|
Post by Prone on Jan 22, 2007 17:34:10 GMT -8
I was listening to a radio station the other night, and the guy was saying that its possible to go back, and even into the future. Now I'm not a gullible person that would likely believe everything that he hears, but what made it so convincing is the fact that the guy said that energy is given off every second of our lives, that contains information on things that we did, so as to make it possible to reconstruct the entire past just from this information.
Now, I don't really think thats true though, just only stuff for the movies. What do you guys think?
|
|
|
Post by tyrantisius on Jan 22, 2007 17:38:55 GMT -8
I really don't think it's possible at all. But I do enjoy nearly all time travel movies, excluding of course back to the future....and no time travel has actually managed to pull it off sensibly. And if even movies can't do it right, what hope do we have?
|
|
|
Post by Prone on Jan 22, 2007 17:44:46 GMT -8
Well, on the other hand, the future would have to come up with an even broader explanation as to how we'd be able to visit the future.
This energy, he said, is dispersed outside of time, which means that time has no authority on it, and therefore if we had any access to this energy, we could manipulate time, since we are going out of time itself, and re-entering it somewhere else.
As to the future, I have no idea. Possible the same theory with the past, except that we would have to "fast forward" time itself.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgecko on Jan 22, 2007 17:50:26 GMT -8
nothing is impossible
except of course, for example, prone turning into a god, just as an example and time travel too
|
|
|
Post by Prone on Jan 22, 2007 17:51:34 GMT -8
You know what, we should have a live debate about this in the channel sometime. We haven't had a lot of debates in there in awhile.
|
|
|
Post by technohawk on Jan 23, 2007 0:11:34 GMT -8
You know what, we should have a live debate about this in the channel sometime. We haven't had a lot of debates in there in awhile. Maybe because the channel is for Trivia and the boards are for debates? Edit: And I'll add my own comments on time travel later on. Plus get that essay written. And mow the lawn, and do my dishes, and walk my dogs and yea....
|
|
|
Post by Prone on Jan 23, 2007 15:20:00 GMT -8
Another theory on time travel:
If you believe in angels, this might make sense, if not, then I'd say, "Good luck believing it."
Angels live in the fourth dimension, which allows them to alter the past, and seemingly, the future as well. This goes with christianity as well, where if you say a prayer, and your angel answers it, it will cause whatever action that is going to happen, if it was "bad", not to happen.
The angel will actually go forward in time, and cause a change in the future (Again, I say hypothesis) which will prevent dangerous/life threatening things from happening.
My theory on the matter is that time stays in the third dimension, where all of us humans live in. Angels livce in the fourth dimension, which is why we don't see them. However, they can come into our dimension, where we can see them, as they manipulate bodies to look like real people, and that is where miracles come from. Now, God is the same way too. He can manipulate time, and he can even create things, so I believe he's in the fifth dimension.
Based on what I have mentioned, the theory goes that we would have to make a device, so utterly complex that it couldn't be conceived, (more so than what leonardo da vinci was able to come up with.), that would actually convert the third dimension into the fourth, have us go through time, and then finally land back in the third dimension.
If it was possible though, we would never stay in the fourth dimension, because we aren't made for that dimension. We are just mere mortals.
So, that having been said, even the smallest of experiments that had two atoms transfer places would just simply be not even, to encompass the knowledge we would have to know in order to create a time machine.
|
|
|
Post by rabidgecko on Jan 23, 2007 15:57:50 GMT -8
prone a simple look at my avatar, and wikipedia.org, will sink your theory faster than a canadian sub and theories with spelling mistakes are usually not as effective as ones without
|
|
dxlightning
Platinum Membership
[ss:LostPeon's Gray][ss:LostPeon's Gray]
Posts: 1,246
|
Post by dxlightning on Jan 23, 2007 17:18:55 GMT -8
Also you can't prove a theory with a theory.
|
|
|
Post by raen7 on Jan 23, 2007 22:41:49 GMT -8
Anybody with a decent grasp of quantum mechanics and astrophysics knows that time-travel is theoretically possible to a certain extent.
However, anybody with a decent grasp of reality and Newtonian physics knows that we cannot build a craft that would both survive the forces of time-travel and carry a human being through the process.
And finally, anybody with a decent grasp of current affairs knows that we will be blowing each other to bits long before we become technologically advanced enough to consider the possibility of researching the above topics in depth.
But as long as we're being hypothetical, perhaps we should ask the question that is really on everyone's mind: If we could go back in time, would we be able to stop Prone's mother from smoking pot while she was pregnant, without succumbing to the deliciousness of old Mary-Jane ourselves?
|
|
|
Post by technohawk on Jan 24, 2007 0:13:14 GMT -8
Lawl and exalts abound for raen7 for the best post in this thread.
Although I REAAALY think that Prone's theory of harnessing the power of 4th dimensional angels and 5th dimensional God should really be studied further. Call a University and get a grant for the research immediately. (Note to reader: Read my sig)
I think the concept of time travel is really cool. But to implement it seems highly(99.99999999%) unlikely.
The easy answer is actually a question. If someone at ANY point in time has created a time machine, wouldn't we know about it instantly?
Because anyone who had created a time machine would have INFINITE time to come to our "present" or past and disclose the information about time machines. And thus we'd already know about it.
You could have stories to explain why we don't know about the machines invented in the future such as
Time Rules and Regulations paragraph 4 subsection C states that any improper use of a time machine to disclose it's existence to people of the year 2007 will be punished by a group of 14 weevils being put in the pantaloons of the offender
But even then there would still be infinite time for someone to break the rules. And that leads to a loop that would 1) Never end and 2) Become really annoying.
So I'll talk about other ideas that have been suggested by authors, directors and anyone else who's not a scientist. I mean come ON, why would you want to hear what scientists have to say on a purely scientific matter?
Idea of Robert J. Sawyer, best Canadian Science-Fiction writer ever(and one of the best period). He wrote a book "End of an Era"(Check your library for a copy, it's a good book but be warned all Sawyer books will actually deal with a universe that is not sugar coated)
There are a few theories in the book about time travel but to me the best one is the idea that: If you were able to go back in time, there is no way for you to come back because you will change the course of history AND the future will prevent the "new" version of yourself from creating another time machine for some reason.
J. Michael Straczynski(creator/writer Babylon 5) had his idea of time travel demonstrated in Babylon 5 several times. It is:
Traveling through time does not change the timeline of anything because a person traveling back through time(or forward) is supposed to happen. Therefore nothing will actually be changed by time travel since all time travel does is make sure what already happened in the past still happens.
Some other shows(Twilight zone type shows) show a similar theme as Staczynski's. Ex (Twilight Zone the newer version with Forest Whitaker) has an episode where a woman goes back in time to assassinate Adolph Hitler when he was a baby. At the end of the show she grabs baby Hitler and drowns him and herself in a river. But then the Nanny goes and grabs a homeless woman's baby and pretends that it's Hitler. So by killing the biological son of Alois Hitler the woman actually allows the person known as Adolph Hitler to become who we know him to be.
The theme is: By trying to change the past you will actually cause the past to happen exactly as it previously did.
The Sawyer example and the Babylon 5 example are the main ones I think of because they were presented in a manner that denoted that the people actually put some thought into their stories, quite akin to what we are doing now on this thread. Well, MOST of us.
The following are some movies that did NOT put much thought into time travel but may or may not have been entertaining.
TimeCop: If you push a future bad guy into the body of his past self you will get a cheap digital effect that looks like a ball of silver snot AND your boss in the future will no longer limp.
Timeline: That if you talk about an extremely specific battle during a short period of time you will later on be transported by a freak coincidence to the exact time surrounding that battle and become involved in it.
Superman: Reversing the rotation of the earth will magically reverse time and bring your hopeless reporter girlfriend back from the dead.
Star Trek IV: Fly a ship around the sun and you go back in time and save a couple whales.
And of COURSE:
Back to the Future 1,2,3: You can travel through time so long as you drive really fast in a cool looking car and use terms such as "Flux capacitor and Jiggowatts."
And thus another lengthy post comes to an end.
|
|
|
Post by Prone on Jan 24, 2007 12:07:37 GMT -8
You can come up with a lot of theories to time travel if you've studied science at all. One without a broad knowledge of subjects can't possible think of anything like that.
|
|
PhoenixFlare500
Diamond Membership
I like chocolate[ss:LostPeon's Gray][ss:LostPeon's Gray]
Posts: 896
|
Post by PhoenixFlare500 on Jan 24, 2007 15:35:22 GMT -8
I don't think I ever thought about that...
|
|
|
Post by raen7 on Jan 24, 2007 17:49:45 GMT -8
You can come up with a lot of theories to time travel if you've studied science at all. One without a broad knowledge of subjects can't possible think of anything like that. Wrong. Anybody can come up with lots of theories; it is in studying the science that you find out which ones are baseless and stupid (for example, almost all of them). Plus, studying could "possible" help you avoid grammar errors.
|
|
|
Post by lolassault on Feb 3, 2007 1:26:41 GMT -8
But isn't a theory (in the scientific sense) by definition a substantiated explanation? Technically speaking, isn't a "baseless theory" an oxymoron?
|
|