Mystery Time travellers

[Sydney Bloods]

There'd be time travel I'd do, as an observer, that would not be much of a request. Of course we all would say "send me back to see Jesus life" etc, but I'd love to have been at Phar Lap's MC, in 1930.

One: To see the great horse win.
Two: To see my Grandfather have 2000 pounds on him, the equivalent of about 500k today, if not more.

Why would you go back to the 1930's everything was in black and white?

 

[Andre]

Why would you go back to the 1930's everything was in black and white?

Yeah, but you'd be colour! Imagine how many B&W chicks you'd pull.

 

[Humanbeing]

Time travel is impossible.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Yeah, but you'd be colour! Imagine how many B&W chicks you'd pull.

Now your being silly, coloured guys couldn't hook up with non coloured back then.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Time travel is impossible.

Not exactly, we're all traveling through time.

Traveling "backwards" is not possible given current understanding.

However nothing prevents information from traveling "backwards" in it.

For this reason most theorise it's possible to actually view the past.

 

[Andre]

Assuming backwards time travel was possible, here's another paradox type one to mess with the mind. You are walking along and reach a crossroads with a CCTV camera. Unbeknownst to you a time traveller from the future has seen the CCTV footage of which road you turn down and is now observing you from a hidden spot overlooking the crossroads (yeah he's a time traveller with shitty taste in destinations). Now he is not interacting with you in any fashion, so he cannot change your decision based on his actions, so he knows with 100% which road you will go down. Does this mean that a person has no choice over how their live will play and it is all fated to run in a certain fashion and they are unknowingly just an actor in an already written play? And if you do have control of what happens to you, how can a future person whose observed it already ever know it?

 

[Hank Scorpion]

Assuming backwards time travel was possible, here's another paradox type one to mess with the mind. You are walking along and reach a crossroads with a CCTV camera. Unbeknownst to you a time traveller from the future has seen the CCTV footage of which road you turn down and is now observing you from a hidden spot overlooking the crossroads (yeah he's a time traveller with shitty taste in destinations). Now he is not interacting with you in any fashion, so he cannot change your decision based on his actions, so he knows with 100% which road you will go down. Does this mean that a person has no choice over how their live will play and it is all fated to run in a certain fashion and they are unknowingly just an actor in an already written play? And if you do have control of what happens to you, how can a future person whose observed it already ever know it?

Although it's not pleasant for me to think it, I don't think we have any free will in the sense that all of decisions are made by chemical balances within the brain. If this is not true, then what physical thing influences our decision making?

That would make your analogy of us being actors apt.

 

[Humanbeing]

Not exactly, we're all traveling through time.

Traveling "backwards" is not possible given current understanding.

However nothing prevents information from traveling "backwards" in it.

For this reason most theorise it's possible to actually view the past.

I'm not travelling. I'm sitting.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

I'm not travelling. I'm sitting.

The thing your sitting on is also traveling, Nothing is truly stationary.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Assuming backwards time travel was possible, here's another paradox type one to mess with the mind. You are walking along and reach a crossroads with a CCTV camera. Unbeknownst to you a time traveller from the future has seen the CCTV footage of which road you turn down and is now observing you from a hidden spot overlooking the crossroads (yeah he's a time traveller with shitty taste in destinations). Now he is not interacting with you in any fashion, so he cannot change your decision based on his actions, so he knows with 100% which road you will go down. Does this mean that a person has no choice over how their live will play and it is all fated to run in a certain fashion and they are unknowingly just an actor in an already written play? And if you do have control of what happens to you, how can a future person whose observed it already ever know it?

There's many answers to this.
Here's a few that will leave more questions then answers:

1) just by being present, the observe will actually change events. "whatever you observe you also change." someone else might see the observer and alert you causing you to change your actions.

Thus causing a paradox simply by being present.

2) all "time" happens at once we perceive time as a continual flowing process.
So him seeing the CCTV footage wasn't actually "in the future" but at the same exact moment. Only the observes perspective has changed.

3) paradox impossibilty. The past cannot be changed no matter what. This would mean when viewing the CCTV footage the observer had no way of knowing it but he had "already" traveled to the past from the perspective of the subject.

Explain it more simply, he couldn't have traveled to the past unless he had already traveled to the past.

So let's say I'm the observer your the subject.

In 2025 I watch footage of the past which shows you crossing the road in 2014 then travel there and watch you the subject cross the road.

In 2025 from your perspective I was watching you in 2014. The event has already happened for you. in order for it to have happened it must have always happened.

My future actual is the past (from your perspective) so like you, my own actions have also already occurred. because as far as the universe is concerned my very presents is a paradox. I'm not supposed to be present and if paradoxes are impossible then it must mean I was always watching you in 2014. My future must be a set event.

 

[Duritz]

He didn't know it, but he was on the footage too, behind the bush.

The guy has free will, and he chose to turn, say, right. The free will made the decision, the other guy is just observing the free will playing out. In this case, it's the opposite of actors in a play, because free will is observed, not harnessed.

 

[radiojake]

I've always figured that if we could travel back into the past, then those travellers would have always been there from the intial time.

So if in 30 years the technology is available for Duritz to go back to drink Jesus' wine, then I say that Duritz was always there drinking Jesus' wine 2000 odd years ago...


Back at school there was a kid in our maths class who said he'd invent a time machine, so me and these other two kids said 'prove it by making sure you come back to this time right now out in the school yard'

He said that he had more important places to go to rather than to come back to high school merely to prove it to us... fair point

 

[TW_Gangee]

All of the "going back in time" paradoxes are a result of the assumption that time is linear.

I'm sure some of you guys have heard of the "Many World's Theory" which states that there are an infinite number of parallel universes where every possible action has already taken place. So when you are going back in time, you aren't really going "back" into time, but going to a sort of alternate timeline where your actions would have already been accounted for. If this is true, then it removes any paradoxes.

Personally, I can't really grasp my head around the idea of infinite parallel universes. Although I do like the idea that in this theory there perhaps would mean that there is such a thing as free will. Think of it like moving or navigating "through" time, instead of an arrow pointing in one direction in the linear understanding of time.

Has anyone here read Slaughterhouse-Five? Theres a great take in that book about the concept of time and fate. I'll see if I can find the quote.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

All of the "going back in time" paradoxes are a result of the assumption that time is linear.

I'm sure some of you guys have heard of the "Many World's Theory" which states that there are an infinite number of parallel universes where every possible action has already taken place. So when you are going back in time, you aren't really going "back" into time, but going to a sort of alternate timeline where your actions would have already been accounted for. If this is true, then it removes any paradoxes.

Personally, I can't really grasp my head around the idea of infinite parallel universes. Although I do like the idea that in this theory there perhaps would mean that there is such a thing as free will. Think of it like moving or navigating "through" time, instead of an arrow pointing in one direction in the linear understanding of time.

Has anyone here read Slaughterhouse-Five? Theres a great take in that book about the concept of time and fate. I'll see if I can find the quote.

But I don't count that as time travel technically that's not time travel at all.

But interestingly there's growing evidence that time is not linear that's only our perspective.

There's a fantastic documentary on it explains time more l like a film roll.

Each cell on the film is a "block" of time (more accurately an instant of time) the cells are actually static and cannot be influenced.

It is only from our perspective that time is moving or flowing. Much like when a projector is turned on we see the people move on film.

Even more shockingly it went on to explain that this film roll could already be complete.

It is static stable but we are only able to view time from a linear perspective, which gives the illusion that time moves.

 

[TW_Gangee]

But I don't count that as time travel technically that's not time travel at all.

But interestingly there's growing evidence that time is not linear that's only our perspective.

There's a fantastic documentary on it explains time more l like a film roll.

Each cell on the film is a "block" of time (more accurately an instant of time) the cells are actually static and cannot be influenced.

It is only from our perspective that time is moving or flowing. Much like when a projector is turned on we see the people move on film.

Even more shockingly it went on to explain that this film roll could already be complete.

It is static stable but we are only able to view time from a linear perspective, which gives the illusion that time moves.

Yes, in our current understanding of time it wouldn't really be time travel. I find it to be a fantastic theory(the Many Worlds theory), because I like the idea(or illusion) of free will. But ultimately I just don't buy it. Sounds too much like something that was cooked up by scientists with too much time on their hands.

So the "film roll" concept of time where everything is fixed is also the theory that I think makes the most sense. So that brings me to the quote from Slaughterhouse-Five which I think illustrates that concept in a different but complimentary way to the film roll analogy:

"I am a Tralfamadorian, seeing all time as you might see a stretch of the Rocky Mountains. All time is all time. It does not change. It does not lend itself to warnings or explanations. It simply is."

"The most important thing I learned on Tralfamadore was that when a person dies he only appears to die. He is still very much alive in the past, so it is very silly for people to cry at his funeral. All moments, past, present and future, always have existed, always will exist. The Tralfamadorians can look at all the different moments just that way we can look at a stretch of the Rocky Mountains, for instance. They can see how permanent all the moments are, and they can look at any moment that interests them. It is just an illusion we have here on Earth that one moment follows another one, like beads on a string, and that once a moment is gone it is gone forever.
When a Tralfamadorian sees a corpse, all he thinks is that the dead person is in a bad condition in that particular moment, but that the same person is just fine in plenty of other moments. Now, when I myself hear that somebody is dead, I simply shrug and say what the Tralfamadorians say about dead people, which is "so it goes."

And the protagonist upon the learning that universe was destroyed by accident on an alien fuel test:

"If you know [that the Universe will be destroyed by a Tralfamadorian pilot who accidently presses the wrong button]," said Billy, "isn't there some way you can prevent it? Can't you keep the pilot from pressing the button?"

"He has always pressed it, and he always will. We always let him and we always will let him. The moment is structured that way."

"Everything that ever has been always will be, and everything that ever will be always has been."

It's a fantastic read, Slaughterhouse-Five. I find it a humourous yet also enlightening take on the idea of free will and fate.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Wow I must read that book.

 

[TW_Gangee]

Wow I must read that book.

While I was trying to find you a link for the 1972 film adaptation of the book, I also found out that they are making another film adaptation in 2015. Charlie Kaufman (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless mind- one of my favs) and Guillermo del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth) are supposed to be involved in making it.

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni55895681/

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Cool.

 

[bkozican]

Not meant to be serious. I dont really know what the black thing is. Just found it on a time travel site



--------------------------------------------------

An interesting story

The story originated with the Weekly World News, but appeared in some newspapers after Yahoo reprinted it two weeks later:
"The fact is, with an initial investment of only $800, in two weeks' time he had a portfolio valued at over $350 million. Every trade he made capitalized on unexpected business developments, which simply can't be pure luck."

"The only way he could pull it off is with illegal inside information. He's going to sit in a jail cell on Rikers Island until he agrees to give up his sources."
The past year of nose-diving stock prices has left most investors crying in their beer. So when Carlssin made a flurry of 126 high-risk trades and came out the winner every time, it raised the eyebrows of Wall Street watchdogs. […] Carlssin declared that he had traveled back in time from over 200 years in the future, when it is common knowledge that our era experienced one of the worst stock plunges in history. Yet anyone armed with knowledge of the handful of stocks destined to go through the roof could make a fortune.
"It was just too tempting to resist," Carlssin allegedly said in his videotaped confession. "I had planned to make it look natural, you know, lose a little here and there so it doesn't look too perfect. But I just got caught in the moment."

--------------------------------------------------------------

The Fentz legend

This urban legend is about a man in his early thirties named Rudolph Fentz, who was hit by a taxi and fatally injured at New York City's Time Square in mid-June 1950, dressed in the fashion of the late 1800s. In his pockets there were a copper token for a beer, a bill for the care of a horse and the washing of a carriage, a letter from 1876, 70 dollars and business cards, all without any signs of aging. A NYPD policeman found a person who was disappeared in 1876 in the age of 29.

 

[Illinois Nazi]

Not meant to be serious. I dont really know what the black thing is. Just found it on a time travel site

It's a notebook. And by "notebook", I don't mean a laptop computer.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Andrew Carlssin story is fake. The all indictments from SEC are a matter of public record. You don't just get "picked up" for insider trading its a massive deal.

There is zero record of the NYPD, FBI or SEC filing any charges against an individual for insider trading under that name EVER.

There's no warrant out for his arrest and the story originally came from a paper notorious for fake articles.

 

[DIG]

The fentz legend, where the 1800s guy materializes in 1950, is a pretty cool story.

That's all it was though, a short story someone wrote which became an urban legend over time.

 

[MaddAdam]

All of the "going back in time" paradoxes are a result of the assumption that time is linear.

I'm sure some of you guys have heard of the "Many World's Theory" which states that there are an infinite number of parallel universes where every possible action has already taken place. So when you are going back in time, you aren't really going "back" into time, but going to a sort of alternate timeline where your actions would have already been accounted for. If this is true, then it removes any paradoxes.

Personally, I can't really grasp my head around the idea of infinite parallel universes. Although I do like the idea that in this theory there perhaps would mean that there is such a thing as free will. Think of it like moving or navigating "through" time, instead of an arrow pointing in one direction in the linear understanding of time.

Has anyone here read Slaughterhouse-Five? Theres a great take in that book about the concept of time and fate. I'll see if I can find the quote.

My football, in their desperate quest to find new and inventive ways to lose last year, convinced me of their existence.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

It's a notebook. And by "notebook", I don't mean a laptop computer.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Every black rectangular object that someone holds in their hands must be an iPhone.

 

[Pessimistic]

Time travel is a bit similar to space travel. We initially used humans for bragging rights but it quickly became clear we just need the information it brings, so we send automated or remote control instruments to obtain this.

Ironically comms over large distances mean the information is from the past althogh the body being observed has moved on in time as we have.

They are saying the next space telescopes will see so far that we will observe visual information from so far away, hence so far away that the information will come from a time close to the theorised time of the big bang

If we could get a probe far enough away quick enough we could observe the earth several hundred or thousand years ago, but wed have to wait the same amount of time forward to recieve that information visually.

Cross time information exchange seems to be more important to me and possibly much more easily achieved than transporting fragile humans, even though it itself will be quite difficult