It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Time travel, go forward to go back.

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 08:10 AM
I have a theory on how time travel might be possible. But my theory would only work if the following was true:
The universe exists in cylces contantly going from big bang to big crunch over and over again. In every cycle the same events happen exactly the same way.
This is not something i have thought up, only heard of. But it does make some sense. Many scientists already believe theuniverse will contract again into a big crunch, then continue with these cycles. I thought about the other part and i realised this, if you where to take the same moment and replicate it millions of times, then let the moments continue onwards, every one would play out exactly the same. Given the same starting circumstances there is no reason for ther to be any difference. This could be the same for the big bang. If the universe exists in cycles then every one would shurely begin the same way, so shurely, every one would play out the same way to.
So this leads me to my theory. If the above was true then time travel could be possible. All you would have to do is find a way to preserve a person or whatever you wanted, so that it would not be affected by gravity towrds the big crunch or the force of the big bang. then just set a time and location for the person or thing to come out of preservation, and there you have it. You could set them to come out of preservation at a time where the events where before your current time, or in future events. Then to get back there would be no need to carry onto the next cycle (unless you went too far forward), you just need to re preserve yourself untill the time shortly after you were sent catches up.
Of course this theory has many pot holes. The preservation part would be hard and who knows, skipping to the next cycle could have big consequences. If something was changed the whole balance would be ruined. There are many questions without answers if you think about it deeply, wich i try not too do. But my theory may have some sense to it. If it doesn't feel free to tell me.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 06:15 AM
Oh, well this seems popular, hasntanyone got anything to say.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:12 AM
You've just created a paradox.

IF everything that has ever or will ever happen has already happened, and will happen again, and again, and again ad infinitum, then the preservation, if it could happen, has happened, and will happen again and again. BUT, this is presuming that one could survive "the big crunch," somehow.

BUT, assuming that one could preserve ones self till the next cycle, I don't suppose it would matter...because even if everything played out in the next cycle, everything in the history of the universe, it is still not now, but would be then...and therefore would not be affecting now in any observable way...but would only serve to affect the "then" that the "preserved" individual observed and changed. Because the cycle in, this description, is more like a a sense....a repeat of that which was before...

...hmmm...I'll think about it.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:25 AM
to start i would like to say that you failed to mention that the Big Crunch is still a theory. second of all the "theory" of the Big Crunch says that eventually the galaxy's will stop moving and SLOWLY start moving towards the beginning again.

how would you attempt to preserver yourself? the only thing i could think of is if you get on a space ship and fly the other way.

second problem: how would you choose where you would end up? as i see it you would just land on a completely lava covered earth.

i could mention more but it doesn't really matter.

it is a good theory but it just wouldn't work the way you want it to. i have another theory for you to think about.

lets say time is a circle and if you can see past the curvature of the circle you would be able to see the future. now lets take it to a whole new level and say that if you were able to travel at the speed of light and hit that curvature you would be able to travel in time.

I'm sure there are thousands of theory's but as of today none of them seem feasible.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:46 AM
I, personally, do not believe that time travel is relavent to anyone but the individual doing the time travel.

I imagine time as a is composed of an infinite number of braids representing major events, those braids are composed of an infinite number of braids representing minor events, those braids are composed of an infinite number of even more minor events...continue this trend in both directions of the macro and micro scale.

The past, is a solid rope...all of these events have come together, the past happened the way it did, the braids of the rope are arranged in a manner that is unique to itself.

The future is represented in the model as all of the stray braids, reduced to their finest bits, which is impossibly small because of the inifinite events within events leading to events....basically, its a big poofy ball...kinda like those fiber-optic christmas ornaments that have the light shining through all the strands except much bigger and more ....its a mess, and its impossible to trace.

The present is where the strands become the solid amorphous point where everything merges and sorts itself out.

Now, an infinite number of presents exist, as do the infinite number of futures, but there is only one past. If you were to travel into the past, it would mean unravelling the the infinitely complex rope to put the present, the individual present, in the past...this would, however, mean that the infinite number of possibilities would exist again, and I believe, make it irrelevant to travel to the future, because you would not have control of the events that happened between the individual present to that other words, you would travel the "a" future, but not necessarily "the" future.

What it means, to me, is that time travel becomes irrelevant to all but the traveller...

[edit on 16/7/08 by madhatr137]

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 12:14 PM
that is the best way i have ever heard of some describing time or time travel. i completely agree with you said except that i picture time as more of a circle then a line. history repeats itself, straight lines don't.

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:29 PM
reply to post by N. Tesla

i completely agree with you said except that i picture time as more of a circle then a line. history repeats itself, straight lines don't.

I agree with the metaphorical implication, but not the literal...if the literal were true, my theory on time travel would be null because the outcome of every event would be predetermined...IE fate, destiny, prophecy...

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 03:00 PM
I prefer to think that what we recognize as spacetime is not as "solid" as it appears, and it has a kind of permeability and malleability (kind of like bread dough when its being mixed) in various unseen dimensions that under certain conditions allows mass/energy to move relatively freely around time and space all the time. It's a natural quality of spacetime.

So we're not just living in a expansion and contraction, time and space are constantly fluctuating back and forth in various dimensions. Some of it goes back 13 billion years, some of it goes ahead 13 billion years. On the level of our consciousness, it only appears to go forward all the time.

The trick to moving outside what we perceive? Maybe some kind of amplified consciousness. I don't know.

posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 06:05 PM
Rats. I had a great, comprehensive reply all typed up there and then I entered the word wrong and lost it all.

Anyway, I'm not going to write it all out again, suffice it to say that my friends will agree that I am an excpetionally smart individual.

I am also obsessed with the nature of Time and spend most of my day theorising about it. Over the past few years I have been creating and refining my own theory of Time, which includes such things as gravity and lightspeed. I understand not only the effects of but the causes of time dilation to a degree that very few people do.

I know how, given a time machine, I could alter history WITHOUT creating a new reality. I know that in order to travel into the future without existing in the mean time as what would look like a statue you would need to bend space in such a way as to remove yourself from the universe and that attempting to travel into the past without that said-same piece of technology would immediately cause a matter/anti-matter explosion.

posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 06:36 PM
My understanding is that past, present and future are always in the "Now."
I would give the analogy of the DVD;

The movie on the DVD is all the events in each moment of time and space from birth to death in physicality for each living entity.
The DVD disc itself is the Brain.
The external DVD player (with an infinite unlimited memory Hard Drive) is the mind.
The trick then in being able to manipulate the past, present and future is being able to learn to use and then program the DVD player(the mind) so one can view the movie at any desired scene on the DVD (brain)as one so wishes (time travel).

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Epsillion70]

posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 06:40 PM
Certainly, every time we look at the night sky, we're looking "back" into time, in some spots, billions of years. So yes, we move with our understanding and consciousnesses "forward," out into the sky, which is actually backwards into time.

posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 01:27 AM

Originally posted by Nohup
Certainly, every time we look at the night sky, we're looking "back" into time, in some spots, billions of years. So yes, we move with our understanding and consciousnesses "forward," out into the sky, which is actually backwards into time.

I disagree, partially. We're not really looking into the past when we look at the sky and a star billions of light years away, I would say that we're looking at a echo of the past. If we were, right now, on a planet halfway to the star we were looking at, we'd be looking at a different echo, a different point in history. But but that history has long gone, even if we were to suddenly teleport to that star, that solar system, that planet, that point of time would be long gone.

posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 02:00 AM
Time is a bunch of interlocking spherical tauruses.

Or it could look like the surface of a brain.... or it could look like like a crazy fractal.

I haven't been able to see the whole picture, just tiny pieces. The end all be all, and then tiny pieces of the in between. It doesn't answer questions that seem to matter.

It just makes those questions not matter so much anymore.

posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 02:57 AM

I watched that science channel documentary as well. Astronomers believe that since the light we are currently seeing from many of the stars is just the light from a dead star finally reaching our point in space and passing by. It is thought by those that study the origin of the cosmos that the further into space we focus, the further back into time we see, eventually seeing to a point in space that is an echo of the very first moment after the Big Bang.


Your theory sounds loosely based on the Quantum, String Theory. I find String Theory fascinating, as it studies the gravitational forces from the the forces that pull us down on Earth to the devastating and extreme possibilities of Black Holes.

In film, time travel is portrayed as reliant on some form of particle acceleration, from Superman flying backwards to change the rotation of the Earth, or HG Wells' Time Machine which used an external particle acceleration to step out of time until a destination was reached. Of course, the varient is the Tardis (Doctor Who) which did not use an accelerator, rather it harnessed the power of a black hole to shift out of phase in its current time frame and back in at the destination time.

All of these theories, of course, have come about because no one actually yet knows how to create such a powerful manipulation of time.

I can see the possibilities of the rope theory, whereby the traversing would be like stopping in one spot, tying two rope points together, then stepping forward into the new time frame. However, without a predetermined end point, it would be impossible for travel into the future, because the rope is only past and present, being created in the "now" by the choices that make up the strands.

As to the bubble theory, it has some merit, but I dont like it. It basically is the analogy from the Bible that "all things come to pass", or a common warning that "what comes around, goes around" and that is just not very encouraging, since it essentially states that life is predetermined to be repeated. Perhaps that is a good basis for reincarnation, but not a good basis when you think that going back into the past means going back into the future all the while never leaving the present.

Here is my personal favorite. Since spacetime is nothing like the constant time we are used to, the very action of passing through space opens the options for passing through time. Normal travel in normal space in normal (earth) time would only be the present moving forward. However, faster than light acceleration could be the tipping point that breaks open the fabrics of space and allows for travel into infinite points of spacetime. While Einstein did include faster than light travel in Relativity, I think there is still hope that some day FTL particles like Tachyons can be harnessed to produce a method by which the time warp can be achieved.

Currently, beyond the wild theories that exist about time and the traversing of it back and lateral, the hardest thing to overcome would be the fact that no current human would likely survive the trip.

Black holes crush beyond the atom sublevels and faster than light travel would tear at a person in such an unimaginable show of force, that there would be nothing left. Provided it could happen and one could survive it, there would be little more that could be done other than research. Remember that a time paradox will eliminate any sense of a planned event in the first place and an accidental encounter could very well change all life as we know it.

I will remain skeptically hopeful about this for my entire life. I highly doubt that dream of reality will ever come true though.

posted on Aug, 9 2008 @ 07:22 PM
Time in form as such is likened to a Mobius strip to my understanding

[edit on 9-8-2008 by Epsillion70]

posted on Aug, 9 2008 @ 07:44 PM
mad, I concur with your rope theory.
But I also think that if you could go back in time it would merely be adding a thread to the rope and almost instantainaly start a parallal rope or thread that will nearly be identical to the rope as long as a the traveler has minimum impact but of course the longer they are present the further this thread and that rope get from the starting points rope. so......

traveler is in lane one.....goes back in time....still in lane one....but nano second later....they are in lane 1.0000001 and the longer they are there or if they do something grand like kill someone.....then they start moving away until they may be in lane 5 or 10 and so far removed from the time and place they left, that they would be hard pressed to ever get back to their present. But only the travelors life would be any different because everybody else is on the rope that has not and can not be undone or changed. The traveler is left out in lane 10 or something and screwed if he had hoped to get back.....he might go back again to the point he started in the past and rather than get pushed out to lane 10 he barely breathes and tries to stay in lane 1.000001 or even closer if he can. he can't avoid the parallal course entirely but he may be able to stay close enough that he can rejoin his life in the present... the trick....the further you go back the more likely you aint coming home.

The past in lane 1 can not be changed. If you becomes 1.0000001 or something and determined by the degree of impact the traveler has.

Did that make any sense at all????????????????

posted on Aug, 9 2008 @ 07:56 PM
the best candidate for time travel theory yet put forward IMO is the one by ron mallet

his experements have testable results and arent just wild speculation like alot of the stuff ive read in this post. It involves using the mass of photons in motion to warp space-time into a loop there is a nova docu that is easy to find that will give you the rundown of his theory really cool stuff enjoy

posted on Aug, 9 2008 @ 08:40 PM
Time is just a "state of Entropy" Everything in the known universe is nothing more than energy (information). Even the empty space contains energy (information). Now imagine taking any point or state of information and recreating this information in a new "Instance". overns-how-the-real-worldbehaves-it-also-explains-why-time-goes-in-only-one-direction.html

Particles pop in and out of existence all the time (casamir effect).

Now you use the information to create any instance you like at any given past point in time. - Multiverse exploration ?

I have a hard time understanding why Einstein said " If you could travel on a light wave time would stop". If it is releative to the observer, that would mean that photons would never reach your eye as the observer.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 07:53 PM
If I have learned anything at all from this thread, it is that I know a lot less than I thought I knew about anything that I thought I knew anything about.

If one of you Einstein's need a monkey to strap into your time machine....well I volunteer.

posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 12:06 PM
I was thinking recently, one of the problems with time travel is conservation of energy. You shouldn't be able to add energy to a system, technically speaking. This kind of goes along with the idea of paradoxes, you can't kill your grandfather if you go back in time, etc.

The solution to the grandfather paradox is that we're probably actually going back in time to a parallel universe, so whatever we do there won't actually effect our future back in our original universe, only the one we travel to. However, this does not solve the issue of conservation of energy as you are still adding energy.

The way I think this is solved is pretty simple. What if the law of conservation of energy doesn't apply to one universe at a time. If all the universes are linked together somehow, then going "back in time" to a parallel universe is simple like going from one continent on a planet to another. You don't exist in both places at once, and it's all contained in one system.

In relation to the original post, I'm not quite sure that is true. If a Big Crunch were to happen, we'd all be time traveling, but it would no longer be forward, it'd be backward. Freezing yourself would have no effect, because once the big crunch started, you'd start living life in reverse, and you'd come out of your freeze and eventually crawl back inside your mothers womb and be unborn, just like the rest of the universe.

If you protect yourself with some sort of anti-time temporal-gravitational field - unlikely at our current stage of technological evolution - then you'd have to figure out how to live in a universe the size of your time capsule. Your body heat would quickly heat up your entire existence, or something.

Would your temporal-gravitational field easily disassociate from the rest of the universe as it shrinks down to a size smaller than a subatomic particle? The reverse of the question applies too. As the universe begins to expand again, since space time is returning to "normalcy", could you remain unaffected by the changes outside of it?

This idea for time travel also means that since you're just "preserving" yourself and not actually actively time traveling, it has to open up the question of paradoxes, just because of its nature, in my opinion. Unless the alternate universe theory applies to this somehow as well. Could the intrinsic nature of time travel mean that, even traveling through time because of the way the universe fluctuates means that your arrival immediately puts you in a parallel universe? Perhaps there is some sort of phase variance that gets changed as we move along through time naturally, and when that phase changes, the universal plane upon which we live does as well.

Also, the universe is billions of years old. You need a lot of energy to live in stasis that long. As you said, a lot of questions can be asked.

I'm sorry if this rambling is off on a tangent to the discussion at hand, but I felt like I should post this.


log in