True or False time machine?

KitNyx: I did not read all the related stuff, but as far as I know, he was reportedly in 2000/2001 for a personal reason (to meet somebody) and in 1975 to get the IBM 5100 computer + also to meet somebody.

The IBM 5100 reportedly has some powerful undocumented "secret" capabilities. That doesn't sound likely to me. It's not clear to me if it's supposed to be on a CPU level or if it's about algorithms coded its ROS (=ROM) memory. Anyway, these old machines are very limited. I do not think IBM would waste resources (especially the ROS memory) to support something that was not supposed to be used. These machines have relatively few KB of ROS memory - pretty expensive at the time.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I contacted IBM to find out who worked on IBM 5100. They quickly replied:

1 hour later I found a name: Bob Dubke.. He did a lot of work on that machine.. Then a few interesting pages came from google..<br><br>Check out this discussion...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

PARADOXES DO NOT REALLY/PHYSICALLY EXIST!

Example:

In Bagdad lives a barber who shaves every man who does not shave himself...Does the barber shave himself???

A Yes or a No would pose problems, but the simple answer is that THIS BARBER (this paradox) does not really exist !

The importance for time-travel is that the so called timeparadoxes (father-grandson paradox etc) that these paradoxes do not exist, never have and never will....

This must mean that no matter what future technology will bring us, these paradoxes can NEVER be created.

This either means that:

- time travel within in our own spacetime is not possible

- travel to another spacetime (other dimension) MAYBE MIGHT be possible , it poses no problem to kill someone elses grandfather in another spacetime.


Contemplations:

Why haven't we observed Einstein/Rosen bridges white holes in our spacetime????, surely they must have black holes in the dimensions as well that would tranport matter to our dimension ?

Ok, so maybe the matter is not baryonic matter (dark matter, MACHOS, WIMPS etc) barely ionteracting with our kind of matter , or is reduced/destroyed instantly to say neutrinos upon entering our dimension....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If it were that simple to discredit the theories of time travel, then why would Project Montauk aka the Philadelphia Experiment have ever taken place, or even been attempted? 2nd, where is your book?

 

Just name me one paradox that actually exists in our spacetime and I tell you where is my book...

I've heard of all the Montauk / area51 stories and no doubt they cooked up some pretty interesting advanced stuff up there, but classic timetravel? I doubt it...


the thing is with classic timetravel, that you would rewind the whole cosmic tape of events, effectively reversing the direction of entropy of the whole universe, this would take more energy than available in this universe. Ok, so maybe we ever might find a way to draw in all this energy from another dimensional plane, but until then only relative timetravel (slower aging than the observer near speed of light) within our own spacetime seems a viable option, or perhaps "time" traveling to other dimensions using Kerr singularities maybe might be possible etc, this wouldn't necessare;ly violate the laws of entropy and thermodynamics or create any paradox.

 

Time travel is very dangerous and uncomfortable to contemplate, and even if possible, will no doubt never be useful.

If the Many-worlds interpretation is correct, when you go back in time you create a new timeline- this is fine, but effectively means all time travellers into the past are never seen again, as they vanish into timelines of their own construction.

If there is only one universe, history becomes fluid- you might go back and change history, then another time traveller will change history to something else; the present will be an ever changing Kaleidoscope, with a different President or Prime Minister every day; you will go to sleep in a mansion, and wake up in a mobile home; your car will change fro a Buick to a Volksvagen while you are driving it.

Such a lack of continuity will invoke the Chronological Protection Conjecture; the universe will morph and mutate until it reaches a history where time travel has never been invented, ever, at any time in the past or future.

This is the only stable state for the universe, the one we are in now. The CPC has been proposed by many people, including Hawking, Azimov and Larry Niven… it convinces me.

Failing an effective CPC, the far future is a less desirable environment than today; little energy and matter to play with. Refugees from the far future will flood back, sometimes in multiple instances, increasing the mass of the present day universe until it collapse; the collapse will get closer to the present day, until it eventually happened yesterday and we will cease to exist.
That is why time travel will never be possible.
_________________
SF worldbuilding at
http://www.orionsarm.com/main.html

 

The Philadelphia project was an attempt to make a ship invisible to radar, not to travel through time. Why would anyone want to travel through time in a battleship?

In any case, I had understood that nothing happened with the Philadelphia project - it just didn't work.

 

/surely, if it worked back then, they wouldn't need to invent and pump all that money in stealth technology of the late 80's begin 90's....


O wait, I forgot, this Tesla technology is only available to a select group of the shadow government and the timecops...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

There is one simple reason to not believe that this is true.
He claims that the multiple worlds theory is true...

If the mulitple worlds theory is true, wouldn't time travel (especially with the intention of "warning" us about the future to come) be completely pointless?

If the multiple worlds theory is true, then there are in infinite number of worldlines existing simultaneously, and an infinite number constantly being created.
If he traveled back in time, what would bring him to this particular worldline? Why?

If every possible outcome WILL happen what is so special and significant about THIS worldline?

If he is a soldier, the military would only send him back if he had a specific purpose (such as to prevent this nuclear war), but...
1.) If traveling from one worldline to another is so easy and common place, the ones affected by whatever they were trying to prevent would simply travel to another world in which is didn't happen.
2.) Regardless of whether or not he stops this event in this worldline it will still happen in another, what is the point of switching it from one worldline to another.

Whatever he does, whoever he convinces, there will be no effect to his traveling back in time, so there would be no point.

 

it would still affect 1 timeline. and that timeline would be close enough tot he original, that perhaps it wouldnt matter, as long as he was able to save just 1 line from his lines fate.

 

he did say that it is impossible for to return to his exact original timeline, but that he would return to one so close to it that it wouldn;t matter.

 

It is still pointless to go back.

In the many worlds scenario, you can't go back and change the past, you can just go back and create new worldlines.
It is similar to going to the beach and dropping a pinch of salt in the ocean.

But the event would still happen in THIS worldline.
He would just create a new one in which it doesn't.

There are an infinite number of new ones beiing created every instant.
If the many worlds theory is true, then there already existed billions of worldlines that look almost identical to his in which this event would not have happened.

Why not simply move himself to to a worldline that is "close enough" to his that was created naturally?

 

I pretty much gave up trying to write a definitive explanation of my understanding of multiworlds environments, purely because of the literally infinite variations of text I could of written generated so many neurological conflictions that it wouldn't have come out in any understandible format.

(Well I would have understood it, it's just alot of you would have questioned things that would have been defined in it's own text)

When I eventually get around to trying to write it again, I shall.

 

It's nice to see that people (and GE

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

) can survive a nuclear exchange and still have enough spare time to build treehouses and perfect time travel.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Dee Cee

 

It's a nice story but it just doesn't seem possible. I cant see a civil war breaking out in less than 2 years. I think that John Titor was convincing, yet elusive in some of his answers. Im not sure I buy the whole traveling back in time thing either. I think it was just someone with way to much time on their hands or someone creating inspiration for a novel or movie. But I suppose i will keep it all in the back of my mind just incase a civil war does break out in 2005

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Reality

There is only ONE dimension, its called reality. Time is a concept, you can't travel through it. The only way to "travel time" would be to put all suns, nebulas, planets,particles etc into the same position they were at a particular time with the exact same properties, even that wouldn't be traveling time. (and all the people that would be set back would have to have an erased memory of the "past future")

Time travel is stupid, and so is Einstine. He is over glamorized by the media and so the people of the world are ignorant and brain washed.

 

I would still suggest paradoxes exist, no matter how infinite the potential for multiverses. For instance lets say there is an outcome that occurs from something we do through an experiment and we decide not to repeat the steps that led up to that outcome. We potentially remove the outcome from occuring giving way to a paradox, if we then have the capacity to make sure we never forget that that original outcome occured and maintain that we do not follow the same path then you would have a "singularity". (A greater paradox)

Personally I understand that it would be possible to generate a universal junction point that some refer to as wormholes, between two staggared parallel time dilations, where anything passing between does not have to follow the rules of lightspeed to transfer between two different time points.

As constantly mentioned though, the concern will always be the implications of interacting with a universe at that level, as an alteration could cause significant changes.

It's not so much that the changes are dangerous, but more to the fact that there are many schools of thought to the potential methods in how we could deal with time. Some would see that there are infinite possibilities and follow the path of seeing the how vastely infinite the multiverse can truly be, while others would prefer to try and keep the universes following the same original time path, as the use of a controlled pathway allows a better studying experience through not dilating the timeline too much and potentially allows the creation of equipment that could foresee future events.

The problem occurs when the two (or more) schools of thought collide, where their intensions of doing different experiments in different areas create a completely different outcome to what either originally presents.

 

Added, what if you did something would something in the future change?

 

in your opinion...does time travelling bkwds involve having every particle back then at the same place it was when you go back?