Do you believe that time travel is possible?

[classy]

I believe science can manipulate a lot things and will do in the future. But as far time travel it will never happen. There is no alternate universe, yesterday is gone forever. The minute that just passed as I posted this is gone forever. Time will never be manipulated.

 

[tyler811]

Something from john titor

There is a civil war in the United States that starts in 2005. That conflict flares up and down for 10 years. In 2015, Russia launches a nuclear strike against the major cities in the United States (which is the "other side" of the civil war from my perspective), China and Europe. The United States counter attacks. The US cities are destroyed along with the AFE (American Federal Empire)...thus we (in the country) won. The European Union and China were also destroyed. Russia is now our largest trading partner and the Capitol of the US was moved to Omaha Nebraska.

Omaha hell why not dayton ohio sheesh

 

[Willy Duet]

Well I finally figured out where to find a flux capacitor. Next time you see a girl wearing a thong, the outline line it leaves on her pants looks exactly the flux capacitor

 

[Legend]

Forward, I'm betting is possible. Backwards, I'm not so sure about.


We really don't know a lot to really say what we can or cannot do. Relativity and Einstein are like our time's Greek Philosophers talking about our solar system.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: FFactory0x
Philadelphia Experiment! Ohh Im a believer

that was invisibility or teleportation IIRC.

I thnk that it was actually a time travel test but apparently the side effect was teleportation, etc.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Travel into the future? Yes, it's been proven theoretically.

Into the past. There is no known accepted theory to do so.

There, that is THE answer.

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: tyler811
Something from john titor

There is a civil war in the United States that starts in 2005. That conflict flares up and down for 10 years. In 2015, Russia launches a nuclear strike against the major cities in the United States (which is the "other side" of the civil war from my perspective), China and Europe. The United States counter attacks. The US cities are destroyed along with the AFE (American Federal Empire)...thus we (in the country) won. The European Union and China were also destroyed. Russia is now our largest trading partner and the Capitol of the US was moved to Omaha Nebraska.

Omaha hell why not dayton ohio sheesh

lol, it used to be 2004 that the civil war started....

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Travel into the future? Yes, it's been proven theoretically.

Into the past. There is no known accepted theory to do so.

There, that is THE answer.

Stand back everyone!! The reliable source on time travel has spoken, err posted!

 

[cHeeZeFacTory]

simple experiments such as have 2 atomic clocks, one on a jet airplane, one on the ground easily shows traveling into the future is possible. The atomic clock on the jet airplane flying at high speeds will be slightly ahead of the clock stationary on the ground.

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Stefan
Why or why not?

One of the things that I don't understand about the theory of relativity is that when something approaches the speed of light, time slows down.

That really doesn't make sense to me. Time is time. 1 second is always 1 second. Whatever we define as an interval, will always be the same interval. The amount of distance you can cover might be greater or lesser depending on the velocity, but the inverval is the same.

Say I have some machine that can take me 100 light years in 1 second. When I reach my destination, I have aged 1 second. So have the people on earth. If I come back in 1 second, I'll have been gone for 2 seconds total, and both me and the people on earth have aged 2 seconds.

This is my take on it anyway.

If my logic is wrong, wouldn't that mean that people who travel more (on planes, cars, etc) will outlive other people simply because while they are moving, time is slowing down for them, while being constant for the people standing still?

It simply makes no sense to me.

The first flaw is you can't travel 100 light years in 1 second. It takes 100 years at the speed of light to travel 100 light years.
Relativity says the speed of light is the maximum speed. In fact as you approach the speed of light and put more energy into going faster much of the energy goes into your mass and not increasing your speed. At the speed of light all the energy you put into going faster transforms into mass not greater speed.
If you travel say 10 years at close to the speed of light your time passed will be 10 years. According to relativity the people on earth (who are traveling thru the universe at a much slower speed) will have passed a lot longer, say hundreds or thousands of years.
At least thats what Einstein says and every test that has been done to test relativity has supported it.

Why did Einstien think that the speed of light is the maximum speed in the universe?

 

[MartyMcFly3]

Yes.

 

[Zenmervolt]

I'll research it and get back to you last week.

ZV

 

[Rock Hydra]

Originally posted by: Legend
Forward, I'm betting is possible. Backwards, I'm not so sure about.


We really don't know a lot to really say what we can or cannot do. Relativity and Einstein are like our time's Greek Philosophers talking about our solar system.

Then WTF is the point? If that's true and it does work that way, it's not like you can to there, and then come back to discuss your findings.

 

[JonBarillari]

Originally posted by: cHeeZeFacTory
simple experiments such as have 2 atomic clocks, one on a jet airplane, one on the ground easily shows traveling into the future is possible. The atomic clock on the jet airplane flying at high speeds will be slightly ahead of the clock stationary on the ground.

Is this valid proof?

Perhaps the speed or altitude of the clock on the jet has an effect on the circuitry or oscillating frequency of the clocks' crystal or whatever means is used to 'tally time'. My point is... If your clock moves faster or slower than someone else's, does that mean you are 'traveling in time' at a 'different rate' than the other person?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Garth
Time doesn't exist. That is to say, we are not "in" time. There is no "time-stuff" in which we are immersed, as we would be immersed in water or somesuch. Rather, what we call time is a manifestation of our consciousnesses moving more-or-less uniformly together. It is a sort of psychological effect that emerges from our conscious orientation in reality. Our abilities to percieve probable futures and pasts creates the illusion of linearity, but basically there is no objective distinction between past, present and future. All events are simultaneous, therefore.

Given the above, "travelling back in time" doesn't really make much sense. The very idea of travelling "through" time is incoherent.

Heh. For once we agree. Time does not pass. We pass.

Kind of a thought on this, a perspective if you will. People like to talk about the Big Bang as the origin of the universe. In many people's minds, it is kind of like a kind of scientific replacement for religious creation. But in fact, all the matter generated by the Big Bang already existed as energy before the Big Bang. In reality, matter/energy is never created or ever destroyed. It IS. In terms of time relevant to human understanding, it always was and forever shall be.


And uh, Einstein's relativity is not relevant here, people. The OP asked specifically about the possibility of non-relativistic time travel. The answer is no given our current understanding.

 

[Connoisseur]

The portion of the logic you're not getting is the constancy of the speed of light. Einstein theorized that light speed is an absolute in our universe based on his equations that anything with mass requires infinite energy to propel it to light speed. So in actuality, we can only go a significant fraction of the speed of light. As we get closer and closer to C the amount of energy required to propel us even faster is greater than all the available energy in the universe.

That said, it IS possible to develop a machine that will send you 100 light years in a second. But what you have to keep in mind is that this second is from YOUR perspective. What happens is, as an object moves closer and closer towards the speed of light, distances along the line of travel shrink. So you don't need to be moving faster than the speed of light. You can get to a 100 light years in a second as long as you're moving at a significant fraction of the speed... say 0.999C. However, relative to an observer who is seeing your motion, they will only perceive you as moving AS FAST as the speed of light. Thus, since light takes 100 years to travel 100 light years, the observer believes (and rightly so) that you took 100 years to travel that distance. You on the other hand, only perceives this time as a second (and this is also a totally correct perspective).

This brings up a lot of issues with relative motion that would take a long time to explain and I don't fully understand them myself. The bottom line is, I believe you're getting caught up in the notion of perspective. Here's the skinny: there is no absolute perspective in the universe. There is no one correct frame of reference. Every observer has their own frame of reference and EVERY frame of reference is correct relative to the observer; thus, every frame of reference is absolutely a correct frame of reference. Also, the one absolute is the speed of light. Without that absolute, our entire scientific notion of the universe would collapse in one big stinking heap of cr@p that we'd have to find another way to explain.

In conclusion, time travel is possible into the future (assuming you mean time travel in that you don't age while everything else ages around you). Let's say you wanted to go 20 years into the future. You would have to travel 10 light years away at a very significant fraction of the speed of light, TURN AROUND (the act of decelerating, turning around and accelerating in another direction is the one necessary step to establish that YOU are the one time travelling), and then go back to the earth. This entire round trip would take 20 years in other's perspectives but would only be a few seconds for your. Thus, you've successfully time travelled. Back in time is another story.... that would require negative mass or energy or some crazy conception like that.

And there you have it... special relativity 101 (and I do mean extremely basic) in a nutshell. Have fun digesting that. Took me many sleepless nights and racking my head to absorb it and I'm still a blubbering idiot about it.

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: Rock Hydra

Originally posted by: Legend
Forward, I'm betting is possible. Backwards, I'm not so sure about.


We really don't know a lot to really say what we can or cannot do. Relativity and Einstein are like our time's Greek Philosophers talking about our solar system.

Then WTF is the point? If that's true and it does work that way, it's not like you can to there, and then come back to discuss your findings.

There wasn't supposed to be a point.

We're all time traveling in the future right now, nearly exactly at the same speeds according the Relativity. Our understanding of this science is in its infancy.

If there was supposed to be a point, I'd go to future, assuming we've advanced. Life extension, better food, better health, better entertainment, etc.

 

[DrPizza]

Who says you can't travel 100 light years in 1 second? Isn't 100 light years the distance light travels in one year in the Earth's frame of reference? So, if we have that distance, then something traveling very close to the speed of light (I attempted to calculate how close, but had rounding errors on my calculator) could travel that distance in 1 second, relative to them, which would be 100 years, relative to the earth.


Anyway, perhaps this explanation might help. (although it's not perfect, scientifically)
The speed of light is exactly 299,792,458 meters per second (by definition)

Now, for a moment, imagine you're in the concorde airliner, capable of supersonic flight (faster than the speed of sound). While the jet is traveling faster than the speed of sound, the person 2 rows behind you yells "omg! There's a fire in the engine!" Does the sound reach you and cause you to panic with the rest of the passengers? Yes. That's because the medium through which the sound is travelling from passenger B to you is stationary with respect to you and that passenger (this is a horrible analogy at this point, but it might work.)

Now, since the concorde has been banned, and after it lands safely with that bad engine, aliens come to earth and replace the engines with something making the jet capable of flying at nearly the speed of light (with respect to the earth) The speed of light, again, is 299,792,458 m/s. The jet is capable of traveling at 299,792,457.9 m/s. Again, the guy two rows behind you starts yelling, but he says something more like "holy ******, did you see that alien pass us? That guy is a maniac." Again, it should seem plausible to you that you're going to hear him almost immediately. And, you see his mouth moving while you hear him talking. Then, he pulls out a green pen laser from his pocket, shines it toward you, where it just misses your head, goes into the cockpit and out through the windshield.

If you've followed along so far, you need to stop and think about this: when that laser passes through windshield, it's actually going to be going slightly faster (light travels faster in the vacuum of space than it does in air.) Suddenly, the spaceship crashes into an interplanetary chicken. Frozen of course due to the extremely low temperatures, and it goes through the windshield, releasing all of the air from inside the space ship. Now, the passenger 2 rows behind you blinks out "S O S" in morse code during his dying seconds. Of course, the light is now traveling at c inside your spaceship, no longer going *slightly* slower due to the index of refraction of air.

Did I mention that the aliens put giant headlights on the jet? Now, as those flashes of green light go forward, relative you to, they are traveling forward at the speed of light. Just about this time the space ship is going by the earth.
Does an observer on earth see the light traveling forward at nearly twice the speed of light? Can't happen.
But, how can an observer on earth see the light coming from your ship and moving at the speed of light, if your ship is moving at the speed of light? There's only one way possible: the rate of change of time is different for you on the ship than it is for us on earth.
Einstein's idea was that the speed of light was a constant, rather than the speed of time.

 

[WildHorse]

 

[mzkhadir]

What about people from the future travelling here ? Dont you think we would have people travelling to our time if time travel was actually possible.

 

[cshel]

I hope so, cause I want to live in the 70's!

 

[Cooler]

You should add only to the future option.

 

[lobadobadingdong]

Originally posted by: cHeeZeFacTory
simple experiments such as have 2 atomic clocks, one on a jet airplane, one on the ground easily shows traveling into the future is possible. The atomic clock on the jet airplane flying at high speeds will be slightly ahead of the clock stationary on the ground.

I read about that test, very cool stuff.

 

[Juno]

i hate science.

 

[JLGatsby]

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong

Originally posted by: cHeeZeFacTory
simple experiments such as have 2 atomic clocks, one on a jet airplane, one on the ground easily shows traveling into the future is possible. The atomic clock on the jet airplane flying at high speeds will be slightly ahead of the clock stationary on the ground.

I read about that test, very cool stuff.

The answer to the possibility of time travel.

That does not mean time travel is possible.

The clocks are simply off, but they both still exist in the present time. One clock is not "in the future."

If one clock is ahead of another, does it mean both clocks exist in two different times? Has one clock traveled back in time or as one gone forward in time? How can you go forward in time if the future hasn't been created yet? To go foward in time is to imply every action anyone ever takes, even exact hum of every atom of every thing in the universe is recored somewhere. Do you believe that? I don't.

To go back in time is to imply you take something that does not exist in the past and bring it there. If you were to "travel" to before your birth, then it would cancel each other out and you simply would not exist. The clock which traveled back in time, does not exist in it's present state. Everything is constantly changing, nothing is the same as it was one millisecond ago because it's atoms are constantly fibrating. Nothing exists in a frozen state for any amount of time. So that clock in a "one second ahead" condition cannot exist next to a clock that has not changed times.

Also, if time travel will one day be possible, why hasn't someone gotten rid of all the problems of the past?

Why didn't anyone kill Hilter before he committed his crimes?

Why didn't anyone travel to 1930 and tell the Federal Reserve to quit raising interest rates during a bad economy, which helped cause the Great Depression?

Why didn't anyone travel back to the time of Jesus to meet him and see if he was a hoax or not?

Why hasn't a time traveler appeared before us and gave us the technology to rid the world of disease and hunger?

There are three options which would anwer these...

1.) Humans will not exist long enough on this Earth to invent time travel, even though it is possible.

2.) Parrellel dimensions exist and time travelers have traveled/created parralell dimensions where these problems are fixed.

3.) Time travel is not possible.

Take your pick.

I for one do not believe anyone/anything is "recording" the present, so travel into the past or future is not possible. I believe the present exists in one spot and watching a clock is not like seeing a DVD disc being recorded with a "time" display.

The entire universe has no time in my opinion because of it's infinite past and infinite future, so in a sense, time does not exist int he universe as a whole. The present is a hallucination by us and stretched and lived out by our consciousness, by which everything will begin and end in a quick flash we never knew even happened.