Time travel.

[Teh Ebil Snorlax]

If a page lacks citations, it's an even shittier source.

 

[jimmyboyacreman]

fair enough

 

[Bluberry Bat]

according to douglas adams all the significant changes caused by time travel, by its very nature, have allready happened

I'm pretty sure this sums up my beliefs on the subject as of current, with the exception that it goes for -all- changes. By the nature of time travel, in our current dimension and perception, if one was to alter the past then it has already happened. In that way, it's impossible.

The other argument, however, is dimensions of course. But that's just as tricky really. Theoretically that would be interdimensional, but not time travel, going on the assumption that multiple dimensions operate alongside each other - at the same time. To travel to a point in the past would likely be more akin to jumping to a parallel dimension which was based on a delayed universal beginning. (Making assumptions on a beginning, of course.) In the same way, it's unlikely we could affect our own dimension, and unlikely we could return if we were to travel between them without a very precise link. As for someone else altering ours, see above theory.

In the end, though, I believe "Time Travel" as we know it is simply... false.

 

[<Joseph: Night SHADE>]

Technically, if the universe is infinite, there will be an infinite number of planets, thus meaning that there would be other life in the universe (not strictly relevant, but hey) and not only that, but any given specification of life would be out there (yay, Pokémon is real if the universe is infinite!) thus meaning that every second of time is ocurring somewhere. So if we could travel the mind-boggling distances, we would kind of travel through time...
But if the universe is finite, then none of this is true.
I hope it is infinite.

 

[jimmyboyacreman]

yeah there isn't really a debate here: time travel is impossible.

 

[1. Luftballon]

two-way time travel should be impossible. you're time traveling just by existing.

 

[Minnow]

how do you know that the tree ever "exists"?

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

 

[Valerunner]

yeah there isn't really a debate here: time travel is impossible.

By what we know so far.

So unless we find out some magical equation that transgresses every single thing we know about the universe, it's impossible.

 

[jimmyboyacreman]

two-way time travel should be impossible. you're time traveling just by existing.

yeah of course: that's what I meant

it's possible to speed up your forward progression through time too...

 

[opaltiger]

Technically, if the universe is infinite, there will be an infinite number of planets, thus meaning that there would be other life in the universe (not strictly relevant, but hey) and not only that, but any given specification of life would be out there (yay, Pokémon is real if the universe is infinite!) thus meaning that every second of time is ocurring somewhere. So if we could travel the mind-boggling distances, we would kind of travel through time...
But if the universe is finite, then none of this is true.
I hope it is infinite.

Regardless of whether or not the universe is infinite, the amount of matter is finite, making your point moot.

 

[Dannichu]

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

How do you know when it's gone away or not, though? People suffering from hallucinations can't just "stop believing" in the things they're seeing/hearing/etc. Having a psychotic episode and hearing voices telling you to do things hasn't got anything to do with belief, does it?

 

[Minnow]

I was simply addressing FireChao's argument, saying that by acknowledging the tree as real enough to debate its ability to make sound, you validate its existence.

I don't really understand what your asking. But, if I understood you correctly, then I'd say that, yes, having hallucinations doesn't really have anything to do with belief. Referring to the quote I gave, I wouldn't say that it works both ways (ie: saying that, "just because you don't believe in something doesn't mean it's not there," doesn't necessarily mean that believing in something means that it's there).

 

[jimmyboyacreman]

I was simply addressing FireChao's argument, saying that by acknowledging the tree as real enough to debate its ability to make sound, you validate its existence.

"real" enough to make us think we hear sound when near it: no reason that it definitely "exists"

just because you don't believe in something doesn't mean it's not there

I'm not sure anyone ever said it did...

 

[Mango]

Time doesn't really exist, so how can you expect to travel through it? Time is a human invention made up to keep track of the passing days/months/years. There is no tangible embodiment of "time" for us to go through. You cannot travel through a theory.

EDIT: Of course, I have always stood by that there is much in this universe we can not, and will not, ever be able to comprehend or explain.

 

[1. Luftballon]

by that logic, so is space.

it's an abstraction.