Hello i'm new to the forums.Anyway i wanted to know what you guys think about time paradoxes. For Example: You go back in time and kill your grandmother, would you cease to exist? would things go on as normal? would you somehow be unable to kill her? or would time collapse on itself? Personally, i think things would go on as normal. I think you have to think farther then the fourth dimension, you have to consider the fifth dimension. I think be going back in time you move into a different timeline all together, because the original timeline didn't have you in that time period.so it would be impossible to kill your actual grandma because she is in a different dimension. I guess in a way, nature doesn't allow you to kill your grandma. Anyways, please post your ideas about what would happen, what you think about my theory, And other time paradoxs.:gossip:
Maybe your grandmother kills you and sets the timeline straight again. Of course, that would create an endless loop in time.
the bigger question is how on earth would you generate the 2.1 jiggawatts of energy required to time travel in the first place?
Plutonium reactor. I think as soon as you stepped out of your time machine you would go 'POOF' if you hadn't been born before that time (in your own dimension that is).
I'm wondering right now if that 'Zoltar Fortune Teller Arcade Machine' from the movie 'Big' (with Tom Hanks) wasn't actually some kind of time machine.
Why in the world would you want to go back in time to kill your grandmother? Unless... Is your grandmother Hitler?
I'm pretty sure that the current theories on time travel preclude the possibility of traveling backwards through time (see: quantom mechanics - abstraction). However, it is theoretically possible to travel "forward" through time, but that's really a matter of relativity. =) With that said, if you were to go back in time and do something that altered the course of history, then there actually would've never been a reason for you to go back in time in the first place. This would most likely result in a distinct, seperate temporal reality--but what then would become of the original timeline? Would it simply cease to exist?
Has it occurred to you that maybe going back in time would be on a "read only" basis ... you could observe, but you couldn't interfere, because "you don't exist yet" and therefore you would have no physical presence.
But how could you both observe and store information in your mind when you lack a physical body? On the topic of interdimensional existence: has anybody read Timeline by Michael Crichton?
I'm not sure I understand your conceptual problem here. When we sleep, we dream. We experience things - perceived through all of our senses - that we subsequently remember, even though we're not actually experiencing them by means of our physical body. So why can time travel not enable us to experience things in much the same was as we "experience" dreams?
When we experience dreams, we are still experiencing them through our physical body, the brain still exhibits neural activity and chemical messenges are still being relayed. Not to mention much of our autonomic functioning such as the respiratory system still functions when we're asleep.
-> I agree with the concept that BeachBall raises, with slight adaption of principle. Ever thought that Daily Paradox occur each time we awake after sleep? For that is how we do not realise the degree/amount of change/s that happen in the Space, Time Continium ? .... hmmm
Your memories are stored within the physical matrix of your mind: if you cannot physically interact with the other elements of the world around you, then how can you possibly remember what you've experienced? Physical existence is not the same thing as consciousness.
We are all time travelers. Moving into the future 1 second at a time. Now I have to go watch Cronocrimenes.