Originally posted by AThousandYoungA good idea.
They'd have to pay you up front and allow you to invest it in the care of your financial representatives. The chance that the same company will exist and have vast amounts of money to pay you with when you get back are low.
So a big lump of money when the contract is signed - what to do with it? Put them in a bank? Buy a stock portfolio? Buy gold and diamnds? Or what? How am I to know 100 years in the future how the money will grow?
Originally posted by FabianFnasThe same problems exist for all investors. However, since you have 100 years you have the advantage of being able to play it safe. If you diversify your investments and don't keep trying to play the market, you should do well.
A good idea.
So a big lump of money when the contract is signed - what to do with it? Put them in a bank? Buy a stock portfolio? Buy gold and diamnds? Or what? How am I to know 100 years in the future how the money will grow?
Originally posted by twhiteheadWell, the problem is that I have to do the investments once, and I cannot do any corrections for the next 100 years, earth time. However, 10 years later, ship time, I can see if I made it right or not. If I'm filthy rich, or if I have to eat rats for the rest of my days.
The same problems exist for all investors. However, since you have 100 years you have the advantage of being able to play it safe. If you diversify your investments and don't keep trying to play the market, you should do well.
Perhaps I can pay someone during the years to manage my money during my 100 years, earth time, absence. But who can trust someone during 100 years?
Originally posted by FabianFnasAlmost all investors pay someone to manage their money for them.
Well, the problem is that I have to do the investments once, and I cannot do any corrections for the next 100 years, earth time. However, 10 years later, ship time, I can see if I made it right or not. If I'm filthy rich, or if I have to eat rats for the rest of my days.
Perhaps I can pay someone during the years to manage my money during my 100 years, earth time, absence. But who can trust someone during 100 years?
As I said, you should also diversify ie invest in more than one place so that if one doesn't work out, the others will.
You should probably be more concerned about whether or not world order still exists etc. If for example there is a world war, you may find that no investments are still honored, or runaway inflation has eliminated them all. Of course property ownership might avoid some of that, but that too may not be honored.
Originally posted by twhiteheadRight, who can predict the future from 100 years from now. Perhaps it's best to buy gold for some, diamonds for some, and avoid everything that depends on stable economics, because no stability can be certain.
Almost all investors pay someone to manage their money for them.
As I said, you should also diversify ie invest in more than one place so that if one doesn't work out, the others will.
You should probably be more concerned about whether or not world order still exists etc. If for example there is a world war, you may find that no investments are still h ...[text shortened]... em all. Of course property ownership might avoid some of that, but that too may not be honored.
But who knows if gold is valueble in 100 years, earth time? Big diamonds maybe can be produced artificially, no digging necessary.
In this scenario - 100 years earth time, 10 years ship time, and a return tour - how far can I go? Where is the target location for such a trip?
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasYou would have to be travelling at over 95% of the speed of light for much of the trip, so you would be able to visit a star up to about 40 light years away.
In this scenario - 100 years earth time, 10 years ship time, and a return tour - how far can I go? Where is the target location for such a trip?
There are over 65 stars within 16 light years, all these and more would be within reach:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_stars
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasHand it to your financial representatives, preferably family with knowledge of finance.
A good idea.
So a big lump of money when the contract is signed - what to do with it? Put them in a bank? Buy a stock portfolio? Buy gold and diamnds? Or what? How am I to know 100 years in the future how the money will grow?
Your family would get a healthy salary...they'd be employed for life!
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIt boils down to this, I can for example look at a CPU under normal useage, I can
[b]The changes you experience while moving really fast are not changes in time, again you may be undergoing changes that does not make time change, the moment remains the same.
This is just a disagreement about which definitions are correct. I don't think you disagree with the basic concept.
The calculations which allow us to precisely predict this phenomenon use a variable called "time". In that sense it is "time changing".[/b]
subject a CPU under conditions that would "age it" so that it appears to have been
used for several years. Those conditions are not time being altered, but the results
will nonetheless make the CPU appear to be much older. This is my argument, it is
not time that is changing, but the material/people/whatever that are under going
some stress that alters them. We can map this out so that we can predict the
outcome and use it to our advantage, but I still do not think the moments have
been touched so that we can say something left our time and came back into it.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoung[/i]This is where we disagree, I do not at all believe someone would leave our moment
[i]Subjective time that like people's different perspectives? I would suggest that if a person appeared to age a year that does not mean that time changed around them, only that they themselves under went some changes that caused them to
appear to age them, again this is different than if time had changed and they did
get a year older in the norma ged one year due to relativistic effects except that old people tend to be less healthy.
of time and return to it a full year later. It is good Sci Fi but I don't think it is a
claim that fits reality. If you were to pop out our time line, which is to say leave
the now, and shift into a different frequency of time we would not be in the same
place. I do accept that someone can under go changes that would give them the
appearance of a year aged, that is not the same thing as jumping out of time, out
of our moment and reapearing in it later. We experience things in the now, what
is before or after are not something we interact with.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayKelly - listen to me - nothing "pops out" of a timeline!
[/i]This is where we disagree, I do not at all believe someone would leave our moment
of time and return to it a full year later. It is good Sci Fi but I don't think it is a
claim that fits reality. If you were to pop out our time line, which is to say leave
the now, and shift into a different frequency of time we would not be in the same
place. I do ac ...[text shortened]... perience things in the now, what
is before or after are not something we interact with.
Kelly
Here, envision it like this.
You have two VCRs playing two movies. You can put one VCR on fast forward and then press play later and the "story will have aged" - that is, been playing on the screen for more of the movie in the same amount of time.
That's what moving fast does, but in reverse. If you move fast, you go into slow motion. A VCR tape in slow motion does not stop showing you an image at any moment, but the tape will take longer to finish than in the case of a VCR tape on fast forward.
4 edits
Or, perhaps consider it like this:
As an electrical engineer or whatever it is you do, you are I am sure aware that temperature affects current as well as the rates of chemical reactions (right?).
EDIT - Removed factual error
Now, a battery or gasoline generator transforms chemical energy to electrical energy. If you have two identical setups, say power source connected to some device that will measure current by using it to power some indicator like a light which might vary in brightness proportionally to current, or perhaps a fan that spins at a speed proportional to the current, whatever.
If you have these two setups in environments with vastly different temperatures, they will go through their chemical potential energy at different rates right? But this will occur in the same time.
Going at high speed slows all of your metabolic processes, etc down so you shift into slow motion (or the outside shifts into fast forward, however you want to look at it). Your "fan" spins more slowly, but your "battery" will last longer.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThere are no chemical reactions involved in superconductivity. It's a quantum effect.
Or, perhaps consider it like this:
As an electrical engineer or whatever it is you do, you are I am sure aware that temperature affects current as well as the rates of chemical reactions (right?). This is why superconductors must be kept at low, low temperatures.
Now, a battery or gasoline generator transforms chemical energy to electrical ener ...[text shortened]... you want to look at it). Your "fan" spins more slowly, but your "battery" will last longer.
2 edits
Originally posted by KazetNagorraOh. Well regular conductivity then.
There are no chemical reactions involved in superconductivity. It's a quantum effect.
Conductivity measurements are temperature dependent. The degree to which temperature affects conductivity varies
http://www.coleparmer.co.uk/techinfo/print.asp?htmlfile=Conductivity.htm&ID=78#anchor0
Electrical conductivity is strongly dependent on temperature.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Electrical_conductivity
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWe view time differently no doubt.
Kelly - listen to me - nothing "pops out" of a timeline!
Here, envision it like this.
You have two VCRs playing two movies. You can put one VCR on fast forward and then press play later and the "story will have aged" - that is, been playing on the screen for more of the movie in the same amount of time.
That's what moving fast does, but in r ...[text shortened]... nt, but the tape will take longer to finish than in the case of a VCR tape on fast forward.
Kelly