Time Travel Possible?

[barbaro]

Hey folks (Diaw), what do you think of this?

Charles Q. Choi
Special to LiveScience
LiveScience.com Mon Aug 20, 11:55 AM ET A new concept for a time machine could possibly enable distant future generations to travel into the past, research now suggests.


Unlike past ideas for time machines, this new concept does not require exotic, theoretical forms of matter. Still, this new idea requires technology far more advanced than anything existing today, and major questions remain as to whether any time machine would ever prove stable enough to enable actual travel back in time.
Time machine researchers often investigate gravity, which essentially arises when matter bends space and time. Time travel research is based on bending space-time so far that time lines actually turn back on themselves to form a loop, technically known as a "closed time-like curve."

Entire & Link: Time Travel Machine Outlined - Yahoo! News

[The Gentleman Scamp]

If you could go back in time just 1 second - you would duplicate yourself - so no I don't think so.

However in an inflight documantary I watched with Singapore Airlines, it really looked into the question properly and said that it would be possible if a human could travel at the speed of light.

Many films have been made on the subject and as a result of the most popular one, a second hand DeLorean will set you back over 20,000 pounds - but there was only one film which portrayed time travel accurately, and strangely enough it was Superman.

The one where he flies around the world so fast that it starts to turn backwards and Lois Lane's death is subsequently undone.

[blackgang]

Yes, it is possible,, With the right combination of drugs and alcohol, anything is possible..

[slimboyfat]

i really must fly singapore airlines again. i am not learning anything on AirAsia

[shehiredahitman]

Word is, if you travel faster than the speed of light, you would actually travel backwards in time.

There were two atomic clocks, accurate to some silly number & one was placed on a jet that flew continually around the world for however long it was. The clock that was on the plane recorded a time that was actually a little slower than the one which remained stationary.

There's something in it. Fucked if I can explain it though.

[Sir Burr]

Can't travel faster than the speed of light unfortunately.

People traval forward in time everyday if they fly, as per the example above. Unfortunately you go into the future by some infinitessimal amount of time.

[slimboyfat]

on sunday motning i looked at my watch which i had placed on my bedside table and it said 8am. After quite a long snooze I woke up again and was surprised to see it was only ten past 8.

Imagine my amazement when i switched on my pc to find it was actually 10.30 and my mobile phone time confirmed this. My bedside cabinet must be a time machine!

either that or the moisture inside the watch casing indicates that it has lost its water resistant properties and is fucked.

[shehiredahitman]

Can't travel faster than the speed of light unfortunately

Yet.

We couldn't travel any faster than a horse not too long ago.

[The Gentleman Scamp]

Word is, if you travel faster than the speed of light, you would actually travel backwards in time.

There were two atomic clocks, accurate to some silly number & one was placed on a jet that flew continually around the world for however long it was. The clock that was on the plane recorded a time that was actually a little slower than the one which remained stationary.

There's something in it. Fucked if I can explain it though.

Ah, you saw it too.

i am not learning anything on AirAsia

Air Asia?

You are sad.

[Whiteshiva]

You can't travel backwards in time, otherwise we would have seen time travellers by now.

You can, however, travel slower in time than others (by moving), which is basically the same as travelling forward in time. However, the energy requirements associated with propelling a body to a velocity at which time difference would be anything more than a fraction of a second or so is enormous.

It is actually all rather easy to calculate, although I am buggered it I am going to try to type the formulas here (unless some other nerds here are particularly interested).

[shehiredahitman]

I am. But I'm not very smart.

I think the key lies in harnessing light itself & using that as a vehicle.

[Agent_Smith]

If you could go back in time just 1 second - you would duplicate yourself - so no I don't think so

This paradox is solved through the multiverse theory which suggests that if a person could travel backwards or forwards through time then they would actually end up in a "parallel" universe where there may be a duplicate of theirself but it is not actually theirself.

Is theirself a word? Just didn't want write his/herself. But I did anyway. Oh well.

[Thetyim]

Is theirself a word?

Yes they is, but I didn;t know until I looked it up.
I usually say 'themselves'

[slimboyfat]

what about 'ownself' ? seems to be popular in Singlish but is it a real word?

[Thetyim]

^ Yes.
"To thine own self be true"

[Sir Burr]

I am. But I'm not very smart.

I think the key lies in harnessing light itself & using that as a vehicle.

Fraid that's out too. the reason light moves so fast is that it has no mass.

Light is crazy stuff and takes you into the world of quantum mechanics which is about the weirdest stuff ever.

Consider a train moving along at 100 km/hour. It has a lamp on the front and a lamp on the back, yet the light particles from each lamp are traveling at the same speed, 186,000 Km/sec. Not 186,000 Km/sec plus and minus 100 Km/hour. That's why the speed of light is used as a constant one of the very few found in nature.

[shehiredahitman]

But light can be manipulated by gravity?

[slimboyfat]

^ Yes.
"To thine own self be true"

they use 'my ownself' instead of 'myself' though. Doesnt sound right to me

[Agent_Smith]

Light is crazy stuff and takes you into the world of quantum mechanics which is about the weirdest stuff ever.

Apparently light chooses to become a wave or a particle depending on whether it's being observed. It boils down to a quantuum "switch" that says exist or don't exist. This backs up the multiverse theory whereby every possible combination has/is happened/ing and that time as we define it (one event follows another in a straight line) in reality exists all at once and doesn't actually flow in a progressive manner.

Anyone who has taken psychotropics can back me up on this.

[Sir Burr]

But light can be manipulated by gravity?

It can be slowed down and it can be bent.

I think the multiverse as you know it has already been discredited.

Though multiple universes, much like bubbles in champagne is probable, though, can never be proved.

[Agent_Smith]

I think the multiverse as you know it has already been discredited.

How? Mathematically, empirically?

[shehiredahitman]

Einstien was full of shit. That much has been proved. That's about the limit of my scientific knowledge without resorting to cut 'n pasting all sorts of stuff.

So's that Steven Hawking.

[Butterfly]

Apparently light chooses to become a wave or a particle depending on whether it's being observed. It boils down to a quantuum "switch" that says exist or don't exist.

I don't think it's the light per se, but some quanta particles observation.

I think the multiverse as you know it has already been discredited.

actually no, it's being re-inforced recently with the Theory of Everything and the 10+1 multidimension string theory

[The Gentleman Scamp]

Blimey.

[Agent_Smith]

Shiver me timbers.