What could be brought back as proof of time travel

There is almost nothing. Almost everything can be explained away. Pictures and videos can be altered. well....perhaps an extinct species of something but even then someone will say oh it survived somehow. Bringing back something from the far future may be especially if it does not exist
yet or the tech is not possible yet. Even a hot smoking time machine will be doubted even if touched...perhaps the only way is an actual ride or to see someone appear or disappear in the machine. hmmm even then the person may assume he was somehow tricked. lol.

Then again it depends on who you are presenting these things to.
If it is an engineer who built the time machine or someone involved in the program bringing back anything will be proof because they know the machine works where if it is someone like you on the internet that does not know the time traveler personally there will be nothing to satisfy your desire for proof. It all depends on who is receiving the info or item. Proof to one person will not be proof to another.
Click to expand...

"Proof to one person will not be proof to another." Well you hit the nail on the head pretty good there. More so with the subject of time travel which can be difficult to prove at best to one person and very difficult to prove to many people. Even if someone can pin point events there is always a hole or nick in the story someone will try to invent or find. And with media your right almost anything can try to be explained away. On devices from the future your correct about that. I recently watched videos on youtube of alian implants which is suppose to be way beyond our technology and even with scientific study all that could be proving was the material was not of earth but nothing else. With future technology yes it would be explained away somehow or put in a catagory other than time travel. Proving actual time travel is difficult at best. The only thing that might be proved was that it was in someway possible but that it actually took place almost impossible to prove. It might help to have the news paper and television reporters there but if they wrote negative storys then again the proof goes out the window. Even if a room full of scientist were present some would agree and some would disagree again clouding the issue. There would have to be some type of test developed and agreed upon by the scientific community which the results would be conclusive and agreed upon. The test more than likely would have to be able to be reproduced by others with the same conclusive results before it could actually be proved. But, how that would happen again would be difficult seeing as time travel creates paradox's and alternate timelines which again makes proof all most impossible.
 
Re: What could be brought back as proof of time tr

You miss the biggest question of all. Why would anyone in their right mind, possessing the "secret" of time travel, want to reveal it?

All that would happen is that somebody would take it away from them. And why try to convince a group of fools who conceive themselves to be experts? If they don't don't know how to do what you can do, but insist on being convinced,that makes them fools, pure and simple.

And for God's sake, the government is the last entity one has a moral or ethical obligation to inform. I'm sure they would claim to have a legal right to such knowledge, but if they don't know it exists, there's no problem. If such information fell into official hands, the C.I.A. and the military would put it to use to kill somebody. Would you want that on your conscience?
 
If time travel really does exist, Not many people would know about it. That's something you would be probably be murdered if you knew the truth about.

I sometimes ponder, if our reality has been altered by a real time traveler, we would never know it!

If there are multiple universes involved in time travel, there would be no way to really prove you are a time traveler. Every universe is different. What would seem like the same time line at first glance, could be very different if you have a closer look.
 
Which begs the question if time travel is difficult to prove to one person who knows the time traveler and virtually impossible to a stranger on the internet why is proof the first thing people
ask for on this site? LOL /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
I agree Pam.
Whose to say some of these people on this site are real? What if they are from different time lines where things are the same until they show up and it changes everything because of their existence here in our time line.
 
Re: What could be brought back as proof of time tr

You miss the biggest question of all. Why would anyone in their right mind, possessing the "secret" of time travel, want to reveal it?

All that would happen is that somebody would take it away from them. And why try to convince a group of fools who conceive themselves to be experts? If they don't don't know how to do what you can do, but insist on being convinced,that makes them fools, pure and simple.

And for God's sake, the government is the last entity one has a moral or ethical obligation to inform. I'm sure they would claim to have a legal right to such knowledge, but if they don't know it exists, there's no problem. If such information fell into official hands, the C.I.A. and the military would put it to use to kill somebody. Would you want that on your conscience?
Click to expand...

Well if someone really had it why would they reveal it? This world is filled with all types of people. Someone with the belief they had a moral obligation to society and did not care about what it would do for them might be inclined to reveal it. Example - There are people you can give money to and trust them to take that money someplace else and give it to someone else and those people do that for a living. But, then there are those if you handed them money its gone and never to be delivered. Some people if they find a diamond ring would try to find the rightful owner of that right then there are others if they found it put it in there pocket and keep it.

As for the wrong hands subject criminals certainly would want the technology. As for the military they are so far ahead of normal society in technology that if anyone had it first it would be them. And, they would use it as they see fit. But, for myself I believe time travel is self defeating. It is only good for a quick tour at best. Lets say I wanted to travel back in time a 100 years just for the fun of it but I did not want to change any thing. So I go back and walk in a empty field maybe do a little fishing out of a stream but did not contact anyone then I return to my own time line. Well that maybe did not harm anything. But if I went back to change something just the act of trying one time only and if the event did not turn out ok then that would spawn many different alternate realities of myself going back in time to change that one event. Each time it did not work out ok then again my future self not knowing he had already been back once would travel back again thinking this was the first time. Maybe eventually it would correct itself with my future self being happy with the outcome. Or, after many different times of trying by my alternate reality selfs the timeline could become a complete mess until my future self did not have timetravel or was never born. Or as I once said my alternate reality selfs could run into each other in the past and make physical contact with their matter having the same sub-atomic state the matter would not repulse each other and cause a fusion bomb explosion. But, now maybe you can see the danger of making changes to the timeline. It can be self defeating.
 
Re: What could be brought back as proof of time tr

I was waiting for someone to say that someone woudln't be 'allowed' to tell anyone or else "time cops" would come get them - enter bad movie plot.
 
Re: What could be brought back as proof of time tr

Anything DNA based that is structurally combined with artificial matter with both working in unison, something that shows mainstream scientific advancement that could not be faked
_________________
wasserbetten
current event
 
Bottom line is that everything can be disproven nowadays.

There will always be ways to logically tread around story holes as examples of a false time traveller.

The truest way to have a time traveller prove themselves is to reveal technology that we couldn't possibly comprehend...because everything we comprehend at this point could be given the excuse as conveniently made-up because the information can be found elsewhere on the internet.

For example, if we all lived in the 1800's where the top technology at the time was a windmill (or whatever). Then one of us went back in a 1985 Delorean with a Flux Capacitor powered by Mr. Fusion. How would it be possible to make the average joe understand that they're looking at a version of a horseless carriage many generations removed from something not yet invented. You'd have to explain the basics of what the vehicle is BEFORE you could even explain how we are able to move it through time.

My opinion...if there was a time traveller out there, we wouldn't know it. They would have no reason to tell us. I think they would go about on their way passing us by like any average person on the street.
 
Bottom line is that everything can be disproven nowadays.

There will always be ways to logically tread around story holes as examples of a false time traveller.

The truest way to have a time traveller prove themselves is to reveal technology that we couldn't possibly comprehend...because everything we comprehend at this point could be given the excuse as conveniently made-up because the information can be found elsewhere on the internet.

For example, if we all lived in the 1800's where the top technology at the time was a windmill (or whatever). Then one of us went back in a 1985 Delorean with a Flux Capacitor powered by Mr. Fusion. How would it be possible to make the average joe understand that they're looking at a version of a horseless carriage many generations removed from something not yet invented. You'd have to explain the basics of what the vehicle is BEFORE you could even explain how we are able to move it through time.

My opinion...if there was a time traveller out there, we wouldn't know it. They would have no reason to tell us. I think they would go about on their way passing us by like any average person on the street
Click to expand...

The truest way to have a time traveller prove themselves is to reveal technology that we couldn't possibly comprehend...
Click to expand...

Well I hate telling people they are wrong because they get defensive and I am not excluding myself in that matter but displaying technology that we don,t have has already been done with the UFO issue and things like denial and disinformation still have that topic buried in folklore instead of real science so how would the topic of time travelers be takening care of. Well with denial and disinformation of course. Just look at this forum has a whole. Topics get denial and disinformation and discredited all the time. They call it debunking. If there was a real time traveler around here no one would know.
 
For example, if we all lived in the 1800's where the top technology at the time was a windmill (or whatever).
Click to expand...

The stated example above is part and parcel to the problem that many people have with the topic of time travel. They're not familiar with either the history of technology or physical science other than what they've read on alt-sci Internet sites.

I know that you added the "or whatever" caveat after suggesting that windmills may have been the top technology of the 19th Century but its simply not a true statement - even though no one bothered to question it. People seem to think that right up to 1905, when Einstein introduced SR, the world was still entrenched in the Dark Ages scientifically. Therefore when they post an analogy using pre-20th Century technology to compare "now" with "before" the false premise is accepted and goes unquestioned. Needless to say, the technology of the 19th Century was a few centuries more advanced than mindmills. Analog mechanical computers used for capital ships' main gun fire control systems may have, arguably, been the top technology of the 19th Century though highly developed steam engines of all sorts may have been the top technology.


Special Relativity, General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics were direct extensions of the scientific research and development of the 19th Century. Einstein himself was fleshing out the restricted conclusions of Lorentz and Maxwell when he proposed Special Relativity. As far as science goes there's not a lot involved with modern electricity and magnetism (E & M) theory that a mid-19th Century physicist or post-grad physics student wouldn't understand. We might have to either alter our math notations somewhat to match what they expect or bring them up to speed with our notation but they would understand. Notation is arbitrary but the underlying science isn't.

I'm not trying to be pedantic for the sake of being annoying. The point is that we all too often make assumptions that aren't true and then apply them to would-be time travelers. Of course a time traveler could stop bye and present technology that is so advanced that we would not recognize it for what it is or understand the technology. But we would understand to some extent the science behind time travel itself if it was presented by the time traveler. Physical law is physical law. Whatever the actual solution they came to would have to be such that, as limiting situations, classical mechanics, Special and General Relativity, and quantum mechanics would also be solutions to their equations. If those limiting situations cannot be derived then their solution is wrong - and the would-be time traveler isn't.
 
The stated example above is part and parcel to the problem that many people have with the topic of time travel. They're not familiar with either the history of technology or physical science other than what they've read on alt-sci Internet sites.

I know that you added the "or whatever" caveat after suggesting that windmills may have been the top technology of the 19th Century but its simply not a true statement - even though no one bothered to question it. People seem to think that right up to 1905, when Einstein introduced SR, the world was still entrenched in the Dark Ages scientifically. Therefore when they post an analogy using pre-20th Century technology to compare "now" with "before" the false premise is accepted and goes unquestioned. Needless to say, the technology of the 19th Century was a few centuries more advanced than mindmills. Analog mechanical computers used for capital ships' main gun fire control systems may have, arguably, been the top technology of the 19th Century though highly developed steam engines of all sorts may have been the top technology.


Special Relativity, General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics were direct extensions of the scientific research and development of the 19th Century. Einstein himself was fleshing out the restricted conclusions of Lorentz and Maxwell when he proposed Special Relativity. As far as science goes there's not a lot involved with modern electricity and magnetism (E & M) theory that a mid-19th Century physicist or post-grad physics student wouldn't understand. We might have to either alter our math notations somewhat to match what they expect or bring them up to speed with our notation but they would understand. Notation is arbitrary but the underlying science isn't.

I'm not trying to be pedantic for the sake of being annoying. The point is that we all too often make assumptions that aren't true and then apply them to would-be time travelers. Of course a time traveler could stop bye and present technology that is so advanced that we would not recognize it for what it is or understand the technology. But we would understand to some extent the science behind time travel itself if it was presented by the time traveler. Physical law is physical law. Whatever the actual solution they came to would have to be such that, as limiting situations, classical mechanics, Special and General Relativity, and quantum mechanics would also be solutions to their equations. If those limiting situations cannot be derived then their solution is wrong - and the would-be time traveler isn't.
Click to expand...


But we would understand to some extent the science behind time travel itself if it was presented by the time traveler. Physical law is physical law. Whatever the actual solution they came to would have to be such that, as limiting situations, classical mechanics, Special and General Relativity, and quantum mechanics would also be solutions to their equations.
Click to expand...

Maybe but I would like to point out one thing to you. We too would have to be brought up to speed seeing as physics as we see it now might not be entirely accurate.

As far as science goes there's not a lot involved with modern electricity and magnetism (E & M) theory that a mid-19th Century physicist or post-grad physics student wouldn't understand. We might have to either alter our math notations somewhat to match what they expect or bring them up to speed with our notation but they would understand. Notation is arbitrary but the underlying science isn't.
Click to expand...

Now, if we could not understand their math not being up to speed and all then maybe we would discount it entirely.

Of course a time traveler could stop bye and present technology that is so advanced that we would not recognize it for what it is or understand the technology. But we would understand to some extent the science behind time travel itself if it was presented by the time traveler. Physical law is physical law. Whatever the actual solution they came to would have to be such that, as limiting situations, classical mechanics, Special and General Relativity, and quantum mechanics would also be solutions to their equations. If those limiting situations cannot be derived then their solution is wrong - and the would-be time traveler isn't.
Click to expand...

It is true we fear what we don,t understand or we discount it and not believe it. Also, it might be possible that a time traveler for what ever reason would not give you or anyone else all the facts that he had. For what ever reason he might be holding some things back. Then again he still would be discounted.
 
Maybe but I would like to point out one thing to you. We too would have to be brought up to speed seeing as physics as we see it now might not be entirely accurate.
Click to expand...

Actually there's no maybe about it. If a new theory is correct it must, at a minimum, have as limiting solutions the physics previously known to be correct to an approximation within the limits of its domain of applicability. As an example, you can derive Galilean relativity from Special Relativity in the limit as velocity approaches zero. You just add two velocities together, paying attention to the signs on the vectors and angles between the vectors (sin/cos functions), and you have an extremely close solution for the relative velocity. You used the "wrong" math and physics by modern standards but the answer is correct to a very good approximation.

If through a new theory the old theory(s) can't be derived then its flat wrong. Such a theory can't explain what we already know. Dead end.

Of course a time traveler (a real one) could pop in and lie about everything s/he says other than the fact that "I am a time traveler". Seems rather pointless but it could happen.
 
If a new theory is correct it must, at a minimum, have as limiting solutions the physics previously known to be correct to an approximation within the limits of its domain of applicability.
Click to expand...

If through a new theory the old theory(s) can't be derived then its flat wrong. Such a theory can't explain what we already know. Dead end.
Click to expand...

so, are you saying that current physics cannot be correct via pure luck, or coincidence? how do you know this?

im not saying i disagree, but how can you be so sure? a google search of the keywords, "incorrect physics" tells that scientists dont agree with each other, except on the basic principles of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.

monkeys and typewriters...
 
so, are you saying that current physics cannot be correct via pure luck, or coincidence? how do you know this?
Click to expand...

Fundamentally simple: Because it has been validated by experimental evidence.

a google search of the keywords, "incorrect physics" tells that scientists dont agree with each other, except on the basic principles of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.
Click to expand...

If said scientists continue to disagree with physics that has been vetted by experiment, over and over, then they are not worth much as scientists. Sure, there are "scientists" who still disagree that the earth is round (well, oblate spheroid to be precise), or that man never went to the moon. But if they continue to disagree in the face of many forms of experiment that they, themselves, can reproduce, then again I say they are not really scientists.

monkeys and typewriters...
Click to expand...

If monkey's and typewriters came up with relativity, we could still verify it as we have Einstein's work. So now one must ask you: If the odds of monkeys and typewriters stumbling upon relativity are already astronomical, how unlikely would it be for them to also have gotten it right such that every experiment confirms it? At that point you would have to conclude that it is not random and those monkey's are brilliant physicists! :D

RMT
 
Fundamentally simple: Because it has been validated by experimental evidence.
Click to expand...

i dont think you understand what i mean. let me tell you a story, maybe it will shed some light.

at the same time john titor was posting, i was modeling and working on the physics for the cars in a game called need for speed 3. no, i didnt work for ea. me, and another guy modded the game, and created the best cars on the net. we got pretty famous for making vehicles that were better than ea's own stuff. other modders would beg us to show them how we did it. we kept it a secret, and till this day, noone but us two know the secret. well, time to let the cat out of the bag...

we didnt know what any of that physics crap meant. we came in, and tested every value. after testing all of the values, we began to understand how it worked. we did a million times better than ea's programmers. during 2000-2002, i was so busy making cars, that i never got a break. i would get 100 emails a day from other modders, begging me to tell them the secret. i never did, because i kept my promise to never tell. since the game is too old for anyone to care anymore, its time to break that promise...

by changing certain values to negative numbers, we could actually make the cars levitate, like the delorean from back to the future. we even created one. by changing another value to a negative number, we could make the cars instantly reach 99999999999999999999mph just by letting off of the gas.

so, were we masters of the universe, or just tinkerers?

our stuff was validated by experimental evidence too, but to say we were correct is a bit of a stretch. we just wanted faster cars. experimental evidence can give you the results you want, but it takes more than that to prove it to be set in stone.

i consider physics the tower of babel. if you know what i mean.
 
i dont think you understand what i mean. let me tell you a story, maybe it will shed some light.

at the same time john titor was posting, i was modeling and working on the physics for the cars in a game called need for speed 3. no, i didnt work for ea. me, and another guy modded the game, and created the best cars on the net. we got pretty famous for making vehicles that were better than ea's own stuff. other modders would beg us to show them how we did it. we kept it a secret, and till this day, noone but us two know the secret. well, time to let the cat out of the bag...

we didnt know what any of that physics crap meant. we came in, and tested every value. after testing all of the values, we began to understand how it worked. we did a million times better than ea's programmers. during 2000-2002, i was so busy making cars, that i never got a break. i would get 100 emails a day from other modders, begging me to tell them the secret. i never did, because i kept my promise to never tell. since the game is too old for anyone to care anymore, its time to break that promise...

by changing certain values to negative numbers, we could actually make the cars levitate, like the delorean from back to the future. we even created one. by changing another value to a negative number, we could make the cars instantly reach 99999999999999999999mph just by letting off of the gas.

so, were we masters of the universe, or just tinkerers?

our stuff was validated by experimental evidence too, but to say we were correct is a bit of a stretch. we just wanted faster cars. experimental evidence can give you the results you want, but it takes more than that to prove it to be set in stone.

i consider physics the tower of babel. if you know what i mean.
Click to expand...

Physics is limited to the math behind it. Example Darby and I talked about old notation and new notation. New areas of math over the centuries have come into existance to explain new areas physics or new mathematical concepts. Now days we get into new theories that can,t be experimented with so all the people in physics can do is debate them. And with technology now days using physics crimes against science and humanity are commited because the break throughs that are being made are kept secret for corporate or military use. With those break throughs there is no debate, no scientific papers or annoucements or news media coverage. It stays covered up. Mean while the public like here at this forum can only speculate why one or two people run around saying where is the proof? But I do agree that there is new math not invented yet to explain the new area of physics not well understood yet. It is just a matter of it getting invented and coming into the public eye and the public scientific eye.
 
hunches dont go far in the scientific community, but i just have this hunch that 2+2 does not equal 4. call me crazy! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
hunches dont go far in the scientific community, but i just have this hunch that 2+2 does not equal 4. call me crazy!
Click to expand...

Well I won,t call you crazy but your right hunches don,t go far. But in physics there are two communities. The public community and the secret community. Physics has applications which are useful in the corporate or military worlds that is why they call it physics. Time is one of those applications that are investigated in both worlds. If a missile that could shoot down other missiles could use a gravity lens to distort space-time and look a couple of milliseconds or so into the future then that kill vechicle would have a big advantage over lets say the Russian missiles which are meant to be acrobatic and maneuverable in the air. That is an example of a military application using time. Now would the military want the Russians or public to know about this. No it would be classified. The scientific community would be prevented from sharing or studing in this physics break through. But sooner or later the public community will catch up. In the mean time there are many scientific theories or even alternative theories which people can buy into. It is like grocery shopping. Just pick what you want. This forum as RMT has pointed out to me is not the place to take on the scientific community. Your 2 + 2 does not equal 4 I can think of many things where this could be true. If the first 2 is of a different unit than then second 2 then the 4 unit or answer would be off. In AI applications neurons are programmed to have any answer at all to the inputs. So there 2 + 2 would not equal four. If the 2 was in a different base than the other 2 and the 4 answer was also in a different base then no 2 + 2 would not be equal to 4. 2 + 2 = 4 was only meant to apply to a single linear mathematical application it does not apply to all cases.
 
Re: What could be brought back as proof of time tr

But in physics there are two communities. The public community and the secret community.
Click to expand...

This is the big problem. Only a few can say with certainty what the status of contemporary physics, or science in general is. Even if you put all of the stories off to the side (I liked the one about Grumman back-engineering 5 UFO's which they could never get quite right). still the U. S, Government has pumped hundreds of billions (maybe trillions) of dollars into basic research, an undetermined amount of which is classified (if you paid for the information it is your's to control, isn't it?)

I remember someone fairly recently making the comment that while anti-gravity research was going full steam in the 1980's, with a number of major players involved, it suddenly died out completely. See what you can find with Google.
Actually the idea of the free interchange of ideas only was valid for a century or so. In the ancient days "Knowledge was power", and it's even more so today.
 
Back
Top