1. Originally Posted by Lehsyrus

Oh my god you truly are the dumbest fucker on this site. To create a black hole a star needs to become a supernova, which then the gravitational pull on said star outweighs the the stars density, causing it to implode. This rapid release of energy creates a singularity, a rip in space where the object in questions density is infinite. That beig said, Steven Hawkings theory on time travel relates to said black holes being so dense that it literally folds te fabric of space allowing one to leap through these separate singularities, though bounding through the fabric of space would cause you to travel forward through time as you are faster than the speed of light. Gravity is a side effect of the singularity, because the density is so great it creates an infinite gravitational pull.

Poison you seriously have no idea what you are talking about in any subject so far. Just stop trying because you're showing you can not comprehend simple science.
"Its proven to be slower/faster in different places."

its not constant... like you said stop copy and paste

2. Originally Posted by Poison

"Its proven to be slower/faster in different places."

its not constant... like you said stop copy and paste
My god, I simply can't ignore this it has never been proven to be faster or slower in different places, if it has well then you have just broken the laws of physics. Think of time, the continuing sequences of events, as an arrow it either goes backwards or forwards and it never changes.

Now look at this below.

From this we are observing that the blue local clock is going faster than the red local clock. When two observers are in relative uniform motion and uninfluenced by any gravitational mass, the point of view of each will be that the other's moving clock is ticking at a slower rate than the local clock. The faster the relative velocity, the greater the magnitude of time dilation.

For instance, two rocket ships, A and B, speeding past one another in space would experience time dilation. If they somehow had a clear view into each others' ships, each crew would see the others' clocks and movement as going too slowly. That is, inside the frame of reference of Ship A, everything is moving normally, but everything over on Ship B appears to be moving slower, and vice versa.

From a local perspective, time registered by clocks that are at rest with respect to the local frame of reference, and far from any gravitational mass, always appears to pass at the same rate. In other words, if a new ship, Ship C, travels alongside Ship A, it is "at rest" relative to ship A. From the point of view of Ship A, new Ship C's time would appear normal too.

3. Why don't you ask @Time?

4. Originally Posted by Commander X
My god, I simply can't ignore this it has never been proven to be faster or slower in different places, if it has well then you have just broken the laws of physics. Think of time, the continuing sequences of events, as an arrow it either goes backwards or forwards and it never changes.

Now look at this below.

From this we are observing that the blue local clock is going faster than the red local clock. When two observers are in relative uniform motion and uninfluenced by any gravitational mass, the point of view of each will be that the other's moving clock is ticking at a slower rate than the local clock. The faster the relative velocity, the greater the magnitude of time dilation.

For instance, two rocket ships, A and B, speeding past one another in space would experience time dilation. If they somehow had a clear view into each others' ships, each crew would see the others' clocks and movement as going too slowly. That is, inside the frame of reference of Ship A, everything is moving normally, but everything over on Ship B appears to be moving slower, and vice versa.

From a local perspective, time registered by clocks that are at rest with respect to the local frame of reference, and far from any gravitational mass, always appears to pass at the same rate. In other words, if a new ship, Ship C, travels alongside Ship A, it is "at rest" relative to ship A. From the point of view of Ship A, new Ship C's time would appear normal too.
yea its never been proven but im willing to trust top scientists on it

5. Originally Posted by Poison

"Its proven to be slower/faster in different places."

its not constant... like you said stop copy and paste
Find the site I C+P'd from, oh yeah that's right you can't. You're an immature brat that assumes they know everything, if you had a well worthwhile argument I would accept that, but your posts are small, unorganized, and just blatantly wrong. I've also been unable to find where you obtained that quote from, considering three search engines can not find it I believe you are making it up.

Stop filling threads with your bullshit, you're wrong. Everytime someone posts any material that proves as such you respond with opinionated sentence fragments, that isn't even worth calling grammar in general. You're uneducated, so stop trying to "seem" smart.

---------- Post added at 04:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:46 PM ----------

Also, yes Time IS constant. When approaching the speed of light it BECOMES relative as you are traveling faster than the visible spectrum, yet that is the VISIBLE spectrum, the speed of light is only considered the fastest ray emittance in the universe because others have not been found. The relative behavior in correlation with the speed of light and Time is Velocity / Distance, but in this case the Distance is infinite and the Velocity can surpass that of the speed of light if there is no visible spectrum to compare it to, making Time CONSTANT.

It's fucking basic science.

Page 3 of 3 First 123