[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 60 KB, 319x387, Einstein.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2540680 No.2540680 [Reply] [Original]

Is time travel possible?
If so how, and where would you go?
What would you do?

>> No.2540686

-Only if there is a stable wormhole
-See above
-To the other end of the wormhole
-Be destroyed by the tidal forces

>> No.2540685

No it's not.

Well that breaks the other questions.

>> No.2540689

Time travel to the future? Possibly
To the past? No. Never

>> No.2540687

If it was possible we already would have met time travelers from the future, wouldn't we?

>> No.2540696

>>2540680
It is possible!
As time slows down when you approach the speed of light, shouldnt it revers if you go faster?
Also, the paradox thingy: when you travel in time you create an alternate universe, probleme solved.

>> No.2540703

>>2540696
>Also, the paradox thingy: when you travel in time you create an alternate universe, probleme solved.
Fuck off with your pseudo-scientific bullshit.

>> No.2540704

>>2540687
See last response:
>>2540696
In this universe no timetravellers yet, in another maybe!

>> No.2540707

>>2540696
>travel faster than light
>problem solved!
LOL, 6/10

>> No.2540708

Yea sure i could imagine a super advanced species has found a way to exist without being bound by time and space and can slow down and speed up time perception to observe things in all possible ways by pure will

>> No.2540712

>>2540686

Fuck your wormhole shit. You can't just say "time travel is possible if there exists a magical thing that makes time travel possible."

>>2540696

You can't go faster than light unless we're wrong about physics.

And an alternate universe would not solve the problem, because each of those alternate universes would still contain a paradox.

>> No.2540713
File: 326 KB, 1024x768, dinoriders.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2540713

go back in time to meet the dinosaurs and start up a super base.

like in dino riders

>> No.2540718

>>2540715
That is the definition of pseudoscience you mongoloid retarded fuck.

>> No.2540715

>>2540703
Why do you call it pseudo?
There has not yet been proof proving or disproving it, it is prefectly possible.

>> No.2540723

>>2540715

In real science, a lack of evidence against something is not sufficient evidence for it.

>> No.2540729

>>2540712
>Fuck your wormhole shit. You can't just say "time travel is possible if there exists a magical thing that makes time travel possible."
It's a structure that is not forbidden by GR.

>> No.2540736

>>2540712
I agree with what you said about the wormhole, its not possible.
Faster than light is indeed unlikely, and even if it could it would enourmous amounts of energy, but its plausible.

Why would there be a paradox in the other universe?
If i go back in time to kill my father, i create an alternate universe without me, but i was still born in the "first" universe, thus i can still exist in that universe.

>> No.2540749

>>2540718
Thats why i said its plausible, i didnt say it was.
Why is an alternate universe impossible, tell me.

>> No.2540757

>>2540696
> Also, the paradox thingy: when you travel in time you create an alternate universe, probleme solved.

Okay, let's try it.

Grandfather paradox.

I go back in time to kill my grandfather. He is dead, and therefore I do not exist, and therefore I did not go back in time to kill him, and therefore he is alive.

That's a paradox.

Can we solve this with two alternate universes? Let's suppose the universe suddenly splits into two universes, one in which my grandfather is alive, and one in which my grandfather is dead. In the first universe, my grandfather is alive, which means I could not have gone back in time to kill him, which means I do not exist. Why don't I exist if my grandfather is alive? In the second universe, my grandfather is dead, which means I must have gone back in time to kill him, which means I exist. Why do I exist if my grandfather is dead? Neither universe can exist, and neither scenario is better than the original scenario in which we had a single irreconcilable paradox.

So basically, your alternate universes theory is complete horse shit.

>> No.2540762

>>2540749
>backpedalling
It's pseudoscience.

>> No.2540768

>>2540749
>Thats why i said its plausible, i didnt say it was.
Actually you did
>when you travel in time you create an alternate universe

>Why is an alternate universe impossible, tell me.
We never said it was impossible. There is simply no scientific basis of support for alternate universes, hence pseudo-scientific.

>> No.2540770

>>2540757
>>2540736
>implying we can go back in time

>> No.2540774

>>2540757
>> my grandfather is alive, which means I could not have gone back in time to kill him

You are not in the first universe, you are in the second!

You have dissapeard of the first and went to the second where your grandpa doesnt exist, you were born from grandpa 1's son, and killed grandpa 2.

Dumbass

>> No.2540782

>>2540768
Pseudo means fraudulent, false.

>> No.2540784

Hey guys, you'd have to invent a teleporter too.

The Earth is never at the same spot in the solar system / galaxy as it was at any other point. Even if you did have a time machine, if it were stationary, you'd poof into the middle of space. It'd have to also teleport you to wherever Earth was in the universe at that time. And not be more than a certain distance off in any direction or else you'll end up buried alive, falling to your death, or stuck in a tree.

>> No.2540781

>>2540736
> Faster than light is indeed unlikely, and even if it could it would enourmous amounts of energy, but its plausible.

Enormous amounts of energy?

To be more precise, accelerating past the speed of light would require an infinite amount of energy.

See the problem? It's not plausible according to our current understanding of physics.

>> No.2540785

>>2540757
No, you're doing it wrong.
I'm not sure how your train of thought is even functioning.

The many-worlds idea is that every time more than one outcome is possible, all the outcomes happen, and the universe branches off into multiple versions that follow the different paths.

If I go back in time, I'm moving back in history - only one path backwards. But then when I stop and move forward again, I spawn entirely new universes, which include me at a different time and place. I can kill EVERYONE and I'm still there, going off on my own new universe-branch.

But this depends on going back in time being possible in the first place, which I don't buy.

>> No.2540788

>>2540782
Exactly, it's false-science.

To have been neither disproven or proven is not science at all.

>> No.2540790

>>2540757
No, the idea perfectly handles the paradox. You're caught up on the concept of identity. Beyond problems in the theory itself (how does matter leave a universe, etc), there's no problem with its solution to the paradox. Essentially, in universe A (your departure point), person YOU existed until such a time as he decided to phase out of existence and go to another universe, universe B. In this universe, a person YOU poofs in at a certain time and kills an individual.

The paradox is handled fine, the only problems are the means of transporting between the two and things like that. Unless that's what you were referring to already.

>> No.2540791

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Mallett

check him out

>> No.2540793

>>2540784
>implying there is an absolute reference frame anyway
The whole thing is hopeless.

>> No.2540798

>>2540774

Okay, fair enough. I've heard this alternate universe shit explained in two ways. The first is the one I just debunked, and the second is the one you're describing.

This one is better, but if you're simply traveling to another universe rather than traveling through time in one universe, it's not really time travel at all.

>> No.2540799

>>2540785
Finally someone logical!
>>2540784
That is an incredibly good point!
I have no answer to that

>> No.2540802

>>2540791
John Titor was here, Ron Mallet is completely correct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Titor

>> No.2540812

>>2540791
"In Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, both matter and energy can create a gravitational field. This means that the energy of a light beam can produce a gravitational field. My current research considers both the weak and strong gravitational fields produced by a single continuously circulating unidirectional beam of light. In the weak gravitational field of a unidirectional ring laser, it is predicted that a spinning neutral particle, when placed in the ring, is dragged around by the resulting gravitational field."

In a later paper, he argued that at sufficient energies, the circulating laser might produce not just frame-dragging but also closed timelike curves (CTC), allowing time travel into the past:[4]

>> No.2540816

>>2540798
It is a kind of time travel, the person étravelling" would think hes in the past, all future events would not have happened.

>> No.2540827

>>2540802
his thoery is sound

but you are not john. you need medical help

>> No.2540833

I have a question, how old are the people in sci?
Not a trollquestion, srsly.

>> No.2540835

I would go back to stop my parents from having me.

>> No.2540841

>>2540835
You could, but youd still be alive, it kinda defeats the purpose doesnt it.

>> No.2540857

Id assemble all the knowledge possible, go back in time and live a happy life as the founder of modern society and all inventions.

>> No.2540878

>>2540841

It would still be worth it for not being born.

Maybe I can convince them to have me born as a female rather than a male.

>> No.2540891

God, not a lot of people on sci.

>> No.2541001

People also need to realise that humans don't have a great sense of logic.