Time travel
Sort:
I would go to Socrates, and have little chat about the morality of not accepting the offer by his friends to help him escape.
We should stay for our better where we are, as we have been lots of times in other times. As if it did us any better?
For those who are curious, Amnesiac wrote his comment, posted it, then quoted that same comment. He then posted the quote and deleted his original post. He was fast enough that no one saw him do it.
Thx yourself, very interesting article there.
Red
I subscribe to the view set out by Stephen Hawking in his book "A Brief History of Time". He theorises that time travel is impossible for the following reason:
If time travel were possible, at any time in the future, we would be inundated by American tourists from the future, right now.
This may seem a little tongue-in-cheek, but I can't help feeling that it's pretty near the mark.
I disagree, just because we don't see or hear about time travellers from the future does not imply they do not exist. Remember time travel, should it ever become a reality, would not be a 'tourist' thing. It probably would only be used by responsible scientists, (hey you never know they might exist in the future). I think if they were able to travel into the past then it would only be for observation purposes. If on the other hand they went back in time prior to our time, now, and changed something, we would not be aware of it because we would have grown up with that history that they changed! Although they risk changing their own future.
Red
My thought is that if you were able to go back in time, there would be nothing that you could do to change anything. Everything would happen just as it was supposed to.
"Although they risk changing their own future."
Incorrect Red... they risk changing their own past and present.
I just want to be like Matt Dillon and shoot all the bad guys. Kitty, Kitty.
I'm mazed at all the interest in Hitler. Why go back to insanity when there are so many more rewarding events to experience? Truth is I would never want to meet the man.
Ray_Brooks wrote:
"Although they risk changing their own future."
Incorrect Red... they risk changing their own past and present.
Hi Ray, actually I'm right. if they never went back then their future history would remain as it would but if they go back and change something they risk changing their future history.
True their past would change and their present would change and if those to change then it follows that their future would change too.
Red
Redserpent2000 wrote: Ray_Brooks wrote:
"Although they risk changing their own future."
Incorrect Red... they risk changing their own past and present.
Hi Ray, actually I'm right. if they never went back then their future history would remain as it would but if they go back and change something they risk changing their future history.
True their past would change and their present would change and if those to change then it follows that their future would change too.
Red
Not quite right Red... you can't change something that hasn't happened yet! Think about it mate.
Hi Ray, but thats the whole point we don't know if the future has or has not happned in reality, but seeing as we have already discussed future people travelling back in time to change something then it is not beyound the realm of possibility for the future to already exist! You cannot argue the future has not happened yet and still posit that future people changing the past will only change their past and present.
Red
"but thats the whole point we don't know if the future has or has not happned in reality"
Red, one of the real problems about discussing time travel, is that the correct syntax does not (yet?) exist.... for instance your post (above) talks about the future in the past tense (e.g future has or has not happned {sic}). This whole idea sits very uneasily with me, and the best I can do is to remain opposed to what I perceive to be the essence of what you are trying to impart. An interesting discussion nonetheless.
To come back to my first post on the issue (Stephen Hawking's rather glib denial of time travel)... if history has taught us anything then it is that "money talks". You theorise that in some future, time travel would be responsibly used by scientists for the benefit of mankind. I'm sure that during the sixties many thought that about space travel, but now we have the advent of space tourists. people with money will always circumvent the system. I'm probably (I don't know what the future holds) going to leave it there, mate. 
Did this thread die nine years ago? Or has it not yet happened?
