is time travel possible?(not including twins paradox) (3 Viewers)

[eldore44]

Woh. You are an idiot.
Of course I was being sarcastic.
I hope you were being sarcastic, pretending to not realise my sarcasm. I mean who can possibly think that '4 whole hours' gives you any kind of understanding in an area as complex as this?

 

[yuri_gagarin]

classic idiot response
the fact that you seriously added to this thread gave me the feeling you were ignorant
4u maths etc gives you a big head

 

[untouchablecuz]

yer, it should have a dotpoint on time travel; doesn't really say much about it

besides the twin paradox (which really isnt in the syllabus anyway)

 

[untouchablecuz]

yeah universe splits every time there is a choice, on a macro and micro level



not sure hugh everett would consider it an 'ad hoc' explanation......using occam's razor is like inference to the best explanation, it's subjective, and furthermore - whats the 'simpler' alternative? that is still plausible?

EDIT: umm sort of a reading list - they send out booklets on each topic, with readings included

i can't really suggest another alternative; but its like the aether, even after failure to detect it, ad hoc explanations with no empirical backup were postulated

i mean sure, hypothesise; but saying that the tourists travelled through parallel universes doesnt "disprove" the implications of alcaders Q but only offers an alternative

also: so theres no syllabus or anything?

anyway, goodluck with hsc

 

[blueduck]

one can only move forward in time not back... the only way to time travel is to get enough energy to propel u forwards at a significant percentage of the speed of light for a while and somehow aviod the crushing g-forces
BUT....
if person A and person B could both go back in time at the same moment to the same time and then one kills hitler would either of them then disapear in to nothingness as since hitler is now dead in their present time they would've had no reason to travel back in time in the first place?
.....i think my brain just melted

 

[yuri_gagarin]

hahah fuck stop it

 

[Darnie]

Time dilation shows how time is relative to your motion, i.e. moving clocks run slower than stationary ones. But really, its just that clocks run at different speeds relative to their motion toward one another.

It has been proven, and clocks on GPS satellites do need to be altered to fit in with our time, due to their speed, they run slower than clocks here on earth. The relationship between motion and time is: t(0) = t(x)/(1/sqrt(1-1/c)) where t) is the "stationary" clock, and t(x) is the clock that is moving relative to the other.

 

[Darnie]

your point?

you could go for a flight around space, at say, 0.8c, for a few days, and when you come back, according to your clock it would say you've been gone a few days, whereas to people who stayed at home, they could say you've been gone for years

 

[blueduck]

grandfather paradox - can be resolved in a number of ways, thats essentially what your hitler thing is...cbb to explain now google it

thax man here is the wiki def for lazy shits

The paradox is this: suppose a man travelled back in time and killed his biological grandfather before the latter met the traveler's grandmother. As a result, one of the traveler's parents (and by extension the traveller himself) would never have been conceived. This would imply that he could not have travelled back in time after all, which in turn implies the grandfather would still be alive, and the traveller would have been conceived allowing him to travel back in time and kill his grandfather. Thus each possibility seems to imply its own negation, a type of logical paradox.

this made me think of that futurama ep when fry goes back in time, kills his grandfather then has a bit of hanky panky with his grandmother consequently becoming his own grandpa...in the words of dr farnsworth "you're your own grandpa u sicko!"

 

[untouchablecuz]

universe conspiracy theory

LOL

would the universe conspire to stop the guy from travelling back in time

 

[untouchablecuz]

farfetched

but eerily interesting

 

[tashisthebest]

time travel is possible. but think about it this way.

if i make a time machine n go back in time to change something that i regret(there's a lot). If i change that then my present would change, this means that i would have never made the time machine. If i never made the time machine how would have i gone back in time n casue the original change.

This is something tha will get you thinking.

If u want to know more bout this paradox. Read Maichio Kaku's "Physics of imposible".

 

[youngminii]

I still agree with my earlier post: You can travel to the future but not the past.
Hence, no one coming back from the future into our present.

 

[untouchablecuz]

Everything can be resolved with many worlds interpretation ^^

EDIT: Also depends on your conception of time - if we can travel to any point in the future, or the past, that assumes that they exist, as a physical destination - and is that not fatalistic?

unless the past, present and future are occuring and reoccuring continuously in an oscillation of events and it only appears fatalistic

edit: the guy in your sig is awesome, i wish i could play an instrument

 

[untouchablecuz]

occurring and reoccurring continuously in an oscillation of events...? explain

all i'm saying is if you were able to travel to the future, then clearly your observations of the future imply that certain events have to happen - which makes it fatalistic, or deterministic perhaps, but that's too subtle for me...

ok, im drinking this cup of water right now

this event has passed

but, the event is still occuring in another self

compare it to an infinite amount of identical films playing but all are out of phase of one another by an infintesimally small amount; the same event continually re occurs

do you see what i'm getting at? it's hard to explain

 

[00iCon]

but you're asserting that your past self exists - so you're saying that an infinite many copies of 'you' exist, all enacting some moment of your past.....?

what timeline are they existing in?

I prefer to think of it as an infinite(or Lim x-> infinity) number of parallel universes rather than t imeline which branches off

 

[blueduck]

yeah thats the theory e.g. the gun would slip out of his hands, the bullet would get intercepted by a random bird etc.

hahaha! im imagining the universe being like "try and screw up my law will u? not on my watch! eat random bird fuckwit!!!" *tweet tweet" KABOOM!
i wonder how many times u could do that until the universe just decided it would be easier to kill u?

 

[00iCon]

would that prove God? as the controller preventing us from scewing up our histories?

 

[untouchablecuz]

but you're asserting that your past self exists - so you're saying that an infinite many copies of 'you' exist, all enacting some moment of your past.....?

what timeline are they existing in?

thats basically it

well, the same timeline i would presume because differing timelines would require multiple universes

 

[untouchablecuz]

but you're saying different things - one in which infinite copies of you exist, each frozen by times (or each lagging behind the one ahead of it - except for your birth, perhaps?) - and the other in which there are an infinite number of universes, where decisions are different e.g. in one, you went to school, in the other, you didn't.

i didnt say the latter

00iCon did