If time travel is real

If someone goes back in time and changes events, and changes everything in the world, what happens to us? do we continue down our own path, or are we erased, and it's like a clone so to speak that takes over us? would we just fade away? just like the universe in the NOW? perhaps in an instant our memories get filled with new thoughts and old ones prior to that event erased...or if back before we are born we fade and nolonger exist, or have a different family? or something? of course if that's true maybe the timeline has already been altered, but we just will never know because memory is erased and filled in with a fake memory that we remember. fake as in we never expierienced it as we are from the future and done our events.

Time travel isn't possible, even millions of years ahead in time. Otherwise there would be accounts of people from the future coming back in time to our time or times before ours.

There have been, but they go become a mental institution person. :P Seriously though, will you believe a person if they told you they are from the future? You can't rely on what they say because future events havn't took place yet for us, unlike that person.

Then again, if you go back in time, you left what you know behind and went to before you knew time...so maybe you wont know anything??

kingofclutch, No. That is an extremely narrow minded view on the concept of time travel.

Perhaps it does exist, but when traveling back in time you would not travel on the same line. It would not be possible as it would create an ultimate paradox. For example, if you were to travel back in time, kill your grandfather. You wouldn't be born, and thus couldn't go back in time and kill your grandfather. So he'd live, and you would be born etc. etc.

If however you were to travel back in time to say a parallel line, you'd be able to alter that timeline's course of events.

This however is pseudo-science and is merely being used to prove a point. There are technical details in which people have theorized about the possibilities of time travel.

We however know too little of the concept of time to make any assumptions on the possibility of time travel. We already know that time can be "bent," via intense speeds (time moves slower around an object the faster it moves) and other powers that be such as extreme gravity (as is the case of black holes), so the idea of going backwards in time is not very farfetched.

Also, to go back in time could possibly be only 1 way. You may be able to rewind time because it's already happened, but now you're back in time, and there is no future events that time can travel to, right? you are in the NOW, not the future, so you are stuck in the NOW and traveling ahead when there is no ahead might be harder, although there could possibly be a way to do it somehow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ExoByte

kingofclutch, No. That is an extremely narrow minded view on the concept of time travel.

Perhaps it does exist, but when traveling back in time you would not travel on the same line. It would not be possible as it would create an ultimate paradox. For example, if you were to travel back in time, kill your grandfather. You wouldn't be born, and thus couldn't go back in time and kill your grandfather. So he'd live, and you would be born etc. etc.

If however you were to travel back in time to say a parallel line, you'd be able to alter that timeline's course of events.

This however is pseudo-science and is merely being used to prove a point. There are technical details in which people have theorized about the possibilities of time travel.

We however know too little of the concept of time to make any assumptions on the possibility of time travel. We already know that time can be "bent," via intense speeds (time moves slower around an object the faster it moves) and other powers that be such as extreme gravity (as is the case of black holes), so the idea of going backwards in time is not very farfetched.

---

Yes, but time 'bending' is completely different than time traveling and yes time traveling IS very farfetched.

That post clearly went right over your head.

Just for the sake of humour, scientifically explain to me why time travel is farfetched.

Maybe no one has come back in time yet because WE are the first point on the timeline. The future hasn't technically happened yet. This probably sounds retarded, but it makes sense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ExoByte

That post clearly went right over your head.

Just for the sake of humour, scientifically explain to me why time travel is farfetched.

---

In physics, time is described as a dimension much like length, width, and height. When you travel from your house to the grocery store, you’re traveling through a direction in space, making headway in all the spatial dimensions—length, width and height. But you’re also traveling forward in time, the fourth dimension.

Space and time are tangled together in a sort of a four-dimensional fabric called space-time.

When something that has mass—you and I, an object, a planet, or any star—sits in that piece of four-dimensional spandex, it causes it to create a dimple. That dimple is a manifestation of space-time bending to accommodate this mass.

The bending of space-time causes objects to move on a curved path and that curvature of space is what we know as gravity.

Mathematically one can go backwards or forwards in the three spatial dimensions. But time doesn’t share this multi-directional freedom.

In this four-dimensional space-time, you’re only able to move forward in time.


Just for the sake of humor, or how you spell it, humour, explain to me why time travel isn't farfetched. :takethatfoo:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Casualtie

Maybe no one has come back in time yet because WE are the first point on the timeline. The future hasn't technically happened yet. This probably sounds retarded, but it makes sense to me.

---

If we went back in time, they would think the same thing. That's why i don't believe that.

There's a theory that you can only travel back in time to the point where your time machine was invented. If you went farther back, the time machine would stop existing and you couldn't travel farther. Same with travelling before you were born.

If anything is possible, it's probably more the "time travel forwards" variety. If you go fast enough, your time slows down, and to you, it feels like time travel. It also feels that way to the rest of the world, except they'll never see you again (except in the future if they're still around).

Going BACK in time is a whole different ballgame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingofclutch

In physics, time is described as a dimension much like length, width, and height. When you travel from your house to the grocery store, you’re traveling through a direction in space, making headway in all the spatial dimensions—length, width and height. But you’re also traveling forward in time, the fourth dimension.

Space and time are tangled together in a sort of a four-dimensional fabric called space-time.

When something that has mass—you and I, an object, a planet, or any star—sits in that piece of four-dimensional spandex, it causes it to create a dimple. That dimple is a manifestation of space-time bending to accommodate this mass.

The bending of space-time causes objects to move on a curved path and that curvature of space is what we know as gravity.

Mathematically one can go backwards or forwards in the three spatial dimensions. But time doesn’t share this multi-directional freedom.

In this four-dimensional space-time, you’re only able to move forward in time.


Just for the sake of humor, or how you spell it, humour, explain to me why time travel isn't farfetched. :takethatfoo:

---

Wormholes are one idea.

The space time continuum can be bent. The idea is that if our universe is like a flat plane(take a piece of paper for example) as Einstein theorized, a wormhole would be a "bridge" from one point of the Universe to another by folding it over itself. This would therefore not only allow an object to instantly get from one point of the universe to another, but possibly travel forward or back in time.

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/3152/worm3zl4.jpg

However, it is also theoretically possible to go back in time via going faster than the Speed of light. Its said, once again by Einstein, that the closer you get to the speed of light the slower time goes around you. Which we so far know as true, which is why "time travel" to the "future" is possible and is done simple by moving very fast.

The idea is, if you surpassed the speed of light, you'd go back in time rather than forward. Take for example Black Holes. Black Holes as we know have gravity so powerful that light cannot escape, this is because the light cannot move fast enough to escape the gravitational pull of the black hole.

Faster than light travel kind of technology is currently beyond our level of understanding, but it is again theoretically possible in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ExoByte

Wormholes are one idea.

The space time continuum can be bent. The idea is that if our universe is like a flat plane(take a piece of paper for example) as Einstein theorized, a wormhole would be a "bridge" from one point of the Universe to another by folding it over itself. This would therefore not only allow an object to instantly get from one point of the universe to another, but possibly travel forward or back in time.

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/3152/worm3zl4.jpg

However, it is also theoretically possible to go back in time via going faster than the Speed of light. Its said, once again by Einstein, that the closer you get to the speed of light the slower time goes around you. Which we so far know as true, which is why "time travel" to the "future" is possible and is done simple by moving very fast.

The idea is, if you surpassed the speed of light, you'd go back in time rather than forward. Take for example Black Holes. Black Holes as we know have gravity so powerful that light cannot escape, this is because the light cannot move fast enough to escape the gravitational pull of the black hole.

Faster than light travel kind of technology is currently beyond our level of understanding, but it is again theoretically possible in the future.

---

That is only a theory, and not close to ever happening and making time slower isn't time traveling, it's going through time slower.

Quote:

---

That is only a theory...

---

Space-Time is still only a theory as well. There is actually reason to believe we're not limited to 4-dimensions either.

Quote:

---

...and not close to ever happening...

---

Lmfao :chuckle:

Are you serious?

The whole point of this discussion was if time travel was possible. Not whether we could do it soon or not. Doesn't even matter, who cares if we're not even close to traveling faster than light? If we learn to in the far future, and it turns out we can travel back in time, it makes no difference. It not happening within our life time doesn't make it any less possible.

Until we at least have a vague idea of exactly what time IS, no one's opinion is particularly valid.

What would happen to us though? alter past events and change the future. Mind erased, and filled with new memories?

One interpretation of quantum electrodynamics is that empty space is full of tiny wormholes through which particles from the future come and go, and manifest themselves in the present as 'virtual particles.' Even if it isn't a wormhole phenomenon, particles popping into and out of existence in a vacuum is probably stranger than time-travel, and it's a proven phenomenon.

If time travel is possible, I doubt the universe has any mechanism to 'fix' all of the paradoxes. If it did, such a mechanism would probably have to act retroactively in time, likely creating its own time paradoxes, which would create more paradoxes, and so on. The multiple-timeline theory is a better alternative.

I don't think it's possible because of all the paradoxes that come with it. Take the Grandfather paradox. The only way that could work is for an alternate universe to be made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingofclutch

In physics, time is described as a dimension much like length, width, and height. When you travel from your house to the grocery store, you’re traveling through a direction in space, making headway in all the spatial dimensions—length, width and height. But you’re also traveling forward in time, the fourth dimension.

Space and time are tangled together in a sort of a four-dimensional fabric called space-time.

When something that has mass—you and I, an object, a planet, or any star—sits in that piece of four-dimensional spandex, it causes it to create a dimple. That dimple is a manifestation of space-time bending to accommodate this mass.

The bending of space-time causes objects to move on a curved path and that curvature of space is what we know as gravity.

Mathematically one can go backwards or forwards in the three spatial dimensions. But time doesn’t share this multi-directional freedom.

In this four-dimensional space-time, you’re only able to move forward in time.


Just for the sake of humor, or how you spell it, humour, explain to me why time travel isn't farfetched. :takethatfoo:

---

None of that actually explained why time travel was far fetched. You basically outlined an extremely basic version of relativistic gravitation and then re-asserted that its only possible to move forward in time; something that relativity does not support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thegnome54

Until we at least have a vague idea of exactly what time IS, no one's opinion is particularly valid.

---

We do have a pretty good idea of what time is. All of the experiments that have been conducted to test the theory of relativity have shown that time is effected in the same way as space by acceleration and gravity. This would suggest that time is at the very least extremely similar to space.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R.D.735

If time travel is possible, I doubt the universe has any mechanism to 'fix' all of the paradoxes. If it did, such a mechanism would probably have to act retroactively in time, likely creating its own time paradoxes, which would create more paradoxes, and so on. The multiple-timeline theory is a better alternative.

---

If time is 2-dimensional and time travelling on the second dimension is impossible then no paradoxes would occur from travelling in the first.

Time Travel cannot exist, because time is not something you can move across.

Well if time is somehow circular (i.e. everything will happen over and over again) then all you need to do is wait for a very long time and voila, you're in the past. But that would also cause problems, such as meeting yourself.

there is no time, there is only change.

time is a way of sort of illustrating how things are. there's really no such thing as "the future", because it hasn't happened yet. there's the idea of the future, but all there really is is the present, and now. but now can change. All there ever is, all we ever experience is NOW. As far as the past goes, yes... that does exist and all because it happened, but now it's only a memory and there's no changing it.



http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...ad.php?t=52586

Zera's and Nondualistic's posts are in relation

Holy shit, i am time traveling right now, and now, now, now. We are all time traveling;), if you get what i mean.

The only thing that comes close to time traveling is an object that goes at the speed of light, time will move slower around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TimeStopper

Well if time is somehow circular (i.e. everything will happen over and over again) then all you need to do is wait for a very long time and voila, you're in the past. But that would also cause problems, such as meeting yourself.

---

No, you would move with time.

But that still isn't correct because time is an idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riot Maker

Holy shit, i am time traveling right now, and now, now, now. We are all time traveling;), if you get what i mean.

The only thing that comes close to time traveling is an object that goes at the speed of light, time will move slower around.

---

Time is compared by the speed of objects in relation to each other.

I've read thats time travel is more possible than teleportion. they've moved a beam of light from one place to another and even though its just a beam of light its still amazing. ill look this up and try to come back with more prove.

This from Xquarias Refuring Determinism thread:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NonDualistic

Perhaps time is a loop rather than a straight line

With both ends connected

Through thought/mind I am connected to myself at any point in this loop

The thoughts you have work to determine the actions you take

Not only affecting your action at the point you actively are in the moment

But also at every oher point on that loop, or circle


Thus not only did the thoughts I had yesterday bring me to where I am now,

But So are the thoughts I am having tomorrow, determining where I am today

---

Expand your picture of this loop not only to include your current existant bodie, but all past lives you have lived and all future lives you will live regardless of form taken.

MAny possibilities here with this.

I don't think you guys are understanding that time doesn't exist. :huh:

This is always an interesting subject to discuss.

Let's say (even if you say "it's not possible to time travel) it is possible to travel in time.

If you'd go back and kill your grandfather, what would happen?

If I'd go back to 1950 and kill him, time would reverse to 1950 and go from there. 2008 would not exist anymore. My existence would only be in 1950 and there would be no chance to go back to the future. (Woah, i didn't think of the movie when I wrote that... weird :P)

If you went back in time and killed your grandfather you would still be alive, you would not vanish into nothing asap. Why? well...you traveled back in time to see him, you are not alive right now to begin with yet here you are, back in time seeing your grandfather. If you traveled forward in time it's likely you would cease to exist, because you traveled to after your father would have existed, so you would cease to be. Anyway that seems logical to me, not sure about other people. But if you travel in the past you are living in the "now", and you are alive and well, not havn't been born yet. See? seems pretty simple to understand. You just cannot travel ahead or you will cease to be.


Anyway, answer the question people. I'm not really talking about if time travel is possible, i'm asking what would happen to you RIGHT NOW. Would this reality exist? or everything just fade to nothing. you are living in the now, so why would this fade? the now is the NOW, going back you are also living in the NOW, so how can a NOW fade to nothingness? it's the NOW, not some 1 time thing or whatever. IMO nothing would happen to this reality, things would stay the same we would just be putting up missing posters for whoever traveled back in time...he's now lost.

Maybe it works, maybe someone comes back now and then. But I think it would be like this:

You got some device with insanely fast cameras, that will activate and take a picture as soon as the time-machine is activated too.

When the time-machine begins, you will not notice anything. But the device will have traveled back, for the atom of time. The smallest bit of time you could possibly have, the point where objects begins to 'jump' from place to place at that speed. If you understand... So it comes in at one time-atom, and goes out the next time-atom.
That way, it is simply impossible for any human or other living things to even detect that there has been anything at all. (Because if it were discovered, the time-machine might not be there when it goes back. I believe that even changing the position of a leaf on the ground can change major events.)

While the device is back there, it takes a picture. And is instantly sent back.
Back in the future, the device now has a picture from the past. Now to find out how to use that to improve the past. But, say that maybe they go back, make 9/11 never happen. What happens? Either the team that was sent back just wont come back. Or the whole world around the team would be something else. So they would be stuck back there.

But atleast you could use the device to take pictures on times and places where criminal stuff happened. But that's about it I think. They can't use pictures from our time for anything other than education things.

I think are memories would be changed in a instant; I doubt its possible though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Holiace

This is always an interesting subject to discuss.

Let's say (even if you say "it's not possible to time travel) it is possible to travel in time.

If you'd go back and kill your grandfather, what would happen?

If I'd go back to 1950 and kill him, time would reverse to 1950 and go from there. 2008 would not exist anymore. My existence would only be in 1950 and there would be no chance to go back to the future. (Woah, i didn't think of the movie when I wrote that... weird :P)

---

According to some who say when explaining the "kill your own grandfather paradox". They say that if you were to go back in time and kill your own grandfather you would simply cease to exist at all.

But according to you if you were to go back intime and kill your grandfather you would still exist but only in the time period in which you did the deed. To go back to the present would be impossible because you never existed in the present at all(because you killed your grandfather)? Is that what you mean?

Pardon me if i confused you :P

May I again iterate that time is an illusion created by memory?

The ability to recall something before the present memory is what creates the past... Speculation off of what is the current memory creates the future.

They aren't planes you can pass through any more than a thought or idea is as it is represented in your mind.

I mean it is just that: A though. An idea.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE A THING because it would have happened anyways....
It's hard to explain it. Either way, we would never experience both events, only one.

Nothing would happen, because you cannot travel back in time!

::head-desk::

we can't :P, doesnt mean it's not possible ^_-

Time does not exist to a rock, because a rock cannot recall, it merely is.

Time is an illusion created by memory.

Seismosaur's got it right. There is only the present. "Time" is "created" becaus things move, and since there are only one set of things and they can't be at two places in the same time (now) you get the illusion that the things former position existed in the past, which of course is not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ExoByte

That post clearly went right over your head.

Just for the sake of humour, scientifically explain to me why time travel is farfetched.

---

Ha Ha Ha

Professor Stephen Hawking has spent a lifetime trying to prove time travel isn't possible but after over 40 years of studying and research, he has concluded that time travel is possible but is not "practical".

The experiments to be carried out later this year at the underground physics lab (CERN) in Switzerland with the Large Hadron Collider, should be an eye opener.

I keep a very open mind when it comes to things like time travel, as I don't believe ours is the only universe. The proof of the existence of parallel universes would help to dispel our ideas of paradoxes occurring if we were to go back in time and change history.

Other "universes" cannot exist.

Ronald Mallett may have something here:

I saw that guy on the dsicovery channel one night, I believe he was on one of the eps. of The Universe

If time flows linearly, then any change you made when you traveled back in time would necessarily bring about the conditions that lead up to the travel back in time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaia

If time flows linearly, then any change you made when you traveled back in time would necessarily bring about the conditions that lead up to the travel back in time.

---

Again-- Time does not exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skysaw

Ronald Mallett may have something here:

---

I completely agree with and understood everything he said EXCEPT actually moving across time. You see, according to Einstein time and space are linked. This is true, however, time is NOT something you can actively move across, what he described in the first video with the fourth dimension was however a great means for teleportation.

You see, spacetime is only spacetime when observed by something with memory, something that can sense change. That perception of change is all dictated by space, which is why we have spacetime, but you cannot move across time.

Besides I am especially not convinced because he would not go into detail about how he planned to do it. He just jumped around with the "Timeloop" and refused to tell how he planned to send a particle into the past with his swirling bowl of space.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Again-- Time does not exist.

---

If it doesn't exist, why did you need to use the word "again?" :thumbdown2:

Quote:

---

however, time is NOT something you can actively move across...

---

Unless you can. You seem very convinced by this, yet you still haven't demonstrated it.

Quote:

---

You see, spacetime is only spacetime when observed by something with memory, something that can sense change. That perception of change is all dictated by space, which is why we have spacetime, but you cannot move across time.

---

Again, you simply state that one can't move across time. Since this was the original question, you are not helping the discussion much unless you present your case in better detail.

Quote:

---

Besides I am especially not convinced because he would not go into detail about how he planned to do it. He just jumped around with the "Timeloop" and refused to tell how he planned to send a particle into the past with his swirling bowl of space.

---

I've seen him talk more extensively on a science channel program, and he definitely goes into more detail on how it should work. I imagine the financial backers he is seeking are getting a full-blown presentation. This of course is too much material to include in a youtube video or to expect people in this thread to actually watch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skysaw

Ronald Mallett may have something here:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skysaw

If it doesn't exist, why did you need to use the word "again?" :thumbdown2:


Unless you can. You seem very convinced by this, yet you still haven't demonstrated it.


Again, you simply state that one can't move across time. Since this was the original question, you are not helping the discussion much unless you present your case in better detail.


I've seen him talk more extensively on a science channel program, and he definitely goes into more detail on how it should work. I imagine the financial backers he is seeking are getting a full-blown presentation. This of course is too much material to include in a youtube video or to expect people in this thread to actually watch.

---

1. Because I have stated it multiple times.
2. Time is just perception of change-- Not a physical plane. Therefore, you cannot move across it.
3. I have: What makes time pass? Memory, the ability to percieve change by comparing what you saw before to what you saw now.

Think of the world as a cartoon. In reality, each slide is separate, and just a slight change from frame to frame. Why do the pictures appear to move? Because you can tell what they looked like before, thus giving the illusion of fluid movement.

Same prinicpal.

4. Well all he has done is dance around anything in those two videos with his "coffee cup of time travel".

I also noticed a flaw in his experiment:

In his experiment, he proposed to send a particle into the past.

...How did he propose to study it in the past, for one, and two: how could he be sure it entered the past?

If it would have, the particle would be in the room before the experiment, assuming it would have worked.

That aside, I stand by my theory of Time Illusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

1. Because I have stated it multiple times.
2. Time is just perception of change-- Not a physical plane. Therefore, you cannot move across it.
3. I have: What makes time pass? Memory, the ability to percieve change by comparing what you saw before to what you saw now.

Think of the world as a cartoon. In reality, each slide is separate, and just a slight change from frame to frame. Why do the pictures appear to move? Because you can tell what they looked like before, thus giving the illusion of fluid movement.

Same prinicpal.

4. Well all he has done is dance around anything in those two videos with his "coffee cup of time travel".

I also noticed a flaw in his experiment:

In his experiment, he proposed to send a particle into the past.

...How did he propose to study it in the past, for one, and two: how could he be sure it entered the past?

If it would have, the particle would be in the room before the experiment, assuming it would have worked.

That aside, I stand by my theory of Time Illusion.

---

Your analogy allows movement in time, very simply. Just move back a few frames in the cartoon and draw yourself in.

But the last frome only existed because you knew it did before. Otherwise only the frame you are looking at does.

If you move a rock from one place to another, it only appears to move because you knew it was there before.

You cannot go back because there is nothing to go back to.

You can keep insisting that time isn't real, but you've yet to convince anyone in this thread.

time does exist because time is our analogy for all the events of the past, pretty simple.

anyways, on to my point, I am fond of the theory that there are an infinate number of universes because every time you make a choice a universe occurs for every choice you make, Im not going to pretend to be an expert on it, but that would solve the time traveling paradox to me. (similar to The One, with Jet Li)

anyways, the point of this thread wasnt if it was possible, it was just light hearted discussion. So if it was possible. I believe there would be one you unaffected, but the you that travled back in time would have instant memory changes.

Time is a dimension, just like space. How we percieve it quite different from how we percieve space. And, unlike space, we can't freely choose where we stand on this dimension. It's as if we're being pushed along it by some invisible force. Time travel is a matter of not only stopping, but reversing this force.

I'm honestly just making this up off the top of my head, but I figure it's an interesting way to look at time.

"Other universes cannot exist"
"time does not exist"

These are pretty big (and totally unsubstantiated) claims for a 15-year-old student to be making.

I think all of us should be doing a bit more studying of experienced physicists' findings before making such sweeping statements which only make one look silly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *cheyenne*

"Other universes cannot exist"
"time does not exist"

These are pretty big (and totally unsubstantiated) claims for a 15-year-old student to be making.

I think all of us should be doing a bit more studying of experienced physicists' findings before making such sweeping statements which only make one look silly.

---

That's exactly what I was thinking *cheyenne*.

Being from the future I am offended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

But the last frome only existed because you knew it did before. Otherwise only the frame you are looking at does.

If you move a rock from one place to another, it only appears to move because you knew it was there before.

---

so are you saying that things just appear places, and don't actually move?

And how does a rock that you pick up and place elsewhere yourself not move?

It seems like you're either trying to say something really profound, or you don't realize what you are saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Time Travel cannot exist, because time is not something you can move across.

---

I don't get it. What are we doing right now? Are we not traveling forward through time? Are you saying the past never happened, that it never existed? Just because it isn't tangible to us now doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Everything we experience right now is the result of everything that happened in the past.

I thought it was pretty well established that time exists. I mean speed and gravity affects time right? Aren't we all experiencing time different, though undetectable without incredibly precise equipment? We are all moving at a different speed and depending on where we are on the earth, time is different. I remember seeing a website where a guy sets two very accurate clocks and takes one up a mountain and leaves the other at home, and at the higher elevation time was slower than at the lower elevation. It was a very very small difference, but it was there. That seems like pretty strong evidence that time exists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yay

I remember seeing a website where a guy sets two very accurate clocks and takes one up a mountain and leaves the other at home, and at the higher elevation time was slower than at the lower elevation.

---

Small point, but it should have been the other way around. The lower elevation should be ever-so-slightly more affected by the mass of the Earth, and time should slow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skysaw

Small point, but it should have been the other way around. The lower elevation should be ever-so-slightly more affected by the mass of the Earth, and time should slow.

---

ah I haven't looked at it in a while, I meant to say that. I got confused because I know that it meant they experienced more time than if they were at home, and I just looked it up and he says about 22 nanoseconds. I interpreted that as meaning time went slower up there , but now I see that it went faster, oops! Thanks for correcting that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by *cheyenne*

"Other universes cannot exist"
"time does not exist"

These are pretty big (and totally unsubstantiated) claims for a 15-year-old student to be making.

I think all of us should be doing a bit more studying of experienced physicists' findings before making such sweeping statements which only make one look silly.

---

I never disagreed with physicists other than the fact that I think they overlook the tangibility of Time. Or lack there of rather.

My age is meaningless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yay

so are you saying that things just appear places, and don't actually move?

And how does a rock that you pick up and place elsewhere yourself not move?

It seems like you're either trying to say something really profound, or you don't realize what you are saying.



I don't get it. What are we doing right now? Are we not traveling forward through time? Are you saying the past never happened, that it never existed? Just because it isn't tangible to us now doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Everything we experience right now is the result of everything that happened in the past.

I thought it was pretty well established that time exists. I mean speed and gravity affects time right? Aren't we all experiencing time different, though undetectable without incredibly precise equipment? We are all moving at a different speed and depending on where we are on the earth, time is different. I remember seeing a website where a guy sets two very accurate clocks and takes one up a mountain and leaves the other at home, and at the higher elevation time was slower than at the lower elevation. It was a very very small difference, but it was there. That seems like pretty strong evidence that time exists.

---

1. They do move, when did I say they didn't?

Pick something up-- It just moved.
2. No, we aren't. We are exerpiencing the remembering of the then, that which was. But it cannot be reversed.

Time is a matter of perception which is why mass, gravity, and speed affect it.

Again-- You cannot tell me how you can move across time (No, we are not moving across time-- That is an illusion created by memory) so I am obviously not convinced seeing as I've explained how it doesn't exist from what I know.

All you've done is tell me I haven't said anything instead of saying something yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

2. No, we aren't. We are exerpiencing the remembering of the then, that which was. But it cannot be reversed.

---

assertion += 1; supporting evidence += 0

Quote:

---

Time is a matter of perception which is why mass, gravity, and speed affect it.

---

An absolute non-sequitur. Are you saying that mass, gravity, and speed only affect things which are solely perception-based?

Quote:

---

...I've explained how it doesn't exist from what I know.

---

No you haven't. You've explained that you believe it doesn't exist. You have yet to explain how or why.

Nope, but they do affect perception of time because of how objects relate to each other is what I was trying to say but it came out oddly.

I cannot prove that it is impossible to move backwards in time any more than I can prove there is no Teapot in orbit around a distant star in the next week.

I have explained my own logic eleven times-- What more do you want? Until they actually send something back in time with loads of support from the rest of the scientific community, I stand by my logic.

Also again-- Tell me why I am wrong. Since you seem so keen on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

I have explained my own logic eleven times-- What more do you want?

---

How about some logic in that logic? You have presented exactly none.

Quote:

---

Also again-- Tell me why I am wrong. Since you seem so keen on it.

---

I have no idea if you are wrong about the possibility of time-travel, but your approach to a logical argument is about as wrong as they come. Your logic seems to consist of asserting your premise over and over without any supporting discussion at all. Even throwing in a simple "I believe" would have made you sound more intelligent by several orders of magnitude.

Well that had much support and pointed out all of my fallacies and plain contradictory and stupid comments.

Care to share what you see is so 'wrong' about it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Care to share what you see is so 'wrong' about it?

---

I did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skysaw

Your logic seems to consist of asserting your premise over and over without any supporting discussion at all.

---

I'll take a shot at this topic (only skimmed the last page of responses). First, I can think of one way in which time (or more specifically the past and future) isn't real. It's a very simple argument, and goes a little something like this:

For something to be real, it must be (or exist)
By definition, the past is that which has ceased to be (or exist)
By definition, the future is that which has yet to be (or exist)

Therefore, neither the past nor the future is real (or existent). If it were, it'd be considered the present. Or in other words, the concept of "existence" is intrinsically present tense. Even the word "is" is intrinsically present tense, and by definition, the word "is" describes what exists.

Think about it. That which was existent (but isn't existent anymore) is qualified as such by the word "was". Similarly, that which will be existent (but isn't existent right now) is qualified as such by the word "will". But you see, as soon as you try to make either the past or future existent, it instantaneously becomes present tense.

Simply put, nothing can exist unless it does so in the present. Since the past and the future are inherently non-present tense, they inherently cannot exist (because if they did exist, they could no longer be considered the past nor the future.) And since the distinction between past, present, and future is what makes time a viable notion, if neither the past nor present is real then the concept of time (at least in terms of past, present, and future) cannot be real either. And this is simply because the validity of the notion of time depends on the existence of 3 things, two of which are inherently non-existent.



Anywho, back to the issue of time travel. Assuming quantum mechanics is valid, history will play out differently each time its repeated...even in identical circumstances. Here's a simple way to look at it:

Lets say this is the circumstance for an event: If A, then 20% chance of B, 5% chance of C, 13% chance of D, 2% chance of E, and 60% chance of F. This is a rough approximation of what is going on the quantum level.

The first time around, under those circumstances, A may have caused F. But if it were to be repeated under identical circumstance (20% chance of B, 5% chance of C, 13% chance of D, 2% chance of E, and 60% chance of F), any of those possible outcomes could happen. Honestly, I don't know how changes such as this would translate into events we would be aware of (like perhaps wearing a yellow t-shirt on a day you originally wore a blue t-shirt). But since everything that happens in this universe is ultimately determined by quantum factors, you can expect some changes, and perhaps huge changes as different outcomes (even if small at first) allow for a whole new world of alternate and non-original possibilities to be realized. And those alternate possibilities would spawn even more alternate ones, and in an exponential fashion, history would veer in a different direction than the first time around.

Small differences at first, but unfathomable changes over time.