You've gotta be shitting me?
- Started
- Last post
- 32 Responses
- ian0
If a time machine has been invented or ever will be invented then we already have been exposed to it and the effects time travellers have already had on the past/present. Or something. Monday morning is not the right time for these kind of thoughts.
Ergo, vis-a-vis.
- like if a perpetuum mobile was possible we would not have oil wars? minor doubts. let's continue this on friday night...invisiblechamber
- A perpetual motion machine would never be able to power anything. The act of tapping it for power...Studiospooky
- would reduce its own power and it would stop.Studiospooky
- not strictly true, SS, please see *detritus
- I guess that would probably qualify as 'strictly true'. Maybe I meant 'effectively untrue'?detritus
- What? Please see what?
I'm CONFOOStudiospooky
- neue75_bold0
Chuck Norris doesn't travel backwards or forwards in time, he is timeless...
- neue75_bold0
Chuck Norris doesn't need a wormhole, he has a mangina...
- Kiko0
chuck norris can watch 60 minutes of film in just 20 minutes
- Raniator0
wrong thread cocklords! ;)
- ha! @ usage of "cocklords" in a sentence.TheBlueOne
- perfect
Kiko
- Studiospooky0
I'm a bit of a Science buff and have been following this for a few years in New Scientist and the Journal of Progressive World Sciences. The biggest stumbling block between our species and time travel is our need to grasp at metaphors when undertsanding soemthing. When we can't grasp a suitable metaphor, we tend to stare in disbelief and dismiss something. With time travel, we hope to satisfy our cynicism by likening time travel to a loop of paper ( as a timeline), and we hope to answer questions about how time travel works by taking that loop of paper and 'touching' two different times together and imagining ourself toddling across the bridge between these two points.
For that reason we also entertain the notion that if time travel were ever to exist, then it would be here now. Its a logical point of view for the metaphorical mind, but the pointed end of advance metaphysical study says that this is naive.
When the LHC collider is finally cranked up the world is likely to change more rapidly than at any point in time so far. The possibilities are endless and time travel is absolutely one of the possibilities that may grow out of it. Just as likely is that the collission causes a black hole that engulfs the entire planet immediately.
I wrote this in 2248 you know.
- Studiospooky0
Also, did anyone ever follow the John Titor phenomenon a few years ago? Total bullshit, obviosuly, but it was quite a nice period in the history of the internet as it predated YouTube, Mysaps and all the rest yet captivated millions around the world and generated masses and masses of speculation and input.
- Yeha I remember that. I really enjoyed, it did send shivers up me spine.harlequino
- Raniator0
Maybe I need to read into this a bit more, and pardon my naivety and ignorance, but time travel has got to be impossible, right?!
- ian0
Well if it is possible then its always existed we just don't know about it yet or else there'd be a paradox, ergo we need laws in place just in case its abused.
Have we learned nothing from watching Back to the Future or Timecop?
- No not true. The paradox is created by our minds being unable to embrace a non metaphorical understanding.Studiospooky
- What if some douche went into the past and altered events so time travel was never inventedcreative-
- Then the fiuture would be a world where time travel was never invented, but you're...Studiospooky
- confusing time travel with fixing all future events for perpetuity, how could a time travellor go back and...Studiospooky
- ensure nobody after that point ever invented time again? that's saucery not time travel.Studiospooky
- sp (time travel, not time)Studiospooky
- They surely could go back and vandalise tht bloody great array thing?creative-
- But they can't ensure nobody else ever came up with a means of time travel. You're labouring...Studiospooky
- a mis-conception. Time travel in either direction doesn't allow the future to be fixed by a point in time.Studiospooky
- creative-0
Apparently if it is possible we'll only be able to go back in time as far as the point that time travel was discovered. Fat lot of good that is.
- Not true either apparently. Thje fact that you go back in time means you go back to an alternate past.Studiospooky
- Studiospooky0
No. Apparently not. The scientific establishment is putting a lot of funding into exploration. Its just that we're too dumb to grasp the concept. Its a hackneyed old thing to bring up but its similar to the arrival of ther Spanish inquisition by boat to the land of the Mayans (Mayonia?)... they could not grasp the possibility of men travelling across water in boats so they just didn't see the boats at all. When the Spanish arrived they naturally assumed them to be gods becuase they appeared to step out of nowhere. There are so many examples of things being totally beyond our comprehension that Time travel is merely a contemporary counterpoint. Up until about the 12th Century (could be wrong about that) it was generally held as the basic truth that eyes shone light onto things and that's how we could see. It was an islmaic scholar who first suspected light was around us and entered out eyes from outside, and he got locked away for 20 years for such a blasphemous notion. The world was hugely different before and after he made his case, and the discovery was no less revolutionary to science as time travel seems to us now.
- creative-0
So what we're saying here is that Sky+ for my life may be just around the corner?
- Studiospooky0
err, yeah, i think that's one of the apps they're developing right now. Google are beta testing GoogleString too.
- ian0
OK, what is going to best inform me of how time travel actually works:
Primer
Donnie Darko
Back to the Future
Timecop
or the episode of Family guy where peter marries Molly Ringwald?- Primer was so good. They shot that movie for 7 grand.harlequino
- Studiospooky0
A well-packed six skin raggamuffin cone and an Orbital album should do the trick.
- creative-0
Okay, this is nuts. Suppose I go back in time and kill my father. Surely I would cease to exist (the grandfather paradox) unless time isn't linear and with that action time gets divided into every possible outcome of my actions. Would this mean I'd end up in some kind of parallel universe? Gonna need Ziggy's help on this one
- Nice Quantum Leap reference there!ian
- Nah, you would just start a different timeline...TheBlueOne
- harlequino0
Well if you subscribe to the theories about multi-dimensional existence (2D vs. 3D, ala "Wrinkle In Time"), the accepted view is that time is the fourth dimension. Which makes sense if you consider that a 3rd dimensional existence is length, width, and depth. The fourth dimension adds duration as a natural ever-present condition of that universe.
So, you could argue that time travel has always existed. You have to be a 4D being to experience it though.
- misterhow0
Physicist on Conan Friday night says it doesn't matter. We can travel through time, but the instant we did, the universe would explode. McFly?! McFly?!
- Studiospooky0
If you went back in time and killed your father, then events would continue from that point without your father's presence, so you would not be born.
To say "Ah, but if I wasn't born, how could I have gone back in time to kill my father?" is to rely on the 'strip of paper' metaphor of time-travel. Its really not a paradox at all. Your father was killed by a version of you from the future, and so in that universe, a contemporary you was never born, and the world would progress without you. Like in B2TF when his family start fading from the photograph.