Except the speed limit of "c" is on the order of 190,000 miles per second.
Plus there is the relativistic issue of choosing the supposedly stationary frame of reference. How does the time travel machine "know" that?
Maybe it was an hour, LOL!
I didn’t realise that error. Perhaps it could be corrected with an idea of distance, rather than velocity? Heh heh!
Jimmy obviously got his units of measurement, but it is interesting to recall that we are moving at very great speeds. Trying to figure out the effects of our inertia on a time traveling particle would be present several interesting paradoxes. The universal frame of reference sorta means that Galileo was wrong, and the Catholic Church was correct.
(The Catholic Church did not teach the Earth was at the center of a shell of spheres; that was Johannes Kepler, AFTER Galileo, trying to make sense of heliocentrism. The Catholic Church’s position was NOT that the Earth was at the center of the universe, but that the universe was so vast as to approach infinity, and that therefore, any arbitrary point might be regarded as the center of the universe. By Keppler’s time, the Church was regarded as wrong, inasmuch as the Earth revolved around the Sun, rather than the other way around. (And of course, later, that the sun revolved around the Galaxy, the galaxy around teh supercluster...) But the stationary frame of reference, taken to the extreme that one cannot suppose any inertia, would argue that it is not more correct to say that the Earth revolves around the Sun than to say that the Sun revolves around the Earth, bringing us back to exactly Cardinal Nicusa’s “doctrine.”
Nicusa is the wrong name in my last post. It’s Cardinal Nicolas diCusa.