Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Time travel could be possible, but only with parallel timelines


Still Waters
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (IP: Staff) ·

Have you ever made a mistake that you wish you could undo? Correcting past mistakes is one of the reasons we find the concept of time travel so fascinating. As often portrayed in science fiction, with a time machine, nothing is permanent anymore — you can always go back and change it. But is time travel really possible in our universe, or is it just science fiction?

https://theconversation.com/time-travel-could-be-possible-but-only-with-parallel-timelines-178776

https://www.sciencealert.com/there-s-one-way-time-travel-could-be-possible-according-to-this-physicist

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
11 hours ago, Still Waters said:

Have you ever made a mistake that you wish you could undo? Correcting past mistakes is one of the reasons we find the concept of time travel so fascinating. As often portrayed in science fiction, with a time machine, nothing is permanent anymore — you can always go back and change it. But is time travel really possible in our universe, or is it just science fiction?

https://theconversation.com/time-travel-could-be-possible-but-only-with-parallel-timelines-178776

https://www.sciencealert.com/there-s-one-way-time-travel-could-be-possible-according-to-this-physicist

Could also explain the time difference between the God realm (creating world in 7 days) and human realm (14.5 billion years).

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time travel in our universe isn`t believed to be possible as there is no time symmetry. Basically, if things are run back to their starting conditions there are atomic particles which arrive back somewhere different.

So time travel does require two universes, or we need a better understanding of time which needs to turn out to be more exotic than what we have. I personally dont hide the fact I think our universe has been created. Be it God, or a super advanced civilization (I think they are the same thing), they could well be outside our realm.

Maybe thats what near death experiences are, the extraction process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what am I too believe? Time travel is possible or that time doesn't exist? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If an "Infinite now" is true, much is in question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 4/28/2022 at 2:27 AM, XenoFish said:

So what am I too believe? Time travel is possible or that time doesn't exist? 

was going to write the same.
But if there are parallel universes, one of them might be ours but still in the past thus allowing for "time travel".

PS. Only after reading the article did I realized that the written above is what the physicist proposed lol

Edited by godnodog
just add a sentence
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, godnodog said:

was going to write the same.
But if there are parallel universes, one of them might be ours but still in the past thus allowing for "time travel"

I'm beginning to think no one has a clue.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2022 at 6:48 PM, Cookie Monster said:

Could also explain the time difference between the God realm (creating world in 7 days) and human realm (14.5 billion years).

The definition of time as the measurement of the duration of an event or the interval between events is critical to this subject. In Genesis 1 the creation of the world is not based on Solar days or years, because the Sun was not created until the 4th day of creation. There is no indication of how long these days were, but whole eras.

As for the article, I remember learning according to the Theory of Special Relativity that if you were to exceed the speed of light, then you would travel backwards in time. I have had conversations quite recently about the moral and spiritual implications of these paradoxes. One that comes to mind quite recently wasn't about time travel, but teleportation. If someone were broken down in a teleporter and copied exactly molecularly to another teleporter and rebuilt are they still the same person and do they have the same soul? A seemingly impossible and absurd situation, but I guess it's some kind of paradox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The events that have occurred cannot be changed since they are already fixed and recorded unshakably, but they can be viewed, that is, they are available in the "reading" mode and not editing. Alas, it is impossible to invent a time machine, since in the next topic I mentioned that time is a supraphysical quantity, therefore, it is impossible to move in time with the help of technical means only by consciousness or in an out-of-body state.

If we assume that a time machine can be invented, then someone from the future would visit us and some information would remain, but no one moved from the future, therefore it will not be invented.

In science fiction books, they often travel to the past to change their future or events, people think that if a person like Hitler is killed, then there will be no war and they think that events will change.They will not change because another dark leader will enter the world stage and perform the same actions as Hitler did, and no matter how much you kill "bad people" you would not be able to change the future.
If you tear out a couple of pages from a book, you will not change the subsequent pages, as they are fixed everywhere in the books.
So all these flights into the past are pure fantasy like "here we will change a couple of mistakes and we will all live happily ever after".And even in science fiction, at the end they come to the conclusion that it is better not to change anything and set up a barrier that prohibits penetration into the past.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2022 at 7:27 PM, XenoFish said:

So what am I too believe? Time travel is possible or that time doesn't exist? 

Time doesn't exist.   (that's my choice, I have more evidence of that)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I have more evidence of that

Do tell! :geek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, zep73 said:

Do tell! :geek:

1st, time isn't real or we wouldn't have daylight savings time to mess up our cycadian rythms.   It is just that we have found a mechanical way to assure everyone agrees on what time it is.   2nd, can you learn to tell how long 10 minutes is and be correct every time you decide to gauge how long 10 minutes is?   Yes, our planet has cycles of seasons, but the way we measure time is out of synch with that.   I will clarify what I said, Time is not linear, and the way we think is not linear.   So linear time is not real.   When I retire, the first thing I am going to do is switch to Navajo time.

Edited by Desertrat56
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
9 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

1st, time isn't real or we wouldn't have daylight savings time to mess up our cycadian rythms.   It is just that we have found a mechanical way to assure everyone agrees on what time it is.   2nd, can you learn to tell how long 10 minutes is and be correct every time you decide to gauge how long 10 minutes is?   Yes, our planet has cycles of seasons, but the way we measure time is out of synch with that.   I will clarify what I said, Time is not linear, and the way we think is not linear.   So linear time is not real.   When I retire, the first thing I am going to do is switch to Navajo time.

I think Einstein might would've agreed with you. Let's put it to the test.
Can you agree with this: He saw the universe as one big chunk where everything happens (or happened) at once, and our perception of events following events as an illusion.

Not my favorite Einstein idea, but it's certainly an interesting concept.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I think Einstein might would've agreed with you. Let's put it to the test.
Can you agree with this: He saw the universe as one big chunk where everything happens (or happened) at once, and our perception of events following events as an illusion.

Not my favorite Einstein idea, but it's certainly an interesting concept.

Yes, that makes sense to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I think Einstein might would've agreed with you. Let's put it to the test.
Can you agree with this: He saw the universe as one big chunk where everything happens (or happened) at once, and our perception of events following events as an illusion.

Not my favorite Einstein idea, but it's certainly an interesting concept.

According to the definition of time as a measurement of the duration of events or intervals of events, then that would be like one universal cycle. As for our perception of events following events being an illusion, I don't think so. I can kind of understand that thought, but instead of calling it an illusion I would call it relative somehow.

10 minutes is 10 minutes as defined by the clock. It's relative to the clock. If the clock were to speed up and go faster then time for you would appear to be slow. The faster it goes the slower you would appear because it is relative. 

I think an example of this would be if you were working on something, then if someone came in and started working faster than you you would appear to be working slower in relation to them. Then if you were to speed up your work to match them, then it would relatively appear that they are going a bit slower to you until you reach the same work speed and level out.

I think according to the theory of relativity if everyone was standing still together, then time would appear to be linear. If people start moving around though, then time will become more relative. This is based on a number of factors. It seems kind of trippy at first, but it's something we experience everyday somehow.

As we get in more extreme circumstances I think this starts to matter more. This experiment apparently proves that a clock in motion moves slower than one that is stationary. Although they aren't using real clocks, but lithium ions. At a third of light speed in a particle accelerator the lithium ions took longer to transition between energy levels than in a stationary control of lithium ions.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/einsteins-time-dilation-prediction-verified/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time to point something out.

It takes a short amount of time for our senses to receive stimulation, nerves to be activated, the brain to receive those signals, to process and create our experience from them, and of course play them to us.

So, in fact, there is longer past, immediate past, present, and future, and the only one we experience is the immediate past. Just like we cannot argue that the longer past or future exists or doesnt exist, we dont even know that about the present lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

According to the definition of time as a measurement of the duration of events or intervals of events, then that would be like one universal cycle. As for our perception of events following events being an illusion, I don't think so. I can kind of understand that thought, but instead of calling it an illusion I would call it relative somehow.

10 minutes is 10 minutes as defined by the clock. It's relative to the clock. If the clock were to speed up and go faster then time for you would appear to be slow. The faster it goes the slower you would appear because it is relative. 

I think an example of this would be if you were working on something, then if someone came in and started working faster than you you would appear to be working slower in relation to them. Then if you were to speed up your work to match them, then it would relatively appear that they are going a bit slower to you until you reach the same work speed and level out.

I think according to the theory of relativity if everyone was standing still together, then time would appear to be linear. If people start moving around though, then time will become more relative. This is based on a number of factors. It seems kind of trippy at first, but it's something we experience everyday somehow.

As we get in more extreme circumstances I think this starts to matter more. This experiment apparently proves that a clock in motion moves slower than one that is stationary. Although they aren't using real clocks, but lithium ions. At a third of light speed in a particle accelerator the lithium ions took longer to transition between energy levels than in a stationary control of lithium ions.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/einsteins-time-dilation-prediction-verified/

 

Linear and relative are not opposites, nor antonyms or synonyms.   Relativity is in relation to the how close to the speed of light an object is moving and our perception of time is linear.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

According to the definition of time as a measurement of the duration of events or intervals of events, then that would be like one universal cycle. As for our perception of events following events being an illusion, I don't think so. I can kind of understand that thought, but instead of calling it an illusion I would call it relative somehow.

10 minutes is 10 minutes as defined by the clock. It's relative to the clock. If the clock were to speed up and go faster then time for you would appear to be slow. The faster it goes the slower you would appear because it is relative. 

I think an example of this would be if you were working on something, then if someone came in and started working faster than you you would appear to be working slower in relation to them. Then if you were to speed up your work to match them, then it would relatively appear that they are going a bit slower to you until you reach the same work speed and level out.

I think according to the theory of relativity if everyone was standing still together, then time would appear to be linear. If people start moving around though, then time will become more relative. This is based on a number of factors. It seems kind of trippy at first, but it's something we experience everyday somehow.

As we get in more extreme circumstances I think this starts to matter more. This experiment apparently proves that a clock in motion moves slower than one that is stationary. Although they aren't using real clocks, but lithium ions. At a third of light speed in a particle accelerator the lithium ions took longer to transition between energy levels than in a stationary control of lithium ions.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/einsteins-time-dilation-prediction-verified/

I wasn't talking about time dilation, but the block universe. You are talking about events and perception, I'm talking about the grand total of all events ever - past, present and future.

And I'm not a fan of the idea of the block universe. It excludes free will.

 

By the way. We should be discussing this in the other thread

 

Edited by zep73
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I wasn't talking about time dilation, but the block universe. You are talking about events and perception, I'm talking about the grand total of all events ever - past, present and future.

And I'm not a fan of the idea of the block universe. It excludes free will.

I guess I went off topic a bit, sorry. I guess without observers to perceive time as event after event, then it would just be a block. It seems to be denying the importance of life though, because when life is in the universe it tends cut it into pieces to survive. Also kind of like if a tree falls in the woods and noone is around to hear it, does it make a noise?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Time to point something out.

It takes a short amount of time for our senses to receive stimulation, nerves to be activated, the brain to receive those signals, to process and create our experience from them, and of course play them to us.

So, in fact, there is longer past, immediate past, present, and future, and the only one we experience is the immediate past. Just like we cannot argue that the longer past or future exists or doesnt exist, we dont even know that about the present lol.

Kind of like the stars seeming to be the present, but really is millions of years old light.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we finally find a way to go back in time to any point really, doesn't that mean we already have?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time doesn't exist?. Tell that to the degrading of everything around us. The cells that make up life have a limit when it comes to operating.. Take away your watch and clocks, and **** still crumbles to the ground.. From cities to ant hills..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, brokenbutcher2016 said:

Time doesn't exist?. Tell that to the degrading of everything around us. The cells that make up life have a limit when it comes to operating.. Take away your watch and clocks, and **** still crumbles to the ground.. From cities to ant hills..

That's not time, that is entropy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.