The Instigator
DarkEngine
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
theta_pinch
Pro (for)
Winning
17 Points

Is Time Travel Possible?. What is your Point of View?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
theta_pinch
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/17/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 797 times Debate No: 44172
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (5)

 

DarkEngine

Con

This is my first debate so go easy on me
If we look at the evidence, we should agree that time travel is impossible. There is no evidence whatsoever that time travel is probable. On a organic scale, on a molecular scale, the results are the same. All objects in the Universe are constantly moving forward at the same base rate because of the initial Big Bang.
Why do I think time travel is impossible? To be fair,I don't think its impossible.I think it is entirely improbable.
Lets debate..............................
theta_pinch

Pro

Time travel is possible and I have proof.

1. The theory of special relativity: time travel is a necessary outcome of special relativity; it's called time dilation.
2. Experimental proof:
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Muon lifetime

A comparison of muon lifetimes at different speeds is possible. In the laboratory, slow muons are produced, and in the atmosphere very fast moving muons are introduced by cosmic rays. Taking the muon lifetime at rest as the laboratory value of 2.22 μs, the lifetime of a cosmic ray produced muon traveling at 98% of the speed of light is about five times longer, in agreement with observations. In this experiment the "clock" is the time taken by processes leading to muon decay, and these processes take place in the moving muon at its own "clock rate", which is much slower than the laboratory clock--wikipedia

The Global Positioning System can be considered a continuously operating experiment in both special and general relativity. The in-orbit clocks are corrected for both special and general relativistic time dilation effects, so that (as observed from the earth's surface) they run at the same rate as clocks on the surface of the Earth.--wikipedia

Debate Round No. 1
DarkEngine

Con

Impressive. Copy and paste Wikiedia info. I hoped that you would have some original thought that would make this debate worth my time. I cannot address one sentence of your "rebuttal.... As it is bovine ca ca".............I was hoping this site has intellectual thinkers...............I may have made a mistake.
theta_pinch

Pro

Impressive. Copy and paste Wikiedia info. I hoped that you would have some original thought that would make this debate worth my time.

First off this is an insult and second I provided valid evidence of time travel.

I cannot address one sentence of your "rebuttal.... As it is bovine ca ca".............I was hoping this site has intellectual thinkers...............I may have made a mistake.

I have no idea what you are saying here and again that's an insult.
Debate Round No. 2
DarkEngine

Con

You are correct in saying it is an insult. I did not mean this personally ( meaning directly to you). ( its more toward myself, if you can believe that)
You have failed to make your argument because you have not stated your point of view. You have simply quoted another source and not stated your own view. I know you have your own view. Express it.
theta_pinch

Pro

My view is time travel is possible. However if you wanted to know people's views on time travel you should have used the forum or made a poll.

Note to con: this is not a debate.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Magic8000 3 years ago
Magic8000
You didn't even need any physical evidence. Time travel is possible because we can conceive of it. Every episode of Quantum leap proves that. If time travel was impossible there would be some incoherent, inconceivable idea in it.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
"Nor would all the people I know be dead and gone if I "Traveled at light speed for a year and then returned. I would have traveled a VERY FAR DISTANCE at a VERY FAST SPEED, but I would still be gone for one year. From a person standing on the ground when I left, I would have disappeared instantly and one year later.... I would reappear. "

Sorry but you are VERY wrong. Time dilation has been tested and verified repeatedly.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
An accurate clock at rest with respect to one observer may be measured to tick at a different rate when compared to a second observer's own equally accurate clocks. This effect arises neither from technical aspects of the clocks nor from the fact that signals need time to propagate, but from the nature of spacetime itself--wikipedia
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Your argument also doesn't hold up when you take into account that speed has an effect too.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Sorry but you misunderstand special relativity, time is LITERALLY slowing down. Also this was about whether or not time travel is possible; what I posted was a perfectly acceptable argument. I gave proof that time travel was possible and con didn't provide ANY arguments.
Posted by HumanShores69 3 years ago
HumanShores69
I must agree with the CON, He is right that the Regurgitation of others work is not a debate, it is the "Re-posting" of others thoughts. Time travel is not proven by those wiki links nor does that give merit to the PRO argument. In fact it merely suggests that his argument is only possible by some one else's thoughts. That defeats a debate. To reference data is one thing, to only have, said references, is quite another. Time is a human need of measurement. If I travel away from the clock at light speed, then yes, My Perception is that the clock stopped. But it did not, My eyes just cant follow it's movement. Nor would all the people I know be dead and gone if I "Traveled at light speed for a year and then returned. I would have traveled a VERY FAR DISTANCE at a VERY FAST SPEED, but I would still be gone for one year. From a person standing on the ground when I left, I would have disappeared instantly and one year later.... I would reappear. As for the effect of clocks at different altitudes, it is well known that "Gravity" has a direct effect on the mechanisms of our existence and the universe we live in. The farther from any source of gravitational effects, the slower or faster a mechanism may run. The same is provable at a sub atomic level. The activities and effects on atoms, neutron, etc are in direct relation to the forces applied to them. Ergo gravity. However this does not mean a shift of time itself, but merely the slowing or acceleration of said unit. Time travel that is not.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
You see; there is no way to debate a point of view.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
DarkEnginetheta_pinchTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: I am handing Pro points for conduct and spelling as Con did use some bad language and made some grammatical errors. To be fair I have not given argument points to either, as Pro didn't make a great argument, but Con also didn't make a valid argument as it was very fragmented and did not flow. I did not award sources points as Wikipedia is not a great source to cite.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
DarkEnginetheta_pinchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con loses points for the insults. Con offered no rebuttals so pro gets arguments. Pro was the only one to provide sources.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
DarkEnginetheta_pinchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made no counter arguments regarding why time travel is not possible or improbable. Pro wins in the very first round as it did-not continued at all in the next rounds. Topic just diverted on 2nd and 3rd round and neither arrived at proper conclusion.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
DarkEnginetheta_pinchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: CONDUCT: Pro should have used quotation marks, and been clear which of the three links the quote was from (he did format it differently, indicating no deception was intended; thus while conduct gets a warning, the rest of the debate continues). ARGUMENT: Measuring this as a debate (as being in the debate section implies), this goes to con, as he brought forward quotes about time dilation, which were entirely uncontested; they did however disprove the reliability of the "moving forward at the same base rate." SOURCES: Lean to pro, but not enough of them to claim the solid two extra points.
Vote Placed by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
DarkEnginetheta_pinchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con basically conceded in the first round. The subject is whether time travel is POSSIBLE. If Con means to answer "no," then he would have to show that time travel is NOT possible, i.e. it's impossible. But he explicitly said in the first round that he does not think it is impossible. He only thinks it's improbable. I tied conduct because although Con was rude to Pro, he was right to call Pro on the fact that he simply quoted Wikipedia and didn't write out his own arguments in his own words.