Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

I'm sorry. I wasn't as clear as I could've been. As far as I know words don't exist to properly convey my meaning. But I suppose I can try again.

How else will it know how to assemble the particles??

It wouldn't. Any time machine could supposebly send the signal to any other time machine, but no time-machine could send the signal to a time when which a time machine doesn't exist & have it reintegrate.

Yes.

Well I invision a type of signal that's sent encoded in a type of particles that we don't yet know of. These particles by nature will trvael in a different way than any known particles. It's a matter of manipulating these particles to create the signal.

Exactly. This would be a blank thread if we were arguing known facts. If you have anything besides theories to offer please say so & we'll start building that time machine.

Arguing this has no use other than fueling the imagination, but I wouldn't agree that time travel is anyless believable than God. The Bible has been proven to be as false as Terminator, Back to the Future, Star Trek, etc.

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

Why do objects need to be assembled? Why do they have to be disassembled?

Why? Is there some sort of law backed up by experimental data which supports your opinion?

Do you know how stupid that idea really sounds on the receiving end?

Why can't your vision be simple and say that objects don't need to be broken down into elementary particles? If you're going to make this all up, at least make it so everyone can understand.

No matter how flawed it is still some solid evidence.

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

Isn't that rather obvious? Any device that truly works would have to put all the matter back in the position and configuration of the date you are traveling to for the time travel to actually occur. You would have to find a way to shield yourself from that, so that would be really tricky. The best bet would be to either alter the position of the matter you are composed of and inject it into that date. And to do that you would need the full information of every single particle you are composed of, then a machine would have to transmit that information to another machine (which may cause problems for the whole traveling in the past idea) when you can be reconfigured.

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

Noxstant,
Not to bash a physicist, but you seem to be speaking in absolutes about how time travel "works" and what you'd "have to do".

The method(s) you suggest are both excluded by modern physics. At least in the way you have described them thus far.

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

The methods I'm considering haven't been touched on hardly at all. MIT has done a bit of work on it, as well as Michio Kaku in "Physics of the Impossible" Give me some hard evidence that my methods have been refuted. And what specifically has been refuted.

Also, there is a theory in theoretical physics that is based off of Einstein's views of the concept of time. It is called granular theory, I believe. This states things very similar to what I have been saying. Of course there is a great chance I am wrong. I'm just defending what my best theory is.... If any conclusive evidence is found, I'd be 100% open with it.

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

No, it's not obvious at all. I can walk down the street without disassembling and reassembling myself multiple times, why can't time travel be the same?

And I would also like to say that before we broke the sound barrier people said some pretty strange things about what could be done which way, what limits existed, and what would happen to people who went through the barrier, some in very definite terms. I'd advise you to be a lot more cautious in what are very little more than predictions, at this stage.

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

You aren't getting this. It's not my opinion. I was explaining the theory of another. There is absolutely zero evidence to support any time-travel theory. Don't take what's posted here seriously.

It's the proper answer, based on the theory, to what I found to be a stupid question. Why do you find it stupid?? You think if a time-machine is built & then destroyed it should still be useable?? If a time machine (or any machine for that matter) is destroyed & still useable it wasn't destroyed well enough.

I'm sorry this theory seems to be to complicated for you, but if it were as simple as you wish it were we would've had time machines long ago. I feel this theory is simple & the radio metaphor used earlier on explained it quite adequatly.

Have you ever wondered why enviromental science & medical science aren't simple. If they were as simple as we willed them to be we would have weather control machines & we would've completely exterminated all diseases.

And as far as I'm aware no time-travel theory doesn't involve breaking things down into elemental particles.

Depends on your definition of solid evidence, but I guess I require more prove than most. I guess that's why there're still Religious people.

However, this is off topic & I will not address it any further.

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

Comparing breaking the sound barrier with time travel is useless. Breaking the sound barrier was just simply breaking the sound barrier. It's sound. Not time itself. Chuck Yeager knew that. And of course you will always have crazies who are superstitious about an upcoming event that will be marked in history.

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

Although a famous string theorist of great repute, I'm not sure quoting one of his "popular science" books is really counted as "work in the area" as far as real physics goes.
No. Any device that truly works might work like that, I guess, maybe. It is not required to work like that at all.

Also to pose a simple question in terms of refuting these ideas: I'll assume that "position and configuration" means that you have absolute knowledge of the position, momenta, etc. etc. of every sinlge particle ever (at that point in time) i.e. you have restrictive knowledge on all Degrees of Freedom. How would you say something like this fits in with basic quantum mechanical restrictions?:)

As far as I know the only theories that Einstein may have been concerned with (that I can recall) that were called "granular theories" were those of granular gas diffusion. Could you maybe link an arxiv article? Or something more solid than speculative popular science :)

edit: to avoid confusion, clan.necrosect and I are one and the same (long story).

Re: Time travel? Changing events?
 

Why? They are pretty similar. Time travel is just voluntary, controlled movement through a dimension through which we normally have limitations moving. Same with breaking the sound barrier.

And you still haven't explained exactly why (and how) such a machine would be able to do all the stuff you claim, if you are so certain about the theory.

The problem with popular science books, like 'popular' books in any field, is that they have too many oversimplifications and people generally tend to get the wrong idea, since they are usually thinking on different wavelengths than the experts writing such books.