Time Travel question

[devilof76]

And the madness begins...

 

[ShadowX81]

No, the universe is a place. It's where all the things are, as a matter of fact. You know, those things you perceive, and which you seem to think your perception somehow makes them be what they are.

And thank you for bringing other dimensions into this. I didn't think time travel was enough. Now we can talk about parallel universes and other contributions LSD made to the scientific community (wait...I think the good Reverend Blackthorn already did).

If you think that there is no philosophy underlying your assertion that my picture of the universe is 'outdated', or that what your professor is passing off as science has no ideological roots, then I have a used concentration camp to sell you. I promise it hasn't been used in a while. Or perhaps you like a more sciency locale out in the Gulag.

The fact is, your scientists have a philosophical problem leading them to make these insane mistakes. Scientific method is the province of philosophy and when the philosophy is corrupt, the science doesn't fall far from that tree. The more you talk, the more that becomes evident.

Obviously you missed the point, as I specifically stated it is not like that at all. But thanks for bringing the Nazis into this.


You keep making these claims about the science being junk, the people researching this being shunned by his peers, and that his experiments are a waste of money to the point of curruption. Where are these wild accusations coming from?

Dr Mallet is a well respected professor by all his peers, his science does not have roots in any kind of corrupt philosophy. You don't even know anything about him or his project, so where are these wild conclusions coming from? You are comparing it to the theoretical quantum physics like in 'What the &^%* Do We Know", when it is nothing like that at all.

If you don't even have the scientific knowledge to understand why his science is junk, then what basis do you have for your statements? This isn't science, this is your own philosophy. Atleast read up and learn about something before you dismiss it entirely. Learn why you don't believe in it before you shut your mind.

That's my whole point.

 

[Darth Snoopy]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHC8z6ULs18[/ame]

Sorry, no offense to Dr. Mallett, but all I get from this is that he's still a ten year old boy who has a fantasy/obsession of traveling back in time to save his father's life.

 

[ShadowX81]

Granted, that does seem to drive him (atleast initially). But today even he freely admits that this wouldn't be possible.

 

[Blackthornone]

And the madness begins...

I hope you aren't going to bite the head off a chicken....

 

[joda76]

Titor was the ultimate sci-fi conspiracy troll of all time and space.

Yea for sure but very entertaining to fall asleep to.

 

[Devil_666]

I'm currently developing technology that could theoretically miniaturize matter (specifically humans) by shrinking individual atoms, but only for a limited amount of time, depending on how small the item is miniaturized. Theoretically

I've also developed a specially designed submarine (named Proteus) that could theoretically be shrunk along with a crew and then injected into patients to theoretically operate on them from the inside! With the ship reduced to one micrometer, theoretically it would give the team one hour to do their work. After 60 minutes the submarine would begin to revert to its normal size and become vulnerable to the patients' immune system. Theoretically

Obviously the miniaturized crew would face many obstacles during their missions. Theoretically an arteriovenous fistula for example could force them to detour through the heart, where cardiac arrest would theoretically have to be induced to avoid turbulence, through the inner ear (all outside personnel would have to remain silent to theoretically prevent turbulence) and they would need to replenish their supply of oxygen in the lungs. An ingenious "Plan B" escape plan (in case the ship is damaged) would be for the crew to theoretically swim to one of the patient's eyes where they could theoretically escape via a teardrop before they would return to normal size.

Theoretically I'm working on all this and more at the C.M.D.F. (Combined Miniaturized Deterrent Forces) facilities in a remote, undisclosed location. Theoretically.

I've already requested a grant from the government to fund all of this with tax payer money too.

 

[Mr. Green]

noeeee! please start on a machine that can turn my brother into a puppy!

[ame="https://youtu.be/0TYdrfm7yaI"]https://youtu.be/0TYdrfm7yaI[/ame]

 

[Super Goblin]

Time travel is real, I just returned from the past! I travelled to 2011 and tweaked the DX05 head sculpt, I thought it looked too much like Ford. I also told Hot Toys to only focus on Iron Man, that collectors in the future hated Batman because he is a terrorist. I also told them that we had being able to pose our figures so they should make a line of figures with limited pose ability, I think they really like this idea.

Your welcome.

 

[devilof76]

That's my whole point.

You said he was building a time machine. I said that you cannot time travel. You said that I don't understand the science so I can't comment. I said the issue is pre-scientific, and that yes, I can comment. Scientists proposing to send anything forward or backward in time have misconceptualized time. I don't care how they have used their data to rationalize the error. It's still an error, and it is the same species of error made by the crackpots who produced that joke of a documentary.

You go on to say it's nothing like I'm assuming, that he's only sending particles, or something, but then you start talking about telephones that can communicate with the past. So what am I assuming incorrectly, again?

And I'll bring the Nazis into this as much as I like, thanks. When I see the philosophy underlying their movement rearing its head anywhere, I will strike it off. Have you studied philosophy? Do you know the history of government sponsored research? Do you know why private money refuses to support science it deems useless or wrong? Do you know how propagating irrationality serves totalitarian states? Do you know what I'm talking about whatsoever?

I hope you aren't going to bite the head off a chicken....

He bit the head off a dove in an early 80's press conference, right before he began his solo career. Then he accidentally bit the head off a bat someone threw onstage (he didn't know it was real).

I'll bite the head off your posts, if you like. But, not right now. I'm still enjoying my weekend.

 

[fosing]

you dont need time travel to change history.

all you need to do is edit and revise existing history/textbooks.

 

[devilof76]

Not everyone is equally as closed minded. Some people think it might be possible, or don't know, and are actually willing to objectively judge/examine logical arguments on the subject. Even if someone isn't totally convinced, they might glean some piece of interesting new data.

Maybe because they have already objectively determined that the idea is not worth entertaining. I'd rather have a mind closed to idiocy than a mind wide open and incapable of coming to any solid conclusions.

The better question is why do people who believe time travel to be completely impossible and have their minds made up, and have no interest in listening to arguments concerning it even bother to go into a thread about it. Do they do this to troll? What is the point? Just to say it's nonsense more than once?

To explain why you're wrong. It's an expression of hope for the human race. If you can be convinced, maybe we're not all doomed to this sick excuse for a learning curve.

...Why would anyone jump in to this thread and claim that time travel is impossible, with little more explanation than that, just to state their opinion without explanation? To troll, to flex their egos.

Who did not explain their opinion? And who said it was an opinion? And why is your ego so puny that this bothers you?

Time is the medium in which things change. The distance between objects is space. You are correct that time isn't a force, but it isn't

"a relationship between the movements of two or more objects."

Yes, it is. There is no 'medium' through which things change. Show it to me. Demonstrate the power of this non-force entity. All I see are object which move and change. When their motion changes relative to another object, I can measure the rate at which they move. Rate is a variable based on a constant unit of measurement. It's an abstraction, similarly to length, width, height, etc. Those attributes are not things, or forces, or mediums. They're variables, used to relate the motion of bodies to an observer, for the purpose of comprehension, comparison, etc.

"There is no cosmic graph paper labelled 'time' through which we're moving."

how can you know?

Show it to me. Show me the axes. Show me the origin.

Most objects are not durable enough to have a permanent concise identity. Only ideas can have concise identities.

Thanks Plato, but 24 centuries later, you're still wrong. Your conception of identity is still mired in Pre-Socratic confusion.

Anything that exists has an identity. In fact, existence is identity. For something to exist, it has to be something specific. There are no vague, amorphous entities; only vague minds. Change does not invalidate the concept of identity. Any conception of change must reconcile itself with identity. It's axiomatic.

Objects are not absolutely individual. All things are connected, and related, whether directly or indirectly.

Then stop talking about things, Parmenides. It's all one indiscrete blur. Motion is an illusion. Change is an illusion. All is one.

"For it to be a past or future, there has to be a present relative to either. "

-Certainly, but that is just a factor of language. There can still be certain states of matter and energy in a certain configuration in various "spots". You are talking about human perspective relative to moments in time, and not the moments in time themselves.

To the universe as a whole, there is no time. It has no before or after. It is an eternal present. Time is a concept relative only to things (those mythical individual parts) within the universe, and then only when you introduce an observer. There are sequences of events, but as far as the whole is concerned, the only things happening are happening now. You need an observer to recognize that things happened before, and that things will happen after.

(And no, there is no one observing from the All perspective.)

"If those bodies are located in the present, and the timetravelling body is going elsewhere, what is it going to exist in relation to in either the past or future? For it to be a past or future, there has to be a present relative to either. For there to be a present, the universe you expect to be waiting in the past or future can't be where you need it to be. How do you and your geniuses propose that the present be in the present, and in the past and future as well? "

The implication of what you are saying here is that you can't time travel because things would be in different places in the past and future. However, you are also implying that things are always in the same place, in the same state, which if true, would mean that there is essentially no time. At least, there would be no movement of objects relative to each other, and no change in the state of any objects.

No, the implication of what I am saying is that there is no past or future without a present. Things are constantly in motion, constantly changing. The past is the state of objects prior to the present moment. The future is the state of objects posterior to the present moment.

What I am saying is that the same object will not be in the same place for you to go back to in the past, nor will it be waiting for you in the future when it's currently in the present. The object exists in the present only. Past and future are abstract perspectives.

Welcome back to reality. I hope you enjoyed the trip.

Going to another point of the movement or state of objects is the whole point of time travel.

Yeah, good luck with that.

 

[Mr. Green]

didn't know how popular this thread is. note to future self to start a sequel thread: "Time travel: are we there yet?"

 

[Intruder04]

Ay caramba!
I'd gone time-travelling a bit myself and a lot went on here. This debate was imminent though. While I do agree that there indeed is a past, present and a future, I'm not sure if we can travel between them. There were a lot of things that were thought to be impossible until they were proven. Similarly, time travel might be proved (discovered) later on. The has-not-so-can-not theory has led me to believe that time-travel ain't possible in my lifetime!

 

[Lejuan]

I skipped out of this thread when it was still for giggles, and look what I missed

 

[TheBlytheOne]

Worthwhile scientific research has a worthwhile end in it's sights.

ie Fund cancer research to (obviously) cure cancer.

What, exactly, is the "worthwhile end" to time travel research?

 

[fosing]

^who doesnt want to have sex with themselves? I would. that's a worthwhile end.

 

[TheBlytheOne]

^who doesnt want to have sex with themselves? I would. that's a worthwhile end.

Not with my tax money!!! haha

 

[Devil_666]

^who doesnt want to have sex with themselves?

Me. Because I just know my other self would be just as selfish so whoever got off first wouldn't want to help the other finish. And that's just infinitely wrong.

 

[DiFabio]

Me. Because I just know my other self would be just as selfish so whoever got off first wouldn't want to help the other finish. And that's just infinitely wrong.

69 DUDE.