-1
$\begingroup$

There is a way (somewhat handwaved) in which someone can travel through time. This is not merely the standard one dimension of time, for there are branching timelines. Whenever you travel into the past, you being in the past causes the timeline to diverge into separate timelines. They do not, however, necessarily grow further and further apart. Distinctions between temporal dimensions and dimensions of space are rather arbitrary from a non-human perspective, and gravity does not only work across three dimensions, a force that pulls mass together gradually over a period of time, but also pulls universes of separate timelines together.

The effect that this has is that a temporal force is exerted, causing properties of adjacent universes to trend towards each other. The closer the universes are to each other, physically, i.e. the less extreme the differences are, the greater the 'temporal force' that causes the timelines to converge.

Convergence does neither add nor remove energy from the universe; a force is merely something that changes one form of energy to another.

There are several theories in-universe on what will eventually happen to timelines as a whole. These are similar to those of the fate of the universe we have now. Theories include: All timelines will eventually converge, similar to 'the big crunch' theory; some timelines will diverge indefinitely, getting further and further away from each other as time goes on; eventually, all timelines will remain equidistance away from each other, and be parallel.

Any energy transferred across timelines will be gradually replaced in the form of entropy being transferred as a result of what are basically homeostasis reactions.

Are there any current unexplained mysteries of physics which would be explained by the discovery of this kind of temporal gravity?

$\endgroup$

closed as too broad by Aify, dot_Sp0T, JDługosz Mar 31 '17 at 20:09

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It's a start of a question...but I think you need to move this to the sandbox to flush out your ideas here. As the question stands, you are heavily in idea generation. For what it's worth...Gravity is a scientific mystery that we can measure but not really explain already...having a force that is similar to something similar to a mystery to explain mysteries wont go far. $\endgroup$ – Twelfth Mar 31 '17 at 19:46
  • $\begingroup$ If I'm hearing you correctly there's some mechanism of switching between timelines in a many world type cosmology. Different world-lines tend to merge together over time instead of remaining distinct. We have no way of understanding the mechanics or pondering their implications unless you explain them to us. Like Twelfth says you're asking us to do the brunt of the work. $\endgroup$ – sphennings Mar 31 '17 at 19:52
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ While @Twelfth was trying to be nice, let me be more concise: This is exactly what we call Idea Generation. You are asking an open question along the lines of "I have xyz, what cool things can I do with that?" - While it may have been a great effort to invent your cool new thing, that is only the start. We are willing and interested in helping you straighten out the bugs & wrinkles of your creations, but we're not here to create for you. As suggested you could move this to the Sandbox, but you will still first need to think of an actual question / have a problem you cannot solve. $\endgroup$ – dot_Sp0T Mar 31 '17 at 19:54
  • $\begingroup$ @Aify I have edited it. Is it still too broad? $\endgroup$ – Piomicron Apr 2 '17 at 14:24
6
$\begingroup$

You put the hard-science tag on, which is a very demanding tag. As such, there is only one valid answer:

Your universe completely and utterly defeats the entire purpose of science, explaining every empirical observation that has ever happened since the dawn of time in a way which cannot be explained by empirical experiements.

The attraction of objects as you describe will do work on the objects in our universe. This means it can add energy into our universe. This violates the fundamental assumptions of Lagrangian mechanics and basically ends all of modern science because of it.

Suddenly our world is affected by an unknown set of forces capable of doing an unknown amount of work. There might be infinite timelines all just outside of our reach, pulling us inexorably towards something which, if you could observe the state of the entire universe, would still be unpredictable.

What you describe could qualify as a mechanism for Aristotle's energia and entelechia, which means you could stop philosophical inquiry into movement 2000 years ago, having explained literally everything except where the mass in our universe came from in the first place.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ How would extra force add more energy? $\endgroup$ – Piomicron Apr 17 '17 at 9:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Piomicron If those forces get to act over a distance, that's the definition of doing work to a system. $\endgroup$ – Cort Ammon Apr 17 '17 at 14:39
  • $\begingroup$ Force being exerted neither increases nor decreases the amount of energy, but rather exchanges energy. The temporal gravitational potential energy would be a property that all mass retroactively has. Furthermore, I have never really understood work done as a concept because the distance something moves has no bearing on how much energy has been expended. For example, provided this was done in a vacuum far away from large bodies, a gun fired in space would travel incredibly far without stopping, using the same amount of energy as a gun fired on Earth into the air. $\endgroup$ – Piomicron Apr 17 '17 at 14:48
  • $\begingroup$ You should also edit the answer, as I removed the hard science tag. $\endgroup$ – Piomicron Apr 17 '17 at 14:48
  • $\begingroup$ It's the distance over which the force is applied that matters. A gun fired in space still only has the force applied for a brief distance (mostly within the barrel) before spending a long time with 0 forces on it. This is also why the amount of kinetic energy in the bullet doesn't change during the bullet's long drift through space. $\endgroup$ – Cort Ammon Apr 17 '17 at 15:05

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.