The Time Machine (2002)
- Thread starter Trex
- Start date
Transient001
Quantum Scribe
Friend Trex of EarthTR125.0121
Yes it was a very good movie, I thing it surpassed the classic. However it does not beat the novel, which I invite you to read.
However, the changes of the Earth as portrayed in the movie would not be noticeables by a time traveler, since time travel is instant. You move through the Prime Temporal Point instantaneously. All one could really get to see are the streams of temporal matter before reassembling int the actual physical states.
However, in the movie they look really great.
Until later becomes now.
Yes it was a very good movie, I thing it surpassed the classic. However it does not beat the novel, which I invite you to read.
However, the changes of the Earth as portrayed in the movie would not be noticeables by a time traveler, since time travel is instant. You move through the Prime Temporal Point instantaneously. All one could really get to see are the streams of temporal matter before reassembling int the actual physical states.
However, in the movie they look really great.
Until later becomes now.
In the movie, the inability to change the past is emphasized. The idea is that one can't change the past. Once something happens, it cannot be reversed. What do you think?
One thing among many others attracted my attention the most. When the photonic cited the name Alexander Hartdegen, 1869 to 1903, Alexander asked questions about Hartdegen, but no avail, there was not enough info as he had not told anyone that he had achieved making a time machine.
What if a scientist makes it and does not tell anyone about that? Do you think there are real Alexanders? And last but not least, why would one declare it if he/she succeeded in making a time machine?
One thing among many others attracted my attention the most. When the photonic cited the name Alexander Hartdegen, 1869 to 1903, Alexander asked questions about Hartdegen, but no avail, there was not enough info as he had not told anyone that he had achieved making a time machine.
What if a scientist makes it and does not tell anyone about that? Do you think there are real Alexanders? And last but not least, why would one declare it if he/she succeeded in making a time machine?
Darby
Epochal Historian
Trex,
Though the question seems to be more philosophical than physical there issome physical "logic" to support the position that profound changes would probably occur.
The time traveler has some concept of what has occured in his past prior to making a tme trip. He then climbs into the gadget and zips into the past. There he interacts with the other actors and some outcome results.
One position would argue that the time traveler affectively altered the future history of that world.
Another position could equally contend that the time traveler simply carried out his function in that era that ultimately resulted in the history that he was aware of prior to making the time trip, i.e. he fulfilled the necessary and unalterable requirements that caused his memory of what had occured in the past.
One should probably hope that the latter is the case. If the former is the case, and if he travels sufficiently far into the past, then the simple act of being there and interacting with air molecules would have profound effects on the future history of that world...he wouldn't even have to interact with living beings. It would not be necessary for him to kill the proverbial butterfly to completely change the future history of that world. Just being present wold suffice...even if being there was for just a few seconds.
Though the question seems to be more philosophical than physical there issome physical "logic" to support the position that profound changes would probably occur.
The time traveler has some concept of what has occured in his past prior to making a tme trip. He then climbs into the gadget and zips into the past. There he interacts with the other actors and some outcome results.
One position would argue that the time traveler affectively altered the future history of that world.
Another position could equally contend that the time traveler simply carried out his function in that era that ultimately resulted in the history that he was aware of prior to making the time trip, i.e. he fulfilled the necessary and unalterable requirements that caused his memory of what had occured in the past.
One should probably hope that the latter is the case. If the former is the case, and if he travels sufficiently far into the past, then the simple act of being there and interacting with air molecules would have profound effects on the future history of that world...he wouldn't even have to interact with living beings. It would not be necessary for him to kill the proverbial butterfly to completely change the future history of that world. Just being present wold suffice...even if being there was for just a few seconds.
well, let us consider we can travel in time, forward or backward. Then wouldn't life be devoid of meaning. There would not be anything unknown to us. How would crimes be dealt with? Could one go to the future where actually one would be dead. Could one you go to 800,000? What if the world ended? The Doom I mean. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif [well, I still am not convinced that time travel is possible, even theoretically /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif.]