Do you think it's possible?
I don't see why direction would be macroscopic, while flow remains microscopic. That sounds like a heap of ad hoc contrived postulates,...
ITT we get confused because we used English instead of maths.
Why would you say time has a direction, or flow?
Space does not have direction or flow.
> Why would you say time has a direction, or flow?
Direction: from pas to future
Flow: as your speed/mass increases, your times slows down compared to other objects.
> Space does not have direction or flow.
Direction: space has three (proven) directions, that's why we speak of 3D, three dimensions.
Flow: actually space seems to have a flow, since the universe is expanding. According to latest discoveries, this expansion (called inflation) could eventually lead to disintegration of galaxies, stars, etc,...
CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY CAUSALITY
Loud but short of arguments,...
Newtonian physics causality is independent of time direction. If time started going reverse, it would work equally well.
ITT we are wholly unfamiliar with Feynman diagrams.
>>169
No, I am talking specifically about Feynman diagrams, with time as one axis and space as the other, in which one can see plots of wonderfully counterintuitive ideas like an electron bouncing back and forth in time, turning into a positron when it's traveling backwards, and annihilating itself in a flash of gamma rays, which become an electron-positron pair that is the original electron/positron.
>>164,165
I would say time doesn't have a 'flow', because like we move through space, we move through time (if this perspective is not just a product of a weak three-dimensional brain interpreting the world the only way it can).
Unprovable philosophy and nitpicking semantics, I know, but this thread is about time travel. Complete speculation.
> space has three (proven) directions, that's why we speak of 3D, three dimensions.
Whoa, whoa -- slow down, egghead!
Wouldn't time travel backward require undoing entropy?
Not if you increase entropy as you move backwards in time,... this has already been discussed ITT
My bad... just asking.
Scientists still believe in time to such a degree that they suggest it is possible to travel through it, just because they've discovered it's just illusional.
Time and travel is the exact same thing, "time travel" is a pleonasm.
You may create such circumstances, through a variety of ways, that you may percieve you're travelling into the "future", sleeping is an easy and natural way to do this. However you cannot travel into the past because there is no such thing, there is only now, and memories of what we're doing in it in different places and other circumstances. Everything is happening at the same time everywhere, but at different locations, being observed at different places. Things are moving through distance, you're observing it through distance. You get a mental image of what you're looking at now, things move and it changes but it is still now, not in the future, and what you just saw wasn't in the past. You call that time, it's more like movement. The sun setting is movement, the universe expanding is movement, you getting older is movement. Within the limit of what speed things may travel, things may happen "faster or slower", but in the end it all comes down to how we percieve it, which is linked to the functions of our brain. It gives us an illusion of time, just as it gives illusions of colours and sounds, other things that do not actually exist.
You're all just musing over a fictional concept with your fractured apprehension of what is real.
> Scientists ... time ... discovered it's just illusional.
> illusions of colours and sounds, other things that do not actually exist.
'Scientists' have also discovered the phenomenon of your mother being so morbidly obese, the only method by which you could theoretically have escaped her reproductive organs is through thermal radiation with a black body spectrum.
>>176
lol
I guess that's your way of saying, that you think I'm wrong. Why not try to convince me instead?
If time is "illusional" then space is too. So find the frequency of the illusional vibration, put it into a computer and wire someone with it. Hop, a time/space machine. :)
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montauk_Project
>>178
nooooo!!!
The frequency of the illusion would be a non-physical energy frequency, there probably is no physical frequency. The only way to do it is to master astral pojection, probably. Very scientific.
>>179
Well, if the person can master astral projections, then he can view the past using the Akashic Records.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akashic_records
He would have no need for a time machine.
that was my point. Akashic records, or, just find the past, and go hang out in it, lol. Probably just going to the past would be a better idea... you're not really supposed to use the akashic records for entertainment.
Forgot to add-
The thing that had me interested was the possibility of there being an identifiable energy frequency... if someone could find that, it would maybe be a much more accurate way to time travel astrally, instead of just trying to do it, or ending up in the past somewhat randomly. Though then it seems likely that this frequency is alreadfy tied to the akashic records.... hmmm. Anyway, it sounds like something well worth looking into, for real scientists and astral projectors alike.
Hey guys, what do you think of this? Time travel is like a feedback loop connect back through a second dimension of time. And all the changes and paradoxes can be explained by changes that happen in the feedback loop until it stabilizes.
this is fucking idiotic
"The Cambridge physicist Professor Stephen Hawking spent much of his career attempting to prove that time travel is impossible. If it were possible, he reasoned, why have we not been visited by voyagers from the future? But he was forced to conclude that there is actually nothing in the laws of physics that prevents moving in time.
"He changed his mind about 10 years ago," said Kaku, "There was no way to ban time travel from happening. So now he says that time travel is possible, but not practical."
The way it might work would be to take a trip through a worm hole connecting one point in space and time with another. The laws of physics suggest that the intense gravity of a black hole is enough to rip the fabric of space and time, making a worm hole possible.
"What we physicists want to do is create our own wormhole so that if you walk through the looking glass you may go backwards in time," said Kaku. Stabilising a black hole would require large amounts of an exotic form of energy called negative energy, thought to be impossible. "But we can now make it in the laboratory," said Kaku."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/02/sciencenews.physicalsciences
Time doesn't actually exist, it's just a social construction to measure change. Of course time travel is not possible. Assuming the laws of the universe holds true and applies that is.
Space doesn't actually exist, it's just a social construction to measure change. Of course space travel is not possible. Assuming the laws of the universe holds true and applies that is.
>>189
Physics is just a social construction. We don't really know what is going on beyond this superficial socially constructed mathematical model for what we perceive our physical universe to be.
Time is just a concept made up by us to explain changes that happen around us. It doesn't really exist; it's just change. Causality. Which is just a concept constructed by humans. It's just a mathematical model to explain cause and effect. Therefore, time doesn't actually exist.
You're just spouting philosophical rhetoric.
Which is just a concept constructed by humans.
>>190 is just a social construction. We don't really know what is going on beyond this superficial socially constructed mathematical model for what we perceive this message board to be.
4-ch is just a concept made up by us for the lulz. It doesn't really exist; it's just change. Causality. Which is just a concept constructed by humans. It's just a mathematical model to explain cause and effect. Therefore, >>190 doesn't actually exist.
>>191
No I am not. What I am saying is the truth.
>>192
Of course I exist. I can think and I can see me, so I know I exist and I can see everything around me, so I know they exist. But physics is just mathematics which is socially constructed and not real. So you can't just say time is real by using physics as proof of it. I can't see time. I can't measure time; clocks only measure themselves, not time itself. So it really doesn't exist, it's just causality.
> I can't measure time; clocks only measure themselves, not time itself. So it really doesn't exist, it's just causality.
You can change time. That alone should give you a hint that it exists.
But you can't change causality. Thus, time and causality are distinct concepts.
It's possible.
> I can see me, so I know I exist and I can see everything around me, so I know they exist.
False. You are solely a brain suspended in a vat of fluid. Everything your experience with your senses is merely your brainself being probed with electrical charges.
I'm going to be visiting earlier in this thread to prove it's possible. Just thought you should know!
Oh, Titor! Choice performance, my friend! Choice performance indeed!
>>196
That still = the person and their surroundings existing. Simply in a different form and context than what was percieved, doesn't cancel out the existence. That's similar to saying that because people a few hundred years ago thought the world was flat, that their world didn't exist. It sure wasn't flat, but it definitely existed.
>>It sure wasn't flat, but it definitely existed.
No it didn't, it was just a social construction.
social constructions exist, duh.
Could my dong be this huge if reality was fake?
Roses are red
Violets are blue
Your dong's a social construction
And so are you
Could my dong be this huge if time travel was impossible?
it's possible, so, shoo, shoo! all of you am powtaytowes.
Is anyone here an actual time traveler?
Yes. We all are traveling in time.