«

[efthimios]

What does he mean that none can actualy travel through time due to this? Like technicaly impossible (infinite power needed etc), or that something would physical stop someone from doing so, like hitting a wall?

[Reup]

Mmm.. that's interesting. This is the 'you can't go back in time to kill your father' thing, isn't it? Maybe it's like when you try to force two equally charged magnets together, the closer you get, the stronger the force is? This means that is the damage to the timeline that can be potentially done is greater, the opposing force would be larger as well. Killing your father would cause quite a resistance, but killing say Napoleon would cause even more?

[TheSmyth]

My Theories-

Isn't it more a case of there being several problems with it?

1) You can't completely destroy anything. Only change it into something else. e.g. Ice into water -> water into steam -> water molecules -> someting else. So if you could travel in time, you would be completely removing yourself and whatever you take with you, from the present, effectively destroying it (in the now).
2) If you went back and killed your father, it must have already happened, because if time travel is possible, all possible changes to the time-line must already have taken place before now (otherwise now wouldn't be now)... And your dad must not have been your real dad.
3) You could not use any fuel to travel in time, because energy takes time to process into motion / electricity / whatever, and if you were going faster than the speed of light, you'd already be gone by the time the energy had been processed. This would include your own body (synapses in the brain etc..)
4) If you could travel just faster than the speed of light, then you would be able to see what just happened a moment ago, but if you wanted to see what happened 10 years ago, you'd have to travel many times faster! or keep travelling at just over the speed of light for about 10 years!
5) If 4 was possible, you'd be millions of miles away from where you started.

That is not to say, you couldn't travel at very close to the speed of light.

Feel free to pick out any inaccuracies in my theories.

[Quintopotere]

The real problem is that (this is MY theory) you can't travel back in time, but you can "only" change the entropy direction of time... isn't simple to explain... anyway you will not go back to your occurred past but to something like a parallel past created by the opposite-working of all the things in therage of the time machine... :eeeeeh:

Well i wrote it better than i can...

[TheGiantMidgit]

Originally posted by Quintopotere@May 23 2005, 01:04 PM
The real problem is that (this is MY theory) you can't travel back in time, but you can "only" change the entropy direction of time... isn't simple to explain... anyway you will not go back to your occurred past but to something like a parallel past created by the opposite-working of all the things in therage of the time machine... :eeeeeh:

Well i wrote it better than i can...

So, if I interpet this correctly, you're refering to splicing of the time line?

Meh, the whole time travel, alternate dimension thing is fun for SF, great paradox potential (yea, going back in time is kind of insane, seeing as how such events would have already occured), but, personally, I can't see time travel progress past the theoretical stage.

[Quintopotere]

Originally posted by TheGiantMidgit@May 23 2005, 01:06 PM
So, if I interpet this correctly, you're refering to splicing of the time line?

well, it's some like this...

In this way of time-travelling you can't return at the travel start point, and once you stop the time-machine the entropy direction return working in the normal way and you have start living an alternate story.