So, the only ways round these are to:
A: Find an instance that theoretically or logically disproves either theory.
B: Someone else adds in two cents, be that two cent a comment about the two theories or a new, third theory? Come on all you vets, get posting...

Back a bit: Hitler, I believe the Red Alert story line is quite accurate. Had Hitler never risen to power and started those nasty 6 years of war I think it's fairly safe to safe that Stalin would have gone a bit rampant. Any comments?

i like arcon's third pic cuz it actually made sense to me. the only thing i don't agree with is the bit where the new timeline joins up with the earlier one. the new timeline is not depreived from teh original timeline, but the actions of ant(whichever that went back into past)
therefore, following hitler theory, if i go back, quarter hitler, then universe/multiverse/superverse*whatever* will take on a new timeline.. if anyone DOES make a time machine don't you think the time physics is impossbily difficult to understand? maybe, MAYBE, if we killed hitler, himler(whoever he is) might suddenly get a light bulb going off and make a super laser gun or something. that MAY have been the eventual timeline WITHOUT hitler.

i knoe i'm making no friggin sense here so i'm taking a new approach:

Harry potter book 3: prisoner of azkaban;
sirius black is an escaped convict who's innocent and is harry's godfather.
hermione takes two too many subjects and has to get a time turner (our time machine) the hermione turns the time turner to go back in time (exact method is irrevelant)
on getting the time turner, hermione is instructed to be NOT SEEN by her past self. why? because, in HP, magic exists. they'll think some dark magic is going on. again, irrelevant. we go back to muggle world.
some non-magic guy picks up the time turner that hermione lost (new senario) and somehow figures out how to use it. he goes back 5 hrs where he is walking down the path of his garden and into hte street.
QUESTION1: where does he end up?
the answer lies in one of hte chapters in HP3. dumbly puts harry and hermione in a cupboard. why? to prevent anyone witnessing - irrelevant. then. hermione works time turner. they go back couple hours. where are they? they are in the cupboard.
WHAT IF. we, non-magic ppl did it in the public? what would we see? fast forwarding of a movie? i'm not sure on this. exact phenomina that might take place is totally over me i need to think on it.
QUESTION2: what happens when we witness our past?
in HP3, harry tries to see what he thinks was his father. but realises its himself. nothing happens. IF he went up and had a chat with his earlier self.. nothing woulda happened. again, i leave this un-answered.
QUESTION3: paradox? no?
ministry of magic comes along and is about to execute buckbeak. the trio are in cloak, unseen. thud of axe. everyone thinks the bird's dead. we'll set the time-zone when trio comes out of hagrid's first time as present.
at this moment, the future harry and hermione have esacped with bird. HOWEVER, we go back to paradox question. i think, its all a matter of why we go back and what we know while doing it. in HP, harry and hermione and everyone else believes bird is dead other than those that witness esacpe. therefore, harry and hermione go back in time to try prevent this, when in reality, the birds already gone so if they knew this, they'd not have gone back in time.
go back to ant. i leave this un-answered again.

now, this is my theory, and from what i've heard. say we lazily ignore the consequences of time travel and just make one, taking into account billions of hours of idle thinking about how to do it. i've read somewhere that this guy is trying to make a time machine, starting with small stuff, like atoms and molecules first. how he does it ? i duno. suppose doomsday comes with humongous asteroid. in the future(from the presented theories of our physiscts) the written future, this guy makes humoungous baseball bat. someone takes it back in time and slams the asteroid into obvlibion. what happens? i htink it'll take on a new timeline, with earth prospering. suppose someone made AIDS cure in future, on same plane as the timeline we are on now. thoughtful person goes back in time and cures everyone. new timeline again. i don't believe in the paradox theory, but lets see the killing granddady.
kill granddady, i don't think you'll be born to different parents. but, i think it'll look like this;
+------>--(2)---------------------------------->------
/
+-----<---+
/
-->-------+

'<''>' signify direction of timeline. the lowest line is our present time. go back in time, ignore the vertical bit. say 3 hrs. kill grandaddy, life goes on, time goes on. say future isn't written. by going back in time, we erase so called 'past future'
as the person knows it. however, say arcon went back. but i'm still here. so the present to me as he knows it in his past self is erased. *i know i'm making no sense* so to arcon, time goes on. say he carries a portable time machine. he can go back as he likes but the process is repeated. so for him, to go back into present (my time, but not same timeline), he'll have to spend time till (2) to be in present mode, as my present as he knows it is erased, so to him, lowest line is non-existant.

now, that was my worthless two cents. lets see what u guys make of it. but i still believe the HP theory is kinda valid, just needs to be verifired in practise.


Science is knowledge.
Knowledge is power.
Time is money.
power = work/time
therefore, knowledge= work/money
therefore, money = work/knowledge
therefore, money is inversely proportional to knowledge.

therefore,

The more knowledge you have, the less money you have.

Prepare for the worst, for you have read the worst.

@ Kimk. Sorry, but I didn't understand much of that, which is a great pity cos it sounds like youve put some good effort into this, and I've read all the HP books and HP3 happens to be my fave. When I next go online at home (I'm at work) I'll re-read that lot. But keep it up! (And I'll look on your new thread too.)

i didnt understand a word of that, you really need to dumb it down to person a and person b, nothing elaborate, just the specifics

-arcon
------

The way I see it, is there is no antA or antB, there is only 1 ant who timetravels.
I don't see how there could be a paradox, because the ant timetraveling itself proves that the ant timetravels. To quote a certain political figure, "The proof is in the proof..."

Here's an example of something to an outside observer, it would look like this:
An ant is walking along, then all of a sudden another identical ant pops out of nowhere. A conversation ensues. If the observer listened carefully, he'd hear stuff like the timetraveling ant saying "Dude, don't time travel! It's like, really, really, painful." The first ant says, "Hey, I'm gonna time travel!" The second ant goes, "Noo!". But it's too late, as the first ant disappears.

But to the POV of the ant, it would look like this:
You're walking along, then all of a sudden an identical you pops out of nowhere. He says "Dude, don't time travel! It's like, really, really, painful." You think: Hey, that's a neat idea! "I'm gonna time travel!" You don't care about what the other you is saying, because you're an adventerous person, and this idiot made you curious. So you flick your time-travel watch-o-matic to seven years ago. Obviously it hurts. You think Hey, that dude was right! I'm gonna go back and try to tell myself to not time travel.
So you head back to that time (enduring the pain) and say to the other ant you meet: "Dude, don't time travel! It's like, really, really, painful." You watch in horror as the other guy thinks for a second, then says "I'm gonna time travel!". "Nooo!" You yell, but you know it's too late as the other ant flicks his time-travel-watch-o-matic and disappears. You don't want to time travel anymore, so you just amble on.

I hope that makes sense... it's exactly like arcon's first pic, only with narration. Now, why didn't the ant listen to himself? Because A) The ant's an adventerous and curious idiot. When somebody pops up and says "Don't do this." What's he gonna do? He'll do it. We can prove that this happens because it happens.

But, what if the ant was a bit more cautious, and listened to himself? Well, we can take this 2 ways: 1)We know he won't listen to himself, because he does go back in time, or 2)He wouldn't time travel in the first place. If he time travels, then he tells himself to not do it, which gets him to time travel. If he doesn't timetravel, then he doesn't tell himself to not do it, so he doesn't time travel. (I like to think of this phenomenon as a self-consistent paradox. ) The ant isn't more cautious, or if he is, he won't listen to himself this one time. I don't know how to explain it, but it just wouldn't happen. It isn't a possibility. "If" it did happen, then there'd be a paradox. But there isn't a paradox, so we know it didn't happen.

Now, what if the ant had a different personality? He's curious enough to time travel, but cautious enough to listen to himself? I can think of another 2 plots, with subplots.
1) He does time travel on his own accord. This means he doesn't persuade himself to time travel. Let's say he picks up this time-travel watch by the road and, not knowing what it is, decides to use it. It hurts. So, after returning to the time he was at when he picked up the watch, he has 2 choices:
a)Throw the watch away, and never think of it again.
b)Try to warn himself. Now, the problem is he doesn't want to time travel himself anymore. So he writes a note: "Dear me, if you find a time travel watch sitting by the road, do not use it. Sincerely, me." He sends this note back in time. But, obviously, the past self of the ant will not use the information in the note. The past self of himself would've either not read the note at all, or read the note, then forgot about it, thinking it's a joke. (Then forgot about forgetting about it, so then he'll write the note.)

I hope that makes sense... basically, I guess it's like 'fate.' You will do or not do something, but the reason you do it is because you will or not do something. I don't like to think of things as being 'meant' to be, because that implies that a greater being somehow planned everything. Also, if the end result is the same, the process will also be the same. (The process can be thought of the end result of an earlier process, and so forth and so forth.)
--------------


Incindentally, I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to have information and items appear out of nowhere. I'll use an example:
Dr. Wartenbuse is credited to be the inventor of the time machine. But he wasn't the smartest guy with physics, only with mechanical contraptions. Anyway, in an interview, he was asked how he figured out how to make the time machines.
"I was sent the plans," he replied.
"By whom?" asked the interviewers.
Dr. Wartenbuse hesitated for a second, then replied "By myself."
The interviewers are puzzled by this, so they asked him to explain.
"I think I've only just figured it out," he says. "I was fiddling around in my workshop one day, when all of a sudden a strange contraption appeared on the floor. I was surprised to see that is was myself inside this contraption. He-I... well, I mean... the myself in the contraption threw a bundle of papers to me, and said 'Bring the knowledge to the world!' Then the contraption disappeared. I thought I had fallen asleep on my table, but, as I found later, I wasn't.
I looked at the papers, and it was a set of complicated plans. I had no idea what it made, but I still built it anyway.
After I finished it (I'd figured out by then that the plans were to a time machine), I hopped in the chair and tested it out. It worked, apparantly! I'm sure you know the rest - I became rich and famous.
But I couldn't shake it out of my head of that day when I saw myself pop out in my time machine and hand me the plans. Eventually I figured it out, it was me! I then photocopied the plans (The originals are in the museum, of course) and went back in time to my workshop. I chuckled in amusement as I saw myself stand there, stuttering and dumfounded. I threw the photocopied plans to him, then yelled 'Bring the knowledge to the world!' I then returned to the time I departed from, and lived a quiet life ever since."


See? A loophole! Nobody invented the time machine, but the knowledge of how to build one came from nowhere! I'm trying to figure out if this is possible, or if it wouldn't happen.

I'm pretty sure that having objects travel through time like that would be impossible, though, due to decay. In the above example, what if the Dr. gave himself the originals when he went back in time? Then the originals would exist only in that section of time. The original plan's personal timeline would be a circle. I think that would mean that it has an infinitum of time compressed into a finite amount, so it would decay instantly and never exist in the first place.

Why make your own mistakes when someone else has already made them for you?
-Learn from the skeletons floating in the piranha pool: NO SWIMMING[!

Edited by - Whasp Commander on 18-07-2003 21:47:24

if you've read the part of

---

2) the "if you kill you're grandfather, will you still exist"-matter, the answer: yes.
you will still exist. because 1) you were meant to do so. and 2) if you were to endulge yourself into timetravel, you would enter another parallel plain of the same dimensional realm (RE. the multiverse theory)

---

you can say that this could apply to hitler

In other words if you were to kill hitler you would unknowingly create a multiverse
with two seperate timelines and the more times you go back the more multiverses you would create



__________________________________________________________
Oh, dear, How sad, Never mind!!-Battery Sergeant Major Williams

the multiverse theory is a romantic atachment. designed to allow people to beleive in time travel where you can do anything you like..its far less likely to actually happen because its not logical.

anyway whasp, you long poster you;
it looks like were in agreement over the ant business, by meeting his future self, the ant knows without a doubt that he will be going back in time in the not too distant future...the proof is in the proof.

now then, the invetion problem. This has been (one of) my main problems with the terminator films. who invented the terminators originally? cyberdyne systems did, but they only did this, using a chip from the t-800 recovered in T1. Cyberdyne does onto create skynet, which in turn wages war against mankind using an army of t-800s. this, i regard as a paradox, simply because if someone asked you to trace the origin of the terminators to the beginning, you cant, its a cicken and the egg problem and this constitutes a pradox.

ergo, the time machine you speak of MUST have been invented by an original scientist off his own back. now this could be at anytime however. if the particular form of science hasnt been fully learned for another 20 years but once it has, a scientist went back and told some random guy how to make a time machine and then 20 years later a guy invents it AGAIN (for the first time). the only way this CANNOT work, is if the person who originally creates something isnt influenced in any way by a visitor from the future who may let slip some knowledge about it (i.e. if you are visited by a guy from a cold fusion powered future and he let slip even the tinyest bit of information that you wouldnt be able to fathom on your own, then you have a paradox baby. it has to be COMPLETELY off their own back else your in trouble.

-arcon
------

I see, that's what I thought. Stuff (information or items themselves) can't be created out of nothing. Makes sense.
(Still, it'd be a neat topic for a story, if you don't like to be too factual .)

Why make your own mistakes when someone else has already made them for you?
-Learn from the skeletons floating in the piranha pool: NO SWIMMING[!

Hello All,
First of all welcome back wiz, I myself just got back from vacation just as the wiz. Now ill be leaving sunday to go on vacation for a week with my dad. Ive read this tonight and figured in put in my 2 cents. The way that I see it is if you were to travel back into time you would alter the timeline and that would change it and the you from that time forward. That would cause the yourself from the past to not have to go back to make changes because they have already been made. When you would then go back to your own time I think that you would just have memories from both timelines in your memory. The you from the past would grow up in that timeline while you would live in both. The flip to that could be that when you go back into time and alter things it my only apply to that specific parrall universe. When you would go back forward into time things still might be the same for you. Well i hope i didnt loose everybody with my statement, i was starting to even get a little confused when i read it. Does anybody know the name of that show on the scifi channell where the guy will go back into time to change world events that went bad for the goverment? I watched it one day awhile back and cant think of the name.

@ arcon

there is already a paradox in the terminator movies.

because if the war never happened, john connor wouldn't be born
because he is bred from the seeds of a soldier that has come from the future
the war future that is (see first terminator movie) if the war never existed, he couldn't have come and impregnate sarah connor. and about the skynet A.I.
it was inspired on the arm and the chip from the first terminator, not made of it

i never thought of that locutus..but it could be argued that regardless of the war, Kyle Reese would still be born so if normal folk invent the time machine, it could still work...but thats more coinceidence than anything else.
plus the fact that the terminators coming back in time and killing sarah/john conner would be a paradox identical to the kill hitler scenario, the terminator films are a damn minefield of paradoxes and impossibilities

-arcon
------

Yes, but because of the skynet A.I. the time machine existed.
the A.I.designed it and made sure it was built, so if skynet (and with skynet the judgement day war) never existed. how could the time machine exist. it was never built, so kyle reese could never impregnate sarah connor.

EDIT: sure kyle reese could still be born, but not in the fashion of a grizzled warshaped soldier. if he were to be born in real-life BTW it would have happened last year in 2002, because in the movies he is about 27 years old (I read that somewhere).

Edit 2:

---

plus the fact that the terminators coming back in time and killing sarah/john conner would be a paradox identical to the kill hitler scenario, the terminator films are a damn minefield of paradoxes and impossibilities

---

that's science fiction for ya.

Edited by - Locutus on 19-07-2003 17:40:34

The following sentances are my opinions/theories, with no obvious scientific backgrounds
Time travel is impossible. Why? (man, you really shouldn't have asked this...)
First of all: There is no such thing as "nothing". Humans have created this term to indicate that there isn't a presence that they can directly detect, "feel" (hear, touch, see...), and it ( the term 'nothingness' ) is widely and grossly misused.
Now that this is clear, let's move on: What is time?
Time is another misused term, originally used to mark that an action is going to be performed slow enough for others to see (perceive) it, and that more things than one shall change during the process. The other usage was to mark that a person will have to wait for something (else than the action mentioned, that requires time to pass) to happen in order to trigger the desired action. The term time is now used as a "4th dimension of objects", although I think that time is an object itself (a 2d object)
I think that time is a byproduct of energy variations and interactions ( including wavelenghts, "color", polarity, and "content" ). Time is also a primary attribute of matter. (mass being the secondary, and frequency/impulse the terciary)
I also think that matter is an extremely high frequency energy turbulence (resonance, color mismatch, or similar high intensity interaction) in which the "main energy flow" and the "parasite flow" are balancing until a "homeostasis" is reached. While this change is taking place, the flow becomes inconsistent and time starts to "make a difference" (up until the turbulence all the energy was the same, so nothing changes = no time). Now we have time and energy combine to form matter, a low density, low content energy which reshapes the "parasite energy" so that it can fit into the main flow once more. All of these changes are taking place in a different time, there are no events with same time values/coordinates. In order to travel back trough time, you would have to create a completely new multiverse, and trigger the exact same events as the ones in your current universe (replicate it) up until the time coordinate that you wish to reach, and then transfer yourself to that multiverse, in the given point in time, in the universe you replicated inside the multiverse. I lost you several minutes ago, didn't I.... OK, here's what I'll do: I think that time travel is impossible, and I can explain it with the General Existence Theory that I've come up with, but since it's too long to type it out on a forum, and too complex to make it short (and understandable) enough on a forum, you can ask me questions about my theory (one by one), and I'll be happy to answer them. I'm even thinking about writing a book, but I'm not sure I wanna do it. What do you think?
Oh, and I'm lacking proper words to describe this in English ( I even lack words in serbian, but I'll make new ones ), so some explanations wont seem/"feel" complete...



Careful what you wish... You might just get it.

Edited by - Chetnik on 21-07-2003 15:09:58

WHAT???
there is pretty much not a single sentence in that i understood.

oh, and this thread isnt debating the exitance/ability to time travel, but a discussion about what would theoretically happen if you COULD and did certain things

-arcon
------