Time travel impossible? Your HT thoughts....

[zsouthboy]

Do you think time travel is impossible? If you think about it long enough, it is so complex, that even if you somehow could do it, every single little thing you do would have massive implications down the road...... It's just mind-boggling.....

Well, all you HTers, what are your thoughts? I believe time-travel is possible, but it would only possible to go forward in time, not back, but that is sorta like being cyrogenically frozen and stuff..... hmmmmm.....


zs

 

[Elledan]

Sure, various particles often travel through time.

The question is not whether time-travel is possible, but whether a gigantic collection of particles (namely us Humans, or any other organisms, for that matter), can travel in the same way through time, and all end up in the same 'time', and in the right order.

Yes, traveling forward in time is a quite easy, just use a spaceship which can travel near half the speed of light. Only going back might be a problem

 

[Evadman]

Well, I have limited knowledge, but baised on mathmaticals I think it is possable to travel back in time. Follow my logic here.

The closer you get to the speed of light the slower time goes. so if you hit the speed of light, wouldn't that mean time would stop for you? ( assuming it were possable ) And then, if you exceded the speed of light, time would start beung in the negitive range, so time should be going backwards for you correct?

Again, this is only assuming it were possable to get that much energy, or find a way around the light speed limit ( like star trek )

 

[CZroe]

Read Michael Crichton's "Timeline" novel.
AWESOME book, and he actually tries to explain a little quantum-physics with a pretty cool idea of how it's possible (Basically, let someone in an alternate reality figure out part of it for you)

 

[Cosmickarma]

Time travel is impossible....yes the time travel which you describe reg going forward in time maybe possible, but it is not the way we think it could be, a la back to the future type. common sense tells us that there are just too many ridiculous paradoxes and anamolies present if ever such a situation arises....pretty positive it will not be possible.

 

[CStroman]

We're constantly going forward in time.

 

[Saurk]

I avoid saying something is impossible. You will never be proven right, and most likely will be proven wrong someday. In this case, I doubt it will be in your lifetime...or in the lifetime of Earth. But you never know.

It seems logically impossible to travel back in time (at least, to me), but my understanding of quantum physics is rather limited. There is a theory that every moment in time contains an infinite number of possibilities (aka: 'alternate realities', which would negate the effects of potential paradoxes/anomolies, etc. from traveling backwards in time.

Even with this possibility, it seems to me that such a time traveller may be unable to return to him/her previous 'reality' after undergoing such a journey. But the possibility exists that someone would be able to travel in the time dimension.

 

[Sahakiel]

I believe strongly in cause and effect and chaos theory.

The future, while uncertain, is set in stone. You cannot change the future. Even if you were to somehow know what the future will be (100% sure without any room for error) then any attempt to change it will result in the future you forsaw.

Applying this to time travel, what it basically tells me is that while nothing prevents time travel forward or backward, and changes made along the way are meant to happen. I remember hearing an old story about a man in one city seeing Death in the marketplace and waving. The man, thinking that he's about to die, goes home, packs his bags, and leaves for the beach or something where he's murdered in his sleep or something. When he meets Death, he asks why He waived at him and Death replies something to the effect, "I was surprised to see you there considering we had an appointment later tonight at the beach." Blah, blah, I know I screwed up the story, but I forget details.

Whole point is trying to change the timeline won't change what is meant to be. Traveling back and forth in time wouldn't change what's going to be or has already been changed.

Physicists have always speculated about tachyons, particles that could concievably travel back in time. Cosmologists have always wondered about the properties of dark matter in the universe that seems to make up an enormous chunk of the mass of the universe, but is undetectable. Anti-matter has the opposite properties of matter, but are difficult to make. I believe that anti-matter is matter traveling in the reverse direction (I think I posted that before) and while we're sitting here in a world of matter, somewhere else in the universe is a world of anti-matter traveling backwards in time.

 

[Cosmickarma]

it seems to me that such a time traveller may be unable to return to him/her previous 'reality' after undergoing such a journey.

precisely!.....you can never come back to the same, everything that happens today is due to a combination of millions of factors, any hand would change everything, your existence itself cannot be there.


Think about this, why dont we have any one who travelled from the future to the present with a time machine today. why dont we see anything in history about people who travelled from the future using time machines. nope not possible. some of you might say a lot of inventions in the past were said to be impossible to make, but most of them were atleast scientifically sound in principle then!

 

[Superdoopercooper]

Sure it is... all you need is a DeLorean and a Flux Capacitor. Sheesh. Didn't you see the movie?

 

[bizmark]

It seems that we shouldn't rule it out. Time is just another dimension which we're being pushed through in one direction. We can move freely in the other three perceptible dimensions; why not believe that at one point we'll be able to move freely through time?

 

[RSMemphis]

why not believe that at one point we'll be able to move freely through time?

mainly because it would not agree with the relativistic theories out there.
And they seem to work over and over and over.

You can change the speed at which time moves on, but that's about it.

While it is hard to say that time travel is impossible, I find it rather unlikely that it is possible, just because the current foundation of physics does not give any indication that it would be possible.

 

[CZroe]

Each "point" in time may actually be co-existing with every other point in time. This is possible through the aformentioned "alternate realities" theorum. Basically, moving through time is simply time branching you through each reality. Because each reality can branch off into an infinite amount of other co-existing realities, you are not affecting your current reality by creating another from a previous one (By interfering with it through time travel). Because "time" is nothing more than a concept, it very well may be dimensional. I urge everyone to please read Michael Crichton's novel Timeline! It's unbelievably descriptive, like his other novels (Though for some reason, the man still believes that evolution is possible! Even if an infinate number of realities exists evolution has no chance: It only makes the universe more complex to have such a system and therefore created by unthinkable design)

 

[Saurk]

<<

<< why not believe that at one point we'll be able to move freely through time? >>

>>





<< mainly because it would not agree with the relativistic theories out there.
And they seem to work over and over and over. >>



Which theories specifically are you refering to? Newton's theory of relativity seemed to work over and over until people tried to apply it to light. Then we found that it doesn't apply to light. Relative velocity makes no difference with light, the speed of light remains constant. This still doesn't seem logical to me, but it's generally accepted; look at Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity.

Now try to apply Einstein's theory to time...Oh, wait; we can't. That's because we currently don't have the technology to do so. Just like they didn't have the technology to apply Newton's theory to light in the 17th-19th century. Maybe it's possible to gather empirical evidence on time travel, with the right technology.

I'm not saying that it might be possible to go back in time and shake your great-great-great grandfather's hand. If it is possible to travel through time into an alternate reality, there will probably be no you. There will also probably be no humans, and even no planet Earth. Probably in most alternate realities there's just a big empty space where Earth is located in this reality - that's what is mostly present in the universe as a whole. That's why it's an alternate reality; anything could have happened in the past to lead to that particular point in time and space.

Anyway, it's an interesting concept to think about... All this is very speculative, and it's easier to quash someone's argument than come up with one of my own.

 

[nirgis]

I'm disturbed by the amounts of "I think we should be able to.. " and "logically, it seems that.." The facts are that the the universe and physics hold no promises or even follow conventional thought. That said, I do not understand the universe nor pretend to, 100 years ago the atomic bomb would have been considered magic, who knows what Science may lead to. However, I severly doubt that time-travel will be convenient, i.e. punch in time --> arrive. Time dialation has been proven scientifically the manipulation of this is the only method I could envision time travel occuring in

 

[Elledan]

<< I believe that anti-matter is matter traveling in the reverse direction (I think I posted that before) and while we're sitting here in a world of matter, somewhere else in the universe is a world of anti-matter traveling backwards in time. >>


Anti-matter contains out of the counterparts of normal matter, i.e., they have the same weight, but the opposite charge (if present) and spin.

When virtual particles are produced, they always consist out of the same amount of matter and anti-matter particles. Often an electron and positron are produced, which quickly annihilate each other, unless they are in the presence of a black hole, of which the gravity will pull one particle towards itself, while the other particle will be pushed away (opposite charge).

 

[Sahakiel]

<< Anti-matter contains out of the counterparts of normal matter, i.e., they have the same weight, but the opposite charge (if present) and spin. >>


Yeah, so wouldn't it make sense if anti-matter moved through time the opposite of normal matter? Last I heard, string theory showed that the properties of fundamental particles were associated with the pattern of vibration along each dimension. I think the most advanced analysis at the time called for vibration on at least 3 dimensions. If time is treated as a dimension, then it's quite possible to have the opposite vibration or wave which would cancel out normal matter. To me, it seems logical.



<< When virtual particles are produced... >>


What's a virtual particle?

 

[AnthraX101]

A "virtual particle" is a particle which is created by the universe at random from the noise. They are always produced in pairs, a particle and an anti-particle.

However, there is no easy way to say that anti-matter is traveling in time in reverse. We have produced anti-matter, and it still existed after production (for short periods of time, I'll give you, but not on the scale of a planck second). What it would have to do is live it's existance in reverse, which requires a rigid time maping. IE: Everything has been set in stone even before it happened.

Armani

 

[imgod2u]

Antimatter is still matter per say. It simply has the opposite charge of the matter we're use to seeing every day. It is very possible that somewhere else in the universe, there is an entire galaxy made up of this "antimatter" in which everything works just like it does here. Only in that galaxy, the electrons would be positively charged relative to our electron, the protons would be negatively charged relative to our proton, etc. It's all relative, antimatter is no some weird thing that can have uncanny properties, it's matter. I think, it has to do with the organization of quarks inside the particles that make them either a particle or an antiparticle.

Anyway, as far as time travel, it's very possible to go back or forth through time, it just takes vast amounts of energy (like that of a black hole) and where-ever you may go, you'll probably destroy. As far as I know, the working theory towards time travel is to create a rip in spacetime, in which two points in spacetime are connected. This mean 2 singularities would appear, you go into one, and come out the other (with enough energy to boost you out that is). Of course, this would also mean that your destination will be consumed by the singularity and the rip you created in spacetime, so I wouldn't try this anywhere near Earth (please don't).

 

[Cosmickarma]

<Of course, this would also mean that your destination will be consumed by the singularity and the rip you created in spacetime, so I wouldn't try this anywhere near Earth (please don't). >


haha..you bet dude...you bet!!!!

 

[Elledan]

<< << Anti-matter contains out of the counterparts of normal matter, i.e., they have the same weight, but the opposite charge (if present) and spin. >>


Yeah, so wouldn't it make sense if anti-matter moved through time the opposite of normal matter? Last I heard, string theory showed that the properties of fundamental particles were associated with the pattern of vibration along each dimension. I think the most advanced analysis at the time called for vibration on at least 3 dimensions. If time is treated as a dimension, then it's quite possible to have the opposite vibration or wave which would cancel out normal matter. To me, it seems logical.
>>


Sorry, but it's not logical.

During the formation of the universe, matter and anti-matter were produced. They should have been produced in equal quantities (50/50), but entropy messed up
That's why we ended up with a universe with far more matter than anti-matter.

As AnthraX101 already pointed out, anti-matter does not have any 'uncanny' properties. It's just matter, but then its mirror image. If entropy would have had its way during the formation of the universe, we would have ended up with a universe filled with mostly anti-matter, after which we would have called it 'matter' and what we now call 'matter' would be called 'anti-matter', because it would be the exact opposite of the matter we would be used to.

 

[Sahakiel]

<< A "virtual particle" is a particle which is created by the universe at random from the noise. They are always produced in pairs, a particle and an anti-particle.

However, there is no easy way to say that anti-matter is traveling in time in reverse. We have produced anti-matter, and it still existed after production (for short periods of time, I'll give you, but not on the scale of a planck second). What it would have to do is live it's existance in reverse, which requires a rigid time maping. IE: Everything has been set in stone even before it happened. >>



That was the whole point of my previous spiel. EVERYthing, all matter, all energy, follows a set course. A large number of simple rules eventually result in complex interaction we see today. If you had powerful enough computers and violated heisenberg's and knew the position and velocity of everything that ever was at the moment of creation, you would technically be able to predict the future. But, your act of prediction would also have been forseen and accounted for, so whatever you do after seeing the future is meant to happen and whether you truly did see the future or saw something that is meant to make you create the future is up for debate.
The main reason I believe anti-matter is matter going backwards is the matter-anti-matter reactions. A positron and an electron combine to form pure energy. I think that if anti-matter is matter traveling backwards, then the annihilation of matter and anti-matter into energy is merely the result of the same matter meeting itself, except one is going backwards. The formation of matter in an energy field out in deep space results in anti-matter and matter of the same types. i.e. one proton, one anti-proton. Basically, if all matter was formed with an anti-matter pair, then matter lives in a loop time-wise. It's formed, goes along its merry way, finds its other self, meets up, goes back in time, meets itself (or, rather, becomes itself going the other way) and so on. The cost for the whole operation is the energy before and after.




<< During the formation of the universe, matter and anti-matter were produced. They should have been produced in equal quantities (50/50), but entropy messed up
That's why we ended up with a universe with far more matter than anti-matter. >>



I agree that as the universe cooled (according to big-bang) matter and most likely anti-matter formed from the plasma. I believe that the universe as a whole exhibits a wave-like property. There is a wave form associated with the universe much like basically every fundamental particle from photons to gravitons. Electrons, protons, quarks, all have a wave form as well, but I'm sure they're made up of the waveforms of their fundamental components.
Anyway, since the universe has a waveform associated with it, that would mean it oscillates in at least one dimension. If time oscillates, that would mean that the universe expands, contracts, ad infinitum. Or, it would mean that it only does so in terms of time, in which case anti-matter would be the other half of the waveform.

 

[Elledan]

<< The main reason I believe anti-matter is matter going backwards is the matter-anti-matter reactions. A positron and an electron combine to form pure energy. I think that if anti-matter is matter traveling backwards, then the annihilation of matter and anti-matter into energy is merely the result of the same matter meeting itself, except one is going backwards. >>


Makes no sense.

For this to be true, anti-matter should have been formed at the 'end of time', and not after the formation of the universe.
Such a Gold universe makes very little sense, and might even be disproven if the amount of matter in the universe is large enough to prevent a 'big crunch', i.e. the universe collapsing on itself.

 

[Elledan]

<< I believe that the universe as a whole exhibits a wave-like property. >>

All matter exhibits a wave-particle duality.

 

[CZroe]

To quote CStroman above:


<< We're constantly going forward in time. >>


Just what exactly is forward? A direction. A dimentional reference. Not temporal. Why do we relate it such? Because we 'percieve' that we are "going forward" due to the fact that we can't return.
Therefore, our percieved mental concept of time is simply that: our MENTAL concept.
To understand why reality is different from one moment to the next or even what a moment is would require that we have something different to compare it to. If time truely is just our concept of moment-to-moment differences, is it not possible that each moment is co-existing and you are just (temporally, not dimentionally) passing through them? Each moment could be an entirely different reality, in which case the old reality still exist and is still capable of branching you through infinite other realities (Thereby making any changes will NOT affect YOUR origin's reality). If a time machine was invented in the future, we would never know because any attempt to return to the past would create a new branch or realities and thus leave us unaffected.
Once again, please read Michael Crichton's Timeline
It's included with the PC game, but it changes the story too much (The book made it clear that a videotape of the professor would not last thousands of years for his students to find)