30 replies to this topic

[phlegm]

What if say, someone in the year 2121, [year not really relevant], invents a time machine and takes his family back to adam and eve, or at least the very dawn of mankind, and gets caught there cause the machine broke.Whatever then transspires, vis a vis his inter mating with locals , would then become our real history, mankind would go on as before, until 2121 comes around again, and the whole process starts over.Would this not turn our history into a never ending mobius strip type of cause and sffect?

[timwakefield]

You were high when you posted this, right?

[Balloon guy]

Crowtrobot used to say that not only is the above likely, it is in fact a sure thing since there are infinite universes.I think all atheist are high in order to believe what they say.

[BillyPilgrim]

Balloon guy, on Monday, January 2nd, 2012, 10:56 AM, said:

I think all atheist are high in order to believe what they say.

it's sad you think this is funny.

[Spademan]

What if you sucked on a very small section of the furthermost rear portion of my ball sack for thirteen hours straight and by doing so fashioned a shriveled tail-like swath of skin near my taint.It might hang down from behind my scrotum - as seen from fellatio perspective - lonely and abnormal. Jesus. What if?

[BillyPilgrim]

Spademan, on Thursday, January 5th, 2012, 2:31 AM, said:

What if you sucked on a very small section of the furthermost rear portion of my ball sack for thirteen hours straight and by doing so fashioned a shriveled tail-like swath of skin near my taint.It might hang down from behind my scrotum - as seen from fellatio perspective - lonely and abnormal. Jesus. What if?

i read this outloud to my roommate and he hurt himself laughing. this is why spademan is god.

[Balloon guy]

BillyPilgrim, on Thursday, January 5th, 2012, 6:56 PM, said:

i read this outloud to my roommate and he hurt himself laughing. this is why spademan is god.

Why do you have a 14 year old roommate?I mean besides for intellectual discussion equality.

[BillyPilgrim]

oh come on bg. that was funny, you gotta give spadey that.

[Spademan]

BillyPilgrim, on Friday, January 6th, 2012, 2:14 PM, said:

oh come on bg. that was funny, you gotta give spadey that.

I'm embarrassed for you that you felt you needed to qualify.

[BillyPilgrim]

dammit

[brvheart]

Ouch. Sorry Suited. Spade was not impressed.

[BillyPilgrim]

SHUT THE HELL UP BRVY NO ONE WAS TALKING TO YOU.

[SilentSnow]

Time travel into our universe is not possible. At best you might be able to travel into a parallel universe which had no effect on the one you left. Even this is incredibly unlikely. (I can't prove this, but I think it's likely enough to be true that I can't take any "time travel paradox" discussions seriously.)

[Balloon guy]

And he's on your guy's side......

[timwakefield]

SilentSnow, on Monday, January 9th, 2012, 8:19 PM, said:

Time travel into our universe is not possible. At best you might be able to travel into a parallel universe which had no effect on the one you left. Even this is incredibly unlikely. (I can't prove this, but I think it's likely enough to be true that I can't take any "time travel paradox" discussions seriously.)

Time travel to the future is of course not only possible but is actually observable, although on an extremely small scale. A clock on the space station orbiting the earth moves a tiny bit slower than a stationary clock on earth, as we would predict. It's time travel to the past which is logically impossible.The kill-your-grandfather paradox can actually be explained away by saying that any attempt to do so or to cause a similar time-paradox by altering the past would have zero likelihood of success. You'd necessarily fail, despite trying your best. But there's another type of fairly simple paradox that can't be explained away: If we could travel to our own past, those travelers would potentially leave records in the past of the actions they took on their trip. So say there was a record of something I did on a trip back in time to 1990. But now back in the present day with my time machine I could come across that record, and because I have free will I could choose not to take the trip, or to not commit the same action that I had read about or seen film of. But since it's the past it's already happened, so it could never not happen. That's at least one paradox which makes it logically impossible.

[brvheart]

Oh my goodness. Are you guys seriously discussing this stoner's question?

[timwakefield]

brvheart, on Tuesday, January 10th, 2012, 11:04 AM, said:

Oh my goodness. Are you guys seriously discussing this stoner's question?

Definitely not, but time travel itself is an interesting topic, so I gave an actual reply about the general question of time travel. I was spurred on by Snow's post, not OP's (who incidentally probably forgot that he ever posted this).

[bat]

Sorta off subject but not totally: I was watching one of those "how the universe was made'' shows on TV last night and some lady was talking about how the universe came from one small point and exploded into everything we know today and went on to paraphrase Stephen Hawking (sp) in saying that ''there is no God, we have proof, because the universe was created from nothing, so therefor, we don't need a God to create one!'' I am totally confused by this rhetoric?

[DJ Vu]

timwakefield, on Tuesday, January 10th, 2012, 6:04 AM, said:

It's time travel to the past which is logically impossible.

No, see, it's like this.1. Create time machine.2. Activate time machine and then leave area.3. Future you exits the time machine.4. Original you stays out of the way until it's time to go into time machine.5. Future you is now in the past and can make money in the stock market.6. Future you is now in an altered timeline.7. Original you is in a time machine loop.Bam. Penetrate that logic.

[vbnautilus]

bat, on Wednesday, January 11th, 2012, 9:11 AM, said:

Sorta off subject but not totally: I was watching one of those "how the universe was made'' shows on TV last night and some lady was talking about how the universe came from one small point and exploded into everything we know today and went on to paraphrase Stephen Hawking (sp) in saying that ''there is no God, we have proof, because the universe was created from nothing, so therefor, we don't need a God to create one!'' I am totally confused by this rhetoric?

Well here's what he actually said:As recent advances in cosmology suggest, the laws of gravity and quantum theory allow universes to appear spontaneously from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.You can read it in context if you'd like to understand his views better: http://online.wsj.co...1609024244.html