I enjoy the concept of Time Travel and the possibility. However, I am confused about how one could travel to the past when the individuals ate no longer there. How can one travel to the future if the future has not been made yet. I am sure it has something to do with theories of time. Interested in any insights.
A tad confused
- Thread starter ABC123
- Start date
If I understand this right, you're saying that we couldn't travel to the future because it doesn't exist. Wouldn't that mean that we do not exist either?For example I shouldn't exist since seventeen years ago the future that is our present didn't exist.
Not sure if that is what you meant but that is just how I interpreted it.
You are correct at the beginning of understanding what I was asking. If we are currently living in the present, then how can there be a future be before us, if we are here in the present. We can not be in two places at the same time. Correct? However to follow up with your example. You should exist, because the seventeen years before hand had all taken place and traveled with you to the present. Your present self has to continue the journey into the future that is not made yet.
There are many theories out there. One states that everything exists all at once.http://everythingforever.com/einstein.htm
It doesn't mean it can't be changed, but the end result already has the change you made in it, doesn't it?
Multiworldline theory helps sort that problem out, too.
thomas pendrake
Temporal Novice
If you could travel to the past, you would find the past. We are continuously traveling into the future. To be able to skip intervening time in our forward time travel would take us to one of a very large number of possible times. If traveling into the past, it may be possible to reach a past time that does not have a direct time line to the particular future from which you start. That may present a genuine paradox. I'm to far out of practice with the math to work it out.And my hand waving skills aren't that good.
This statement interests me because I tend to agree, as some others, that time is comprised of past, present, future simultaneously. I am not a professional in this area, merely a gut feeling, that I am comfortable to give some credit to a degree of likelihood. Anyways, more to the point, is there truly only one direct time line for us or multiple?
Well to "correct" the first quote I'd like to point out that the future is something uncertain since there are an infinity of possibilities of things that one would do (meaning that time is composed of past present and variable futures).This would consequently create several timelines (or worldlines) in which the you would have made a different decision (e.g: In one world line I would have gotten married and lived a happy life; and in this world line I'd live by myself until the day I die.)
But the possibilities of there being different timelines is still theoretical...
Aha, I see your point about the future. So, going back in time and making different choices would not only create different experiences, but also different consequences. I just always threw it around, what if I made choice A would the consequence still be stemmed from choice A or could choice B bring me to the same consequence. I guess it goes back to the idea of fate vs destiny.I am going to have to ponder this idea of different timelines a little more.
Thanks for the reply.
ScornedTramp
Chrono Cadet
And so any clues are welcome ...
It could be possible. It would mean that the there wouldn't be too big of a divergence for that choice. However depending on the choice that is made it might have an impact on the future. There would always be a difference in the timelines depending on the choice that you make. It could lead to something good, bad or might not even be a difference there, but there will still be a difference from the original timeline like people having different memories or the possibility of you meeting someone in the first timeline but you'd never see that person in the second timeline. (At least that is how I've understood it so far.).
worldmachine
Temporal Novice
I have never considered time travel to involve being in two places at once, either a time machine would take us away from the present to visit a specified time and place so we would temporarily cease to exist in the present, more likely though we will time travel via the mind and not physically. The theory of being in two places at once would not arise.It is not a question of the future not being made yet, the future is waiting for us to get there. If the future did not exist none of us would make it through to tomorrow. The secret we must discover is how can we get there faster? How can we reach tomorrow today? We will then have the secret to unlock the mystery of time travel.
Well that would be impossible because as the saying goes "Tomorrow never comes"
As for the fact about the future existing. I'd like to point out again that the future is an unpredictable variable so it's not something certain. So it does exist but it's always changing so, I'm not sure if what I'm saying makes much sense (other than in my mind).... but they way I see it the future is not a necessity for us to live, but the actions we have taken in the past and that we take in the present that determine if we make it through to tomorrow.
Okay, I started doing a little reading and research on this subject.. I am drawn to Michio Kaku “Physics of the Impossible: A Scientific Exploration Into the World of Phasers, Force Fields, Teleportation and Time Travel” He discusses three possibilities.The first stems back to destiny is destiny. Going back in time is simply a repeat of past events with no changes.
The second possibility is free will (which is what I meant to say in my original post instead of fate when I was talking about destiny). The catch is that it is a limited sense of free will. A person might choice or make different decisions, yet the outcome remains the same.
The third possibility become a bit more complex, and thus more difficult to explain in layman's terms. Here a time traveler goes back to the past and there are two universes.
Then this whole idea of time travel goes into a type of multi-universe theory.
So are you inclined to give more credibility to the third scenario?
I am really not sure where I stand, yet.
worldmachine
Temporal Novice
Tomorrow does come, it just evolves from a future event in to a current event, i agree that the future is uncertain because it is not a physical entity or place on any level that we can comprehend. I see the future as a space waiting to be filled, it is like a blank page waiting to be written on by life.
In the realms of time travel however, the future must exist in some sort of tangible way if there are people from the future living in the future and if we wish to visit them. I think if and when we make time travel a reality the past and the future will take us to a completely new level or vibration of existence. We will not experience life or any sort of reality in the same way we do in the present, so we at the moment do not need to look at the future as anything solid or predictable, it is way beyond that.
In the realms of time travel however, the future must exist in some sort of tangible way if there are people from the future living in the future and if we wish to visit them. I think if and when we make time travel a reality the past and the future will take us to a completely new level or vibration of existence. We will not experience life or any sort of reality in the same way we do in the present, so we at the moment do not need to look at the future as anything solid or predictable, it is way beyond that.
Here is my example of the past...present...and future.
The present exists in each keystroke I make during this post. The past is the "H" in "Here is my..."
The future is the next keystroke I intend to make. As long as I am creating this post I am experiencing the past, present, and future of "This post". The future, as far as the writing of this post is concerned, will end with the last keystroke I make and the mouse click to post it. I can, if I wanted to, go back in time, "in this post", and change the first word to "This". The past would be altered, but only I would know. The difference between the words, here and this, are small enough to not effect any change in the future replies to this post but, a bigger change to, "Do you agree with this example of the...", would effect the very nature of the post and the tone of the replies to it. The future, in regard to the replies this post may receive, is as yet, "unwritten". Therefore the future doesn't exist, until the present has passed into the past.
The present exists in each keystroke I make during this post. The past is the "H" in "Here is my..."
The future is the next keystroke I intend to make. As long as I am creating this post I am experiencing the past, present, and future of "This post". The future, as far as the writing of this post is concerned, will end with the last keystroke I make and the mouse click to post it. I can, if I wanted to, go back in time, "in this post", and change the first word to "This". The past would be altered, but only I would know. The difference between the words, here and this, are small enough to not effect any change in the future replies to this post but, a bigger change to, "Do you agree with this example of the...", would effect the very nature of the post and the tone of the replies to it. The future, in regard to the replies this post may receive, is as yet, "unwritten". Therefore the future doesn't exist, until the present has passed into the past.