Determinism and time travel?

[EyeSeeCold]

What are the popular theories on space-time / time travel? They may help resolve my thoughts here.

I was thinking about some kind of forward travel device, say if you were able to isolate yourself and skip forward through time, isn't it paradoxical that anything has progressed forward? How could events happen if they weren't given time to happen, because you jumped through time? It seems that there is a certain higher level of causal determinism present, assuming time travel is possible, that is not necessarily apparent to time perceiving beings.

Or is this not a paradox because of the 4th dimension? Everything has both happened already(4th) and is currently happening to time perceivers(3rd)?

 

[QuickTwist]

I suggest watching Donnie Darko even if you have seen it before for added inspiration.

 

[StevenM]

But isn't it already known that this happens already?

For instance, time doesn't progress at the same speed closer to the earth, as it does outside of the earth. The mass off the earth bends space time. Even though it's very minimal, the gradient differences on time that the earth made creates acceleration, or better known as 'gravity'.

How could events happen if they weren't given time to happen, because you jumped through time?

Maybe it wouldn't be possible if they weren't given 'time' to happen. But suppose a few decades happened in a warped manner of just a fraction of a millisecond. Even though brief, it is still a measurement of time.

 

[Jennywocky]

The relative aspect can be confusing. As far as human beings go, we have not developed any kind of way to move fast enough to skip ahead relative to other human beings. Perhaps there are other beings in the universe who have developed the ability to do this; it's just that for humans on earth, no one has accelerated fast enough to skip forward nor even been anywhere near a black hole or other large distortion of gravity that would change time relative to others. The time distortion only occurs noticeably right as the limit of the curve is being approached.

Of course, that kind of time travel -- is it even possible to go backwards? Everything is still moving forwards, and you can move forwards, but there's no way to go backwards that I'm aware of. Whatever moment you happen to be in relative to yourself, your sense of time is still marching ahead. And time for others is marching ahead as well, whether that's at a crawl or at a rapid pace.

 

[The Grey Man]

...is it even possible to go backwards?

You have asked one of my favorite questions. It's only one of two in this thread that requires no groundless assumptions. I love questions. I like timespace. I like this forum. I like you. I like the OP. Life is good. Ask another! That is, if you don't mind my not answering them.

Who says I have any answers anyway? Why don't people even want answers?

Haha I've reached my daily nonsense quota...which I don't have. Y'know I used to speak when I had something to say. Now my somethings are silent and my nothings are audible. I don't think I'm going in the right direction. Oh boy, ain't that just the truth...

 

[StevenM]

Of course, that kind of time travel -- is it even possible to go backwards?

I'm guessing it's not possible, basically because there is nothing there to go "back to".

It's hard for me to elaborate on my thought right now. This will probably be on my mind for awhile now.

 

[QuickTwist]

I'm guessing it's not possible, basically because there is nothing there to go "back to".

It's hard for me to elaborate on my thought right now. This will probably be on my mind for awhile now.

Just because there would be nothing to "go back to" doesn't mean it isn't possible.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I suggest watching Donnie Darko even if you have seen it before for added inspiration.

I haven't watched it yet but I see it mentioned all the time.

But isn't it already known that this happens already?

For instance, time doesn't progress at the same speed closer to the earth, as it does outside of the earth. The mass off the earth bends space time. Even though it's very minimal, the gradient differences on time that the earth made creates acceleration, or better known as 'gravity'.

Maybe it wouldn't be possible if they weren't given 'time' to happen. But suppose a few decades happened in a warped manner of just a fraction of a millisecond. Even though brief, it is still a measurement of time.

Yeah I can't wrap my head around the relativity of it, though I know that it should exist.

It's easy to imagine a person arriving to the current time. But from the perspective of the traveler, it doesn't make sense that you could travel to a time that hasn't happened yet.

I haven't ever fully studied space-time theories though so I could have erroneous concepts of time travel.

The relative aspect can be confusing. As far as human beings go, we have not developed any kind of way to move fast enough to skip ahead relative to other human beings. Perhaps there are other beings in the universe who have developed the ability to do this; it's just that for humans on earth, no one has accelerated fast enough to skip forward nor even been anywhere near a black hole or other large distortion of gravity that would change time relative to others. The time distortion only occurs noticeably right as the limit of the curve is being approached.

Of course, that kind of time travel -- is it even possible to go backwards? Everything is still moving forwards, and you can move forwards, but there's no way to go backwards that I'm aware of. Whatever moment you happen to be in relative to yourself, your sense of time is still marching ahead. And time for others is marching ahead as well, whether that's at a crawl or at a rapid pace.

The DeLorean of BTTF would be impossible right? You'd be traveling to an intangible arbitrary calender day..

I don't believe backwards time travel is possible, I looked to refrigeration for analogous phenomena. If something is frozen its processes are slowed down but not stopped or reversed, and if something is heated up then its processes are accelerated. Theoretically we could travel through time through deep sleep and cryogenics, but it isn't the acceleration type.

I remember reading about an ageless jellyfish that can revert to an earlier biological stage to regenerate and prolong its life. I suppose backwards time travel could be possible if the structure of space-time could be recorded somehow and rebuilt like genetic evolution, at the least I know the information about past events in space-time already exists because it takes light from other galaxies a long time to reach Earth.

 

[nexion]

This thread is interesting because it has a fairly simple premise but can potentially relate to a ton of different things.

Why don't people even want answers?

If you have answers, give them up. We don't even care to apply that knowledge, we just want to KNOW!

I'm guessing it's not possible, basically because there is nothing there to go "back to".

It's hard for me to elaborate on my thought right now. This will probably be on my mind for awhile now.

Perhaps some variant of presentism?

As for myself, I am more of a determinist than anything. It is certainly interesting and useful to consider the timescale as something which is malleable, where events exist as potential branches in the future with certain probabilities of occurring, but these concepts only exist in the mind. It is simply not reasonable to consider this notion to exist in any real capacity, as where would the source of humanity's ability to break from deterministic reality and start their own causal chains stem?

Assuming you don't believe that some supernatural entity has endowed man with some extraordinary attribute not shared by any other clumps of matter in this universe (which is kind of an outdated belief to have anyway), how would it ever be possible for man to develop some kind of way to operate outside the laws of everything he observes? Reality as man has seen is mostly deterministic in its underlying root, and there's no reason to believe this is not mirrored on the macro scale, with every event and how they interact having been 'preordained', or at least that every state the universe will ever be in was predetermined by the initial conditions that caused in the universe.

This is largely where I learned to be able to both know what is most true and believe what is most useful at the same time.

 

[Dormouse]

**DISCLAIMER: NO SCIENCE. FUCK SCIENCE. NOT PHYSICIST SCUM.**
Also: Wrote this assuming the 4th dimension spans time, and isn't just some extra space. idk why. Replace any mention of it with your own pet theory about how we'd transfer matter in leaps through time.

Taking the "wanton list of every concept I've ever encountered in science fiction" approach...

0. DON'T FUCK UP DON'T FUCK UP
The rare universe where you might actually destroy the human race via butterfly effect, stop Hitler, invent popsicles six decades in advance, or otherwise drastically change the future as you know it.
Here, the universe is a potentially malleable thing, that wobbles and morphs when matter is displaced in it. Perhaps it stabilizes when no travel is happening, or perhaps it's constantly oscillating, constantly altering reality in ways that are invisible to a being in the system. I like to imagine it as a block of spacetimejello, and all human memories as faulty and everchanging products of shifting chains of causality.
Note: This option requires that timetravel somehow involves exiting the jello briefly, IE exiting spacetime completely.

1. EVERYTHING IN ITS PLACE
The universe is pretty much a static block. The past has happened, the future has happened, all instances of timetravel have been accounted for. You won't change anything, no matter how hard you try. Everything is tragically prophetic. Fuck your free will, have some consolation beautiful clockwork.
Seeing as your timetravel is a predictable component of the universe, this must mean events in the 4th dimension or wherever you zoom through are also deterministic and fixed. Which opens up the possibility of a kind of mega-timetravel where you exit the 4th dimensional structure into the 5th dimension and proceed to actually alter it from the outside?? Weird.

2. MULTIVERSES LIKE RABBITS
Timetravel causes the universe to branch. The previous state is preserved somewhere in the future/past as its own timeline, and instead you generate a new world.
Seemingly gets complicated if you believe multiverse theory is already in action, all possible worlds unfolding simultaneously, but really it'll just grow new branches since your unexpected presence in the past/future will engender very new possibilities.
Again, I guess you'd be traveling through a 4th dimension.

3. LIKE A GHOST?
See "A Christmas Carol". You're on drugs or guided by some supernatural being and can view the future and past, but you're not physically present and you can't alter them in any way. Possibly a kind of cosmos in which consciousness operates on its own plane, and is not as tethered to a strict temporal progression as matter is. Oracles slot in here, somewhere.
3.1 NOT A GHOST, A MACHINE
A less paranormal interpretation where information can be transmitted across time by certain kinds of devices. Kind of a cop out unless you explain how, so... antennae into the 4th dimension? It's so nice how expanding space can explain anything away.
Still, doesn't address how timelines would/wouldn't be changed by the information which would SURELY EFFECT PEOPLE'S ACTIONS.

4. NOT ACTUAL TIMETRAVEL
Deterministic universe, supercomputer can recreate the past/predict the future in perfect resolution. You may wander through these pre/postdictions rendered as virtual reality type spaces. A lot of the time travel is restricted by a certain time frame because of the massive computation involved.
4.1 OKAY THIS IS JUST COOL BEAR WITH ME
I like the idea of generating endless virtual reality pasts/futures that people then play in and alter, creating a massive database of these many semi-possible universes and allowing for the easy illusion of timetravel. Just sounds fun.

5. LIKE, THE OPPOSITE OF CHAOS THEORY?
So you can timetravel (somehow, probably through our friend the 4th dimension) and you can change a few things, but the dreadful march of history reasserts itself very quickly after your actions. Time is a current that tiny material blips cannot redirect for more than a moment. Perhaps some key events are set in stone. Perhaps spacetime is just a shitty medium that kills the propagation of any deviance. I dunno man.

6. CREEPY BRAIN TRANSFER
Kind of an offshoot of "information/your consciousness can timetravel, but not matter", this is the bizarre scenario where you're sent back to inhabit your childhood body. Who knows how it works! Fucking crazy but I see it everywhere. Presumably limits travel to sometime during your lifespan, starting whenever you grow a noggin. Not sure where your actual childmind goes, did you kill it? Do you switch places? Does it exist consciously in parallel with no control of its body??
Other versions where you can go beyond your own lifetime by cannibalizing the existence of your ancestors, or possibly total strangers.

7. THIS JUST SOUNDED REALLY COOL

I remember reading about an ageless jellyfish that can revert to an earlier biological stage to regenerate and prolong its life. I suppose backwards time travel could be possible if the structure of space-time could be recorded somehow and rebuilt like genetic evolution, at the least I know the information about past events in space-time already exists because it takes light from other galaxies a long time to reach Earth.

Summarizing: Most versions of timetravel involve some combination of a couple of factors:
Is timetravel even possible in this cosmos? Y/N
Can you actually change anything? Y/N
Travel is: Material/Mental/Illusory

 

[EyeSeeCold]

That was stimulating to read, Dormouse. I think I like #6 and #2, number 6 though is perhaps closest to what I was thinking. The space-time line features "phases" of birth-life-death for each mass and a mass will cycle a logical phase while being able to move forward or in reverse in terms of atomic progression/regression. It's like being able to control a sports replay at will, including zooming in and out at all angles, but perceiving all of this at once maybe.



My mind produced this weird thought train earlier and I was trying to extrapolate to the 6th dimension and explain it relative to human perception. None of it sounds too sensible to post though at the moment...

Math and physics can't be the only ways to express these concepts.

Perhaps some variant of presentism?

I heaven't heard of this before, but from skimming it seems I partly agree. Only the present moment is real? The past is memories and the future is nonexistent.

 

[The Grey Man]

I like the way you laid that out, Dormouse. Explanations should simplify, not complicate.

This thread is interesting because it has a fairly simple premise but can potentially relate to a ton of different things.

Indeed.

If you have answers, give them up. We don't even care to apply that knowledge, we just want to KNOW!

...

 

[Jennywocky]

Stephen King's short story "The Jaunt" was always a bit interesting, in terms of what happens in the wormhole and why it's good to not be conscious when passing through one.

The DeLorean of BTTF would be impossible right? You'd be traveling to an intangible arbitrary calender day..

Well, remember, in reality you are not just traveling in time but in space (with the Delorean). If you just travel in time and not in space, you're going to end up floating in outer space at a location where the earth has not reached, probably millions of miles away, since everything is always moving. So you're moving in all four dimensions, and the machine would have to calculate how much distance to instantaneously travel during the actual time hop. That delorean is far more complicated than we ever imagined, to have all the coordinates necessarily to get a person not just from Time A to Time B but from Space A to Space B, in the blink of an eye.

I don't believe backwards time travel is possible, I looked to refrigeration for analogous phenomena. If something is frozen its processes are slowed down but not stopped or reversed, and if something is heated up then its processes are accelerated. Theoretically we could travel through time through deep sleep and cryogenics, but it isn't the acceleration type.

Yeah, that's not the glamorous version of time travel -- you're just stepping outside the time stream (kind of) in terms of your life processes and letting the rest of the world carry on until you wake up. For intents and purposes, you're moving ahead, though.

I remember reading about an ageless jellyfish that can revert to an earlier biological stage to regenerate and prolong its life. I suppose backwards time travel could be possible if the structure of space-time could be recorded somehow and rebuilt like genetic evolution, at the least I know the information about past events in space-time already exists because it takes light from other galaxies a long time to reach Earth.

yup, that's another interesting quirk, kind of like the cryo-suggestion you offered. No one is really 'traveling' but the limitation of light's speed across vast distance allows us to see some things as they were rather than as they are. But we can't adjust anything or look at other times -- the distance something is from us in that regard locks in our view of the "time" we are seeing.

 

[StevenM]

Of presentism:

I heaven't heard of this before, but from skimming it seems I partly agree. Only the present moment is real? The past is memories and the future is nonexistent.

It was also the first time I have heard of it as well. Before, I was just pulling as many ideas of time theory as I can together, thought lead to thought, and more theory, and I came up with "It's impossible because there is nothing there to go back to".

When I read about presentism, I thought that perhaps, it's not a good philosophy. Say I throw a ball, and we 'pause' the moment where it is in midair. If the past, or future doesn't exist, then why will the ball continue traveling in a certain determined trajectory?

Can I say that space is time and vice versa? That 1 cubic meter is not only a measurement of space, but also time? To even have a cubic meter of space, time irrevocably has to exist within it, for anything to even occupy that space or travel through it. Hard to explain, hopefully you'll intuit that out.

And we know that condensing space, also condenses time. I would think that you'd need to continually and infinitely condense the space-time until it finally reaches 'zero', or absolute nothing, and whatever lies beyond that is when you finally get to travel backwards.

Traveling through a hole that is infinitely small, or in other words, an absolute measurement of 'zero'. Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase: "It is much easier to fit a camel through the eye of a needle".

But that line of thinking was kind of absurd and may be fallacious.

***********

Another idea which was interesting. So far, I think I may believe that space/time is not boundless and infinite, but actually having both a beginning and an end.

Let us say that the universe was infinite. Yet we know that the diameter of our earth is finite. Let the diameter be x.



x / ∞ = 0

It seems in relation to a boundless universe, our earth is so infinitely small that it is absolutely nothing, or zero.

But then with the above, it's a good possibility that I overlooked something. Perhaps someone can explain the earth still being finite and something in a boundless universe.

I find this relevant and important to time travel.

 

[awm]

What if I reach the moon traveling at almost speed of light and then come back traveling at almost speed of light. I arrive in the place from where I started some hundreds of years ago, and I finish killed by a car driven by one of my descendant?

Traveling in the future is the same as traveling in the past (where I kill one of my ancestors...).

If it possible to travel time, causation has to be made safe.

So, traveling in time is possible along a path which makes safe causation.

Normal flowing of time in our perception is a view of this path.

Along this path, causation is in equilibrium.

How did this sound to you?

 

[Jennywocky]

Um, I'm not sure your incredible journey of 2.4 seconds (or whatever it is) will allow for centuries of time shift or traveling back or forward in time.

 

[awm]

Move the moon far enough.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Stephen King's short story "The Jaunt" was always a bit interesting, in terms of what happens in the wormhole and why it's good to not be conscious when passing through one.

This would have been perfect material for Cognisant's consciousness thread. Hallucinogens are probably the closest thing to experiencing 4th dimension related phenomena and what happens to the mind.

Well, remember, in reality you are not just traveling in time but in space (with the Delorean). If you just travel in time and not in space, you're going to end up floating in outer space at a location where the earth has not reached, probably millions of miles away, since everything is always moving. So you're moving in all four dimensions, and the machine would have to calculate how much distance to instantaneously travel during the actual time hop. That delorean is far more complicated than we ever imagined, to have all the coordinates necessarily to get a person not just from Time A to Time B but from Space A to Space B, in the blink of an eye.

True a time travel device that doesn't move through space would be useless, and maybe impossible. I know it's fiction and the DeLorean is assumed to be complex , it's just weird that the 4D coordinates for time travel can be calibrated to our Sun-Earth calendar system. In the vastness of the universe what does "January" even mean, or even 2015?

Yeah, that's not the glamorous version of time travel -- you're just stepping outside the time stream (kind of) in terms of your life processes and letting the rest of the world carry on until you wake up. For intents and purposes, you're moving ahead, though.


yup, that's another interesting quirk, kind of like the cryo-suggestion you offered. No one is really 'traveling' but the limitation of light's speed across vast distance allows us to see some things as they were rather than as they are. But we can't adjust anything or look at other times -- the distance something is from us in that regard locks in our view of the "time" we are seeing.

Well I mean that events that happened already are still able to be seen, and so whatever is the oldest event we can see and record - maybe there's some kind of preserved cosmic DNA and we might be able to clone the universe, or certain galaxies or stars etc as is possible with genetics.

 

[MentalBrain]

What if I reach the moon traveling at almost speed of light and then come back traveling at almost speed of light. I arrive in the place from where I started some hundreds of years ago, and I finish killed by a car driven by one of my descendant?

Traveling in the future is the same as traveling in the past (where I kill one of my ancestors...).

If it possible to travel time, causation has to be made safe.

So, traveling in time is possible along a path which makes safe causation.

Normal flowing of time in our perception is a view of this path.

Along this path, causation is in equilibrium.

How did this sound to you?

You would have had to have had kids before you left, because relativistic time travel is only future-wards.

 

[Cognisant]

Stephen King's short story "The Jaunt" was always a bit interesting, in terms of what happens in the wormhole and why it's good to not be conscious when passing through one.

That's highly unlikely, the brain is a processor and processing takes time so if the mind can experience the passage of time then that would mean all the other organs in the body would still be functioning too, so you'd come out of the other side as dust after likely asphyxiating soon after you went in.

But it's an interesting thought experiment, what would the mind become if given an eternity and no input to process?

Well since we're associative in the absence of input I guess your mind would either enter a catatonic state of hibernation as the connections wither (likely causing partial if not full memory loss) or you'd hallucinate, maybe even come to understand probability in some completely new alien way, not that you'd be able to use this revelation since your "operating system" so to speak will have been overwritten by millennia of hallucinations.

Probably the most vainly hopeful theory is that you'll dream a long and happy life before you either become lucid (a true solipsist?) or succumb to complete nonfunctionality.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I don't expect anyone to follow this but I just wanted to get it out.


What is Time? We may question its existence or acknowledge that it's measured indirectly, very much like gravity which is intrinsically linked to time, considering physics and astronomical bodies.

On Earth we measure time in a several ways. We have the calendar which follows the Earth's rotations around the Sun, and the 12/24 hour clock which follows Earth's rotations about its own axis. Both of these have something in common that is fundamental to the measurement of time - rotation. A rotation is the phenomenon of an object transitioning through phases and returning to an initial point, which may be repeated indefinitely. So a rotation requires motion and recurrence, and since our concept of time is based on rotating bodies, time thus involves movement and recurrence.

In mathematics a rotation is represented by 360°/2π radians, but circles are only two-dimensional and the universe has at least three dimensions which humans can perceive. It is the spheroid/ball then that rotates (a physical object need not be spherical but if rotated on its axis its path will be).

This is all elementary knowledge of course but altogether in context the relevance of spheres to the measurement of time is clear. Now consider space, the universe is filled with relatively gigantic spherical objects called stars and planets held together by gravity and these astronomical objects rotate and allow us to conceive time. And time is what we consider to be an element of, if not the Fourth Dimension itself.

So my question is, if the sphere can represent time, are spheres also representative of the Fourth Dimension? And what would that imply for all fields of knowledge?


Again I don't expect anyone to consider the above, but if anyone did I'd be interested in a mathematician's or astronomer's perspective to structure it, critique it etc.

Well I mean that events that happened already are still able to be seen, and so whatever is the oldest event we can see and record - maybe there's some kind of preserved cosmic DNA and we might be able to clone the universe, or certain galaxies or stars etc as is possible with genetics.

The phrase I was looking for was thermal radiation.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I'm already traveling forward through time. Backwards is the tricky part. It's like going the wrong way on the highway; All you do is crash into stuff, wreck up your car, and get huge medical bills.

 

[scenefinale]

So my question is, if the sphere can represent time, are spheres also representative of the Fourth Dimension?

I would urge you to (re)watch Stephen Hawking's Origin of the Universe. Some wonderful philosophy in said video:
http://youtu.be/nFjwXe-pXvM

Also is your other question strictly "time-travel" and not to include "perceived" time travel? Time-dilation has some pretty interesting implications when traveling near the speed of light or operating under a different gravity, it is fascinating to think of the effects one could produce in computation with such time distortion (in theory anyway).

 

[StevenM]

I'm already traveling forward through time. Backwards is the tricky part. It's like going the wrong way on the highway; All you do is crash into stuff, wreck up your car, and get huge medical bills.

I like that.

On Earth we measure time in a several ways. We have the calendar which follows the Earth's rotations around the Sun, and the 12/24 hour clock which follows Earth's rotations about its own axis. Both of these have something in common that is fundamental to the measurement of time - rotation. A rotation is the phenomenon of an object transitioning through phases and returning to an initial point, which may be repeated indefinitely. So a rotation requires motion and recurrence, and since our concept of time is based on rotating bodies, time thus involves movement and recurrence.

I wouldn't argue your point of time operating and working of a cyclic nature. In my opinion it very well could be. Although I think the way you reasoned it could be critiqued.

I think your reasoning is:
The principle nature of the workings and operation of the Universe's 'time' is cyclic and recurring because:

1) Astral bodies rotate
2) Humans designed clocks that rotate.

If I'm following your reasoning, these rotating things helps humans gauge the movement of time from a relative point, it's a good universal indication of measurement.

But I don't think that premise alone necessarily means that 'time' itself is cyclic.

For instance, I think we could also measure time as linear movement as well. For instance, hypothetically, we could measure time by the distance of how far Voyager 1 has traveled in space. (Voyager 1 travelling in a straight line out into space at a constant speed)

But you also may be right.

At first, I found it better to assume the universe was absolute and finite, a universe of space/time/matter/energy having both a beginning and an end. I assumed that because to have 'one' of anything in an infinite universe, actually equates anything relative to everything being absolutely nothing.

(x / ∞ = 0 )

It was funny with that idea, because the day after, I watched a video (which had nothing to do with this subject), and a speaker just casually mentioned the above in the exact same way. (I found it frustrating that my idea was that commonly known). But back on topic.

I read scenefinale's comment:

He (Stephen Hawking) talks much about the form spacetime takes and how it is possible for it to not have a "beginning", as opposed to how most people tend to treat it, as an "absolute".

I haven't watched Stephen Hawking's video yet, but just the fact that he could imagine the universe being infinite made me rethink my assumption.

The earth, (as it is now), had a certain likelihood to happen. The likelihood may have been extremely low (> 1 / billions to the power of billions), but the proof lies in the fact that it did have a chance of happening in the Universe, because, here we are.

Let 'x' be the odds of the earth 'happening' exactly as it is now.

x% (∞) = ∞

The way I imagine that, is everything that is occurring on this earth right now, is indeed happening in many places in the universe. In fact, there are infinite occurrences of anything that is possible happening.

Even things that were in the past.

So maybe the Universe and all it's space-time is cyclic, repeating and reoccurring.

Perhaps, (eventually, and only if continued on a linear trajectory) Voyager 1 will encounter a place in the universe where there is the same earth as we know it, and in any of it's possible events (depending on where Voyager 1 travelled).

If a linear trajectory in space is like a sine wave, where eventually you'll kind of return back to where you started, then:

Travelling back in time may not be a question of turning back the clocks, or going backwards on the sine wave. It actually may be just the question of aiming towards a certain vector in space, and going a certain distance.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I would urge you to (re)watch Stephen Hawking's Origin of the Universe. Some wonderful philosophy in said video:
http://youtu.be/nFjwXe-pXvM

Also is your other question strictly "time-travel" and not to include "perceived" time travel? Time-dilation has some pretty interesting implications when traveling near the speed of light or operating under a different gravity, it is fascinating to think of the effects one could produce in computation with such time distortion (in theory anyway).

I could've sworn you posted earlier about the Cosmos series , I'll watch that when I have some more free time but I have already started watching Hawking's presentation.


Concerning the determinism question only actual travel is relevant I believe, but time dilation is a welcomed topic as well since it's fundamentally connected. I don't have any specific thoughts on it at the moment though.

Of presentism:


It was also the first time I have heard of it as well. Before, I was just pulling as many ideas of time theory as I can together, thought lead to thought, and more theory, and I came up with "It's impossible because there is nothing there to go back to".

When I read about presentism, I thought that perhaps, it's not a good philosophy. Say I throw a ball, and we 'pause' the moment where it is in midair. If the past, or future doesn't exist, then why will the ball continue traveling in a certain determined trajectory?

I haven't read more than before, but I got the impression the presentism philosophy was supposing a perspective to understand the world. Your ball example is the classic Zeno time paradox of the arrow, so yeah I don't think it was making that mistake.

Can I say that space is time and vice versa? That 1 cubic meter is not only a measurement of space, but also time? To even have a cubic meter of space, time irrevocably has to exist within it, for anything to even occupy that space or travel through it. Hard to explain, hopefully you'll intuit that out.

And we know that condensing space, also condenses time. I would think that you'd need to continually and infinitely condense the space-time until it finally reaches 'zero', or absolute nothing, and whatever lies beyond that is when you finally get to travel backwards.

Traveling through a hole that is infinitely small, or in other words, an absolute measurement of 'zero'. Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase: "It is much easier to fit a camel through the eye of a needle".

But that line of thinking was kind of absurd and may be fallacious.

Don't you mean proportional? distance=rate*time, time = distance/rate. I'm not sure if I understand the scenario considering that, but yeah if the rate is constant condensing space would condense time as well.

***********

Another idea which was interesting. So far, I think I may believe that space/time is not boundless and infinite, but actually having both a beginning and an end.

Let us say that the universe was infinite. Yet we know that the diameter of our earth is finite. Let the diameter be x.

x / ∞ = 0


It seems in relation to a boundless universe, our earth is so infinitely small that it is absolutely nothing, or zero.

But then with the above, it's a good possibility that I overlooked something. Perhaps someone can explain the earth still being finite and something in a boundless universe.

I find this relevant and important to time travel.

Doesn't x/∞ result in an asymptote? Substitute Earth with a grain of sand, and the universe with all the sand on Earth. The ratio might approach zero, but we know very well that all the sand is finite so it isn't exactly zero.

I'm thinking that spheres might be important to the Fourth dimension, possibly in the sense that spacetime is cyclical but these are very early thoughts.

I wouldn't argue your point of time operating and working of a cyclic nature. In my opinion it very well could be. Although I think the way you reasoned it could be critiqued.

I think your reasoning is:
The principle nature of the workings and operation of the Universe's 'time' is cyclic and recurring because:

1) Astral bodies rotate
2) Humans designed clocks that rotate.

If I'm following your reasoning, these rotating things helps humans gauge the movement of time from a relative point, it's a good universal indication of measurement.

But I don't think that premise alone necessarily means that 'time' itself is cyclic.

For instance, I think we could also measure time as linear movement as well. For instance, hypothetically, we could measure time by the distance of how far Voyager 1 has traveled in space. (Voyager 1 travelling in a straight line out into space at a constant speed)

But you also may be right.

How are we measuring? The distance may be linear but the method in which we measure speed(distance divided by rate) may not be. Even by intuitive counting we get a feel for the cyclical "rhythm".

I would agree it's an interesting example though. If two spaceships were traveling alongside each other, there would be an experience of time dilation that doesn't have anything to do with cycles/rotation that I can think of.

At first, I found it better to assume the universe was absolute and finite, a universe of space/time/matter/energy having both a beginning and an end. I assumed that because to have 'one' of anything in an infinite universe, actually equates anything relative to everything being absolutely nothing.

(x / ∞ = 0 )

It was funny with that idea, because the day after, I watched a video (which had nothing to do with this subject), and a speaker just casually mentioned the above in the exact same way. (I found it frustrating that my idea was that commonly known). But back on topic. (I believe these two paragraphs are covered in the first set of quotes.)

I read scenefinale's comment:


I haven't watched Stephen Hawking's video yet, but just the fact that he could imagine the universe being infinite made me rethink my assumption.

The earth, (as it is now), had a certain likelihood to happen. The likelihood may have been extremely low (> 1 / billions to the power of billions), but the proof lies in the fact that it did have a chance of happening in the Universe, because, here we are.

Let 'x' be the odds of the earth 'happening' exactly as it is now.

x% (∞) = ∞

The way I imagine that, is everything that is occurring on this earth right now, is indeed happening in many places in the universe. In fact, there are infinite occurrences of anything that is possible happening.

Even things that were in the past.

So maybe the Universe and all it's space-time is cyclic, repeating and reoccurring.

Perhaps, (eventually, and only if continued on a linear trajectory) Voyager 1 will encounter a place in the universe where there is the same earth as we know it, and in any of it's possible events (depending on where Voyager 1 travelled).

If a linear trajectory in space is like a sine wave, where eventually you'll kind of return back to where you started, then:

Travelling back in time may not be a question of turning back the clocks, or going backwards on the sine wave. It actually may be just the question of aiming towards a certain vector in space, and going a certain distance.

Is this related to multiverse theory? Regardless I like it, I don't have anything to say about the possibility of different life elsewhere, but I find it hard to believe there aren't solar systems similar to the Sun and Earth.

 

[StevenM]

I haven't read more than before, but I got the impression the presentism philosophy was supposing a perspective to understand the world. Your ball example is the classic Zeno time paradox of the arrow, so yeah I don't think it was making that mistake.

I'll have to read and think more about those things.

Don't you mean proportional? distance=rate*time, time = distance/rate. I'm not sure if I understand the scenario considering that, but yeah if the rate is constant condensing space would condense time as well.

I was just playing with the idea that whatever makes up the substance of space, also makes the substance of time. That space is time, and time is space.

My reasoning was, if we were to have a certain block of space, it is impossible to not also have a certain block of time with it. If you wanted a certain block of time, it is impossible not to have a certain amount of space also accompanying it.

I was playing with that idea to try to understand what 'time' even is. Perhaps a blob of time, is the exact same thing as a blob of space.

Doesn't x/∞ result in an asymptote? Substitute Earth with a grain of sand, and the universe with all the sand on Earth. The ratio might approach zero, but we know very well that all the sand is finite so it isn't exactly zero.

Oh crap, you are right. I guess dividing by infinity is not good, because it's being treated as a number. Also, my mathematical expression doesn't equate too well at all.

I'm going to have to wrap my head around limits a bit better.

Is this related to multiverse theory? Regardless I like it, I don't have anything to say about the possibility of different life elsewhere, but I find it hard to believe there aren't solar systems similar to the Sun and Earth.

That was just me trying to play with the non-defined aspect of infinity. I thought if space really doesn't have an end, and that it just keeps going on and on forever and ever and ever, then eventually things must repeat themselves.

Because it was too hard for me to understand there only being 'one' out of infinite.

But now I'm thinking my whole idea has crumbled. Perhaps I was wrong again, and indeed, it is possible to have 'one' of something that never ends.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I would urge you to (re)watch Stephen Hawking's Origin of the Universe. Some wonderful philosophy in said video:
http://youtu.be/nFjwXe-pXvM

Although the presented concepts were condensed and simplified on the whole what Hawking discussed seemed to relate to what I mentioned earlier about time/the 4th Dimension being spherical.

Richard Feynman's sum of histories was also included in the presentation, this gave me a hint of (perhaps undeserved) certainty about my idea of the dimensions but I still have trouble with conceiving a way to verbalize it without it seeming way too quacky to me.

In short I guess I imagine that each dimension encapsulates infinite manifestations of the previous. So travel along the 4th dimensional plane would allow returning to a previous or future (causally predetermined) state of something which would be time travel. 5th dimensional travel would allow seeing all possible future states of something, or multiverses/the sum of histories; it would be as if explorers had fully mapped out their time traveling experiments, this is also where I believe quantum mechanics would lie.


Anyway thanks for the video scenefinale and thanks to anyone who commented, I have enjoyed reading your thoughts so far.

 

[QuickTwist]

If I might add...

I believe that one of the dimensions there does not contain time, matter, or sense in any true sense of the word. I believe it would be a constant infinity, where things both are constantly the same and ever changing. It would be an impossible place to get to because a thing called life is not even a relative experience there, but rather it would go beyond life, death, the whole of what we experience.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

If I might add...

I believe that one of the dimensions there does not contain time, matter, or sense in any true sense of the word. I believe it would be a constant infinity, where things both are constantly the same and ever changing. It would be an impossible place to get to because a thing called life is not even a relative experience there, but rather it would go beyond life, death, the whole of what we experience.

If nothing exists then what are the things that are constantly changing?

It's possible higher dimensions exist where there is "nothing" but it wouldn't be true nothing. To us things are finite, but also we can see the spectrum of different things in the universe like stars, oceans, ants, mountains, electricity etc. You know how light cast upon a prism becomes divided into several colors? Sort of like that. Or how on smaller scales of magnification there are only atoms and other subatomic particles.