Time Travel

[ulthar]

What you are describing reminded me of the two major interpretations of the Quantum Theory:  the Copenhagen Interpretation and the New World Interpretation.

In the Copenhagen Theory, the universe is completely random.  Einstein had a bit of a problem with this, which led to his famous quote "God does not play dice with the universe."

The New World Interpretation is analogous to the multiple universe version of time travel.  In New World Interpretation, each instance of a possible decision, the 'universe' splits into two equivalent paths (one for each outcome of the decision).

Neither of these views is entirely satisfactory, just as the two 'views' on time travel (deterministic vs. multiple universes) is entirely, by itself, fully acceptable to many of us.

[AndyC]

Actually, I think the chronometers would have to be out of sync with the beacon. They would still be set to the day they have been repeating, while the beacon, being outside the phenomenon, would show the correct date.

[The Burgomaster]

I thought PAYCHECK was one of the best thrillers I have seen in awhile.  The whole concept of the machine that can see into the future was a bit far-fetched, but the movie definitely was NOT boring.

[ulthar]

AndyC wrote:

> Actually, I think the chronometers would have to be out of sync
> with the beacon. They would still be set to the day they have
> been repeating, while the beacon, being outside the phenomenon,
> would show the correct date.
>

That's the rub.  If they were reliving THE SAME THREE DAYS (or whatever period of time it was), then that is the same three days for the beacons outside, too.  2 pm Tuesday, December 2, 2003 is 2 pm Tuesday, December 2, 2003, even if you keep repeating it.  While they are in, say, their third iteration of the same time, the beacon is in that time as well, because that is the day/time it IS.

I guess that is the 'science fiction' part of it, that the Enterprise can redo a period of time while the rest of the universe marches merrily along, but there are all kinds of paradox issues that arise.

Mathematically, that case would represent a discontinuity.  Consider for a second a baseball thrown from the Enterprise, just BEFORE is goes back to repeat that time period.  The path that baseball travels is a trajectory that, within the Laws of Physics, is determined by the initial conditions of the flight.  Lets assume the ball flies with a constant velocity.  In Physics, the trajectory should be time-reversible.  That is, if we pick an arbitrary time 'in the future' and march the trajectory backwards to the point it was thrown, that trajectory will be indistinguishable from the forward one.

As the Enterprise comes back to the point that the ball was thrown (the first time, as the ball is not in the rift, as you are saying the beacon is not in the rfit - if we are assuming the timeline does not apply to the beacon, we can equally assume it does not apply to the first baseball).  Now, in the baseball's frame of reference, it is distance = (velocity * Time since thrown) from the Enterprise.  But, to the Enterprise, it is the time that the baseball IS thrown.  The baseball's trajectory is no longer properly reversible - it's position and velocity, etc. become discontinuous.

So.  Two baseballs?  Which one does an observer at the beacon see?  Which one does the Enterprise see?  I think this is different from the "Twin Paradox" in Special Relativity which does not with deal time travel.

Incidentally, Special Relativity postulates that the Speed of Light is contant and non-reachable by any object with nonzero rest mass.  If I recall correctly, time travel would require moving FASTER than the speed of light to be consistent with Special Relativity.

[ulthar]

I just thought of another one that was pretty entertaining....Ground Hog Day with Bill Murray.  It seemed like the point of that one was "relive this until you get it right."  It was interesting how he spent that day while thinking he really was in an infinite loop.

[Flangepart]

Jamtoy : What if you send the $20 bill back in time, and it becomes pure energy.....
might that be the equivilant of turning matter into energy...
If the energy potential in a bill was converted to its raw state....Good by Portland!
E=MC2, don't ya know....

[Ash]

Actually, that episode you're talking about is called "Cause & Effect" and the Enterprise was caught in a Temporal Causality Loop.

[ulthar]

ASHTHECAT wrote:

> Actually, that episode you're talking about is called "Cause &
> Effect" and the Enterprise was caught in a Temporal Causality
> Loop.

Thanks...as I said, I am bad with episode names.

[Susan]

What was the recent time travel movie with dennis quaid? That is one reason why I think some movie producers need to leave time travel stories ALONE. It contradicted itself so badly that I couldn't  enjoy the movie for that fact

[Neon Noodle]

I loved the Back To the Future series, even though they are RIDDLED with paradoxes.

If I had to choose a favorite story, it would be "Sound of Thunder" by Ray Bradbury.

This short story had a time travel company that financed rich people to go into the prehistoric past to hunt dinosaurs. While on the journey, the guide talked about the danger of changing the past in the slightest, since it could have disastrous outcomes. He used the example of killing a mouse. All future generations of that mouse are now dead. What hapens to the animal that needs to eat that future mouse to survive? This domino effect could continue until the first caveman gets sick or loses a limb as a result, which would change the future big time.

Though it's only about 20 pages, it's a GREAT little story.

As far as my favorite time travel theory, I believe that with a multitude of infinite universes, we don't really travel in time so much as we branch into alternate realities where every possible variation in our lives leads to different outcomes (Sure, this is a Star Trek TNG episode, and probably the plot of the whole Sliders series, but I have the least gripes about it.).

There are a number of paradox theories that come to mind which people use to try and prove time travel can't exist; like the Grandfather Paradox. This states that you can't go back in time and kill your grandfather because if he dies, you wouldn't be born, so how could you go back and kill him? Paradox. No movie yet has been able to get around this one.

The movie Millenium tried to use time travel and prevent paradoxes at the same time, but with the low budget and cheesy acting ["It's a damn paradox, Louise!"] it takes multiple viewings to see this level of depth in this movie. Good attempt, tho.

[AndyC]

I recall the grandfather paradox was actually brought up in The final Countdown. They solved it by demonstrating that they couldn't change the past, because there was only one 1941, and they were already a part of it. That presents the problem that a person who does not yet exist can suddenly appear with uninvented technology and knowledge of the future. The only possible explanation is that all time exists at once, and there is no free will. I don't know if they thought that far.

Just the same, I thought it was cool that the rich old man who came to see the ship off at the beginning turned out to be the guy who got left behind in 1941.

[AndyC]

OK, I see what you mean. If the ship actually jumps back in time at the end of every loop, that also wouldn't allow Frasier to be trapped in the anomaly for 80 years, which is one of the cooler things in the episode.  I'm satisfied with the explanation that the Enterprise is stuck in its own little pocket universe where time repeats. Stranger things have happened.

[Jamtoy]

Then once again, since both matter AND energy are interchangable, the net result is the addition of matter and energy to the universe.  Same problem occurs.

 Even in Portland

(Did I understand your post right?)

[Scott]

Our eye (conciousness) is simply scanning a location (the world) and it takes a certain amount of time to go "from here to there". Location + Movement = Time

Believe it or not your body, a bycycle, or an automobile is a type of time machine. Each has it's own speed and terrain.

The pursuit would be can you get your consciousness and/or body somewhere faster than most others can.The tranporter room may be closer than expected, but to "go into the future" is a statement where the problem is. It lends to the idea that something dosn't yet exist, but if you do know that the past, present, and future are all happening at the same time then you have a chance to unravel the time travel riddle.
 
Time travel isn't meant for everyone because everything does indeed have it's own time and place. It's kinda like the question of what if everyone didn't have to work. That would be a life without a story (trial/struggle). Every story has a beginning, middle, and a end. If you were to find the secret of time travel then you would destroy that which fuels what is above. Your life "emotions" are like incense to the one who created you.  Your life serves a multitude of purposes.

[Prophet Tenebrae]

Time travel is an interesting concept...

As to which view I favour... probably something between a 12 Monkeys - fixed future - and a Farscape/Terminator/Star Trek view - one where there is a pre-destined future but it can be changed, although the nature of existence is such that the universe will tend toward the intended course. I favour this because, as a student of history really people can only be carried by trends and circumstances. Although History is really a conflict between macroscopic and microscopic forces.

I have to reject the whole idea that somehow time travel creates parallel universes and so on. That's pretty stupid - I mean, isn't it suggesting the spontaneous creation of a universe, last time I checked universes didn't need people time travelling to come into existence. It's just such a messy explanation...

Someone also mentioned the impossibility of other universes - but I've read articles where scientists had claimed to discover another dimension which is infinitely long and thin which apparently joins them all up.

Finally, I don't like the "the future hasn't happened" yet attitude. The future is an entirely relative point. If I send person A back in time, their future becomes my past - yet I still exist. Perhaps this highlights the fact that 4 dimensional thought is beyond the grasp of our primitive minds, which is why these time travel stories are inconsistent. It's pretty hard to put together a story about time travel that is dramatic and coherent.