Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!2.us.feeder.erje.net!newspeer1.nac.net!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2017 18:55:59 -0600 Message-ID: <5869A521.5FCE@ix.netcom.com> Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2017 16:56:01 -0800 From: The Starmaker Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity,alt.astronomy Subject: Re: Time Travel Is Not Possible References: <5866B352.6F63@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 88 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 108.219.229.47 X-Trace: sv3-VT26L2Fv41LMDtwE2DcIfcgjvOGBNyI9MpbCA7Zh1HGKn2e+AhARZCXInmVcUQ9X+OkeZeqZcWKSjco!Jw3qICyeL2Y9BzlazFY3dvDcefOXjt2cb1wT4a2Ic31JnDC3PIX2GBwbWv3aojtGMG4+//iKwV/L!DFOuVRfb+T8= X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 5004 Xref: csiph.com rec.arts.sf.written:461415 sci.physics:611252 sci.physics.relativity:403747 alt.astronomy:288542 Michael J. Strickland wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 11:19:46 -0800, The Starmaker > wrote: > > >lets say > >you travel back in time > >in a time machine and your > >time machine lands on your > >grandfather and kills him... > > > > > >Time Travel Is Not Possible. > > And...? > > I don't claim (or know) if "time travel" back in time is possible, I'm > just pointing out that your evidence/argument does not preclude it. > > Your old "grandfather/father/? paradox" is easily disposed of but > there are some other difficulties which have to be overcome if you > travel to the past and then return to the present. > > In your example, if your grandfather is alive in the present before > you leave for the past, the grandfather you fall on in the past dies > but that doesn't affect the grandfather you have when you return to > the present. He is a separate entity. He is just as you left him > (alive). Obviously he could have coincidentally died while you were > "neglecting/relieving" him by traveling in time (lol) but it would > have nothing to do with anything you did in the past to his earlier > entity. THAT IS THE MOST RIDICULOUS THING I EVER HEARD! I guess it gets more ridiculous if i continue reading..(if you follow the second law) > > Say you "go" back in time 20 years. This probably requires non-zero > time. Two versions of your grandfather (entities) must exist (a > present and a past version) while you are in transit. Any changes made > in the past normally propagate forward in time at the speed of time (1 > second per second). They would normally take 20 years to arrive at > (affect) the present you left. > > I believe the only way to experience changes made in the past is to > remain in that past. The present you start from is a different part of > the timeline. The past is also a different part of the timeline. These > two separate timeline segments do not normally interact directly. Btw, > "my" timeline is infinite in both directions. > > As I replied about 20 years ago (in sci.physics) to a similar > statement/question, one way of looking at it is to assign every object > in the universe a location in space (x, y, z). Btw, "my" universe is > an x, y, z coordinate grid of infinite size (volume). Each location > is specified by a location in space (x, y, z) along with a location in > time (t, s). "s", the second time coordinate, describes its "shift" or > distance from you on the timeline. At s = -20 years on the timeline, > you find the universe as it was 20 years ago. Your "time machine" must > also change x, y, & z (spatial location) since these usually change > with time for anything that's moving (like a planet and everything on > it). The "s" gives your time machine's "time shift" from its start > time (present) and the t gives its current location (in time). > > Also, the fact that you are going into the past implies you are going > into a different past (one with a different "s") because, let's face > it, in the original past, no one popped in with a time machine, now > did they. > > So when you go back 20 years into the past, your coordinates change > from (x, y, z, t, s) to (x, y, z, t', s'). Normally, when not time > traveling, "s" remains constant and "t" increases at the normal "speed > of time" which is 1 second per second as we are currently traveling > inexorably into the future at 1 second per second. > > I've tried to give you a "theory" without resorting to what you said > you didn't want to hear. Your welcome. > > P.S. Killing your grandfather won't help - lol. > > Mike > See you at the show trials - lol. > --------------------------------------------------- > Michael J. Strickland Reston, VA > ---------------------------------------------------