This is what I don't get about time travel....

[SagaLore]

If time travel were possible, the travelers would have a way of preserving their section of the timeline. So if a traveler made his/her presence known today, the future people would be able to observe it and its consequences and send back another person prior to the original traveler's arrival and intercept them.

Time travel is a self preserving system.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
The future and past exist only as concepts and images generated by the human brain.

An interesting philosophical point, but are you now dead, or never been born or both?

What?

Show me the past or the future.

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
The future and past exist only as concepts and images generated by the human brain.

interesteing indeed, i'd even tend to share that view.

BUT...this doesnt change the fact that events seem to happen logically 'chronologically', eg. i cannot know the right lottery numbers before they're actually drawn some time in the future. Mind concept or not....

But...maybe you might be able to change that conception/interpetation....eg. by meditation..like...'free your mind from these concepts'...too bad i just didn't manage it yet

 

[OREOSpeedwagon]

Maybe because they wouldn't have a way to get back?

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
That is actually one one of the reasons skeptics give as proof that time travel is impossible. Personally, I don't think it's possible to travel through time. You can view the past (by viewing old light rays, ie: looking at the sun is looking 8 minutes into the past), but you can't interact with it. I believe that time is an abstract concept invented by people, not a physical or metaphysical or tangible thing. Think about it, to a slow turtle, time may seem accelerated. When they look at us, perhaps they see us moving at impossible speeds because their brains perceive time at a different rate. To that turtle, it may seem like a few moments to move 100 ft across the ground when in actuality, 10 minutes have passed. Or maybe a fly views time differently too. Maybe we move in slow motion to a fly.
We just created a concept of time that corresponds to our own perception of how fast things move. You can't go back in time one year because there is no such thing as a year. It's an abstract concept designed by us to keep track of when things happen.

Just my oppinion...

yes yes yes,

although there s nothing to say against concepts per se. Because the one (and only) denominator we have here is the human brain - and when the concept only is valid 'for' our human brains..then it's still legitimate.

However, all these all of sudden realizing that time is merely a concept is nothing new...i think it's basically one thought which essentially triggered Eini to invent the theory of relativity...and this was (AFAIK) 1910 or so. Ok..time is a concept, time is NOT what ticking clock is, no months, no years...no other wise human constructs. Nothing new. That's why we have the theory of relativity.....where he tries to show up the fact that 'space' and 'time' are actually ONE, interwoven....there is no 'distance'. Correct. There is no 'time'. Correct. There is something called 'space time' which is a combination of the above and which seems to vary with the (relative) speed an observer moves to an observed 'something'. (Jeeezzz...i hope i got that right). Everything is relative, so to speak.

Btw. i still think TT should be possible - if someone moves faster than light.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
The future and past exist only as concepts and images generated by the human brain.

An interesting philosophical point, but are you now dead, or never been born or both?

What?

Show me the past or the future.

You said that the past and future are concepts, and not actualities. If this were true, how do you reconcile that your birth is in the past and your death in the future? Only past and future separate these events. I am not picking on your statement, but it is one that has been made and wrestled with and has no satisfactory answer.

The universe has been thought of as a "world volume" where if you could view it from the "outside" our perceivable reality would be like a loaf of bread, with one end of it being the big bang, and the other being who knows what. Our "now" would then be as a slice of that bread. Past and future need to exist or the time dimension has zero "length"

To answer your question, I cannot show you past or future, but you cannot show me what "space" is either. You cannot show why motion cannot be undone, just compensated for. It is all linked I think, but how is beyond me.

 

[Syringer]

Repost.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=38&threadid=1111019&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=

 

[IEatChildren]

Using the example of the guy coming from the future and using his knowledge of said future to play the stock market, this would be impossible. This guy would be trading presently where in his past (our present) he was not. Since he would be trying to make money (obviously), he would be spending large amounts of money and thus would be affecting the market in a way that would alter our future and his present. Therefore he wouldn't make money, he'd probably lose it. Time is too chaotic to take advantage of in that way, and so is the stock market.

 

[Angrymarshmello]

Originally posted by: IEatChildren
Using the example of the guy coming from the future and using his knowledge of said future to play the stock market, this would be impossible. This guy would be trading presently where in his past (our present) he was not. Since he would be trying to make money (obviously), he would be spending large amounts of money and thus would be affecting the market in a way that would alter our future and his present. Therefore he wouldn't make money, he'd probably lose it. Time is too chaotic to take advantage of in that way, and so is the stock market.

If the present alters the future, if he makes a choice in the present he can always go into the future to see if it was a good decision, and if not, pull out.

 

[esun]

I'm not sure if someone else mentioned this already, but time travel to the past, if possible, is extremely limited. One of the major limitations is that you can only travel to a time in which the time travel device already exists. So that means once it is first invented, that is as far back as anyone will ever be able to travel back in time (and clearly it hasn't yet been invented, so it's not unreasonable that there are no time travelers in our time). There are other theories concerning alternate universes (everytime something in the past is changed by time travel, that splits off into a seperate timeline), or wierd consistency theories (you cannot change anything significant in the past due to some inherent limitation) that also come into play when discussing time travel.

 

[Nocturnal]

All I know is the world was supposed to end about five times since I've been born and it has yet to happen. I've worried day in and day out about those days as well. Nothing happend. I'm sure this will pass and nothing will happen and we'll happily post here (if ATOT is still around) and say that it was a fluke. The guy either is a very good story teller or he is schitzophrenic like John Nash.

 

[Angrymarshmello]

Originally posted by: esun
I'm not sure if someone else mentioned this already, but time travel to the past, if possible, is extremely limited. One of the major limitations is that you can only travel to a time in which the time travel device already exists. So that means once it is first invented, that is as far back as anyone will ever be able to travel back in time (and clearly it hasn't yet been invented, so it's not unreasonable that there are no time travelers in our time). There are other theories concerning alternate universes (everytime something in the past is changed by time travel, that splits off into a seperate timeline), or wierd consistency theories (you cannot change anything significant in the past due to some inherent limitation) that also come into play when discussing time travel.

And um, why would the device's invention have anything to do with how far back you could travel? How can someone begin to try to prove a theory that can't be proved?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello

Originally posted by: esun
I'm not sure if someone else mentioned this already, but time travel to the past, if possible, is extremely limited. One of the major limitations is that you can only travel to a time in which the time travel device already exists. So that means once it is first invented, that is as far back as anyone will ever be able to travel back in time (and clearly it hasn't yet been invented, so it's not unreasonable that there are no time travelers in our time). There are other theories concerning alternate universes (everytime something in the past is changed by time travel, that splits off into a seperate timeline), or wierd consistency theories (you cannot change anything significant in the past due to some inherent limitation) that also come into play when discussing time travel.

And um, why would the device's invention have anything to do with how far back you could travel? How can someone begin to try to prove a theory that can't be proved?

At the risk of speaking out of turn, the most viable postulated method of time travel involves the creation of worm holes or something like it. One could not travel back to a point before that wormhole was created.

 

[Angrymarshmello]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello

Originally posted by: esun
I'm not sure if someone else mentioned this already, but time travel to the past, if possible, is extremely limited. One of the major limitations is that you can only travel to a time in which the time travel device already exists. So that means once it is first invented, that is as far back as anyone will ever be able to travel back in time (and clearly it hasn't yet been invented, so it's not unreasonable that there are no time travelers in our time). There are other theories concerning alternate universes (everytime something in the past is changed by time travel, that splits off into a seperate timeline), or wierd consistency theories (you cannot change anything significant in the past due to some inherent limitation) that also come into play when discussing time travel.

And um, why would the device's invention have anything to do with how far back you could travel? How can someone begin to try to prove a theory that can't be proved?

At the risk of speaking out of turn, the most viable postulated method of time travel involves the creation of worm holes or something like it. One could not travel back to a point before that wormhole was created.

So time travel is really a way for these dorks to keep themselves from eating that bad Taco Bell they had the night they invented the time travel machine?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: Angrymarshmello

Originally posted by: esun
I'm not sure if someone else mentioned this already, but time travel to the past, if possible, is extremely limited. One of the major limitations is that you can only travel to a time in which the time travel device already exists. So that means once it is first invented, that is as far back as anyone will ever be able to travel back in time (and clearly it hasn't yet been invented, so it's not unreasonable that there are no time travelers in our time). There are other theories concerning alternate universes (everytime something in the past is changed by time travel, that splits off into a seperate timeline), or wierd consistency theories (you cannot change anything significant in the past due to some inherent limitation) that also come into play when discussing time travel.

And um, why would the device's invention have anything to do with how far back you could travel? How can someone begin to try to prove a theory that can't be proved?

At the risk of speaking out of turn, the most viable postulated method of time travel involves the creation of worm holes or something like it. One could not travel back to a point before that wormhole was created.

So time travel is really a way for these dorks to keep themselves from eating that bad Taco Bell they had the night they invented the time travel machine?

Yep

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: Syringer
Repost.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=38&threadid=1111019&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=

or no repost at all?

:evil:

 

[MegaloManiaK]

A while back i asked the question of "is technology infinite"

Basicly to believe in time travel you have to believe that tech is on an infinite progression and that eventualy all things are possible. The chances of anyone ever traveling at the speeds necessary to produce time travel are zero. Just becuase your mom told you that you could be anything you wanted to be doesn't make it true. Thus time travel is an impossibility (possible only on paper) due to the energy limitations. So that is why you will never meet a time traveler, there are simply things in the universe that cannot be overcome, speeding anything that has mass up to the speed of light is one of those things.

And basicly since we are talking about more than 100 years in the future none of us will be around to see anything that may happen there, so you can't prove me wrong.

Nah.....Nah.... Nah-nah.

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: MegaloManiaK
A while back i asked the question of "is technology infinite"

Basicly to believe in time travel you have to believe that tech is on an infinite progression and that eventualy all things are possible. The chances of anyone ever traveling at the speeds necessary to produce time travel are zero. Just becuase your mom told you that you could be anything you wanted to be doesn't make it true. Thus time travel is an impossibility (possible only on paper) due to the energy limitations. So that is why you will never meet a time traveler, there are simply things in the universe that cannot be overcome, speeding anything that has mass up to the speed of light is one of those things.

And basicly since we are talking about more than 100 years in the future none of us will be around to see anything that may happen there, so you can't prove me wrong.

Nah.....Nah.... Nah-nah.

Hey, I could live to be 122.

 

[Quixotic]

maybe the world just doesn't survive long enough to achieve time travel

 

[Woodchuck2000]

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
OK, so let's assume that given an infinite amount of time, time travel will eventually become possible... If time travel does become possible in say 10,000 years, then wouldn't we have tourists visiting us from the future? I'm not getting into time travel theory but just logic- if it is eventually possible, we should be having visitors... Since we do not have people coming from the future today, does that not mean that it's never possible?

Yes. Yes it does. We're never going to find a way to travel backwards in time. It's not impossible that we'll eventually do something funky with relativity and be able to slow it down and/or speed it up (temporal stasis etc) but I think travelling backwards will never happen.

BTW, it just occured to me that travelling backwards in time would increase both the mass and the energy of the universe as a whole - moving anything back in time means that it exists doubly in one frame, and not at all in another. That's gotta break things...

 

[Quixotic]

Originally posted by: Woodchuck2000

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
OK, so let's assume that given an infinite amount of time, time travel will eventually become possible... If time travel does become possible in say 10,000 years, then wouldn't we have tourists visiting us from the future? I'm not getting into time travel theory but just logic- if it is eventually possible, we should be having visitors... Since we do not have people coming from the future today, does that not mean that it's never possible?

Yes. Yes it does. We're never going to find a way to travel backwards in time. It's not impossible that we'll eventually do something funky with relativity and be able to slow it down and/or speed it up (temporal stasis etc) but I think travelling backwards will never happen.

BTW, it just occured to me that travelling backwards in time would increase both the mass and the energy of the universe as a whole - moving anything back in time means that it exists doubly in one frame, and not at all in another. That's gotta break things...

what if, like in Atlas Shrugged, everything we know today is almost correct, but not completely... meaning our laws regarding the conservation of energy, etc. are for the most part correct but not absolute... then what?

 

[Woodchuck2000]

Then we'd hypothetically be able to answer a hypothetical question

 

[dman]

We've already been saved by Time Travelers. You just don't know it.

In our original time-line the world was reduced to rubble after Y2K Turnover, computers in critical locations had been prepared but they missed a few critical lines of code on machines that were thought to be unimportant. Ultimately the error triggered a nuclear Holocaust that eventually resulted in the end of most lifeforms on the planet.

Of course, there was no 9/11 in that time-line, but, you can't fix everything.

/not a time traveler, just throwing wrenches.

 

[h8red]

I want a phase plasma rifle in the 40 watt range

 

[guyver01]

Originally posted by: TMPadmin
I think someone who travels through time would try to keep as quiet as possible.

The Temporal Prime Directive prevents us from revealing ourselves.


oops