Time Travel

[EternalCynic]

I'm going to leave this relatively open and broad.. so I'll just ask:

What is your theory on Time? Time Travel? Does Time exist/is Time Travel Possible/How is the thread of Time (if there is one) structured?

What are your thoughts on this? :)


::Edit::
Also wanted to add that it doesnt have to be a set in stone theory, anything that may have wandered through your mind at some time or another.

[Sam172]

Now give me a few days to try and remember a 3 hour talk I had with a good friend about this subject about 2 1/2 years ago...

[EternalCynic]

Now give me a few days to try and remember a 3 hour talk I had with a good friend about this subject about 2 1/2 years ago...

Hah, yeah.. the reason I asked was because I had a long chat with my friend about it as well, he kept flat out denying it's existence without giving anything else a though :(. So I'm hoping to get some interesting responses here :D.

I'll post a few of my own when I've got more energy :blush:

[Johnny]

As long as we are not limited in our examples of time travel in writing, then I will claim that time travel doesn't really exist and our blinders are confusing us from seeing that.

[jimkopelli]

We appear to be continuously travelling forward in time. Does that help?

[SensEye]

Deja vu all over again.

http://www.intpcentral.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=214&highlight=travel

[jimkopelli]

Deja vu all over again.

[Avengardh]

<Neo>Whoa</Neo>

Yes, that last fragment was lame, but deja vu reminded me of it.

If you ask me, I think it's possible, but time is just a measure humans came up with. We rely on it.

My Physics teacher said it was not likely....but not impossible.

And yeah, so we talk about the same things...it was really to be expected, there are quite a few people joining the forum :D.

~*Aven*~

[Vagabond]

And let me just say, deja vu all over again. :ph34r:

[Laeskis]

time travel is possible for objects but not for living beings.

[Melody]

what is the difference?

[Melody]

all u gotta do is travel faster than the speed of light

[int]

Unless time is just a human element that isn't really "real" but just a measurement.


And yes, that's (what I just wrote) is deja vu. :)

[flan2dave]

What if there were two dimensions? Instead of a time-line, a time-plane? You could have a "home line" where you spend most of your time, so to speak, and you are free to dabble or stay in any various parallel lines, of which there can be infinite. Or what if you decided to choose the perpendicular direction to travel in only? Would it just be a smear of the various individual time lines, or could it also make coherent sense? Maybe a diagnol line?

[int]

I don't know. I've never operated inside a fourth dimension, as far as I know.

Not to overlap threads, but what if the energy that makes up the cells in your body are the timeless makeup of what has been, and is what to come (may explain some deja vu...)? :)

[flan2dave]

I think that would also help explain "gut" feelings something is about to occur, or explained in the cell context, tapping into the future histories contained within.

[EternalCynic]

doh, figures there would already be a thread about this. oh well, might as well have one in the science forum as well..

loving the responses anyway.. thanks guys :)

[KentOhio]

I have a unique theory on time travel. It's my opinion that UFO's are time machines from the future coming back to check us out. The "aliens" inside, with big heads and eyes, are super-evolved humans, which is the result of the great amount of time between their world and ours.

[cloakable]

I don't know. I've never operated inside a fourth dimension, as far as I know.

We all do:

1 Dimension: not sure what the desc. is.

2 Dimensions: Height, and Length

3 Dimensions: Height, Length, and Depth (also known as Space)

4 Dimensions: Height, Length, Depth, and Time (also known as Space-Time)

So we are in four dimensions now - I think entropy proves that.

The question is, are there more than four dimensions?

[jimkopelli]

I'm of the opinion that time isn't a dimension, but a constant. Call it the 0th dimension or whatever... but if you think about it, if you tried to observe anything which was in any dimension, you'd need time to observe it in. Can you think of anything which can exist without time? Neither can I.

Some of the upper level TOE people have put out estimates of up to 17 dimensions... but I think they're playing silly buggers. Check out this article at Popsci (http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/article/0,12543,591747,00.html) for an ok version of their story.

[Strephonade]

If we assume time as a constant for all points in a plane, and we consider this plane to be topographically variable, then it would perhaps be possible to time travel in the sense that one could be in two places at once, and one could move instantaneously between the two points.

We can look at it from the perspective of a measurable output--radio waves travel a certain distance in a certain amount of time, given certain conditions. If we were to listen in from another point in our universe, we would be able to hear programs that were broadcast decades ago. If we happen to catch an echoing sequence of radiowaves (bouncing off some structure somewhere), we might be able to do the same thing. If there are echoing dimensions, all one would have to do to travel there is to catch the echo.

If we find a way to determine how, when, where space folds, then we may be able to travel to many points in time, including the future.

[edit] I should also mention that I am taking into account the existence of multiple planes.

[Strephonade]

Well, it's very easy to be in both the future, past, and present--when was the last time you considered what you wanted to do about a dinner? ;) J/K--I skipped ahead several steps in my last post before the last statement, I know. In the interest of saving you a bit of time, I will skip to the end.

Imagine, if you will, that there is a universe in which nothing three-dimensional exists. All creatures that exist in this universe are two-dimensional. Let us say that a rectangle exists in this universe, and a circle. To the rectangle, the circle would always look like a line of the same length, and to the circle, the rectangle would look like a line that would change lengths, depending on the direction in which it was pointing.

Neither would know it resembled a circle, or a rectangle, really, but from our perspective, it would be quite clear. Or maybe, depending on the behavior of the line, they would call themselves a circle or a rectangle. In any case, let's say that something three-dimensional passes through their plane one day, like a building made of Legos, followed by a porcupine, or a sea urchin. What would that look like? What would their frame of reference be?

We have to ask, how do we know what it is we are observing? We can only be certain of the measurements we have made, and to some extent, the precision of the instruments available. Put these together with a curious mind, one that likes to ask perceptive questions, and we can explore infinite possibilities, and travel beyond the stars.

[Melody]

Can you think of anything which can exist without time? Neither can I.

That's why Einstein thoughted up spacetime.

you goofs need to look into relativity (at least special relativity, which is simple in the superficial sense (general relativity is simpler in the true sense) meaning it requires simple math) it is completely sensical, nothing magical.

[Laeskis]

If a person travels faster than the speed of light he/she would probably die. If I'm not mistaken matter converts to energy at that speed.
Your body might make it back, but you probably wouldn't breathe anymore.

[indczn]

If a person travels faster than the speed of light he/she would probably die. If I'm not mistaken matter converts to energy at that speed.
Your body might make it back, but you probably wouldn't breathe anymore.

Except you can't ever reach the speed of light, as you approach the speed of light your mass gets larger, and larger, and as aresult it requires an infinite amount of energy to go faster and reach the speed of light. Good luck getting there. :D

[Laeskis]

anyhoos it aint possible. ;)

[Ckyzxr]

Being who I am, I thought deep on this.
In order to form an "opinion" on this I had to assume that what I understand about relativity is correct; that both gravity and time are closely interrelated. The theory purports that time near a black hole "moves" slower than on earth.

Based on this, one could hypothetically slingshot/orbit around a black hole, getting as near as possible and then return to earth. The time elasped on the space vehicle would be much less than on earth. This essentially would be travelling to the future. So if the relationship between time and gravity is true then...yes, time travel is possible. Only to the future though.

I have more to dispence on this, but I am simply a "traditionally uneducated" being and I am more likely to be full of shit as to have my theory comprehension correct. It makes sense to me though.

[SensEye]

The time elasped on the space vehicle would be much less than on earth. This essentially would be travelling to the future. So if the relationship between time and gravity is true then...yes, time travel is possible. Only to the future though.


Not really. You have travelled to the future only from your relative perspective (hence the term relativity). When you talk about "the future" in the context you are using you are refering to the time from people on the Earth's (outside the black hole) perspective. As far as they are concerned you have been stuck in a black hole for xxx years, you haven't travelled into the future at all.

This is no different than freezing yourself cryogenically and calling that travelling to the future. All that's happened is that inside the black hole all the things you have been using to measure time (the cells aging in your body, the clock on the wall, radioactive isotope decay or what have you) having been moving relatively slower than those things outside the black hole.

Time is simply a measurement of motion and not a dimension you can travel through.

[Melody]

but if ur speed gets fast enough, this 'solely relative' thing is what would allow one to travel back into the past

[Birdsnest]

I think its possible that the ufo sightings people see today may be people from the future traveling back in time to visit us. I have no scientific view on this, just heard that time is manmade and you can go backwards and forwards in it and when you incarnate you can chose to be born in any time period.

But of course, thats just an idea, I don't really believe it until there is proof of it.

[EternalCynic]

I think its possible that the ufo sightings people see today may be people from the future traveling back in time to visit us. I have no scientific view on this, just heard that time is manmade and you can go backwards and forwards in it and when you incarnate you can chose to be born in any time period.

But of course, thats just an idea, I don't really believe it until there is proof of it.

I've thought about that before, 'time travel' through reincarnation.. that would assume, though, that time has no flow, and you could relive your same life again if you wanted, or others would be born as you, because if you could be born in any time period, there are already bodies there that await you.

Then again, maybe there was ONCE a flow of time but it came to it's end, and we are all merely living out the past lives of others and being reincarnated into the same body over and over and over..

I'm going to stop now before I ramble on any more, lol

[Avengardh]

I think its possible that the ufo sightings people see today may be people from the future traveling back in time to visit us. I have no scientific view on this, just heard that time is manmade and you can go backwards and forwards in it and when you incarnate you can chose to be born in any time period.

But of course, thats just an idea, I don't really believe it until there is proof of it.

I've thought about that before, 'time travel' through reincarnation.. that would assume, though, that time has no flow, and you could relive your same life again if you wanted, or others would be born as you, because if you could be born in any time period, there are already bodies there that await you.

Then again, maybe there was ONCE a flow of time but it came to it's end, and we are all merely living out the past lives of others and being reincarnated into the same body over and over and over..

I'm going to stop now before I ramble on any more, lol

Have you ever read, The Law of Love by Laura Esquivel?
Interesting book, nonetheless, it talks about how you are linked to certain people as you keep reincarnating. For example, in a past life, perhaps your mom was your husband. Anyway, quite interesting.

I have thought much about the whole UFO thing, more so because of the Aztecs, and the Mayans, but the way I see it there is a type of net (energy net) that covers the world, perhaps even the universe.

Somewhere in the net perhaps there is a rupture, or the strings are just somewhat more stretched there than anywhere else (higher points of energy, the Bermuda Triangle for example). I think that's where other dimensions come from, perhaps even time travel. I just don't think that the world has a uniform energy distribution.

I guess this is just another theory, but time-travel in our dimension might not seem possible, but perhaps in another dimension or parallel universe, it is.

~*Aven*~

[Ckyzxr]

The time elasped on the space vehicle would be much less than on earth. This essentially would be travelling to the future. So if the relationship between time and gravity is true then...yes, time travel is possible. Only to the future though.


Not really. You have travelled to the future only from your relative perspective (hence the term relativity). When you talk about "the future" in the context you are using you are refering to the time from people on the Earth's (outside the black hole) perspective. As far as they are concerned you have been stuck in a black hole for xxx years, you haven't travelled into the future at all.

This is no different than freezing yourself cryogenically and calling that travelling to the future. All that's happened is that inside the black hole all the things you have been using to measure time (the cells aging in your body, the clock on the wall, radioactive isotope decay or what have you) having been moving relatively slower than those things outside the black hole.

Time is simply a measurement of motion and not a dimension you can travel through.

This is pretty much what I was trying to say. This description of time travel is not travel, it's rate of aging relative to another entity or system. (I just can't resist the urge to help clarify ;) )

[Boozer]

Kent: I'm with you on the Grey aliens being superevolved people thing. Either that or just superevloved figments of our imagination. In other words they may just look so much like people because they are monsters our minds made up.

As for time travel, from what I can tell travelling forward in time only needs a really fast ship, no need for faster than light, just very fast, and suddenly when you get back to earth you are still young and all your peers are either old or long dead thanks to relativity. As for backwards in time (the more interesting one to me), I'm kind of stuck between impossible, and needing to use wormholes to do it. I also think the whole kill your grandfather paradox is probably solved with the parrallel dimensions for every choice, kind of like that sliders show I think.

[Boozer]

Also I'm not sure if the semanitc of cry being real time travel or not is important. Isn't the real objective to be able to go somewhere in time that you cannot naturally. I'm all for literal truth but if I make it to the year 3000 by freezing and you do my a "real" time machine, aren't we both still in the year 3000?

I for one suggested it because it was at least plausible with cryo or speed, but then again for INTP's being able to do it is secondary, being right is the real importance.

[Aryan]

I DOnt know whether time travel is possible or not but i know something :nerd:

let
p be the statement travel travelis possible
q be the statemet Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is true

Then
if p is true then q is not true

Hence since Heisenberg's principle has been experimentally verified p is not ture
So time travel is not possible

PS:
Any theory can have flaws, so Uncertainty principle might be proved wrong somewhere in the future

[EternalCynic]

Have you ever read, The Law of Love by Laura Esquivel?
Interesting book, nonetheless, it talks about how you are linked to certain people as you keep reincarnating. For example, in a past life, perhaps your mom was your husband. Anyway, quite interesting.

~*Aven*~

I've never even heard of it. Worth a read? (My booklist is expanding every day x_x.. I should keep a list.. but then I will have become a J =P)
I'll check it out, thank you :D.

[Boozer]

if p is true then q is not true


I'm not sure I understand why. I thought the uncertainty priciple basically says that you can't know a particle's position and velocity at the same time.

[INTrPosr]

I love time travel movies that are made well, but two things preclude me from believing it could occur. Traveling to the future implies that our futures already exist and our lives are predestined. I believe in free will too much, otherwise what’s the point? If we were capable of returning in time, how would we account for collective past memories? Each time someone traveled back, it would cause a ripple effect, resulting in the only reality as this instant moment.

[Melody]

I dunno as much relativity as I want to, but spacetime is a 4-dimensional manifold ("surface") in 5-space. Like how a sphere is a 2-dimensional manifold in 3-space. Just thought I'd point that out. Actually, the physics ppl will prolly tell u not to think of the manifold in that way, but to think of it as "all there is, surrounded by nothing."

I guess what I am saying is that it is not unreasonable to believe that spacetime is a structure such that when perceived from an external view, it is unchanging; in the same way we see a stone or a piece of metal or someone's sun-dried kidney.

That reminds me of my Theory of Everything.
http://chu2.blogspot.com/2004/08/my-theory-of-everything.html

[nona]

Okay, I'll get suckered into this one... :)

Time is a unit of measure, not a physical demention. It can not be "traveled through" as such in either direction.

Time is simply the measure between the events in our life...

We progress through the events of our lives and we have a handy way of denoting when they happened. (Time)

However, there are illusions of forward time travel.

For example, if we somehow suspend or seriously slow down all bodily functions, then we percieve that we are traveling or have traveled forward through time. Kind of like when you accitently go to sleep and wake up later only to have perceptualy "lost" an entire evening (the evening actualy happened you just didn't notice it). But if you slow down the bodies processes by some method then the illusion is complete and from your perspective, you have jumped forward in time.

However, one can see that moving backwards in time would be somewhat more difficult (impossible really)

Now that I have said it is impossible, some of you bright people need to go out and prove me wrong. :)

[Almaviva]

Time is not "simply" anything.

Time is connected to space, and gravitation, and deeply so. For instance, there's the "twin paradox". If someone accelerates on a spaceship, travels a while, and then comes back, less time will have elapsed from the point of view of the traveller than for the person at home. This effect has been measured with atomic clocks and jet airplanes, and also GPS systems need to correct for it. (You can't just launch accurate clocks into space and assume they are going to stay in synch, and this has nothing to do with how accurate the clocks are.)

If you learn the basics of relativity, it is clear why it makes sense to talk about time in the same units as distance (1 year of time equals one light year of spacial distance, i.e. time it takes light to travel in a year. Or light travels about 1 foot per billionth of a second, so a "foot of time" is about a nanosecond.)

[nona]

Almaviva... Let me propose another theory... Any time you are in the presence of a loosly wound spring... Time slows down....

Oh wait... Maybe it isn't time slowing down.... Maybe it is the CLOCK slowing down.

Yes. Atomic reactions slow down as speed approches the speed of light. This DOES NOT mean time slows down. It means the clock slows down. BIG DIFFERENCE.

Yes, the body ages slower at relitivistic speeds. This does NOT mean time slows down. It means our perception of it slows down. and the way it affects us changes. But it does not change.

[Almaviva]

What do you mean by time then? If different frames of reference have clocks moving slower, atomic reactions happening more slowly, people aging slower, people's thoughts being processed slower, and everything else moving more slowly, what is time aside from that?

After all, you claimed time as the measure between events of our lives. Measured how?

[jyakulis]

I think time travel is most definitely possible, but ehh I'm no expert. For it to work I'm pretty sure, well, first you are gonna have to have a worm hole. Which I think is a way through the fourth dimension. Worm holes do exist by black holes BUT you could never travel through one because of radiation, you'd have to travel faster than the speed of light (Impossible), and you'd basically get stretched like a piece of a spaghetti. But if you were to travel through one of these I'm not sure what would happen. I'm not sure I would guess you'd get transported to another 3 dimensional spot, maybe another universe, or maybe the same spot just a different point in the time clock of the current universe you were in. But if we could produce a device to make a wormhole without a blackhole then theoretically time travel is possible. Because all negative effects of traveling through a worm hole could be negated through scientific means because there is no black hole to get in the way. And from what I understand it would work like umm you would enter one end of the wormhole and it would take you to the future. While the other end would take you to the past. Why does this work, well I'm not sure just have a basic idea. It has to do with the bending of time. Think about a triangle on a flat plane then one on a round surface. There will be a differences in the angles (won't add up to 180 degrees). It's the same idea around black holes. The angles are either gonna add up to be negative or positive relative to what actually exists in three dimensions. I guess the negative and positive equals traveling through time. But again I just have a basic understanding anyone know anything else? Or anyone able to clarify for me?

[Dman]

What about the possibility that time travel may exist, and even be common, for certain particles - but will never be possible for humans simply due to the laws of nature. I think this is much more realistic, although less romantic.

[jyakulis]

What about worm holes to the future to solve our garbage problems. We won't be around to see all the mess we created. Besides if we go far enough everyone will prolly of killed themselves from nuclear war, so, we wouldn't be hurting anything. :huh:

[Dman]

What about worm holes to the future to solve our garbage problems. We won't be around to see all the mess we created. Besides if we go far enough everyone will prolly of killed themselves from nuclear war, so, we wouldn't be hurting anything. :huh:

"Prolly"; I like that.

I have doubts that every living human being would perish in a nuclear war or even it's after-effects. We can be tough sons-a-bitches sometimes. And lucky.

But really, I think the idea of time travel is about as likely as hooking up with aliens.

[kali]

bump

[asperger]

bump

Oh, this is cruel.

[kali]

this is a glimpse of the past lul

[kali]

seriously though i have to write a philosophy essay on time travel, do my homework for me

[asperger]

I believe in recycling:


It seems to me that time, because it is an objective property of the real world, is properly within the domain of science. A room full of philosophers could shed no more light on the subject than a single frat-boy farting at an unlit candle.

This is where I would start my paper. It's also a likely clue as to why I don't even have a high school diploma.

[kali]

Haha. My marker would kick my arse.

They said to not approach it scientifically, but philosophically - don't talk about how things are, but how things can be.

[asperger]

Haha. My marker would kick my arse.

They said to not approach it scientifically, but philosophically - don't talk about how things are, but how things can be.


How things can be is delimited only by science. How things can be imagined belongs to the arts. There is simply no legitimate place for philosophy here. However, if he started with the instruction: “Imagining that time travel is possible what philosophic implications might there be.” then there is a legitimate place for philosophic speculations. But I suspect/guess that the only area would be the sub-domain of ethics.

[kali]

Theoretical possibilities are not delimited by science itself, it's delimited by logical and natural laws, the latter of which science works to find.
Philosophy in this case is a form of meta-science, the analysis of scientific findings. We don't really have scientific essays, essays are attempts to convince the reader of a particular viewpoint; we have scientific reports.

We're just asked to think about if time travel is possible with one-dimensional or two-dimensional time frameworks. This question would be moot in science if there were no supporting empirical bases.

[asperger]

Theoretical possibilities are not delimited by science itself, it's delimited by logical and natural laws, the latter of which science works to find.

You are correct, I was being sloppy.

"How things can be is delimited only by science." I should have writen "How things can be is delimited is strictly within the domain of science." If you have further criticism I would be glad to hear it. It's nice to have a chance to learn.


Philosophy in this case is a form of meta-science, the analysis of scientific findings.

If an anlyisis does not proceded by the scientific method I see no justification for the use of the word "science" If it does so proceeded I see no justification for the word philosophy.


We're just asked to think about if time travel is possible with one-dimensional or two-dimensional time frameworks. This question would be moot in science if there were no supporting empirical bases.
Exactly so.

And thanks its pleasing to engage your mind.

[puzzled-observer]

I don't see any good reason to suspect that time travel is possible...Meaning that i see no reason to suspect that either the past or future is preserved in some space that we can access.

[asperger]

I don't see any good reason to suspect that time travel is possible...Meaning that i see no reason to suspect that either the past or future is preserved in some space that we can access.

Reason to suspect is so broad an invitation I cannot refuse to accept.

Imagine a cube of tough but otherwise jello like material, and imagine two dots as on the left in the drawing below. Now apply force as shown by the arrows on the right. The two magenta dots that were separated on the left are contiguous on the right.
http://crhzfg.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pdQ4vw6TAbNBI_1FrXgSDYwtevVc001v2GYnrbRP6Psup2FxZVXbFY_MSsyquc2cQWeg4963IRq4tNQAxFSxA_oGtRSPJ5amQ/spaceTimePinch.jpg?psid=1

Now imagine the cube is a spacetime hypercube.
.....
And now I see reason to at least suspect that time travel might be possible. Or at least visualize how a world line could meet itself. And that seems like a reasonable first step to me.

Edit:

But to be perfectly honest I don't see it as possible either.