Re: OT: Helen Keller & Whorf-Sapir
| From: | Philippe Caquant <herodote92@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Monday, August 16, 2004, 20:15 |
|---|
--- william drewery <will65610@...> wrote:
> Perhaps you can comment on something for me. I'm
> skeptical of the idea of time-travel via relativity
> theory. Einstein basically said that if one could
> move
> faster than light (ignoring the problems with that
> for
> now) then one would catch up with light-cones that
> had
> already escaped one's reference frame. But is this
> time-travel? Because the reflected light signals and
> what-not are NOT the object(s) which reflected them.
> It seems to me that any nonpositivist reading of the
> theory concludes that this sort of "time-travel"
> would
> be traveling to a world of ghost, where our observer
> would be interacting with mere holograms. But the
> idea
> is still quite pervassive in modern science, so
> maybe
> I'm missing something.
> Travis
I understood that nothing material can travel faster
than light. Material means belonging to our usual 3+1
dimension universe. But if you use another dimension,
there isn't the faintest problem. If I want to travel
from Paris to Australia, I need to travel about 20,000
km, on a half circle. But if there were a tunnel
through the centre of the Earth, it would be much less
(about 13,000 km I guess). So traveling faster than
light just needs digging the right tunnel, or using it
if it exists already.
=====
Philippe Caquant
"High thoughts must have high language." (Aristophanes, Frogs)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Replies