/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3021498]

/sci/,

I come to you with a question that was raised at my dinner table.
My uncle stated that he wish he could go back in time to eat his delicious steak again.
I started thinking about this and asked where the steak would be when he got there: in his stomach, on his plate, or both?

[Anonymous No.3021510]

well he would go back in time. and find himself eating a steak

[Anonymous No.3021517]

>>3021510
I DIDN'T EVEN THINK OF THAT

[Anonymous No.3021519]

Depends on what kind of time travel.

Back to the future: would be on both.
Superman: on the plate.

i should stop procrastinating.

[Anonymous No.3021536]

I always wondered:
If you go back in time, do you go back as another you, or does your body merge into the on in the past?

[Anonymous No.3021545]

did you fools watch Back to the Future

buncha idiots

if you are reading this your an idiot

[Anonymous No.3021561]

HOW DO WE KNOW WE"RE NOT CONSTANTLY GOING BACK IN TIME AND EATING THE STEAK AGAIN BUT WE DON'T KNOW IT

[Anonymous No.3021573]

what are the relativistic implications on time travel? aren't there 4-vectors now?

[Anonymous No.3021619]

>>3021519
How could it both, because matter cannot be created or destroyed, so how could there be two steaks?

[Anonymous No.3021622]

There is no "back in time" because the past does not physically exist.

The past is your survival trait(memory) giving you the illusion of something that exists.

[Anonymous No.3021650]

>>3021622
whats up with you and your survival memory kick.

What book did you read last?

[Anonymous No.3021688]

>>3021650
>What book did you read last?

I didn't get that from a book.

[Anonymous No.3021740]

>>3021688
Well somethings making you repeat it in multiple threads.

Perhaps you have a parasitic worm.

[Anonymous No.3021756]

>>3021740
I only have to restate it for time-travel threads, and wherever time-travel becomes a topic.

Seriously, you demand that fiction is a reality, then you get mad when people point out the fictional parts and cut them apart with Occams razor.

[Anonymous No.3021772]

If time were real, and going back were possible, then if he would go back, the steak would be in both.

However, he would be unable to eat the steak, as his past self would be eating it, and in order for him to exist, the past self MUST have finished the steak. Then his past self would go back in time, leaving only one uncle left in the universe. Interacting with this past uncle is impossible, as he does not remember interacting with himself (it did not happen, therefore it cannot happen).

[Gawwwwwd Jesusorus Rex No.3021779]

Direction + Distance = Time
OH GOD WHAT HAVE I

[Anonymous No.3021782]

I makes sense to me, the brain grows and uses neural pathways from inputs, so it leaves a recording of the "past",. It's not like you wouldn't be able to run those same pathways again in thought, they don't disappear.

[Anonymous No.3021807]

>>3021740
what he's saying sounds very similar to what the "ruler of the universe" said repeatedly in one of the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy books

[Anonymous No.3021810]

>>3021756
>fictionalizes anonymous

u mad?

[Anonymous No.3021838]

>>3021807
You would know better than I would. I haven't read that series for over 20 years.

[Anonymous No.3021865]

>>3021810
Nope. There are plenty of things that make me mad.

Fiction isn't one of them.

This is not /lit/, and fiction really doesn't belong here.

[Anonymous No.3021874]

>>3021810
Nope. There are plenty of things that make me mad.

Fiction is not one of them.

This is not /lit/, and fiction really doesn't belong here.

[Anonymous No.3021875]

>>3021838
An oldfag approaches

[Anonymous No.3021882]

>>3021875
or a 20 year old who's sneaky with words