TALP
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jan, 2016 02:11 pm
@xris,
I tend to think of a paradox as an eddy in a river of time, an anomaly that occurs around a dense object; a black hole perhaps.

I also think that if someone were to go back in time, the spit instance they arrive in the past their presence there would cause them to fork off on an alternate time line where they could kill their Grandparents with out affecting the time line from which they came. Because of quantum mechanics I believe that all possibilities exist and traveling back in time would only allow us to navigate another time line.

Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jan, 2016 06:54 pm
@TALP,
Either that or they would already be there n rather be the reason for instance they grandparents met. You don't do what you want for free you want to do what you MUST !
Normally what you MUST do happens to coincide with what you want when you can. It seems in the example the alternative to multiverse is conditioning by circumstances that are beyond your level of awareness and free willing operational competence. A layer up.
0 Replies
 
CVeigh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2016 09:27 pm
@xris,
It does not tell us that.

It solves equations and then leaves the interpretation in the air, often.

IF you solve a word problem about how many boys it takes to mow a lawn in a given amount of time and you come up with 1.5 boys you must then take that correct mathematical answer and convert to the reality terms of man-hours for it to make sense.

0 Replies
 
Cognitive Cape
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jan, 2017 11:17 am
@xris,
The solution to this paradox is that time travel is a theoretical mistake. It is a mistake to think of time as a spatial dimension that is on par with a dimension such as length. One can travel along the length of a pavement, back & forth. It is impossible to travel backwards in time. Time is only spent, with every passing instance.

Why?

Because length is a measure of distance, but time measures something abstract. We use the motion of an object in reality to measure time. But why are we measuring time in the first place? The answer lies in self-awareness & sentience. As conceptual beings, we possess the capacity for introspection. When we think, reason, are happy or sad, or feel another emotion, something in us is capable of observing the actions of our consciousness & categorizing it as such. We are able to state to ourselves that I am sad or elated or angry, etc. As conceptual beings, we are able to remember our past, but most importantly, plan our future. Man is the only living being who is able to set for himself a purpose, & take the necessary steps & actions to attain it in order to further his survival, well-being, prosperity, & happiness. Man is the only living being who is able to formulate a concept such as a past & a future which denote lapses of time & upcoming instances, respectively.

What then does time measure & why do we need it? Time measures the progression of self, of one's own consciousness in relation to an external event. We are aware of our inner state, our inner self, our fact of being conscious. However, time is a measure of this progression. Animals are alive but they are not self-aware, at least, not to a level where they are able to monitor the processes of their own consciousness or to observe its continuity. Man is aware of his own consciousness & is certainly aware of its continuity & progression over a lifetime. It is time that permits him to keep a track of this continuity & progression.

Because man is a being of free will & is able to focus his consciousness to a specific task, he wants to know how much effort to exert & for how long. In every conscious decision to act, a man is confronted by one question every-time - how long to carry out that specific task, or put another way - how long to focus his consciousness on that specific task?

A writer in the morning tells himself that he would write till afternoon before he gets up for lunch. An athlete decides that he will need an exercise regimen of at least two hours before breakfast. Observe that even telling oneself that I will continue a specific task till I am completely exhausted or till I no longer feel like doing it is still determining how long one intends carrying out a specific activity - in this instance - the event that determines the 'how long' is not one the ticking of a clock to a specified hour, but the state of one's own consciousness or body. When a person states that he will continue an activity until a specific outcome is reached, the time-determining factor, is again, not the tick of a clock but the occurrence of a specific outcome. For instance, a driver tells himself that he would continue driving, without taking a break, till a specific destination is reached. Even a life-purpose such as deciding to be a writer has an implicit event attached to it - the continued existence of one's own consciousness. If a person states to himself that he wants to spend his life writing, what is implicit in this statement is that he would continue to write for as long as he is alive, healthy, & fit to write.

Because man is a sentient being, because man is aware of his consciousness, because man is self-aware, he is also acutely aware of his mortality. Man can know years in advance of the event of his death. Because man is aware of his mortality, he is aware that unless he takes specific steps to further his life, he would be unable to extend his lifespan & death would be certain. Again, what is a man interested in when he wants to extend his lifespan? It is the continued existence of his consciousness & mind that he, above all, desires residing, of course, in a health body. It is the continued progression of his consciousness that man desires which is what time enables him to measure.

Man's method of employing his consciousness is his conceptual faculty which he employs to gain knowledge & to apply that knowledge to further his life. A conceptual consciousness seeks & is able to make causal connections. A causal connection tells man that something or some event can lead to a specific outcome. A causal connection, implicitly, implies a past, present, & a future. For instance, water when heated to 100 degrees Celsius would boil into steam. Put another way, in the past, this specific bowl of water was heated to 100 degrees Celsius & is now vaporizing into steam. In the near future, those present wisps of steam caused by the boiling of water in the past, will turn into invisible air. It is time that enables men to measure the progression, not only of their own consciousness, but the progression, also, of external events. It is only man's consciousness, aware of its own progression, aware also of a need to measure its own progression, is desirous of the need to measure the progression of external events in order to understand existence & mold existence to suit its own purpose. Man's ability to make causal connections is his ability to observe cause & effect. An effect is the outcome of a cause & always, by definition, after the cause.

Therefore, to talk of travelling back in time is to reverse the precedence of cause before effect which is, by definition, a contradiction. An adult human being cannot go back in time to when he was a toddler or an infant & yet continue to exist as an adult. His adulthood is the continued progression of his childhood into adolescence & into his present state. To go back in time, which is nothing but a measure of this progression, would mean to reverse all of the causes, the life events, the biological changes, the memories or experiences gained, the skills learnt, etc of this particular adult & yet, somehow, have the adult continue to exist back to when he was a toddler in addition to his toddler-self also existing. Therefore, travelling back in time means creating two entities of one's own self at the same instance - the adult which is the effect of the toddler's progression - a contradiction in terms.
0 Replies
 
Alan McDougall
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Apr, 2017 07:33 am
@xris,
xris wrote:

science tells us, theoretically we can travel back in time.The problem is, if we went back in time and killed ourselves at birth how would we be able to exist in the first place to be able to kill ourselves..The paradox is either free will is not feasible or time travel is a theoretical mistake.


Physics does not tell us that we can go back in time for precisely the reasons you mentioned Rather it would be possible to go back in time by entering a parallel universe

As for forward time travel you are doing it now, but if you did the almost impossible and concentrated nearly all the energy in the universe to propel your space ship say to? 9999999.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of c (speed of light) you could come out long after the death of our universe some googlplex years into the unimaginable distant future.
Krumple
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Apr, 2017 07:29 pm
@Alan McDougall,
Alan McDougall wrote:

xris wrote:

science tells us, theoretically we can travel back in time.The problem is, if we went back in time and killed ourselves at birth how would we be able to exist in the first place to be able to kill ourselves..The paradox is either free will is not feasible or time travel is a theoretical mistake.


Physics does not tell us that we can go back in time for precisely the reasons you mentioned Rather it would be possible to go back in time by entering a parallel universe

As for forward time travel you are doing it now, but if you did the almost impossible and concentrated nearly all the energy in the universe to propel your space ship say to? 9999999.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of c (speed of light) you could come out long after the death of our universe some googlplex years into the unimaginable distant future.


All those 9s are not even necessary but it's funny that you thought they were.

It does not matter how close you get to the speed of light in your conclusion. What matters is how long you maintained that velocity.

Currently we can see photons that are 13.4 billion years old. This means they have been traveling for that long to reach us.

This means you would need to maintain your velocity at least that long if not longer. Even though time would slow for your reference frame on the ship. The outside observable universe time would still need to move along at that same amount.

This is why airchair physicists should stick to cut and pasting lame theology instead.
0 Replies
 
Madmutt
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 5 May, 2019 02:43 pm
@xris,
All events leading up to any point in time have already happened. There are no paradoxes! There is only one timeline.
chai2
 
  0  
Reply Sun 5 May, 2019 02:52 pm
@Madmutt,
Madmutt wrote:

There is only one timeline.


But a line goes in 2 directions.
Madmutt
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 5 May, 2019 02:59 pm
@chai2,
Time moves in one direction only. Forward.
chai2
 
  0  
Reply Sun 5 May, 2019 04:22 pm
@Madmutt,
That's not what you said.

Not saying I agree or disagree, but give proof for your statement.....and saying it's never been observed is not proof, as it has not been observed to this moment.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 11/15/2019 at 08:42:43