Anyone know any cool new theories about time travel?
one method to travel into the future and is very inexpensive is to simply sit and have the future come to you. like the 70s song: "Time keeps on slippin' (slippin', slippin'...) into the future..."
if you want to travel farther into the future than your expected lifetime might allow for, then you have to spend a little bit of money. perhaps a couple of trillion dollars. you'll need a really good and big space vehicle with enough fuel and food and living supplies to take you to a large percentage of the speed of light (relative to those of us left behind on earth), and then somehow (either with the fuel you have and maybe you can slingshot around some neighboring star to save some fuel) you have to turn around and come back. when you get back, your younger siblings will be older than you and if you get close enough to [itex] c [/itex], you'll have outlived everyone you have ever known and maybe even their children. and you won't be all that old yourself.
but there's no turning back. time-travel back is not possible.
Or you could pull a Disney and have yourself frozen. Don't count on us finding a safe way to thaw you out, though.
how about going to the future via suspended animation? check out the june issue of scientific american if you have not seen this.
Time is a meandering river, which spits and forks into many "parallel dimentions". For instance, if one went back in time and killed Hitler, he would still live in our dimention, however, time would spit, thus there can be an infinite number of dimentions. Some physisists believe that a black hole is the point of passage between these universes, lets just hope the crusshing gravity of 2 or 3 billion suns doens't kill you!
This is just a bunch of crap. Might work for science fiction movies, but people come here to learn. I can't imagine a physicist that believes any of this.
I have always considered the Everett, Wheeler, and Graham theory to be refering to universes that exist only hypothetically. I thought the idea was that mathematically you had to treat the various possabilities as true even if they don't come true. Am I wrong on that, does any one know?
Separate names with a comma.