Hello Guest, please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Login with username, password and session length.

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?  (Read 7369 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2007, 02:52:24 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +8/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6604
imfletcher, I still think that in the movie Marty did what we was supposed to.  What did he call a Frisbee in his time?  A frisbee.  Was he not the first one who through it and gave it that function of being thrown?  I do not know.  It has to do something with material concepts called "jin" or something; the concept is introduced and later rediscovered by its creator, having the concept have a circular timeline or something.  If Marty went back, then who is to say that he should not have?

I like .TakaM's statement.  I do not think that the people from the future would come back because the people from their past might be threatened by it and not know how to respond.  If they were to come back, I do not think that they would make it known.

Cronian, I get the weird feeling you watch Teen Titans because there is an episode exactly like that.
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2007, 03:44:53 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1285
Quote
imfletcher, I still think that in the movie Marty did what we was supposed to.  What did he call a Frisbee in his time?  A frisbee.  Was he not the first one who through it and gave it that function of being thrown?  I do not know.  It has to do something with material concepts called "jin" or something; the concept is introduced and later rediscovered by its creator, having the concept have a circular timeline or something.  If Marty went back, then who is to say that he should not have?

Well that's more of a question of whether you believe in luck or God's master plan. Since it happened, it's hard to see it happening any other way, and impossible to tell whether it would have been better. But simply in terms of the changes resulting from the time travel, it wasn't a good thing.
Logged
The Legend of Zelda: Hall of the Dead
Complete and free Zelda fan game
http://dayjo.org/uncannyvisions/hotd.html
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #22 on: January 21, 2007, 06:54:15 pm »
  • (y)(;>.<;)(y)
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3293
If time travel was possible, I'd go back and invent the XBox before Atari released Pong :D Screw the ethical implications of my actions.
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2007, 07:57:12 pm »
  • Personal Text
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1229
The Theory is

Every one has a destined path.  They were destined to... eat a piece of bread for instance, but there are paths leading away from after putting the bread in your mouth. for example, during eating it, you deside to talk, or another path is to chew with your mouth open or closed.

My theory is, if we can go back in time, we are still going to do the same thing, but in a different manor. 
Make sence?
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2007, 08:21:14 pm »
  • (y)(;>.<;)(y)
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3293
Since when did humanity care about the Ethics of anything?

Ethical or not, Time travel is perfectly possible. We are travelling forward in time at the very moment ;)
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2007, 11:31:05 pm »
  • IBV
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1075
I think there's one way to remove the time paradox. If you could move in time, at least backwards, but not actually interact with it. I.e. the time is completely still when you come there (and you would only be able to observe the exact moment). And the time flow would only happen at one place, where we call it "present" (and suppose this time flow would continue as you observe the past). Then again relative theory and such would suggest that there are several time flows in some way so the theory would need a lot more.

On topic though. I think it would be somewhat ethical to go back in past and not actually interact with it, but only observe. Although it would kinda mean you could watch someone...nekkid...in "privacy" <.<;;, or learn about secrets and such. Doing anything in the future would be unethical since you could see what would happen. Although let's say that what you see in the future is "uncertain" it would still not be exactly possible to take advantage of it. Anyone can come up with an uncertain future in their head so what would then be the point of go in time to see an uncertain future?

Logged
My signature is empty.
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #26 on: January 21, 2007, 11:40:49 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +2/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2376
Quote from: TheDarkJay on January 21, 2007, 08:21:14 pm
Since when did humanity care about the Ethics of anything?

Ethical or not, Time travel is perfectly possible. We are travelling forward in time at the very moment ;)
Time isn't in a lineal movement. so we could be traveling in different directions.
Well, time travel if possible, we could just travel to the past but not return. Let say I travel to the past one year, I can't return one year to the future since the future I traveled to the past doesn't exist anymore. I also consider Time travel imposible.
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #27 on: January 22, 2007, 12:58:36 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +4/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4747
I have always thought people will one day be ABLE to travel into the future...because that causes no paradoxes.

Traveling into the past may seem impossible. Because of the possibility of paradoxing. But I have a new theory to not create a paradox. Suppose you go back in time and kill yourself. One would think you would make a paradox. But what if you simply from that point on be erased from history, but yourself be protected from normal time by traveling into the past. So if you go back to the future at the same point you left, there would not be 'another' you from the future that traveled back in time and killed himself and stuff. But 'you' would be there. Just nobody would know you since the original you was killed at age 5. You turned into a alternate 'you' the moment you traveled back in time. If you go back in time and back to the future without killing yourself. You would simply synchronize with the orignal 5 year old to now 'you' since nothing changed that.

My head hurts. But I love time travel.
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #28 on: January 22, 2007, 05:24:49 pm »
  • [sic]
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2334
According to the structure of dimensions, if somebody goes back in time, he simply creates another timeline in the... fift or sixth dimension, I think, that follows the things he changed. The other time plane would remain the same.
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #29 on: January 22, 2007, 07:25:26 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
Quote from: Kame on January 22, 2007, 05:24:49 pm
According to the structure of dimensions, if somebody goes back in time, he simply creates another timeline in the... fift or sixth dimension, I think, that follows the things he changed. The other time plane would remain the same.

No. It just would never happen.

Time travel is physically impossible; let's just ignore the physics of it, and get to the proper topic of the debate, please? <_<
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #30 on: January 23, 2007, 12:30:01 pm »
  • :D
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2418
It IS possible to go forward in time, you just need to approach the speed of light, right?

Well, as far as I know (other than wormholes) it's impossible to go back in time.  So going forward in time would be great, but there wouldn't really be any world-altering changes;  You can't change the past in the future.  Plus you wouldn't be able to steal technologies/patents/ideas from the future, because you wouldn't be able to go back in time anyway.

As far as I can tell there isn't really a problem (with just going forwards in time).
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #31 on: January 23, 2007, 04:27:10 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
Quote from: Limey on January 23, 2007, 12:30:01 pm
It IS possible to go forward in time, you just need to approach the speed of light, right?

Linear time travel is constant; the point being that when you go faster and faster, personal time decreases; the faster you go, the faster stationary objects seem to be moving through time in comparison.

Quote from: Limey on January 23, 2007, 12:30:01 pm
Well, as far as I know (other than wormholes) it's impossible to go back in time.

No. Not even "wormholes". It's just impossible, k? :P
Logged

Dascu
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #32 on: January 23, 2007, 05:28:55 pm »
Quote from: Limey on January 23, 2007, 12:30:01 pm
It IS possible to go forward in time, you just need to approach the speed of light, right?
You're travelling forward in time right now. The faster you go, however, the less you "age". So going really fast would make you percept time slower, and would result into something like: for you, it seemed like 5 minutes, for the rest, it was 500 years.

Quote from: Pyru on January 23, 2007, 04:27:10 pm
Linear time travel is constant; the point being that when you go faster and faster, personal time decreases; the faster you go, the faster stationary objects seem to be moving through time in comparison.
Eh, time movement is never really constant.

Quote
No. Not even "wormholes". It's just impossible, k? :P
What are you basing this on? Human consciousness would probably "freeze" though by the movement through a time-space rift. I would assume that particles can move freely through time, just as they can move freely through space.
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #33 on: January 23, 2007, 05:50:59 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
Quote from: Dascu on January 23, 2007, 05:28:55 pm
Quote from: Pyru on January 23, 2007, 04:27:10 pm
Linear time travel is constant; the point being that when you go faster and faster, personal time decreases; the faster you go, the faster stationary objects seem to be moving through time in comparison.
Eh, time movement is never really constant.

Yes it is... it never stops. Regardless of "personal" time - the movement of time of an individual object, based on the speed it moves - the time around the object moves at a constant rate.

Quote from: Dascu on January 23, 2007, 05:28:55 pm
Quote
No. Not even "wormholes". It's just impossible, k? :P
What are you basing this on? Human consciousness would probably "freeze" though by the movement through a time-space rift. I would assume that particles can move freely through time, just as they can move freely through space.

No, particles move in the same linear motion through time as everything else does.
Logged

Dascu
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #34 on: January 23, 2007, 06:07:21 pm »
I do believe black holes and other anomalies influence time movement. Same with stuff at quantum level, planck length, strings, etc. They have very different perceptions of time, if any.

Photons don't age. A lot of particles use all their energy for means other than time movement. Quantum particles can pop up ANYWHERE in a blink of an eye. As I asked before, what source are you basing your info on?


Edit:
I think you probably already understand this, but if you do, then I don't really see what you're talking about with "constant time".

The more energy you use for movement in a spacial dimension, the less you have to use in the time dimension. Standing "still" (not taking account of earth movement), means you have a lot of energy for the time dimension. There is no constant time, only the movement for each single energy-containing entity who is present in space-time.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2007, 06:19:57 pm by Dascu »
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #35 on: January 24, 2007, 04:40:20 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
Movement through time doesn't use energy... spatial movement uses energy. But, yes, as personal movement increases, personal time moves at a slower pace compared to completely stationary objects. Time continues to move AT THE SAME PACE for those stationary objects; the difference in time movement is all perspective. It appears to the traveller as though the rest of the universe is moving through time faster, when in fact, they are experience a slower pace of personal time.
Logged

Dascu
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #36 on: January 24, 2007, 05:03:42 pm »
Quote from: Pyru on January 24, 2007, 04:40:20 pm
Movement through time doesn't use energy... spatial movement uses energy. But, yes, as personal movement increases, personal time moves at a slower pace compared to completely stationary objects. Time continues to move AT THE SAME PACE for those stationary objects; the difference in time movement is all perspective. It appears to the traveller as though the rest of the universe is moving through time faster, when in fact, they are experience a slower pace of personal time.

....What on earth? Everything has a limit of energy. That's why photons don't age. They use up all their energy for spatial movement, and have none left for time movement. That's why going faster makes you experience time at a slower rate. Time is in fact going slower for you, because you're moving in the time dimension at a lower pace.

For god's sake, Pyru, read something decent like Brian Greene's Elegant Universe. Again, I ask, what is your source? Random sites? Wikipedia? Do you even know about string theory? Quantum mechanics?
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #37 on: January 24, 2007, 05:19:48 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
The law of conservation of energy comes to mind as a good one to point out; everything else is from various things I've read on quantum mechanics over the years.

The law of conservation of energy states that energy is not created or destroyed, merely transferred. How does movement through time transfer energy? It doesn't. No energy is involved.

Not only that, but your theory would require everything to have a finite amount of energy; however, energy can be added to and taken away from things. Some things simply CAN'T move until energy is added; even when that energy is added, regardless of whether or not it is used for movement or similar, it does not affect ageing, etc.
Logged

Dascu
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #38 on: January 24, 2007, 05:35:17 pm »
Explain why you can't move faster than light please.

Let's say there's a finite amount of energy. (I know it sounds absurd, I thought so myself the first time I read it)
Let's say that energy is distributed over spatial and time movement.
Let's say the finite amount of energy = c.
This would result into:
Photons move at maximum speed, namely speed of light.
Photons don't age because they have no energy for time movement.
Moving faster than light would result into a negative value of time, which is the only way Einstein concluded to move back in time.
Logged
Re: Hypothetical Time Travel: Is It Ethical?
« Reply #39 on: January 24, 2007, 05:41:56 pm »
  • *whistle*
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2224
It is infact possible to move faster than the speed of light; read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherenkov_radiation

The speed of light is variable anyway. It's not nearly as significant as some people make it out to be.

There's other reasons why it's assumed that the speed of light in a vacuum is impossible to exceed... I'll have to do some reading up on it to check, but I don't think it's the reasons you're giving.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
« previous next »

 


Contact Us | Legal | Advertise Here
2013 © ZFGC, All Rights Reserved


Page created in 0.128 seconds with 72 queries.

anything