Another Time Travel Post

[NavajoEverclear]

Sorry I didn't have the attention span to read all of the other time travel post, anyway I'm starting my own. The dude that posted it has some good ideas for his own beliefs, but they are just one way, not the only.

 

Traveling into the future, by skipping over time, I see as absolutely possible if we figured out how. Stopping time, might be possible, but it has lots of problems that would arise:

*If you are traveling between time, it still takes time to do one thing, I don't see a way past that, it takes time for something to happen (thats not a problem, just a comment). But in the time which is stopped, you are traveling with infinate speed--- you can do any amount of work, in absolutely no time

*so, I'm not sure what that does, do you then hold the value of infinate energy? That might not destroy you if the theory of relativity were applied

*but then it might, because how do you exist on a different plane

of time, all yourself and you being the only space in it? I have no idea what happens now, maybe that makes stopping time impossible

 

Then traveling back in time, I see as completely impossible. Actually, there are two ways to do it. If you went back then you would simply go down another path of alternate universes, that works. But as for going back in time along our own universe, say you go back in time to save yourself from breaking your leg. Well then your leg wouldn't be broken for you to go back in time to fix.

Oh wait actually i just figured out it would work. You'd just be multiplying yourself---- but YOU would still have the broken arm. Kind of interesting. WOW i am a freaking Genius, I need to publish this.

[Superman]

the alternate universe theory has already been thought up

[JaKiri]

Quantum Mechanics++

[NavajoEverclear]

I know the alternate universe idea was already thunk up, I read about it before I thought about it on my own. Likely everything I said was already thunk up, whether or not its been widely published.

[Radical Edward]

Originally posted by NavajoEverclear

say you go back in time to save yourself from breaking your leg. Well then your leg wouldn't be broken for you to go back in time to fix.

 

and hence you wouldn't bother travelling back in time to stop you from breaking your leg in which case you break your leg and travel back in time to stop yourself from breaking your leg.....

 

 

........ can you see where this is going?

[NavajoEverclear]

Actually I don't think it would be a matter of you bothering, I think it would be against the laws of physics to even begin with . . . . . but if you had read to the end we resolved this dilemna, you would simply be multiplying yourself, you would save your other self from the occurance, but the time traveling self still has the broken arm, and I guess you could drop yourself out of existence maybe, but I wouldn't chose that. And then the matter of you doing it depends on your reasons for your decision, some would say, whats the point of changing something if it doesn't directly benefit you . . . but one might have a good reason for doing such, and it isn't against the laws of physics.

[NavajoEverclear]

exuse my inconsistencey over whether its an arm or leg broken--- of coarse thats the point though

[Radical Edward]

yeap, it is probably against the laws of physics. chatting about paradoxes is fun, but there will probably be something from stopping them from happening.

[JaKiri]

I don't like arguing about paradoxes, because they always turn out to be invalid, and thus don't really constitute an argument.

[Sayonara]

It would help if people didn't just assume that an apparently causeless effect always constitutes a paradox.