T: Time Travel Backwards - Effects on Age?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hypothetical concept of backward time travel and its potential effects on aging and perception. Participants explore various implications of traveling back in time, particularly focusing on whether individuals would experience a regression in age and the ability to perceive events prior to their birth.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if backward time travel were possible, individuals might regress in age and potentially disappear upon reaching their date of birth.
  • Another participant argues that many components of a person change over time, implying that the concept of identity is fluid and may complicate the idea of time travel.
  • A different viewpoint questions the feasibility of backward time travel, suggesting that if time travel were linked to cellular regression, it could render the travel device and user ineffective.
  • One participant introduces a critique of the reasoning behind backward time travel, referencing the Lorentz equations and the impossibility of exceeding the speed of light, which they argue undermines the validity of the initial claims.
  • Another participant expresses agreement with the notion that backward time travel is impossible if it entails reversing the order of events, yet seeks to understand the implications if such travel were possible.
  • A participant references the novel "Timeline" by Michael Crichton, discussing its portrayal of time travel through quantum physics and the blending of real science with fiction, although they express uncertainty about its scientific validity.
  • One participant reiterates the original question, emphasizing a desire to focus on the experiences during time travel rather than the mechanics of how it could occur.
  • Another participant concludes that since time travel is not currently possible, providing a detailed explanation of its effects is inherently limited.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some agreeing on the impossibility of backward time travel while others explore its hypothetical implications. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing ideas and no consensus on the effects of time travel on aging or perception.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions and limitations in their reasoning, including the nature of identity over time, the implications of physical laws on time travel, and the speculative nature of fictional representations of time travel.

Dr.Brain
Messages
539
Reaction score
2
This one just popped into my head while I was on my bed last night.

Leave the possibility of time travel backwards, but if it were to become possible in near future , then wouldn't it be possible that as we go back in time , we keep getting younger and probably disappear once we pass the date of birth? :blushing:


BJ
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, technically many parts of "you" disappear as time goes on. there's only a small portion of "you" that has been around since birth and before your parents did the dirty deed, "you" were simply sperm and an egg. Before that, you were other proteins i suppose and before that you were various other molecules floating around doing there thing and such. So technically, you could go 10,000 years and find a piece of dirt with a carbon molecule on it that eventually became part of "you"... although 10,000 years later.
 
Pengwuino said:
No, technically many parts of "you" disappear as time goes on. there's only a small portion of "you" that has been around since birth and before your parents did the dirty deed, "you" were simply sperm and an egg. Before that, you were other proteins i suppose and before that you were various other molecules floating around doing there thing and such. So technically, you could go 10,000 years and find a piece of dirt with a carbon molecule on it that eventually became part of "you"... although 10,000 years later.

You missmatched my question . Before we were born , we couldn't 'see' , because 'seeing' is believing, that is getting images of an event is sure proof that event is/has happening/happened.But before we were born we didnt receive those images because simply didnot had the required equipment to receive images,that is in our initial stages of development as you just told in your previous ambiguous post, we were basically not introduced to world.

So when we time-travel backwards , because time is going backwards , it is necessary that we also go on getting younger and younger , and then reduce to a mere molecule , so basically as we pass the date of birth while traveling back in time , will we see the images of general world before our birth? ...I think not because we didnt see that world before our birth , so we just cannot possibly see it again by time-travelling , and also as we travel backwards , we would keep on getting younger , our senses will keep on getting weaker , and time-travel won't be that good experience as hoped.I hope you get my point.

BJ
 
If time cellular regression were associated with one traveling time then I would imagine that the actual device used would also be affected in this manner, thus making it impossible. I believe that there is some kind of gravitational/cingularity/electromagnetic field surrounding the device and its user protecting both from time flux.
 
Dr.Brain said:
So when we time-travel backwards , because time is going backwards , it is necessary that we also go on getting younger and younger , and then reduce to a mere molecule , so basically as we pass the date of birth while traveling back in time , will we see the images of general world before our birth?

I think there is an error in this reasoning as follows: The objection cited would make sense, for example, were it possible for an object to travel, in the conventional sense of travel, faster than speed C. If we look at the value of the interval for an object in motion t', as opposed to the interval of time, t, for an observer defined to be at rest, then the Lorentz equations suggest that just as time "slows down" in the frame of t', as we approach speed C, it would stop or reverse at speed C and beyond. However, we know that this is impossible; we can't get to speed C by travel in the conventional sense, so the extrapolation suggested is without a basis. In other words, what you suggest might be true, but I don't think there is a model that can be used to elevate this idea above that of a wild guess.
 
Last edited:
If we look at the value of the interval for an object in motion t', as opposed to the interval of time, t, for an observer defined to be at rest, then the Lorentz equations suggest that just as time "slows down" in the frame of t', as we approach speed C, it would stop or reverse at speed C and beyond. However, we know that this is impossible;

So you mean basically time travel backward is impossible? , I agree it is impossible if we take time travel backwards as 'slowing down of time to limits, such that order of events reverse'? , I fully agree with you on that point. But what I seek is what happens after time-travel happens backwards, if it was possible to do so , would my argument be still valid?

BJ
 
The novel Timeline by Michael Crichton has people traveling back in time by means of quantum physics as opposed to Relativity. There is some kind of explanation given as to how the double slit experiment adds up to making this possible in principle. I didn't pay much attention to it. The net result was that people were "faxed" into alternate universes where the present was identical to our past in this universe. I don't know enough about quantum physics to know if any of this made any sense.

In general, Michael Crichton seems to start with a collection of things that are real, hard science, and then he fantasizes forward into science fiction. There may in fact be dinosaur blood in amber-preserved mosquitos, but the DNA is all destroyed. Jurassic Park is based on the premise they could find intact DNA.

I assume there is a lot of fact behind his quantum time travel in Timeline but I couldn't tell you where the facts end and the pure fiction begins.

It is a fun read, regardless.
 
Leave the possibility of time travel backwards, but if it were to become possible in near future , then wouldn't it be possible that as we go back in time , we keep getting younger and probably disappear once we pass the date of birth?

Bringing the question back into spotlight.Deviations are invited but they should end up by connecting the explanation with the answer to my question.What I am concerned here is about 'what happens during Time Travel' and not 'How to time-travel backwards'.

BJ
 
Well since time travel isn't possible... its not really possible for us to give you much of an explanation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
9K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
14K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K