Implications of Time Travel and Parallel Universes

Originally posted by Druscilla

Originally posted by ImaFungi

whered you get this idea from?

It's very simple. Once something has been observed, it cannot be unobserved.

If you make a time machine, then travel back in time to destroy that time machine, you have simply created an alternative space-time point that will continue on in it's own fashion. You would still be able to go back to the point where you finished the time machine, or any other observable and observed point.

You could travel to the point in time just before traveling and kill yourself before you ever pressed the button to start time travel, but, the fact that you've already pressed the button to get to whatever point you decide you want to get to is an observation, so, no matter how many times or ways you try to kill yourself or destroy your own time machine in the past, you are only creating alternative points in space-time.

Every observed point in space-time is like an indestructible photograph. You can make copies of the photograph, make changes, destroy the copies or alter them beyond recognition, but, the very original point in space-time that was first observed will always be there to go back to.
Every time you make any attempt to change the original observed reality of any space-time point that's been observed, you only result in the creation of a copy.

This is why we don't see any evidence of time travel.
We have already observed our past and that observable past shows no observation of time travel.
You could go back in time and make sure that Ancient Egyptian cultures survives into modern days, or make it where Hitler won WWII, save the Titanic, prevent JFK from being assassinated, or any number of things, but, doing so only creates new observed space-time points that continue on their own separate courses without ever altering or changing the original observed point or time-line.

You could thus make whatever reality you want to make, and follow it, or forget it, without ever worrying about ever being able to get "home".

edit on 11-8-2012 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)

You do realize that you did not answer the question? But you went into great length not answering the question.

If your grandfather had been shot, it would be in the family history.
Your grandfather would have been shot after your dad/mom had been born.
Okay, go back in time, to, say, 1910, in 1910, 2012 would not exist, (as its in a future that has not happened yet) so how do you get back to somewhere that does not exist yet?

reply to post by The Endtime Warrior


It was on Netflix streaming a couple years ago. That's how I watched it.

Also, the perception of time varies because time is relative. It's not really time travel when you experience time quickly or slowly. It's just your perception of time that is different. That said, if manned deep space travel ever becomes common, humans will definitely want to engage some form of cryosleep or cryostasis, so that the years/decades/centuries of travel will seem like a single night's sleep (only a few hours). Did they "travel in time"? Not any differently than you or me sitting here "travelling" through time normally. But their perception would have been drastically altered to account for long periods of time doing nothing.

reply to post by OrphenFire


I've been wanting to watch but unfortunately haven't been able to find the movie. I guess if I really wanted to see it I could purchase it somewhere online...

I do get that time is "relative" Do you think that perception of time plays a part in how fast we age? I don't know if that is the right question to ask it seems to me that if we were in suspended animation for the purposes of time travel and our of perception of this would seem like no time at all spent, could be a reason why aging is slowed down, no?

Originally posted by The Endtime Warrior
reply to post by OrphenFire

 

I do get that time is "relative" Do you think that perception of time plays a part in how fast we age? I don't know if that is the right question to ask it seems to me that if we were in suspended animation for the purposes of time travel and our of perception of this would seem like no time at all spent, could be a reason why aging is slowed down, no?

First of all, in real life, "Time travel" as such is not possible.

Sorry about reversing the order of your statements as well as not quoting you exactly, but it's easier that way:

If we are traveling very fast for the purpose of time travel and our perception of this would seem like no time at all spent, could be a reason why aging is slowed down, no?

No.
You do not seem to think/get that time is relative despite your first sentence.
It doesn't "seem" as no time (actually, little time passes). If you would be looking at your clock watching the seconds tick while traveling very fast, it would to you seem exactly the same as if you would be doing it right now behind your computer. The second has the exact same length as now. Your trip would be done i a few minutes, and many more minutes has lapsed at your destination (assuming it's the same place as your departure). This means that your cells in your body have also aged the same amount of time as your clock tells you.
So in short, "perception" is exactly what is happening to you, there is no "seems like" in that.

Do you think that perception of time plays a part in how fast we age?

This is essentially already answered now (answer from the future ). Your local time dictates how fast you age. You will always perceive time the same way as you do now.

Read the books "City of Secrets" and "The Portal" by Patrice Chaplin, daughter-in-law of Charlie Chaplin, interviewed here:
andrewgough.co.uk...

You will discover that travelling into the past is not only possible (she describes her own trip into the past in her second book) but it was the essential secret guarded by the priest Berenger Sauniere in the so-called "Renne-le-Château" mystery.
Patrice Chaplin knew famous Surrealist artist Salvador Dali. In 1965 he painted "The Railway Station at Perpignan". See here.

It depicted his similar transit through the time portal on the summit of Mount Canigou in France. Chaplin claims that she was told that Dali was initiated into the ancient Kabbalistic ritual, details of which were encrypted into the documents left by Abbé Bigou in the parish church at Rennes-le-Château. Sauniere found them by accident and had them deciphered in Paris, after which the Hapsburg royal family paid him millions of francs to turn his church into a kind of theme park encoding the great secret of the time portal and to build a copy in his church of the Torre Magdala which was part of a property behind the cathedral in Girona inhabited by Maria Tourdes, a French woman who loved Sauniere. The two towers were supposed to have been necessary to energize the time portal when the Kabbalistic ritual was enacted. The guardian of this ritual was Spanish poet and Nationalist, Jose Tarres, Chaplin's soul mate.

It's an amazing story that cannot be summarily dismissed, for many internationally famous people are involved in the mystery.

Originally posted by Consequence

Originally posted by The Endtime Warrior
reply to post by OrphenFire

 

I do get that time is "relative" Do you think that perception of time plays a part in how fast we age? I don't know if that is the right question to ask it seems to me that if we were in suspended animation for the purposes of time travel and our of perception of this would seem like no time at all spent, could be a reason why aging is slowed down, no?

First of all, in real life, "Time travel" as such is not possible.

Sorry about reversing the order of your statements as well as not quoting you exactly, but it's easier that way:

If we are traveling very fast for the purpose of time travel and our perception of this would seem like no time at all spent, could be a reason why aging is slowed down, no?

No.
You do not seem to think/get that time is relative despite your first sentence.

It doesn't "seem" as no time (actually, little time passes). If you would be looking at your clock watching the seconds tick while traveling very fast, it would to you seem exactly the same as if you would be doing it right now behind your computer. The second has the exact same length as now. Your trip would be done i a few minutes, and many more minutes has lapsed at your destination (assuming it's the same place as your departure). This means that your cells in your body have also aged the same amount of time as your clock tells you.
So in short, "perception" is exactly what is happening to you, there is no "seems like" in that.

Do you think that perception of time plays a part in how fast we age?

This is essentially already answered now (answer from the future

). Your local time dictates how fast you age. You will always perceive time the same way as you do now.

I think according to this
( you can start it around 1:10

relative to the time passing on earth,, traveling at high speeds like the speed of light,, you would age less ( experience less time passing) relative to people on earth who are not usually and ever traveling at light speed...

reply to post by Consequence


I thank you for the "lesson" but who is right? You or Stephen Hawking?

reply to post by The Endtime Warrior


Well I'm not sure if the perception of time affects aging or not, but in a hypothetical "cryostasis" scenario, aging is slowed drastically (almost to a nonexistent rate) because the body is in, well, cryostasis. The body is frozen, preventing molecular activity and therefore the body will not age. The perception of time is altered for the same reason. It's not causative, it's correlative.

reply to post by OrphenFire


I am a little illiterate, thank you for your response, that makes sense.

reply to post by The Endtime Warrior


Believe it or not, we said the same thing.
In that video, they were talking about time relative to the Earth. Clearly, time goes slower on the train than on earth. For every second on the train, ten has passed on earth, say.

So, if you managed to look at a clock in the train from earth during ten seconds, you would slowly see the clock only tick one second during that time.

However, things are different if you're actually on the train and experience it from there.
I won't repeat myself, so you could read my post again, and then think about this killer example instead:

Think of a computer. In the computer is a CPU which has a crystal, a clock that ticks in a certain rate, say, 100MHz. Think of Super Mario Bros, you being Mario, inside the computer.
You run around through the courses jumping on koobas-troopas and trying to rescue the princess.
You are "super" in that sense that if you look up, you can actually see the scores and time left on each course.

Now.. The actual game consists of a program, and the cpu loops through that program and executes one instruction at every clock tick, meaning 100 million instructions per second. This determines how fast the game actually runs on the TV (how fast the timer ticks down, how quickly everything moves).
However, within that game, you have no sense of this clock, you are just moving around for every instruction that is getting applied on you. Every cell...I mean pixel in your body moves around at that rate (100mhz), your thought process moves at that rate, so does the Koopas Artificial Intelligence.

So, if someone now boosts up that clock to 200MHz, on the TV, everything would suddenly move twice as fast, including the time left to finish the course. However, you cannot run "faster", to beat the clock easier, nor is it more difficult to beat the clock, because you too are running "twice as fast".

If you live inside the game, it is no different at all for you. You simply cannot experience this shift in the clock, because your whole universe is ticking at that rate. Your thoughts relative to your surroundings are ticking as fast, regardless of the rate of crystal in the cpu.

The only difference in this case is that from the outside world, the game ticks eon faster, and it might be more difficult to the player to control react in time for monsters running towards the hero. And it gets a bit tougher to beat the clock, because everytime you stop and think, you lose more than than before..

So, when you are in the train, that 100Mhz clock is changed to 10MHz, things happen 10 times slower, but you wouldn't know, because EVERYTHING happens slower, even your thoughts. So you cannot tell the difference.
Thus, watching the your wrist-watch slow down, you can't notice it, because your thoughts slow down too. This is why you will not experience anything "special".

reply to post by Consequence


I like the Super Mario analogy. Now you're speaking my language! Although I am more partial to Samus Aran and Link, personally....

Thanks for taking the time to answer me in a very concise and respectful manner, star for you.

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
Soon as you go back or forward, you are on a different world-line.

edit on 11-8-2012 by CALGARIAN because: (no reason given)

you are onto something there.
however playing with the time paradigm is extremly dangerous and is the reason why the
vatican is against this

Hello all,

The idea of time travel is so appealing to me, i've had so many thought on the matter.

My latest thought is what if time is circular?

Theory would be: Time starts then ends and then starts again each time it starts again some things are different from the last. (this might explain de-ja vu) anyway within this timeline time travel is possible, but only if you take yourself outside of space time, thus exsisting at all points of time everywhere at the same time. But you can only observe not affect anything.

This would allow time travel to be possible and also neglect the big issues of time paradox's?

idea's anyone?

or am i talking absolute rubbish :-)

Originally posted by felixjames20
Hello all,

The idea of time travel is so appealing to me, i've had so many thought on the matter.

My latest thought is what if time is circular?

Theory would be: Time starts then ends and then starts again each time it starts again some things are different from the last. (this might explain de-ja vu) anyway within this timeline time travel is possible, but only if you take yourself outside of space time, thus exsisting at all points of time everywhere at the same time. But you can only observe not affect anything.

This would allow time travel to be possible and also neglect the big issues of time paradox's?

idea's anyone?

Are you sure you have thought about this - at all?

or am i talking absolute rubbish :-)

Yes.

Think about the following:

* If time is circular, how can there be a start and an end?

* You will need a start and an end and a restart if things are to "re-happen", there is no such things in a circle.

* "some things are different from the last." Some things? Like what? Why? How about 3 things are different each time, and one has always something to do with a big white fluffy rabbit?

* "(this might explain de-ja vu)", even if the Universe DID for some reason stop and restart and everything would happen the same again (or almost), as the mind is just a creation of organic matter that is "smart" enough to gather information from the surroundings, it cannot gather anything it doesn't have access to.

* anyway within this timeline time travel is possible, but only if you take yourself outside of space time, thus exsisting at all points of time everywhere at the same time. But you can only observe not affect anything."
What does it mean to "take yourself outside of space time"? And how would you do it? Why can't you do it in this universe? The circular time (Which in itself is faulty) doesn't add anything, as you claimed being outside-space time would put you anywhere (in time as in space). This surely would then apply to our universe, right?

And if you don't have an answer how you would take yourself outside of space time in that universe, (or this), then it would just be a theory (well, random thought) within a theory (another random thought).

It's fine to think of these things, but if you are to remember anything from this reply, remember the rabbit. Seriously.

I'm of the opinion that there are no parallel universes for the simple reason that I'm only experiencing the one I'm in right now. If there are others, why am I not experiencing them? I only seem to have one point of view and one life, not a thousand or billion or whatever. Just this one, which seems to be pretty stable and relatively predictable. Not much popping in and out of alternate realities.

So any time travel being done is only going to affect this reality, this timescape. Which might be a good reason why time travelers don't like to make themselves publicly known. There are consequences.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
I'm of the opinion that there are no parallel universes for the simple reason that I'm only experiencing the one I'm in right now. If there are others, why am I not experiencing them?

For the same reason you're not experiencing Jenna Jameson's vagina - you're not in it?

...Which might be a good reason why time travelers don't like to make themselves publicly known. There are consequences.

Or because time-travel is not possible?

reply to post by Consequence


You are a funny one, every thought of a comdey act.

I did say it was a thought, I never said I was a quantum physicist.

I could sit here typing about how narrow minded you must be in order not to think outside of a box but i simple cannot be bothered.

Everyones views are valid on this topic, and the reason for it is that nobody has even come close to proving wether time travels in a direct line, is curved like space, circular, is a web where point intersec each other etc etc never mind inventing a time machine.

If you think you know it all, go build one and let me know how that works out for you.

Good luck

Originally posted by felixjames20

You are a funny one, every thought of a comdey act.

Actually yes, and I've done that. However, I wasn't supposed to be funny when I replied to your post.

I did say it was a thought, I never said I was a quantum physicist.

You said you had a theory, and I thought you had too many holes in it that I wondered if it was more of a thought than a laid out theory.
Also, you asked for opinions as well as frankly asking if it was rubbish - which it was.

I could sit here typing about how narrow minded you must be in order not to think outside of a box but i simple cannot be bothered.

Apart from that you sat the and typed about my narrow-mindedness, I do think outside the box. Otherwise I wouldn't have bothered answering to your thoughts, would I?
I accepted every sentence of yours, processed it, came into a conclusion that it couldn't be right, presented you the reasons why it seemed so. Please feel free to object if you have answers to the apparent problems/inconsistencies.

Everyones views are valid on this topic,

Of course, every human being is allowed to think exactly what and how they wish to think. Everything else would be horrible.

and the reason for it is that nobody has even come close to proving wether time travels in a direct line, is curved like space, circular, is a web where point intersec each other etc etc never mind inventing a time machine.

Actually, to most of the above statements - we have. "Time" is well defined and we know how it behaves.

If you think you know it all, go build one and let me know how that works out for you.

You may have missed that in my earlier post(s), unfortunately, since I "do know it all", I happen to know that time travel is not possible, so I cannot build one.

Don't be offended, I just gave you feedback.

Originally posted by felixjames20

Everyones views are valid on this topic, and the reason for it is that nobody has even come close to proving wether time travels in a direct line, is curved like space, circular, is a web where point intersec each other etc etc never mind inventing a time machine

in simplistic terms for understanding purposes, you could look upon time and space as
standing waves, neither of which bend and the time component has regions of compression and rarifactions
depending on presence or matter/mass or otherwise resptly