And then the universe exploded.
- Thread starter Sn1P3r M98
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It depends on how you look at time. Going back in time and killing your parents, I believe, would result in them dying and you instantly disappearing. The timeline travels with you, thus anything you do will in fact be changed regardless of your future self.FargoDog said:
Although I have absolutely no proof of the matter. Let me know if you figure it all out.
Funny. I lol'd.Treeinthewoods said:
Just like, if a fat kid falls in a forest, is it still hilarious?
OT: I have a phobia. It's a phobia of having a phobia. Do I still have a phobia?
If I went back in time and killed my own parents, then in the future I would be dead, but I would already be dead if I killed my parents in the past, but if I killed my parents in the past then who would be my parents and would those people be the people I murder in the past.
Basically an un-ending stream of endings.
Basically an un-ending stream of endings.
Hello FargoDog,FargoDog said:
I am very sad to inform you that not one single scientist thinks this is possible.
No, not because its impossible to travel through time, but because if you did travel through time to kill your parents, you couldn't kill your parents, you cant change the past even if you could travel there, you can change the future though, as long as you havent seen it.
If you wanted to go in the past and lets say, oh, become the first president of the United States, you could, only George washington would still be George washington known as him some how, but still you. The past wouldn't change.
If you want a good example of this, play timesplitters, it demonstrates this theory perfectly.
Faster than light travel, if you could then you would arrive at a destination before you set off, basically time travel, what if you used faster than light travel to move a meter to the left, would you see yourself moving to your current position after you did it, and would this mean there was more mass in the universe than previously, and if so then there would be more energy, and therefore you would have created energy, which is impossible, arghghghghgh my brain hurts
Zeno's Paradox is simply rubish. He (and everyone else in that time) was convinced, that the result of an infinite sum has to be infinite, but that is not true. The infinite sum over 1/(2^x) converges to 1. You don't even need math to prove that...imagine a simple line...now mark the middle of it...then mark the middle of the right half of that line and continue doing so, always dividing the rightmost part of the line by half...you will never reach the right end of that line with your marks (of course there is a limit to the resolution you can observe, but you'll get the idealozfoe444 said:
)
If an unstoppable force meets a unmoveable object, it will probably move it's force over or under the object or wherever, until it finds a way past it. Everything is always searching for the way of less resistance. If it is not there, it will probably go on for ever.
I myself am convinced that ftl-travel does not contradict causality...ftl is not time travel, no matter what mathematicians and physicists say...the whole idea of one single event being in the past for one timeframe and in the future for another might be theoretically comprehensible, but members of different timeframes cannot share information with one another without collapsing these two different timeframes into one...at least thats what I say, but nobody would listen...then again they also don't, when I tell them that our complete understanding of time itself is flawed...there is no such thing as time...there is only now + entropy...what we call time is a tool for our simple minds to be able to deal with the entirety of changes in our surrounding...so therefore timetravel and violations of causality are intrinsically impossible anywayAirsoftslayer93 said:
And to answer the question...you will see yourself move to the current location, since the image of you takes a little while to follow you, but since it is only 1m this will be over before you even notice it...and you will not have created additional mass or energy. The image of you is not a corporeal clone of you, it has no mass.
Yay! Someone who explained the impossibility of resolving an unstoppable force/immovable object problem before I could!lacktheknack said:
Also, Schrodinger's cat has only 2 logical outcomes when you open the box - dead cat, or your face gets heavily clawed. For safety's sake, burn the box before you open it.
And a lot of maths (e.g. calculus) deals with the concept of limits - essentially dividing by zero by working out what an equation tends to as you divide it by smaller and smaller numbers. (or, basically, dividing by zero without actually dividing by zero - it's a bit of a mindfuck, but less so than imaginary numbers)
6÷0.
OSHI-
Or, for the unstoppable force + immovable object, the force just passes straight through without affecting the object.
OSHI-
Or, for the unstoppable force + immovable object, the force just passes straight through without affecting the object.
'Fraid not. In that case, the force doesn't exist whilst it moves through the object (if it helps, visualise the force as an accelerating object, a train, maybe), so isn't unstoppable.Island said:
If a force moves around or over (or bounces off) an object, it changes. Direction is an integral part of a force, so a force is stopped if it's made to change direction.
And the immovable object is, y'know, immovable.
I'm explaining it badly, because I'm tired, but basically the concept of an unstoppable force prevents a change in direction, and a lack of interaction between the force and the object means the force has to cease to exist, so both cannot exist in the same universe as the collision is impossible.
And yet still more people are going to suggest ways it could work... I'm a physicist! A bored physicist, who spent far too much time trying to resolve the problem mathematically and logically, and it can't be done. Unless some kind of wormhole can spontaneously appear, anyway...