There are geographical places such as the countries, cities and towns, not the past or future. You cannot escape the present. It is a universal law, which the whole universe and its contents must abide by. — Corvus
If one looks at a kind of causation chain that has taken one from birth to the present, at each temporal step a host of causes converges to form the next step, not an easy thing to grasp. Stanislaw Lem had an Ergodic theory of history in which going back in time and performing an act wouldn't necessarily cause a radically different present. The fact that so many aspects of causation go into effect for a moment might mean that they "average out" and any one might have very little effect compared to the others.
The Grandfather paradox might not be completely binding. Give it some thought. — jgill
If one were able to go back in time, inconsistencies and contradictions would ensue if the time traveler were to change anything; there is a contradiction if the past becomes different from the way it is. The paradox is commonly described with a person who travels to the past and kills their own grandfather, prevents the existence of their father or mother, and therefore their own existence.
The idea is that backwards time travel is impossible because if it occurred, time travellers would attempt to do things such as kill their younger selves (or their grandfathers etc.). We know that doing these things—indeed, changing the past in any way—is impossible.
I could say that I am "here" at my current location (or "geographical place"), whereas earlier I was at a different location and later I might be at a location different to both of these. While I am at each location, I can sensibly say that I am "here" at each location. This is no different to being at the "present" at different times. I always find myself "here" no matter the place and at the "present" no matter the time. Although you can neither escape "here" nor "the present", this does not entail that you cannot depart from or arrive at different places or times. — Luke
When you say "I am here." in the each different locations, you are not saying anything about the locations themselves, but you are stating that YOU are in a location. — Corvus
And no matter how far back or forward, you imagine to have gone to, it would be always the present, because everything happens in present. You cannot escape from it. — Corvus
Another problem with time travel would be, that you might have gone to the past or future, but the rest of the universe will still stay at the present. There is no point of you going back to 100 years back, if the rest of the universe stays at the present. — Corvus
It is just physical, metaphysical, logical and QM impossibility to wake up all the deads from the graves, and rebuild all the castles which had been demolished, and reinstate all the past monarchies and governments into the power .... etc. — Corvus
The whole point of time travel is about going to the place at the time of the past or future with the historical or futuristic people in real flesh in the reality at the time.This is not what time travel is. A time traveller does not bring (objects and events from) other times into our present time. Rather, a time traveller leaves our present time to arrive at other times. — Luke
The whole point of time travel is about going to the place at the time of the past or future with the historical or futuristic people in real flesh in the reality at the time. — Corvus
It is just physical, metaphysical, logical and QM impossibility to wake up all the deads from the graves, and rebuild all the castles which had been demolished, and reinstate all the past monarchies and governments into the power .... etc. — Corvus
Well, Kant has been dead for over 200 years. How else could you meet him, if you are going back to his time. Someone has to wake him up from the grave, and reinstate him as the professor of the university, and make the universe as it was in 1776. :nerd:Time travel has nothing to do with waking the dead or rebuilding demolished castles. — Luke
Well, Kant has been dead for over 200 years. How else could you meet him, if you are going back to his time. Someone has to wake him up from the grave, and reinstate him as the professor of the university, and make the universe as it was in 1776. :nerd: — Corvus
Someone has to wake him up from the grave, and reinstate him as the professor of the university, and make the universe as it was in 1776. — Corvus
Your premise "If I travel to 1776" is an impossibility from the reality of 2024, and therefore it is false. Your conclusion is true in that 1776 was the time Kant was alive.If I travel to 1776, then that was a time when Kant was alive. — Luke
I thought it was obvious. Your statement has too many unclear terms. When it says someone could invent, who is someone? Does he exist in the real world? What is his name? Where is he from? What does he do?I already answered that. It's possible that someone could invent the technology for time travel.
You said it was impossible and that my premise was false. The onus is on you to explain why it's impossible. — Luke
So, you statement is made up with the terms which doesn't have clear meanings. Therefore your statement is not true, and the negation of the statement is true. — Corvus
How is that? — Corvus
It is not true, because its negation is true.Non sequitur. If it's an unclear statement, how does it follow that it's not true? — Luke
Support is not our goal of argument. The goal of the argument is finding out which statement is true. It seems clear that yours is not true.Very poor. You've offered zero support for your assertion that time travel "is an impossibility from the reality of 2024". — Luke
That's a poor argument and conclusion. Good day. :)Absolute nonsense. Goodbye. — Luke
And time travel? What do you mean by time travel? Does time exist? In what form does it exist? Travel? what do you mean by travel? Are you physically going somewhere? Where is the destination? — Corvus
Time is a concept in mind. — Corvus
Recreating a piece of some past state. Indeed, this isn't time travel being described.It would be recreating the past in the future. — LuckyR
This is what I mean. Corvus seems to assume presentism with this statement. The whole notion of time travel seems to assume otherwise, that there are 'other times' available as valid destinations.You cannot travel into a place where the destination doesn't exist. We are all nailed into the present until deaths under the universal law. — Corvus
Funny that you will nevertheless travel to tomorrow. I plan to see you there.Impossibility of time travel seems to be one of the universally necessary truth. — Corvus
Yes, my view of time is similar to Kantian time. It is a concept in mind. Time doesn't exist in the physical world like space does.If you’re a Kantian or similar about time. Not everyone is. Beside this, time as a concept describes a pattern which actual does obtain among material and bodies. Just move through the pattern of materials. — AmadeusD
Do you claim that change is the same thing as time? No, one can deny the existence of time without denying the existence of the world. They are totally different things altogether. The world exists physically, but time exists in mind.Unless you deny the external world entirely, changes exist. Choose your “point in time” based on the “previous state of affairs” you’re after. No need for dates - but would require a more god-like knowledge of history — AmadeusD
If you insist that you can travel into the past or future in your imagination, yeah I would say it might be imaginable within your imagination. I was only pointing out the impossibility of time travel in the physical world.This is what I mean. Corvus seems to assume presentism with this statement. The whole notion of time travel seems to assume otherwise, that there are 'other times' available as valid destinations. — noAxioms
Strictly speaking there is no tomorrow in reality. What you call tomorrow is in your imagination as a concept or idea. There is only "Now" for the whole universe and its members. :) So you might say, we are travelling into tomorrow, but in actuality you are awaiting for another "Now" which will be in next 24 hrs of duration.Funny that you will nevertheless travel to tomorrow. I plan to see you there.
People talk about time dilation being time travel. It isn't any different than doing the same thing sitting still. You get to 'the future' either way, assuming you live long enough to get to the target destination. — noAxioms
Time doesn't exist in the physical world like space does. — Corvus
I am leaning toward “no”. Time being immaterial, change being material in some sense or another. The “previous states of affairs” may obtain somehow, though I can’t answer the how.Do you claim that change is the same thing as time? — Corvus
o what is your own definition of time, and time travel? Can you travel in time physically, or is it in some other way? — Corvus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.