Is time travel possible, if so what would the rules most likely be?
First rule of time club is; you don't talk about time club.
>>7649319
What I went back in time and changed the rules?
sleep tight nigger
>>7649303
You can travel time, at the rate of one second per second.
>>7649667
pretty much best answer
>>7649303
Yes it is possible
Rules: You can't go backwards and you can't travel faster than 1s/1s
Since going back in time almost necessitates bringing the universe to a lower entropy state, you probably need to find a way to reduce absolute entropy of the universe to go back in time and restore things "the way they were".
I don't have any proof (and don't know how I would prove it), but it seems sensible.
>>7649303
The rules would most likely be you can only travel forward, and at a rate that negatively correlates with your absolute velocity, but never reaches 0.
>>7649303
Yes.
Rules are: You can only travel forwards.
Exposure and proximity to enormous gravity slows time for the exposed.
Still, being able to travel forwards in time could be useful although it is unfeasible since there are no such gravity rich places close enough to Earth for us to travel to them.
>>7649303
Is it possible to time travel backwards?
>>7650856
Theoretically yes, but most likely no.
How are dry ice and green lasers going to send him back in time?
>>7650908
Two options.
A. He isn't going anywhere because dry ice and green lasers won't do shit.
or
B. He knows something we don't.
>>7651029
bu-but green lasers
>building a time machine to see your dead father
of all the infinite possibilities that time travel would allow, this guy just wants to see his dead father? you could travel back in time, and learn about extinct species firsthand, you could go forward in time and figure out what humanity's next big fuck up is and how to stop it, there are literally limitless possibilities, and this fuck just wants to say hey to pops? what a waste
>>7649680
>you can't travel faster than 1s/1s
You can though.
>>7651371
Maybe it's a time loop, and he needs to go back in time to tell his father to write down the time travel equations he discovered before he dies, so the son can continue his work and build his time machine.
>>7651029
Maybe it's just bait for his future self. Like, he's only posing in this retarded picture so that the regret will drive him to create a time machine solely to travel back in time and stop himself from posing in said photo. Thereby he is in fact creating a time machine in the picture.
>>7651572
How?
(you can't)
>>7651900
We've literally already done it, look up time dilation
>>7649303
I can't pick up my car keys in an empty spot. Be it happened a second ago. The past does not exist anymore.
>>7651974
But that doesn't answer the type of travel in OP I fucked it
>>7651964
You're retarded. In your reference frame, you always travel at 1s/1s.
>>7651987
But that's literally what time travel is. It's when time travels at different speeds in different reference frames. That's how it's always depicted in fiction - traveling 30 years into the future doesn't cause one to age 30 years.
How do you travel to somewhere that doesn't exist? The past does not exist anywhere, not even as information. If it did exist as information, you could hypothetically use said information to reconstruct the past, just like information is used to reconstruct a song or a video. It doesn't though, and therefore it's completely impossible to travel to the past barring the very, very low possibility of the past's existence elsewhere within the universe.
Travelling to the future is a lot easier though. At any one instance, you are a pattern / set of parts. Atoms, elementary particles, whatever scale you want to use, this pattern can be logged as information. Once this pattern has been logged as information, you are killed and time goes on as usual. Some time in the future, you are reconstructed 1:1 using the previously logged information and you become existent once again. From your perspective, no time passed whatsoever. One moment you were in the year X, and the very next instance you are in the year Y.
Time travel to past, no
Time travel to future, yes
>>7652074
Why would time be different from other dimensions in this respect? A town 20 miles to the east doesn't cease to exist once you leave it, so why should a moment 20 hours ago cease to exist when you leave it?
>>7652080
Because the parts that make up that moment have underwent time / change and now constitute another moment. The town of 20 hours ago ceases to exist as the parts are no longer in the exact arrangement / pattern that equalled to that past moment. They are now in a different arrangement, and thus a new town that is very similar to the past town now exists. That particular town of the past is nowhere to be found throughout the entirety of existence as there is no arrangement / set of parts in place for it to exist.
>>7652080
But you're not visiting time you are consuming it.
A better way to look at it would be
>I ate a steak 2 hours ago, why can't I eat the steak again?
>>7652092
Isn't it just a problem of frame of reference? A being which could travel through time would be able to witness the ageing process the way we observe scenery as we drive down the road.
>>7652092 according to the 4th dimension all time exists at an instant, it's our brains that interpret time in a straight order. If you were able to transcend outside of the 3rd dimension then you would be able to visit any time, kind of like standing back and watching time flow.
>>7652102
I've always liked the illustration that according to relativity time isn't like a river its like pages in a book. Every observer lives on their own page, the only way to move between pages is to travel faster than light.
I believe it was Gödel who first used this illustration or something similar. Talking about shifting your frame of reference reminded me of it.
>>7651029
>>7650908
If this is the time machine I think it is, then the dry ice is just for the pic to see the lasers.
The lasers are arranged in a spiral such that the momentum warps space time in a spiral which should according to him causes frame dragging which would make a tunnel such that an object inside the tunnel traveling at light speed or slower would travel faster than light relative the the outside on the tunnel. This tunnel can then be used to go back in time.
Ive never seen the GR equations for such a geometry so im not sure if it will work the way he thinks.
>>7650856
absolutely, will anyone ever figure out how to do it?
nah.
>>7649303
>Is it possible?
Yes, by being alive you are travelling through time
>What are the rules?
You can't go backward in time, all you can do is make a copy of your universe and set your start point anywhere you want.
>>7651987
you’re retarded. on your reference frame time would always be 1 fast, even if you went backwards. we measure that change from an outside frame, usually from the surface of the earth. what you say is like saying you can never travel more than 0 meters because that’s how much the distance between you and yourself will always be
Superdeterminism - your travel back in time and your modification of a chain of causality is included in the 'script' of the universe. This is believed to explain quantum entanglement with a non-local variable.
But there's more to it than that. Time travel is possible because certain thermodynamic states are reversible, and can be said to oscillate back and forth between two extremes in 'equilibrium.'
A white hole is a black hole at a different point in time. Hawking radiation is the white hole - what goes into the black hole at one point in time is emitted as hawking radiation at a later point in time. The radiation would be emitted as a jet, which would expand until it erupted into two balls at astronomical distances which lagged behind the poles. These two white holes would eventually turn into black holes, and emit two more white holes. Rotation complicates this, and allows the creation of more than two white holes.
Note that galaxies have black holes at their centers - the stars and dust surrounding them are white holes. Since certain parts of this process are reversible, you get a web of holes that change from black to white.
Some people have conjectured that all particles are black holes, including dark matter and dark energy. Very light black-white holes would turn on and off in less than a second - very heavy ones would oscillate over the course of trillions of years or much, much longer.
When you enter a black hole, you're emitted as a jet of super-fast particles from it's poles. Since two black holes oscillate, what's happening is that traffic is going all in one direction, and than changing to go all in the other direction. The lighter, sparser region is the white hole - the heavier, denser region is the black hole.
However, mass bends space, and rainbow gravity suggests that momentum does too. There's no distance between the two holes - quantum entanglement. The faster they go, the closer their destination gets.
>>7652379
Moreover, what this means is that which hole is which is a matter of perspective - each hole will observe the other to be the black hole. The space we see as dark is light in another time, while our light space is dark during that time. To speak of time at this point as if it had a front and a back makes no sense - it's really a pattern of kinetic energy transfer through a fluid of varying properties. The pattern vibrates off itself forever.
Also, it should be remembered that not all holes would emit from two poles - a given hole could be a dipole, or it could be a N or S pole. A wormhole is composed of two monopolar holes, which form a dipole pair and which each oscillate between being the N and S pole.
One of the features of black holes is that they would compress fermions down to the pauli limit, resulting in maximum pressure, which would result in a very high rigidity. Despite the pressure, the speed of sound in such objects would be very high - neutron stars are predicted to have very high speeds of sound as well.
It's the speed of sound that determines the group velocity of a medium. Group velocities higher than c have been observed, along with negative velocities. Thus, the perfectly ridged rod required for FTL rod logic exists - infinite group velocities were measured.
These rods would also be extremely strong, despite being very thin. They could stretch for infinite distances. The universe is, in fact, a single cord woven around itself into at 3D tapestry - entropy is it's fraying. By changing it's diameter, it functions as all particles at all times. Any given moment exists forever in perfect stasis - it's your movement down the cord that produces the sensation of time.
The fate of a particle - or a human - to go back in time is part of a seeming loop-back from your perspective. Black holes are a metaphor for short distances on the cord - it takes less time to cross them.
>>7652379
>>7652380
Pseudoscience: the post, the experience, the board.
Go back to /x/. Hawking radiation is not confirmed to be real and even if it is isn't a white hole, the energy is emmited very very slowly over time.
Infinite group/phase velocities do not allow FTL communication this has already been tested quite a bit.
This whole post is just nuts.
>>7652581
>Hawking radiation is not confirmed to be real
>http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v10/n11/full/nphys3104.html
>Observation of self-amplifying Hawking radiation in an analogue black-hole laser
Yes, it is. And moreover, we can create it - which relates to my post in the sense that everything I'm talking about presumes intelligent control of the physical processes being discussed.
>http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-bounce-could-make-black-holes-explode-1.15573
>Black holes might end their lives by transforming into their exact opposite — 'white holes' that explosively pour all the material they ever swallowed into space, say two physicists
>The theory suggests that the transition from black hole to white hole would take place right after the initial formation of the black hole
>If the authors are correct, tiny black holes that formed during the very early history of the Universe would now be ready to pop off like firecrackers and might be detected as high-energy cosmic rays or other radiation
>and even if it is isn't a white hole, the energy is emmited very very slowly over time
Subjectively, you enter the white hole and get emitted instantly.
>Infinite group/phase velocities do not allow FTL communication this has already been tested quite a bit
>http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/FTL.html#4
>In practice the effect of hitting one end of the stick propagates along it at the speed of sound in the material
>http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/90/1/10.1063/1.2423240
>The results confirm recent theoretical predictions that faster-than-light group velocity propagation of sound is possible. Further, the results show that the spectral rephasing achieved in a loop filter is sufficient to produce negative group velocities independent of the phase velocity of the spectral components themselves
The group of particles can be hit on end A, and end B will respond faster than light - or even before end B gets hit.
My understanding is that this won't work. As whilst time dilation would allow you to travel forwards in time relative to the earth, travelling backwards would be impossible.
>>7652379
>Superdeterminism
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Dropped.
>>7649303
Time is a thing that is hard to understand.
Right now you are traveling through time at a certain speed relative to everything els.
It's often argumentet that you can not travle back in time, but with little known knowledge of the subject, there might be possiblities through wormholes although this is but a speculation.
So far it has been ruled out to be able to travle back, but you never know.
To travel forward in time, just require that the speed of time for you, is slower than for everybody els relatively.
So if you were to be moving at 0.9999 the speed of light, time elswhere would move fast relative to you, but not to the people who are elswhere. Time feels the same wherever you are, but it may be moving at a different speed
>>7653380
I didn't say group/phase velocities faster than light are impossible, I know they are possible, I said they can't be used to communicate FTL. Research has confirmed this. Changing the wave on one end does not instantly change it on the other end.
And I know about the lab test of Hawking radiation but that's hardly proof, they made something similar in a lab and behaved the way the theory predicted, that's evidence but its not proof. Until they detect it for real coming from an actual black hole its not confirmed. They're still working on doing this.
And regardless of all that your post is riddled with meta physical garbage and that's what I really take issue with. Even if Hawking radiation is true, which I think it probably is, that doesn't equal
>super derteminism and time travel confirmed real!!!!
>>7649319
Top kek
>>7654319
I found out how to time travel. Massive objects bend spacetime, so we just need her breasts, and that should work.
>>7654357
Oh you
Neither the past nor the future exist. You can't travel through time for the same reason I can't book a flight to Zugannaland - it's not real.
>>7654386
>Time isn't real
You wot m8
>>7650842
>Absolute velocity
Correct ur own ass
>>7652104
Ahahah out of 3D is a 6D hyperspace, time is a separate dimension.
![tc65863_james-watt--james-wat[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/EZVwX3h.jpg "tc65863_james-watt--james-wat[1].jpg")
>>7649303
wat?
If you could go back to one point in your life and do it differently, what would it be?
>>7654386
yea but there's the theory that all time exists at an instant and our brains are the things that put it together in an understandable order.
>>7649303
I thought the guy in pic related was slim jim from rae sremmurd for a second
Is falling asleep a type of time travel?
>>7654707
Yep, time definitely goes forward while you do it.
>>7654710
What about "the big sleep"? Do you just keep going?
I don't think time traveling back in time will ever be possible, but someone will probably read this post on some archive in 1000 years and laugh at me.
Time traveling forward definitely doable
Theoretically, if you could travel at the speed of light, your perception of time would be zero leaving you had been "time traveled" in the future
>>7654817
>>7653857
this "travel at almost speed of light to travel into the future" theory bothers my a long time...
does that mean, if you dont travel at all in space, like standing still in a spot in universe where no gravity affects you...
would that mean that time around you stops?
i mean...yeah the reason we see/feel/imagine/observe time is just because we travel on our planet/solarsystem/galaxy & at least in our universe...
maybe also our universe travels...
but what if we subtract all this velocitys and reach a point of "no movement", would time around you stand stil?
would you age much faster then anyone else around you?
if thats the point, maybe traveling as fast as light is NOT traviling into feature, but conserving or slowing down your aging process (reverse effect, not moving at all, would mean speed up the aging process)
i know there are experiments that proof that time slows down at near light speed, but...dunno, that bothers me somehow
>>7653880
>I didn't say group/phase velocities faster than light are impossible, I know they are possible, I said they can't be used to communicate FTL
I'm saying that the universe is made of wormholes;
>http://www.technologyreview.com/view/413483/could-all-particles-be-mini-black-holes/
Moreover, wormholes can be made without exotic matter;
>http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0701152v3.pdf
>‘Mass without mass’ from thin shells in Gauss-Bonnet gravity
>The third kind of solution are wormholes. Although vacuum solutions, they have the appearance of mass in the asymptotic regions. It is striking that in this theory, exotic matter is not needed in order for wormholes to exist- they can exist even with no matter
>A thin shell vacuum wormhole whose throat is a small
sphere can be interpreted as a particle
>Research has confirmed this
Actually, it's confirmed exactly the opposite;
>http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/307499/pdf
>HUBBLE SPACE TELESCOPE OBSERVATIONS OF SUPERLUMINAL MOTION IN THE M87 JET
>The fastest speeds we observe require a Lorentz factor y > 6 for the bulk flow and a jet orientation within 19° of the line of sight, in the context of the
relativistic jet model
>http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1995ApJ...447..582B
>Detection of Proper Motions in the M87 Jet
>Constraints derived from the observed motions, as well as the appearance of a sharp edge in knot A, suggest the jet is oriented about 43° from the light of sight
So, we have the experimental evidence for; infinite and negative speeds of sound; and superluminal jets. We also have the theoretical explanation for these observations - wormholes.
>Changing the wave on one end does not instantly change it on the other end
Group velocity in this context refers to how fast a rod conducts a kinetic signal to move from end A to end B; this is how the elastic modulus is calculated;
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21317078
>Shear elastic moduli derived from shear wave group velocities
>>7655790
What this means is that the M87 jet is moving, as a whole, faster than light. Photons it emits arrive sooner than they should, given a 43° angle.
>Until they detect it for real coming from an actual black hole its not confirmed
Hawking radiation is black body radiation, polarized by mass to that it's ejected at a particular angle. Black body radiation is just photons. They observed photons being emitted with the predicted angle.
The M87 jet is what this looks like on an astronomical scale. It's what the nature article I linked early was about.
>And regardless of all that your post is riddled with meta physical garbage and that's what I really take issue with
So you're admitting that you're ignoring my arguments, and focusing on their implications and rejecting them based on that - and arguing that this is intellectually honest.
>Even if Hawking radiation is true, which I think it probably is, that doesn't equal super derteminism and time travel confirmed real!!!!
So you're even admitting the legitimacy of my sources - you just don't like what I derive from them.
Free will doesn't exist, and neither does time. Wormholes are a form of space travel - not time travel. If you're laughing at superdeterminism, it shows you don't understand how particles behave on a quantum scale.
Everything is in an indeterminate state. That doesn't mean there is no truth - it means that one particle can be many things at once. It's entire causal line through 3D space exists eternally, and crosses other such lines. Everything is predetermined because nothing ever changes.
There is no time to travel through - imagine a checkered plane, and imagine that around a black hole the squares get smaller, and around a white hole they get bigger. Time is created when you walk through the plaza of the universe, and is counted in squares - there are more, smaller squares around black holes.
>>7654457
All time does exist in an instant. It's just that at any given instance you're at the very next instance of "all time":
>>7655866
>More meta physics
I haven't even mentioned cosmology, let alone gotten into the physics controlling physics - which is what metaphysics is. Instead, I stayed concrete, and used only physics to back up my arguments.
>and philosophy
I've stuck with descriptions of physical phenomena, and remained utterly silent on their ethical or moral ramifications. You seem to be deriving your own philosophical ramifications from what I'm saying - which was the point - and than coming back and telling me that I'm responsible for them.
>Its fine you believe what you believe bro just stop acting like its fact
Every single thing I've said has been sourced. I've constructed a self-consistent model that allows and explains superluminal phenomena, and can point to evidence of these phenomena.
>>7656082
You sourced some facts sure, your conclusions fall under meta physics and philosophy.
Its fine you believe it but don't act like its the only possible interpretation of things.
>>7651889
well... we can confirm he failed then.
