Time Travel possibility.

[Oilerfan92]

First of all, i want to apoligize if my wording here is terrible. I have it worked out in my head, but my articulating skills suck, so try to bear with me.

I was reading the Would You Kill Baby Hitler topic, and i thought about time travel, and then i thought of something. Looking back, we have no record of time travelers ever poping up in history. So does that mean time travel will never exist ? Atleast in the go back in time aspect.

Just think about it. If it is possible, and say it was created in the year 2033. We would have no idea, because its only 2010. But then they go back to 1922 or whenever, and someone discovers the time traveler, likely, something would be recorded of it. Unless they go back to the middle ages or whenever and someone just flat out kills them and ignores it.

Basically, what im saying is because we didnt have time travelers poping up in the past, or even presently, does that mean time travel will never happen ?

I am aware of the possibility that if they did go back they couldve never been found/discovered, found and never reported/covered up. But id think that something would be known.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

Well, actually it's pretty simple. In order to time travel, you'd need a device on both ends. (The present and the time you want to travel to) So once time travel is invented, we'll only be able to travel around Post-time travel-invention-time. Read it again, it'll make sense eventually.

 

[Oilerfan92]

Well, actually it's pretty simple. In order to time travel, you'd need a device on both ends. (The present and the time you want to travel to) So once time travel is invented, we'll only be able to travel around Post-time travel-invention-time. Read it again, it'll make sense eventually.

That makes complete sense. I always pictured time travel as either like the teleporter from Star Trek (im not a fan of the show, dont bombard me with the real name) in that it sent them where ever and could pick you up from wherever, or the time travel where you go inside a portapotty or bigger sized thing and it went back with you and you had to get back to it to go back.


What i dont get, is how time travel would work. Going forward in time i KINDA understand with going certain speeds and that. But how do you bring past events back into physical existence ?

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

Well, actually it's pretty simple. In order to time travel, you'd need a device on both ends. (The present and the time you want to travel to) So once time travel is invented, we'll only be able to travel around Post-time travel-invention-time. Read it again, it'll make sense eventually.

That makes complete sense. I always pictured time travel as either like the teleporter from Star Trek (im not a fan of the show, dont bombard me with the real name) in that it sent them where ever and could pick you up from wherever, or the time travel where you go inside a portapotty or bigger sized thing and it went back with you and you had to get back to it to go back.


What i dont get, is how time travel would work. Going forward in time i KINDA understand with going certain speeds and that. But how do you bring past events back into physical existence ?

Well, as it turns out time may not be linear. We just perceive it as being linear because we see things in the 3rd dimension, and time is (theoretically) the 4th dimension.

There's an avatar floating around this site that explains it perfectly (as far as I'm concerned)...Let's see if I can remember it:

"Most people assume that time is linear; a strict progression of events, when in fact it's more of a big ball of bobbely wobbley, time-whimey....stuff."

That's not it, and I'm sure I just crushed a Dr. Who fan's spirit by butchering it, but that's the basic idea.

I'm really not the guy to ask about this stuff.

 

[octafish]

I'm travelling forward in time at 60 seconds a minute right now.

 

[D3l7a3ch0]

traveling faster than light lets you "see the past" because you get ahead of the light and it hits you again. but to see something on earth you'd need a pret-ty powerful telescope. and the perspective would be from straight up or somewhat vertical--not the best for making out the faces. and of course the picture would have no sound, since sound and light travel at different speeds. and even though space is a void, there would still be enough space dust to interfere with your line-of-sight and diminish your picture. plus you'd have to go pretty far. to see one year ago, you would need to travel 1 light year out, at faster than light speed + compensate for your travel time...

E for Event (in the past)
P for Present Time or time of launch
L for speed of light

to see 2 years ago, you would need to: ((P-E in years, we're making it=2)(9.4605284 × 10^15 meters <-light year)) DIVIDED BY (the positive difference between your Rate of travel and Speed of light) PLUS (9.4605284 × 10^15 meters <-light year X Total Travel time in years)

 

[Glamorgan]

Well, actually it's pretty simple. In order to time travel, you'd need a device on both ends. (The present and the time you want to travel to) So once time travel is invented, we'll only be able to travel around Post-time travel-invention-time. Read it again, it'll make sense eventually.

That makes complete sense. I always pictured time travel as either like the teleporter from Star Trek (im not a fan of the show, dont bombard me with the real name) in that it sent them where ever and could pick you up from wherever, or the time travel where you go inside a portapotty or bigger sized thing and it went back with you and you had to get back to it to go back.


What i dont get, is how time travel would work. Going forward in time i KINDA understand with going certain speeds and that. But how do you bring past events back into physical existence ?

Well, as it turns out time may not be linear. We just perceive it as being linear because we see things in the 3rd dimension, and time is (theoretically) the 4th dimension.

There's an avatar floating around this site that explains it perfectly (as far as I'm concerned)...Let's see if I can remember it:

"Most people assume that time is linear; a strict progression of events, when in fact it's more of a big ball of bobbely wobbley, time-whimey....stuff."

That's not it, and I'm sure I just crushed a Dr. Who fan's spirit by butchering it, but that's the basic idea.

I'm really not the guy to ask about this stuff.

Actually, Timelord has changed his avatar. Also, that does make perfect sense.
Wow, I need to get a life...

 

[lawrie001]

Time is basically a never ending circle, theres no start or finish. To travel forward through time you would use the time dilation effect, which is when you move faster then the speed of light you get a time dilation effect which causes less time to pass for you then the rest of the universe. E.g. a ship travelling at that speed will experience 2 years but the rest of the universe expereinces 10years. Something like that.
Travelling backward is basically up to debate because some people beleive if you were to go past the speed of light then the time dilation effect somehow reverses somewhat and you actually back through time which is hard to beleive. But as the earlier guy said the most likely reason we arnt seeing time travelers everywhere is because its like a phone you need a sender and reciever for it to work.

 

[Abengoshis]

Maybe if time travellers went back in time they would try their best to blend in to go unnoticed. Anyway I couldn't say because time is just a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey...stuff.

 

[DazZ.]

Well, actually it's pretty simple. In order to time travel, you'd need a device on both ends. (The present and the time you want to travel to) So once time travel is invented, we'll only be able to travel around Post-time travel-invention-time. Read it again, it'll make sense eventually.

That's all well and good if we knew that's how one would time travel. But we don't, who's to say (and still assuming time is linear) that we can't eventually find a way of travelling along the 4th dimension just as easy as the other 3?
We don't need a receiving end to walk forwards a few steps, why would we need one for time travel?

That's also assuming time is the fourth dimension, whereas I prefer thinking of the forth dimension as spacial.

In short, Back to the Future is still possible (sort of)!

 

[diego_2112]

I have speculated and pondered over the kanundrum that is time travel for many many years.

I have come to the conclusion that it shall NOT be possible to travel back in time, due to the butterfly effect. If you WERE to travel back in time, and were to change ONE thing, the future would change.

Assumeing that the future changed, your ability to travel through time might go away. If it went away, then you would no longer have been able to go back in time, and therefore, the future would remain consistant, and then the cycle of circular logic comes into play *curses, logic!*...

Now, as far as travelling FORWARD in time... IN THEORY, see above posts about faster than light, reciever on both ends, etc, etc. Also, see the book "Time Machine," it kinda shows some of what could happen, a possible machine that would not need a reciver on both ends, yadda yadda yadda.

I've also conducted an ongoing experiment with myself, leaving a note for my future self, or my children, or my childrens children, etc, assuming time travel ever IS possible (either direction). Assuming it IS possible to travel BACK in time in the future, I've not met any of my future kids/grandkids/etc, so yeah. Laugh if you like, it's SCIENCE!

 

[DazZ.]

Assuming it IS possible to travel BACK in time in the future, I've not met any of my future kids/grandkids/etc, so yeah. Laugh if you like, it's SCIENCE!

It will most likely be incredibly expensive, with a shed load of laws attached. Meeting your past relatives to tell them time travel exists would very likely be high on the list of "don't do this, you eejit".

 

[Kimarous]

Either time travel does not exist, is only forward-moving, or the various travels to the past have had either no effect on history, due to inability to interfere, or their "fateful" effect on history, causing history to go it's historical course (in other words, it was meant to happen). That's my thoughts on the matter.

 

[diego_2112]

Assuming it IS possible to travel BACK in time in the future, I've not met any of my future kids/grandkids/etc, so yeah. Laugh if you like, it's SCIENCE!

It will most likely be incredibly expensive, with a shed load of laws attached. Meeting your past relatives to tell them time travel exists would very likely be high on the list of "don't do this, you eejit".

I have also left detailed plans/sketches/blueprints/diagrams/etc for a perpetual motion device that acutally generates electricity. It is not practical in THIS time, just because of the cost, HOWEVER, in the future, it stands to reason that the coils I need for energy storage will either be cheaper, OR more effective. Without said coils, certain elements of it will lose power, and therefore the device WILL shut down...

As a result, my future genepool donation will (in THEORY) be set for life!

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

The general consensus on time travel is that it isn't possible in the traditional sense because we haven't seen any time travellers. So in that area you're correct, the problem with this stuff is that even our greatest scientist's theories on this are just that, theories. So in other words: We have no fucking clue.

 

[Gwarr]

Time travel is a impossibility , and can be simple to explain why .
Now , imagine time travel was possible , ok? Somebody makes an obsession with changing his past . If time travel was possible , that person would be able to travel in time and change his past , right? But doing so means he never needed to time travel in the first place , because his life would be perfect , right? But if he wont complete the time travel in the future , then how did his past change? Did his future time-travelling him disappear? or will his past remain the same?
That's how I see it , tried to explain it as good as I could in English.

 

[DazZ.]

Time travel is a impossibility , and can be simple to explain why .
-Paradox snip-

What if going back in time creates an alternate timeline? Thus eliminating paradoxes.

We don't know it's impossible.
[small][sub]I want to believe![/sub][/small]

 

[Gwarr]

snip , snip

Then you need to hope Wormholes exist .http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

 

[AdmiralMemo]

Here's something... Alright, say backwards time travel will exist in the future, but you could only go back to the time when the first time travel device was invented...

Now imagine you're the person turning it on for the first time...

I would expect dozens, hundreds, or thousands of people from the future to pop out.

For more information about time travel, watch the movie Primer [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primer_(film)]. Then, go to a mirror and watch your head explode.

 

[Sir Prize]

Time travel is a impossibility , and can be simple to explain why .
-Paradox snip-

What if going back in time creates an alternate timeline? Thus eliminating paradoxes.

We don't know it's impossible.
[small][sub]I want to believe![/sub][/small]

With DazZ, if anyone has heard of the Parallel Particle theory, then they'll understand why.