Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
Here's a thing....what if the whole notion of causality that physicists have been mulling over for years is a load of poppycock. Meaning, their equations which say if you do travel faster than light, then you're able to arrive before you leave, are wrong. No if's or buts. The whole idea of effect preceding cause in this fashion has never, and I mean never, been verified via any experiment. It is all theory and speculation which has come from them accepting their calculations as gospel. So despite their complete and utter confidence in what they believe is the case, they have no empirical evidence to back themselves up!!!!. It doesn't matter what is said in debate for the veracity of their science, if you go by the strict covenants of the scientific method, until you have done the experiments to test the idea and have either verified or rejected it, then it has no currency or weight to which it can pin itself. As Craig would've so elegantly put it...."it's not real"....whatever real actually is.
.
|
What if there is an other kind of time that runs in Universe. Such a time would not be affected by motion, acceleration gravity in other words it would be non relativistic time. Maximum possible speed would be then instantness(from the point of view relativistic time). Causality or sequentiality would be still preserved, but there would not be any relativistic time interval between the action and reaction. Couple possible pointers to existence of non relativistic time are Big Bang ( effect without cause and even without possible cause as time did not existed until BB) and quantum entanglement.
Can you imagine quantum entanglement telescope that would let you see where the stars and galaxies accentually are right now,
