| ........ | Here are a few interesting links for further exploration:The Montauk Project and the Philadelphia Experiment Listen to the late astronomer and Pulitzer Prize-winning author's insightful and delightfully droll views on everything from wormholes ("very Alice in Wonderland") to the nature of time ("one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition"). (text and RealAudio) www.WingMakers.com - A discovered time capsule from beings from the 28th century - GREAT SITE! http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/time/resources.html - GREAT SITE! http://compbio.caltech.edu/~sjs/tew.html http://www.metro2000.net/~stabbott/timetravel.htm www.timeflights.com : novel about time travel a partcipation-platform/startingpoint dedicated to the nature, science, politics and spirituality of an alternative time-consciousness http://www.introweb.nl/~theorder www.total.net/~negutz/index.html/gut.htm Yahoo's listing of Time Travel sites
I'd like to thank all of you for contributing to the Time Travel / Interdimensional Vovage web site. I've tryed to reply to everyone, however I'm sure I've missed a few. Hopefully all of your wonderful ideas and thoughts can spawn more! Keep them coming!!!
"W. Sumner Davis" drwdavis@prexar.com Sat, 3 Aug 2002 08:51:00 -0400 Yu are on to something. There are a few errors in your thesis--but it is sound as a pound otherwise. I did read the "feed back" forum--but it would seem that those folks had not really read your thesis--or they would not have made so many "stupid" (sorry--only word that is accurate) comments. Keep chipping away at it. You may wish to converse with a few friends of mine who are very interested in Temporal Mechanics: Kip Thorne out at Caltech, and Michio Kaku at NYC in New York. I am quite sure both would find your ideas interesting. As for the "grandfather paradox": Penroses equation of quantum realities over the sum of histories rules this out--you could not travel back any farther than the invention of your time machine (if that was how you traveled--a worm hole would probably place you someWHER else, rather than some WHEN else). So even if you could get back, you be unable to effect the past--you would progress onward to a different time line--your past remaining intact, but different. However, the law of the constancy of energy state that there is a finite amount of matter in the cosmos. If you were to go BACK there would be TWO of YOU--an obvious breach in the law, as you would add to the finite amount by some 150 lbs. or 68kg or so (Sorry H.G. Wells)Well, that's just my opinion. Sumner Dr. W. Sumner Davis, Cosmologist H. J. Fowler Space ObservatoryOakland, Maine 04963 USAwww.powerlink.net/drwdavis/hjf "The Aim of science is not to destroy faith, but to dislodge ignorance"
April 1999: Nice site, nice dissertation. I take a differing view if you will. For instance, in your last sentence you state: "If time travel is completely impossible then the reason has yet to be discovered." I would say that the reason is right in front of us and is so simple we tend to overlook it. It would be that time does not really exist. We have concepts that we verbalize with semantics to describe the "cause and effect" principle, but that's all they are. Explanatory concepts. We are thusly contemplating the exploitation of an ability to interact with something that is only imaginary. Sort of like that "pretend" friend most of us had as children. I also can't see how Multiverse theory addresses "Time Travel" per se. You said yourself that this renders our concept of reality to be a false one. I would agree that it does, but it negates "Time" travel in the process. I believe in Ocamm's Razor. The universe is no more complicated than efficiency requires it to be. Multiversity complicates the universe without adding anything truly functional. A dimension "shift" or jump by any individual would add no functionality to the individual's existence per se. It may not even be noticeable, even if it were possible. Relativity does hypothesize the possibility of "Time" travel, but hypothesis is all it is. Even the most staunch quantum theorists I've read admit the "uncertainty principle" renders all speculations and observances regarding cause/effect reversal and seeming interdimensional anomalies as just that. Uncertain. And it is only at this quantum level where the uncertainty of the "uncertainty principle" exists. That in itself makes all observations of this nature suspect. We still can't be sure that what we think we are seeing is what is really happening. It could be an illusion that is a "side effect" of the process itself. I do very much like your analysis however. So many folks let the Multivers concept become something more spiritual or paranormal in nature. Imagining that one is time travelling or dimension shifting is not the same thing as getting to the physical core of the issue. I respect the metaphysical view, but cannot accept it for my self. I truly HOPE it is you that turns out to be "right" and I that is "wrong" however. Your analysis will lead to a future that will be more "fun" than mine. I thank you for your time and hope keep you up this very interesting pursuit. Lee D. Hill - LHill@accessability.com
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 08:55:54 From: Andrew Watson <andrew.watson@citicorp.com> Subject: time dialation
I found out from the web a couple of days ago that the time slowing caused by a plane at say 30 000 feet is a great deal bigger than the time quickening caused by it's increased height putting it in a lower gravity field.
The time slowing on the atomic clocks on an aircraft travelling at 500-750mph is in the order of 100 parts per billion whereas the time speeding on an atomic clock sent up in a rocket to 6000 miles was only 4 parts per billion.
Therefore the effects of Special Relativity on everyday Earth actually far outweigh those of General Relativity, although both are of course tiny.
Your web site actually prompted me to question which of the two had more effect, so I went out and found the answer ! I guess this shows that a web site can be a good instigator of trying to learn more.
Cheers
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 15:28:56 From: allyson diana <allyson.diana@snet.net> Subject: Why are we still here then?
I am a proponet of time travel, but my one problem with it is that if it is one day created in the future then how come an army of the future has not come to plunder our resources or have not altered our past in such a way that does not impact thiers as to not be able to create time machines. The one danger in this thinking is that if time is openended then any event in the time loop cannot be considered the current time event. All points are constant and not fixed. So if at any point if a travller goes back in time then his presence alters the constant and ill ripple foward. If he eats one piece of bread then whomever was ment to eat it will never eat it and for example if that person was staring at a clock while he ate this bread and was pondering time and this led to him telling his child about his perceptions who passes it on to the man who invents time travel then in the midst of the paradox the time loop would collapse. Just my thoughts. Thanks for the 'time' tony diana Andy
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 12:50:18 From: Tom Cornelis <Tom.Cornelis@rug.ac.be> Subject: deep thoughts on time travel
I'd like to comment on time travel:
1) time dilation does not really cause time travel: if you would try to wave your arm inside a fast moving vehicle, you would notice no difference as to if you'd stay put. However if you would wave your arm outside the vehicle, you would have more difficulties to wave your arm at the same speed, due to the resistance of the surrounding air. The same principle applies in my opinion in near-light-speed travel. If you move at such a great speed, your movements go slower as observed, as observed by people on earth for example, but because you would think and move slower, it would appear to yourself that, you're living at the same pace as on earth. Thus if you would travel at near-light-speed, you would live (and all object inside the spacecraft) at a slower pace, and thus if you come back you have experienced a seemingly shorter time but actually arrive at a much "later" time. At this point I would like to point out that any clock inside the craft would also slow down, due to the high speed. That's because all particles in the universe that travel at near-light- speed, "experience" a slower time. (as a consequence of the special and general relativity theories) Time as we defined it, is used ONLY as a reference to movement, of any type for that matter. This is unmistakably true and therefore time is constant. The time that is measured inside the craft is not the real time that passed, but only a reference to the movement inside the craft AT A VERY HIGH SPEED, thus creating a false illusion of time , since it is a reference to movement in general, 1 second is 1 second everywhere. And when we defined it as a number of ticks in an atom-clock, we forgot to reference it to a zero speed. Once you use time with that definition no (time) paradoxes are possible any more. Time is only a figment of our imagination, simply to reference movement. Therefore time is not a physical dimension. We live in a 3D and not a 4D world. In a threedimensional system you can always define displacement(without any need for relativity), and you can even define absolute movement: as the sum of the weights of the points passed in the displacement. This is all logical if you define the weight of a point in a universe by it's resistance to movement. In vacuum the weight would be zero. In that case the velocity of light in vacuum would be mathematically infinite. This is clearly impossible, so the weight in that point cannot be zero. The only feasible reason is that in that point, there's mass present, which resists movement. If you measure the speed of light, you act upon a photon, and thus in the point(s) of measurement, there's mass of the photon present. All the observations I made of (meta)physics have made me make the following conclusion: time exists only in our mind, and if we are ever to understand the universe, we will first have to accept this. Note that time is the ONLY fundamental physical object that cannot be reproduced without any aids by experiment. (I mean that you need a physical object that doesn't relate to time, such as an vibrating atom: you need to measure the vibrations and thus something in terms of length). Opposed to this if you need a reference for length, you don't need to measure something else (1m = the length of a perticular rod in Paris, e.g.). In my opinion time and movement can be derived from the basic physical objects length, mass and electricity. Electricity encourages movement and mass discourages movement. So there's probably a 1-1 correlation between those 2.
2) wormholes and consorts (for the purpose of time travel): impossible because time doesn't exist, only movement does. if movement has happened it should be reversed to get back in time. It is still impossible in all physical relations (even in the relativity theories) to reverse a happened occurrence in the same way it occurred. There would be no causality if this wouldn't be true.
3) if something happened , it happened . It would be absurd to be able to go back in the past, undo it, go back in the future and find another reality than that where youo started from. I would like to add here that we can see what will happen in the future if we can detect tachyons (faster than light traveling particles). We constantly look in the past , because light takes a certain amount of time to travel from one object to another. So past and future already exist and we can't change them, however unacceptable that may seem for us. Even the future can't be changed , all the decisions you make reflect in the future and it would be possible to see your future actions if tachyons would exist. There's no paradox here because a continuous flow of tachyons would have to exist between you and the future you and you would be deciding knowing that you already have recieved a transmission of the decision, but still being able whatever you want to decide. (It's a complicated mind turn, I know, but true.)
I hope I left you something to think about.
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 00:57:14 -0600 From: Darlene Klamerus <klamerus@dp.net> Subject: It's not possible
Although I do understand where you are coming from in you writing there are aspects that you did not list that would disprove the ability to travel through time. For instance you state that Einstein's Relitivity Theories can prove time travel. Granted in you know the right half of information you can say this. However if you look at the entire theory you will find that time travel is NOT possible. One law of Relitivity is that: The faster you go the more time slows down. NOW that accounts for a possibility of time travel. But the law goes on to state that: The slower times goes the slower you will age. This destroys any chance of time travel. And futher more Einstein stated himself that one could never abtain or pass the speed of light (186,000 mps.) The reason for this is becasue as the ship you are in speeds up the slower time will go and therefore the slower you will age and if you were to come very close to the speed of light you would almost NOT move at all. And if by some chance did obtain the speed of light you and your spacecraft would stop COMPLETELY. I know that defies common sence however Relitivity has been doing just that for 94 years. And there is yet another law of Relitivity that states that: The faster an object travels the more it contracts. Now if you were to reach the speed of light you would be contracted into NOTHING. But with both of these consequences to traveling at the speed of light the person in the space ship would not notice his change however he will, in another law of Relitivity,: see all of the thing that are happening to him happening to the world outside of him. If he's frozen in time he'd never know it. Because there would be no time for him to know it! And as for traveling into the past you would have to go slower than you would be going at that present time and there is absolutely NO way to do that. Therefore time travel, however a nice thing to think about, just is not possible. And the Theories of Relitivity prove that fact themselves.
Thank You,
Jonathan K. P.S. If you wish to respond my email is: jonk84@hotmail.com
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 11:16:19 -0400 From: "Piccirilli, Joe" <joe.piccirilli@staples.com> Subject: Another possible hinderance to time travel
Hi. I am certainly no physicist, but I like to stop and ponder these things every once and a while. I have also thought about another reason why time travel to the past may be impossible (excluding the multiverse school of thought).
My idea has to do with the fact that matter is never created or lost, simply changed from one state to another. If you traveled back two minutes into the past and met your former self, suddenly there are two of you. Where did the matter come from to have two of you? Could you keep doing this and "clone" yourself a thousand times?
Also, If you went two minutes into the future, would you be there? What actions would you have taken in the elapsed time? If there is no multiverse, that leaves only a few options. One, you aren't there because you left to time travel and didn't exist in the future until you traveled there (this would be like the spacecraft traveling near the speed of light). Two, you are there and the actions you took followed a strict linear path (which would support determinism and the fact that we are not in control of our own destinies).
I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with the idea of a multiverse, but it does seem to "take care of" a few of the paradoxes associated with time travel.
I am the type that wants to believe in these things, but needs to have fundamental scientific reasoning to support it.
Thanks for letting me bounce these ideas past ya!
Joe Piccirilli
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 23:33:22 -0400 From: Josette et Pierre <josettepednaud@videotron.ca> Subject: Time travel....not yet but?
Your page was fantabulous! I thank you for putting it up. I have been thinking about time travel for a long time and could never really explain exactly what I meant but after reading your bit on the multiverse...It came close to what I thought.
I think there is a multiverse but I do not think that every single possible possibilities exist. I don't think that it took Billy 13.0002 seconds to finally decide to ask Shelley to the dance and in an other universe it took him 13.0001 seconds and so on... there can be many cases like this. I like the idea that if you go back in time and kill your father, you CREATE another universe. In fact, the fact that you go back in time at all creates another universe. Now, can you go back to January 1, 1999 of your time or January 1, 1999 of the next time? I don't know. What if Wayne Gretzky went back in time and killed his dad. After coming back to 1999, who would have the record for the most points in a season? I believe that he can choose between either. If he chose his original universe, it would take additional power and more sophisticated equipment than if he chose to move forward in time from the new timeline.
Would you consider cryogenics a way of "time travel" (I hope I spelled that right). Would that not be the same as going really fast? Going at the speed of light would slow down you biological readings just like cryogenics. You would be unfrozen at the tender age of 20 at the same time your twin's ship would land, he would be in his twenties as well. To him, he was on a x among of time journey, for you, you stepped in a tank and now you are coming of it a second later. Meanwhile, you are both 50 years in the futur. Now, I am not just writing to you to kiss your ass. In my humble opinion, I believe there is a mistake in your page. So sorry to mention it but if I am wrong please elaborate via email at pmorin@levy-travel.com
When you say that time travel is possible, building two identical machines and sending one in to space at the close to the speed of light... Here is an example : January 1, 1999 at 12:00 the electric fields are activated. The machine on Earth registers... lets say, January 1, 2000 at 12:00 to keep it simple. The machine on the ship would register Decembre 30, 19:21. (it really doesn't matter what the time differencial is as long as there is a time differential) Going through the machine at lets say, March 19, 1999 at 11:11 Earth time, you would appear on the ship at... I don't know, lets say March 19, 1999 at 11:00 ship time. The time on the ship HAS gone slower, it is still synchronous with the Earth's time. To actually travel in time as you suggest, you would have to be INSIDE the ship. If you wanted to know who won the stanley cup NEXT year, you would have to wait until the ship got to next year, which WOULD BE next year for you, but only next year minus whatevervariableformula on the ship. I can only hope that I am making sense.
I like to think of this as constructive criticism. I can only hope that you can punch hole in my theories because that is the only way to learn as far as I am concerned.
I don't know if you whatch STAR TREK at all? (you must!) But there are many paradoxes. There are many that come to mind. StarTrek Voyager, the episode where Voyageur recieve a garble distress call from some nebula or something and when they go investigate, they get stuck in a hole and send a distress call which in turn... What about the old StarTrek, on the city on the Edge of forever. Deep Space Nine with the parrallel dimension, the same dimension as in the old startrek episode : "mirror mirror".
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 17:59:42 -0500 (CDT) From: Rick & Louisa Clerici <clerici@neaccess.net> Subject: time comment - great site
Brian you have created a beautiful site. Please continue to create around the mystery of time.Time is most certainly the next frontier. It seems to me that as we explore time we discover the limitations of our own belief systems. As we release our limiting beliefs and shift our understandings more of time and its nature is revealed. In this exploration of time we find the deeper qualities of human nature.
Check out our book "Sparks From the Fire of Time" and our new web site www.timeflights.com
Rick & Louisa Clerici <clerici@neaccess.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:38:08 EDT From: TooLongJon@aol.com Subject: feeling of constant awareness
What would you have to say about my Mother sitting with me when I was young at a basketball game and saying to herself in a quiet voice "I think he makes this shot." On top of that, feeling what people are thinking, having it pop up in your head, then someone mentioning what I was thinking a few seconds after I thought about it. And not being explained by something common or an event that would stimulate the same thinking, I mean just out of the blue things that can't possibly have a reason to be mentioned at that particular time. Sensing people staring at you behind your back, and having a song stuck in your head, then you turn on the radio, and there it is...... Something else that adds a bit of color to what I am mentioning... I don't feel like I belong where I am. 98% of the people that I interract with in my life are what I refer to as "followers." No-one thinks for themself and just follow what they believe is the normal or right. I hate to say it, but most people are stupid. They are vague and empty, not on the same level. Lol, I'm not trying to make something up like out of a movie or something, but this is what I feel. Just wondered what you have to say about it all. Please take the time to read this and tell me EVERYTHING you have to say, or can comment about. Thank you...
Johnny
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 23:54:02 EDT From: TooLongJon@aol.com Subject: Ever feel different?
For me, it's not the challenge of working for what I want, it's just the idea that we are a rare breed, and we deserve more for being the special ones. Most people are just not on the same level. I wish there was a place where you could go, like a higher conscience institute. Where you can be in a natural atmosphere, without having to constantly play the social game, where you have to change your attitude to blend in with the rest of the world, and change how you interract, and change your appearance. I've always wished that I could be a part of some institute like that. I have had many world changing ideas, but you can't just explain it to anybody. I feel that I can tell you this one idea that I had seeing as how you are on the same level. First let me say, that it has already been worked on about 4 years ago... I realized how to make something invisible... Not invisible as you would think as far as becoming air or something, I mean the word invisible, not being seen. Example... there is this solid wall, and there is this box sitting in front of it, the front of the box is covered completely with fiber optics. Now if you are standing in front of it, you are looking at the side of the box that has the fiber optics installed on that side. Ok, now substitute yourself for a camera. A computer is connected to the fiber optics on the box, and the camera looks at the surrounding atmosphere around the box, and then sees the box as a missing hole in the picture, the computer then reads what the camera sees, then "fills in the blanks" using the fiber optics. So now the camera sees a complete wall now, the box has been colored in to match its surroundings. I was told that what I discovered was already worked on 4 years ago. I wish someone would gather together those of us that think for ourselves, and let the other followers carry on about their business. There is sooooooo much that I want to uncover or be a part of. Parapsychology, Stonehenge, Black holes, etc...... In reality, I am majoring in Electronics Tech. A fantasy of mine that I want to do is study on paranormal activity in the brain. Using the other 90% of your mind. Like I stated in that last email I sent you, when you feel somebody staring at you from behind, then you turn around and there they are; or you have a song stuck in your head, and you turn on the radio, and there it is. I have had things pop up in my head like somebody calling me, then a few seconds later, the phone rings. Now that is not coincidence. I mean, sure, it can be explained IF there is some event that would cause you to think about it, like remembering that someone is going to call you at a certain time, but it absolutely by normal terms can not be explained if that feeling pops up in your head and there is no reason for the person to call at that particular time. There is just more to it. I absolutely defy the idea of this stuff being coincidence. Actually, its just the normal man's explanation of something that they can't explain, and don't want to explain. They come up with something to pacify themselves if they can't figure it out. Know where I'm coming from man? And I know you do... Like you said, we're on the same level, your not one of the other 98% of the morons on Earth, the blind followers. I think our little rare breed deserves more. To be a part of a grand institution one day. Also, if you have Aol Instant Messenger, give me a buzz on here. Thanx again...
Johnny......
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 22:09:59 EDT From: Raamsmith@aol.com Subject: Time Travel
Absolute time travel is not possible, either into the past or future. Realative time travel to the future is possible. (Einstein's Relativity Theory) The reason is that whether there is only one universe or many universes. The Law of the Conservation of Matter and Energy do not allow it.
Matter and energy cannot be either created or detroyed, it can only be converted from one form to the other. There is only a constant amount of matter and energy in the universe at every point in time. To travel to the past or future would be sending that particular matter and energy to another place where it already exists. The same atoms canot occupy the same space at the same time. This is in my opinion why time travle is not possible.
Thank you for allowing me to send you feedback.
Date: Sun, 04 Jul 1999 19:49:35 -0700 From: andy <jpapkp@alltel.net> Subject: time travel
Hey your page is cool, I was wondering what your thoughts are about sites that sell schematics of time machines and even go as far as having interviews with people who have sworn on their lives that they have traveled back and forth through time.
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE.
As a society we could never handle time travel and that is why we would never know about it even if it did exist. If people want to believe something bad enough they will. The allure of time travel seems to be no different. Who wouldn't want to change something in their life. The world would be too chaotic. I think no matter how close we think we are to figuring out the universe we never will because it seems to me that there is a bigger picture to everything that we will never be able to comprehend. Although it is settling to come up with ideas that ease our minds. For all we know our entire universe could be an electron orbiting a nucleus.
thanks,
Aaron
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 16:16:24 EDT From: DTAITMIBTM@aol.com To: bosabri Subject: Awesome site!
This was definitely a site worth coming to. I have spent a lot of time researching time travel and other phenomena of the universe. Where did you get your information from?
From the internet and text books and science journals.
To add on to your topic of wormholes, I believe that wormholes are not only a doorway into the past and future, but also to universes semi-parallel to our own. This alternate universe from time to time exists simultaneously with our own at different places. It only exists with ours at certain times because both universes are constantly shifting. When the universes exist on the same plain, we see what many believe to be paranormal apparitions, or ghosts. To the ones in the other universe, however, we are the ones who are the ghosts.
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 13:14:57 PDT From: Daniel Clark <dans16@hotmail.com> Subject: The Truth is Out There!
Hi, my name is Daniel and I come from Britain. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your page on time travel, it brought to light some great ideas and reinforced much of what I already know. I may not be a famous physisist not to mention only being 16 years of age, but I do have some fantastic theories which you and other physisists may fing interesting. I have possible theories as to how travel at the speed of light could be possible and reasons why it is not. Also reasons why time travel of any sort could never be possible. All I ask is that you take me seriously and not mock or disreguard my ideas simply because I'm not named Einstein. I also ask of you to realise that even the most experienced physisists are only speculating. I mean the most that they really conjure up is how to get astronauts to float above the Earth. I mena absolutely no offence but am just suggesting that they are looking for the answers in the 'visible' part of physics, or they are looking in a section or area which is leading to falsified or wrong conclusions. There is still so much we do not understand and we are looking for answers where we haven't even got a basis upon which ideas and speculations can be formed. We must select a new medium and begin looking into the 'invisible,' the areas of physics that aren't tangible or there to see and touch. What we do have though are the 'effects' that it causes and it's these that must be reversed in order to reach the answer. -A bit like seperating an unbaked cake mix back into eggs, flour, sugar and water. It is certainly possible and I feel that my theories that have minimal scientific basis may give way to some new ideas and perhaps bring us nearer the answers. After all the world and laws of physics are only as we basic and sceptical humans perceive them, and we are just a dot in a seemingly endless, which can only be described as 'GODLIKE' universe or multiverse possessing a transcendant nature which perhaps we will never understand. Either way, if you would like to hear more from me please e-mail me at DANS16@HOTMAIL.COM I am currently learning the basics of quantum physics, and show a distinct interest in this area of science. Thanking you very much for your time.
On Tue, 6 Jul 1999 Rob.Broxup@icl.com wrote:
> Brian, > > I've just been reading your thesis on time travel, very well written. > > I'm writing to you actually to run an idea past you that has been on my mind > for some time. > What I've been thinking about doing is producing a document containing > details of a rendez-vous point at some point > in the near future (next week for example). The idea would be to keep the > document in a safe place or add it to public records > with the intention of this document being read by someone at a point in time > when time travel is posible (may be 100s of years). If the document > contains enough detail about the meeting point taking into account that > language evolve over time, it may be possible to actually meet someone from > the future (if travel into the past is ever going to be possible). > > Regards, > Robert > The idea makes the assumption that at some point in the future, travel backwards in time will be possible. Based on this assumption, we write an invitation for some one in the future to travel back in time and meet with us.
We decided where and when the meeting will take place and produce a document that will be read by someone in the future. This document would need to be kept in a safe place so that it could be read by someone in the future. Time line example: We want to meet some one from the Year 2200. Today: We write a document inviting someone to travel back in time to meet us at a given location next Satuday. Next Saturday: We turn up at the meeting place and meet the Time Traveller. Between Saturday and the Year 2200: The invitation is kept in a safe place, i.e. a bank vault, in public records etc. Year 2200: Time traveller comes across the invitation and decides to travel back to Next Satuday and meet us. -----MY REPLY:----- Cool idea, but if the time travelers have any regard for our future (and theirs) they would not come back to meet us. If they did they would change history and possibly delete their own existance. Time travel to the past must always, at all costs, not change history, i.e. a time traveler can not change the way anyone in the pat thinks or acts or alter their body of knowledge. To do so would possibly catastrophicly alter history. That's why I think the future time travelers would never show up. -----Robert's Reply to my Reply:----- Unless, for strategic reasons, it is necessary for them to change history (assuming we can change history). I understand exactly what you mean. If we assume that the Chronology Protection Therory is correct, then someone from the future would not change the past (our future). Their presence here would only form a part of their history (our future) as implemented in Star Trek: Times Arrow where commander Datas' head is found underground after resting there for 500 years. Putting such a document in public record might attract an irresponsible visitor who does not understand the implications of such travel.
Regards, Robert
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 23:01:25 -0400 From: Jesse Zoeller <darwin@bright.net> Subject: Time I have found a new way that makes time travel very easy and it is very provable. I need help to show others. I will give you all the information you need to prove to yourself. My methodologies are completely inverse to that of modern physics/math. It appears the whole time we have been going the wrong way. It appears that we are using a "given" reality, but in doing so we are limiting ourselves. Most of oue problems deal with the definitations of things. Look at everything existing at one time, in one space. As infinity and zero are the same in one. If interested i shall explain in MUCH more detail.
Until then,
Jesse Zoeller darwin@bright.net
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 23:50:36 -0400 From: Johnston Wilson <jdwilson@tidalwave.net> Subject: Time Travel
Hi, My name is Johnny. with everything that i've read your saying that sending something into the past is not possible because it could in sense have catostrophic effects on the timeline in which the time traveller came from. I agree. However, i have heard (and maybe you can help me with this theory) that if you send something far enough into the future that it will eventually come around back to the beginning of time. Now if that is possible, (and also using the "Sliders" theory) wouldn't you be able to change time and not be affected because you have gone so far into the future and started over with a new time, but identical as the last, that the only reason changes occure is because you change them (assuming your the time traveller) therefore not affecting you in anyway whatsoever. And of course being able to make the outcome of that future a possibly good one?
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 14:45:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Anna <lanniel@rocketmail.com> Subject: Re: time traveling
Change may not always be bad, though. If they had learned about electricity earlier, then they may have better computers today (and wouldn't have that Y2K problem!). If they meet us, then what would the worst possibility be? Also, if the universe works according to the"parallel universe theory", then it wouldn't do them any harm to alter "our universe" anyway, correct? Also, let's say that a time traveler were to meet me, or you. That would only PROVE the existance of time travel, to that ONE person they meet. For not everyone will believe you or me. That will not change the world much, for just because you or I learn that time travel exists, it doesn't mean that we will build the machine any earlier. Even if we do, it's not likely that there'll be a catastrophic change.
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 05:06:37 EDT From: Kgprophet@aol.com Subject: Brief response
I am avidly interested in the concept of time in general and I know that to begin to tackle the question of time travel, we have to begin discussing how to do it. It may take a few years, but theories and leaps of thinking will happen as the discussion grows. I come from the metaphysical side of time. My train of thought is that the autonomy principle occurs in the reincarnation sense. If we discover the interweaving layers of time as alternative universes, there are echoes of these manipulations in every conceivable fashion. Mother and Father as personalities may have been reversed and spurred an even further branch of this "family". But they all relate to the original time traveller. My father is a psychiatrist, and I have read case studies about Past Life Regression Therapy. Through hypnosis, a patient discovers innate ties in his own life, with related personalities in all periods of time. Sometime what happens is in effect, the Grandmother returns back to earth as her own grand-daughter.
Through the teachings of Seth (Jane Robert's books), we discover a whole other aspect to navigating outside of space-time. Joseph McMoneagle describes in his book "The Ultimate Time Machine", his own type of time travelling through the technique of remote viewing. He transcends his physical body, and uses his subconscious to guide him to other physical places and times. I am suggesting that the idea of how we actually may travel through time, may not include our physical body. BUT....
Some readings, of which I cannot give immediate references, talk about the idea of different periods of time vibrating at different speeds. The idea goes that you need only alter the rate of time, such as changing the vibrating frequency of an atom. A good analogy is watching a film run at 24 frames per second. We as the viewer do not see the flashes between the frames. But when the speed of the projector is changed to 10 frames per second, you will be able to see the moments inbetween that are not normally visible. If we could alter our consciousness to be able to see these moments that otherwise are outside of our normal awareness, then we are outside of our own time. These moments are the avenues to the alternate realities. One idea to achieve this is some kind of resonance chamber, possibly used in the Philadelphia Experiment. This chamber somehow vibrates to the other frequency in time. But the problem with this is, that if our own faculties are equipped only to view our own frequency, then we would probably be unable to properly comprehend another frequency. The participants in the Philadelphia Experiment supposedly met aliens, and travelled through space. Others would still be partially tuned to the other frequency, and could walk through walls, or totally vanish. Whether or not these events really did occur, this explanation may explain the possibility of it.
Food for thought. I would enjoy chatting with you and any others on this fascinating subject. Please reply with any comments, and I will stay in touch.
Kenneth Gammell
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 20:02:22 -0400 From: Al Chalet <chaletcorp@home.com> Subject: is it possible in theory?
Tell me if you agree.......
If I were a genius, and created the two identical machines that would produce enough energy to blow open a whole in the universe, and sent one of those machines the speed of light 4 google million miles away and then back. Lets just say the machine came back to our Earth in the year 88,786. I then proceeded to explain to my Great Grandson 3000 times over to step into the machine (worm hole) he would step into Earth 1999? Then traveling into the past would be possible?
YES
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:54:34 -0500 From: AFT <aft@nlci.com> Subject: Time Travel
It occurred to me while watching a NOVA rerun, which featured an interview with Kip Thorne, that there is a more fundamental reason travel into the past cannot be accomplished.
Because the same matter (electrons, neutrons, protons, etc.) cannot simultaneously exist in two different places, neither human beings nor anything else from our present space-time can travel into the past. If that were to happen, one would find that the matter of which the visitor is composed also exists in that earlier space-time, albeit in different forms (e.g., soil, air, plants, animals, etc.).
One could imagine that because prior possession must rule, the particles of which the visitor is composed would be sucked instatnaneously from him and merged with their prior selves in a release of energy of stellar proportions.
Is my speculation correct or have I missed something? Please reply to rbailey@monti.net.
Best regards,
Richard Bailey
Date: On Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:50:05 -0500 From: GOODWINR@aol.com Subject: worm hole question
> Dear sir, > I recently saw a nova special on possible time travel and had a brief > question that I would appreciate if you could take a moment to answer. Your > site was listed as a reference. > The statement that was made was as follows; > A man on earth opens a worm hole (?). He takes one end of the worm > hole and travels for a year (for him). He returns to find that 10 years have > gone by on earth. Looking through the wormhole he traveled with, he can step > back to the time when he originally departed on his trip. My questions is, > why didn't the wormhole remaining on earth age the 10 years? Wouldn't the man > return to find everything, including the other end, just 10 years later? If > both ends are opened at the same time, wouldn't each end age in it's current > frame of reference? > I am a chemist by trade and had a number of years of physics. I would > very curious about this subject and would be grateful for a response. > > Thanks > Ron >
The use of a wormhole to travel in time is clear when you have the enterance and exit of the wormholes at different locations in space. One on earth (10 yrs old) and one on another planet so to speak (1 year old in your ref. frame) The one machine on at the other location journey is still connected to the one on earth via the wormhole. Now, a simple step into the wormhole would transport you to a different place and a different time. If the enterance and exit were at the same place then you're right there would be no apparent time travel the one on the earth would be 10 years older and you and your wormhole enterance would only be 1 year older. Beacuse you're at the same place the wormhole would do nothing but move you a few feet to the other exit. It seems that Wormholes are only useful as time travel machines if they connect different places in the universe.
I don't want to belabor the arguement; How would it be possbile to have one travel through time and have the wormholes exist in differenet times using the univere as a frame of reference? The arguement on the nova show (and you implied) was the man travels for one year (equals 10 on earth, returns, the earth is 10 years older while he is one year older, steps through the wormhole and travels to the time when he left. This is my understanding. Well, if a different person was standing on earth next to the hole when you left for outter space, what happens to the hole he is watching? If nothing happens, he would get 10 years older, so would the hole and the space traveller would appear with them (at their time)when he stepped throught the hole? Maybe I'm missing something obvious but everything seems pretty linear. I understand the time dilatency aspect that the traveller doesn't age as fast but I still don't see how one can travel back in time.
-----MY REPLY:---- You make perfect sense. I think you have it correct. The question about using the universe as a frame of reference for time travel does confuse things, that's where the multiverse theory comes in. Some theorize that it is impossible to travel in time to the same location (space/time continuim SP? problem) but you can travel in time to a different space i.e. a different multiverse. It may be identical to your or it may be vastly different... That's another long story thought. This is what the TV show SLIDERS is baised on.
Hope I helped a bit!
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:43:01 -0700 From: gilles mansillon <gillesm@juno.com> Subject: www.WingMakers.com beings from the 28th century
Here's information on the first time capsule of the WingMakers. They are a groups of beings from the 28th century and they are indeed claiming to operate outside of the time/space continuum. i do not see any reason to doubt their claims and abilities from what i have seen and I believe in the validity of the information. i think you will find it interesting if ytou have not seen it yet. i enclosed a piece of philosophy downloaded from the site. More can be seen at the address noted above. Best wishes,Gilles Mansillon
|
a brian creation - created 7/25/00 updated 3/14/01
