Total Posts:42|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page

# Backward time travel impossible?

 Posts: 59 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PMPosted: 3 years agoDoesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going back in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.
 Posts: 1,166 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going back in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.
 Posts: 2,621 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/29/2016 2:35:45 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going back in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.Future time travel is quite possible but also quite impractical"Hate begets hate"
 Posts: 59 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.
 Posts: 10,593 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/29/2016 10:28:11 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going back in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.I agree. Either theoretically impossible or beyond the practical technology of any intelligence which ever arises in the future.If there are any intelligent species alive at the heat death of the universe they would come back to colonize the early universe as a way to escape their fate, if it were possible. We see no evidence of that.Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
 Posts: 13,644 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/30/2016 12:20:28 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going back in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.Making time go backwards would mean making the entire universe go backwards, that's not going to happen.Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung There would be peace if you obeyed us.~Uncung Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
 Posts: 3,730 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/30/2016 1:01:51 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going back in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.Maybe in the future they can time travel back but they find us and our time too uninteresting to come back to. My guess is "wasting time" and "being bored" are not the goals of the time travel program.It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
 Posts: 1,166 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/30/2016 3:28:01 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.ME: Theoretically If you traveled at a bit more than the speed of light, you could go to the moon and come back to shake hands with yourself before you left. however, I can't agree that you could travel to a place that does not yet exist, even though we are traveling into the future every nano-second or less.
 Posts: 683 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/30/2016 4:47:29 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/30/2016 3:28:01 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.ME: Theoretically If you traveled at a bit more than the speed of light, you could go to the moon and come back to shake hands with yourself before you left. however, I can't agree that you could travel to a place that does not yet exist, even though we are traveling into the future every nano-second or less.Under relativistic time dilation you are not traveling to a place that does not yet exist. You are traveling to a frame of reference where time moves slower. If you travel at nearly the speed of light relative to the Earth, you could come back to Earth and find that 1 year has passed for you, but 10 years have passed on the Earth. Or 100 years, or 1000, or 1 billion or more, depending on how close you traveled to the speed of light, and for how long.
 Posts: 1,106 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.
 Posts: 59 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/30/2016 10:12:49 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.As you slow down the less time dialation occurs, its doesnt reverse.
 Posts: 10,593 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/30/2016 10:15:36 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.No. That would be travelling into the past.Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
 Posts: 10,593 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 6/30/2016 10:22:51 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/30/2016 3:28:01 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.ME: Theoretically If you traveled at a bit more than the speed of light, you could go to the moon and come back to shake hands with yourself before you left.No. Even if you could travel instantaneously to the Moon and back you could not do that. That would be time travel into the past.however, I can't agree that you could travel to a place that does not yet exist, even though we are traveling into the future every nano-second or less.You are always in a place which exists regardless of the temporal speed at which you are travelling.Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
 Posts: 1,106 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/1/2016 9:31:55 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/30/2016 10:15:36 PM, dee-em wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.No. That would be travelling into the past.Not really; you need to understand that time dilation isn't really time travel. What's more, it's more like slowing time than going back.
 Posts: 1,106 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/1/2016 9:41:13 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/30/2016 10:12:49 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.As you slow down the less time dialation occurs, its doesnt reverse.No; it does reverse. "The paradoxical aspect of the twins' situation arises from the fact that at any given moment the travelling twin's clock is running slow in the earthbound twin's inertial frame, but based on the relativity principle one could equally argue that the earthbound twin's clock is running slow in the travelling twin's inertial frame. One proposed resolution is that the earthbound twin is at rest in the same inertial frame throughout the journey, while the travelling twin is not: in the simplest version of the thought-experiment the travelling twin switches at the midpoint of the trip from being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in one direction (away from the earth) to being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in the opposite direction (towards the earth)."Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org...
 Posts: 10,593 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/1/2016 12:34:39 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/1/2016 9:31:55 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/30/2016 10:15:36 PM, dee-em wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.No. That would be travelling into the past.Not really; you need to understand that time dilation isn't really time travel. What's more, it's more like slowing time than going back.I understand that. I was disputing your statement "time dilation reverses and you end up back where you started". I took you to mean that whatever time dilation was experienced when travelling at a sizable fraction of c, it is then reversed once speed drops back down to rest. Time dilation cannot be reversed unless backwards time travel is possible. If that is not what you meant then you may need to clarify on exactly what you were trying to say.Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
 Posts: 10,593 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/1/2016 12:52:00 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/1/2016 9:41:13 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/30/2016 10:12:49 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.As you slow down the less time dialation occurs, its doesnt reverse.No; it does reverse. "The paradoxical aspect of the twins' situation arises from the fact that at any given moment the travelling twin's clock is running slow in the earthbound twin's inertial frame, but based on the relativity principle one could equally argue that the earthbound twin's clock is running slow in the travelling twin's inertial frame. One proposed resolution is that the earthbound twin is at rest in the same inertial frame throughout the journey, while the travelling twin is not: in the simplest version of the thought-experiment the travelling twin switches at the midpoint of the trip from being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in one direction (away from the earth) to being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in the opposite direction (towards the earth)."Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org...The direction of travel reverses. Time dilation occurs on both the outward journey and the inward journey. Nothing in what you quoted supports your assertion that time dilation reverses (presumably you mean they cancel out). You are misinterpreting what the text is saying and such a notion is refuted by observation and experiment.Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
 Posts: 1,106 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/1/2016 1:11:53 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/1/2016 12:34:39 PM, dee-em wrote:At 7/1/2016 9:31:55 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/30/2016 10:15:36 PM, dee-em wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.No. That would be travelling into the past.Not really; you need to understand that time dilation isn't really time travel. What's more, it's more like slowing time than going back.I understand that. I was disputing your statement "time dilation reverses and you end up back where you started". I took you to mean that whatever time dilation was experienced when travelling at a sizable fraction of c, it is then reversed once speed drops back down to rest. Time dilation cannot be reversed unless backwards time travel is possible. If that is not what you meant then you may need to clarify on exactly what you were trying to say.It seems that you're confused between "time dilation reverses" and "time reverses"; I'm talking here about the former.
 Posts: 1,106 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/1/2016 1:13:05 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/1/2016 12:52:00 PM, dee-em wrote:At 7/1/2016 9:41:13 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/30/2016 10:12:49 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.As you slow down the less time dialation occurs, its doesnt reverse.No; it does reverse. "The paradoxical aspect of the twins' situation arises from the fact that at any given moment the travelling twin's clock is running slow in the earthbound twin's inertial frame, but based on the relativity principle one could equally argue that the earthbound twin's clock is running slow in the travelling twin's inertial frame. One proposed resolution is that the earthbound twin is at rest in the same inertial frame throughout the journey, while the travelling twin is not: in the simplest version of the thought-experiment the travelling twin switches at the midpoint of the trip from being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in one direction (away from the earth) to being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in the opposite direction (towards the earth)."Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org...The direction of travel reverses. Time dilation occurs on both the outward journey and the inward journey. Nothing in what you quoted supports your assertion that time dilation reverses (presumably you mean they cancel out). You are misinterpreting what the text is saying and such a notion is refuted by observation and experiment.What I mean is this: The effect of time dilation reverses until it is nullified. Why do you take issue with this statement?
 Posts: 10,593 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/3/2016 1:46:13 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/1/2016 1:11:53 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 7/1/2016 12:34:39 PM, dee-em wrote:At 7/1/2016 9:31:55 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/30/2016 10:15:36 PM, dee-em wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.No. That would be travelling into the past.Not really; you need to understand that time dilation isn't really time travel. What's more, it's more like slowing time than going back.I understand that. I was disputing your statement "time dilation reverses and you end up back where you started". I took you to mean that whatever time dilation was experienced when travelling at a sizable fraction of c, it is then reversed once speed drops back down to rest. Time dilation cannot be reversed unless backwards time travel is possible. If that is not what you meant then you may need to clarify on exactly what you were trying to say.It seems that you're confused between "time dilation reverses" and "time reverses"; I'm talking here about the former.I still have no idea what you mean by "time dilation reverses". Time dilation is cumulative. It does not reverse. You will need to clarify.Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
 Posts: 10,593 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/3/2016 1:53:09 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/1/2016 1:13:05 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 7/1/2016 12:52:00 PM, dee-em wrote:At 7/1/2016 9:41:13 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/30/2016 10:12:49 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.As you slow down the less time dialation occurs, its doesnt reverse.No; it does reverse. "The paradoxical aspect of the twins' situation arises from the fact that at any given moment the travelling twin's clock is running slow in the earthbound twin's inertial frame, but based on the relativity principle one could equally argue that the earthbound twin's clock is running slow in the travelling twin's inertial frame. One proposed resolution is that the earthbound twin is at rest in the same inertial frame throughout the journey, while the travelling twin is not: in the simplest version of the thought-experiment the travelling twin switches at the midpoint of the trip from being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in one direction (away from the earth) to being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in the opposite direction (towards the earth)."Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org...The direction of travel reverses. Time dilation occurs on both the outward journey and the inward journey. Nothing in what you quoted supports your assertion that time dilation reverses (presumably you mean they cancel out). You are misinterpreting what the text is saying and such a notion is refuted by observation and experiment.What I mean is this: The effect of time dilation reverses until it is nullified. Why do you take issue with this statement?It's your use of the word "reverses" which is confusing. I think what you really mean is that time dilation ceases once the traveller slows down and comes to rest. Correct?Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
 Posts: 1,106 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/3/2016 3:37:35 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/3/2016 1:46:13 AM, dee-em wrote:At 7/1/2016 1:11:53 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 7/1/2016 12:34:39 PM, dee-em wrote:At 7/1/2016 9:31:55 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/30/2016 10:15:36 PM, dee-em wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.No. That would be travelling into the past.Not really; you need to understand that time dilation isn't really time travel. What's more, it's more like slowing time than going back.I understand that. I was disputing your statement "time dilation reverses and you end up back where you started". I took you to mean that whatever time dilation was experienced when travelling at a sizable fraction of c, it is then reversed once speed drops back down to rest. Time dilation cannot be reversed unless backwards time travel is possible. If that is not what you meant then you may need to clarify on exactly what you were trying to say.It seems that you're confused between "time dilation reverses" and "time reverses"; I'm talking here about the former.I still have no idea what you mean by "time dilation reverses". Time dilation is cumulative. It does not reverse. You will need to clarify.What I mean is the effect of time dilation reverses.
 Posts: 1,106 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/3/2016 3:39:43 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/3/2016 1:53:09 AM, dee-em wrote:At 7/1/2016 1:13:05 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 7/1/2016 12:52:00 PM, dee-em wrote:At 7/1/2016 9:41:13 AM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/30/2016 10:12:49 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/30/2016 5:39:25 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:At 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:At 6/29/2016 1:24:10 AM, Peternosaint wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going bacyk in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.ME: I would "Guess" that it is as logically impossible as future travel, the future has not happened, so there is no destination and the past has gone and can not be recovered.well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.This is somewhat true; but when you slow back down again, the time dilation reverses, and you end up back where you started.As you slow down the less time dialation occurs, its doesnt reverse.No; it does reverse. "The paradoxical aspect of the twins' situation arises from the fact that at any given moment the travelling twin's clock is running slow in the earthbound twin's inertial frame, but based on the relativity principle one could equally argue that the earthbound twin's clock is running slow in the travelling twin's inertial frame. One proposed resolution is that the earthbound twin is at rest in the same inertial frame throughout the journey, while the travelling twin is not: in the simplest version of the thought-experiment the travelling twin switches at the midpoint of the trip from being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in one direction (away from the earth) to being at rest in an inertial frame with velocity in the opposite direction (towards the earth)."Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org...The direction of travel reverses. Time dilation occurs on both the outward journey and the inward journey. Nothing in what you quoted supports your assertion that time dilation reverses (presumably you mean they cancel out). You are misinterpreting what the text is saying and such a notion is refuted by observation and experiment.What I mean is this: The effect of time dilation reverses until it is nullified. Why do you take issue with this statement?It's your use of the word "reverses" which is confusing. I think what you really mean is that time dilation ceases once the traveller slows down and comes to rest. Correct?Yes; correct. What I'm probably regarding is the differential of the time dilation.
 Posts: 13,644 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/3/2016 4:05:27 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/3/2016 3:37:35 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:What I mean is the effect of time dilation reverses.We must remember that the concept of time dilation is not valid within a single reference frame, but must be observed and compared to another reference frame. For example, if we are in a ship traveling at near light speeds, our own reference frame inside the ship is completely normal for us, no time dilation is being observed because there is no other reference frame from which to compare. It is only when we compare our reference frame to one that isn't moving a near light speeds do we observe time dilation.Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung There would be peace if you obeyed us.~Uncung Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
 Posts: 1,106 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/3/2016 5:28:55 PMPosted: 3 years agoAt 7/3/2016 4:05:27 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:At 7/3/2016 3:37:35 PM, KthulhuHimself wrote:What I mean is the effect of time dilation reverses.We must remember that the concept of time dilation is not valid within a single reference frame, but must be observed and compared to another reference frame. For example, if we are in a ship traveling at near light speeds, our own reference frame inside the ship is completely normal for us, no time dilation is being observed because there is no other reference frame from which to compare. It is only when we compare our reference frame to one that isn't moving a near light speeds do we observe time dilation.Of course.
 Posts: 8,122 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/3/2016 9:05:06 PMPosted: 3 years agoStephen Hawking suggested backward time travel might only be possible to times after the time machine was constructed, so if my current experiments are successful later today, we will suddenly be overrun by time-tourists from the future, as they'll all want to go back as far as they can.
 Posts: 10,593 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/5/2016 2:49:13 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/30/2016 1:01:51 AM, Sidewalker wrote:At 6/28/2016 10:55:32 PM, Internet wrote:Doesn't the simple fact that we have never seen a time traveler prove that its impossible? If we consider that there are an infinite number of possible timelines, one would think that, logically, atleast one of them would produce a time traveler at some point. But since no time traveler has appeared, it would seem going back in time would be impossible in any possible timeline. At the very least, it seems safe to assume there is no possibilty of a time traveler visiting me before I posted this, since it didnt happen, in this timeline.Maybe in the future they can time travel back but they find us and our time too uninteresting to come back to. My guess is "wasting time" and "being bored" are not the goals of the time travel program.Hmmm. Show me an archaeologist and I'll show you someone who would give his right arm to be able to go back in time.Which leads me to religion. How many Christians and Muslims and Budhists do you think there might be who would be eager to see Jesus (assuming he is historical) and Mohammed and the Budha in the flesh? You would be fighting them off with sticks.Lying and/or abusive trolls on permanent ignore: ethang5, skipsaweirdo, dsjpk5, Polytheist_Witch, Studio-B, TKDB, Factseeker, graceofgod.
 Posts: 982 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/5/2016 3:33:19 AMPosted: 3 years agoAt 6/29/2016 3:21:01 PM, Internet wrote:well if one travels fast enough time dialation occurs, and that could be kind of like traveling into the future.Time dilation is a false concept. When you travel fast the clock may slow down but time doesn't. Its the mechanical pressure of the aether that slows the clock down. Relativity is illogical nonsense.
 Posts: 8,122 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/5/2016 3:26:20 PMPosted: 3 years agoRelativity is illogical nonsense.I completely agree. And so is QM. Unfortunately they're true, so the absurdity of reality is something you just have to get used to.
 Posts: 8,122 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 7/5/2016 3:38:55 PMPosted: 3 years agoWhich leads me to religion. How many Christians and Muslims and Budhists do you think there might be who would be eager to see Jesus (assuming he is historical) and Mohammed and the Budha in the flesh? You would be fighting them off with sticks.I think I'd prefer the dinosaur era. The historical Jesus would probably be a bit of a disappointment, being probably being a Mediterranean verson of L. Ron Hubbard. But a real live T. Rex would be a real treat.Perhaps we can sell religious types one-way tickets?