So... I'd like to discuss three things within this thread, each of them big, each of them powerful, yet none of them proved (ok, one might have been, but last I read on it, I didn't understand it). These three things are as follows:
- Time Travel - Going back and forward in time.
- Multi-verse - In theory, everything that can happen, will happen, thus for everything that happens, a new universe is created.
- Dimensions - So, there are suppose to be what, 10? or 11?
So, lets start off with Time Travel. I guess the first thing to ask is whether it is possible or not. Some scientists probably think it is, others think not. Myself, I don't quite know. If you had a bigger picture of it, then going back in time would be possible. You would be going back to a time that has existed, whether you change what has happened is up to you. However, to travel forward in time, to something that (from your current perspective) doesn't exist wouldn't theoretically be possible. My thoughts on time travel are varied. One thought that I have had, is that you can travel back in time, and change things to your liking (stop WWI & WWII, say hi to Jesus, etc), however, upon 'going back' there would be no way to 'come back' to your future. Thus, once you've gone back in time, to you, the future doesn't exist yet. I'd also believe that for someone to travel through time, could mean their death. Say Person A decides to go back in time, he doesn't belong there, thus, upon his arrival, his existence is wiped out of existence (making sense)? Now, about changing things in the past, this brings up the Multi-verse topic. In theory, if you went back and changed a load of historic events, you'd just be creating another universe, and when you again went forward, you wouldn't go to what you knew, you'd end up in an alternate future because of events that you have changed. And to think, for a Multi-verse, everything that can happen, will happen. So, from the dawn of time, up until now (billions of years) and with everything that can and will happen, that is a lot of universes. Just to think, that in another universe, I could be head of FileFront, or could own Playboy Mansion, or Microsoft. I could even have a T-Rex as a pet. The possibilities are endless, yet this as with time travel has yet to be proved. Dimensions however are something that even scientists believe, they even (to a point) have proof, there are many theories on it for starters, and I suppose to some people, they'd make a lot of sense, though I can't quite get my head around it. So, there is then the question of 'what is in these other Dimensions (if anything), and what are they there for'. Of course, I don't know, but it doesn't hurt to speculate. So what do you guys think? Feel free to discuss Time Travel & Multi-verses within this thread also. I'll be interested to see what everyone has to say. :)
There is a subset of string theory called m theory, which has 12 dimensions, 10 spacial and 2 time. This allows for time travel backwards along one dimension, and forwards on the other. Also, time travel is allowed in quantum mechanics, but it cannot be controlled, it is random, and for objects more than 5atoms large, the chances of it happening are almost zero. Also, the little known fact about string theory is that the strings require either 10 dimensions or 26 dimensions(just spatial mind you, so 11 or 27 after including time). Weird, I know.
Yep, I'm lost already :lol: So, you are saying that time travel exists, though only for things that are 5 atoms large or less, thus impossible for humans (unless we are condensed to 5 atoms). Right?
In a way time-travel exists because the light we see shows objects how they were in the past, this may be little for ojects that are close to you, but if you want to travel back four years just take a look at the closest start ;)
Time travel is perfectly possible as far as I see it, but it's alot easier to travel to the future rather than the past. Gravity is relative to time, so the more gravity there is, the slower time goes, so theoretically, in a fixed position in space (the Earth revolves around the sun, without a fixed position, you could wind up in space, or worse yet, with the Earth headed on a several million mile per hour collision course with you. So starting in space could help a decent bit.
From here we get to the point, you set up a feild of super intense gravity with a surrounding field of super intense anti-gravity to stop it from extending into the room, You let the gravity dissapate by cutting it off and letting it sit, now you have for what it's worth, a portal, if you walk through the area where the gravity was, you enter into the future, because it's been in so much of a slower time than you have, meaning to the rest of the universe, this spot has fallen behind. Even though the field occupied only so much space, it doesn't matter once the person travels through it as they enter the new time, on the other side where time wasn't slowed down. So now you have just entered the future. Getting to the past may entail speeding up time by creating an area of super anti-gravity, so this area speeds up, and once the person walks through the dissapated field, they walk into the time that wasn't sped up (which should this idea fail, may be the exact time that you started in meaning no change, or you wind up in the future again, who knows). Either way, it's a one way trip, once you walk through, there is no going back, hell I'm not even sure if you could pull your hand out without loosing it.
Now is where it gets interesting, if you go back to the past to change something, then you prevent yourself from having reason to change it, leading to it never being changed. For what it's worth, you could interact with anything that wouldn't prevent you from going on your visit, but once your start taking away the reason for your trip, or end up accidentaly causing you never to build said time machine, or atleast enter it, or perhapse killing yourself all together, you may get a ghost like affect. In this state, for example attempting to stop a heavy object from killing your freind, the object or whatever you attempt to stop it with simply cannot be touched by you, you can reach to grab it, but your hand will go through it until the event is complete, at which time you may resume your ability to interact, which could cause problems, like your hand being fused to whatever you were trying to grab. If you were trying to tell someone something, they couldn't here or understand you, if you tried to give a visual signal, they wouldn't see it.
In the future what may happen to the traveler is similar in it that all events that would result in somehow not allowing to travel back (if he exists in the future presented) or otherwise causing a state of change that prevents that same change from occuring, simply couldn't and wouldn't happen.
The reason for this theory is, time itself is inanimate, it has no intelligence, no mind, nothing, it simply is a part of the world we live in, so rather than a situation where the event re-occurs, but slightly earlier or later (See: The Time Machine) or the person dies upon entering the past to prevent them from making changes, the act of trying to change something, becomes the act of not, meaning the two cancel out, and your actions have no meaning towards their intended function.
Chemix2;3522307A Whole Bunch Of Shit I Didn't Understand.
I think the most likely way to travel through time is that you would go back in time and create a new branch of history in doing so so you now effectively have two pieces of history following completely different paths.
But here is a good point. If time travel will be possible in the future why have we not been visited by someone from the future yet. You would think it would have happened by now.
Also a side note. I find theoretically physics to be nothing more then some little unimportant pastime. It is impossible to prove half(actually more like 99%) of the stuff theoretical scientists come up with.
Actualy, it might be quite possible in the near future, think about what 1 simple discovery could spawn in terms of inventions, that discovery being the successful creation of gravity and anti-gravity.
The problem with the "Back to the Future" theory, or the two paths theory is that it creates a paradox that doesn't allow for the other to occur, or at the very least, makes you unable to return to your true original time.
The idea of the paradox is relatively simple, but difficult to explain.
Say you have a baseball and a time portal to the past, you through the ball through the portal, but when it comes out, it ricochets and hits you in the head, knocking you unconcious and incapable of throwing it. So what hits you then? You don't throw it, so nothing goes through and nothing hits you, but then what's to stop you from throwing it and preventing it you from doing so. The actions cancel out, meaning you may not even see the ball until it goes through the portal, if you ever see or feel it. It may just pop up right behind you after having non-interacted with you (it went through you without you noticing).
In "The Time Machine", a scientist meets a beautiful women who he engages, but on the same night of the engagement, she is shot while he struggles with a mugger. He builds the time machine to go back and save her, but in doing so, erased his reason for building the time machine and changing the past, so she was killed again, run over by a stray buggy. What it comes down to, nomatter which applies (The new incident ala HG Wells, or my theory of non-interactability), you can't change the past.
Since the space time concept has disproven the logical assumption that time is absolute, constant progress, it means time travel (in my opinion the most relevant of those three complicated concepts) is not theoritically impossible. Travel to the past is of course logically impossible (look at Chemix post and you'll see why), but to the future could be possible, but I don't see this possibility being harnessed in a controlled way in the near...well, future.
Time travel in the sence of going back 2 years is utterly impossible. Ask any scientist who has studied nuclea physic's. It is theoreticly intreging.l cant even say possible. The problem is the same old same old, you go back in time, meet your dad and kill him, now under our laws of physic's, you never exhisted, so it would be theoreticly impossible. Anyways, timetravel is for the movies, it makes for a good script, but l daought its possible. Time dilation, now thats another matter. Atomic clocks show evidence of time travel, but scientists seem devided over whether this is evidence of time travel or evidence of how much more accurate our clocks need to be to even attempt to record such a thing ! Space has been proven to be flat not curved, time travel is looking pretty unlikely. From my understanding, alternate universes require a curved universe, so that blows the alternate universe's/earth's idea out of the water. Sliders is bullshit for all you dont know. Thats science. As for dimentions, this can get overly complicated fast, most of these dementions you have to realise are still theory, or even hypothesis, there isnt a way of scientificly checking some of it. We know of the 3 dimentions we live in, and when you start talking dimentions, are you not reffering to an alternate reality, ie, another place somewhere in time? As- a - dimention ? Would this be the same as the sliders idea, or, similar ? Anyways, time travel is out. Alternate earths or universes where there could be literally thousands of you or me, is , out. Dimentions is confusing if its not clearly stated what the question is in specific ,in relation to the dimention/s.Its maths, looool.Confused meself there !!!
well, there is the theory that I first heard about in the hitchikers guide to the galaxy that time is like a giant jigsaw puzzle. And that no matter what you do, it will all end up correct. meaning that you were ment to go back in time and do whatever. You were ment to change the future and create a paradox. Every thing works out as it was ment to, even if it doesnt seem that way. Of course, this would also indicate that there is indeed an end to time.