scientist in pursuit of creating the world's first time machine

Well, I have not been educated on the 4th dimension, but if he went back to save his father, then his father would be alive already, correct... That's assuming if something is changed in the past, the whole future is changed.
 
But here you're assuming a universal present moment. Nothing "is happening". Stuff merely "happens". The time we perceive is merely an illusion created by causality. All things are happening and have happened at the same instant. When looking at all of time, you would see every moment together at once. We exist in all times at once, and we perceieve "the present" and "the past" and "the future" merely because we logically assume cause precedes event, and it is only possible for us to experience one moment at a time. In truth there is no universal present for anything.

The present for you is different for the present of someone on the other end of the universe, and it is different for someone living in 1836 or 2098. Time is a property of the universe; it is different for every square centimeter of the universe because it is a property and not a quantity.

Travel into the future is possible because travelling very fast literally warps space and time, and makes it totally different for the object that is travelling it. It is not a matter of perception, it is literally completley different. So while you're travelling at the speed of light, nobody witnesses stuff "happening" to you, because the present is different for the observer and the traveller, whose present is actually in the past for the observer.
Click to expand...
However this is not all fact and most theory.

I don't believe Time is a property of the universe, but rather a way of organization of a series of events(it is the organiziation, not the events themselves).

For example, lets take away all perception and stick strictly to particles.
According to me:
This particle moves at x velocity for z length, because of y. Simply according to me time would be the organization of the infinite amount of events that took x to go that velocity for that length. I don't believe time as a dimension. It's quite hard to explain in words. It's an idea that you have to understand in your head before it makes sense. That time of how your thinking of it does not exist according to me. It is nothing more than a human idea. Where time itself is not moving forward or backwards, simply events are being added to the idea of "time" as they happen. That's not to say you couldn't figure out stuff that will happen before they happen because everything is a reaction.

Simply my idea of time is that it is not a thing but an idea. I get what your saying completely. However, I have a very different perspective on how everything works in the universe.

Just a theory.

Well, I have not been educated on the 4th dimension, but if he went back to save his father, then his father would be alive already, correct... That's assuming if something is changed in the past, the whole future is changed.
Click to expand...
However is going back in time still going forward in time? Because him going back in time is the future(if he so does it).
 
Cole said:
However this is not all fact and most theory.

I don't believe Time is a property of the universe, but rather a way of organization of a series of events(it is the organiziation, not the events themselves).

For example, lets take away all perception and stick strictly to particles.
According to me:
This particle moves at x velocity for z length, because of y. Simply according to me time would be the organization of the infinite amount of events that took x to go that velocity for that length. I don't believe time as a dimension. It's quite hard to explain in words. It's an idea that you have to understand in your head before it makes sense. That time of how your thinking of it does not exist according to me. It is nothing more than a human idea. Where time itself is not moving forward or backwards, simply events are being added to the idea of "time" as they happen. That's not to say you couldn't figure out stuff that will happen before they happen because everything is a reaction.

Simply my idea of time is that it is not a thing but an idea. I get what your saying completely. However, I have a very different perspective on how everything works in the universe.

Just a theory.


However is going back in time still going forward in time? Because him going back in time is the future(if he so does it).
Click to expand...

I had the exact same mindset as you a while ago, but then I started reading about general relativity and quantum physics, and really nothing we are seeing experimentally makes any sense unless we treat space and time as equals of the same caliber.

And no, going back in time is not going forwards, if you go back in time then you have always existed in that time. Obviously time travel will never work because time travellers aren't visiting us. Changing somethign in the past does not change the future, because all times are equally real and existing at once. So really that does make it impossible to "go back" and change something, because you cannot change something that has always been and will always be the same.
 
I had the exact same mindset as you a while ago, but then I started reading about general relativity and quantum physics, and really nothing we are seeing experimentally makes any sense unless we treat space and time as equals of the same caliber.
Click to expand...
However, I believe there is a different explanation. While yes I have read about general relativity and quantum physics. I see how they do make sense. However, I believe there is another way to go about it.
 
Cole said:
I don't see how time travel is possible.

Not due to free will(as such is non existant) or anything. Everything is atom's(or quarks if you wanna keep on goin lower). Atoms react. Thats not the problem.

The problem lies in how. In order to go forward in time you would have to increase the speed that these atoms are reacting. To go backward in time you would have to reverse the atomical reactions. I don't see how this can be done to every single action that is happening.

Going faster than the speed of light wouldn't do it either. While you may percieve the light quicker than say someone else who is stationary, you are not going forward in time because what your seeing is something that has already happened. There is a difference between time and perception. Using einsteins train model. If there is a lightning bolt that flashes between two people. One person is going away from it, one person is going toward it. The lightning bolt happened at one specific point in time, however it gets percieved by the individuals at different points in time. Thereby we can only increase how fast we percieve things that already happened or use mathimatical guesses to predict the future(although that'd be technically impossible considering how fast chemicals are reacting). If you were 1,000 light years away from earth, you could see what earth is like 1,000 years before this momment, however you are only percieving the past and have not gone backward in time.

I simply can't see how you can go forward or backward in time.
Click to expand...

Your using atoms to disprove time travel? It's your perspective that matters.

Take the Theory of relativity for example. Different objects are relative to you through different speeds and distances. Here's an example of how this could relate to time travel.

Lets say there was a man who built a space ship that could go the speed of light instantly (not eventually speeding up to the speed of light but at an instant). He travels to the nearsest star besides the sun which is 4 light years away, comes back to earth still going the speed of light.

The theory is, if you were able to reach the speed of light, time would stop around you (not for you just around you).

So, the man goes to the nearest star and back (which in total is 8 light years, without slowing down from the speed of light). Because time has stopped around him and because he left earth going the speed of light instantly the people on earth would see his ship leave and return at the same time. For the man in the spaceship, 8 years have gone by because it took him 8 years to go to the nearest star and back. The people on earth would see him leave and return at the same time.

So in conclusion, the man in the space ship went through eight years of his life and the people on earth went through not even a second of their lifes. The man in the space ship then (theorectially) went back in time.

Simple enough for you? I thought so. Have a good sleep tonight. :cool:
 
And thats why that man should be frozen in cryostasis for a significant part of those years.
 
Here's the stinger..

If the proffessor has managed to make a time machine some time in the future and he was 100% correct then went back and saved his dad in this timeline, then why hasn't the timeline already changed with his dad alive right now.

Also how do you know that by doing that you won't trigger events that could put you in a coffin or someone else close by instead of him.

I don't agree with the principal of going back in time to change anything even if it is possible, it could have all sorts of undesired implications.

I agree with Cole on the whole theory of time travel, time is something far more fundemental than what we percieve through light.
 
I thought he said he wanted to meet him not save him. And from what I conclude about the not having saved him thing is that either he didn't save him (like he said, he wanted to only meet him), failed to save him, or literal time travel isn't possible and he only travels to another dimension to save (if he wants to save) his father. Which would be a solution to the paradox: a whole nother universe is traveled to, not just time, thus only changing the fate of his father in that other universe/dimension.
 
A hundred years ago they would have told you that it was impossible to send a message across the world in seconds. Now we can do it in many different ways.

Or that a horseless carriage would travel over 750mph.
 
Humnanity. ****ing up everything. It makes you so proud doesn't it. ;(
 
Fliko said:
Well, I have not been educated on the 4th dimension, but if he went back to save his father, then his father would be alive already, correct... That's assuming if something is changed in the past, the whole future is changed.
Click to expand...

Unless he goes back in time, abducts his father and brings him to the present. This might be a way to avoid a paradox especially if he disguises it so that his past self still believes his father is dead.
 
dream431ca said:
Your using atoms to disprove time travel? It's your perspective that matters.

Take the Theory of relativity for example. Different objects are relative to you through different speeds and distances. Here's an example of how this could relate to time travel.

Lets say there was a man who built a space ship that could go the speed of light instantly (not eventually speeding up to the speed of light but at an instant). He travels to the nearsest star besides the sun which is 4 light years away, comes back to earth still going the speed of light.

The theory is, if you were able to reach the speed of light, time would stop around you (not for you just around you).

So, the man goes to the nearest star and back (which in total is 8 light years, without slowing down from the speed of light). Because time has stopped around him and because he left earth going the speed of light instantly the people on earth would see his ship leave and return at the same time. For the man in the spaceship, 8 years have gone by because it took him 8 years to go to the nearest star and back. The people on earth would see him leave and return at the same time.

So in conclusion, the man in the space ship went through eight years of his life and the people on earth went through not even a second of their lifes. The man in the space ship then (theorectially) went back in time.

Simple enough for you? I thought so. Have a good sleep tonight. :cool:
Click to expand...

Wrong. You've got it backwards.

The man traveling in the space ship will perceive the trip as an instance, while the people still on earth will perceive him having taken ~ 8 years to make the round trip (which is how long it takes light [at the speed of light] to travel from Alpha Centauri, the nearest star to the Sun, a round trip back and forth).

Think about it in terms of the people sitting on earth. A man traveling at the speed of light SHOULD take the same amount of time to travel the distance as light would, right?
 
^Yeah right... If that ship travels at the speed of light and the distance is 4 light years then the round trip takes 8 years for both the traveler and observers on earth.

The thing is I'm simply not convinced by theory alone, so until technology advances to the point where this time warping phenomenon can be tested in the real world I'll stick to this mindset thank you very much...
 
Dan said:
I time travel pretty much every day. I just lie down in my comfortable time machine at night and I will find myself 7 or 8 hours in the future when I get up.
Click to expand...

:LOL:
 
dream, you didn't read anything beyond that did you?
 
What a strange story. The movie is ridiculous, the whole thing is dumbed down so much that you might start thinking he is building one of those deloreans ... After reading the article its not completely clear too, but as far as I can understand all he does is try to prove that there is indeed some kind of 'time vortex' around his laser.
A next step would be to figure out exectly how to fling something in that vortex. But it wont be anything more than a single particle at best.

So, nice touch, that whole story about his father. But if he is serious about going back in time, he better start losing weight.
 
Clavius said:
So, nice touch, that whole story about his father. But if he is serious about going back in time, he better start losing weight.
Click to expand...

LOL


So do his experiments have anything in common with those laser teleportation experiments?
 
If we ever invent time travel, howcome no one from the future has come back to visit us?
 
If we ever invent time travel, howcome no one from the future has come back to visit us?
Click to expand...
I'm from the future visiting you.
 
dream431ca said:
Your using atoms to disprove time travel? It's your perspective that matters.

Take the Theory of relativity for example. Different objects are relative to you through different speeds and distances. Here's an example of how this could relate to time travel.

Lets say there was a man who built a space ship that could go the speed of light instantly (not eventually speeding up to the speed of light but at an instant). He travels to the nearsest star besides the sun which is 4 light years away, comes back to earth still going the speed of light.

The theory is, if you were able to reach the speed of light, time would stop around you (not for you just around you).

So, the man goes to the nearest star and back (which in total is 8 light years, without slowing down from the speed of light). Because time has stopped around him and because he left earth going the speed of light instantly the people on earth would see his ship leave and return at the same time. For the man in the spaceship, 8 years have gone by because it took him 8 years to go to the nearest star and back. The people on earth would see him leave and return at the same time.

So in conclusion, the man in the space ship went through eight years of his life and the people on earth went through not even a second of their lifes. The man in the space ship then (theorectially) went back in time.

Simple enough for you? I thought so. Have a good sleep tonight. :cool:
Click to expand...
I'm afraid I don't quite agree with you, I'm but a mere meger A-level physics student, but surely light travels at the speed of light and takes time to get from AtoB so light cannot have stopped around it.

I think you misunderstand relativity
 
one questiong?

if they hav succed in building a time mahcine

they wouldnt hav send someone to the age where the scientist decided to do this,to proof they will suceed?
 
<RJMC> said:
one questiong?

if they hav succed in building a time mahcine

they wouldnt hav send someone to the age where the scientist decided to do this,to proof they will suceed?
Click to expand...

Perhaps they did, but then realized it was a mistake to do so and so they went back in time a 2nd time to stop them from doing it.
 
if i get a time machine im going back to every single time when I could of used a "thats what she said" joke

Your from the future!?!?, as far as time travel goes, is it hard?


......THATS WHAT SHE SAID
 
The reason why you wouldn't see anybody from the future, because there is different fabrics of space. When people with time machines visit the past, it's like they went to page 2 from page 5, but, there's so many duplicates of page 2.

Every second is saved into a different fabric... so, if a dude traveled from the future to my house @ 2:40(it's 2:57 now) he would meet the Andy from 2:40... not me as I am typing this right now.


just a theory, hehe.
 
ailevation said:
The reason why you wouldn't see anybody from the future, because there is different fabrics of space. When people with time machines visit the past, it's like they went to page 2 from page 5, but, there's so many duplicates of page 2.

Every second is saved into a different fabric... so, if a dude traveled from the future to my house @ 2:40(it's 2:57 now) he would meet the Andy from 2:40... not me as I am typing this right now.


just a theory, hehe.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's how John Titor pretty much explained it aswell. Another thing might be that time travel is extremely harshly regulated because it might mess up the past real bad. An example being the creator himself: He got into this time-travelling stuff because his dad died and he wants to maybe save him. But if his dad never dies, he might never get into the time-travelling stuff, thus his time-travelling self never exists (the only evidence that he ever existed being his living father).
 
Anyway, if you went back in time any amount of time would you not end up several million miles away from the planet Earth?
 
Tyguy said:
if i get a time machine im going back to every single time when I could of used a "thats what she said" joke

Your from the future!?!?, as far as time travel goes, is it hard?


......THATS WHAT SHE SAID
Click to expand...

I would travel to every single time I could of used a "i told ya" joke
 
i have seen this a while ago its interesting nevertheless.
 
tehsolace said:
Wrong. You've got it backwards.

The man traveling in the space ship will perceive the trip as an instance, while the people still on earth will perceive him having taken ~ 8 years to make the round trip (which is how long it takes light [at the speed of light] to travel from Alpha Centauri, the nearest star to the Sun, a round trip back and forth).

Think about it in terms of the people sitting on earth. A man traveling at the speed of light SHOULD take the same amount of time to travel the distance as light would, right?
Click to expand...

Ya and it takes 4 years for light to reach the nearest star, so the man would experince for 4 years go buy. Think about it this way.

It is a known fact that the faster you go, the slower time will go by. There comes a point where you're going so fast that time will stop (according to physics). Where it gets trickey is at these very high speeds (especially over very long distances). It also depends very heavliy on relativity. If your outside watching someone go the speed of light, what you would see is someone leave and return at the same time (if he was always going the speed of light and didn't stop anywhere). If you were in the spaceship that was going the speed of light you would experience time normally (if you had a clock in the spaceship with you, the clock would increment normally, so an hour feels like an hour and the clock would show that).

What you stated about the man going the same distance light would if he was going the speed of light is correct, but it's perspective that matters. Regaurdless of the distance.
 
Solaris said:
I'm afraid I don't quite agree with you, I'm but a mere meger A-level physics student, but surely light travels at the speed of light and takes time to get from AtoB so light cannot have stopped around it.

I think you misunderstand relativity
Click to expand...

You're right, light does take time to travel from A to B. If it didn't you would see things happening as they are, no matter how far the change is occuring.

What is not so clear is the theory that time stops at the speed of light. I'm just predicting what would happen if that was true.

But I think that best thing to say would be that when going the speed of light the rate of change does not change only the perspective of the rate of change.
 
dream431ca said:
Ya and it takes 4 years for light to reach the nearest star, so the man would experince for 4 years go buy. Think about it this way.

It is a known fact that the faster you go, the slower time will go by. There comes a point where you're going so fast that time will stop (according to physics). Where it gets trickey is at these very high speeds (especially over very long distances). It also depends very heavliy on relativity. If your outside watching someone go the speed of light, what you would see is someone leave and return at the same time (if he was always going the speed of light and didn't stop anywhere). If you were in the spaceship that was going the speed of light you would experience time normally (if you had a clock in the spaceship with you, the clock would increment normally, so an hour feels like an hour and the clock would show that).

What you stated about the man going the same distance light would if he was going the speed of light is correct, but it's perspective that matters. Regaurdless of the distance.
Click to expand...

No, the person on the ground would not see you appear and reappear.
From the view of the person on the ground, you take 8 years, because from the view of the person of the ground the trip is 8 light years away.
From your POV, the journey is instant, because time has slowed down for you so much.
So when you return you are the same age, 8 years ahead of when you set off.
 
People seem to be talking about the twins paradox situation, which is only a paradox in Special Relativity, not General Relativity, because SR only considers inertial frames of reference.

But the man travelling in the spaceship from the earth will experience accelerations (including turning around and coming back to earth), therefore being in a non-inertial reference frame.

Anyway, due to him being in these non-inertial reference frames, he will have aged less than the people who remained on earth when he comes back.

Also, talking about going at the speed of light, or from a photon's point of view (e.g. "From a photon's point of view, is the universe frozen in time?") is physically meaningless.
 
I don't believe traveling in time is possible before I see a screenshot
 
avatar14194_3.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Omnomnick
Examining The Files Of "SteamVR Performance Test" & "Aperture Robot Repair"
Replies
27
Views
91K
MFL
MFL
BabyHeadCrab
  • Locked
OMG GOOGLE PROOOOOOVEN RACIST.
Replies
9
Views
730
Bad^Hat
Bad^Hat
Omnomnick
[UPDATE #5] Half-Life 3 accidentally appears in Gamescom Official List, Then Appears in Keyboard Ad
2
Replies
55
Views
25K
Stigmata
Stigmata
Pikminiman
CES 2014: Steam Machines Round-Up
Replies
3
Views
4K
Pikminiman
Pikminiman
Back
Top