Dimensional Travel and the Human Body

  • Thread starter Thread starter FantomTravler
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dimension Travel
AI Thread Summary
Dimensional travel is currently considered a fantasy rather than a scientific possibility, with no documented experiences or evidence to support it. The effects on memory and the human body during such hypothetical travel are purely speculative and limited to creative imagination. Discussions emphasize that any changes to memory would depend on the narrative context rather than scientific fact. As there is no empirical basis for dimensional travel, concrete answers cannot be provided. The topic remains within the realm of fiction and creative writing.
FantomTravler
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am not a physicists, engineer or even a student of such, however, I am writing a book and so this leads me to research. Say traveling to another dimension is possible. Would the traveler lose his/her memory there, only to regain it upon return to the dimension they started from?

What would this kind of travel do to the human body? Has any such experiences been documented? If yes, where?

Thank you in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
FantomTravler said:
Would the traveler lose his/her memory there, only to regain it upon return to the dimension they started from?

Changes to the traveler memory are limited only by your imagination.
 
FantomTravler said:
I am not a physicists, engineer or even a student of such, however, I am writing a book and so this leads me to research. Say traveling to another dimension is possible. Would the traveler lose his/her memory there, only to regain it upon return to the dimension they started from?

What would this kind of travel do to the human body? Has any such experiences been documented? If yes, where?

Thank you in advance.

You are asking about a fantasy, not about science. As Borek says, what happens depends only on your imagination. There is no such thing as a person "travelling to another dimension", so we can offer no scientific help to you.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...

Similar threads

Back
Top