Time travel

	Email		Print
	Bookmark		Link

Time travel

Time travel Discussion Forum

Is time travel possible?

Is time travel possible?

crazyman2
2/1/09

Is time travel possible?

dazzerd03
11/2/09

Time travel will never happen for the simple fact that if in the future time travel became possible then we would know because someone would have travelled back through time. As this has never happened time travel will never be possible.

godfather
10/31/09

Time travel is nothing but creation of a world where a identical copy of u exists or an advanced one that will maybe exist...

such event need energy that can only be created by GOD and no one else...of course not any human...

dnt think of time travel...enjoy ur present...maybe u wont have any future...

painkiller24
10/31/09

It's all just a matter of opinion. Remember in history class when you were studying the 1700's or whatever? People would have been burned at the stake for even mentioning human cloning. But look at where we are today. It's definetly possible. Even back then, time travel was just some whack job's idea in writing a book to make a few bucks. But look at where we are today. It's really surprising. I say that it's a matter of opinion because it depends on what your definition of the word "possible" is. There's evidence that only forward time travel may be possible and backwards is not allowed, yet at the same time, there is no law in the universe that says we cannot time travel in any sense.

There's a book I often see at the book store that I will most likely purchase on my next visit. It's called "Is God a Mathematician?" Of course it doesn't touch on the existence of god at all but argues of whether mathematics is truly the way the universe works or just a man-made concept to help compensate for our understanding of how everything works.

I look at time with the same question. Is time truly the fourth dimension? Or is it just a man-made concept to help us measure the distance between events over our unique perception? Perhaps this is why there's no law that says we cannot time travel...time might not exist. You cannot penalize a basketball team for a foul ball that would be accounted for in a baseball game! :)

painkiller24
10/5/09

Yes, I am from 2312. As of that date, Christ has not yet returned (no will he ever, you'll find out about 2058 or so), there has been 4 more revolutions since the one you are experiencing now (the information revolution) and the world has gotten away from dependency of oil and the car that runs on water has been reveiled and is open for sale to the public. Captialism has shown to not be the ideal government and has fallen into a dictatorship (though it definetly had the longest run). Yes, 300 years into the future, things are not a whole lot different. You can even tell that my lingo and grammar are still as they are in 2009.

whiten
10/9/09

Very pleased to know if in the year 2312 it is still called "Time travel".
Can you be so nice and tell me where do you like it more? "here" or "there"?! :-)

painkiller24
10/9/09

I like it better "then" actually. We still call it Time Travel because of it's notorious background of fringe science and to call it something else would be just plain no fun!

whiten
10/10/09

Sure u must like it better "then" as in "Now" u are not even borne yet,or are you? :-)

In the past there has been vehicles that run on water and not on oil fuel.
In the year 2312 those vehicles that run on water do they manage to heat the water by the same ways (wood or coal burning) or is there some other way?!
It will be very nice of you if u can brink some more fun on this subject. :-) :-)

cheers.

painkiller24
10/15/09

As you mentioned, the vehicles that run on water are indeed very real during this time (2009). Unfortunetly due to the economy and conflicts between nations, I'm sure you're aware of the touchiness of it, oil is the name of the game and the H20 car will not be fully available to the public until just before 2100. All of those worries about oil shortages are just propaganda. You need not give concern to them. :)

whiten
10/17/09

Thank you for your reply.

Even that there was not any worries on me, what so ever, about the oil shortages, now you have managed to make me worry about the water supply shortages in the future.

Even that,at the present,the water has not entered yet the equation as a fuel substitute for the oil,it is in some way costly and, to a point of management;in shortage(even while in substance is considered free for all).

How do work the economics of it all in the future?!
Forgive my ignorance but am really puzzled.
Appreciated a lot if you can shed a bit more light in the matter.

cheers :-)

painkiller24
10/17/09

I fear that I am exhausting the extent of information that I am allowed to expose. It is through a water shortage at some point in the 2100's that forces the nations of the world to re-evaluate what it means to BE HUMAN. Hehe, emphasis on those words because it is a world wide revolution that changes economies, cultural values and all around morals. Not a single human being is able to survive without water so what kind of asinine being would deny its own race the means to survive? Truly embaressing if any other civilization would be observing (hint hint!)

whiten
10/18/09

Thank you for the reply.

I see your point,I think.
In the end it seams to come down to a revolution instead of a willing to freely embrace the so much needed harmonious and reasonable reformation of Our Social and Civic order. A shame for us all if we still can't see despite all that was given to us. Still not able to give back any thing of value.
It seams we are lead more by our own fears than by our virtues.Can't see how a revolution can change that.
But in the end that is only me.

Hope you work your way to control your own fears and grow to lead your self through the principals and the virtues.(hint hint!(if that means any thing)):-) :-)

As, in one way or another, there will be water,the problem it lies with the pollution of it rather than with it's shortage, I think.
What do you think?
Will we be able to keep it unpolluted and clean enough in the future?!

cheers. :-)

painkiller24
10/18/09

What I don't think a whole lot of people appreciate is that our water is not so polluted as it is made to seem. It's cleaner than it has ever been in human history. If you look at a timeline of the human race's life span, it climbs the graph higher and higher as time goes on. As time went on, cleaner water systems developed. As of today (2009) the average lifespan of an American male is 77 (+-2) years. As far as some less fortunate countries in Africa, the average life span may be no higher than the mid 40's or 50's. This of course hurts the world average but it still remains higher than ever in humanity's existence. The reason why people are so fearful of water contamination is because of the huge population on the planet. Nearly seven billion people on one habitable rock in the solar system is quite a cramped place. Should a contamination strike a source of fresh water, or any water seeing that filters are available that can freshen almost any water, the result would be horrific. Hundreds of thousands, millions, maybe even billions of people could go without fresh water. A chunk of the population would fall into anarchy. Some may even refer to it as the end of days, but that's a whole different story.

whiten
10/19/09

Hi again there.

Very clever reasoning, but must say that it is to selective and focused in a very narrow point of the time line of the human civilization.
Through most of that time line the world was considered a very cramped or very crowded a place by the humanity, apart from the instances of horrific destruction,like plagues, natural disasters,horrible wars..etc.

And always it seams there is a connection between the pollution of the water and the disasters.It seams like humanity gets intoxicated with it's own,so much claimed,purified source of fresh water.
These water systems and especially the filters,you mention, seams to degrade and get corrupt unchecked, and most probably become the source of the contamination itself.

As for the USA,sorry to say this,but through all it's national history,as far as I know,it has been considered as a very crowded place by the American people, despite of it been one of the less crowded nations on this world of ours.

And Africa once upon the time was home to the very top of the human civilization and for same reason it did totally perish as a such. There is some historical(so to say) claims, that apart from other causes, the water pollution played some part in it too.
And prior to this happening there seams to have been claims that the water was cleaner than ever before in human history.

Will be pleased if you, with your better knowledge of the future you come from, can shed some more light in this matter.

Don't know if that makes some sense for you,as you been from the future and therefore from a better place.

By the way,if it is not much of asking, what nationality do you have in the future,if that still make same sense for you?!

Thank you for your reply.:-)

painkiller24
10/19/09

I would first like to clearify that the year I traveled from may not be "better" in the eyes of everybody. I prefer it then, than now. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

This almost is taking on the characteristics of a political debate. It can rage on and on and both sides may neither be wrong or right. Just a big waste of time ha! I tend to stay away from politics because of that matter. As far as this conversation goes, I'd see it from a more sociological point of view. In my late teen years, I took a bit of an interest in sociology. I was so curious as to why people do the things that they do. How they react under certain situations. But much like politics, there just ends up being no right or wrong answer. Only a theory. When it comes to water contaminations and over population, which are obviously huge issues that need to be addressed, they tend to be recognized but go unaccounted for. I like this to sociology and why I lost interest in it. There just isn't any real answer as to why people do the things that they do. Maybe over population and water contamination will be addressed when we're on the brink of extinction. I'll even put 20 dollars on that. :)

I am a resident of the United States. Yes, it has survived that long. The world's nations aren't a whole lot different in my year than they are today.

whiten
10/21/09

Thank you for your reply.
Been very pleased with all of your replies, as they shed a bit more light on my understanding of the world I live in and share with the rest of us all, despite the time factor.
Happy to see a connection of interest,no matter how that perceived through the eye of the beholder.

Do like your point of view, even while I really fail to see where actually the politics did manage to snick in on this discussion we have.

Always liked the theoretical point of view in general, specially when it has a touch of fun.

Always been interested in understanding of the water and it's related properties as it seams to be the main conduit to life and energy configuration in this world of ours, either in the natural or the social aspect(At least that is how it seams to me).

My self I do consider the reaction as a connection to the counter-reaction, whatever be the subject. It seams to be a basic unavoidable rule of the existence.
Am not pretending this to be right or true, only that this is how I see it, at least for now.

Wish you the very best, which ever the time be in any moment of your life.

Welcomed to share your thoughts any time you see fit.

Whatever or whenever you think that can shed a bit more light on that way of my trying to understand the world, will be appreciated.

Thank you very much again, painkiller24. :-)

realeyes
9/26/09

I nearly forgot. Two years (?) ago I went into my local grocery shop at the time the Euromillions Lottery hit it's maximum value, £180m (or thereabouts, everyone remember this?) The earliest they could have advertised the massive Jackpot before it was reset, was 7 days before the next Draw, yes? The promotional materials were in place mid week; I bought a ticket on Wed/Thur for the Friday Mega Draw. On Saturday I went back to the shop, picked up a Results printout, saw that I hadnt won a bean, and left. Monday I was back at the shop and chatted to the shopkeeper; I asked him if he knew how many people had shared the Mega Prize Fund payout, was it one lucky winner or lots of people sharing the £180m. He said "They havent done the Draw yet, it's next week".

B'Boom. TIME TRAVEL!

realeyes
9/26/09

Yes. Ive done it. Didnt know I was doing it at the time of course, but then worked out that Time Travel was the ONLY rational+logical explanation for all the anomalous events in my life over the past 2yrs. The first time I noticed it was a simple situation which, had something else not happened to make me question my 'temporal stability', a neighbour reporting an equally surprising event in HIS life which I knew backed up understanding of having "shifted" to another date and back again.. I'd not have realised anything was happening for perhaps several years. During a storm in 2006, a tile fell off the roof+landed on the grass. I removed it and put it against the back wall in case it killed the grass. The following day I looked out the back door to see how the weather was, and to my surprise saw the tile back in exactly the same place as it had been the day before. Hm... I assumed (as you would) that my neighbour had replaced it eg. maybe she'd used it to mark the fall point thus aiding any roof repairer to locate the area needing attention. Being scientific, I asked her saying I hadnt meant to cause any trouble by moving the tile.
Neither she nor anyone upstairs had seen let alone replaced the tile onto the grass. No visitor would have been able to replace it on EXACTLY the same spot.

I think Time Travel is/can also be Dimension Hopping.
The way you spot this is - a person you spoke to last week, perhaps asked a specific question of, tells you something \*completely different\* the next time.
eg. After my Gran died, I asked my mother if there had been much to clear out of her flat. She said "Nothing. Gran didnt keep lots of clutter, her house was always immaculate". 3wks later I decided to check my theory of "moving around" and I asked her again about Gran's flat.. Had there been much to clear out? "LOADS she said. Gran never threw anything away, it took us all week and we're all exhausted".

So, if you were suspecting that Time Travel was real.
It is. What we do with the opportunity though..that's another question. I already have the impression that someone/something has fu\*ked up my life by affecting events in other Time Frames/Dimensions. One minute I had a number of friends, then, suddenly, I walked into a Social Night in Edinburgh and half the people int he room walked out. It was as if I had a Harry Potter cloak on; they thought I was someone else altogether!? Friends have spoken to me as if Im fabulously wealthy. Ive seen that my own sister is virtually IDENTICAL to Rhonda Wylie, the super rich woman recently connected to the McCann case. Do I have a double out there?!?!

I pay my Gas Bill and find myself fighting for A YEAR with NPower who refuse to admit they have the money.
A year later, they say they've "found it". Another year passes and I find that the same money isnt on the printout of "all money paid to them by me". Someone even rang me from a competitor company saying "I was afraid to call and speak to you". WHIT?! WHY would a member of staff in a call centre at a fuel supply company who havent even taken over my accounts yet, and who dont know me AT ALL - be afraid to phone me??

Time+Dimension Travel is a reality. God help us all.

doingnothing
9/19/09

In general relativity, space and time are regarded to be similar. As we can travel in space, there is no reason for time travel to be not possible. Consider a star in the sky; the light from it will continue to reach us even after the star as burned out.(As light doesn't travel instantaneously but takes time, so the information wouldn't reach us for many years) We are living in the 'past' every second.

Also we can enter a spaceship and travel near the speed of light and when we come back, more time would have passed on earth than the time on spaceship. So we can 'travel' to the future.

Going to the past by extension could very well be possible, but the possibility of actually changing the past events is questionable. Also, time travel is possible theoretically by some results of general relativity.

oncearoyal
9/18/09

Time travel is absolutely impossible!
The Past is FIXED. It's gone so there is no destination to travel to. Even God can't change the past.God can only wish to do what is logically possible. He would not do any thing that was illogical, nor would he wish to, as this would deminish his perfection

The Future is yet to be!- So again there can be no destination to travel to.

The speed of light has nothing to do with it.

We live in a continuum of 'nows'.

The past is no longer and the future again is yet to be. Ergo time travel is impossible - QED.

realeyes
9/26/09

Complete rubbish.

yaaaaaaaay
9/16/09

No quite simply

timsauder
8/17/09

Time is a measurement of sequence. The time past has already happened and can not be revisited. The time future has not yet happened and it would alter the sequence of choices that make up the future. I fact that possible alien life forms move through another dimension does not destroy sequence. Even if you talk about eternity you are talking sequence. The measurement of that sequence can change but the fact of it will not. The spiritual world has no time space as we know it but it does have sequence. Time travel will never destroy sequence of events.

zerogee
8/3/09

Impossible is a word that is used when the explantion is beyond the comprehension of those that claim to know what they are saying. Until a true understanding of time is gained and is there anyone
out there that can make that claim? Then like many of the things that were thought to be impossible that have later been shown to be completely possble I would most definitely have to say yes. The direction will not matter. Time is not related to space as is currently thought and is only a by product of speed. It is the result of what happens to a mass that is accelerated and is a completely local phenomenon which is why it can only compared to anything else from a fixed position. The action that causes time to pass can be recreated with out motion it can be accelerated and reversed. The only problem you will have is that nothing was where it is now and what is here now will not be there when the time comes.

Owenbomar
7/28/09

Thru time dilaton you could pass thru time at a faster pace relitive to others but you could not go backwards.

realeyes
9/26/09

It's completely wrong that you can't travel backwards. Like Willy Wonka's Great Glass Elevator, you can travel up, down, sideways... :-)
These forums are refreshing in that all debate is good, but, when people simply post "it's impossible" whilst offering NO evidence, that's irritating. When I began to realise that something strange was happening to me, I got very "pissy scientific" about it. I have this friend who was phoning me up from 30miles away and telling me all manner of specific things about my flat; stuff she couldnt know because she'd never been in the flat & other people could not have told her because she named things I'd only just bought, or which were stored away inside boxes and I'd never shown them to anyone. I was SO impressed by her bizarre ability that when she next rang me, and I had half a Snickers Bar from the fridge on a side plate; I picked it up, turned it over in my hand + asked; What do I have in my hand? Her reply (verbatim) was:
It's cold. I can feel edges. Nuts. Toffee. Something like mint?? (no) Well, light anyway. I can see a 50p piece shape Sal. So, what is all that anyway?

Chilled Snickers Bar. Nuts. Toffee. An 8-sided plate.

Timewise; A year ago I looked out my front window and saw "life" happening at triple speed. I blinked. I saw LOTS of people passing back & forth in each direction I was confused. Didnt believe it at first. I saw a car drive at some speed the wrong way along our one-way road. 2wks later I was outside in the street and saw a car coming right at me from the wrong direction. I have never before seen ANY vehicle drive the wrong way down this road since I moved here 3yrs ago. Not once. What really happened here is, I saw the event from TWO DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. That is what Time Travel, and "Being seen to be someone else" etc is all about.
I also had a friend sit 5ft from me, look me in the eye and ask "How do you know it's not me". I got an email from Microsoft saying "If you're not already subscribed to receive this mailing, click here".
How's that for circular logic. haha

ayeshaasif
7/2/09

Time travel is absolutely possible. if you can travel with speed of light and your heart is so much strong to support your body and brain then it is absolutely possible. see videos on cosmic strings and black holes in you tube.

lisapruitt10
5/8/09

As a part of our DNA, chromosomes, cells, going back in time, there is a scene that is a part of it, that can be seen. It is there as a part of your cells. If you think back to any time in your life, or at any time, if you let yourself see, you will see what was happening at that time, even feel it.
This is great for doing the Universe. For instance . . .
In the very beginning, take the idea of Space with nothing in it at all. Space does exist but it's nothing and doesn't move. (logic-there is nothing to move) and space goes on forever in all directions. If you "look" you will "see" white. why? because with nothing to differentiate areas, everywhere seems to be everywhere. there seems to be more everywhere, which is white (with white you "feel" nothing. And alot happened after that.
I wonder, if you have lots of info. who do you get it to. the stuff I know is beyond everyone. Just wondering. I love doing the Universe. I can see it. Try it - the white - try and see it.

KALMANGI1974
5/6/09

Yes it is possible. I have a "TIME MACHINE" project idea. Please e-mail me to rameshkalmangi@yahoo.com, then I will send you my idea.

Thank you,

RAMESH

valisammabhi
8/1/09

Can you send me the project idea to my account on absolute astrnomy my email ID is valisamma abhi

jayzee943
5/25/09

Oh!!!really???

how can you travel to the past or future???
here is my email add: jayzee_943@yahoo.com

pls send me your idea.thanks

derogatron
4/23/09

THE SPEED OF THOUGHT IS ONLY ACCESSIBLE TO TIME PSYCHOLOGY REVERSE.I've said it before but that was the past,so i'll say it again....the speed of thought is only accessible to time psychology reverse.I've said it again but that was the future,so i'll say it before.....and this went on for some time.

tBoone
4/15/09

Going back in time is impossible. It's an exercise in meaninglessness! Why? Who says time is something that you "can travel" anyways? Time is simple: time = change; nothing more and nothing less. You can have more change (like time "speeds" up), less change (like time "slows" down), or no change (like time stays "still"), but you can't have negative change. I hope that clears things up.

Also, even if the "super string" theory of "alternate universes" is correct (which I HIGHLY doubt) you would still NOT be traveling to the past through time; instead, you would be traveling to alternate universes. C is the universal speed limit...it is the speed of time! Once you reach c you will have used up all of your available time in the universe!

Cheers!

realeyes
9/26/09

"...even if the "super string" theory of "alternate universes" is correct (which I HIGHLY doubt) you would still NOT be traveling to the past through time;"

What surprised me was to recently watch Dr Who programs and see a lot of things which related perfectly to the notion of - when you die, you go to another dimension. What happens to me is, when I talk to people, I frequently find other people talking within the same conversation, or speaking within the gaps. So where eg. a person were to simply walk across a room, instead of doing so in silence, someone in what appears to be an adjacent universe seems to be able to use them to talk to me. Bizarre, but correct. I see the changes very quickly sometimes. Here's another phenomena that suggests that we also access information from other dimensions through dreams;
One morning in July/Aug 2001, my partner and I woke up and turned to each other to describe having had Disaster Movie dreams. What followed was unbelievable
- A few weeks later we were looking back on having described in graphic detail the events of the WTC attack. Curiously we also both woke up with mirror image phrases in our minds; "Planes crashing+planes tipping over", and "Trains crashing+trains tipping over". (Madrid of course). In my dream I saw events from every angle; From within the plane as though through the eyesa of a hijacker who sat in the frotn left seat of the cockpit, I saw the green spire-topped building which that plane flew past on the right of before smashing into the South Tower; I saw as if I were a cloud(!) people "herded to the back of a plane by a man wielding a surgically sharp knife"; I knew a plane had "bounced in the desert they nearly made it". We saw the city from overhead, from the ground, and from a distance. I had NO idea where NY was, not really and I certainly didnt know it had "fingerlike projections around the water-filled edges", and I had no idea of the existence of the WTC let alone that one of the "identical, designer quality" buildings which my partner saw as "half built" had a conductivity spike on top. We saw all these things as clear as daylight several weeks before the events took place in the real world. Would anyone expect us to try to TELL someone of the details in advance of the fact? Hm. Do you think I'd have been wearing an orange suit, or a closely fitted padded cell within 24hrs.

Parallel Universes appear to be separated by a time differential. Movement between them is Time Travel.
It's the ONION RING PRINCIPLE.

lisapruitt
5/16/09

Everything has what was in it before - thats how we evolved. So actually, we do have all of evolutionary time in us. We don't have to actually travel back in time. Its always there with us and it keeps coming up in different ways.
Why do they keep thinking about dinosaurs? Maybe its part of our evolution - it could be possible,
then you say some other really complicated things, which I can't figure out. Are dinosaurs in alternate universes. JK.

lisapruitt
5/16/09

Well we are here in the present time, but we may have holding from the past that hold us there, so it affects the way we feel about the present. Like, people hold in abusive things from a childhood and are always feeling like they have to protect themselves, and until they connect to the scene and release it (which can take time) they keep going back to is.
The rest of what you said is really complicated - I might have to work in out in some future time.

lisapruitt
5/16/09

That sounded really complicated. You would have to think about it alot, before replying. I just wanted to tell you that.

axus
4/16/09

The speed of thought is said to be equal to the speed of light.
Since we have to comprehend the speed of light, and the speed of thought takes no comprehension but is comprehension, I propose the speed of thought to be faster.
We use the speed of thought to measure the speed of light, meaning the speed of thought is faster.

Time travel is possible traveling at the speed of thought, we do it all the time.

tBoone
4/23/09

Well, maybe in philosophy the ?speed of thought? is said to be equal to the speed of light, but in science it?s simply not the case. Regardless, thought is an abstract concept that is not physical and speed is a physical thing; although one can remember the past by thinking about it, it is quite different from the concepts of time travel being discussed here. BTW, the electrical signals that constitute ?thought? in your brain travel at speeds lower than c. Neither mass nor information can exceed c.

axus
4/23/09

You stated "time equals change..." Wouldn't you say that "change" is abstract and not physical? So if time is change then time travel is only possible if we change the way we think. The physical cannot separate from the psyche. Both have to travel together. Ok, let?s say you are correct, and the speed of thought is slower than c. Time travel is theoretically possible at ?near? light speed, since nothing but light travels at the speed of light. So our physical body could then travel metaphysically and achieve ?near? light speed. Thus, we would travel in time, travel in ?change?. I?ve ?changed my mind? have you?
Why do you want to be Einstein? (a reference to the icon)

tBoone
5/4/09

(A) No. I wouldn't say change is abstract and not physical. Quite the contrary: change is very physical and not abstract (at least that's the type of change that I'm refering to.)
(B) So if time = change...then time isn't something that you travel. Does it make sense to say that you can travel change? My point is that time is NOT something that you travel. The "time travel" thing is a common misconception. Within this framework, if change occurs then time is progressing (you age, you live your life, etc.) You can slow down, speed up, or stop time (relativity) according to Einstein by traveling closer to c, (time dilation, etc.) You can even stop time by traveling at c (like a photon does) because once you reach c you use up all the time in the universe (relative to the photon of course.) But you cannot have unchange or negative change; consequently no returning to the past. To sum it up, just think of change as the forward progression of time.

(C) As far as thought being faster, it's actually much slower. Our involuntary reflexes are much faster than thought; as is muscle memory, etc. Yet all are slower than c. Look them up, very interesting stuff.

(D) "The physical cannot separate from the psyche" I do not know what you mean by this.

(E) Our physical bodies physically travel through spacetime; they are not of the metaphysical realm. However, I suppose that our metaphysical bodies can travel metaphysically anywhere. Also, I beleive that Relativity doesn't apply in the metaphysical realm, so I suppose one can travel as fast as one wants. However, I was only refering to the physical realm.

(F) Einstein icon: the guy was a friggin genious. I only hope that I can know 1/2 the things he forgot!

axus
5/9/09

Wow, nice post! Are you writing a book?
"The physical cannot separate from the psyche"?
To "physically" travel in "space" you have to change your mind, the way you think. If your mind thinks you are still at home but you are physically at work you would have issues. Traveling in time is similar. Did you ever get home from school, take a nap and when you woke up you didn't know "when" you were? Your mind AND body were lost in time. You traveled in time the instant you looked at the clock, your mind told you when it was and your body went right along with it. To travel in time ?physically? we have to change the way we think.
I've changed my mind.
Have you changed yours?

tBoone
5//09

Thanks, but...you can change your mind all you want it still isn't going to happen. "If your mind thinks you are still at home but you are physically at work you would have issues..." I'll say, mental issues.

"Did you ever get home from school, take a nap and when you woke up you didn't know 'when' you were? Your mind AND body were lost in time." Actually, it's called disorientation. It's your perception of time that's disoriented and not time itself as it progressed normally whether you were aware of it or not.

"You traveled in time the instant you looked at the clock, your mind told you when it was and your body went right along with it." No. You became oriented once you read the clock and so you now became aware of the current time. Your body didn't care whether your mind new what time it was; it aged just the same.

"To travel in time 'physically' we have to change the way we think. I've changed my mind. Have you changed yours?" Not really, as time isn't something that's traveled (again.) You can change your mind all you want about something that isn't true; it'll still not be true. Someone famous once said that the moon is still there whether we are looking at it or not. :o)

lisapruitt
5/16/09

I thought I answered that but am learning how to do this.
The reason you may think you are in a place, is that you can go into holding mode in any situation (its a physical thing) and these holdings hold in a whole place, the scene even, and until you release whatever it was that made you go into the holding - it may keep coming back, and you'll kind of think you're in that place where the holding began.
I only come to the library once a week or so. Yes I am writing a book - about the Universe.
Thanks for your reply - and you keep it simple enough.

It all started simply - Once there was only empty space.

tBoone
5//09

You do realize that there is no such thing as empty space, right?

realeyes
9/26/09

"You do realize that there is no such thing as empty space, right?"

I love the simplicity of this comment :-)
Whether perceived or not, all that comes out of a place has to be inside it in the first place, yes?

tBoone
11/2/09

Of course that something that's inside a place and comes out has to have been inside in order for it to come out. Why state the obvious though? What are you rambling about?

derogatron
4/23/09

If however vulnerable a species evolved then once before it 'crack' to which contest.Only the unfortunate survive in normality,the science is there but only if the dinosaurs that smoke it are themselves in this sentence.To which i summise correct how more mad are you.

Deadfire
5/21/09

I think Im going to have to get reeaalllyy high to understand this...

KALMANGI1974
3/26/09

Yes it is possible. I have an "TIME MACHINE" project idea. If anybody please e-mail to rameshkalmangi@yahoo.com, then I will send you my idea.

Thank you,

K. RAMESH

Alexander
4/10/09

I really want to see them, this subject is the talk amongst my friends many times. and guess what were only fourteen years old so please send me them
my email is
alexbolek45@yahoo.com

derogatron
3/13/09

Only to the time traveller.Whether or not you discuss desire or objectively fool,time only goes forward nowhere.It depends on what you do with YOUR time toward its longevity and force,and therefore you travel in time travel.

fizanali
2/7/09

It is possible according to one of Einstein theory of special relativity where he says that time and distance approach zero while reaching the speed of light.
But it is impossible according to another theory of Einstein: e=MC^2 where all mass is destroyed at speed of light.
From here we can conclude that few things are possible:
- We can definitely slow time down
- We can even go into the past if we could exist in the form of energy rather than mass ! (may be our souls)

mthoms
2/3/07

We're all time travelers, of course. We're all traveling forward in time at the same rate - but is it possible to travel faster or slower than this rate?

Einstein says yes. In his theory called 'Special Relativity', he suggests if you were traveling in a spaceship at near the speed of light, time would slow down.. You wouldn't notice the change, but when you returned to your point of origin, much more time would have passed for the people you left behind.

Bjort
3/5/09

Hello everyone, I am looking for an explanation of something imparticular. Or what it may be called so I can do more research on it.

Example:
You look at the clock, rub your eye for a couple seconds and look at the clock again and 10 minutes past.
Where were you, what happened during that 10 minutes?
What is this fast forward in time?

If anyone can help me with this I would appreciate it.
Thanks!

whiten
10/9/09

Very clever.What you describe it is called, I think, "spaced out".Your first question starts with a "where" not with a "when". It looks more like a space switch than a time switch. :-)

cheers

tbone
2/4/09

Some theories, most notably special and general relativity, suggest that suitable geometries of spacetime, or specific types of motion in space, might allow time travel into the past and future if these geometries or motions are possible.[9] In technical papers physicists generally avoid the commonplace language of "moving" or "traveling" through time ('movement' normally refers only to a change in spatial position as the time coordinate is varied), and instead discuss the possibility of closed timelike curves, which are worldlines that form closed loops in spacetime, allowing objects to return to their own past. There are known to be solutions to the equations of general relativity that describe spacetimes which contain closed timelike curves, but the physical plausibility of these solutions is uncertain.

Physicists take for granted that if one were to move away from the Earth at relativistic velocities and return, more time would have passed on Earth than for the traveler, so in this sense it is accepted that relativity allows "travel into the future" (although according to relativity there is no single objective answer to how much time has 'really' passed between the departure and the return). On the other hand, many in the scientific community believe that backwards time travel is highly unlikely. Any theory which would allow time travel would require that issues of causality be resolved. For example, what if one were to go back in time and kill one's own grandfather? (see grandfather paradox)

aseforlife
2/4/09

Theoretically it is possible by use of worm holes in space , which are allowed by Einsteins theory of special relativity

space and time are irrelevant in a worm hole to the person/thing going through but time would still pass for those outside the wormhole

it has been suggested that wormholes also may provide passage between time past or future

so one could go in a wormhole and possibly come back in 1400 BC

of course none have been found till now but once upon a time black holes were ridiculed as science fantasy hype

aseforlife
2/4/09

There's nothing in Special Relativity that predicts it is possible - but nothing that forbids it, either.

swartzy
2/4/09

There is not a lot of science on this subject but we can use a little common sense:

I think it is reasonalbe to assume that since we have not been visited by time travelers from the future - time travel will never be possible.

axus
2/25/09

If a time traveler from the future could only successfully accomplish time travel to the past by purging his knowledge of the future, could we have been visited by time travelers, they just didn't know it?

fizanali
2/7/09

I would say that may be we have been visited by time travelers like UFOs ! but we won't believe them that's because we already know we didn't believe them !

wellis
2/4/09

True, but we also have to consider that everything that hasn't been proved to be impossible is possible.

scbrow
2/8/09

That logic could be used to justify any crazy argument.

Kivey90
3/29/09

No , its not possible .
not so scientific explanation : Because if it were possible , someone would have came back from the future by now holding evidence and so .. (or we would have heard that sometime in the past .. a strange guy appeared from no where and claimed to be a time traveller ) .

tBoone
4/15/09

1st of all, that is totally ridiculous. Just because something IS possible doesn't mean it will ever happen. Those are 2 different things. Let's say that time travel is possible...ok...but now let's say that no one EVER figures it out...also a possibility. So now we have a situation where time travel is possible but NEVER gets executed. You see, raw logic is useless. You can prove anything to be true using logic...anything. You can say that "anything is possible" which should eventually lead to the fact that impossibility is one of those possibilities and thus there are things that are impossible.

Deadfire
5//09

I agree with tBoone 100% on everything. Time is a concept used to comprehend change. Everything happens in an order of events. Its quite possible to relatively speed up or slow down these chain of events, but once something has occured, there is no way to "undo" it. And I dont mean like the "Undo" command on your computer. Thats not wiping the first event (Such as typing an error) from existence such that it had never happened, but merely erasing it what you have done. The error has still occured, and will forever have occured.

Deadfire
5//09

Sort of on the subject, have you guys seen Donnie Darko. Weird movie, but intriguing at the same time. Watch the movie first, then check out some websites on it discussing it's background on time travel and parallel universes. The movie itself has very interesting concepts which come to light near the end, but the information read about it on various websites really make you think about possibilities.

sls02
9/5/09

Movies are only the result of weird imagination which may or may not have credible concepts.Time travel seems impossible for atleast the the next few aeons.
Explanations in movies are for make-believe people and to prevent it from being a flop.

tBoone
5/21/09

Thanks Deadfire.

I have seen Donnie Darko; I liked it but I liked Southland Tales better. I will take a look at some websites as you suggested to see what they say about it. I'm not too fond of the alternate universes or parallel universes theories but they do make for great movie plots!

IMO, parallel/alternate universe theory of time travel is quite ridiculous because in reality you are not going back in time; the fact that you went back in time already means that you are in another universe to begin with. That's the problem w/that theory; there's just too many darn combinations of possible alternate universes.

To elaborate on alternate universe theory: let's pick point A (1990), point B (2000), point C (2009), let's say these points lie in U1 (Universe 1.) As you live your life in U1, you go past point A, then B, and then C. At all these points, there was always only 1 of you in U1. Now at point C you decide to hop into your nifty time machine and go back in time to point B. You set all of your knobs and power up the flux capacitor and presto whammo you traveled back in time to B. But wait, there's 2 of you at B BUT in U1 there was only 1...therefore you are NOT in U1.

Kind of like the old "psychic" that see's the future. He has this "vision" of his friend crossing the street and getting hit and killed by a car. So the next day he see's his friend about to cross the street and he pulls him back & saves him! Wow! Only one thing, he didn't see the future because had he seen the future he would have seen himself save his friend!

Deadfire
5/21/09

I agree with all of that too. I said something similar in the thread about the possibility of someone going back in time 4 years. And I agree that that seer didnt see the "future" necessarily as much as he did the outcome of the current consequent series of events leading up to that point unaffected by outside forces. An outside force being him pulling his friend back away from the position he'd have been in had he not been acted on by that force, thus resulting in a different outcome. Much like physics and predicting the trajectory of an object, Id imagine, or an event tree.

5ws1h
8/11/09

Hello, I'm not supposed to do this, but I figured raz the shaz, know what I mean. So I'm here at Disney Planet in the Time Machine Room. I decided to use this external PC-A and try out a keyboard. It's so dupe, I've only seen these things in holopics.
Just to let you know...We don't have "time travel" where I come from. What we do have is probably as close as we will ever get. You might think of it as a superstring recorder, of course that whole superstring theory was disproven years ago, as just and myth.
So newya – what we have here, you might think of it as a mixamash of HDR's and VR displays. Whatever we record, we playback in this room.
I guess that would mean if you’re reading this, well than – you’re just part of a recording!

tBoone
8/17/09

We have them too, they're called a video cameras!
And wait, hold on, I am going to erase you!

doingnothing
9/19/09

tBoone
11/2/09

Hello doingnothing.

I must say that "observing" light from the past and traveling to the past, are two completely different things. Seeing an event that occurred long ago and actually being present long ago are not the same.
I believe that we are living in the present not the past and "traveling" (one could say) to the future at 1 sec/sec. This is true regardless at what speed one travels; however, the closer we approach c, the more time slows down relative to others. But it is indistinguishable to the traveler.

As you mentioned, changing past events is questionable. Not only is it questionable but it is impossible as this would violate causality. Can you have a reaction precede an action? Of course not, that would be non-sense.

doingnothing
11/3/09

You enter machine A. A does something. You wait inside it for 1 minute. You exit A and find your twin brother is now 1 year older than you. This is time travel right?

key:
A- spacecraft
something-traveling near the speed of light(taking a u turn and coming back at speed near c)

Since time travel to the future is possible, I appeal to symmetry and say time travel to the past is possible.
(you can use a wormhole)

But I don't believe we will ever build such machines.

doingnothing
9/19/09

"To elaborate on alternate universe theory: let's pick point A (1990), point B (2000), point C (2009), let's say these points lie in U1 (Universe 1.) As you live your life in U1, you go past point A, then B, and then C. At all these points, there was always only 1 of you in U1. Now at point C you decide to hop into your nifty time machine and go back in time to point B. You set all of your knobs and power up the flux capacitor and presto whammo you traveled back in time to B. But wait, there's 2 of you at B BUT in U1 there was only 1...therefore you are NOT in U1. "

err.. thats wrong. Who said there was only 1 you at B? There was always 2 of you at B if you decide(or decided?) to go back.

tBoone
11/2/09

Actually, it's quite right.

To answer your question "Who said there was only 1 at B" I did. It is a GIVEN part of the thought experiment; if you change the GIVEN, then you change the experiment. It becomes a completely different experiment. One simply cannot violate causality. That's one of the reasons why "backwards" time travel is not possible. The other is the fact that time isn't really something you travel: it is change. As long as change is occurring so it time. You can more change (like approaching c), less change (like time slows down), or no change (time stops like reaching c); but you can't have negative change as that is nonsense and meaningless.

tBoone
11/2/09

doingnothing
11/3/09

Well then, by taking a given you are reducing the problem to its subset. You merely proved you will never time travel back to B. You didn't prove that time travel is impossible.

Who said you are going to violate causality?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novikov_self-consistency_principle.

Negative change? It is used in maths all the time.
What would you denote a change that was undone:
change + (-change).

Your definition of time is not the scientific one.
The time is 0s at the big bang and you can measure others relative to it.
The world was completely different 1 sec ago(call that state A), now it is state B. What is meaningless about shifting everything(including electrons,...) back to state A and replacing some amount of air molecules there with yours?
You can call it state shift if you want. If that is possible, I will be excited. But if I invent it, I will call it time travel.

tBoone
11/3/09

According to the MWI, I did prove that it is not possible to time travel to B, because once you arrive at B you are no longer in U1 and so you have instead universe traveled and NOT time traveled. It may "appear" as if it were time travel but it most certainly is not. This logic is irrefutable. Furthermore, due to quantum uncertainty, once you arrive at B there is NO guarantee that the universe you are in (whether it's U1 or U2) will evolve in exactly the same way as it did up to point C (whence you departed to the past from!) Matter of fact, it is actually HIGHLY unlikely that it will! Which means you might never leave to the past to begin with! This is why I have no love for MWI.

As far as violating causality, the only way that I see you won't violate it is with the MWI which I have shown isn't really time travel at all. Then there's Novikov: there is SO MUCH more assumption, speculation, & conjecture in that proposition than there is in mine. Basically it says that "the universe just won't let a paradox happen." (my paraphrase.) Never mind free will, quantum uncertainty, and other paradoxes that it may lead to. Using Occam's razor, we can see that it's more likely that time travel to the past is not possible vs Novikov's Consistency Principle.

Negative change (as you describe) is still change. A fraction (a ratio or change) is still a fraction regardless of the sign of the numerator or denominator. Of course I can walk forwards and then backwards but it doesn't mean I can time travel to the past. In both instances time is still going forward because change is occurring and entropy is still increasing. You have change occurring in one direction and then another. Think of it like distance: there is no such thing as negative distance.

My definition of time is most certainly a scientific one. I defy you to prove it wrong scientifically. The fact that you can measure time (Big Bang onward) only proves me right: we measure time by measuring change in cesium atoms (for example.) As far as your example is concerned (state A to state B): it's nice but it only shows forward progression of time. I mean, we can theoretically go back to state A on "paper" (i.e. thought experiment) but not in physical reality. It would violate a score of thermodynamic laws (especially entropy.) You would have to return EVERY quark, atom, photon, & "energy" in the entire Universe to that state without using any energy...What do you think is more likely that or simply that time travel to the past is not possible. Precisely.

doingnothing
11/6/09

You didn't see my point. You didn't prove that time travel is impossible.
After searching everywhere to see whether a copy of you exists, and you find it does not.
So, Given:There is only one of you at B.
So, YOU can't time travel 'back to B', because you know YOU haven't time traveled to B. You haven't proven anything else. For someone who has actually time traveled to B, the given is not possible.(see circular reasoning)

I am not talking about alternate universe travel.

There are no assumptions in Novikov's principle. It goes merely: If time travel is possible, the probability of causing a paradox is zero.(the possibility of causing a paradox is always zero;it is not going to change merely because you traveled to the past)
It doesn't affect free will. You can do whatever you want, but you still won't be able to change the past.
You are the one making the assumption that you can actually change what has already happened(which leads to paradoxes).

You can't apply Occam's razor, as time travel is theoretically possible due to bending of space-time.

Same way a negative number is still a number. Can you give me -5 number of apples? The sign is merely a notation. -5 can be taken a removing +5. Similarly, undoing a change delta(x) is denoted -delta(x).
Time can be compared to distance only if you think it can go only forward(which is what you are trying to prove). Otherwise, you should compare it with displacement. Displacement can be negative.
I didn't say you have to shift everything back to state A(in that case changing the past will actually become possible).
I merely provided you a way to visualize time travel without using negative change(which you think is not possible).Err... I just noticed that describing time travel as negative change is not right(changing past becomes possible)

So my argument becomes very short:
1)There is nothing logically wrong with time travel
(Novikov Principle(what assumptions does it make?))
2)It is theoretically possible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel#Time_travel_to_the_past_in_physics
3)You don't cause negative change. You loop back into the past. You are never traveling back in time. You travel to a wormhole(while time progresses normally around you), go through it and come back in time instantaneously.(Yes, I made a mistake before)
4) Due to 2), Occam's Razor(which can't prove anything anyway) is not applicable.
5)Traveling to the future is very simple(atleast theoretically) by traveling very near the speed of light and combing back to the place from where you left at the speed of light. If you travel at 0.99995c and come back taking 1 year for the forward and back journey combined, 100 years would have passed at the starting point.So effectively you have traveled 99yrs into the future.

tBoone
11/6/09

"For someone who has actually time traveled to B, the given is not possible." Yes. That's because your premise is false; my given (your conclusion) is only true if your premise is true. In other words, for someone who does the impossible then my given is not possible.

You say it is circular logic but, then again, time travel to the past IS circular logic.

"There are no assumptions in Novikov's principle." It assumes that the universe will somehow not let a paradox occur.

"It goes merely: If time travel is possible, the probability of causing a paradox is zero." If there is free will then the probability is NOT zero. Because the probability is NOT zero, time travel to the past is not possible.

"It doesn't affect free will." It completely undermines it. Let me explain: you say that there were always 2 of you at point B; but, in order for that to be true it means that the events from B to C (which have not occurred yet from point B) are set in stone. In other words, you are predestined to come back to B. And you think that this allows for free will? Don’t think so.

"You are the one making the assumption that you can actually change what has already happened (which leads to paradoxes)." True, and that’s why time travel to the past is impossible because the probability of a paradox IS zero. What you don’t realize is that at some possible point far enough into the future, everything is the past. How can you have free will?

"You can't apply Occam's razor, as time travel is theoretically possible due to bending of space-time." Of course I can. Furthermore, time travel HAS been shown to be possible…time travel to the future that is; to the past, never.

"Same way a negative number is still a number." Who has ever said it wasn't a number? Not me.

"Can you give me -5 number of apples?" Of course not. That only proves my point. "The sign is merely a notation. -5 can be taken a removing +5." That’s right. It is a direction and the number a magnitude.

"Similarly, undoing a change delta(x) is denoted -delta(x). Time can be compared to distance only if you think it can go only forward(which is what you are trying to prove)." I’m not trying to prove it: it’s the status quo. There is no empirical evidence anywhere that shows that it can flow any other way.

"Otherwise, you should compare it with displacement. Displacement can be negative." I could but that would be a mistake as it does not behave that way and thus it would be a poor comparison.

"1) There is nothing logically wrong with time travel (Novikov Principle(what assumptions does it make?))" There's plenty wrong; see above.

"2) It is theoretically possible http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel#Time_travel_to_the_past_in_physics" Most of the theories border on fiction. The more accepted ones are the MWI; regardless, they are built on what ifs, on top of more what ifs, and more, and more, etc. Incidentally, I have shown how the MWI theories on time travel are not actually time travel.

"3) You don't cause negative change. You loop back into the past. You are never traveling back in time. You travel to a wormhole (while time progresses normally around you), go through it and come back in time instantaneously.(Yes, I made a mistake before.)" Amazing! You travel to the past, but you don’t, but you do. Make up your mind! Anyways, wormholes do not exist and are purely theoretical; they are possible solutions to EFE.

"4) Occam's Razor(which can't prove anything anyway) is not applicable." It isn't proving anything but it is applicable in the sense that I am using it here.

"5)Traveling to the future is very simple(at least theoretically)…" Theoretically? Are you kidding? It's what's happening around us right now! We are traveling into the future at 1 sec/sec.

"…by traveling very near the speed of light and combing back to the place from where you left at the speed of light." You don’t have to return for the time dilation to occur. This has already been shown experimentally.

"If you travel at 0.99995c and come back taking 1 year for the forward and back journey combined, 100 years would have passed at the starting point. So effectively you have traveled 99yrs into the future." That's great but I never said that time travel to the future wasn't possible; but to the past it is.

doingnothing
11/7/09

I used the negative number argument to show that negative change is as valid as negative numbers.(as you mentioned the negative sign only shows the 'direction')
But, I am not describing time travel as negative change anymore.

doingnothing
11/7/09

Your argument is circular logic. You haven't proven anything.
("my given (your conclusion) is only true if your premise is true. In other words, for someone who does the impossible then my given is not possible. ")
Again circular, you are trying to prove time travel is impossible.

Your argument condensed:
Given:Time travel is not possible
("for someone who does the 'impossible(time travel)' then my given is not possible. ")
Conclusion:Time travel is not possible.
So scrap that argument and try another angle.

The universe will never let a paradox happen.(Do you disagree?). If you think it will, then your whole argument against time travel collapse.
So, no assumption, it is tautology. Time travel by itself is not paradoxical. But, you won't be able to kill your own grandfather before you are born even if you went to past. The logic simply goes that you failed at your attempt(s), and that is why you were born. The 'universe' does nothing. It happened in the past i.e. it is predetermined.

Free will? Is this a philosophical discussion?
You have no more or less free will even if time travel to the past is possible.

Just because the choice is already made, it doesn't mean you didn't make it.(The Oracle from Matrix)

Swami Vivekananda:"Therefore we see at once that there cannot be any such thing as free-will; the very words are a contradiction, because will is what we know, and everything that we know is within our universe, and everything within our universe is moulded by conditions of time, space and causality. ... To acquire freedom we have to get beyond the limitations of this universe; it cannot be found here."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will. You will find the concept of free will is disputed.

I am not arguing for MWI.
Theories predict time travel is possible. If you think that is 'almost' fiction, that is your POV.
About negative change, there is nothing wrong with it, but I have abandoned that angle as the theories are describe them differently.
"Amazing! You travel to the past, but you don’t, but you do. Make up your mind! "
My mind is made up. What I meant was:
While you are on the machine, time is not moving in the backward direction(i.e. no negative change). You loop back into the past through a path created by a traversable wormhole.
"...You don’t have to return for the time dilation to occur..."
I never said that. But wouldn't you like to see what happens to your country after 99yrs.

Occam Razor:"entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity"
You are using it erroneously.
Wikipedia:Occam's razor is not an embargo against the positing of any kind of entity, or a recommendation of the simplest theory come what may[32] (Note that simplest theory is something like "only I exist" or "nothing exists").The other things in question are the evidential support for the theory[33] Therefore, according to the principle, a simpler but less correct theory should not be preferred over a more complex but more correct one.
If you are using Occam Razor using Hawking's argument:
"A time machine will be built someday, but hasn't been built yet, so the tourists from the future can't reach this far back in time." So, we don't have evidence yet.
But I believe in something simpler, humans will never time travel even though it is possible.There is no emprical evidence for time travel, as the concept is beyond our time(no pun intended)

Wormholes are hypothetical as in predicted by theory. Which is what I was saying. Time travel is theoretically possible, but we have no evidence.

There is no evidence for time travel AND there is no evidence against time travel. But since it is theoretically possible, you can't toss the concept aside.
Since, this is not actually a debate, I will end my discussion here.
You have stated your POV and I have stated mine.

tBoone
11/3/09

"The Novikov self-consistency principle proposes that contradictory causal loops cannot form, but that consistent ones can."

Does nothing for this scenario:

"On your 13th birthday, a familiar looking man of middle age gives you a beautifully crafted pocket watch; what appears to be a priceless antique in pristine condition. He tells you that he is a friend of your father's and he'd want you to have it. So you accept the watch, thank the man and he goes on his way.

You never see him again, but you keep the watch in a cigar box and it goes untouched until 35 years later when you finally complete work on your time machine. With the watch, you go back in time to meet your former teenage self and give yourself the watch."

So...where did the watch come from originally? Thin air?

doingnothing
11/6/09

Simple. Such a thing won't happen.

doingnothing
11/6/09

For your scenario to be possible, it should be possible to conjure watch out of thin air.
Since, you can't do that, the scenario you described is not possible.
You haven't proved time travel by itself is a paradox