Reading Ideas

Crichton basically said that time travel isn't possible, however, there are many parallel universes existing simultaneously with our own. Some of them still exist in the past? Isn't that how it was?

Yes, he said that there are a quadrizillion of different universes, covering all possibilities fate could have taken. So in one world Hitler won, in one world he didn't. In one world you chose Cornflakes for breakfast, in one world you reached for Cheerios. And when two universes are very similiar to each other, they sometimes interact.

Anyway, they shrink you down so you can fit through some wormhole and you reappear on the other side.

He describes the method like sending a Fax - you step on the platform, every single atom of your body gets scanned, the data is compressed and sent through the wormhole. Then you get reconstructed at the other end.

ONLY THAT THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO RECONSTRUCT SOMEONE AT THE OTHER END

This part was so cool I almost wet my pants. They don't know how to reconstruct people at the other end. It just happens.

So when you enter the pad and arrive at the other universe, it's actually not you who arrives. It's a version of you from another universe. In a universe almost identically to ours, with the single differnece that they know how to reconstruct.

Damn I just wet my pants.

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion

What do you mean that the other universe knows how to reconstruct? The one they transferred to was in medieval times, and probably had no idea about teleporting whatsoever.

I personally liked the idea of a "laser gun" in congo. The magnitude of the laser has to be so intense to reach the satelite that it could literally burn through most anything. With the diamond, it was focused like a prism and so the magnitude was just that much more intense over a smaller area.

If the world should blow itself up,the last audible voice would be an expert saying it can't be done

What do you mean that the other universe knows how to reconstruct? The one they transferred to was in medieval times, and probably had no idea about teleporting whatsoever.

Ah no. They ("present") destroy a person to transmit it to another universe ("past") and reconstruct it there (through the wormhole). But our present doesn't know how to reconstruct. People from our present never arrive in the past. They are destroyed here, true, but the person who actually arrives on the other side is coming from another "present". A present that is identical to ours, only that in the other present, they know how to reconstitute a person in the past.

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion

That's crazy. That boggles the mind. It is sort of like saying that if you decided to make it your life's work to create a time machine, then you suddenly see an older version show up at your door saying that you were succesful, then that means all your work paid off. It is immediate gratification. In this way, anybody can know if it is possible for them to build a time machine based on the fact that they saw the evidence before it was even conceived of before.

If the world should blow itself up,the last audible voice would be an expert saying it can't be done

This post was edited by Hawkeye on Jul 20, 2002.

Many sceptics of time travel bring up this point: The proof that time travel isn't possible is that we just don't see any time travellers popping out of nowhere all the time.

This is a problem I also have with the multiverse idea (every decision splits up the universe into two alternate dimensions). If there's really one universe for each and every possibility, there should be an infinite number of universes where people are capable of travelling into other, our universe.

Maybe a bit too much kitchen physics...

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion

I never really agree with said skeptics, as I believe that in order to travel along time, you need to "pierce" it at both ends of the travelled distance. That is, both the departure and the destination point must be prepared for the travel, most likely using some complex apparatus of some sort at either end.

!sdrawkcab si erutangis yM

I somehow feel that there is no way one can travel into the past. But, there might be a way to travel into the future.

My belief is based on Einstein's special theory of relativity where one of the twins goes into space and returns after spending 2 years in space, while on earth 80 years have been passed, thus in a way he has travelled into the future. I find Einstein's explanations pretty interesting, and believe that time travel might be possible one day when humans learn to travel at speeds comparable to the speed of light. But whenever they do so, it will still not be possible for anyone to go back to the past, but they can definitely go into the future.

Is that the reason why we don't see any time travelers popping up in our era?

As Martin said we are still at the infancy level of the scientific knowledge, and there are a lot of mysteries still to be solved, I am sure there might be a good reason why even if the multiple universe theory is correct, why haven't we seen any time travelers, maybe even if there are multiple universes, the time travelers can only travel into a future of a different universe, but never into the past!

Love is blind, but marriage is a real eye opener.

Of course this would work without hurting any laws of physics, but what you suggest isn't really travelling into the future, rather "waiting" for it. I believe the general term 'time travel' implies a back ticket, or at least a way into both directions.

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion

Another interesting topic - I was wondering what is the relation between ageing and time travel. It just confused me even more!

I assume that the "waiting" period is still present when one uses the time machine, it's just that it's pretty less compared to the one which Einstein suggested (2 years for traveling 80 years). So, I assume that suppose a person takes x seconds to travel into the future. So, what happens to the person while he is traveling across time? Does he age during that time? If yes, does he age older when is going to the future, or does he start ageing backwards if he is going into the past? Or, during those x seconds he does not age at all?

I am sure that if one says that it's instantaneous travel, well, the only way one can achieve that is teleportation, but even for that, to transfer the information to the other universe, one has to "send" information to the other universe about the composition of the person in one universe, which will also take some time. And, while someone is creating a different form at the other end, what is happening to the ageing process? Is the new form which is created at the other end has the same age as was at the time the information was sent to the other universe? If this is possible, then don't we know a way to counter-effect the ageing process, just keep teleporting yourself back and forth and you will never age older, OR, just "store" your composition at the age of 20, and then when you are 40 years old, just teleport that "stored" composition to the same universe where you are residing, in a way destroying the 40 year old RCD, and creating a 20 year old RCD!

So, if we do believe that ageing does take place while one is traveling thru time or being teleported, does one age while traveling to the past and is it the same effect as going to the future?

Love is blind, but marriage is a real eye opener.

So, if we do believe that ageing does take place while one is traveling thru time or being teleported, does one age while traveling to the past and is it the same effect as going to the future?

I don't think we can apply these thoughts to trips into the past. After all you can't wait for past to arrive.

'Yeah, That's what Jesus would do. Jesus would bomb Afghanistan. Yeah.' - snowlion