Present time-travellers - a thread for you!
- Thread starter TimeNot_0
- Start date
Twighlight
Quantum Scribe
I find it really quite amusing the tizzy you believers have gotten in...all because some mean and nasty rational minded person DARED asked the so-called 'time travellers' to take the simplest test imaginable.
If you want to engage in the 'privilege' of social interaction with liars then that's your problem. But as far as I am concerned, anyone who refuses to take even the simplest of tests proposed is a hoaxer. Period. Mature and civilized people apply logic.....and do not believe everything they resd.
Twighlight
Quantum Scribe
I also find it rather sad.....because it seems to me that many of you 'believers' have in fact given up hope of any real time traveller showing up.....and have just settled for any old crap that comes along, just for the sake of something to chat about.
I've heard it said that the time travellers won't show up because they are questioned with tests. I think it much more likely that real time travellers are not showing up because they don't want to be drowned out in a sea of hoaxes.
Maybe the chaff just needs a little clearing....before the wheat shows up.
I've heard it said that the time travellers won't show up because they are questioned with tests. I think it much more likely that real time travellers are not showing up because they don't want to be drowned out in a sea of hoaxes.
Maybe the chaff just needs a little clearing....before the wheat shows up.
dimaggio
Chrono Cadet
Come on, could you be any more vague and defensive?
You "know" exactly what I meant.
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
*Me trying to match up with your smiley count*
You "know" exactly what I meant.
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
*Me trying to match up with your smiley count*
aerohead you crack me up!! LOL :D
Could this be a second line of defense for time travelers? LOLOL
****************ATTENTION TIME TRAVEL CLAIMANTS:*****************
If you interest me I may ask you questions.
This does not mean I necessarily believe what you are saying but only
that I am interested and curious about what you have to say.
I like to gather all the information first and save judgement till the end.
I am here to have fun, interesting and thought provoking conversation.
If you have a sense of humor, are highly intelligent and creative I may end up liking you!
However, This does not mean I will have interdimensional babies with you. LOL /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Could this be a second line of defense for time travelers? LOLOL
****************ATTENTION TIME TRAVEL CLAIMANTS:*****************
If you interest me I may ask you questions.
This does not mean I necessarily believe what you are saying but only
that I am interested and curious about what you have to say.
I like to gather all the information first and save judgement till the end.
I am here to have fun, interesting and thought provoking conversation.
If you have a sense of humor, are highly intelligent and creative I may end up liking you!
However, This does not mean I will have interdimensional babies with you. LOL /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
You mean YOU really believe a real honest to goodness time traveler might actually show up here?? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif (I find that quite amusing actually. hehe)
****************ATTENTION TIME TRAVEL CLAIMANTS:*****************
If you interest me I may ask you questions.
This does not mean I necessarily believe what you are saying but only
that I am interested and curious about what you have to say.
I like to gather all the information first and save judgement till the end.
I am here to have fun, interesting and thought provoking conversation.
If you have a sense of humor, are highly intelligent and creative I may end up liking you!
However, This does not mean I will have interdimensional babies with you. LOL /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Twighlight
Quantum Scribe
If all those worldlines exist....then it's a statistical certainty.
That's quite a big 'if'.
Its hardly certain at all, It is entirely possible that when the time traveler travels back in time the timeline we are on is the timeline that's exactly the same as the one he went to, except the time traveler didn't go to it. This could apply to every time traveler who ever time travels. When dealing with the theory of timelines, nothing is ever certain.... and there always has to be atleast one timeline that never gets a time traveler.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Again with a pseudo-scientific argument about non-scientific gibberish. Most amusing...
Logical fallacy.
And there could also be a timeline where a giant taco that craps ice cream controls the laws of time travel and nullifies this supposition. See? I just created another in the infinite timelines! :D
This is both an attempt at univalent logic and also a self-falsifying statement. If, as you claim, "nothing is ever certain" when dealing with timelines, then how can you claim your follow-up statement is certain? Moreover, your statement has an embedded implication (whether you know it or not) that all timelines have a beginning and an end (as opposed to closed loops) and never overlap.
I think you need to go back to college and retake your logic and rhetoric classes!
RMT
Logical fallacy.
And there could also be a timeline where a giant taco that craps ice cream controls the laws of time travel and nullifies this supposition. See? I just created another in the infinite timelines! :D
This is both an attempt at univalent logic and also a self-falsifying statement. If, as you claim, "nothing is ever certain" when dealing with timelines, then how can you claim your follow-up statement is certain? Moreover, your statement has an embedded implication (whether you know it or not) that all timelines have a beginning and an end (as opposed to closed loops) and never overlap.
I think you need to go back to college and retake your logic and rhetoric classes!
RMT
2009------------>2709--------------->
                /
2009<--------------/
  \
   \------------->2709------->3450------------>
                /          /
               /          /
2009<------------/-------------/
Lets say that the 2709 is the first time that someone time travels in our time line and they go back to 2009. Now there, if the theory of multiple timelines is true, There are now two 2009 exactly the same, except the second one has s time traveler and the first does not. Now the second 2009 progresses to 2709 again and the time traveler times, but this time in 3450 another time traveler travels to 2009. The 3rd 2009 is exactly the same as the 2nd except it has another time traveler and so on and so forth. This is just an extremely basic representation.
What you read my statement as is not what I meant it. I was saying that nothing is ever guaranteed to a single specific timeline... and that as a whole atleast one timeline should never get a time traveler
                /
2009<--------------/
  \
   \------------->2709------->3450------------>
                /          /
               /          /
2009<------------/-------------/
Lets say that the 2709 is the first time that someone time travels in our time line and they go back to 2009. Now there, if the theory of multiple timelines is true, There are now two 2009 exactly the same, except the second one has s time traveler and the first does not. Now the second 2009 progresses to 2709 again and the time traveler times, but this time in 3450 another time traveler travels to 2009. The 3rd 2009 is exactly the same as the 2nd except it has another time traveler and so on and so forth. This is just an extremely basic representation.
What you read my statement as is not what I meant it. I was saying that nothing is ever guaranteed to a single specific timeline... and that as a whole atleast one timeline should never get a time traveler
dimaggio
Chrono Cadet
I think there is a distinction to be made when talking about multiple timelines.
On the one hand you could say that there is a timeline for every possibility.
This, of course, includes timelines where the laws of physics are different from ours and where there might be at least one where we live on a planet that looks like a can of peanuts and all humans look like scissors.
But on the other hand you could say that when you travel back in time you will arrive at a point in the past that is exactly the same like the past you've come from until to the point where you arrived.
"If" it would work that way, then we would never arrive in a timeline that's already been different.
And then there's the notion that a timeline is just used for semantics, i.e. to make it more easy to talk about the subjective view of the TT.
In reality it "might" be that we actually do travel back on our own timeline, but that from the TT's POV he thinks he is in a new timeline.
From the POV of the people he left (when he travelled backwards) it very well might be that they are continuing their lives without ever seeing the TT again, because from their POV he is many years in the past.
Since their perceived here-and-now is constantly moving forwards in relation to the here-and-now of the TT in the past, his changes will never propagate to them.
Example:
At time X Peter travels back 1 year into the past and thus arrives at time A. For simplicities sake let's say this travel is instantaneous:
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|<----------|
After Peter arrived at A, let's say he watches his clock and counts 5 minutes.
At the same time the people he left at X began to count 5 minutes as soon as Peter was gone.
So, following the POV of Peter and the people he left behind from the moment they saw eatch other for the last time, this could very well mean that both simultaneously counted 5 minutes:
Peter: A + 5 minutes
Others: X + 5 minutes
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|>|<font color="white">...........[/COLOR]|>|
If we follow this thought through:
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|--->|<font color="white">........[/COLOR]|--->|
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|------>|<font color="white">....[/COLOR]|------>|
Now, the moment when Peter get's to time X again, he will not see the here-and-now people he saw from a year earlier.
It took him a year to reach point X again, but simultaneously for the others they lived on for a year as well, way past time X.
So when he arrives at time X again, he WILL see the others again, namely a version of the others of exactly that point in time X.
But from the POV of the others from the moment they last saw Peter, they still moved forward with their here-and-now.
And THEY are still a year infront of Peter, since THEIR subjective here-and-now moved forward as well as Peters from his subjective POV:
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|---------->|---------->|
My point is NOT to say it is this way!
It's just a thought experiment to provide an explanation as to how TT with "multiple timelines" could work.
Of course everything is possible, etc... it can't be falsified etc.. it's of no use, etc...
As I said, just a though experiment to fuel some brainsm and to see what you think about it.
To sum up my thought/idea:
Multiple timelines could just be considered a symantic helper to describe different POV's.
What might actually happen is that any changes made by the TT from his POV will never propagate to the here-and-now of the POV of the people he left behind, because when the TT travels a year forward, the here-and-now of the others he left behind has travelled forward a year as well, resulting in them always being a year infront of the TT.
To be clear:
I always look at the POV of both in realtion to each other, simultaneously, from the moment they departed at time X! Like watching two camera feeds at once.
But again, this does not mean he won't see a "version" (just to distinguish them from the other others who are a year infront of the TT) of the others when he arrives at X again.
He will see them of course, they just won't be the one's he originally said goodbye to a year earlier, because they are still a year infront of him. The ones he's meeting at X again are the ones who were always with him (from his POV in his here-and-now) when he arrived at A.
I hope I could get everything into the correct words to understand everything I meant.
There are still some points where I have the feeling I didn't quite get it through, but I guess my thoughts->words processor is just not that good in quality.^^
Addition:
I'm aware that you can say the poeple from point X who move forward could get a visit themselves from an "earlier timeline".
That's absolutely ok, but the exact Peter who left them at point X is never gonna show up again. He would have to be able to travel to point X without just slowing down his own time in relation to the outside world, because this would just propagate his here-and-now faster to point X ALONG with all the changes he made.
This means that the "version" of the others a year in front of him would equally fast travel forward, which means he could never reach his "original" friends, only other "versions" of them.
There will always be friends a year in front of him who wil never see HIM again. Maybe another "version" of him, but not HIM.
Of course you could say: But what makes the others at point X Peter will see different from the others at point X + 1 year?
Well, nothing really, they are the same people, only in different times.
But the X people Peter will meet, will not be the same as the ones he said goodbye to.
Because the latter are already at time X + 1 year.
*Phew*
I hope this addition didn't make it even harder to get my thoughts.^^
On the one hand you could say that there is a timeline for every possibility.
This, of course, includes timelines where the laws of physics are different from ours and where there might be at least one where we live on a planet that looks like a can of peanuts and all humans look like scissors.
But on the other hand you could say that when you travel back in time you will arrive at a point in the past that is exactly the same like the past you've come from until to the point where you arrived.
"If" it would work that way, then we would never arrive in a timeline that's already been different.
And then there's the notion that a timeline is just used for semantics, i.e. to make it more easy to talk about the subjective view of the TT.
In reality it "might" be that we actually do travel back on our own timeline, but that from the TT's POV he thinks he is in a new timeline.
From the POV of the people he left (when he travelled backwards) it very well might be that they are continuing their lives without ever seeing the TT again, because from their POV he is many years in the past.
Since their perceived here-and-now is constantly moving forwards in relation to the here-and-now of the TT in the past, his changes will never propagate to them.
Example:
At time X Peter travels back 1 year into the past and thus arrives at time A. For simplicities sake let's say this travel is instantaneous:
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|<----------|
After Peter arrived at A, let's say he watches his clock and counts 5 minutes.
At the same time the people he left at X began to count 5 minutes as soon as Peter was gone.
So, following the POV of Peter and the people he left behind from the moment they saw eatch other for the last time, this could very well mean that both simultaneously counted 5 minutes:
Peter: A + 5 minutes
Others: X + 5 minutes
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|>|<font color="white">...........[/COLOR]|>|
If we follow this thought through:
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|--->|<font color="white">........[/COLOR]|--->|
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|------>|<font color="white">....[/COLOR]|------>|
Now, the moment when Peter get's to time X again, he will not see the here-and-now people he saw from a year earlier.
It took him a year to reach point X again, but simultaneously for the others they lived on for a year as well, way past time X.
So when he arrives at time X again, he WILL see the others again, namely a version of the others of exactly that point in time X.
But from the POV of the others from the moment they last saw Peter, they still moved forward with their here-and-now.
And THEY are still a year infront of Peter, since THEIR subjective here-and-now moved forward as well as Peters from his subjective POV:
----A-----------X------------>
<font color="white">.....[/COLOR]|---------->|---------->|
My point is NOT to say it is this way!
It's just a thought experiment to provide an explanation as to how TT with "multiple timelines" could work.
Of course everything is possible, etc... it can't be falsified etc.. it's of no use, etc...
As I said, just a though experiment to fuel some brainsm and to see what you think about it.
To sum up my thought/idea:
Multiple timelines could just be considered a symantic helper to describe different POV's.
What might actually happen is that any changes made by the TT from his POV will never propagate to the here-and-now of the POV of the people he left behind, because when the TT travels a year forward, the here-and-now of the others he left behind has travelled forward a year as well, resulting in them always being a year infront of the TT.
To be clear:
I always look at the POV of both in realtion to each other, simultaneously, from the moment they departed at time X! Like watching two camera feeds at once.
But again, this does not mean he won't see a "version" (just to distinguish them from the other others who are a year infront of the TT) of the others when he arrives at X again.
He will see them of course, they just won't be the one's he originally said goodbye to a year earlier, because they are still a year infront of him. The ones he's meeting at X again are the ones who were always with him (from his POV in his here-and-now) when he arrived at A.
I hope I could get everything into the correct words to understand everything I meant.
There are still some points where I have the feeling I didn't quite get it through, but I guess my thoughts->words processor is just not that good in quality.^^
Addition:
I'm aware that you can say the poeple from point X who move forward could get a visit themselves from an "earlier timeline".
That's absolutely ok, but the exact Peter who left them at point X is never gonna show up again. He would have to be able to travel to point X without just slowing down his own time in relation to the outside world, because this would just propagate his here-and-now faster to point X ALONG with all the changes he made.
This means that the "version" of the others a year in front of him would equally fast travel forward, which means he could never reach his "original" friends, only other "versions" of them.
There will always be friends a year in front of him who wil never see HIM again. Maybe another "version" of him, but not HIM.
Of course you could say: But what makes the others at point X Peter will see different from the others at point X + 1 year?
Well, nothing really, they are the same people, only in different times.
But the X people Peter will meet, will not be the same as the ones he said goodbye to.
Because the latter are already at time X + 1 year.
*Phew*
I hope this addition didn't make it even harder to get my thoughts.^^
Twighlight
Quantum Scribe
Ah....there is a supposition that timelines are somewhat like upward branches of a tree. And that is the basis upon which much timeline arguing is done......that the branches split off from each other...and then a sort of vertical growing. That is the basis of your type of argument.
In fact, the entire theory is messed up somewhat by the existence of a second type of ( equally valid ) timeline. This would correspond to the lateral branches themselves. Ironically, every timeline is itself just such a timeline.....it not only travels vertically up the time chart, but diagonally sideways as it spawns new timelines ( new twigs on the tree ) itself. Hmm, this is fractal geometry.....our timeline is a timeline of itself. One of the timelines that breaks off is also identical ( something that many worlds enthusiasts forget.....the 'no change' scenario is also created ).
In fact the identical timeline itself goes on to spawn more identical timelines.....which in turn exist both horizontally and vertically on the graph. So there is not just ONE 'our timeline'....there are many of them. That truly confounds things.
dimaggio
Chrono Cadet
Yet another addition (sorry for any posts from others inbetween):
Ok, we are in a video room.
There are 3 monitors, A B and C.
For the moment we only need A and B.
Peter travels back 1 year into the past.
As soon as he arrives there we will watch HIS video feed on monitor A and his FRIENDS' video feed at B, simultaneously.
So we're watching two movies, the one is from, say, 2000 and the other from 2001.
The moment we started the feeds, we could see that the friends on monitor B saw Peter vanish.
They looked at each other, puzzled, and then went on with their daily lives again.
At the same time on monitor A we see, let's say for simplicities sake, the same room, which is empty but then suddenly Peter appears out of nowhere!
So it looks like he jumped from monitor B to monitor A. And thus you could say he jumped to a different timeline.
BUT, remember these are just the two different video feeds that show the different POV's!
Ok, going on:
Now we watch these feeds for a year.
On monitor B we can see that the friends have given up hope of ever seeing Peter again and now on their feed it's 2002.
On monitor A its 2001 now and we can see how Peter is hiding behind something in the room where he and his friends said goodbye to each other a year back.
He waits a little longer and suddenly another "version" of himself and his friends are coming into the room.
They talk a bit, then Peters other self gets into the time machine, says goodbye and vanishes.
Puzzled the friends look at each other and are about to go.
But then Peter comes out of hiding and says: Here I am again!
They say: "You sure you didn't just teleport?"
Peter: "No, I arrived in 2000 and waited a year for this exact moment."
Friends: "Hmm, yeah, you sure look a bit different, and you haven't shaved your beard."
And to close the last point I forgot:
You could say that even the friends of video feed B we started with could've met a Peter hiding in the room themselves.
I just let this part out so everybody can follow my thought. But now I hope I could make it clear that SUCH a Pater would not be the same Peter they saw leaving.
Because that one will always be a year behind them.
Ok, we are in a video room.
There are 3 monitors, A B and C.
For the moment we only need A and B.
Peter travels back 1 year into the past.
As soon as he arrives there we will watch HIS video feed on monitor A and his FRIENDS' video feed at B, simultaneously.
So we're watching two movies, the one is from, say, 2000 and the other from 2001.
The moment we started the feeds, we could see that the friends on monitor B saw Peter vanish.
They looked at each other, puzzled, and then went on with their daily lives again.
At the same time on monitor A we see, let's say for simplicities sake, the same room, which is empty but then suddenly Peter appears out of nowhere!
So it looks like he jumped from monitor B to monitor A. And thus you could say he jumped to a different timeline.
BUT, remember these are just the two different video feeds that show the different POV's!
Ok, going on:
Now we watch these feeds for a year.
On monitor B we can see that the friends have given up hope of ever seeing Peter again and now on their feed it's 2002.
On monitor A its 2001 now and we can see how Peter is hiding behind something in the room where he and his friends said goodbye to each other a year back.
He waits a little longer and suddenly another "version" of himself and his friends are coming into the room.
They talk a bit, then Peters other self gets into the time machine, says goodbye and vanishes.
Puzzled the friends look at each other and are about to go.
But then Peter comes out of hiding and says: Here I am again!
They say: "You sure you didn't just teleport?"
Peter: "No, I arrived in 2000 and waited a year for this exact moment."
Friends: "Hmm, yeah, you sure look a bit different, and you haven't shaved your beard."
And to close the last point I forgot:
You could say that even the friends of video feed B we started with could've met a Peter hiding in the room themselves.
I just let this part out so everybody can follow my thought. But now I hope I could make it clear that SUCH a Pater would not be the same Peter they saw leaving.
Because that one will always be a year behind them.