There's a thingy called the time paradox I think. Say, you go back in time stop the JFK assasination. So you succeed and JFK never gets killed. But if JFK never gets killed why would you need to go back in the first place? Therefore he would get shot and the cycle starts over again.
JFK gets shot so you go back in time and shoot the guy that was going to shoot JFK. While you're there you leave a message to your future self telling you to go back in time and shoot the guy.
The signal from the first time-machine, containing instructions on how to reintegrate the transported matter.
Why does it need these instructions? And why would it receive if from the first ever time machine? What if that time machine was destroyed before another one was made? Would there be an arbitrary period of time between the destruction of the first and the construction of the second where you couldn't actually go back to in time?
Quote:
You don't understand. It has nothing to do with the matter transported through time. Just the time-machine in itself. The way I see this theory is that one machine disintegrates a person, but records their molecular make up. It then sends a signal through time to another machine that reconstructs you based on the 'model' (for lack of a more appropriate word) contained in the signal.
Why would it do that? If it were able to transport matter in the first place why would it not be able to transport entire molecules and objects? Why would it be restricted to elementary particles?
Quote:
People seem to think theories expressed here actually represent something that we actually know. All theories on time-travel are just opinion until a time-machine is actually built. We aren't trying to prove our theories as we have nothing concrete to base them on at this point. We are merely suggesting possibilities. So either Neil Degrasse Tyson's theory & Dr. Who's theory remain valid until proven wrong.
So...you are arguing for someone's opinion? This has nothing to do with fact and observable evidence?
Good grief. This is even worse than arguing for God. At least for God you have the Bible.
There's a thingy called the time paradox I think. Say, you go back in time stop the JFK assasination. So you succeed and JFK never gets killed. But if JFK never gets killed why would you need to go back in the first place? Therefore he would get shot and the cycle starts over again
First off, this paradox could not occur. There would be two possible outcomes if a device of high enough energy was constructed to manipulate the time dimensions as desired. (that is assuming it is possible, which according to Einstein it is) First, we know that the 3 dimensions of space are intertwined with the dimension of time. We can't be sure if manipulating the time dimension and making it go back to a certain date would make all the matter and energy go back into its positions at that time. If it didn't, time would go back, but through the perspective of the user of the machine, nothing would happen because the past was not altered. The user would then not experience the affects of the time pushback in a linear manner. And if there was a sort of "memory" in the time dimension that allowed for the positions and multiple arrangements of matter & energy at that time, you wouldn't be able to do anything. This is because the matter you are composed of would return to its original destination(s).
I suppose if the technology was advanced enough, you could alter a type of "quantum clone" of yourself and have it stop the JFK assassination, but that would be time alteration. And that is completely different from time travel my friends. And if your "quantum clone" was successful, history would change and chances are you would be changed as well. Upon your perspective, as soon as you activate the device, you may never remember doing it at all. But yet it did happen.
Your mom's a hypothetical particle that accounts for the weakest fundamental force but has unlimited distance.
Indeed. One on hand you have groundbreaking scientific discovery. On the other you have the high risk that some nutjob is going to get ahold of it and figure out how to use it. That could spell disaster for all of us.
Your mom's a hypothetical particle that accounts for the weakest fundamental force but has unlimited distance.
I do find it interesting a topic on time travel made it into the pub.
It strikes me odd as having a discussion on a topic very much scientific about which we know nothing. There are plenty of ideas out there, but nothing close to concrete. You cannot speak in absolutes as in "we cannot go back in time because", or "time works like this..." as no one has any idea. You can believe what you want about how time works, but there's no evidence for any particular system.
This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!
The Pub 
Re: Time travel? Changing events? 
Re: Time travel? Changing events? 
.gif "Roll Eyes (Sarcastic) at that stupid method of spelling color")
Linear Mode
