Is Time Travel Possible?

[noseall]

the only time travel that is feaisble is via light .

Wrong again.
Theoretically if you were a passenger on the tip of a beam of light, time would appear to be standing still. Theoretically you would need to travel faster than the speed of light in order to go backwards in time.
Impossible.

 

[The Samaritan]

Wrong again.
Theoretically if you were a passenger on the tip of a beam of light, time would appear to be standing still. Theoretically you would need to travel faster than the speed of light in order to go backwards in time.
Impossible.

Incredible and to be very frank, I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time attempting to educate you.

You are wrong on all accounts and that is a fact. In your favour I guess is that you are not alone
that does not understand at all the basic principles of time travel.

You bang on about "theoretically" yet you don't fail to comprehend the basic definition of that simple word.

Bottoms line: You can not, you certainly, definitely can not travel back in time if you don't go faster than the speed of light and that my dear chum is a fact of the universe.

I give up!!!

 

[Munroast]

And even if you could you wouldn't get any younger - its 50 years I want knocked off, otherwise happy with here and now.

 

[Justin Passing]

I give up!!!

I predict that they haven't.

 

[jeds]

Bottoms line: You can not, you certainly, definitely can not travel back in time if you don't go faster than the speed of light and that my dear chum is a fact of the universe.

Interesting. Now, going back in time to earlier (see what I did there?) we get this.

Well know fact re time travel going back into time is easy in theory.

Hmmmn, are your getting you bottoms lines and your well know facts a bit mixed up?

 

[motorbiking]

If I take a photo of something and show it to you 8 minutes later, would you say you were looking back in time?

You could, but that isn’t the argument. If I’m standing in front of you, you’d say you are looking at me as I am right now. If I’m 400mil miles away and you are using a very powerful telescope you’d still think it was me now. Except it’s not, you are seeing me as I was an hour ago

 

[Justin Passing]

You could, but that isn’t the argument. If I’m standing in front of you, you’d say you are looking at me as I am right now. If I’m 400mil miles away and you are using a very powerful telescope you’d still think it was me now. Except it’s not, you are seeing me as I was an hour ago

NO.


About 40 minutes.

 

[Justin Passing]

You can get information to travel faster than c. Infinitely fast, apparently, though afaik, nobody's timed it yet. Maybe they'll set up an experiment between here and the moon, or mars.

 

[motorbiking]

Are you talking about Quantum entanglement? Einstein wasn't a big fan of Quantum theory.

 

[jeds]

You could, but that isn’t the argument. If I’m standing in front of you, you’d say you are looking at me as I am right now. If I’m 400mil miles away and you are using a very powerful telescope you’d still think it was me now. Except it’s not, you are seeing me as I was an hour ago

I'm not convinced. A photo is a snapshot (literally) of light waves as it left the subject. In other words a record of the light at the time. When you see light that has travelled from a distant object - such as a star, say, - it is also a snapshot (a record) of the light as it left the object. You could say it is just a slice of light which shows what the object looked like when that slice left. There are billions of slices of light hurtling towards you, one after the other, about a photon apart. Slice number 1 - the one you are looking at presently - isn't influenced in any way by slice number ten thousand billion which is way back in the line.

 

[gas112]

Because it is a feeling of something that happened before. Maybe something very similar happened before and that memory is no longer immediately available.
It is just a feeling. Probably something evolutionary to help us learn from the past, even when we may have forgotten most of what we learned.

Mystery of déjà vu explained – it’s how we check our memories
Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/articl...-its-how-we-check-our-memories/#ixzz7NhkhpkqJ

Na too easily explained away classing everything together . There is instances that could never have happened before

 

[JP_]

There is instances that could never have happened before

such as?

 

[gas112]

such as millions of things , there is things that have never happened in our lives not even remotely close to it . That just before they happen you know exactly what is about to happen and what is said etc straight afterwards .Then bingo 2 seconds later it happens .
Not a case of thinking afterwards oh im sure thats happened before . a case of knowing what is about to occur before it does

 

[mitch66]

Incredible and to be very frank, I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time attempting to educate you.

You should have asked Noseys' advice before you started giving advice on shower seat fixings for fat people. Then you'd realise he was educating you. As he is with this speed of light ******.

 

[Justin Passing]

Are you talking about Quantum entanglement? Einstein wasn't a big fan of Quantum theory.

Yes, partly. Spooky indeed.
No concensus on how it works, yet. Or even agreement that it does. Brian Cox, for example will tell you that if you change the orbit (energy state)of an electron in one atom, that instantly has a bearing on every other electron orbit in the universe. Being a mere mortal I have trouble with that, but the maths fits, and the bloody theory works. If you want to really fry your noodle, look at what happens when things get really cold. Technically the Q.E.D of a Bose-Einstein condensate. You need to plod through the maths a bit, but I bet you come up thinking "that doesn't feel right"..