactly the same thing.
Why are you didn't you see your friends get blown up when it happened? Because the information didn't reach you for two minutes.
Why didn't you see whatever the fuck his name was get washed away by the giant wave after the robot saved catwoman? Because that signal took 37 years to reach you, so you didn't see it until 37 years after it happened.
>>69721796
>>69723373
>>69723426
Do you guys believe the movie is actually made up bullshit? It is based on the theory of relavtivity as thought up by Albert Einstein:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation
Basically time behaves differently depending on your speed or in the case of this movie, the effects of gravity on your location. In the case of small differences in gravity, the effect is almost unnoticable (say the diffrence between someone on the equator and someone in Norway), but it can be measured!
Realitvity fucks with time in all kinds of special ways. You should google it!
>>69723579
>the gravity would kill them
No it wouldn't.
>back peddling!
Again, no. You have zero idea what you're talking about. You just want to troll.
I find it hilarious you don't know there are black holes with planets orbiting them.
>>69723373
Looking at a star isn't broadcasting a stream dipshit. I'll dumb it down for you some. The computer broadcasting the stream from the planet is sending blocks of 1's and 0's in something called binary language. These would leave the planet in regular intervals equal to the time distortion. So, if time is moving forty times slower, the gap between the bits would be expanded that much. Each individual transmission would take the same amount of time from initial broadcast to reaching whichever receiver, but the distortion would mean that gaps normally a millisecond apart would now be, in this case, 40ms apart. If they were shining a light, the light would be constant, but they're blinking a light in set intervals, and those intervals are not equal to those on the planet and off of it. The distance is irrelevant, it's the relative gravity that causes the effect. Consider gravity relating to time as you would consider refractive objects relate to light.
Anyone who thinks time wouldn't be slower, read a god damn book. There's a book specifically about the science of Interstellar, start there. Or be a lazy fucking and read some DeGrasse-Tyson tweets about it.
>>69723654
>see the article
>bunch of text and some math equations
riiight...
>>69723654
>>69723549
i dont know why people keep linking my post. youre agreeing with me. the time difference comes from gravity. read my fucking post or something before responding to me to get upvotes or some shit
>>69723667
im aware the planets could orbit black holes, and that white holes could orbit planets. thats not what this argument is about, youre just trying to change the subject
the argument is: if gravity is strong enough to distort time by as much as is seen in the movie, it would kill them
>>69723702
In layman's terms...
It's because space and time are considered to be physical dimensions in general relativity. Gravity changes space, and hence time since they're the same thing, making particles "travel" further to complete its path.
Things slow down because there's more distance to cover and more time to pass by.
>>69723699
The distance, and the gravity, are from your perspective causing the exact same effect; they are causing a delay in the time it takes for the information about what is happening in that location to reach you.
>>69723730
>the argument is: if gravity is strong enough to distort time by as much as is seen in the movie, it would kill them
Why? You realize the gravity of this planet is distorting time right now? That satellites in orbit gain as much as a second of time a DAY because they have less gravity exerted on them?
>>69723735
now that makes sense. thank you nasa.
>>69721796
>>69723654
Also, sorry OP I forgot to directly address your question.
If you were live streaming on Planet A (with the black whole) you would stream say the 10 minutes of video (I forget how long there were on the planet in the movie) and your server would broadcast that video out of Planet A immediately a total of 10 minutes of footage.
Now lets say you are recieving that stream on a computer at Planet B. Lets ignore the distance between planet for this exercise as this would add extra complications and just focus on the time dialation.
On Planet B you would receive the packets of information that make up that 10 minute video over a 37 year period!!! Basically it would be the slowest video download over your entire life.
I hope I explained this well. Ask me more if you need to.
>>69723809
so maybe like a thousand years from now if we somehow harness gravity we would have like really fricking fast internet? if we wanted to?
>>69723801
>Why? You realize the gravity of this planet is distorting time right now?
why yes i am anon
>>69723801
>That satellites in orbit gain as much as a second of time a DAY because they have less gravity exerted on them?
now adjust the strength of gravity that that second turns into 37 years. gravity that strong would kill a human. do you finally understand now little try hard redditor? are you getting red faced and pacing circles around your room yet?
>>69723730
But you were actually describing the wrong phenomena, You said we see Deneb as it was 2600 hundred years, this is because it takes 2600 years for the light reflected off Deneb to reach us, not because of any time dialtion effects. We were not agreeing.
>>69722108
Just if there is anyone seiously wondering what's the answer it's this
>>69723852
You still have NOT explained why it would kill them.
HEAD OF A TRICK IN BUCKET
so um, what if earth already exploded and we're all dead but we can't see it yet cuz time is delayed? we're fucked arent we?
>>69723901
BODY OF A TRICK IN A BAG
>>69723848
It's been suggested you we could use realivity to time travel if worms wholes were to exist.
Basically you use some kind of time dialating effect to around one of a worm whole to be able to ship items from one end to the other, effectively from past to future or vice-versa in a limited sense. We wouldn't be able to the use worm whole to travel further back than the time we first discovered them.
>>69723898
because standing on a planet with gravity a billion times or whatever stronger than earths would kill them
is really really that hard for your tiny brain to comprehend? CRUSH = BAD
of course it also doesnt make sense that the planet is able to exist in such conditions, which is why is said its just a stupid movie full of bullshit and you shouldnt be calling it scientifically accurate
>>69723702
This is the big take away from that article
"This has been demonstrated by noting that atomic clocks at differing altitudes (and thus different gravitational potential) will eventually show different times. The effects detected in such Earth-bound experiments are extremely small, with differences being measured in nanoseconds. Demonstrating greater effects would require greater distances from the Earth and/or a larger gravitational source."
Image the effect if you had something effecting gravity as powerful as a worm whole!!!
>>69722823
Yes. That's precisely how time dilletation works
>>69723945
Gravity is not a force. Try again.
>>69723901
IM IN YO AREA
>>69723945
And yet it's possible.
>>69722714
No, because there'd be no one around anymore to buy it.
>>69723953
"worm whole" wow Im retarded, also I meant Black Hole anyway
>>69723958
Gravity is by definition a Force. Not just _a_ force but one of _THE_ fundamental forces of the universe
>>69723874
That 2600 year delay IS a time dilation effect.
If it wasn't. then with a powerful enough telescope you could see what is happening on Deneb RIGHT NOW, not 2600 years ago.
It is a time dilation effect, just a different one than one where you visit a planet with a black hole, but they occur for the same reasons.
>>69723958
still trying so hard to wipe egg off your face
>>69724011
>Gravity is by definition a Force. Not just _a_ force but one of _THE_ fundamental forces of the universe
Might want to look that one up, m8, before you continue. It was declassified as a force a while ago.
>>69722714
In a funny way, you would be the relic as everything else would have aged at an enormous rate compared to the quarter, which only aged 20 years.
>>69724029
see
>>69724025
"Common sense," just doesn't work in this situation. Most of quantum mechanics is 100% counter-intuitive. Like nothing actually having mass, but rather an emergent behavior of mass-less particles interacting. But it's a thing and mathematically and empirically demonstrated to be so.
>>69724020
Jesus Christ are you honestly this retarded or just baiting?
Let's start with the basic.
Light has a speed.
>>69723635
That delay isn't a function of distance, but of time dilation. Time for those on the planet was stretched out, so that every hour spent they spent there, seven years passed for the guy on the ship. If they left an hour earlier, they would have got back 30 years after they left. If the black guy could have watched them in real time, they would have appeared to be moving incredibly slowly.
>>69721796
hey, I remember a Stargate episode with this.
>>69724020
But time isn't behaving differently on Deneb relative to Earth, You are just seeing old light...
>>69724020
>That 2600 year delay IS a time dilation effect.
You don't understand what time dilation is do you?
The 2600 years you're talking about has simply to do with distance and speed light travels at.
Time dilation has to do with gravity creating different time "zones" where time runs differently.
Just stop talking.
If gravitation was so high, how did they take off?
>>69723974
its no possible. its literally impossible
i see how youre confused but you seem to be too stupid to work it out. if gravity was weak enough that the plant was in the condition of the movie, sure they could survive. but if gravity was strong enough to distort time to the degree that it does in the movie, they could not survive
>>69724029
>>69724054
its fucking semantics at this point. youre trying to save your argument with this dinky bullshit? gravity would CREATE the force that would kill them. happy now? you are so fucking unbelievable that im 100% convinced youre redditors
they would die. end of story
>>69724107
because its a shitty movie and nearly everything about it is wrong
black science man told redditors that it was scientific though so they will defend it to the grave
>>69724064
>>69724059
Yes, they would be moving incredibly slowly from his point view they would appear to stop and not be moving at all.
The delay from the distance when you were looking at your friends on venus is also time dialation, it's just that your friends on venus would all seem to be moving at normal speeds only you would be seeing them two minutes in the past.
>>69722112
Kek
>>69724107
>he doesn't know the strength of gravity is the inverse square of distance
The dilation of time is not the same function.
>>69724125
>its no possible. its literally impossible
Why? Because you feel it shouldn't be? kek Most of general relativity or quantum mechanics has nothing to do with common sense, or you thinking, "That's how it SHOULD BE." It is what it is. Accept it or not. Time dilation is a side effect of gravity... but is not gravity itself.
>its fucking semantics at this point.
Maybe on your part. Everyone else seems fine with it.
>Gravity would create the force!
It doesn't do that either.
>they would die. end of story
Because you say so? kek Because you lack the imagination, intelligence, and scientific understanding to get it? Not my problem. Stay ignorant though.
>inb4 you're trolling
You being mad is your own fault.
For the people who think it takes longer for the light (or electromagnetic radiation in general) to reach more distant places: You are officially retarded. Light does not "slow down". Special relativity clearly states that light always travels at a constant speed. Instead, if it has to escape from a big gravitational field, it will lose energy, thus its wavelength will become longer and longer. So radiation emitted by the team on the planet would be red-shifted to such a degree that it would be basically impossible to pick it up.
>>69724167
But that's not Dialation.
Dialation cause time to appear longer or shorter. Ie 10 hours becomes 37 years or 37 years becomes 10 hours. IN the vens example time isn't getting longer or shorter (ignoring the minor variations in gravity between earth and venus), time just always looks 2 minutes in the past and always 2 minutes. That is not a dialating effect.
>>69724102
Just think about what you are saying. Think it through.
If the people on venus or deneb are not in a different "zone" as you put it although you should really say frame then why can't you see what is happening to them right now with a strong enough telescope? Why do you see them 2600 years and 2 min in the past? Why do you see your friends who visited the water planet slow down and appear to stop moving? Because they are in different frames relative to you. They are in different frames on Deneb, on Venus and on Nolan's black hole planet. It is a different phenomenon but the same cause; a delay in information reaching you because you are in a different frame than your friends.
>>69724201
Actually, the "speed of light," isn't even about the speed of light. A photon was slowed down to passing three inches in an hour in a lab recently, experimenting with Bosen-Einstein condensates. The speed of light isn't fixed.
What the "speed of light" is actually describing is the absolute upper limit of the "rate of cause and effect" in the universe. The speed of light in a vacuum is similar to it, and often confused with it being so.
>>69724175
whoever talked about common sense? nothing i have said is based off of common sense. have you ever even been to college? this is basic shit that you can get off of the science channel or some shit.
they would be pulled apart by the gravity pulling their bodies at different speeds since gravity weakens with distance and your head is farther than your feet (assuming youre going feet first into the black hole). so your feet would be pulled off of you and so on and this would happen at the atomic level
it doesnt make sense that the planet is there (like iv repeatedly said) but if it was magically floating there then they would just be crushed on its surface as gravity tried to pull them through the planet and to the black hole
anyway i now realize that its just europoors and on i know you guys dont actually attend college so ill stop wasting my time
keep being the tryhard that you are so everyone can laugh behind your back about the one thing you think youre actually good at
>>69724300
>nothing i have said is based off of common sense.
Do you even proofread your own posts?
>>69724300
>they would be pulled apart by the gravity pulling their bodies at different speeds
Super-massive black holes have gentle gravity tidal forces, though. They're quite safe. The scientific experts advising them on the movie said it was plausible.
Who are you to say otherwise, anonymous shitposter on 4chan?
>>69724272
No you fucking retard. It's because light LITERALLY takes 2600 years to travel from Deneb to us because Deneb is 2600 light years away. This is not time dilation that's just light moving at it's regular speed in a normal time you fucking retard fuck off stop usibg the term time dilation wrong
>>69724293
The speed of light in a specific medium is affected by the density of matter. But that does not affect the speed of the photon itself. It is just scattered over and over but the speed it travels with between each atom is still the speed of light. This is of course completely unrelated to the question in the OP since the light could just travel through the atmosphere and the surrounding space to an observer so that the scattering coefficient can very well be ignored.
>>69724256
It doesn't cause time to "appear" longer or shorter, it IS longer or shorter relative to where you are.
If your friend stepped through a wormhole and appeared on Venus and you were looking at the exact spot he appeared with a magic telescope why doesn't he appear there instantly when he disappeared? Because the information of his arrival took two minutes to reach you.
If you were with the black guy in orbit and your same friend stepped through a wormhole to Nolan's water planet and you again had your magic telescope pointed at the exact spot he appeared why can't you see him appear for another 37 years? Because that information took 37 years to reach you.
The distance, the gravity, the time of the signal, it's all the same thing because space and time are the same thing.
>>69724293
The propagation of all electromagnetic radiation through a vacuum for inertial reference frames is exactly equal to the rate of causality because it is not imparted mass from the Higgs field.
> then why can't you see what is happening to them right now with a strong enough telescope?
BECAUSE IT TAKES TIME FOR THE LIGHT THAT REFLECTS OF VENUS/DENEB TO REACH US YOU FUCKTARD
Let's make this clear.
If the people on venus and the people on earth were looking at eachother it would take exactly the same amount of time for the light to reach eachother.
Do you understand what this means?
What we see has nothing to do with what actually happens. So your telescope example is completely wrong to showcase what time dilation actually is.
A practical application of time dilation is satellites that send gps signals run on slightly faster clocks than the ones on earth to compensate for the different gravity on the ground and in the atmosphere.
Light doesn't slow down by gravity so your telescope example is stupid and just proves you don't know what you're talking about.
Time dilation is a result of gravity.
Delay of vision by light is the result of the speed of light and the distance it has to travel.
Please, it's not that complicated.
>>69724272
Yeah the problem is again your example with Deneb is not time dilation.
If I spent and hour on black hole planet and then teleported over to you instantaneously on earth. You would appear 50 years older than me. If i spent and hour on Deneb and teleported over to you instantaneously on earth, we would both still be the same age.
That is why the first example is dilation and the second is not.
stargate did it well
I would just chill there for a while and see what earth would be like or if it would still exist in a million years
>>69724459
>If I spent and hour on black hole planet and then teleported over to you instantaneously on earth. You would appear 50 years older than me. If i spent and hour on Deneb and teleported over to you instantaneously on earth, we would both still be the same age
Yes. This is true. The information of your visit to Deneb would still take 2600 years to reach me though, and if I lived that long and waited then 2600 years later I would see you appear, walk around on Deneb for an hour, then disappear, because the time dilation affected the information about your trip, not your actual age. If it didn't effect the information about your trip I would have seen it all happen instantly. In the time you spent on the black hole planet 50 years passed because you were in a different frame relative to me. You came back from Deneb in an hour because it was the same gravity, but the information about your trip only reached my telescope 2600 years later, because when you visited Deneb your visit took place in a different frame relative to me.
>>69724577
The Dinosaurs exist 65 millions years ago.
The Earth is 4.5 billion years old.
One million years wouldn't even be that long relatively speaking.
>>69724674
What if we got a super high powered telescope, blasted it off into space and looked at earth would we see dinosaurs?
I get what he is trying to get at, even though it's retarded. The more important question is, whether or not there is a way to view time on both planets simultaneously.
>>69724669
I dunno man, I give up at this point.I don't know why you think seeing old light is the same as time acting differently on our bodies. Good Night.
>>69724669
Just stop you fucktard.
Take two watches, synchronize them. Teleport oneto deneb (assuming same gravity and relative speed as earth) they're still synchronized.
Bring them together after a trillion years, still synchronized. No time dilation.
Do the same with a black hole and one runs 50 times faster than the other.
Seriously fucking kill yourself and don't breed you fucktard
>>69724772
If you had a way to make that telescope move faster than light then eventually yes. You could do the same thing with a wormhole.
>>69724835
>I don't know why you think seeing old light is the same as time acting differently on our bodies
I don't. It isn't.
>>69724772
The light from the Earth at the time of the dinosaurs would be 65 million light years away, and travelling further away at the speed of light. You'd have to go fast to catch it up.
>>69724772
If we blasted it far enough, probably yes. But by the time it reaches that point there would probably no more earth anyway.
>>69724772
Yeah man, on other distant stars they are seeing our past right now. Basically if you know how many light years away a star is... that is how many years in the past they see us (and the opposite is true as well, we see them in the past).
The problem is we don't currently know how to make a rocket (or theoretically anything) go faster than light speed. So we wouldn't really be able to do your plan (for now). Sorry
btw: the closest star is Alpha Centauri is roughly 4 light years away.
>>69724906
Also just so fun thoughts to add Currently the universe is expanding and that means the galaxies are moving further and further apart and it will be harder and harder to move between them.
but some galaxies are moving as fast as we predicted. it looks like some kind of gravity is holding certain galaxies back and they are moving slower as a result. We don't know what it is, but it must be truly and utterly massive:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Attractor
The Great Attractor,I love that name.
>They were live-streaming to someone on earth
The broadband waves would travel at the speed of light, which means it would still take it somewhere between a few decades, to hundreds of millions of years to reach earth, depending on where this Gargantua actually is
>>69724850
Hmm... that's an interesting question...
Is teleportation the same as accelerated movement? Would that have relativistic effects? Can this be manipulated to go backwards in time since the acceleration would be faster than light? I wonder what the math would be like on this...
Fuck man... Goddamn... I know your hypothetical meant for zero distance traveled but now I'm thinking about teleportation with distance traveled and... fuck...
I need to sit down. Star Trek wasn't in the future! It was from the PAST!
It's no wonder /tv/ thinks movies like BvS and Interstellar are smart.
It's because the average /tv/ poster is apparently retarded as fuck.
How do you guys feel about the movie Lucy? Such a smart movie amiright?
>>69722205
I actually jumped back from my screen
>>69724772
Let's do a quick estimation:
70 000 000 years (time of dino's)
= 2 153 088 000 000 000 seconds
* 300 000 m/s (light of speed)
= 645 926 400 000 000 000 000 000 km
That's basically how far we'd have to get the telescope.
>>69724850
>Take two watches, synchronize them. Teleport oneto deneb (assuming same gravity and relative speed as earth) they're still synchronized.
>Bring them together after a trillion years, still synchronized. No time dilation.
Yes.
>Do the same with a black hole and one runs 50 times faster than the other.
It ran 50 times faster *relative to you* yes.
And if you were watching Deneb on your telescope and looked at the first watch, after it arrived there do you know what you would see? The hands of the watch on Deneb would be 2600 years behind the hands of the watch on your desk. They would only appear synchronized again once you telepoted that watch back to you.
This is a good example and maybe help you understand what I am trying to explain all along. The watch, relative to you, was teleported into a different frame. Relative to you that watch took 2600 years to arrive, even though it arrived instantly, that's why it doesn't show up on the telescope for 2600 years and that's why when you look at it the hands through the telescope they are 2600 years behind the other watch you have. When you teleport the watch back they are syncronised again.
The time dilation in the first example takes place on the watch because it existed in a different frame.
The time dilation in the second one acted upon the time the signal of the watches arrival took to reach you, because you teleported it into, and out of, a different frame relative to you.
>>69725047
What if Aliens don't visit us because they still see giant Dinosaurs and shit and think "dude let's avoid that place"
>>69725173
If they're that far away, they would be dead long before meeting us.
>>69725173
It's pretty unlikely that they would have a telescope that would see that far and in such great detail. But if they have, they probably have figured out that what they see is already long dead. If not, then they are pretty stupid and unlikely to have made a telescope that could see that far and in such great detail.
>>69724198
this.
don't ask /tv/ anything even somewhat scientific.
the average IQ here is well below 100.
>>69725173
then theyre probably smart enough to know what speed light travels.
>>69721796
literally retarded
but anyway radio signals or whatever travel at the speed of light and since speed of light in a vacuum is a constant it would be a livestream with a 37 year delay
meaning that the video would be perfectly fine with the only exception that you'd have to wait ~74 years for an answer (37 years for the message to reach the planet and another 37 years to hear the answer)
>>69725173
if i saw something like dinosaurs on another planet i'd literally beeline towards it
>>69721796
This is why sci-fi movies have to dumb-explain all the shit, cause of retards like yourself. So this is why I have to endure a baby's first introduction to the basic mechanism of worm wholes and time and space dilation during the movie or when someone says terraforming someone in the movie yells "ENGLISH PLEASE". You should consider hanging yourself and sparing our species of your retarded offspring.
>>69725416
You haven't thought it through.
Lets say they start livestreaming before the trip. They stream getting onto the rocket, they stream piloting down to the planet, they stream being on the planet, then flying back.
But relative to you that trip took 37 years. So what happened to the stream? Did it just stop when they entered the gravity of the black hole and then start up again suddenly 37 years later?
No. The signal would begin to get choppy and slow down as their time relative to you slowed down. And eventually when they were on the surface you would be getting hardly any information at all, like a single frame of video a week or something.
>>69724414
do you nerds seriously have nothing better to do
>>69722147
>>69722196
>>69722108
>>69723893
You guys aren't understanding the situation.
If you sent the signal between two planets that had similar gravity, yes it would just take a long time to get there but play normally. But if you sent the signal from a high gravity planet to a planet like earth, the time difference between the start and end of the stream would be different on each planet.
It would actually play in super fast motion.
>>69725756
>super fast motion
Slow. Super slow motion.
>>69725813
No, fast.
>>69726012
Think it through. Think about the black guy watching Catgirl and Rust stream their adventures down on water planet. Is the show going super fast or super slow. It takes 37 years to watch.
>>69723654
Dude.
Why you posting this? Plebs can't understand even fictional things like Force/medichlorians, or Pym particles/why Ant-man is able to ride ant, breath easily when he small, or become smaller than atom, or why ant isn't floating when enlarged. And they even makes YouTube videos on their misunderstanding of FICTIONAL SHIT that explains itself. So How do you expect them read and understand the real physicseven though it's more theory?
>>69726262
pym particles and midichlorians are not real, that's why those things can happen
relativity is real, that's why time dilation happens
>>69722673
There is no physics it's all made up movie logic
Like /v/ discussing portals, none of this is real
>>69721796
>>69722489
>>69725756
>>69722570
>>69722638
>>69723426
>>69723527
>>69724272
>>69723874
>>69723635
you stupid fucking niggitor
>1 light =/= information
>2 digital =/= analog
>3 blue/red shift wavelength distortion =/= amplitude distortion
gravity is a space time density.
>>69726347
Do you even read my post?
That's basically what I wrote.
>>69723373
>having friends
Now that's sci-fi!
>>69726236
You're right I got it backwards.
>>69725047
In English, doc
>>69726262
How can antman punch a guy when small but still ride an ant without squashing it?
>>69722888
RAM stands for random access memory. its a piece of hardware you can't download it. i know this because i am taking intro to computers in 8th grade this semester.
>>69726587
I have downloaded quite a few Rams, but I still prefer her sister Rom
>>69726670
I prefer to ram ur mom.
>>69722856
What the fuck do you think slowmo is? It's when you play something at a lower framerate than it was recorded in. So yes, it would be slowmo.
Actually the ones and zeros would be stretched out, and the receiver would read them as multiple inputs, resulting in garbage data
If you wrote a program that shortens them by the proper amount, you would get a regular video that downloads very slow
But if you had a telescope it would simply be slow-mo
What I want to know is how the fuck Anne Hathaway only figured out that the person sending the signal would have been there for a couple relative hours, even though they knew full well of the time dilation before landing there. Or that an entirely aquatic planet orbiting a black hole would have ungodly large tidal waves on it.
>>69726516
Because parts of his massmass=/=weight if you didn't knowshrinks inself to "pocket dimension"that is how you can shrink I.e. change distance between molecules/atoms without changing physicallyso part that shrunk isn't affected by gravityand space-time because it's quantum realm (actually even beneath it), but energy of his normal size is compressed in part of mass that remains unshrink (that's why he learned how to punch) and also he is more faster smaller he gets. The main trick of Particles is that he technically stays the same whole time, so he can breath normally, see normally (that's why Douglas said in the movie that it can change whole reality) it's just reality cheat-code, that's why he could become smaller than atom. Amount of mass stays the same, it's just diameteryou imagine it's parts as spherethat change.
When he broke floor in his first shrinking it's because he didn't controlled his force, not because he is heavy as many "scientific YouTube nerds" think.
Same but inverse goes with enlarging, he just weighs more because gravity affects more , and moves like in slow-mo/water.
>>69724428
>Light doesn't slow down by gravity
Do you know why black holes are called 'black holes'?
Also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lens
>>69726731
>>69726796
I don't know if it would technically be slow-mo, since slow-mo requires that frames be 'held' or repeated for long enough to maintain the same base framerate. I think you'd actually see a 'still frame' then blackness, then another 'still frame' etc, with no continuity in the image like with slow-motion.
All dependent on the exact degree of the time dilation, of course. Maybe the factor in this instance wouldn't be enough to produce that effect.
>>69725567
it wouldn't slow down, the delay for the stream would get longer and longer the closer the get to the planet, it would go from a few seconds delay to days to weeks to months to years
>>69727174
>Do you know why black holes are called 'black holes'?
Because they change the space-time continuum in their vicinity changing direction of the light without affecting its actual speed.
Gravity doesn't affect the speed of light. It affects the space-time geometry and hence the paths of light. However, this can have a similar effect.
Light emitted at source S to pass a massive object M that is very close on the otherwise (if M weren't there) straight path to an observer O has to "go around" M, which takes longer than following the straight path in the absence of M.
The light that reaches O from S is not emitted from S in the "straight" (in the absence of M) direction to O, but slightly off that direction, such that the "bending" of its path by the gravity of M "deflects" it onto O.
.
Of course, light is never bent, but always follows a straight path. What is bent is the space-time as compared to Euclidean space-time in the absence of distorting masses (see: geodesic).
This distortion in the fabric of space time is called gravitational lensing.
TL;DR: Gravity changes a certain field which light has to pass. If the field is significantly changed it will seem like the speed of light has slowed down while it actually hasn't.
Please get on my level.
>>69726516
There >>69727074
>>69727228
It would work the same as a highapeed camera
Time can be infinitely shortened, so it wouldnt be an issue
>>69727679
>Time can be infinitely shortened
I'm not sure that's true. But it doesn't matter. When they reach your eyes, the photons are moving at regular speed in the same gravitational conditions as normal, which means they'll 'last' only as long as a regular photon lasts. But since their distribution is (let's say) one minute's worth of photons spread out over (let's say) five years' worth of time, clearly there's going to be gaps.
>>69723598
Exactly the same thing. An extremely laggy stream that would take days to load a few seconds.
>>69727074
OK, seems pretty legit.
>>69721796
It's just a voyager episode.
Would run normal speed.
>it's a /tv/ pretends to unerstand relativity or streaming video episode
>>69728171
It's absolute fucking bullshit but if you're happy I'm happy.
hello /r/4chan
There has never been an observed black hole in nature. Its all theory to make a bunch of science bitches look smart. E m c my ass
>>69728225
Why is it bullshit?
>>69721796
Yes, it would. Measuring time length between fairly regular phasar of pulses of something like a supernova or black hole around objects of high gravity is exactly how you demonstrate gravitational effect on time.
>>69728269
Jesus fuck did this thread really get posted there. Please tell me it didn't, I fucking hate all of you
>>69728590
>so part that shrunk isn't affected by gravity and space-time because it's quantum realm (actually even beneath it), but energy of his normal size is compressed in part of mass that remains unshrink
Most of this could be replaced with "it's magic".
>>69728515
"Black hole" is simply a term for the phenomenon that we've observed with insane gravity that light can't escape from. You can call it whatever you want, but we have observed it and black hole is a pretty fitting name
>>69728662
Why?
>>69728644
>waaah reddit
overlapping userbase buddy
>>69728678
There has never been a black hole, one that we can see anywere in the universe
>>69728970
What's that swirly shit in my yard, then?
>>69728662
Sup.
>>69728970
How does it feel to be retarded?
>>69728795
Fuck off you faggot. Redditors are shitposting cuckold scum.
>>69724414
>delay is the same as dilation
I am convinced this board is made up mostly of high school dropouts.
>>69729003
>>69729280
not him, but he's slightly correct
we can detect black holes but we can't see them
all we've got are artist renditions of them
>>69729500
No, what he's saying is some crackpot bullshit that black holes don't exist, which is untrue. There are huge gravity wells out there that suck in light and everything; yes, we can't "see" them in the traditional sense, but we can measure all kinds of shit like the radiation they leak and so on. They do exist.
>>69728662
Guys. Can you just chill out? Please be nice.
Jesus is this thread still up?
>>69721796
this is literally nigger-tier retardation
>>69729708
I didn't meant to "answer" to him >>69728662
Sorry.
>>69728736
>the part that's shrunk enters the "quantum realm"
The 'shrinking' has already been identified as reducing the distance between atoms/subatomic particles. This takes care of volume, but not mass. The mass just 'goes somewhere' that's like, a bit quantum-y or something, so it disappears.
>but energy of his normal size is compressed in part of mass that remains unshrink
This part is almost completely incoherent, but making some charitable assumptions about what's meant, it says that the inertial mass of unshrunk ant-man is retained by the 'parts' of ant-man's mass that remain 'unshrunk'. It's not offering any reason why that's the case, it's just saying, That happens, yo.
And it doesn't address why ant-man is super-strong when he's large. No amount of quantum woo can rescue that from basically being magic.
I really don't care, I mean the same goes for Superman and who gives a fuck about that. Capeshit is wall-to-wall people with magic powers fighting 'evil', there's no point worrying about 'how' this or that happens.
>>69729909
Anon asked why I answered why. That's all.
>>69723928
>whole
GUYS
HOL UP GUYS
WHAT IF YOU
AND NOW HEAR ME OUT
What if you had a reaaaally long stick?
What if they have it aimed down from the Interstellar station at the planet, and it would be barely touching the ground.
If they pushed it down, would it take them 37 for the stick to touch the ground? We are talking like 10 centimeters here guys.
It's a tough stick too
The only good thing about this movie is the soundtrack and pretty pictures
>>69731703
>If they pushed it down, would it take them 37 for the stick to touch the ground?
74, I would think. 37 for the information to propagate down and another 37 for the reaction to propagate back up.
>>69727364
Are you stupid.
Light travels at 2.99792458 x 10^8 m/s in a vacuum only.
Light slows down in a medium e.g. an atmosphere/water/any solvent you can think of.
That's why light refracts.
http://www.rpi.edu/dept/phys/Dept2/APPhys1/optics/optics/node4.html
>>69721796
time is a concept that we created. Time in space and in reality is different then how we accept and perceive it.
>>69727364
>Gravity doesn't affect the speed of light.
This is patently untrue. One of the only ways we can tell that gravity distorts time is its effect on light's speed.
>>69734213
Time is simply a measure of change. It doesn't exist in the proper sense. Only by observation of change can one even define time.
>>69735200
>Time is simply a measure of change. It doesn't exist in the proper sense.
What is the 'proper sense'?
>>69721796
You simply wouldn'tbe watching in real time. You'd be watching stuff that has already happened because it would take too long for the signal to reach earth.
You know those 5 second delays TV networks do when they're showing the Oscars or whatever? Think of that but on a greater scale
>>69735355
I don't think this is true.
The time dilation is because of the intensity of the gravitational field, right? And that intensity diminishes the further away from the source you get.
So what we have is each 'bit' of information (photon, digital packet, whatever) starting out very slowly and gradually increasing in speed as it gets further away from the source of the gravity.
So, imagine a long sequence of marbles being sent down a slide. If the incline of the slide is constant, then the marbles will travel in a pack and will all arrive at the same time. But if there's a gradual increase in the incline, the marbles will separate over the course of the slope. Gaps between the marbles will develop.
So it won't just be a normal picture taking ages to arrive, or a slow-motion picture, it'll be garbled nonsense (if a digital stream) and intermittent 'flashes' of image if analogue.
>>69722406
Exactly.
Look up and look at the sun. That sun that were both looking at at the same time isn't the sun that exists in this precise moment. It's a sun that existed around 8 minutes ago. That's because at the speed of light, the light emmited from the sin takes 8 minutes to reach the earth. So if the sun were to blow up we wouldn't know until 8 minutes later.
That's how astronomers can figure out how old the stars are.
To put it simply, every time you look at the skies at night, you're looking at the past. You're basically time traveling every time you look up at the night sky.
>mfw I used this once to get a girl superwet
>>69735256
It's a wholly perceived concept, the past and future don't exist in any sense. You can't "travel to the past" unless you physically put every atom back to where it was before, which due to entropic losses is simply impossible. The universe doesn't keep track of where stuff was, it doesn't know where it will be etc. Time dilation as a concept is simply a measurable effect gravity as a natural phenomenon has on matter, speeding up or slowing down the speed at which things occur relative to other places with more or less gravitational dilation.
The cosmos is just s bunch of shit floating around. It's not that time passes more or less quickly, or that time is lost or gained, since time doesn't exist. The speed of the events one might use to measure the passage of time change.
Does that make sense?
>>69735355
This isn't true. If you had a watch that sent out a radio blip every second was put inside the gravitational field of a neutron star, for instance, you would receive the blips much slower than once a second.
>>69735613
>Time dilation as a concept is simply a measurable effect gravity as a natural phenomenon has on matter, speeding up or slowing down the speed at which things occur relative to other places with more or less gravitational dilation.
Yeah, but "the speed at which things occur" conceptually incorporates the reality of time. It's like saying "Time doesn't exist, it's just that stuff takes time to happen". If you're saying that time has no physical aspect, then I dunno, I reckon it's a property of space and whatnot.
I mean, I could easily say that eg "Length" doesn't exist, and in a sense that's correct, since there is no thing 'length' that I can point to, only measures of length. Seems like the same thing.
>>69735666
Same thing goes for traveling quickly, say at the speed of light. Even traveling in an equidistant circle around a receiver (taking variable distance out of the equation) the watch's blips would take far longer than a second of Earth time, and slower still the closer it got to the speed of light.
In a very real sense, the watch feels as though much less time has elapsed if it were to return to you, and it never gets all the extra time you spent on earth back. It's as if it had been frozen and travelled into the future.
>>69735666
>sound is the same as light
Retard
>>69735857
>radio waves are 'sound'
>>69735760
>time has no physical aspect
This is true in the sense that an object doesn't know how old it is, or that time is even happening at all until it is affected by some outside force which causes it to change (heating, cooling, collision, chemical reaction, etc.).
>property of space
In the sense that change is measurable and fairly uniform in a closed system (our planet, for example), you could say that. But no one is keeping track of that passage except us.
Position (the difference of which gives length), is also a measurable physical property, and also one that is relative. The difference is that an object unaffected by any forces will remain in its position (relatively speaking to another such object) forever, whereas time is so sinister as to pass even when nothing happens.
>>69735857
heres your (You)
>>69735857
If you disregard dampening losses and loss of medium, the same is true of sound.
