| Sergei. 02.01.2007 18:59 |
Will be made possible, in our lifetime? And I ask this question, in all seriousness! I do believe that, with the proper research and technology, we MAY be able to do something, but nothing like "Back to the Future 2." |
| user name 02.01.2007 19:01 |
No. |
| deleted user 02.01.2007 19:03 |
Well, if you think about it...if it would ever be possible, why aren't we seeing people in odd futuristic clothing saying, "I'm from the year 2159!" Unless people in the future have a clever way of not sticking out in the past. Hmmm. lol |
| Carol! the Musical 02.01.2007 19:05 |
Ask Britney Spears. She knows. :P |
| iGSM 02.01.2007 19:43 |
Is true. You'd think that someone from the future would come back and say 'Here! Here is time travel equipment...but don't let it fall in to the hands of Roger the Dodger!!' Also no. I do not. |
| KillerQueen840 02.01.2007 20:00 |
No way. And if it did become possible we'd be screwed. |
| Sweetie 02.01.2007 20:07 |
My Friend Cameron thinks it's possible... He said that you have to go faster than the speed of light though... then he explained a whole heap of crap using cars and I forgot it..... |
| 7Innuendo7 02.01.2007 20:18 |
unfortunately, no...time is a spatial effect of the second law of thermodynamics, time is a concept invented by people...there's just no substance of 'time' to manipulate. the ancient symbol for our planet, the cross inside a circle, is a tool for determining which age (Taurus, Aries, Pisces, Aquarius, etc) of the Platonic year the planet is located in, based on earth's tilt or ecliptic, pointed at a particular region of the band of stars called the zodiac. the vernal equinox is the true beginning of the year, with each arm of the cross inside the circle pointing to an equinox or solstice. thus, we travel thru space, but not 'time' as most think of it. all of the ancient megalithic structures such as the Giza pyramid or Stonehenge or the central and southern American structures are there so people could determine what the pole star was. the central ascending shaft of the Great Pyramid is focused on Thuban, Alpha Draconis. as you read this, earth is beginning to intersect with Polaris as the north star, and will be fully aligned in 2095 CE. The Mayan calendar indicating an end date of Dec 21 2012 points out that the ecliptic will be located at 27 Sagittarius. What that really means is speculation -- some folks anticipate a harmonic convergence, as some researchers suggest the supernova of the star Vela X resulted in the Great Flood, and released background radiation that dramatically decreased the lifespan of humans. 'Time' is just a convenient way of marking our location by means of relative position. If you turn an hourglass upside down (or right side up, if you're Klytus in Flash Gordon!) all you can really measure is the changing distance each grain of sand travels. some folks theorize about wormholes and superstrings as elements of the physical universe, but 'time travel' is just a dramatic way to discuss the fear of mortality. sorry if that's TMI! somebody once said you can't step into the same river twice, but actually you might not even be able to step into the same river once. that has something to do about waves versus particles. Brian's song '39 is basically about two groups of people travelling across space at two different speeds, hence the illusion of time travel. yeah if I could I'd time travel back to Queen live at the Rainbow or something lovely like that |
| Yogurt 02.01.2007 20:30 |
HAHA! Dane Cook spoke about that once. He said if he ever got in a time matchine, He would go back in time to where his parents are making him and he'd walk into their love scene and slap them and scream, "I'M YOUR SON FROM THE FUTURE!" |
| iGSM 02.01.2007 21:21 |
Well spoken. I would go back to 1849 and scream 'COCONUTS CAN FUCK FASTER THAN YOU'. Hopefully I would get an article in the newspaper. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 02.01.2007 21:58 |
As much as I would love to have it happen, no. We could do it, in theory, but only for a split second, and you wouldn't have control over where in the past you went. It would be sweet as hell if we could though. |
| Mr.Jingles 02.01.2007 22:16 |
<font color=660066>Maverick<h6>4711 wrote: Ask Britney Spears. She knows. :PLMAO!! That clip is destined to become an all time classic. link I love it when she goes... HUH??!! It's hilarious, but at the same time sad that those fucked up genes were passed on to those 2 poor kids. |
| eenaweena 03.01.2007 01:29 |
on a serious note, i think that if time travel was used, it would be cool because i can kill euclid and all those greeks and romans who made my life a living hell before they actually conceptualize all that crap. i'm just kidding. on a really serious note, as much as i want to use it to go back to the 60's, i don't think it's right. come to think of it, having a time machine will not make us appreciate our present. we might just even take it for granted. you'd be like... ah. i don't care if i make a mistake on this day because i can just go back in time and undo it. or something like that. but you get what i mean, right? |
| john bodega 03.01.2007 09:06 |
Hate to spoil it : Time travel is like trying to travel through 'litres' or 'centimetres'. You can't travel forward and backward through an imagined measurement that was put there merely to help us organise our lives. Sorry folks. |
| Sonia Doris 03.01.2007 11:47 |
I travel in time every day. Just a few minutes ago I was having lunch with Imhotep at his house, and then we both went to meet Napoleon who prepared a special snail treat for us along with Marie Curie. |
| yamaha 03.01.2007 22:43 |
It could be possible though, jump to one of the infinite parallel universes. I'm not exactly sure how or why, but I saw a show on public television about it. I can't believe I was actually enamored by the topics of string theory, quantam physics, and the like. Probability my ass! Just once I'd like to see a banana appear out of thin air. Technically it is possible. What our laws of physics really say is that if an object is dropped, it is most likely that it will fall to the ground. Things like that. |
| greaserkat 03.01.2007 23:49 |
Its impossible. We would have to go faster than the speed of light which is 186, 000 feet per second, humans cannot travel at that speed, they can barely travel as fast as the speed it takes when the challenger is coming back to earth and going to space as well |
| blerp 04.01.2007 01:02 |
ask duck dodgers goddamit |
| user name 04.01.2007 01:44 |
greaserkat wrote: Its impossible. We would have to go faster than the speed of light which is 186, 000 feet per second, humans cannot travel at that speed, they can barely travel as fast as the speed it takes when the challenger is coming back to earth and going to space as wellThe reason why it is physically challenging for humans to do these things is due to gravity, not speed, which is relative anyway. |
| Raf 04.01.2007 06:19 |
Edgarlicious, if you're REALLY interested in this subject, you could read some books by Stephen Hawking. "A Brief History of Time" and "A Briefer History of Time" are "easy" for "normal" people like us. Specially the second one. I read the "Briefer" one in December, and Hawkings explains a lot about time, shows theories about how it began, about how gravity affects it, how it's relative, just like space, unlike absolute, and there's a chapter about time travel. Technically, you can go back on time once you're able to travel faster than the light, but it's not what Hollywood shows, where you leave your time machine and see your grandfather 57 years younger playing in the yard. Hawking uses an example to make it easier to understand everything... You'd be able to "trick" time only by going to faraway places (other galaxies, for example...) by taking "shortcuts" in Space-Time. Well, you'll just need some patience to read the books, as it deals with some advanced physics, but Hawkins doesn't show the "math" part of it, so with a little bit of patience anyone can understand it. He makes it as simple as possible. Now something to make you think... When you look at something (the computer screen, for example), you're looking at the past. Light has a limited speed, so when you're looking at the computer you're seeing the light sent by it 0,0000(...)01 second ago. When you look at the mirror, you're looking further into the past, as first the light goes from your body to the mirror, then back to your eyes. Interesting, eh? :-P |
| deleted user 04.01.2007 14:18 |
I don't think it's possible...I mean...How CAN it be POSSIBLE? 0_o...But of course, if computers are possible, and cars and cameras....then....MAYBE something MIGHT happen... |
| deleted user 04.01.2007 14:52 |
<font color="lime">Raf840 wrote: Now something to make you think... When you look at something (the computer screen, for example), you're looking at the past. Light has a limited speed, so when you're looking at the computer you're seeing the light sent by it 0,0000(...)01 second ago. When you look at the mirror, you're looking further into the past, as first the light goes from your body to the mirror, then back to your eyes.I don't see that as "looking into the past", more like, "seeing something that was generated in the past". For example - stars far away in space, whose light takes a very long time to reach us. What are we seeing ? We're seeing the light, not the star (just a product of it). So, while we are seeing what "the star" (it's light) would have looked like a long time ago at a closer position to the star, we're seeing the light as it currently appears to us (eventually, the star's "now" will (should, depending on how you want to describe the universe) reach us (or whatever exists here, ifever). I guess it's just a matter of semantics. For instance, if I popped in a Queen DVD, I wouldn't consider myself to be watching "the past", I would be watching the current light from my television (as it reached my eyes and they interpreted it) - even though the information was recorded in the past, from a mechanical perceptions of molecular configurations that (supposedly, wink-wink) happened in the past. Because, after all, it would look different on a different television, and my perception would be different even if I watched the DVD again (since I can't exactly re-create the situation as it was the first time I saw it). As for time-travel, I read about it awhile ago - but I'm not sure how ideas and theories have changed. One interesting idea (though I don't know if it's valid today) was time travel with a worm-hole, I believe. I don't remember exactly how it went, but it explained why there WOULD NOT BE time-travellers visiting us now. Something about how the worm-hole would be accessible from the future, and that the moment when it was invented would probably be a time-tourist attraction. But since we have not done this yet, would be travellers don't have a way to come here. A lot of it relies on the understanding of how the Universe works. For instance, "time travel" theories would depend on if you were relating the concept to a "multi-verse" with parallel infinite universes, or a singular universe, brane-wolds, et cetera. And also what "laws" that universe operated on. |
| you_rock_my_socks06 04.01.2007 15:11 |
Hopefully it will never be possible because say someone went back in time and killed your great great great great grandad then that is your whole family, which should have been born, wiped out as they will never exist and you will never have been born and your future family will never exist. Lol you get the drift |
| deleted user 04.01.2007 15:23 |
you_rock_my_socks06 wrote: Hopefully it will never be possible because say someone went back in time and killed your great great great great grandad then that is your whole family, which should have been born, wiped out as they will never exist and you will never have been born and your future family will never exist. Lol you get the driftI don't think that would / could happen. I think that if someone went back in time (assuming it would ever be possible to do this) to do such a thing, they would be prevented in some way - therefore, allowing the "future" to play out as it does. It would only be failed attempts, since if you were to be successful, the past and future would no longer "line up" and you would have had no reason to go back in time in the first place. If you go for the "parallel universes" where there are infinite universes where anything and everything does happen, then they are pretty much free of logical constraints, in theory (for example, a giraffe suddenly appearing in my room - or a world where Freddie Mercury is the President of the United States and declared every Saturday to be a ... nevermind) - but then you could (if it were possible) just "jump" to a universe that was similar to ours, but where that person didn't exist. |
| Micrówave 04.01.2007 15:43 |
If it was ever going to be possible, wouldn't someone have gone back in time and "spilled the beans" by now? It's not possible, quit watching Star Trek! |
| deleted user 04.01.2007 15:48 |
Micrówave wrote: If it was ever going to be possible, wouldn't someone have gone back in time and "spilled the beans" by now? It's not possible, quit watching Star Trek!... The Audacity of Charles wrote: One interesting idea (though I don't know if it's valid today) was time travel with a worm-hole, I believe. I don't remember exactly how it went, but it explained why there WOULD NOT BE time-travellers visiting us now. Something about how the worm-hole would be accessible from the future, and that the moment when it was invented would probably be a time-tourist attraction. But since we have not done this yet, would be travellers don't have a way to come here.I don't know if they changed their mind about the worm-hole theory, but it did explain (the one that I read) why we would not have people from the future coming to visit us today. Personally, I think time-travel is a fantasy created by people who want to "just go back in time and change that one thing". If it ever happens, I doubt it will be like that. If it EVER happens. |
| Carol! the Musical 18.02.2007 00:54 |
Zebonka12 wrote: Hate to spoil it : Time travel is like trying to travel through 'litres' or 'centimetres'. You can't travel forward and backward through an imagined measurement that was put there merely to help us organise our lives. Sorry folks.Yowza, that concept is deep..! :0 |
| john bodega 18.02.2007 03:36 |
<font color=660066>Pomponias Marrion wrote:Makes sense though!!Zebonka12 wrote: Hate to spoil it : Time travel is like trying to travel through 'litres' or 'centimetres'. You can't travel forward and backward through an imagined measurement that was put there merely to help us organise our lives. Sorry folks.Yowza, that concept is deep..! :0 Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day You fritter and waste the hours in an off hand way Kicking around on a piece of ground in your home town Waiting for someone or something to show you the way Tired of lying in the sunshine staying home to watch the rain You are young and life is long and there is time to kill today And then one day you find ten years have got behind you No one told you when to run, you missed the starting gun And you run and you run to catch up with the sun, but its sinking And racing around to come up behind you again The sun is the same in the relative way, but youre older Shorter of breath and one day closer to death Every year is getting shorter, never seem to find the time Plans that either come to naught or half a page of scribbled lines Hanging on in quiet desperation is the english way |
| deleted user 18.02.2007 13:42 |
<font color=gold>Thirtynine<h6>Whee. wrote: Well, if you think about it...if it would ever be possible, why aren't we seeing people in odd futuristic clothing saying, "I'm from the year 2159!" Unless people in the future have a clever way of not sticking out in the past. Hmmm. lolThat's a good point. |
| Poo, again 18.02.2007 16:08 |
I wish I could go back in time to say like... 1935 when yo moma looked a whole lot younger. |
| blerp 18.02.2007 16:36 |
<font color=pink>Account Deleted wrote: I wish I could go back in time to say like... 1935 when yo moma looked a whole lot younger.What is that? A toad? A frog?! Or yo momma! ! |
| Queenluv4Life 18.02.2007 17:23 |
i dont think its possible in our lifetime and i dont think it will be possible in the future. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 18.02.2007 18:08 |
i asked this question in 2009 and i was right |
| Eviltwin 18.02.2007 18:11 |
iGSM wrote: Well spoken. I would go back to 1849 and scream 'COCONUTS CAN FUCK FASTER THAN YOU'. Hopefully I would get an article in the newspaper.and you would be burned as a Witch. That would be cool. Besides that tho...no! My dad said according to the crap they used to say when he was little, we should be flying around with jet packs on our backs by now. |
| Sergei. 19.02.2007 08:01 |
Oh God. This thread again. xD |
| iGSM 19.02.2007 08:07 |
I would go back to yesterday and tell you the right year of the Gettysburg Address, Sasha. And...Uncle Tom's Cabin/Disco Fever. |
| deleted user 03.03.2007 21:29 |
Is it just me or did Albert Einstein already prove time travel impossible about a century ago? |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 03.03.2007 21:35 |
<font color=space>sweden_man wrote: Is it just me or did Albert Einstein already prove time travel impossible about a century ago?he hasnt done it yet |
| Elizabeth Knightson 04.03.2007 04:08 |
According to Einstein, time is only one way (like a one way street). If you take a step forward and take one backward, you went forth and back in space but not in time. Time is simply events following each other, there's no circle of time. I think he said (shame I can't say it in English) "On ne pourra jamais télégraphier dans le passé". Anyway, Time Travelling is like the Loch Ness monster: a dream, another expression of Man's incredible imagination. That's why there are so many movies about it. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 04.03.2007 06:51 |
Elizabeth Knightson wrote: According to Einstein, time is only one way (like a one way street). If you take a step forward and take one backward, you went forth and back in space but not in time. Time is simply events following each other, there's no circle of time. I think he said (shame I can't say it in English) "On ne pourra jamais télégraphier dans le passé". Anyway, Time Travelling is like the Loch Ness monster: a dream, another expression of Man's incredible imagination. That's why there are so many movies about it.loch ness monster not real? you obviously havent met any of my ex girlfriends |
| Elizabeth Knightson 04.03.2007 08:12 |
Lol It was just an example of something I consider to be sheer legend. Men (meaning humans) like to fantasize about things so extraordinary. |
| thomasquinn 32989 04.03.2007 09:04 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: As much as I would love to have it happen, no. We could do it, in theory, but only for a split second, and you wouldn't have control over where in the past you went. It would be sweet as hell if we could though.Even that is bullshit. It would involve us travelling at speeds considerably beyond light-speed, i.e. not possible; interestingly, at those speeds the earth would look like a doughnut. Only you couldn't really see that, as the total of all the planets' orbits and the sun itself would make the whole scene look like a solid orb. |
| Donna13 05.03.2007 09:45 |
link |