Time travel

[LOVEavatar]

Originally Posted by GP-5

I think you've all have heard this one before...."If timetravel will be possible in the future, where are all the timetravelers?"

lmao

Good quote

(PS: Haven't heard it before )

[caveman]

It seems my identity has been compromised...

[The Man in Black]

Originally Posted by caveman

It seems my identity has been compromised...

[Impressionist]

Hmm, quite interesting opinions here

Originally Posted by GP-5

I think you all have heard this one before...."If timetravel will be possible in the future, where are all the timetravelers?"

Yeah, exactly. This explains why traveling into the past is impossible.
But generally, I think that there are no timetravelers, because the future is still in front of us. The timetravelers have nowhere to come from.
Meh, it's confusing.

[LOVEavatar]

Originally Posted by Impressionist

Hmm, quite interesting opinions here



Yeah, exactly. This explains why traveling into the past is impossible.
But generally, I think that there are no timetravelers, because the future is still in front of us. The timetravelers have nowhere to come from.
Meh, it's confusing.

Do we really know that? What if we are in the past without knowing it?

There are multiple theories about dimensions as we know them in the universe, one specific I heard about a while ago (can't really remember) but it built on that it was all divided into 11 different dimension. And instead of describing 3rd and 4th dimension as <- that, they had name as "Feelings/Emotion" and "Thoughts". And I remember the higher ones as "Magnetic Energy", "Matter Energy" etc. And the ones on the top were something like "The all God" and "Servant to the all God".

That last part might sound silly, but that's how I recalled it of being. And it might just be more than that, what if both are probable?

Ah, seems like I finally found something of what I was referring to:

"Multiple Dimensions

For years, Einstein hoped to unite the contemporary ideas of relativity and quantum mechanics. Yet, he could not unite these theories because he limited his parameters for a unifying equation to the four dimensions that humans consciously experience. The first physicists to truly pursue the theory of additional dimensions were Kaluza and Klein. They noticed that if a fifth dimension were to exist in the universe, there would be fields of angles between all of the existing dimensions. By applying this to Einstein’s geometric model of gravity, Kaluza and Klein noticed that gravity, the force that relativity is concerned with, and electromagnetism, one of the forces that quantum mechanics deals with, showed similar properties. Therefore, by adding a fifth dimension to the universe, the same equations that apply to electromagnetism could also apply to gravity. It was later shown that not only is one additional dimension required for this link to be solidified, but six more dimensions. Even further down the road, it was discovered that the formulas used to determine this number (which are actually mathematical methods of approximation, since the actual formulas are unknown) we slightly off, resulting in yet another necessary dimension. Therefore, our three physical dimensions plus one time dimension plus seven additional dimensions results in there being eleven dimensions!"

Maybe this also have some valuable points:
Multiple time dimensions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Have in mind though that that^ is almost as much physics as philosophy.

I don't usually (like... never?) get myself involved into discussions, even less scientific ones, but now I felt like i wanted to share my two cents

[Banefull]

In theory these extra dimensions are crumpled up so small they you would not be able to notice them. If you were shrunken down the size of subatomic particles then you could observe them.

The problem with this is that there are multiple possible scenarios that could be valid. There are some theories stating there are 13 dimensions. I have my hopes pinned on M-Theory to unite physics which states that the smallest particle that makes up everything is called a brane (sometimes called membranes). Branes are multidimensional particles that can have 0 to 9 dimensions.

[LOVEavatar]

Originally Posted by Banefull

In theory these extra dimensions are crumpled up so small they you would not be able to notice them. If you were shrunken down the size of subatomic particles then you could observe them.

The problem with this is that there are multiple possible scenarios that could be valid. There are some theories stating there are 13 dimensions. I have my hopes pinned on M-Theory to unite physics which states that the smallest particle that makes up everything is called a brane (sometimes called membranes). Branes are multidimensional particles that can have from 0 to 9 dimensions.

Hmm, so I did contribute with some valuable information

[The Man in Black]

Originally Posted by Banefull

In theory these extra dimensions are crumpled up so small they you would not be able to notice them. If you were shrunken down the size of subatomic particles then you could observe them.

The problem with this is that there are multiple possible scenarios that could be valid. There are some theories stating there are 13 dimensions. I have my hopes pinned on M-Theory to unite physics which states that the smallest particle that makes up everything is called a brane (sometimes called membranes). Branes are multidimensional particles that can have 0 to 9 dimensions.

String theory is certainly on the rise again. Have you heard of the exceptionally simple theory of everything? Now that has some serious promise, and it was created by a hardcore outdoorsman, not the type you would expect to be involved in unified field theory, haha. Here's a wiki link:
An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[fkeua vrrtep]

I'd go back to like 2000 B.C. and travel to some Egypt ancient towns like Luxor or Alexandria , you see , only the ruins are already fascinating people in the present , imagine walking through one of these ancient towns , with music and melodies played in the alleys that nobody heard for thousands of years , enourmously beautiful looking gardens , I'd love to do such a travel , but it's another thing if it's possible or not.

[SaphirJD]

Originally Posted by Banefull

Wouldn't that mean you would end too (if you were actually present inside that universe)?

This is a very very late response i know Well, nothing beats a spectacular showdown, and it would be a perfect scene to leave the universe with a bang

[Woodsprite]

Hawking touches a point in theory, but not reality. I find it kind of amusing that intelligent people are actually contemplating time travel when no one really has any grasp on what time itself is.


...I know I'm delving quite deep with this, and going very far off a limb, but I personally think Stephen King got it right in "The Langoliers". Sure, the story was completely unrealistic itself, and the movie wasn't that great either... but take out everything except the concept of past time. I urge people to read this:

The concept is that the past is made up of things at rest. The beer is flat. Fire cannot exist. Any living, breathing thing cannot be a part of the past, and neither can anything else that has any molecules in motion. Why? Because objects in motion are constantly time-traveling. Objects at rest cannot take part in the time cycle. In other words, if one were to travel to the past, nothing would exist except things that don't require time to exist. Mostly solid things would exist. Water would be either motionless or gone. There would be no people or anything living because we constantly thrive on the present, which is constantly turning into the past every moment.

In other words, if one traveled into the past, they would die immediately. There's no oxygen, no sunlight... Everything in motion has already traveled into the future.

So if anything in motion is time-traveling all the time, the past is made up of nothing but used energy, and objects that don't require time to exist as they are. Any weathering to these objects is caused by molecules in motion; the objects themselves aren't changing. The future only exists in infinitely small moments of time, where both objects at rest and those in motion are created every moment we travel into the future. Therefore, traveling into the far future is impossible because the far future doesn't exist yet.

[Earthlover18]

I think of time as all past and future frames of reference. For example, think about one of those early cartoon flip books. Each page has 2 dimensions length and width. Once you extrude the plane to include an axis of depth, the 2d page can become dynamicly layered and change. Now think about that but with our 3 dimensional world. Time is a 4 dimensional extrusion of 3d space. Without it nothing would ever be able to change, everything would be like a 3 dimensional static snapshot.

Thanks how I think of time. I'll be back later and talk about string theory and relativity and stuff.