So, I have been thinking: whenever there's a significant event somewhere say a first performance of something, among the audience there is sure to be some enterprising time travelers to see it for their own eyes. So yeah, that first performance of Romeo and Juliet could very well have some time travelers mixed with the crowd. Better keep your eyes peeled for Donald Trump 's ascension as well in case there are temporally displaced people as well.
Time Travel Theory
481 Views | 8 Replies
This post will actually appear at the bottom of this page.
At 12/29/16 11:08 AM, Timsplosion wrote:At 12/28/16 02:19 PM, LauriJ wrote: Better keep your eyes peeled for Donald Trump 's ascension as well in case there are temporally displaced people as well.Hopefully Terminators.
Nah, there would likely be laws against weapons of destruction by then...
At 1/16/17 01:38 PM, RightTime wrote:
Isn't there a whole, time traveling can mess up the flow of history thing going on though? You wouldn't want to accidentally change something and not be born. I think if there is time travel sometime in the future they would only be able to observe the past, not physically travel to it. Then again, we are talking about time travel here so who really knows.
If everything would happen on the same "timeline reality", then there isn't really any space for altering anything, because if something happens then it means it had to happen ( this is a sort of a view on determinism )
If a space shuttle were to fly into a worm hole and fly out back in time to prevent itself from flying in, the only possible scenario is either this opportunity wouldn't ever exist for anyone to perform in the first place, or right on the first occurance of the event a shuttle clone hits you trying to get into a wormhole, but this clone shuttle would have completely different reasons to do that and would have nothing to do with intentionally stopping a former shuttle for the sake of testing a paradox.
There never can be a case of you doing something and then going back in time and stopping yourself. If you were to stop yourself from doing anything, you would be stopped at a first attempt, and your future self wouldn't do that because he have done this prevented action before and wanted to stop you, he would most certainly have to have dementia and stop you by accident not remembering that he did it before as a past himself. If he hasn't forgoten the incident of meeting with future-self in the past, then this would be an extreme coincidence.
A good example of this is a movie Primer, where actually all the time traveling happens in same timeline, only what is shown to a movie viewer might seem like multiple timelines for the sake of telling a story.
That's assuming that traveling into the past is actually possible. Current knowledge of physics tells us that we can travel into the future, but not the past.
At 1/16/17 05:15 PM, Zornuzkull wrote: One thing that always bugged me about the terminator was the fact the hero never shoved a weapon up his ass before he went back... I mean the terminator was a complex machine wrapped in flesh and he could travel through time... So why couldn't Kyle Reese plug a laser up his ass before the trip?
And how the hell was T-1000 able to time travel if he's entirely made from metal mimetic alloy even when he's "naked". I mean it's not hard to imagine they meat-wrapped them before dispatching but it wasn't touched upon in any way whatsoever.
At 1/16/17 06:11 PM, Zornuzkull wrote:At 1/16/17 06:09 PM, PanzerJig wrote:
And how the hell was T-1000 able to time travel if he's entirely made from metal mimetic alloy even when he's "naked"The more you pull at the thread the more it unravels... It's as if they didn't take the whole concept of time travel seriously at all...
ikr
It's not a theory unless it's been proven fact.
Pay attention in school kid.
