Do you think a time machine will ever, realistically be built?

thetonynator

An ad for the hot tub time machine film just came on as i was reading this thread . . .

Agricola

StormWarrior wrote: »

Why?

Sorry gotta go. Dont have time to reply.................hyuck hyuck hyuck!

SoulTrader

latenia wrote: »

It's impossible because time is a physical property within objects rather than an external force. Going back is impossible because it no longer exists and the future doesn't exist yet.

Now, I'm no theoretical physicist (gasp!) but I was of the opinion that time travel was possible in theory, but that the amounts of energy required to send a small payload through time was so vast that it would equal the entire energy output of earth for 2000 years to achieve it? Therefore, although possible in theory, it just couldn't work in practice - it's failure to work in practice being limited by logistics and not necessarily by scientific impossibility.

Owen

Don't mind the stupid photo, but this was an ad in some paper in the states years ago.

http://www.myconfinedspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/time-travel-want-advert.jpg

the_syco

The day after it's built, some religious whackjob will go back in time, and kill the inventor.

antodeco

I think its a case of when it is invented, it will only be that point that can be travelled back to.

Pherekydes

I have already built a time machine, but I don't know how realistic it is.

Any volunteers? (I've run out of pet mice and goldfish. You'll have to sign a disclaimer)

Capt'n Midnight

I have a time machine. It only goes forward though, very slowly.

watch12

i actually figured this sh#t out before, cant quite recall the details though... it was something along the lines of time being consistent with the outward expansion of the universe, time being a matter of space and distance and all that, however i recall theorising that when the universe begins to retract that time will go backwards...... then the universe will expand again and time will return to a forward motion..... ad infinitum......hmmmm

Biggins

Stephen Hawking: Time Travel Possible

Astrophysicist Stephen Hawking says that time travel is possible and may hold the key to humanity´s future. His theory is supported by theoretical work by Albert Einstein and more recently by experimental data from the Large Hadron Collider.

Hawking says that over six years a ship carrying humans could accelerate to 98 percent of the speed of light. At that speed a year would pass on earth for each day on the ship. Humans could return to repopulate earth many years later.

Hawking by his own admission is obsessed with time travel and says we can only travel forward in time. In the past he has steered clear of the topic in public lest he be considered a crank but now he is less worried about that possibility.

Article continues: http://www.news.com.au/technology/time-travel-possible-but-only-moving-forwards-says-stephen-hawking/story-e6frfro0-1225861418565

rossie1977

StormWarrior wrote: »

But if it's going to be invented, wouldn't people from the future already have come back here? They wouldn't be able to keep it secret for long if they did.

lets say for second time-travel were possible
1.why would people come back here and now, why not during some interesting period such as dawn of civilisation, or the height of the roman empire, to see if the story of jesus were true , or the 23rd century (time travel might not be invented till say the year 50,000)

2.if someone did travel back in time to 2010 and told everyone he was from the future, how many would believe him

Biggins

rossie1977 wrote: »

...2.if someone did travel back in time to 2010 and told everyone he was from the future, how many would believe him

I don't know about anyone else but they didn't believe me, the first time I told them!

latenia

What Hawkings is saying was proved long ago through the use of atomic clocks on jet aircraft; I don't see why they have to bring the hadron collider into it. It's still not time travel as most people think of the term-it's more the equivalent of the 'caveman in a block of ice' movie plot.

bonerm

StormWarrior wrote: »

I would give my life savings to go back and live in the 80's.

Why? It was shíte. No internet, no electronics, 6 tv channels, women were less liberal. Ireland living in a sort of shadow of violence, repression and forced perception of inferiority.

I don't think you want to go back to the 80's. I think you just want to be a kid again and you can do that already if you want. Just hit yourself on the head with a brick a few times.

Darksaga87

Go to Cavan, for every second we move forward, they move one second back, So its like 2010 BC over there. The Amish are more advanced than them.

"What is this "wheel" ye be speakin bout hey bai.?"

indough

latenia wrote: »

What Hawkings is saying was proved long ago through the use of atomic clocks on jet aircraft; I don't see why they have to bring the hadron collider into it. It's still not time travel as most people think of the term-it's more the equivalent of the 'caveman in a block of ice' movie plot.

its just like slowing down your experience of time and its effects on you, its technically still time travel but only insofar as we're all time travelling right now

Degsy

I remeber hearing that its possible to go a thousand years into the past but not one nanosecond into the future.

The_B_Man

rossie1977 wrote: »

lets say for second time-travel were possible
1.why would people come back here and now, why not during some interesting period such as dawn of civilisation, or the height of the roman empire, to see if the story of jesus were true , or the 23rd century (time travel might not be invented till say the year 50,000)

2.if someone did travel back in time to 2010 and told everyone he was from the future, how many would believe him

Loadsa reasons!
Boards 1 millionth post
JEdward
or...

to off Stephen Gately!

worthy of chapters in any history book!

Peanut

SoulTrader wrote: »

Now, I'm no theoretical physicist (gasp!) but I was of the opinion that time travel was possible in theory, but that the amounts of energy required to send a small payload through time was so vast that it would equal the entire energy output of earth for 2000 years to achieve it?

But for something much smaller, the energy requirements would be much less.
Perhaps there are electrons flitting in from the future(s)...

OutlawPete

StormWarrior wrote: »

I would give my life savings to go back and live in the 80's.

Mad ..

I just seen this earlier tonight @ the cinema:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHr2DbA2Wl4

Jesus Wept

:cool: The future is here

Overheal

watch12 wrote: »

i actually figured this sh#t out before, cant quite recall the details though... it was something along the lines of time being consistent with the outward expansion of the universe, time being a matter of space and distance and all that, however i recall theorising that when the universe begins to retract that time will go backwards...... then the universe will expand again and time will return to a forward motion..... ad infinitum......hmmmm

..deep o_O

m@cc@

Time will tell.

MarkR

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/time_machine.png

Blazer

If I ever get the chance to travel back in time Bertie and his mob are fúcked.

pajodublin

a few people are saying, if there was a time machine in the future we would know about it as they would be here.
Not neccesarily!
Think about it this way, maybe they have developed the technology to go back in time in the future but the technology to GO BACK to their own time is not available in this time..

Just a thought

StormWarrior

bonerm wrote: »

Why? It was shíte. No internet, no electronics, 6 tv channels, women were less liberal. Ireland living in a sort of shadow of violence, repression and forced perception of inferiority.

I don't think you want to go back to the 80's. I think you just want to be a kid again and you can do that already if you want. Just hit yourself on the head with a brick a few times.

I have never been to Ireland. I want to go back to the 80's and live somewhere good, like Sweden. And I want to go there as an adult, not a child. A young adult though, a bit younger than I am now. About 21 would be good, old enough to do everything but still youthful. I don't want to be a kid again, I just want to be permanently surrounded by awesome backcombed mullets, cool clothes, the best music ever, and that beautiful 80's spirit.

StormWarrior

Degsy wrote: »

I remeber hearing that its possible to go a thousand years into the past but not one nanosecond into the future.

Where did you hear this? It's the total opposite of everything I've ever heard.

Pittens

Why? It was shíte. No internet, no electronics, 6 tv channels, women were less liberal. Ireland living in a sort of shadow of violence, repression and forced perception of inferiority.

He didnt say Ireland. I can tell you as someone born in 75 that there were far more advances in the 80s - say 1980 to 1992 - than since.

Since then we have been marking time. My parents moved house on Jan 7th 1980, and I left in late 1992. In that time we went from black and white TV's to having color TVs, CD, DVDs, ( via VHS), home Computers, microwaves, walkmen. and even old school modible phones. Also the 80's had the internet. Wasnt invented in the 90's. Usenet did what boards did back then. First laptop 1992.

So everything else has been evolutionary.

As Bill Maher said about the BP disaster - we whould in 2010 not only be able to solve these things, we should be having mining disaters on the moon.

2010 is a sore disappointment to those of us who were born in a more technologically advancing times. Music changed more radically too.

Back on-topic: Hawkins mentioned he put out an invitation to time travellers to come to a recent party, but none came. He will be famous in the future, so where are they?

muppetkiller

Wasn't there something said about the time travel Paradox that you can only travel back as far as the first day that the time machine was built (or something like that)..