Time Travel

I was sitting here with nothing to do and thought of time travel. Now, should it be allowed or not? I believe there is expirement in Californa working on time travel as we speak. Ok, now lets say its a normal day and your going about you buisness. Then outta no where someone appears(your future self) saying, lets say, run for president because you’ll cause a nuclear war or something. Would it be possible for you to change your own future outcome. Why not? Your forgetting ont thing, the future you had the exact same thing happen in there own reality. Meaning them going back in time just sealed your fate.

Could it be possible to change something written in stone?

I don’t believe it’s possible to alter the future or past just by travelling in time.

For one thing, all of these imagined time glitches don’t seem to work logically. The universe doesn’t glitch up just because we have a faulty model for what will happen if we attempt to travel back in time and kill ourselves or something similar. Nor do we really need the extravagance of many-world solipsism to escape the logical errors in our model. (and it is just an escape, not an adressing of the time travel paradoxes). Based on my experience of the solidness of reality, I believe it’s our models that will short out, not the universe.

Think of an analogy to time travel - the tangled up mess of cords behind your computer as entities in time. Two of the dimensions can stand for space, one for time. The fact that some of them loop around in crazy patterns doesn’t cause a spatial contradiction or a “space paradox”. I don’t think people looping their world-lines around in space-time will cause “time-paradoxes” for exactly the same reason.

Now we just need some plutonium, a delorian, and a flux capacitor. :evilfun: Actually, what we would need to cause any sort of backwards time travel would be some device, object or exotic matter with a negative overall energy density. Don’t ask me what this would be or how to get it. It’s just what’s required in almost every time travel scenario worked out to date, from wormholes, to warp drives, to my own crazy schemes.

why do all my threads get moved here lol

if you are going to ask questions, great… but type a paragraph or two detailing your position on the question first.

questions alone get moved here. that’s the rule.


AFAIK, those experiments are on sub-atomic level. “Upgrading” them to send something bigger is quite out of the question (let alone the required energy)

Or, as a Scientist once said: “If time travel will be available at some time in the future, why is it that noone has visited us yet?” :wink:

I once wrote a short theoretical paper for a novel I wrote (the novel contains a professor who refers to the paper in his one scene before he dies) that proposed the theory that if time travel were possible then all roughly linear notions of causality would become redundant, so it would actually make no sense to describe a point in time at which time travel became possible.

In answer to your query - all ethics, all notions of right conduct are bound in to notions of causality. How can we talk of right conduct without referring to both past experience and future possibility? I don’t think we can, or I certainly have no idea what such a conversation would look like (though I have to concede the limits of my imagination are not the same as the actual limits of possibility). Hence it makes no sense to ask the question ‘should time travel be allowed’ because if it were possible it would destroy the very ground on which that question is asked.

Are you following this?

I believe that if time travel was possible it should not be done at this point, we understand very little about the universe as a whole still, we would effectivly be puttin excess matter into the universe, which wouldn’t be there otherwise. It could cause the universe to explode or react in ways which are unimaginable.

This is asumeing the universe it only big enough to support what is already inside it.

I don’t see why ethicaly it would be wrong however, If you did change something in the past it would not change your reality, instead create a new one. But thats getting into quantum physics.

To move faster than light to another region of the universe… is to literally move to a wholly different time. Space is time… so moving in space will change your time reference. Say you were to get launched from earth, travelling faster than the speed of light to the nearest star (besides the sun) and then if you were to get blasted back… something like I think 140 years would have gone by from the time you left on earth, to the time you returned on earth… even though for you, it only felt like a couple minutes. This is because you are your own time… moving within time.

Still though… all these relative times are still advancing in one way or another… the universe can’t go backwards… so I dunno that’s where my head explodes.

Of course Time Travel is possible and allowable; I just did it.

I see time travel as behaving in one of two possible ways:

1: There are multiple timelines, all running parallel to oneanother, but at different points in time. Traveling back in time would take you to the timeline currently at the point in time you specified, and any changes made therein would affect only that timeline and not your own.

2: Traveling in time keeps you in your own timeline. However, you cannot change anything that occurs. This is because it has already happened. This is to say, if you go back in time to stop the attack on Pearl Harbor, you won’t be able to make the outcome any different than it was last time, since you (or at least the future you) went back and tried to stop it last time as well. The future could feasably be manipulated by time travel in this setup. However, whatever you did to the future would be unchangeable as well. For instance, if you went forward in time and beat yourself up, no amount of physical training could prepare you to fend your past self off in the future, since you already beat yourself.

The biggest problem with time travel is that if you think about it to long, your brain will explode from the work.

I realized years ago that time travel is pretty stupid and of course I will tell you why.

What is going on when we “see” time? Well, we are really witnessing rot in action. One can’t measure time too well by watching a stone wall in a windowless room, that is unless we were to consider the feelings of our own body as it slides into decline. However, if one was in that room with a flower it would be fairly easy to tell the passage of a few days.

Even something like smell is an example of rot. Molecules fall off of an object and go up your nose. This is why glass doesn’t have a smell, as it rots slowly.

Anyway, if one were to go back in time that would mean that all the rot that has even happened between the two time periods would have to reverse. Now how would that happen? A skin flake that blew off of you ten years ago and was eaten by a dust mite and pooped out would suddenly reform and reattach itself. Nope.

Frankly, it is the case that there is no time at all. It is always now.

However, one could travel forward in time, but it would only be their perception of it, if their rot was stopped. Somehow they would be frozen while all of us continued. To them it would seem like no time passed, but to us they would simply be a frozen person.

So, let your time travel thoughts rest.

time is just the word we use to explain movement. Without movement, there would be no such thing as time. Regardless of this, discussing theories of time travel is just an all-around fun thing to do.

I think that it’s fun to not talk about it.

Then go ahead and do it.

All im trying to say is that while having a theory on the nature of time travel is great, its only a theory and not of much use to us here in the constant forward motion of time.

nope. Conservation of mass still holds. You may find it somewhat odd, but if you want to loop your path in time, you have to also somehow create at least your quantity of mass-energy in negative mass-energy as well to make the whole thing work.

It could be looked at like this - suppose you have a spaceship that wants to travel backwards in time - it accelerates out into space, then engages the Time Travel Drive (c), just before ramming into a negative of itself and vanishing. Spacecraft + negative Spacecraft = 0. :stuck_out_tongue: Actually, it wouldn’t be zero. Something would somehow have to carry twice the entropy of the spacecraft away, but none of the mass or energy. (so this might not be entirely realistic). Did the spacecraft anhillate? Well, yes and no - the negative spacecraft that it ran into is actually the spacecraft while it is travelling backwards in time. While the spacecraft was hanging out in orbit and the crew was drinking away their leave in the bar, the negative spacecraft was travelling around the universe at reletavistic speeds to build up a time difference between the crew and the earth. Sometime in the distant past, the negative spacecraft pulled the same reversal that the forward spacecraft did, and spawned a forward in time spacecraft (and a wave of “negative entropy” travelling backwards in time at the inversion event). This positive spacecraft in the past is the ship after completing it’s backwards in time journey. Still with me?

Anyway, this is usually done with wormholes, or other weird gravitational anomalies, but the wormholes also require at least the mass of the spacecraft in “negative energy” to be usable (otherwise the spacecraft closes the wormhole while attempting to travel through :astonished: ).

This is correct. In fact, time travel forward in time is quite easy - you just have to go fast. Relativity normally only deals with objects of positive mass-energy and positive time-rates. But the order of “simultaneous events” and the rate at which they happen is dependent on your position and velocity, so it’s not as if time is this imaginary thing. We can do things with it. We just can’t go backwards yet.

Hmm, MRM1101, interesting theory. But about the negative-positive ships colliding: you said that a negative in the past would have to hit a positive of itself and that would be the future ship? Doesn’t that mean that the positive ship would be destroyed as soon as it reached the past?