Time travels

Some scientists think time travels are possible, and that they could be performed with some methods in the future.

If a time travel is performed in the past, do you think humans experience their life again? (To be more concrete; do you think they are conscious again, or that their life just occur again, with no awareness of it?)
Any viewpoints?

the laws of thermodynamics prevent any sort of time travel into the past. time is asymmetrical… it only goes in one direction.

time travel into the future is, as far as most folks these days are concerned, definitely possible.

That may not be true at the subatomic level.

I’m time travelling into the future right now. Woah it’s crazy.

Coulden’t (fast) time travel into the future be achieved by travelling spacially at faster than light speeds away from earth, then returning to earth. Many years will have pasted on earth, but a short amount of time will have passed for the traveller. Or am I mistaken?

no, you’re absolutely right. (except about the “faster than the speed of light” thing. that’s not possible, according to Mr. Einstein’s theories.) “time travel into the future” is a phenomenon (a result of Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, that goes by the name “time dilation”, and it has been proven fairly rigorously! check out: http://aci.mta.ca/Courses/Physics/4701/EText/TimeDilation.html
its interesting to note that this can only happen in one direction. time, as i said above, is unidirectional… or if you like, “asymmetrical”. you can’t go back into the past. this is a consequence of the laws of thermodynamics, which we can’t say too much more about (philosophically, anyway). that’s just the way things happen to work in our universe.

the same phenomenon can also be described in (what i think are) more interesting terms. certainly its an exaggeration of the concept of time dilation. this is known as the TWIN PARADOX! check out: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/twin.html

i am entirely unfamiliar with that idea. which doesn’t mean anything at all. how might that not be true? where can i read about it? references please!


Try Google, that’s what’s called “common knowledge”…

fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/7496265.htm ← less than a minute of searching.


Next time, do your own homework. :laughing: :unamused: :laughing:

no need to be rude… if you hadn’t only provided me with a one-liner, i wouldn’t have had to ask for more information. i was at work, i couldn’t do the research. this bit of “common knowledge” comes to mind:

i’m pretty sure your first post in that thread yields the answers “not really” and “no”.

Well, I disagree. I think the fact that three posts resulted from it doesn’t help your case.

And I found what you said in response earlier to be rude. Oh friggin well. :unamused:

I am the source. I read more shit than I can keep track of, I don’t know where I originally read it. If you do not want to believe my word, that’s fine, prove me wrong by doing your OWN searches.

uhhh yeah i read quite a bit myself…about lots of different subjects…don’t we all? usually i don’t go around talking about it as not to appear starved for attention and praise.

the fact that you “read more shit than you can keep track of” says nothing about what you read OR the validity and/or credibility of what you read. this seems too obvious to even say, but the fact that you can’t keep track of what you read (as to provide references) makes you even less of a credible source of information.

so no, i don’t trust what you say, especially if you present it in one-liner form. no one should trust anything anyone says, unless they’re given adequate reason to do so. not until i saw the articles did i have any support for your original claim.

can you guess what fallacy i’m thinking of…?

the whole thing is here, if you love reading as much as rafajafar does: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html

That’s fine, but like I said, it is the responsibility of the reader to discern truth from fiction, not the author. If you don’t believe me, or you think I said something wrong, look it up.

I think I’ve proven myself to be a rather credible source on subjects such as though so far, though, don’t you?

ultimately yeah, the reader should do the work to figure out whether they think a claim is true or not. its just messed up to claim that you’re “the source” for information and that people should automatically trust you because you read a lot. that’s where the fallacy comes in.

as far as the actual content of those articles is concerned, it seems to me that those claims are, as of yet, more or less unsubstantiated. they don’t have any serious experimental evidence to back them up, so they’re speculation at best. they may eventually be worked out and rigorously proven, but for now, they have to be relegated to the realm of speculation. the theory is nice though.

time travel into the future is still the only form of time travel that is (currently) fully endorsed by (and proven by) science, in theory and experiment, for anyone who cares about such things.

oops… that was me, DarkMagus.

It’s not “messed up”. I am the source, I pulled that personal knowledge out of my head. You dont want to go down this slippery slope, dude. You’ll wind up discrediting yourself for everything you say from here on out unless there’s a book reference.

As for the experiments, there’s experiments that have been conducted showing that positron production is actually the result of sending electrons back in time.

Look it up! grins

in a scientific discussion raf, you have to refer to your sources as much as possible…
it could as well be a total loon who wrote that…

let’s see…
here’s something that applies to it

nothing is ever sure in science… keep it in mind… one experiment doesn’t prove a theory

but it is true that relativity doesn’t keep us from time travelling if we’d go faster than the speed of light, i’d give you a nice diagram with that, but this board doesn’t support drawing, lol

according to einstein you can’t get to the speed of light, because you’d need an infinite ammount of energy for it


or even better

google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& … c+positron

This information is littered all over the net, man… asking me to quote my sources is like asking me to quote Democritus when one says, “Atoms exist”. Just look it up…

scienceforums.net/forums/sho … ge=1&pp=20

These guys are science nerds and they’re not as picky about sources as you guys are… yesh. Yall callin’ me a liar now?

excellent… ok, you rule the house… heh…
so what about time travel then?

hmm, well, those science nerds are just referring to common knowledge about relativity theory,
an experiment can barely called common knowledge, now can it? there’s millions of experiments, you can’t know em all…

thank you, willem, for clearing up that basic bit of knowledge.

and rafa, someone needs to call you out on your bullshit. that would be me, in this case. though i’ve seen lots of other folks on this board do it too.

if you don’t have the basics down, as far as methodology goes, in science or philosophy or anything, (which you apparently don’t) you’re bound to sound like a complete nutcase. you have to play by the rules in order to communicate your ideas effectively.

finding an article on the internet doesn’t have as much merit as does finding an article in a scientific textbook or journal. that’s very basic stuff that i can’t even believe i have to mention.

What bullshit? I dont see or smell any bull shit.

I see the shit you’re starting up, but I see no bullshit.

Stop being such an ass, DM.

I think that I saw in the news some years ago that scientists had found a particle that actually does go back in time. The effect was measured before the cause happened (although I don’t know how they knew this). The particle in question was (they theorised) going faster than light. I know that approaching light speed takes infinite energy etc, but what if you’re already on the other side of this barrier?

you’re talking about tachions?
i don’t know wheter their existance is confirmed yet… but it’s possible…