posted on Jul, 4 2003 @ 11:09 PM
Although quauntum string theory does leave loopholes that may be exploited for some sort of time travel, I'd bet more on the time cone idea of
Stephen Hawking. It basically states that (as Toltec preaches) life only exists as the present. The past, although defined, can be changed. The
future is just what we assume will happen based on what's going on in the present. Still, only the present exists and changes what we consider to be
the past or future. The time cone explains the idea of time in a better fashion, I believe, and shows that there are still some possible avenues for
manipulating the present to change what is understood about the "past." The past doesn't really change the present, it just defines the present.
Does that make sense?
One idea is that if you go back and kill your father, you still exist in your present, although history might state that your father has been dead, he
was actually alive in the "first present" in what you would refer to as the past, but you changed "history" under the context of a "new
present," not the original moment, or "first present." Since the present is dynamic, you are only changing how you see your history, not what
actually happened at the moment it first occured. So now that your brain is fried... add salt, pepper, and maybe put it on a slice of bread.
That idea states that there are 2 types of time travel. One where you change the future based on the past, while the other states that you change
history, but not the present or future. Which one is correct? Who knows. I suppose it depends if only the present exists. Dare I say, "time will