Jack the Time Traveller
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
115 comments displayed.
#228 to #6
-
lazerpickle (02/20/2013) [-] the paradox argument is pointless anyway, seeing as backwards time travel isn't possible.
#8 to #7
-
derangedberger (02/19/2013) [-] No, not that.
If he were to go back in time and stop himself from being born, he would never exist. If he never existed, he could never go back in time to stop himself from being born. Thus, he is born, and goes back in time and stops himself from being born and so on. It's called the Grandfather Paradox.
If he were to go back in time and stop himself from being born, he would never exist. If he never existed, he could never go back in time to stop himself from being born. Thus, he is born, and goes back in time and stops himself from being born and so on. It's called the Grandfather Paradox.
#30 to #8
-
whoovesthedoctor (02/20/2013) [-] unless, of course, time isn't a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - is more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff.
#116 to #30
-
lamarisagoodname (02/20/2013) [-] the brony's logic is very sound and it's an argument I use all the time, nobody has successfully explained to me the concept of time being non-linear
#137 to #116
-
winglit (02/20/2013) [-]
Well think of it like this the invention of a time machine would alter the very meaning of time, see we view it as traveling down a stream, but a time machine by its very nature is going from one point to another and avoiding the points in between, so if time is like a straight line
l
l
l
theres no way to cut out any bits of time you cant move from 1 point to another without going through the river or next to it, you cant avoid time
but if time travel were made posible
(
)
(
it bends the river and lets you cross at the bent points... I just ******** that entire thing btw so i could be entirely wrong but thats what id assume, i mean there is no expert on time travel, so any opinion is valid
l
l
l
theres no way to cut out any bits of time you cant move from 1 point to another without going through the river or next to it, you cant avoid time
but if time travel were made posible
(
)
(
it bends the river and lets you cross at the bent points... I just ******** that entire thing btw so i could be entirely wrong but thats what id assume, i mean there is no expert on time travel, so any opinion is valid
#163 to #137
-
lamarisagoodname (02/20/2013) [-] but you're travelling through time, not randomly teleporting. you can move backwards along a line, can't you?
#321 to #163
-
winglit (02/20/2013) [-]
well yes i suppose but im thinking that the invention of a time machine would be a lot like putting a dam in the river to divert its flow along a path we want, were caught in the current naturally and going upstream is pretty tough, so i think the invention of a time machine changes the nature of time, and we wouldnt be going along the river because its current can carry us downstream anyway if we want to travel to the future without waiting wed need to bend that stream and cross at a bank
#322 to #116
-
rieskimo (02/20/2013) [-] I'm going to make this as simple as I can. Linear time is seeing time as a series of rivers, splitting at every choice et cetera. Non-linear time would be seeing time as a series of pools, close but never touching. You could jump from pool to pool without effecting your own pool, versus linear you would effect the future splits thus creating different time streams and changing the course of any time stream you are present in.
#149 to #8
-
OminousDemon (02/20/2013) [-] this can be explained through dbz logic
where if u go back in time it starts a new timeline so as to not disrupt the future that wouldve happened otherwise
where if u go back in time it starts a new timeline so as to not disrupt the future that wouldve happened otherwise
#306 to #8
-
drhoffable (02/20/2013) [-] but in order for him to actually go back in time he must have been born atleast once for the idea of him traveling back in time to even occur
#289 to #8
-
ohgodmysides (02/20/2013) [-] Who says that's the sex in which the son is going to be made?
#240 to #8
-
undeadwill (02/20/2013) [-] Unless this is the reality that he exists and goes back thus the next reality he does not exist
#224 to #8
-
asmodeu (02/20/2013) [-] That paradox is solved by implying (>) the idea of creating an alternate universe the moment you travel back in time. Any changes you make there will not affect the universe in your actual time. Any little thing you change can completely mess up the future (even taking a dump).
#87 to #8
-
shyyk (02/20/2013) [-]
But then there's also the possibility of multiple world lines occurring or him never being able to stop them from having sex. If time is linear with only a singular "line" then no matter what he did, he'd never be able to alter an event that caused him to go to the past. For example, if I went back and shot my grandfather, we'd have a paradox. However, since it affected me going back in time, it's possible the event could never happen. The gun may jam, bullet misses, etc.
But if there are multiple world lines, then two worlds will exist: one where they had a very fun night, and one where their kid screwed everything up just like he probably did for the next 18 years. In one he will exist, while in another, he will not exist. The question is, would he be able to traverse "lines" and live in a world where he never existed?
TL:DR: You go back in time, you get screwed up the ass one way or another.
But if there are multiple world lines, then two worlds will exist: one where they had a very fun night, and one where their kid screwed everything up just like he probably did for the next 18 years. In one he will exist, while in another, he will not exist. The question is, would he be able to traverse "lines" and live in a world where he never existed?
TL:DR: You go back in time, you get screwed up the ass one way or another.
#250 to #6
-
musclemarinade (02/20/2013) [-] I like to think of the theory of branching timelines for questions like this. While he was born in one time line, going back and stopping himself from being born creates an alternate timeline where he was never born yet at the same time still exists. Pic somewhat related
#156 to #6
-
Fgner (02/20/2013) [-] However, that's making assumptions of the nature of time. If you were to look at time as a physical existance, rather than a metaphysical concept, the paradox is solved easily.
I'll elaborate: If you go back in time, your existence is now manifested in the previous timeframe. When you do something like prevent your own birth, it has no influence on you, because you're existence is no longer in the future timeframe. The physical matter in that timeframe is moved, and therefore incapable of being influenced by past events. So while you are never born to go back in time, you are already back in time and therefore don't need to be born to go back in time. I'll make a pretty picture later.
Essentially, it's extremely hard to explain and I'm probably not getting it along correctly - Doctor Who's explanation of wibble wobbley timey wimey stuff is pretty much spot on.
I'll elaborate: If you go back in time, your existence is now manifested in the previous timeframe. When you do something like prevent your own birth, it has no influence on you, because you're existence is no longer in the future timeframe. The physical matter in that timeframe is moved, and therefore incapable of being influenced by past events. So while you are never born to go back in time, you are already back in time and therefore don't need to be born to go back in time. I'll make a pretty picture later.
Essentially, it's extremely hard to explain and I'm probably not getting it along correctly - Doctor Who's explanation of wibble wobbley timey wimey stuff is pretty much spot on.
#206 to #156
-
blindkungfumasta (02/20/2013) [-]
I followed it, but when and if he goes back to the future, would that mean he has no identity? Or would he go to a different future in a parallel dimension where he was born?
#239 to #206
-
Fgner (02/20/2013) [-] That's the brilliance of it. If he goes forward in time, the future will be the modified future of what happened because of his presence in the previous timeframe. If that means he wasn't born, then exactly, he'd have no identity - But he'd still exist exactly the same. Memories in tact and everything.
#25 to #6
-
hammerfell (02/20/2013) [-] What paradox? He activated a cloaking device so they think he's gone and he can watch, obviously.
#70
-
workitout (02/20/2013) [-] Time travel will never happen.
If they invented it in the future, somebody would have already came back to tell us.
If they invented it in the future, somebody would have already came back to tell us.
#86 to #70
-
gameshredder (02/20/2013) [-] What if it's only observable time travel. Where they can't effect anything they touch, and can only observer things from the past. And we here in the past can't see them.
#330 to #70
-
Keidis (02/20/2013) [-] Didn't read all of the comments yet, but I've heard from several time theories about how time is like a river that would be split into smaller streams once time travel is unlocked.
Thus; If you travel back to stop Hitler, you create a completely different time line where Hitler never exists, and the one where the damage is already done, stays as is.
You'd never be able to actually permanently change your own past.
Also, if time travel WERE possible, I'm quite sure that EVERY country that has it would be VERY conservative with it and NOT use it often. Could cause colossal damage such as butterfly effects.
Say if they DID go into the past to change something, like killing an infamous bad guy, it may cause a butterfly effect that would cause someone even WORSE to follow in the same timeline as him/her; making it nearly impossible to stop a horrible snowballing effect. History MUST happen how it has to happen, if not, we'd never learn from the problems of the past and build our future.
TL;DR **** yourself, you're reading. :)
Thus; If you travel back to stop Hitler, you create a completely different time line where Hitler never exists, and the one where the damage is already done, stays as is.
You'd never be able to actually permanently change your own past.
Also, if time travel WERE possible, I'm quite sure that EVERY country that has it would be VERY conservative with it and NOT use it often. Could cause colossal damage such as butterfly effects.
Say if they DID go into the past to change something, like killing an infamous bad guy, it may cause a butterfly effect that would cause someone even WORSE to follow in the same timeline as him/her; making it nearly impossible to stop a horrible snowballing effect. History MUST happen how it has to happen, if not, we'd never learn from the problems of the past and build our future.
TL;DR **** yourself, you're reading. :)
#319 to #70
-
torkildsen (02/20/2013) [-] If someone traveled to our time or before that they would likely just blend in like a ************ to avoid anything to change. Time travel will probably only be used for gathering of lost information or gain of new technology. It's not possible, though so I don't know why I'm discussing it...
#189 to #70
-
pencildick (02/20/2013) [-] or or or maybe they traveled later for us to tell us at a later date
#135 to #70
-
Alchemyst ONLINE (02/20/2013) [-] Quite frankly, I subscribe to the Split-Timeline version, where each BACKWARDS time travel creates a branching timeline at the point of reentry into the timestream. It's one of the only time travel theories that prevents the creation of a paradox, but it does mean that truly altering the past is impossible, for your own timeline at least. All you'll do is create a new timeline where a foreign factor (You) was introduced, changing the outcome of any future events.
So in answer to your question, if someone invented time travel in OUR future, in the Alpha timeline, they would be going back and telling people in the Beta timeline that they invented it, which may well prevent the invention of time travel in the Beta future since they already have it.
Pic related, my favorite time-traveler.
So in answer to your question, if someone invented time travel in OUR future, in the Alpha timeline, they would be going back and telling people in the Beta timeline that they invented it, which may well prevent the invention of time travel in the Beta future since they already have it.
Pic related, my favorite time-traveler.
#92 to #70
-
garymotherfinoak (02/20/2013) [-] travelling to the past isn't possible. but to the future it is.
#192 to #118
-
anon (02/20/2013) [-]
So anyway, what my nemesis failed to explain is that we are already constantly moving forward in time however, depending on your position in space, time progresses at a different speed. Some things that affect this speed are gravity and velocity. For example, gravity exerted on satellites is less than whats exerted on objects on earths surface, so satellites that use timers (such as gps satellites) have to compensate by keeping time at a different pace than clocks that what is kept on the surface of the earth. Also the reason it's impossible to move backwards in time is because it's believed that the energy required to do so would be greater than all the energy in the known universe.
#207 to #1
-
mailstrom (02/20/2013) [-] proudest moment of my existence. someone using my material
www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/4071417/STAHP/
inb4 cool story bro
www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/4071417/STAHP/
inb4 cool story bro
#230 to #207
-
anonyrnoose (02/20/2013) [-]
Good job. You've used a cancerous meme of which should have died long ago.
#100 to #96
-
mochidrake (02/20/2013) [-] You still upset my RED mercenaries could beat your BLU mercenaries every time my old brother?
#102 to #100
-
triggathepirate (02/20/2013) [-] Blabbering idiot. My mercs have bested yours multiple a mission.
Your stinking ragtags couldn't hold a fort if it were laid siege by infants.
Your stinking ragtags couldn't hold a fort if it were laid siege by infants.
#107 to #102
-
mochidrake (02/20/2013) [-] You give your offense too much appraise, your mercs could barely push a payload cart up Thunder Mountain
#114 to #111
-
mochidrake (02/20/2013) [-] You know it, let's see how well your pathetic BLU team can fare against my REDs
#127 to #124
-
triggathepirate (02/20/2013) [-] Our scout has long since went to pursue different job opportunities
#85 to #82
-
triggathepirate (02/20/2013) [-] It's been years and I can't solve his paradox.
I know.
I'll keep thinking, and develop a time machine when I get it. then go back and tell my self the answer.
I know.
I'll keep thinking, and develop a time machine when I get it. then go back and tell my self the answer.
#98 to #85
-
triggathepirate (02/20/2013) [-] I'VE DONE IT, I'VE SOLVED THE PARADOX.
I'LL BUILD MY MACHINE RIGHT AWAY TO INFORM MY SELF.
I'LL BUILD MY MACHINE RIGHT AWAY TO INFORM MY SELF.
#5
-
areo0420 (02/19/2013) [-] Grandfather Paradox...
he just broke the universe, unless the multi universe does exist, in which case this is not how it would happen, he'd simply enter a time flow or what have you...
he just broke the universe, unless the multi universe does exist, in which case this is not how it would happen, he'd simply enter a time flow or what have you...
#12 to #9
-
areo0420 (02/19/2013) [-] that argument is fallacious.
you are applying a principle of the whole to a part, similar to the following statement:
American Buffalo are practically extinct.
<--- this is an american buffalo, so that means it's practically extinct.
or this one, if the previous one didn't make sense to you:
America is a wealthy nation. Mitchel is an American, so he must be wealthy.
you are applying a principle of the whole to a part, similar to the following statement:
American Buffalo are practically extinct.
<--- this is an american buffalo, so that means it's practically extinct.
or this one, if the previous one didn't make sense to you:
America is a wealthy nation. Mitchel is an American, so he must be wealthy.
#23 to #9
-
taintedangel (02/20/2013) [-] it would mean that in one universe, no one ever came up with the theory, therefore most if not all the branching universes won't have that theory.
#11 to #9
-
misterymisterman (02/19/2013) [-] Not exactly - the multiverse theory allows for a universe for every possible world. If there was a multiverse, then there could not be a universe in which the multiverse theory was false, so that isn't a problem. Fundamentals don't change. In the same way, you couldn't have a universe where nothing was made up of atoms.
There could be one where the theory didn't exist, because nobody had proposed it, but that's not the same thing at all and would be inconsequential.
There could be one where the theory didn't exist, because nobody had proposed it, but that's not the same thing at all and would be inconsequential.
#10 to #9
-
faoneone (02/19/2013) [-]
that universe would be destroyed instantly due to the energetic imbalance and time flow repetition causing unending ripples int he continuum of that universe, if that universe were to exist, the multi-verse wouldn't exist as an >option< to "vent" the time frame and energetic loops, which would be the only possible way it exists, or in shorter words, multi-verse is the theory of every >possible< outcome of the universe, that universe you mentioned is >impossible< there fore it cannot exist even in the multi-verse theory....just saying
#139
-
chaotixx (02/20/2013) [-] People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff.
#262
-
chucknorrisTHEGAME (02/20/2013) [-] A baby girl is mysteriously dropped off at an orphanage in Cleveland in 1945. "Jane" grows up lonely and dejected, not knowing who her parents are, until one day in 1963 she is strangely attracted to a drifter. She falls in love with him. But just when things are finally looking up for Jane, a series of disasters strike. First, she becomes pregnant by the drifter, who then disappears. Second, during the complicated delivery, doctors find that Jane has both sets of sex organs, and to save her life, they are forced to surgically convert "her" to a "him." Finally, a mysterious stranger kidnaps her baby from the delivery room.
Reeling from these disasters, rejected by society, scorned by fate, "he" becomes a drunkard and drifter. Not only has Jane lost her parents and her lover, but he has lost his only child as well. Years later, in 1970, he stumbles into a lonely bar, called Pop's Place, and spills out his pathetic story to an elderly bartender. The sympathetic bartender offers the drifter the chance to avenge the stranger who left her pregnant and abandoned, on the condition that he join the "time travelers corps." Both of them enter a time machine, and the bartender drops off the drifter in 1963. The drifter is strangely attracted to a young orphan woman, who subsequently becomes pregnant.
The bartender then goes forward 9 months, kidnaps the baby girl from the hospital, and drops off the baby in an orphanage back in 1945. Then the bartender drops off the thoroughly confused drifter in 1985, to enlist in the time travelers corps. The drifter eventually gets his life together, becomes a respected and elderly member of the time travelers corps, and then disguises himself as a bartender and has his most difficult mission: a date with destiny, meeting a certain drifter at Pop's Place in 1970.
Reeling from these disasters, rejected by society, scorned by fate, "he" becomes a drunkard and drifter. Not only has Jane lost her parents and her lover, but he has lost his only child as well. Years later, in 1970, he stumbles into a lonely bar, called Pop's Place, and spills out his pathetic story to an elderly bartender. The sympathetic bartender offers the drifter the chance to avenge the stranger who left her pregnant and abandoned, on the condition that he join the "time travelers corps." Both of them enter a time machine, and the bartender drops off the drifter in 1963. The drifter is strangely attracted to a young orphan woman, who subsequently becomes pregnant.
The bartender then goes forward 9 months, kidnaps the baby girl from the hospital, and drops off the baby in an orphanage back in 1945. Then the bartender drops off the thoroughly confused drifter in 1985, to enlist in the time travelers corps. The drifter eventually gets his life together, becomes a respected and elderly member of the time travelers corps, and then disguises himself as a bartender and has his most difficult mission: a date with destiny, meeting a certain drifter at Pop's Place in 1970.
#307 to #262
-
goblingang (02/20/2013) [-] But how could she get pregnant if she was a hermaphrodite?
#235
-
rsfilmsworld (02/20/2013) [-] MFW people are all wrapped in paradox theories instead of having a quick laugh....
#188
-
deathrinder ONLINE (02/20/2013) [-] But if he went back in time and stopped his own conception he wold never have been born to stop his own conception so he would have been born but if he was born he would grow up to travel back in time to stop himself from being born but if he succeeded and was never born he wouldn't be able to go back and stop his birth again which means he would be born but then he wouldn't be born but then he would be born but then he aworgiubyserdjkhfgeirurgh
#193 to #188
-
randumbgamer (02/20/2013) [-] Parallel realities, since it happend in the past time from then on branches out into a universe where he does not exsist.
#332 to #234
-
randumbgamer (02/20/2013) [-] alternate universes, parallel universes, alternate ralities, and parallel realities are basically all the same thing
#155
-
creepyunclebob (02/20/2013) [-]
I think a Stable Time Loop seems like the most likely result of time travel. You can't change the past, or rather you already did and the present is the result of your future self's past actions.
