if and when time travel is possible

[OrangeAppled]

I am travelling to the future as we speak, and most certainly fucking it up.

 

[Galena]

I think of time like a video game, where you have different 'save files', and these files can be always 're-played' (if you don't delete them [forget what happened]; there will be bits of corrupted data here and there, which will further decay with time).

The mind is the projector that can play these events out in our imaginations. We can't necessarily 'change' what's happened (yet), but we can reintegrate the experiences, 'level up' differently.

Maybe in the future, we will be able to 'jump out' of this existential plane, and realign ourselves back into some past position of this world, and then literally change the past reality.

Yes, I think I see what you mean by "re-play". You can replay the events that did happen in the past; the catch is, you just can't play the ones that didn't happen, eh? I enjoy the metaphor.

 

[Mole]

I am travelling to the future as we speak.

Yes, and the faster we travel the further into the future we go.

And it is hard to believe, but as we come up to 90% the speed of light we can cross the entire universe in a lifetime, but we leave everything millions of years in the past, because we are millions of years in the future.

 

[93JC]

Assuming time travel to the past is possible, would it be possible to do so without affecting the timeline by virtue of your very presence?

 

[baccheion]

It's not that hard to visualize/conceptualize time, as many things seem to follow the same consistent pattern. If moments of time are connected, then it's possible there would be some ripple effect. If they are not, and it's only perception that leads us to believe that each moment is connected to the next, then going back would affect nothing but that moment you revisited. In all likelihood, time is probably a mixture of connected moments, and pockets or fragments that stand alone, both forever looping on themselves.

Time travel to the future is not that hard to believe, as the brain already hypothesizes (sometimes correctly) about what will happen next. And the universe is so consistent that it would make sense that this aspect was made to eventually be controlled and manipulated. All it will take is some daring few to make it happen. But alas, with the state of the world as it is, it's very likely that we won't see time travel for some time. I mean, just trying to get rid of the idea of cancer, or pass some basic reform is met with people getting in the way with BS, red tape, delays, self-serving agendas, and with trying to keep everything the same. Anyone doing real research is made to suffer, is constantly hampered along the way, has been too caged by the incessant inculcation of bullshit, or is just not good enough. And everyone else just makes up or steals some BS theory, bastardizes it, then tries to publish it as something profound. This is not a good place to be. Things need to progress. Every reason they give for the continuation of this garbage should clearly register as bullshit. Some reasons sound better than others, and some reasons make more sense than others, but it's still just plain wrong.

 

[prplchknz]

Assuming time travel to the past is possible, would it be possible to do so without affecting the timeline by virtue of your very presence?

they'll invent suits that make invisble and penetrable, so no one will know you're there

 

[Mole]

We now know that time is relative, that is, time moves at a different pace at different speeds. Time only seems to move at the same pace here because we are all moving at the same speed.

So that time moves at different speeds in different places is counter-intuitive, just as the Earth going round the Sun is counter-intuitive.

So for 200,000 years we thought intuitively that the Sun went round the Earth and that time moved at the same speed no matter where we are, and it is only during the last 300 years we have started to think counter-intuitively and created the modern world.

Why is that?

And why are we so attached to the intuitive thinking of astrology and mbti?

 

[Standuble]

I do not think we could travel through time but if we coulf I prescribe to what I call the "Donnie Darko model" which partially states that objects from the future are treated not as paradoxical if the future where it came from is rendered defunct. If a time traveller is treated either as a) an agent of the present or b) a tolerated paradox which is allowed to remain then the Grandfather Paradox falls apart and the time traveller is now free to reshape the world. It also gives an explanation from the origin of stable time loops with objects being born into existence with no casual reasoning for being there.

I have actually built an elaborate model for what I would do if I possessed a time machine. Basically you take some modern tech, 3D printer, laptop or three, download dump of Wikipedia and some friends back to 3500 BC pre-dynastic Egypt and from there rapidly industrialise the country. If carried out correctly the meagre world population of 20 million can enjoy the world more (with a ballooning population never reaching the billions), lack of ancient tradition means the whole world will be absorbed into your culture and the lack of indigineous claims to land allows you to expand as far as you want. It may technically be genocide but what can you do?

 

[INTP]

We can travel into the future by increasing our relative speed.

And at the quantum level things can travel back into the past, but for reasons of entropy, quantum time travel doesn't translate into macro time travel. And we live at the macro level.

Thats just some stupid hypothesis that is believed because it works on paper..

Basically this hypothesis is based on the fact that when you shoot light from one hole, it goes straight line, but when you shoot it trough double slit, it makes interference pattern. Now when you try to look at from which slit the light went trough, it doesent make the interference pattern anymore. The conclusion that works on paper is that the light goes trough both holes and when you try to observe it, it seems to predict that you are observing it before the interference happens -> it seems to go back in time.

Personally i think thats just stupid, obviously if you try to measure light, you need to catch the photon to measure it, thus it doesent go trough the hole which you measure it from and doesent make interference pattern anymore because it starts to act like particle. Particles cant go trough two holes like waves can and thus cant interfere with itself.

Now it would seem weird for why the scientists would believe the hypothesis of photons predicting the future when there is a simple explanation for that which doesent require time travel. The reason why they do believe that is because math used in that says that the photon goes back in time and the same math works on other stuff in quantum mechanics. So basically because the "time travel of quantum world" math works in that case and in others, its used and considered as the most plausible explanation by people who use the math. I think its just the math that is flawed, but happens to work in some instances.

 

[Mole]

Thats just some stupid hypothesis that is believed because it works on paper..

Actually Relativity works in reality. For we have measured the different speed of time on satellites moving fast around the Earth.

And we know that as we approach the speed of light, distance is foreshortened and time in dilated. So it is theoretically possible to travel from one side of the universe to the other in a lifetime, knowing that we leave our home millions or billions of years in the past, forever out of reach.

 

[INTP]

Actually Relativity works in reality. For we have measured the different speed of time on satellites moving fast around the Earth.

And we know that as we approach the speed of light, distance is foreshortened and time in dilated. So it is theoretically possible to travel from one side of the universe to the other in a lifetime, knowing that we leave our home millions or billions of years in the past, forever out of reach.

Yea relativity works, but that double slit experiment where the hypothesis for photons going back in time comes from isnt relativity theory..

What comes to what you said about relativity isnt quite true. Its true that to an outside observer for example a spaceship thats moving away next to you sideways at the speed of light appears to get smaller and that the same spaceship moving closer to you(and passing by) at the speed of light appears to be stretched, also if the spaceship is at in front of you and suddenly starting to move away from you at the speed of light will appear to first stretch and then get smaller. But the whole idea about relativity is that all of this is relative to the observer.

Ill explain it and need this uber artistic picture to illustrate:

Those rings are photons that are emitted from each end. If the ship is stationary, the photons from each end will hit your eyes at the same time and the ship will look normal to you. Now if the ship moves at(or near) the speed of light away from you sideways(as pictured), the photons from the side which is further away from you will take longer to travel to you than the photons which are at the other end. So because the ship is moving away from you and you perceive the other side with a small delay, the spaceship appears to you as if it had changed size. Similarly if the ship is moving towards you, you will perceive the photons that are closer to you sooner than the photons that come further away, so you will perceive photon that is older at the same time than you perceive photons that are coming from the side which is loser to you.

And here are some numbers added for you to ponder on to illustrate it even further:

You see this is hat happens:

The first box is where the ship is when you perceive the closest part of it, the middle box is there just because you see it there also(as long as there are photons coming all over the ship, not just the ends) and the box on the right is where the ship is when you perceive the side which is furthest to you. -> the ship will look as if it was longer than it is in reality because it is relativistic how you perceive things due to static speed of light.

If this didnt clear it out, feel free to ask for further explanation.


What comes to traveling long distances in a lifetime, well basically it is true, but there is a twist to it which doesent really go hand in hand with your other claims.

You see if you are moving at the speed of light, you are not aging because none of the atoms can work normally anymore. You see the proton that is spinning around the atom nucleus cant spin anymore, as it would be required for it to move faster than light in order for it to spin around the nucleus -> atom will stop and you will stop perceiving time and nothing changes until you stop and you wil end up in the other side of the universe before you grow any older. Obviously you cant get back and have moved through time, as time is nothing than distance which light travels and when you travel at the speed of time, time will pass around you, but not on you. The time that will pass around you depend on how many light years you travel, so if you move 10 light years, 10 years have passed around you and you have moved the distance which light moves in 10 years.

 

[entropie]

The concept of time is per se pretty much unknown to the physical universe, as it looks from our present standpoint. That means going back in time would mean to rearrange the physical matter that way that you can recreate a previous state. But that wouldnt necessary mean that you'd change the present time. The other problem would be going forward in time, you cant create a physical state from the future you dont know.

With present physics thinking about time travel is very limited. Even spacetime theory is just a theory of space and not time. Time is only in the human mind. Maybe with quantum physics things will change. Following this quantum entaglement theories where particles are physically connected, maybe there is something like time-dilated connections...

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

I don't think it will ever be possible.

I do think however that great advances in spacecraft tech is possible, and that eventually we will slip the surly bonds of our solar system.

 

[Mole]

You see if you are moving at the speed of light.

We can't move at the speed of light because mass reaches infinity which is impossible. However theoretically we can approach to near the speed of light where relativity effects are real and not just an illusion seen by an observer.

And although it is theoretically possible to approach the speed of light, it is not technologically possible now or even in the medium future.

 

[Betty Blue]

Assuming time travel to the past is possible, would it be possible to do so without affecting the timeline by virtue of your very presence?

Yes, because magic.

 

[93JC]

Yes, because magic.

But... but... temporal causality loops!

 

[Betty Blue]

But... but... temporal causality loops!

Oh dear, do i need to draw you a super diagram picture of magic?

 

[93JC]

Oh dear, do i need to draw you a super diagram picture of magic?

If you think it would help.

 

[INTP]

We can't move at the speed of light because mass reaches infinity which is impossible. However theoretically we can approach to near the speed of light where relativity effects are real and not just an illusion seen by an observer.

And although it is theoretically possible to approach the speed of light, it is not technologically possible now or even in the medium future.

The whole point of relativity is that the measurement made is relative to point in spacetime where the measurement is made in. Spacetime will have an effect to the measurement due to its curvature. You could say that the measurement you are making is the real reality(since its the reality which effects you), but in my opinion thats just a retard Te way of looking at things. But if you take more intellectual view of the things(*cough* Ti *cough*), the real reality is what happens where the photons are sent, and the path of the photons arent straight due to the spacetime curvature, so things observed from a distance just seem to be different than what they actually are.

I need to go to work now, so i dont have to write more now about the mass of a photon, so i might come back to you later. What i can say is that E=MC2 and that there is no evidence for photons not having any mass, there is just evidence for that the mass cant be very big.

 

[Betty Blue]

If you think it would help.

I hope this makes things clearer for you.






(I do not pretend to own my mothers artistic talents)