It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

SCI: Time Travel 101: A How To Guide

page: 11
163
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Firstly, just because some thought experiment sounds good does not make it true in real life.

So true, but the corollary to that is that it also doesn't necessary make it false, either !



Secondly, each time you go back and change something to the original timeline you are creating a new timeline that compensates for the new information.

As per the "Many Worlds" (and other) interpretations.

But you have to now ask yourself this question ... does each "possible" outcome create a NEW timeline that you move into when the choice/decision is made OR does EVERY possible timeline (i.e. an infinite number of time lines) ALREADY pre-exist and by making a decision/choice, that you simply move into the appropriate but ALREADY existing timeline ?

If you choose the version that a NEW timeline is created each time a decision/choice is made, then ask yourself, where does the mass/energy come from in order to create this new time line ?
Using a coin toss as an example ... you exist in a timeline when you toss the coin ... the coin can land heads or tails,theoretically creating a split. In your existing timeline you see it come up heads and from your point of view the universe goes on as normal.
But if we agree that a "split" does occur to cater for tails to come up instead, then your original time line (heads) continues as normal but a NEW timeline comes into being that didn't exist before ... so where does the mass/energy come from to create this NEW timeline ?




Thirdly, in the past on a timeline all events in the quantum and macro world would have already happened, it is like a recording (but one you can edit).

Agreed ... but that flies directly in the face of quantum events being TOTALLY and COMPLETELY unpredictable. By travelling back and using my previous example of watching a bunch of radioactive atoms decay, YOU as the time traveller can now PREDICT EXACTLY which atom will decay (because you already know) whilst at the same time, the experimenter waiting for a decay event to happen has NO IDEA because of the very nature of quantum indeterminism.
So in that simple example, you've managed to bypass the very basis of quantum uncertainty !




Finally, about your spatial navigation issue; since space and time are connected, hence spacetime you should move back to the previous location in space, as well time.

If that's so, then what can we assume ? that time finds itself is "mapped" to an infinite number of spatial points ?

What I'm saying is this:
Let's assume that you and 5 of your friends each has a time machine in your respective garages. So all 5 of you are in different locations .. could even be in different parts of the world. You all agree to climb into your tm's at EXACTLY the same time and agree to travel back EXACTLY 1 month.
You're saying that once the experiment is completed, that you and your 5 friends will all find themselves reappearing in your respective garages but 1 month in the past ... i.e. same place, different time.
I'm saying that if that's so, that MUST mean that all 6 seperate locations were somehow linked or "mapped" to a single time event. In other words, every instance of time must somehow be linked to an infinite number of spatial locations ! And another but different "instance of time" must also be linked to an infinite number of spatial locations, etc, ad infinitum.




posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   
Originally posted by tauristercus


What I'm saying is this:
Let's assume that you and 5 of your friends each has a time machine in your respective garages. So all 5 of you are in different locations .. could even be in different parts of the world. You all agree to climb into your tm's at EXACTLY the same time and agree to travel back EXACTLY 1 month.
You're saying that once the experiment is completed, that you and your 5 friends will all find themselves reappearing in your respective garages but 1 month in the past ... i.e. same place, different time.
I'm saying that if that's so, that MUST mean that all 6 seperate locations were somehow linked or "mapped" to a single time event. In other words, every instance of time must somehow be linked to an infinite number of spatial locations ! And another but different "instance of time" must also be linked to an infinite number of spatial locations, etc, ad infinitum.


So what this suggests, if I am following correctly, is that everything is connected to everything else...Now there is something to think about. Perhaps everything is just a single part of one whole big thing.... Intruiging.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
Originally posted by tauristercus

...You're saying that once the experiment is completed, that you and your 5 friends will all find themselves reappearing in your respective garages but 1 month in the past ... i.e. same place, different time....


Well, problem I've been seeing there, when thinking of that scenario, is one month in the past the people will reappear in the same place in space, but the Earth will have moved on in its orbit....better wear an EVA suit.



Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
So what this suggests, if I am following correctly, is that everything is connected to everything else...Now there is something to think about. Perhaps everything is just a single part of one whole big thing.... Intruiging.


We don't really know...that's the 64 million dollar question.

_______________________________________
edit pesky tags!



[edit on 9 August 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by tauristercus

I basically wondered if mass/energy conservation should be modified from approximately the following:


"Within a closed system, that the total mass/energy content of the system cannot be created/destroyed, although it may be rearranged in space"


to a slightly modified form as follows:


"Within a closed system, that the total mass/energy of the system cannot be created/destroyed, although it may be rearranged in space and time"


Is there any reason why this "slight modification" couldn't be valid as the underlying law that we're familiar with and were taught in science class would simply become a "subset" of the "modified" version but still be perfectly valid and useable?



hmmm, let me think about that one. Time, is more or less the measurement of how fast the universe is expanding....or that is how I have come to understand it within the confines of this theory.

Going on that, it seems safe to me to assume that as time "expands" so does the universe or rather, space. So in a way, I am not seeing a difference in saying space or space and time.


By adding the additional "and time" modification to the original conservation of mass/energy law, I was thinking along the lines that if multiple time lines DO exist (as postulated), then the implication would be that each of these individual time lines would have to be necessarily completely independant of each other. As such, each time line therefore is a completely closed system and must be treated as such.
Therefore if the theory that time travel into the past involves a process of moving ACROSS time lines, we would have an immediate problem because if each time line IS a closed system unto itself, this means that the "modified" mass/energy conservation law would be violated ... which in turn would then mean that across time line travel must be DISALLOWED !

Is there any reason to assume that each time line should NOT be considered to be a COMPLETELY closed system ? I can't think of any ... and it makes logical sense to me.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Originally posted by weedwhacker



We don't really know...that's the 64 million dollar question.



That is absolutely right. When we break it all down. we just do not know for sure. At least not yet. One day I figure maybe we will, but until then we certainly will never know unless we contemplate all of this complex stuff now.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 




Well, problem I've been seeing there, when thinking of that scenario, is one month in the past the people will reappear in the same place in space, but the Earth will have moved on in its orbit....better wear an EVA suit.


Agreed ... and covered in an earlier post of mine .
Sucking space can be hazardous to your health !



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by tauristercus
 


Firstly, just because some thought experiment sounds good does not make it true in real life. Secondly, each time you go back and change something to the original timeline you are creating a new timeline that compensates for the new information. Thirdly, in the past on a timeline all events in the quantum and macro world would have already happened, it is like a recording (but one you can edit). So the very fact of you knowing what happens does not change anything, the only thing that would change something would be if you went in and stopped yourself from conducting the experiment or altered it in some way it was not before. All this is of course IMHO and according to theory.


Finally, about your spatial navigation issue; since space and time are connected, hence spacetime you should move back to the previous location in space, as well time. If for some reason you can not, then a navigation system (if you have a time machine then a navy system should not be a huge issue) could make the nessicary corrections.

[edit on 8/9/2009 by jkrog08]



Can you go back in time 5 years and say hello to yourself?
What would you say?
There was a good episode on Star Trek Voyager about this.
There are many paradoxes.
There are many ways to clean up pollution of the spacetime continuum.
It gave Captain Janeway a headache.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   
Originally posted by tauristercus



Is there any reason to assume that each time line should NOT be considered to be a COMPLETELY closed system ? I can't think of any ... and it makes logical sense to me.


Well, to be quite honest, I do not know. with that logic, it does seem likely that each time line is seperate and closed...

For some reason though, when considering the idea proposed by scientists such as Stephen hawking that there are an infinite amount of universe and time lines all existing at once... For some reason... I just keep thinking they must be connected some how. I don't know how, but I just cant shake that.

I mean, these universes have to take up space correct? What is to stop us from jumping from one time line/reality to another? This is getting into the question "what is on the other side of the universe?" perhaps it is another universe? Perhaps all universes not only exist all at once but some how through the use of multi deminsions exist within the same 'space'?

I just don't know.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   
Great fan of A. Einstein myself.
First, congrats on the thread, very interesting.
Second. A few thoughts I´d like to share.
To me the infinite universes theory is just an easy exit taken by people who can´t come up with an answer to that “PARADOX” of time travel to the past, that if you go back you will change the timeline and you might even not be born and therefore not be there to travel to the past. So another universe is “magically created” just to accommodate your “extravagant” wish to travel in time.
But where does all the matter and energy of that “new universe” come from? It just appears every single moment to accommodate all the possible “splits” that can take place?
To me this is not logical. And time travel as it has been explained here I think, is also related to space.
And to travel back in time within our planet, we would need to go to the place where our planet was in the universe at the time we want to visit. And how would we do this? Because our planet is moving together with it´s solar system and with it´s galaxy within space you know? So we would not only have to move back in time, but also we would need to move to another place in space many hundreds or thousands or millions of miles away from where we are right now to find that time in the past.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
I would like to add one little tidbit of information that the OP left out. While it is true that the faster an object travels, the more massive it becomes, and the more energy is required to accelerate it, there is a way around this that would allow us to travel fasterthan the speed of light. By bending space, an object need not accelerate to the speed of light. The surrounding space can be bent into a 'bubble' of sorts (similar to the warp drive from star trek, actually, exactly the same) with an expanding region of space behind the object, and a collapsing region of space infront. The object itself stays stationary and does not accelerate. By this method it is already relativistically possible to travel faster than light. The problem is we do not currently have the technology, specifically the knowledge of how to create artificial gravity and a power source to provide it, in order to bend space.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by angrysniper
 


Hi thanks for writing, but bending space is exactly what using a worm hole does.

It loops space and time in on itself thus theoretically making it possible to travel to any time you wish...

Anyway, I do thank you for further explaining that part of the article. I am always glad to hear what people are thinking.




posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by rush969
Great fan of A. Einstein myself.
First, congrats on the thread, very interesting.
Second. A few thoughts I´d like to share.
To me the infinite universes theory is just an easy exit taken by people who can´t come up with an answer to that “PARADOX” of time travel to the past, that if you go back you will change the timeline and you might even not be born and therefore not be there to travel to the past. So another universe is “magically created” just to accommodate your “extravagant” wish to travel in time.
But where does all the matter and energy of that “new universe” come from? It just appears every single moment to accommodate all the possible “splits” that can take place?
To me this is not logical. And time travel as it has been explained here I think, is also related to space.
And to travel back in time within our planet, we would need to go to the place where our planet was in the universe at the time we want to visit. And how would we do this? Because our planet is moving together with it´s solar system and with it´s galaxy within space you know? So we would not only have to move back in time, but also we would need to move to another place in space many hundreds or thousands or millions of miles away from where we are right now to find that time in the past.


GREAT questions. I have a feeling tauristercus will have some good answers.

Anyway, you raise a good point. If a new universe were to just appear where does the matter that makes it up come from? To me that goes against physics for something to come from nothing...What you say does make a lot of sense. Thanks for posting, I am glad you enjoyed my article and I am glad you shared your thoughts.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 11:12 PM
link   
One question.
You say in an earlier post that a wormhole appears and as soon as anything or anyone goes into it, it disappears. (Closes in in itself.) Is this correct? However, wormholes are still “theory” aren´t they. So their behavior is even “more theoretical” right?



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
Originally posted by tauristercus




Well, to be quite honest, I do not know. with that logic, it does seem likely that each time line is seperate and closed...

For some reason though, when considering the idea proposed by scientists such as Stephen hawking that there are an infinite amount of universe and time lines all existing at once... For some reason... I just keep thinking they must be connected some how. I don't know how, but I just cant shake that.

I mean, these universes have to take up space correct? What is to stop us from jumping from one time line/reality to another? This is getting into the question "what is on the other side of the universe?" perhaps it is another universe? Perhaps all universes not only exist all at once but some how through the use of multi deminsions exist within the same 'space'?

I just don't know.


I understand exactly what you're saying and agree with you ... you tend to get this "feeling" that there just HAS to be some kind of interaction between these many "proposed" universes and time lines ... what form that interaction could take, no idea.
Perhaps we've simply been reading to many scifi/time travel novels (which I freely admit I totally enjoy !) and been conditioned to expect such interactions


But I also have a suspicion that to prevent all sorts of unimaginable paradoxes and universal chaos from running rampant, that perhaps there really IS some kind of "barrier" in place to prevent physical travel, communication/information exchange occuring betwen these seperate entities ... again, perhaps something as simple as I mentioned earlier that each universe/time line MUST be considered as a completely closed system thereby remaining isolated thru the mass/enery conservation law.

But the more you think about it and the more "solutions" that are conjectured... the more complicated things continue to become ... and all because we want to travel backwards in time !


[edit on 10-8-2009 by tauristercus]



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   
Originally posted by tauristercus



But the more you think about it and the more "solutions" that are conjectured... the more complicated things continue to become ... and all because we want to travel backwards in time !


isn't amazing how many questions arise from just contemplating one question?

It does make since that nature might have a built in mechanism to prevent a thing from happening that might damage it some how...

And perhaps you are right, I certainly do read my share of sci-fi and other such books.

But at the same time, if there are all these universes, there must be a way to get from one to another. why would there be multiple universes if there was no way to get from one to the other?

Assuming there are multiple a M theory suggests, were they all created at the same time or were there others around before ours came into existence? If they came about all at the same time I am inclined to believe they are connected in some way. I just wish I could at least take a guess at how....

I just cant seem to wrap my head around the possibility that they are not connected some how...



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Originally posted by tauristercus


What I'm saying is this:
Let's assume that you and 5 of your friends each has a time machine in your respective garages. So all 5 of you are in different locations .. could even be in different parts of the world. You all agree to climb into your tm's at EXACTLY the same time and agree to travel back EXACTLY 1 month.
You're saying that once the experiment is completed, that you and your 5 friends will all find themselves reappearing in your respective garages but 1 month in the past ... i.e. same place, different time.
I'm saying that if that's so, that MUST mean that all 6 seperate locations were somehow linked or "mapped" to a single time event. In other words, every instance of time must somehow be linked to an infinite number of spatial locations ! And another but different "instance of time" must also be linked to an infinite number of spatial locations, etc, ad infinitum.


Actually I just thought about what you said here again, because assuming this is true, what this indicates to me is that everything is connected with everything else.... But the question is for me, does "everything" apply to everything just in this single universe or does it apply to everything in all parallel universes?

I am going to be stubborn and say that it applies to everything that is in all parallel universes...


It just seems... right... to me... You know?

Honestly I will have to do a bit more research in that one and see if I can't come up with a more scientific answer. I mean, when it comes to sciences there really is not much room for just believing something is so, you have to be able to prove it. If only I had an idea.

[edit on 9-8-2009 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

GREAT questions. I have a feeling tauristercus will have some good answers.

Anyway, you raise a good point. If a new universe were to just appear where does the matter that makes it up come from? To me that goes against physics for something to come from nothing...What you say does make a lot of sense. Thanks for posting, I am glad you enjoyed my article and I am glad you shared your thoughts.


Hahaha ... thanks for the pat on the back, gimme_some_truth but truthfully I sometimes feel that perhaps I'm just spouting so much verbal diarrohea ! But I'm trying to include a logical and rational approach to all my comments in the hope that there's an occasional gem hidden amongst all my ramblings


You've kicked of what's become a very interesting and thought provoking thread which in my opinion is more the exception than the rule here on ATS .. oh, and by the way ... have you noticed you've cracked the 100 flag barrier ... just goes to show the interest others have taken in this thread ... congrats !

Anyway, admittedly I've been a follower of the "Many Universe" hypothesis almost from the time I 1st came across it ... the Copenhagen version, then all the other variations that followed over the years. You get the feeling (and the theory supports it) that this is actually the way the universe works ... weird as it may seem.
But I've always found it hard to get my head around the fact that if all it takes to create a completely, brand new and self-contained universe is an action like something as simple as tossing a coin ... then where the heck does all the matter/mass/energy COME FROM to create this new universe/time line or whatever ?
After all, one assumes that this NEW universe DID NOT exist until the coin was tossed. The same applies to time travelling backwards. If as one theory claims that when you actually make a change in your own past time line, that at that point ANOTHER time line immediately is created ... then the same question applies as to where does the mass/energy come from ?

And the other issue regarding backwards time travel and "hoping" that you end up in the same physical localion that you started off from ... rather than reappearing in the same physical location but finding that you don't have a planet under you.
As far as I know we don't have any evidence to support the hypothesis (or belief) that a temporal relocation will ALSO imply a corresponding physical relocation, thereby keeping them in synch. It just seems like so much more "fudging" and "cobbling" being needed just to get time travel working.
So from a simple premise of travelling back in time ... we now find ourselves needing the additional "support" of extra timelines, extra universes, an infinity of spatial locations being "mapped" to each "moment" of time, etc, etc ... is it just me or is this becoming just SO incredibly complex ?



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
reply to post by angrysniper
 


Hi thanks for writing, but bending space is exactly what using a worm hole does.

It loops space and time in on itself thus theoretically making it possible to travel to any time you wish...

Anyway, I do thank you for further explaining that part of the article. I am always glad to hear what people are thinking.



Yes that is true although spatial compression and expansion for the purposes of FTL travel are distinctly different than using a wormhole to negate the distance being traveled altogether.



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by tauristercus
 




Yes, I saw that I broke the 100 flag barrier. That is one hell of an accomplishment, I cannot take credit for how amazing this thread has become though, That was the doing of every single person who has posted in here.

Anyway, I touched upon the "new universe being created" idea earlier. I must admit, I was wondering the same as you. Where does the matter come from to create this new universe/reality?

Something I am not sure of is, does a universe that is already in existence have the ability to create NEW matter? Or as the universe expands is the matter just expanding and growing with it?

If a universe can create new matter, than perhaps as a new one is created it is able to put out matter just for creating the new universe? I really have no idea. I am just thinking out loud here...

About parallel realities and whether or not we can pass from one to another... I was looking at where that idea first popped up. Apparently in 1954 a man named Hugh Everett lll, came up with the idea that there are multiple universes and they are all branched together one branch attached to another and so on... like a tree or something.

This made me think that perhaps there is one main universe and all the infinite universes 'spun off" from that one...

But is it possible for example if you are in that main/first universe to follow a branch to and inside of another universe?

Here is a website that talks a bit about the subject that we are heading into which is Multiverse theory...

www.astronomy.pomona.edu...

Anyway, I am looking all over the internet and through old books I have and am just not really finding much about the question of whether we can enter into another reality... Have scientists juts not done much work on that one yet perhaps?

[edit on 10-8-2009 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Aug, 10 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   
We flip a coin and create a Universe? WOOOW!!!
Talk about creationism right? The big bang?
I don´t buy it for anything really.
About going back in time one theorist (I don´t remember his name) said that when the time machine is created it will only be able to go back to the moment it was created and not further back.
That also makes sense doesn´t it?

Edited for spelling.

[edit on 10-8-2009 by rush969]



new topics

top topics



 
163
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join