Time Travel discussion

54 views
Time Travel in the News > Is time travel possible?

Comments (showing 1-26 of 26) (26 new)    post a comment »
dateDown_arrow    newest »

message 1: by John, time travel information guru (new)

John | 847 comments Mod
I came across this article online and thought it was kind of interesting. Perhaps it will offer us some fodder for discussion:

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channe...


message 2: by Tej, time travel referee (new)

Tej (TheyCallMeMrGlass) | 1335 comments Mod
Tiddlers Cylinder...sounds like Emett Browns Flux capacitor ;) I'm surprised Hawkins apporved the theory but its pretty cool. There's just too many imaginary variables though, dark energy, negative energy.

We need a few new generation scientists to unlearn the these imaginary variables sucha as Dark matter, dark energy and a new one called dark flow (a new unexplained force that is pusching galaxies together in the far reaches of the universe) and start thinking fresh from the ground up again.

But I like the Tiddler Cylinder, never heard of that before. I wonder if any writer has utilised this mathematical model in a TT novel?


Keith McArdle (Varangian) | 18 comments I don't know if time travel is possible, but if it is there was another post about how to do it safely. If UFOs are real, maybe that's just our future selves flying around from a safe distance viewing events?


Graham (20LEgend) | 5 comments I always thought that if it were possible wouldn't we already have been visited by our future selves. Then I read that travellers could only go back as far as the invention of the first machine.


A.K. Adler (akadler) | 96 comments (stumbles out of NaNoWriMo isolation to rejoin the group)

This person certainly believes time travel is possible:

http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/man-a...

It's almost certain that what he's claiming isn't true, but it does raise the question of whether or not we'd be able to spot a time-traveller if one did show up. Especially if their return to our time disrupted events to such an extent that it derailed any 'evidence' they might have about the future.

Just a thought...


Aloha Free Kit-Kats for everyone? A chocolate communism? That is my utopia! I must find that young man.


Keith McArdle (Varangian) | 18 comments A.K.,

This footage was from the out take section of a Charlie Chaplin movie (it's black and white and filmed well before I was born, or even thought about). The woman in the clip seems to be holding a mobile phone to her ear and talking.

I can't remember where, but I do recall reading somewhere that this was someone's great grandmother and that she had a tooth pulled that day and was holding an ice pack to her face (deep freezes had been invented at that time because I remember checking into that) and that where it looks like she is talking is actually her stretching her jaw. Okam's razor would suggest the latter explanation, but it's still interesting:

http://forgetomori.com/2010/fortean/t...


message 8: by John, time travel information guru (last edited Dec 01, 2011 06:48AM) (new)

John | 847 comments Mod
A.k. wrote: "It does raise the question of whether or not we'd be able to spot a time-traveller if one did show up...

I actually recieved a call from myself in the future. Someone left me a message on my voice mail that said something like: "Hey John, it's me John. I have come from the future to tell you something. Call me back." Needless to say I failed to give myself a call back number, so this message from the future went undelivered. And apparently, my voice somehow changed because it sure didn't sound like me. It was a great prank, but I never did find out who the message was from.


Aloha LMAO!!!


message 10: by Tej, time travel referee (last edited Dec 03, 2011 04:08AM) (new)

Tej (TheyCallMeMrGlass) | 1335 comments Mod
John wrote: "A.k. wrote: "It does raise the question of whether or not we'd be able to spot a time-traveller if one did show up...

I actually recieved a call from myself in the future. Someone left me a mes..."


I can get a full picture of your reputation now if you getting that sort of prank, lol.

Its strange though, A.K's book (Disconnected, which I read last month) has an uncannily similar scene...wait...John, I just solved your mystery...A.K is your prankster!


A.K. Adler (akadler) | 96 comments You can't prove that, Tej.


Scott (ArtRobot) | 63 comments Graham wrote: "I always thought that if it were possible wouldn't we already have been visited by our future selves."

The only reasonable explanation is that this is the Prime timeline. When someone does go back, they will create an alternate timeline and never be able to return to this one. ;)


Frances Clark (throughtime) | 89 comments This is an interesting old thread. I believe time travel would only be possible in a dimension not governed by time, so for time travel to be possible we must first find our way into that dimension.


Brenda Clough (BrendaClough) | 182 comments Once I drove to Boston with fellow writer Catherine Asaro, who has a PhD in physics from Harvard. It was a long enough drive that I could keep on pumping her about time travel; I was determined to do it in the next novel but needed plausible science. Essentially, if you look at it with Einstein's physics, time travel is the same thing as faster-than-light travel. If you can do one, you can do the other. So there's your answer. It's easy. Just go faster than light.
And, from my point of view, it's evidently CHEAPER to travel through time than FTL.


Howard Loring (howardloringgoodreadscom) | 1138 comments Brenda, I think you misunderstood your friend, unless she was speaking only in generalities.

The convention has indeed been used many times in SiFi but Einstein's physics never said that you could go faster than light & he didn't think doing so was plausible science.

It's true (and demonstrable) that as you approach that fixed constant, time is relatively affected, but he never said that you could go faster, quite the opposite.

It's others that, by extension, have said Time Travel would be the outcome, but not him, as he didn't think it possible to begin with.

Of course, he didn't have a flux capacitor.


message 16: by Tej, time travel referee (last edited Dec 03, 2012 09:06PM) (new)

Tej (TheyCallMeMrGlass) | 1335 comments Mod
Brenda wrote: "Once I drove to Boston with fellow writer Catherine Asaro, who has a PhD in physics from Harvard. It was a long enough drive that I could keep on pumping her about time travel; I was determined to..."

I bet you took the "long" route! Was that for the Revise The World novel? I've resumed reading that now as I had to break away from it for the BOM group read.

You dont have to travel faster than light to time travel to the future. Only to the time travelling to the past, requires FTL. Its already proven we can travel to the future. The closer anyone can travel to speed of light, the further into the future one can achieve aging a short period of time. Its basically already achieved simply by travelling by a fast jet or rocket, however, the effect is in the region of fraction of a second. Nevertheless, its significant enough for Earth based geo satellite control centres to install, time compensation devices for their satellites because the time dilation effect of their orbits would otherwise cause GPS devices to lose accuracy by significant distances.

It should be cheap to travel FTL too as your mass will approach zero, so the travel fare conductor should consider the traveller exempt, being dead and sub quark sized! :)


Frances Clark (throughtime) | 89 comments These discussions are very interesting but some topics get a bit beyond my comprehension at times. Perhaps I tend to simplify things too much. I find if I read a book that gets bogged down in technical jargon I start getting bored. That's probably just me. I don't mind a bit of science thrown in to make a story believable but I probably focus more on the plot and the characters. In reality no one knows if time travel is possible but as writers we have to make out we know what we're talking about even if we don't.


Howard Loring (howardloringgoodreadscom) | 1138 comments Frances, I agree & it's often been said that good SiFi is good fiction, not good science.

And I also agree with Brenda that the story only has to be plausable, as opposed to possible.

You can always get around the hard science, that's not the point, rather an enjoyable, thought provoking read.


Randy Harmelink | 380 comments Howard wrote: "Frances, I agree & it's often been said that good SiFi is good fiction, not good science."

Too bad the SyFy channel doesn't have either.... :(


Brenda Clough (BrendaClough) | 182 comments I should mention that I am NOT a physics major, au contraire. I figure I understood about 10% of what Catherine was saying. Perfectly OK -- what I wanted to do was to have enough scientific underpinning so that the real scientists would be able to fill it in themselves.
The charm of this is that not only are the boffins doing all the work, it is how you create a fully convincing world -- by enlisting the reader's imagination. I didn't want to load the book (it was REVISE THE WORLD, btw) with boring jargon; I wanted to get on with the fun stuff.


Howard Loring (howardloringgoodreadscom) | 1138 comments Brenda, please don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to lecture you or, God forbid, tell you how to write good SiFi, just wanted you to put that possibility (faster than light travel) in context re: Einstein.

It's OK to use that convention & many have & to good effect, just didn't want you to think it was the big mans's theory, as that's a common misconception.

His first 'thought experiment' was to imagine what it would be like to travel at the tip of a beam of light.

I have another question: If you were in your car & it (and you) was traveling at the speed of light & given that there's nothing faster, then what would happen if you turned your headlights on?

I don't think anybody ever asked him that.


message 22: by John, time travel information guru (new)

John | 847 comments Mod
Howard wrote: "If you were in your car & it (and you) was traveling at the speed of light & given that there's nothing faster, then what would happen if you turned your headlights on?..."

You would have to drive backward as the light would shine behind you.


Howard Loring (howardloringgoodreadscom) | 1138 comments John, I hadn't thought of that.

Pretty funny.


David Haws | 57 comments Possible and plausible are two different things. If you can imagine something (a Chimera) it’s possible. I think it might also be a coherence theory of truth thing. Time travel may be impossible if the theories of your coherent worldview require it to be impossible. Most people whose coherent worldview believes time travel impossible are thinking of the paradox problem in what Howard is calling spacetime travel (trans-temporal interaction). Of course, the many-worlds interpretation can speak to the paradox.


message 25: by John, time travel information guru (new)

John | 847 comments Mod
If we positioned a high-powered telescope near the sun (it would be fire-resistent, of course) and pointed it toward earth, we would be able to see what happened on the earth eight and a half minutes ago. Take the telescope out a little farther and we could possibly witness events from even farther back, but the angle would not be the best since you could only look from above... And your telescope would have to orbit around the earth so that you could watch the same spot for more than a few minutes... And you would have to have an almost instantaneous radio transmission in order to beam the images back to earth in the present... Okay, so maybe it isn't the best idea, but still plausible. It worked for L. Ron Hubbard in "Battlefield Earth."


Howard Loring (howardloringgoodreadscom) | 1138 comments John wrote: 'we positioned a high-powered telescope'

John, not too far-fetched given you had the platform as described.

I think you know from other posts that some time ago I acquired an old rusted-out scope that took me nearly a year to recondition.

It's an ASTROLA & the 12 1/2 in. mirror gives an image the size of a pie plate & you can point it anywhere & see all kinds of stuff streaking by.

I'm still working out how to use the equatorial mount, as it's a huge contraption when assembled.

That didn't come out well, but what I mean is that the tube is too large for me to connect each time, so I leave it assembled to the also very large mount.

I had to build a shed & platform to hold it as my containment unit here is so small & there's plenty of before & after pictures on my Facepage.

Looking back in Time is much of Astronomy now, to see the bang.

The problem there is you need a good platform there, too.


back to top

unread topics | mark unread