"Somewhere in time" (1980) is a movie ...

[exorcist_1699]

"Somewhere in time" (1980) is a movie in which a guy tried to go back to the past and meet his lover in her young age. Yet by reasoning , as what the main actor tried in the movie by going back to the old place and concentrated his mind , in reality , can't either make people younger or allow them travel across time no matter how hard they try .

 

However, reversing aging can be viewed as , in some sense, disentangling our existence from time because time can only measured by other physical things ( e.g. a physical clock ) or in some biological framework , yet the introduction of Qi into the system makes all things blurred; the discovery of Qi and Shen does make two things possible :

 

1) We can reverse a aging process, which of course, happens in time. That is even not in a space ship traveling at a speed close to light, a biological process can be lengthened or reversed .

 

2) We can know the unknown things that happened in the past or those that are only going to happen in future. Shen is , in fact, not limited by any physical or biological barrier or framework .

Edited January 18, 2011 by exorcist_1699

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

I loved that movie!!

 

Christopher Reeves right? I think the woman was Jane Seymore but I can't quite remember.

 

I think I watched that film about 4 times at least when I was younger.

[TaoBee]

I loved that movie!!

 

Christopher Reeves right? I think the woman was Jane Seymore but I can't quite remember.

 

I think I watched that film about 4 times at least when I was younger.

 

 

Yes indeed it was Jane. And I love that movie. It fascinates me...time travel

[Bum Grasshopper]

Yes indeed it was Jane. And I love that movie. It fascinates me...time travel

 

 

Which, according to quantum physics is possible.

 

The movie incidentally was filmed on Mackinac Island, one of my favorite vacation destinations.

[surfingbudda]

That was a Great Movie!

[strawdog65]

This was the movie that brought me the Love of my Life.

It was the connection we both felt for this film, that told us

we were meant to be. I have never Loved like I Love Her.

 

We celebrate our Love with watching this film at least once

every year.

 

Love is wonderfully necessary... and the mind's potential

is unlimited.

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

 

This was the movie that brought me the Love of my Life.

It was the connection we both felt for this film, that told us

we were meant to be. I have never Loved like I Love Her.

 

 

I realize what you are hinting at strawdog65, and although we are both males and I'm not that way inclined, I'm willing to give it a shot as destiny has quite obviously willed it.

 

I shall be wearing a white suit with a pink carnation and sporting an attractive hat.

[strawdog65]

I realize what you are hinting at strawdog65, and although we are both males and I'm not that way inclined, I'm willing to give it a shot as destiny has quite obviously willed it.

 

I shall be wearing a white suit with a pink carnation and sporting an attractive hat.

 

I will make sure to throw that penny away this time!

 

I bet you will be amazingly dapper in that hat!

 

Will you be bringing some of those biscuits?

Edited January 19, 2011 by strawdog65

[TaoBee]

I will make sure to throw that penny away this time!

 

I bet you will be amazingly dapper in that hat!

 

Will you be bringing some of those biscuits?

 

Biscuit games? I'd chuck that penny too...you never know how old that biscuit is!!

[Owledge]

1) We can reverse a aging process, which of course, happens in time. That is even not in a space ship traveling at a speed close to light, a biological process can be lengthened or reversed .

That theoretical claim regarding speed of light is highly dubious, just like the whole infinite-mass thing. In my understanding, it came from an inability to interpret the facts correctly and thus trying to adapt reality to crazy flawed math, instead of fixing the logical mistake.

[Otis]

Edited January 31, 2011 by Otis

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

That theoretical claim regarding speed of light is highly dubious, just like the whole infinite-mass thing. In my understanding, it came from an inability to interpret the facts correctly and thus trying to adapt reality to crazy flawed math, instead of fixing the logical mistake.

 

It's not dubious, you just have to wrap your head around it. Plus, actually getting the variables such as traveling the speed of light, are physically unobtainable in reality. But the math and physics proves this would be the outcome.

[Owledge]

It's not dubious, you just have to wrap your head around it. Plus, actually getting the variables such as traveling the speed of light, are physically unobtainable in reality. But the math and physics proves this would be the outcome.

Math is used in physics, and when you only have the theoretical part about a thesis, and then use math, it is unverified and thus can have mathematical errors.

I mean, scientific certainties are being disproven all the time, but the game continues.

There is an interesting story that I can't find anymore, about someone who proved that light speed is not constant. Then, someone else followed by proving that it is constant, using more complexity in math, and that one prevailed.

Then there's the thing about the particle accelerator needing incresingly more energy input for decreasingly higher speeds and the statement that this proves that the mass increases. And although the very definition of "mass" has later been altered for the specific case of relativity, that seems like a mere cop-out.

The obvious thing in my opinion would be to first acknowledge the ridiculousness of a multimillion or even billion dollar machine working on a principle (electromagnetism) that is far from being understood.

If you reason that because electromagnetic fields are driven by a force flowing with near light speed (electricity), the magnetic fields might also apply their force with near lightspeed, then it starts to make perfect sense why you need more and more energy for less and less speed gain. It's the same principle as in non-relativistic, ordinary rocket propulsion.

I'm not saying this is all the case, but there are enough precedents for the hugeness or profoundness of mistakes not necessarily exclusively defining the likeliness of the mistake being revealed.

There's a lot of ego, belief systems and all that in science.

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

Math is used in physics, and when you only have the theoretical part about a thesis, and then use math, it is unverified and thus can have mathematical errors.

I mean, scientific certainties are being disproven all the time, but the game continues.

There is an interesting story that I can't find anymore, about someone who proved that light speed is not constant. Then, someone else followed by proving that it is constant, using more complexity in math, and that one prevailed.

Then there's the thing about the particle accelerator needing incresingly more energy input for decreasingly higher speeds and the statement that this proves that the mass increases. And although the very definition of "mass" has later been altered for the specific case of relativity, that seems like a mere cop-out.

The obvious thing in my opinion would be to first acknowledge the ridiculousness of a multimillion or even billion dollar machine working on a principle (electromagnetism) that is far from being understood.

If you reason that because electromagnetic fields are driven by a force flowing with near light speed (electricity), the magnetic fields might also apply their force with near lightspeed, then it starts to make perfect sense why you need more and more energy for less and less speed gain. It's the same principle as in non-relativistic, ordinary rocket propulsion.

I'm not saying this is all the case, but there are enough precedents for the hugeness or profoundness of mistakes not necessarily exclusively defining the likeliness of the mistake being revealed.

There's a lot of ego, belief systems and all that in science.

 

K.

[TaoBee]

K.

 

 

Well said