# Time Travel Possible in future?

1. Nov 15, 2004

### Kimorto

People say and have decently backed up that time travel is not possible by saying that you would have to rearrange every particle back to where it was. Instead of rearranging the particles of everything. What if u could take all the information and I mean every aspect and formation of every atom could be written down. What if you used the information you found out that was every part of ur previous body. step into a machine, and if possible re-arrange every single particle of the body at the exact same time. But since you lose blood cells and other stuff from getting hurt. It seems like its near impossible even though i have the concept down. This again leads back to time, "the 4th dimension" If we could find a way to negitate time it might work. If it is true that in the exact center of a blackhole, time slows down and maybe comes to a stop. Based upon that, and with information that we should be able to get in the future.

2. Nov 20, 2004

### Tigron-X

OK, lets say you could change all the matter to different coordinates, past coordinate positions and future coordinate positions at your will with a machine. Wouldn't that mean that you won't know that you traveled? So, what's the point?

Time is not the 4th dimension, but gravity is. As for time, time is relative to a given point of a calculation; calculation of objects in motion. For time to stand still would mean that objects are not moving. If objects are not moving, then there are no events to gain a relative point of existence as there is no existence. The moment there is an event, there are objects in motion, thus one can calculate what he/she experienced first and create a relative time table. So, if you're creating an event such as the one you're looking to create, then you're putting objects into motion, thus a new event will occur that is similar to an event that already happened or events that will happen. Therefore, you will travel spacetime to events that appear as the past or as the future, but you never negated time or progressed time because time is relative to one's own calculation of experience defined by gravitational occurances.

In other words, it would be an illusion of time travel, but seeing as how perspective is individual reality, you would never really know the difference. I presume there would be suttle differences, and as your presence remains, then the differences might eventually become major ones because events are all relative to acting gravitational forces.

3. Nov 20, 2004

Staff Emeritus
Where did you get this? Is it your own, or did you read it somewhere?

4. Nov 20, 2004

### Tigron-X

I came to the conclusion on my own after doing a paper on Einstein in my high school physics class. Time as the 4th dimension never made much sense to me because time is a man made calculation like the metric system, plus many other contradictions that went through my head with respect to time, and as I was doing a paper on Cold Fusion a year later, I came across electro-magnetism. That lead me to some articles of gravity as the 4th dimension that I briefly read because it supported my own idea. The statement "gravity as the 4th dimension" made way more sense than time, so the phrase was never my own, but I came to the conlusion on my own.

I wish I could claim it, but it wouldn't be fair to others, nor would I ever want someone to do that to me. Anyhow, anything you read is my own thought out perspective on the matter.

5. Dec 14, 2004

Time travel is inevitable

As we sit in our chairs typing, we are traveling into the future. Time is "relative" so you may want to ask if one can travel into the future faster than other sentient beings or whether time travel into the past is possible. Entropy seems to be the arrow of time and that makes traveling into the past probably unlikely. If one could travel into the past, more than likely it would be discovered in the future that one could do so and we would have people from the future coming back to play the stockmarket, or some others possibly altering the history of the future. There is also the grandma paradox which comes into play if one goes back in time and kills their grandparents, then the time traveler would not exist in the future. This is not a paradox if you want to inckude many worlds/many histories and the possiblility of parallel universes. One could then go back in time, kill his grandparents and then create a parallel universe where one exist only because of the time travel.

A good book to read is called "The End of Time" by Julian Barbour which claims that time is an illusion.

At this point some other forum users may argue that all of reality as it appears to us is illusion, or what Hindus call "maya". I would have to agree with them that at this point in our evolutioion, what we think is truth, whether it is in regards to space and time or anything else for that matter is illusion.

Last edited: Dec 14, 2004
6. Jan 4, 2005

### Gamish

Time being gravity makes sense. See, I define time as the way we measure movement through space. So, movement and gravity act in the same way, or something like that. I am working on a theory of time, and I am trying to fit it into SR and GR.

7. Jan 4, 2005

### phoenixthoth

If you leave your contact coordinates in a conspicuous enough time capsule, and if time travel is possible, you can, in principle, meet up with time travelers from the future. I haven't yet thought of a conspicuous enough time capsule myself.

8. Jan 5, 2005

### Philocrat

When it comes to time dimensions, the most important thing you should worry about is the notion of 'CIRCULARISM'. Firstly, it is not clear whether time is a PARAPLEX (perfect part of the universe), let alone the universe itself being a 'PARAPLEXED SYSTEM or DESIGN. If time is a paraplex, then so must the whole universe be a paraplexed system or design, because no paraplex can form part of a non-paraplexed system. This would mean that all the conceivable parts of the universe are paraplexes. But then again how could this be when many parts of the unverse seem to be multi-purposedly and chaotically structured?

What is the problem with this? If time were trully a paraplex, then the very notion of going back in time would not arise at all. You would not even be thinking about the notion of time travelling in the first place. Infact, time would have neither an exit to the past nor an exit the future. You would be actually and psychologically locked up in a permanent and irreversible superstructure called the 'STANDARD UNIVERSAL NOW' (SUN). You would exist and do everything, regardless of the spatial extension, at time t = 0.

Since time is not in this very sense a paraplex, it seems that Circularism is an option. The three dimensions of time (past, present, and future) may very well exist. You may very well be able to head in either directions, past or future. But with regards to circularism, supposing you travelled to the past and arrived at the future, and vice versa? Well, these are spooky and hair-raising posibilities! What sense would the notion of time-travelling make?

Last edited: Jan 5, 2005
9. Jan 9, 2005

### scarecrow

10. Jan 9, 2005

Staff Emeritus
He has been exhaustively discussed on the debunking forum.

11. Jan 9, 2005

### StatusX

Time being gravity, or gravity being a dimension? I don't see how this could make sense. A dimension is an independent degree of freedom of the position of an event. Are you suggesting that to locate an event, we need to specify it's three spatial coordinates, and its gravity? That is absurd. Time dilation, caused by spacetime curvature near a large mass, accounts for most of the gravitational force we feel, but that is a different thing completely. You can't just throw together words and expect it to form a coherent idea.

12. Feb 3, 2005

### jackle

According to GR, gravity is the curvature of space-time, so any other definition is unlikely to fit into GR. The good news is that gravity and time do seem to be closely related in a special way.