Can someone explain how time travel is not complete bullshit?

[Anonymous No.15897235]

[Anonymous No.15897236]

Nope

But is fun to talk about, also linear travelling in time is just aging

[Anonymous No.15897237]

>>15897235
We're traveling forward in time right now nigguh

[Anonymous No.15897240]

[Anonymous No.15897250]

As far as I know, entropy is the biggest theoretical obstruction to time travel because of the second law of thermodynamics. Every other law of physics is independent of the direction of time (they work in both directions). A better understanding of this second law of thermodynamics could shed light on time travels, but for the moment there is no way to understand this law from other theories in physics (like quantum mechanics, or general relativity).

[Anonymous No.15897276]

>>15897237
>We're traveling forward in time right now nigguh
We aren't though. We can't travel in time, because time only exists in our minds. It's just a perception.

[Anonymous No.15897282]

I believe we will some day discover things that will make time travel seem totally nonsensical. Our perception of time is an artifact. We know practically nothing.

[Anonymous No.15897310]

It depends what kind of time travel you're talking about. Time dilation is normal and happens all the time, where time is moving at different speeds all over the universe, there's nothing weird about it, its like how temperature is different all over the universe. Changing timelines or something like that though is weird and probably isn't possible and there's no evidence for any of it, as far as i'm aware

[Anonymous No.15897312]

time does not exist. there is only a record of the past and a prediction of the future.

all "science" talking of time travel are crooks trying to bait for publicity.

[Anonymous No.15897614]

>>15897276
Time the change of entropy, limited by the speed if causality.

[Anonymous No.15897625]

the physicist David Deutsch believes time travel is possible so I'll take his word for it

>I myself believe that there will one day be time travel because when we find that something isn’t forbidden by the over-arching laws of physics we usually eventually find a technological way of doing it.
- David Deutsch

[Anonymous No.15897654]

>>15897235
There's no such thing as a single linear time according to special relativity. What we consider as single linear timeline is just from our pov. There are also other time lines where they're travelling in opposite direction to us. And some in sides, in all cardinal 3d directions.

[Anonymous No.15897657]

>>15897235
gps

[Anonymous No.15897776]

>>15897654
And that's bullshit.
Laws of the universe are deterministic (any other assumption is religion and not science - as nondeterminism basically allows anything to happen at any time).
And in determinism you can simply describe evolution of the universe with a simple function:
f(I, t) where I is the initial state, and t is absolute time (not necessarily the same time as we perceive as humans).

[Anonymous No.15897787]

>>15897776
>deterministic
crazy how I can watch an unstable particle until the end of time and nothing happen but have a kilo of that shit and it's the most precise shit in the universe.
point to the very next atom that will shit itself anon.

[Anonymous No.15897838]

>>15897776
Determinism is a philosophical position, not a scientific one, please dont mix them together.

[Anonymous No.15897872]

>>15897787
Locally (as in you having access only to limited information about the system) probabilistic =/= globally nondeterministic.

Pseudo-random number generators are perfectly deterministic, yet them seem to act completely random to someone without access to their internal state.

[Anonymous No.15897919]

>>15897312
If time did not exist you would not exist though

[Anonymous No.15897925]

>>15897776
Is quantum mechanics religion?

[Anonymous No.15897936]

>>15897925
Likely not the whole picture, but still a useful tool when dealing with limited information.

[Anonymous No.15897944]

>>15897872
how do you know their internal state is deterministic if you can't access it?
>yet them seem to act completely random to someone without access to their internal state.
are they random to someone without access to their internal state?
do they "appear to" be random or are they truly random for someone who doesn't have access to their internal state?

[Anonymous No.15897997]

>>15897919
only recordings and predictions exist. you confuse predictions and recording with "time" that can be "travelled", like most sub-150-IQ individuals.

[Anonymous No.15899423]

bump

[Anonymous No.15899426]

some pretty stupid answers for smartest board,

o well, smartest posters prob dont wanna talk about dillation, near speed of lite, etc....