A loophole

[Anonymous No.15069460]

So it seens to me paradox free time travel is possible if the past you are traveling has no causal relationship with the current you.
And this is can achieved if the time machine moves you not only in time but in space.
If you travel back in time one year but also are placed one lightyear away nothing you do there will effect your past since it takes one year for any action there to have any effect on the you befire you left .
This may not seem very useful
But it could be used for space exploration were a probe is sent backwards into time several years /light years and to us it would appear to us as if it is immediately sending back data about the star system .

So setting aside the technological feasibility aside does this violate any of the math in physics?

[Anonymous No.15069476]

>>15069460
Butterfly effect

[Anonymous No.15069507]

>>15069460
Interesting idea.
I can't think of any problems with it so far.
>>15069476
If he's really far away then the butterfly effect might not apply. I mean, we haven't even seen some stars since 1 billion years ago, because that's how old the light from them is.

[Anonymous No.15069512]

>>15069460
If all interactions take place within the same field, you'd be folding the field into itself, not so much tricking it.

[Anonymous No.15069586]

Wait a minute I'm starting to see a problem
If someone travels back several years/light years before their world is consumed by a supernova and goes to a nearby star system and warns them of of the supernova this feels like it violate something
Like they are getting information about a supernova faster than if they could sent in a starship at light speed.

[Anonymous No.15069603]

>>15069460
paradox-free time travel is indeed physically feasible, but there's no requirement to avoid interactions
the series Dark is a great example, where characters interact with their younger and older selves all the time
the only necessity is that causality is preserved, so you can't change the past at all, only affect it in the exact way that led up the present
this is known as a causal loop, and as long as it obeys that principle, the Novikov self-consistency principle, it's perfectly fine

[Anonymous No.15069682]

>>15069460
Why do pop-soijacks think that you can move backwards in time? It's not a physical dimension, it's just a feature of conscious perception. No moment exists in any discrete sense except the one you're in now.

[Anonymous No.15070013]

>>15069682
I think you could move back in time but the only way would be to rewind the path of every atom and field in the universe to the point you wanted to travel back to but without rewinding your own atoms so you don't go back in time with everything else.

Another way I've read is using a machine with a bunch of lasers that creates frame dragging to slow down atoms in some area locally and then sending things into that area from outside would send them back in time, but you can only go as far back as to when the machine was first turned on
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Mallett#Time_travel_research

[Anonymous No.15070510]

>>15069460
>go backwards in time 1 year + 1 light year in space to the left
>go backwards in time 1 year + 1 light year in space to the right
>be 2 years in the past in my original position
>problem?