Is time travel really possible. Could it be that yes people time

How can travel through time be possible if time is and illusion?

>>18131131
I like this idea. it could be possible but humor me for a second, what if time isnt an illusion but another dimension?

>>18131131
How can mirrors be real if our eyes are an illusion?

>>18131127
Time is just the human understanding of the passing of events, as far as we know. In a way, it's possible to move forward in time, through time dilation, but it's not really time travel. The farthest anybody has ever "traveled in time" through time dilation was 20 milliseconds and the guy who did it is 0.02 seconds younger than he would have been. But again, it's not actually time travel

I opened your thread because you posted a picture of the Flatwoods Witch. I really love that story

>>18131169
I do too. I like crytpid stories, like how they came to be, the sightings, and accounts of it whether it be unbelief or total belief.

>>18131127
Einstein's special relativity theorie provides the fact that an object with mass needs infinite energy to be speeded up faster than light(which would be necessary for time travel). So there are hypotheses about massless or even objects with negative mass, that might be able to timetravel. But if we look on massless particles, we get a mathematical contracdiction with the fact, that lightspeed is a constant. For negative mass it's even more complicated to check if it is possible. To sum it up, I believe, we need to understand why there are natural constants, so to speak why our world exists and I don't think that it is possible for humans to uncover such mysteries - even if I hope that we find more clues in the future.

>>18131131
How CAN'T it be possible if time is not even real?
>>18131140
the initial statement that mirrors are real lacks a source

>>18131233
9/10 post

In an infinite number of parallel universes, some of them are exactly like this one, except a few seconds, days, or years in the past. Also, the moment you go there, it's now no longer exactly like this one, now is it? Which means it "never was" going to be like this one.

>>18131233
That's one interpretation. The other way to interpret his equations is that there is no way to observe an object accelerating faster than the speed of light in a finite amount of time. This doesn't tell us that there is no way to accelerate faster than the speed of light--it might just be that the luminance of an object traveling this fast goes to zero upon reaching the speed of light. Saying "it is impossible to observe an object accelerating faster than the speed of light" is just another way to say "the probability of detecting light from an object traveling faster than the speed of light is effectively zero." Einstein likely missed this caveat, since until the day he died, he was attempting to rewrite quantum mechanics in such a way that the probability component was taken out; he never succeeded.

Here's the way I look at it; the only way to make an object travel faster than the speed of light is to remove there any reference frame for there to be a faster than light in respect to. Does removing this visibility of any reference frame for a finite amount of time also take infinite energy? Or does it take finite energy?

>>18131127

Time is the observation of states.

We constantly measure the state of systems and build a concept of the present state of our surroundings. Our brain interprets the info in real-time and updates immedietly, giving the illusion if time "passing". Our idea of "past" and "future" suggests that "time" is a linear dimension, but, it isn't.

There is no going "back in time". It's possible to go "forward" at different rates due to the speed if light being finite, but backwards time travel is a) nonsense, and b) stupid.

>>18133344
Is it possible to go "forward" in time to a state that matches our memory of """the past?"""

http://io9.gizmodo.com/all-the-evidence-that-time-travel-is-happening-all-arou-1446262029

It is possible, i belive beings from other dimentions, other universes or even our own universe with more superior technology are able to timetravel

>>18133361
Good question. If the whole "big bang to big crunch" theory is accurate, and somehow everything repeats itself, that might happen, but I don't think it's likely that matter would explode then implode repeatedly the exact same way. Why would it?

>>18135692
I didn't ask if it was likely. I asked if it would *ever* occur at some point in the future.

>>18135698
If the universe is truly infinite, then yes.

>>18135707
Then if a person traveled forward in time, because we all know that you can only go forward time, to a point *so* far into the future that it actually resembled exactly a moment in the past, would traveling to this definitely-not-the-past moment be like traveling into the past?

Boomf. Time travel. And you didn't even have to break any laws of physics to do it.

>>18133321
>>18131233
Neither. Time travel is not possible in the format that you have perceived. Light and energy alone are only part of the equation. Reconstruction of energy patterns and supervenience of energy is where we can determine how with sufficient amount of trials and errors of cause and effect, that we can jump to certain regions in space where things are being reconstructed exactly as we have wished to visit. Time moves forward, energy is not capable of "redoing" itself without being a paradox against all of time. The only true way to visit the past is to reconstruct the past, then live in it. We need to move on beyond perceiving light when considering such ridiculous notions. Einstein is the fucking genius we all need, but eventually we will need to see beyond his perception if we would like to advance.

I believe you can and some have. Many have dreamed and days, months or years later events from that dream happened. Well you saw into the future. How? Why? Who knows. But we can do it.

>>18131138
Do you mean like a 3D hologram that changes depending upon how you look at it? The holographic universe?

>>18131169
Time dilation has moved far beyond that 0.02 seconds. Still no one has broken the time barrier using that method.

>>18131233
Einstein's special relativity has been completely discredited by faster than light technologies including quartz barrier technology that was confirmed accelerating light through compression to approximately 400% of it's base speed in the given medium it's traversing.

>>18135728
Holy shit though that would take a long while. But how would you even know when to stop?
Besides this, what if the universe doesn't restart one of those times? And if there is any cost associated with time traveling a bit further into the future, then every time travel from the current age and basically all future ages will stop traveling at the same time that you stop, because you will have reached a decent optimum state of the universe. Unless the rest of humanity dies each time it crops up, you will be followed.

>>18135728
>>18138195
isnt this a futurama episode?

I used my whitebelt google-fu and came up with some shitty pop-science site describing some things faster than light and found this:

>compressing the space in front of your and expanding the space behind you, so that you surf on a tidal wave of warped space. You can calculate that this tidal wave travels faster than light if driven by negative matter (an exotic form of matter which has never been seen.)

Which is, eerily, what Gurdjieff describes in his "Beelzebub's Tales to his Grandson", published in 1950, which is (as the title suggests) meant to be a religious/philosophical rather than a primarily scientific work (although Gurdjieff would've hated the distinction and he does have his own brand of science in it).

File: 7f5c8b092a.jpg (32KB, 635x486px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 635x486px

>>18140338

>>18140338
Sounds like the alcubierre drive

>>18135546
I believe there are beings made out of cream pie filling in the universe and they are delicious