Time travel in one direction (Theory)

[Blair]

If you time travel in one direction you should finish up were you started.

Right back at square one.

No need to travel back wards at all.

Travel forward in time till you finish up in the past.

Thanks for reading my post,
Blair Styles.
11:11

 

[selfAdjoint]

This implies the time dimension is circular. It has interesting implications for the development of the universe. Some of the ancient phillosophers had a cyclical view of time, called "The Eternal Return" (qg).

 

[Blair]

I will take a look and read about it thank you selfAdjoint.

I know its not my idea and I'm not the first to say it, but i remember seeing a movie of a man walking in a desert and after hours of walking he was right back were he started.

I think that is because nothing is ever straight, so i have applyed the same idea with time travel.

Now if there was only a way to test the theory.

 

[Blair]

Ide just like to add to this post.

I think you would need less energy to travel into the past by Travelling froward in time to get to the past.

That is as simple as i can explain this theory.

Ide like to here from a professional opinion if anyone has a thought thank you.

Blair Styles
11:11

 

[Entropy]

Time traveling to the future is possible. Travel around the galaxy at near light speed and come back to Earth in 1000 years and you'll be the same age because of time dilation. But I dought going back in time is.

 

[Blair]

I'm not shaw what you mean by that:
Time traveling to the future is possible. Travel around the galaxy at near light speed and come back to Earth in 1000 years and you'll be the same age because of time dilation. But I dought going back in time is.

My theory is travel forward in time till you finish up in the past.

The amount of energy used to do this is a lot less then trying to go back against the grain.

I understand Mr Einsteins theory of time travel.
I'm just trying to make it a little less complected by trying to-go back.

 

[Lama]

Dear Blair,

By your model of time there is no future and no past, because all possible events simultaneously exist like points on the surface of a ball, where each point is some event in a one global present time.

 

[Blair]

Dear Lama.

Yes i believe everything exists all at once past present and future.

I think time is not measured in days weeks years hours or even distance.

But as one continuous event all at once all at the same time.

That is how i came up with my theory.

Thanks for reading.

Blair Styles
11:11

 

[Lama]

But what if we add another dimension where we can move inside and outside of this ball's present surface?

In this case we get infinitely many surfaces of present times.

 

[Lama]

Dear Blair,

To any given present state, I can give another states which a beyond it.

So the real question here is this:

Is reality is an opened or closed phenomena.

If you ask me then in my opinion the most priniple basic of reality is complementary relations between opposite states.

 

[Blair]

Agreed

There is a cryptic message in my theory if you understand how the universe is working.

And that to is a theory.

Time travel into the future till you finish up in the past.

 

[Lama]

In my opinion no one knows how the universe "works", including you and me.

And this is exactly the gap between any model (theory) of reality and reality itself.

In my opinion, life phenomena is like a time machine that saves the past in order to use it in the present, for a better future, where better future means more chances to find deeper connections between simplicity and complexity.

 

[Gza]

In my opinion, life phenomena is like a time machine that saves the past in order to use it in the present, for a better future, where better future means more chances to find deeper connections between simplicity and complexity.

which leads one to ask: who decides the definition of what is "better?" Your definition seems rather boring, and too anthropomorphic to me.

 

[Lama]

I wrote:

"where better future means more chances to find deeper connections between simplicity and complexity."

If you against my definition of better future, then please give your definition for better future, unless you have no motive idea about what is a better future for living things.

 

[Gza]

I apologize if the context of my post appeared as an attack, but it wasn't. I simply meant by saying "boring to me", that different people will have different opinions of what a better future is, and that won't really help when trying to understand what time truly is. The fact of the matter is that my definition of a better future is really just as pointless as yours or anybodys when it comes to understanding how time works.