The Instigator
Zaradi
Pro (for)
Winning
29 Points
The Contender
TheMrkanyewest01
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Time Travel is possible and can be done in modern day society

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 8 votes the winner is...
Zaradi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/18/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,488 times Debate No: 23671
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (11)
Votes (8)

 

Zaradi

Pro

No, this isn't a troll debate. This is legit.

Resolution: Time travel is possible and can be done in modern day society.

I define time travel as either going forward or backwards in time. Meaning that I can either cause myself to get older (going forward in time), or cause myself to get younger (going backwards in time).

BOP is on me. First round is acceptance.
TheMrkanyewest01

Con

I accept zadaris challenge
let me inform everyone that this is my first debate
Debate Round No. 1
Zaradi

Pro

Thanks for my opponent for accepting and all that jazz. But seeing as I'm on a time envelope that's rapidly closing on me (screw my parents for taking away my laptop), I'll go ahead and skip the formalities.

Time travel has been a fantasmic thought in the heads of all of the great scientific thinkers throughout all the ages. Is there a way that we can go back in time to visit our forefathers and change history? Is there a way to go forward into the future and see where humanity will be in one hundred, five hundred years? The answer may not be buried as deep in science fiction as some may think, as the answer lays in simple physics.

Let's enter the world of time dilation for a moment. Time dilation explains a special relativity principle that explains under certain circumstances where time slows in relation to a specific frame of motion. A popular example is if I were standing in a train car, and my opponent were standing outside the train car, our views of the rays of light coming out of a lightbulb would be different, as his perspective would be in a different frame of motion from mine. When we achieve time dilation, time for us slows down and is continuing at normal pace for the rest of the world. We simply don't notice it, as our perception is limited to our frame of motion, yet we can observe it through a few different principles in quantum physics, namely the Twin Paradox.

>> The Twin Paradox <<

Let's delve into the hypothetical for a moment. Say, for example, that we have two twin brothers, aged 21. One is an astronaut, and one is not. The astronaut brother decides to go exploring the cosmos with his spaceship, and leaves earth bound for the unknown. His spaceship is going at a speed of .8c, or 80% of the speed of light (hence why I said hypothetical). He travels at the constant speed of .8c for about five years, before realizing that he really, really misses his brother! At which point he turns his ship around and travels at .8c back home, returning after a 10 year voyage. How old are both of the brothers? The simple, and seemingly correct, answer would be both would be 31, as he was gone ten years, and as they were born at the same time, so they would both be 31. But this would be incorrect, as we would need to factor in time dilation to account for the travelling of the astronaut brother. The universe literally slows down time for the brother, so while he may have felt like he was gone ten years, his brother aged massively more (I think the calculation comes out to something around 28 years gone on earth) than his space-venturing twin. But why is this true?

Nothing can go faster than the speed of light. We can get things dangerously close to the speed of light (I think the closest we've gotten on the molecular level is 99% of the speed of light), but we can never pass it, as time would stop if we were to achieve the speed of light. Let's take another hypothetical example to show where this is useful. Let's say we have a train going at 99.999% of the speed of light, or .99999c. A child gets out of her seat, and sprints down the halls of the train at the speed of .002c, or 2/10's of the speed of light. To find her total momentum, we would have to add it with the speed of the train, which would reach 100.001c, or over the speed of light. But this isn't physically possible, as we physically cannot go over the speed of light. That's why the universe slows down time in the frame of the train, to prevent this paradox from occuring. This illustrates a simple principle, that as the closer we come to approaching the speed of light, or c, the more time is slowed down in our frame of motion, or the more time is dilated.

Bringing it back to the twin paradox, since the twin was going at .8c, or 80% of the speed of light, he's being slowed down in time by a significant amount. So while he was gone for ten years, as he aged ten years, time was faster on the earth than he was in space, and it aged more than he did. But time was slower for him, as earth was still going at the 'normal' speed. What does this mean in terms of the resolution? Simple:

The answer to time travel is to go fast. Really fast.

>> Application to Modern Day <<

Now the question then becomes how can we travel fast enough to travel forward in time? Certainly we can't make something that goes 80% of the speed of light currently, at least something of size that a human can fit into, so how can we go fast enough for time to dilate? It's rather simple, just floor it the next time you're on the freeway. While you won't be going anything close to 80% of the speed of light, the faster you go, the more time dilates and the more time slows. While the difference in time may not be as drastic as 28 years, you will certainly be going at a slower speed of time in relation to the earth, thus time traveling.

So, in conclusion:

1: I have proved that time travel is, indeed, possible, using the Twin Paradox.
2: I have proved that the every day person can utilize the Twin Paradox to travel forward in time.
3: Thus, I have fulfilled both BOPs of the resolution. Affirm!

Thank you for your time.
TheMrkanyewest01

Con

Time Travel is possible but it is so sublet that it is hardly noticeable,and I will focus my argument that it cannot be done in modern day society. My opponent explain in rather complicated fashion the dynamics of time travel but he did not explain how it can be done by humans. Allow me to elaborate I am saying that time travel by human hand cannot be implemented and completed (ie a time machine that would render significant results) .As Michio Kaku a a physicist at the City University of New York has said on the subject of time travel "But that would require a technology far more advanced than anything we can muster," he said. "Don't expect any young inventor to announce tomorrow in a press release that he or she has invented a time machine in their basement." Now let me focus on my opponents believe of backwards time travel.I believe that backwards time travel is not possible,Stephen Hawking once suggested that the absence of tourists from the future is an argument against the existence of time travel—a variant of the Fermi paradox. Of course this would not prove that time travel is physically impossible, since it might be that time travel is physically possible but that it is never developed (or is cautiously never used); and even if it is developed, Hawking notes elsewhere that time travel might only be possible in a region of spacetime that is warped in the correct way, and that if we cannot create such a region until the future, then time travelers would not be able to travel back before that date, so "This picture would explain why we haven't been over run by tourists from the future."[19] Carl Sagan also once suggested the possibility that time travelers could be here, but are disguising their existence or are not recognized as time travelers.[20] An excerpt of wikipedia on time travel
Debate Round No. 2
Zaradi

Pro

From what my opponent is saying, I can discern two main points he's bringing up. I'll refute both points:

A1: Not possible to build time machine.

Apparently my opponent has misread what my stance is. I'm not advocating for the construction of some elaborate machine that, with the flip of a switch or something, will transport us back to the dinosaurs. I'm advocating for the utilization of the Twin Paradox, by just going fast, to cause time for us to slow down, thus causing the world's time to go faster than our time, thus transporting us into the 'future'.

A2: Backwards time travel is not possible.

Again, my opponent misreads my argument, although he brings up a valid point. I'll concede that backwards time travel is looking pretty unlikely, although not impossible, to happen. The problem is my advocacy is not for backwards time travel, but forwards time travel.

Since he hasn't really provided any solid proof, outside appeals to authority that lack actual warrant, to prove that time travel isn't possible and cannot be done in modern day, you can extend my case. I'm still fulfilling my BOP, and thus you can still easily affirm.
TheMrkanyewest01

Con

I concede,I cannot find any more valid arguments against your proposition. plus i don't really have time for a response against yours.
Debate Round No. 3
Zaradi

Pro

Fair enough. Give him conduct for the graceful concession and vote pro.
TheMrkanyewest01

Con

TheMrkanyewest01 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
That's what I argued.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
Forwards yes, backwards no
Posted by Callen13 4 years ago
Callen13
TheMrkanyewest01 took a smart route during round 2 in my opinion.
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
Not in that sense xD
Posted by royalpaladin 4 years ago
royalpaladin
LOL, we are always time traveling, Zaradi. :p
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
Yeah, I'll make it. But I made a mistake. My argument explains time travel to the future, not to the past. Appologies.
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
Wow, this is gonna be close. I'll have lunch period tomorrow to do this, and even that will have, like, an hour left on the time. This is gonna be close...
Posted by kyro90 4 years ago
kyro90
I love that song. NSN Forever.
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
In the non-trap way of moving forward. But I can prove backwards.
Posted by martianshark 4 years ago
martianshark
Traveling forwards in time, by that definition, is of course possible. But I have no idea how you're going to prove traveling backwards is possible.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by K.GKevinGeary 4 years ago
K.GKevinGeary
ZaradiTheMrkanyewest01Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: lol ff
Vote Placed by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
ZaradiTheMrkanyewest01Tied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro showed rather humorously that time travel is in fact possible (incredibly subtly) via time dilation. Con's concession automatically gives full arguments to Pro though, even if his arguments weren't independently convincing.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
ZaradiTheMrkanyewest01Tied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con concedes.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
ZaradiTheMrkanyewest01Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61 
Reasons for voting decision: lol
Vote Placed by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
ZaradiTheMrkanyewest01Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Good job Zaradi! I think I want to start a debate about this now...
Vote Placed by vmpire321 4 years ago
vmpire321
ZaradiTheMrkanyewest01Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: I can't wait for this. I'm definitely going to go steal the keys to my parents' car and floor it on the highway. History is going to be made...
Vote Placed by Cobo 4 years ago
Cobo
ZaradiTheMrkanyewest01Tied
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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by airmax1227 4 years ago
airmax1227
ZaradiTheMrkanyewest01Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF