Time Traveling

[Raziel]

What is your time traveling theory?

There are many theories, like changing history leads to a time paradox that will split reallity split into two realities which are parallel to each other.
For example you'd have the choice to kill Hitler.
If you wouldn't kill him, the events would have continued as they did years ago.
If you would kill him, maybe the whole war didn't even start, creating a second reallity where events changed.

Another theory is the one of a time loop.
If you traveled back in time and shoot your grandfather what would happen?
Events would repeat themselves over and over again.
Shooting your grandfather would prevent you from being born, but if you had been born, who shooted your grandfather in the first place?
So if you couldn't shoot your grandfather because you weren't born, than no one could have shot him, allowing you to be born again...
The same thing would be repeated over and over again.

Also a theory is that time cannot be changed.
Whatever you do in your life, if you had the same choice thousands of times, you would do the same thing over and over again.
You could call it fate, something leading you to do the same decision every time leading your future,
or you could call it an illusion of freedom, never ever being able to make your own decision, even if you wanted to.

I personally think, time can't be changed. If we would travel back in time and do something to change it, we couldn't.
History was already written, we can't change it as we already were a part of it.

What is your theory of time, time traveling or even parallel dimensions and please try to explain why you think so.

 

[Wings]

I don't believe time travel is even possible. If you think about it, we would have to develop some type of machine that is able to reach light speed (299,792,458 m/s) and be able to carry a carbon based life form (person)for an extended period of time.

Light travels in particles and is not solid matter (like humans). In order to travel at that speed, that person would have to materialise and then be grouped back together (like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory). We would never be able to survive the change...honestly.

 

[Raziel]

I know Wings, actually that's why it is about time traveling theory and not if it is possible or not.

 

[Wings]

I know Wings, actually that's why it is about time traveling theory and not if it is possible or not.

Then stamp the "realist" tag on my forehead. Is it even a theory if the concept isn't even possible? I would assume it to be more fantasy...OMG thinking too much.

 

[Grandor]

Yeah, I don't think it would be possible either. The closer we reach to light speed the denser we become, eventually we become so dense that we would begin to slow down or just melt. Whichever comes first. :p

However with new technological advancements making ground breaking discoveries everyday I don't think it would be to far out of the question in the future. By the time time travel does become possible I probably wouldn't be around to see it. Perhaps you can believe in the wormhole theory by having two black holes formulated and the being going inside one as nothing, not even light could escape it and emerging from the other side. But the chances of the person still being intact would be slim. And the funding for such a project would be impractical, the idea of time travel is tempting but the cost of it would far exceed any practical uses we could make for it.

 

[Rhazdel]

The only thing is, wormholes are far too frail to allow any large body of matter to pass through. Even something the size of a human being would likely cause the wormhole to collapse, leaving the object in one of the continuums.

I agree with Wings. Timetravel is theoretically impossible, so it really can't be discussed, other than in a science-fiction sense. And, as Grandor said, if I were ever to be proven wrong, I highly doubt it would be during my lifetime.

 

[LosAngeles]

I think that's it's a repeating process. Everything starts over and over again. But it always takes a different direction. My theory is a bit complicated...I try to eplaine it on an example.
If you would look from the "outside"(not influenced by the time flow), you'd see yourself. Now imagine you get thursty. Then you go and grab something to drink that would be one dimension of time. If you look back now at the very moment when you felt thursty there's this other dimension, where you remain in your seat, because you're currently to lazy to go downstairs and get a drink. That's the second dimension. And many others appear as well. They're countless.
Now back to the first reality. You get something to drink, you can either get a glass or drink out of the bottle. Now to new dimensions are created and they process parallel further. So basically everytime you decide something or do something multiple(countless)new dimensions are created because you coul have done it differently.
So a small change in one's action would not be a totally different reality, just a coexisting one with a small change. But this change can effect the later events so in the end it is a totally different reality.
(It's confusing, I know)
There is also the possibility of intersection. When parallel realities/dimensions
have events or actions in common.
Then one experiences a so called "deja vu"! This state where the surroundings and the whole situation in general seems so familiar. This is caused by the intersection of two(or more)realities. Or also when one reality already experienced this particular event. But because the realities are so diverse, the deja vu's are rather seldom.

Time travelling would cause a total chaos in the realities...
Who knows, maybe some are already affected but not mine!

I read about the deja vu thing once in a book(can't remember which one though)and it seemed to fit perfectly in my other views, so I integrated it.
Well..that's my theory, but I don't know why I think so...has to do with the realities, I suppose. I might think differently in another parallel reality:D

 

[arcthemonkey]

While I believe firmly in human innovation, and entertain the possibility of mankind someday getting around the problems surrounding the proposed methods of time travel, I'm not entirely convinced that time travel is possible even if you did go through a wormhold at the speed of light or whatever concept you subscribe to. People talk about quantum physics like they knew what the hell was going on, but the fact is that we don't understand the way the universe works. No model can describe the universe accurately, and sometimes things that should be possible are impossible - and perhaps more importantly - things that should be impossible are possible.

All that being said, if we were to somehow find a way to travel to the past, I lean towards the "stone in a river" analogy. Basically, the concept is that if you throw a small stone into a flowing river, the ripple would never "catch up" with the river, and really be eliminated by the motion of the river itself.

So if time is the river, the concept is that if I were to go back in time and kill myself, that would be an event "downstream" as it were, and would have little to no effect on my "upstream", also known as the present.

Basically, if you throw a rock in a river, you are only noticably affecting the part of the river you threw the rock into.

This is the only theory that's really able to shrug off all paradoxes. Thing about it, if something I changed in the past reflected into the present, then nothing could be done in the past that hadn't already been done from the perspective of the present. So I couldn't go back in time and kill myself, because I had already been killed by myself in the past (when it was present, of course.) I couldn't go back in time, and accidently step on a beetle which leads to a chain of events leading to global destruction, because that beetle would have already been stepped on. If it was possible to go back in time and change the past, it would be at the same time impossible, because the very concept of changing the past implies it had already been changed.

(Also, Deja Vu is pretty easy to explain without alternate realities, you know...
)

 

[Queue]

I believe in anything to be possible.

Theory behind a theory behind a theory behind a theorem. A theory, or possibility cannot be considered a fact as it's manifested from a being creating a theory whose base knowledge can be or influenced by an observation of either another theory or possibility. The ?observation? of time, space and matter are heavily defined within a Theorem which is considered a possibility not a fact.

Logically, logic is illogical.

Question it, or observe it, don't approach it in a manner which isn't able to view an object or detail realistically. Realism and Imagination, React and Absorb, Observe and Define.

Ramble... ramble... ramble... ramble.

EDIT:

"Gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble gobble! Too much darling too much!"

 

[Overnerd]

Taking into account the fact that the extreme gravitational forces around a black hole literallt drag space time along with the hole in its rotation, it is theoreticaly possible to exceed the speed of light by a slight amount by coming in at the speed of light in the opposite direction of the holes rotation. This would start the object travelling backwards in time, but not for very long and it would be horribly dangerous and costly to be that close to a black hole anyway.

If you could go back in time, then it would most likely nd up with the parrallel universe hypothesis.

 

[Roman Candle]

Logically, logic is illogical.

...
No.


We do travel through time, all the time, relative to lots of things. Personally, I think that should be enough. Anyway, Quantum entanglement makes me think that Kant was right: We understand the universe as well as we do in terms of space and time, but that doesn't mean that we can actually understand the universe in those terms, (totally, at least). I suspect the harder physics fights, the worse it makes things for itself.

 

[Monk]

I'm gonna have to side with the physicists on this one and say that backwards time travel is probably impossible.

However, if I were to indulge my nerdy sci-fi side, I'd say that if it were, I would like to believe it would be a scenario where the present is permanently interconnected with both past and future, so it already takes time travel into account (i.e. if one were to "go back" to 1957 from 2007, there would never be a timeline where that person didn't briefly exist in 1957.

 

[Raziel]

Okay, it has been said many times that time travel probably is not possible...
Please let's stay on topic. If you wish so, see it as science fiction, but at least talk about the theories in general and not about if time traveling is even possible. Thanks.

 

[kaze950]

I think that, if time travel were possible. every instance of time traveling would lead to a parallel world of sorts, a 'branch' of the timeline. Thus, time paradoxes wouldn't happen (If you went back in time, and shot your grandfather, the you from this parallel world would die in the present of the parallel world, but you would remain unharmed...or something like that)

Time travel can get really, really confusing.

I don't think it would be possible to travel into the future, as I don't think the future is written.

 

[Roman Candle]

Parallel universes. Interesting. Since the universe by definition means "Everything which exists", what exactly does "Parallel universe" mean? If something interacts with our universe, then it's part of the universe. If it doesn't then, (for something in the universe), it does not exist. I don't quite hold with parallel universes, in the sense that people seem to be using it.

 

[arcthemonkey]

Some people would argue that's a matter of perspective, especially since, even as far as time travel supposedly occurs right now, it's all a matter of perspective.

 

[NarutoFan27]

Here i go with all the science physics stuff. Ok time travle is possible but it can be used to go back to when when the first time portal was opened
You in side an atom way deep, time and matter create something call a time foam their are these little bubles of foam that pop in and out of existence these bubbles are wormholes a wormwole will take you from one point in time to another so if you stopped one bublles in a pair of bublles enlarge it so a person could walk through you would end up where the other one would be in space and time.
All of this is in fact possible but you would need so much technology to get this to happen it would probably take a millenium.
Thank you science channel hehe

so i think its possible and the theories that you go back in time kill your grandfather but yet you cant because you have never existed thing is true and all those other things but what sucks is you cant go back and kill hitler

ps: im sorry i went off topic i just had to do it so that could say on what i beleive is right on the theories

 

[Mezmerize]

Time travel is just silly. What's done is done :p, I don't see the point in going back in time or going into the future. It spoils the fun, just let it happen as it will.

So, no, I don't believe in any form of time travel.

 

[Overnerd]

Time travel into the future is relatively easy, you just need to go really really fast to slow time passing relative to the rest of the world.

Backwards time travelling requires something of sufficient gravity to "frame-drag" the space around it.

Science Channel is awesome!

 

[Roman Candle]

Yes, travelling forwards in time is a cinch. I personally do not travel at the speed of light all the time, and enjoy a great deal of time beacuse of it. Yes yes indeed.

I recently learned about Wheeler's Delayed Choice experiment. It blew my MIND. Like, dude. Seriously. Wow. Put simply, if you shoot photons through a card with two slits onto a screen, they will form a wave interference pattern, (that is, in some sense it passes both slits). However, detecting the particles between the slits and the screen causes them to lose their wavelike behavior, and the pattern built is one of two bands of light as you would expect for particles.

This is a standerd experiment. But in the Wheeler's Choice varient, instead of placing the detectors between the slit and screen so that the photons are particles when they hit the screen, you put telescopes nearby. In this way, you determine which slit the photon will pass though after it has hit the screen. But here's the wierd thing. When the photon hits the screen, it does so as a particle - no wave pattern. However, at this time, it has not been detected. In fact, it loses is wave property beause it's going to be detected. NO WAY. SERIOUSLY.

In my Quantum Mechanics Must Die varient of the experiment, you set it up so that the screen the photon hits is a LDR, which alters a circuit. The circuit is attatched to the telescopes and activates/deactivates it. When the light is concentrated into two bands, (beacuse it's going to be detected), the telescopes are deactivated and the photon is not detected. However, if the photon is not detected, then it would behave as a wave. But when it is not a particle, the circuit deactivates and reactivates the telescopes, destroying the wave form. In this way, the prediction made invalidates itself, (this is similar to the Laplace's Demon thought experiment, where an infinitely knowledgable being in a determined, determinable universe cannot predict the action of someone who will do the opposite of it's prediction).

Supposedly in quantum mechanics objects can defy the law of excluded middle and possess two conflicting properties. I'd like to know if it can posses neither. Would it then still be light?