Time Machine

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Let there exist a time machine.  Now what are its parameters and what happens if:

1. You travel back in time and kill someone who is a famous historical figure before they become famous, for example, John Wilkes Booth
2. You travel to tomorrow and find out what happens in the market.  Can you apply your knowledge when you get back?  What effect will this have on the market?

[Easy Bakes 253]

Personaly I think time is static.

There for everything that has happened in the past  has happened and cannot be changed.

This includes you going back to try to change things.

to take your example.

I travel back in time to  kill JWB before he can kill Lincon (  Im assuming that would be the event you wanted to stop). You build your device and travel back, WB somehow sees you and killes you before you can kill him. Or you try to warn Mr Lincon,  no one belives you and you get locked up.

 or your device by the nature of how it works you cannot leave its area of effect( which is another theory of mine on how time travel would realy work).

or any of numberous senarios that prevent you from interfering with this event.

 in my theory traveling forward in time will never work. 

But if it did wouldnt it be eaiser to get the winning lotterys numbers  rather then try to manipulate  the stock market?

Playing the stock market for a one day big gain requires a lot more ready cash the a $2 Lotto ticket.

[topcliff 1]

Backward paradox:

I go back in time to meet my great-grandpa. In a twist of events, my being there causes him to get murdered. Because he's murdered, I'm never born, and therefore I don't go back. Because I don't go back, my great-grandpa doesn't get murdered and therefore I'm born, and the cycle continues for the rest of the existence of time.

Forward paradox:

Impossible to go forward in time. If I go forward in time to meet myself, I can't. Because I went forward, there was no version of me left in the past, therefore there is no old me. If I manipulate the market, it could create a ripple in time therefore changing my past in the event that because I become rich from manipulating the market, I don't travel forward in time, and then the cycle continues for time's entire existence. TopCliff

[MrCinatit 30]

An interesting topic, Mr. Body - I have been long fascinated by the effects of time travel.

Let us say, theoretically, you prevent Booth from assassinating Lincoln by killing Booth.

If this is the case, then Samuel Mudd never treats Booth for his broken leg and is never sentenced for treason.

In 1876, Mudd becomes national chairman of the committee to elect Tillman-Hendricks on the Democratic ticket of the Presidential election (instead of being a local VP). Under his leadership, Samuel J. Tilden is elected President in a landslide (he actually won the '76 popular vote, but the electoral college voted in Rutheford B. Hayes).

Unfortunately, President Tilden is not a well man. He dies in office in 1877 (instead of 1886 - the office does offer a lot of pressure).

Thomas A. Hendricks takes over the office of The President.

While Hendricks is not a great President, he is not a bad President and is easily re-elected in 1880, defeating James A Garfield and Chester A Arthur (who actually were elected).

During this time, many in the States are complaining of the massive immigration of the Chinese (which had been going on since the Gold Rush). Hendricks does nothing, and relations between China and the U.S. slowly erode. They erode to such a point that, when Japan declares war on China in 1894, the U.S. shows support for Japan. Japan wins the war (which they did), and relations between China and the U.S. fall to all-time lows, while relations between the U.S. and Japan remain good.

When World War I breaks out, both the U.S. and Japan declare their neutrality - but both pledge to assist the U.K. if requested to do so. Both do assist on the Pacific fronts, but not in the European fronts, which drag on until the early 1920s. Casualties in Europe are immense. The Pacific front sees fewer casualties, though an already bruised China does suffer significant defeats.

During the 1930s, Germany begins is resurgence. This time, Japan vows its alliance with Germany, while the U.S. remains neutral. While the rest of the world is mired in WWII going into the late 1940s, the U.S. remains neutral, unwilling to chose between allies Japan and the U.K. Instead of focusing their forces on the Pacific (and U.S.), Japan focuses its forces inland - and China. Even though the war is devastating, Japan is victorious with the shorter attack ranges.

With momentum on their side, Japan is able to quickly move through the lower part of Asia, easily defeating Vietnam, Korea, India and going into the Middle East, where again, they face little resistance. They finally meet with their allies, the Germans, and both are able to sweep up and break the U.S.S.R in half, crippling her....

I am sure you can see it only gets worse and worse. While getting rid of one madman might help one cause, there are many unforeseen causes and effects which might take place. Sure, we could get rid of Hitler - but what if that leaves a different madman in charge - one who has an even "better" plan for world domination?

Your second scenario:

Let us say I live in 1960. I have a time machine. I transport myself to 2007, and see one of the biggest companies is something called Microsoft. Ok, there is no Microsoft in 1960 - but I know there will be one, so I keep my eye out on it. Finally, I see it in 1978 - but it is a private company. That is okay - I still sneak around and buy some private shares. When the stock goes public in 1986, I have a lot of private shares - and use those to buy even more public shares. Suddenly, I find myself virtually in charge of the company!

The only problem is, during all of these years, I have absolutely no clue about computers, let alone operating systems. Heck, I am not even a businessman, so many of those geeky guys in Microsoft (Gates, et al), have left my company and formed their own. There is a Windows, but it is not made by Microsoft. So, instead of using this to sneak myself into a fortune - I find myself in charge of a struggling company.

Again, these are only "What if" scenarios off the top of my head - but if we were to attempt to use a time machine to play around with the future or past, we probably will not end up with what we bargained for.

[6underground 11]

Think: Sliders, before it became crap.

[Odainsaker 2,135]

I still like Bill & Ted abducting famous personages of historical significance to speak at their high school history class report.  Maybe in a sequel they can kidnap Chairman Mao, Mahatma Gandhi, Elvis, Ronald Reagan, and Mussolini.

Ted - Dude, we could use my dad's car, but he lost the keys a few days ago.
Bill - Can't we look for them?
Ted - We don't have time.
Bill - Sure we do!  After the report, we could use the Time Machine to go back back in time to before a few days ago, steal your dad's keys, and then leave them waiting for us here.
Ted - But where will we leave them so we can find them?
Bill - How about behind this sign?  See, here they are!
Ted - Whoa, dude!  Okay, after the report we can't forget to do this otherwise it won't happen....uh, but, it did happen...hey, it was me that stole my dad's keys!

[topcliff 1]

They did make a sequel to Bill & Ted. Evil robots from the future took over their lives and they got banished to Hell where they had to face off against Death to get back their lives. Weird, huh? TopCliff

[Eastwinn 6]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes Personaly I think time is static.

Or you try to warn Mr Lincon,  no one belives you and you get locked up.

quote>

 

That reminds me of an pisode of the twighlight zone. I man finds himself back in time before Lincoln is assassinated. He trys to warn everybody but no one believes him.

The paradox that is always present in time travel is what top cliff mentioned. I travel back in time and someone how make it so I do not exist. If I don't exist then I never went back in time, therefore I exist only to go back in time and restart.

[Jasoncw 11,840]

Well, I think the concept of time is a human invention that doesn't really have much true meaning.

[JanYpe 17]

Sure, we could get rid of Hitler - but what if that leaves a different madman in charge - one who has an even "better" plan for world domination?quote>

There is a reason Allied plans to have Hitler assassinated were never carried out: his orders and beliefs were doing the Wehrmacht more harm than good. With Hitler gone, the war would have been largely orchestrated by capable army leaders. Men like Rommel, Model and all the Prussian guys with 'von' in their names. And if you squished Hitler under your time machine in the beginning of the war, say July 1st 1940, they would have had a carte blanche.

[ilikehotdogsalot 308]

if you think a time machine will be made sometime in the future, don't you think someone will go back to the past after they created it and tell everyone about it?

[Duke87 1,070]

This discussion is moot as traveling back in time is physically impossible.

Something like traveling forward in time, however, is completely possible, due to the increasing effects of time dilation as you approach the speed of light.

Though, there are none of these such paradoxes to worry about there. When you "travel into the future", you will not meet your future self, as you will have left on your journey to the future however long ago you left, and things on earth will simply have been going on without you having been there.

And besides, once you go forward, there's no going back. So it's not exactly the kind of thing you'd want to toy with, considering how everyone you know will either be older or dead when you return.

It's one thing to "what if" about things that could actually happen. But "what if"ing about impossible things cannot be an intelligent discussion at all, since it's pure fantasy. The intelligent discussion ends at "that's impossible". There simply is no more to it.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: Duke87 This discussion is moot as traveling back in time is physically impossible.

Something like traveling forward in time, however, is completely possible, due to the increasing effects of time dilation as you approach the speed of light.

Though, there are none of these such paradoxes to worry about there. When you "travel into the future", you will not meet your future self, as you will have left on your journey to the future however long ago you left, and things on earth will simply have been going on without you having been there.

And besides, once you go forward, there's no going back. So it's not exactly the kind of thing you'd want to toy with, considering how everyone you know will either be older or dead when you return.

It's one thing to "what if" about things that could actually happen. But "what if"ing about impossible things cannot be an intelligent discussion at all, since it's pure fantasy. The intelligent discussion ends at "that's impossible". There simply is no more to it.quote>

 

Thats not realy time travel though. you just moving at a different umm  Rate of time as

every one else. time still pasess but for the traveler its at a different rate.

Oh and you can go back it just even more time will have passed, 

read Larry Nivins "A world out of time".

[The_Dalai_Llama 15]

Possible or not, If I had that kind of power, I'd go back in time and kill Michael Bolton.

Why?  Let's just say... I have my reasons.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: The_Dalai_Llama 

Possible or not, If I had that kind of power, I'd go back in time and kill Michael Bolton.

Why?  Let's just say... I have my reasons. quote>

 

I'm not saying you don't have your reasons but surely there are other people who have earned a higher place on the list.

[ciber 0]

actualy it is theroticly posible to travle back in time becaus as we know ay you aprotch the speed of light time dialates for us thear 4 at the exact speed of light time goes poof stop ------->l but to reatch that speed we wold need to travel infnitly fast thear4 requireing infinit energy makinig it imposibl to axelerate past the speed of light

but thear is a theretical particl called a tacyon that starts past the speed of light causing it to go backwards in time and unlike normal particls that need infnit energy to axelerate to the speed of light tacyons requir infint energy to decelrate to the speed of light so that proves that no thing not made out of tacyons can go back in time but what if it was made of tacyons then it wold percev tim in rvers

and hears sompin to think on a tacyon with absolutly no energy is posibly mor than infinatly fast but then wold that be cald the stop of tacyon as our speed is of light well then tell me what is after the stop of tacyon

[Goldfish4209 9]

Bad things can happen... The paradoxes are really good, but we won't know what will happen until someone actually tries to do this. Hopefully, these experimental things won't kill us all.

As long as you don't try to do something drastic against history, bad things could be avoided. Harry and Hermione used their time turner to good effect, but they were extremely careful. Imagine what would have happened if Hermione didn't duck in time and she saw herself.

[The_Dalai_Llama 15]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

Originally posted by: The_Dalai_Llama 

Possible or not, If I had that kind of power, I'd go back in time and kill Michael Bolton.

Why?  Let's just say... I have my reasons. quote>

 

I'm not saying you don't have your reasons but surely there are other people who have earned a higher place on the list.quote>

 

Obviously, there are bigger fish to fry in the past... pretty much everybody would want to take a shot at Hitler or Osama Bin Laden if they had the chance, but Bolton is an easy target.

To actually be serious...  yeah, serious... I wouldn't mess around that much with time.  Doing something as minimal as squishing a bug can have dire consequences... think Homer Simpson killing a stupid bug and returning only to see Flanders running the world.

Plus, I think time travel is static like Easy Bakes said.

[hamsterTK 93]

since you hate him, by any chance is your name also Micheal Bolton

[Voar Tok 4]

Originally posted by: The_Dalai_Llama

Originally posted by: SkiGeek

Originally posted by: The_Dalai_Llama 

Possible or not, If I had that kind of power, I'd go back in time and kill Michael Bolton.

Why?  Let's just say... I have my reasons. quote>

 

I'm not saying you don't have your reasons but surely there are other people who have earned a higher place on the list.quote>

 

Obviously, there are bigger fish to fry in the past... pretty much everybody would want to take a shot at Hitler or Osama Bin Laden if they had the chance, but Bolton is an easy target.

To actually be serious...  yeah, serious... I wouldn't mess around that much with time.  Doing something as minimal as squishing a bug can have dire consequences... think Homer Simpson killing a stupid bug and returning only to see Flanders running the world.

Plus, I think time travel is static like Easy Bakes said.quote>

Which is why, while we're speaking of Michael Bolton, we should never allow Cher to possess time-travel technology.

If I were to go back in time, I'd follow the age-old advice of Star Trek and Sliders - never break the Prime Directive.

[JoystickJunkie 0]

If you go back in time to kill John Wilkes Booth before he kills Lincoln, he'd never be famous and no-one would remember him.

Which means that it never gives you a reason to go back in time, as in the present you wouldn't know who John Wilkes Booth.

It would unravel time, as it never gives you a motive to go back in time so you would die or implode. Something like that.

Time is fickle friend and thus we shouldn't mess with it...if I had a Time Machine, I would fix a few things in my life. But the effects could be deadly.

JoystickJunkie

[burtos 0]

what about back to the future, when marty falls from the tree and his mother ends up having a crush on him. Imagine if you didn't know what your mum looked like when she was young (may be you where adopted) and end up having a kid together

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: burtos what about back to the future, when marty falls from the tree and his mother ends up having a crush on him. Imagine if you didn't know what your mum looked like when she was young (may be you where adopted) and end up having a kid togetherquote>

 

Like Futurama Fry is  his own grand father.

[Barbarossa 51]

Personally, I do not think time travel is possible, as least with regard to the past. Look at it this way: Have we seen any time travelers? Whether from the 22nd century, the 25th century, or even the 50th century, we have never seen anything to indicate visitors from the future. But, perhaps they are the explanation for Roswell? LOL... I just don't believe it is possible.

Now, travel into the future... that is a whole other story. Einstein's Theory of Relativity says it is possible, much like Duke87 and EasyBakes discussed, although their perspectives were different. Both were right, however. The closer you come to the speed of light, the more time "slows down" for the observer.

But if I think too much about it, I get a headache... it really does bend the mind.

Suppose we traveled to Pluto at 99% the speed of light, but the Earth still moves at the same rate (obviously). Would it seem like the travelers were gone only a short time, or would it seem like years? I don't know, but from what I recall, Einstein's theory predicted everyone the traveler knew on Earth would be dead and buried. A disturbing thought to me.

Time to whip out the ol' Physics book...

Barbarossa

[Voar Tok 4]

At the risk of scientific sacrilege, I have to say that I think time travel is impossible both forward and backward. The reason why I say that is because I believe that the day that we send an object any appreciable distance at around the speed of light is the day we're going to find out that our understanding of how time works is horribly flawed. First off, the average person believes that the speed of light is a constant. This is not true, as has been shown by scientists. Second, Einstein's statements about the speed of light in a vacuum are a bit ambiguous. All in all, it's difficult to say exactly how it works, but there's a fairly good reason to believe that the speed of light and time are not connected to each other. I seem to remember that part of the thinking behind why it's impossible to travel faster than the speed of light is because at the speed of light, mass is believed to be infinite. The problem here is that photons are also believed to be a physical object. If they have a physical aspect, that means that they have to have mass. If they have mass, then mass can't be infinite at the speed of light because that would mean light would have infinite mass.

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

May I add on and say that, the laws of physics say that no particle of matter can exist in 2 places at the same time. If you go back in time, the atoms that make up your body would exist in 2 places at the same time. I have been fascinated with stopping time, but since both heat and light are functions of time, it would be absolute zero and pitch black. Hardly the type of scenario for any shenanigans.

[ciber 0]

if tacyon particles exist then time canot be liner ie it can flow both 4ward and backward depending on perspectiv

[ciber 0]

an idots guide to travling back in time

1.prove tacyons exist

2.invet a computer that can turn mater int infermation then back to mass ie teleporter

3.colect tacyons

4.go 99.999999999999999%of light speed make self out of tacyons with teleporter thing

5.grab tacyon selph

6.transfer x amount of energy to tacyon not the mor energy the slower you go back in time

7.let go a desegnated time and space

this may in thery work

computer will proably be a mini controld black hole one of the most powerful computers other than an entire galexy or more

[Explodingsims 3]

Time Travel you say? Even if possible, this wouldn't serve a purpose...

Because if you go back to stop...oh say 9/11..you would go back and stop the event, but since you stopped it, you wouldn't go back in time to stop it, so the event will still happen, and this cycle will continue on and on...

[topcliff 1]

Exactly my point Explodingsims. However, on the whole "stop-time" issue, has anyone seen the movie "Clockstoppers"? They invented a watch that causes your molcules to move 200 times faster, therefore causing you to move 200 times faster. It didn't stop time, but for each second happening in real-time, one half-hour occured for person in "hyper-time". In theory, at that rate of movement, two weeks in real time would be twenty years for the person in hyper-time. I personally think this type of technology could be figured out, but we'd have to better understand molecular movement and how our atoms truly function. Leonardo