Time Travel to the Past is Possible - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate News And Just About Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Time Travel to the Past is Possible
in Science

Time Travel to the Past is Impossible

"Time travel into the past, which is what people usually mean by time travel, is a much more uncertain proposition. There are many solutions to Einstein's equations of General Relativity that allow a person to follow a timeline that would result in her (or him) encountering herself--or her grandmother--at an earlier time. The problem is deciding whether these solutions represent situations that could occur in the real universe, or whether they are mere mathematical oddities incompatible with known physics. No experiment or observation has ever indicated that time travel is occurring in our universe. Much work has been done by theoretical physicists in the past decade to try to determine whether, in a universe that is initially without time travel, one can build a time machine--in other words, if it is possible to manipulate matter and the geometry of space-time in such a way as to create new paths that circle back in time."           -ScientificAmerican.com

See these short sources:  

2.  
3.  


The fundamental question of this debate is, "Is it possible to time travel to the past in a "Back to the Future" type format?" That is, could you travel into the past and meet your parents before you were born? Could you travel back to the "Wild West"?, ect., ect.

Thoughts?
yolostideStevenWuzz
  1. Time Travel to the Past is Possible

    14 votes
    1. For the Motion
      14.29%
    2. Against the Motion
      85.71%



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
22%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • I do agree that time travel could be eventually possible, but I don't think that you could see your parents before they were born. I think that you could see their molecules or particles, but not them in their complete physical form. Then again, I am not experienced in this area, so that is just a theory.
    A good debate is not judged by bias, but in the context of the debate, where objectivity is key and rationale prevalent. 


  • There is no such thing as Time Travel, it is a illiterate fallacy.  :*
    EmeryPearson
  • It may be possible, but could need more technological advancements and more research for science, technology, etc. to have time travelling.
    agsr
  • I think it's certainly unlikely, and I don't see how we can do it with current understanding of science and current technology.
    That said, I am not ready to rule it out forever.  It's likely that new twist on technology will develop down the road that will make it possible. 
    It may take hundreds or thousands of years to advance technology enough to do this.  
    Live Long and Prosper
  • agsr said:
    I think it's certainly unlikely, and I don't see how we can do it with current understanding of science and current technology.
    That said, I am not ready to rule it out forever.  It's likely that new twist on technology will develop down the road that will make it possible. 
    It may take hundreds or thousands of years to advance technology enough to do this.  
    I think time travel could be possible if one person manages to move at the speed of light or survives a black hole, but we would as previously said a lot of technological advances, like the formation of new elements that can withstand the vacuum or space or a faster traveling engine for space, so that we can explore more planets or at least get the funding for such research.
    Erfisflat
    A good debate is not judged by bias, but in the context of the debate, where objectivity is key and rationale prevalent. 


  • @WilliamSchulz, good point.  Black hole is one way of time travel, the other one could be some other way of finding to bend time space continuum.  Of course, if the hologram theory is true in some ways, than everything can be recorded and played back.
    Live Long and Prosper
  • agsr said:
    @WilliamSchulz, good point.  Black hole is one way of time travel, the other one could be some other way of finding to bend time space continuum.  Of course, if the hologram theory is true in some ways, than everything can be recorded and played back.
    Can you tell me what the hologram theory is?
    A good debate is not judged by bias, but in the context of the debate, where objectivity is key and rationale prevalent. 


  • Live Long and Prosper
  • Looks interesting, I'm working my way down the line. What I would say so far is that I could understand an object being preserved in a black hole but certainly not as a hologram or computer programming. There has to be some God who didn't press copy / paste a bit too much. More scientifically, however, Coulombs Law states that "Matter can not be created or destroyed, opposites attract and like objects repel." Before wondering what happens if 2 black holes collide, this may hold the clue to why time travel could be possible. Because a black hole "destroys" objects, it simply turns the object into a particle or a molecule because mass / matter can't be created / destroyed. This means that if we were to travel time, we would be able to see the molecules of previous timelines, but only what had entered the black hole. Everything else is probably not a hologram and acts normally. Then again, Stephen Hawking probably knows way more than I do.
    agsr
    A good debate is not judged by bias, but in the context of the debate, where objectivity is key and rationale prevalent. 


  • NopeNope 324 Pts
    edited January 8
    MWilliamSchulzike
    Coulombs Law states that "Matter can not be created or destroyed". Matter is defined by something taking up space and having mass. Lets go to Einstein. E=MC^2. You are suggesting energy is matter. How can you be sure? We have yet to have an experiment prove positive that energy takes up space or has mass. We do however have experiments supporting E=MC^2. This is a statement that needs to be supported.
  • I think that being able to time travel to the past will eventually be possible. I think that in the early development stages you could see people in their molecular form but not real form but I think it will eventually be able to see an entire terrain and not just on a molecular level. However, I don't think anybody will be able to do it. I think this because if you go back in time and change something in history on total accident then that changes the whole course of history from the point that you went back to. If anybody watches The Flash you know that Barry created Flashpoint and that time period changed everything and nothing was the same. Also, if tons of people went back think about the chaos that would be happening because there would be tons of different timelines that have totally different viewpoints. 
  • What is time?

    Time is a human construct. 
    Time is how we regard and quantify the duration of events.
    Time does not exist, it is intangible, without dimension.
    An event which occurred in the past cannot be revisited, as it ceased to exist at its moment of completion.
    brontoraptor
  • @xMathFanx

    I could easily imagine it this way. Reality is a simulation, thus we are easily able to transport within the program to the recorded past.
    xMathFanx
  • @WilliamSchulz Your idea about seeing your parents before you were born, for instance, in the form of molecules and particles, is interesting. Can you explain more? Thanks!
  • Sure! However, it depends if they get sucked into the black hole :). As previously mentioned, we move in real time moving forward. However, the physics of a black hole are incomprehensible, so powerful that they can rip a hole through space, including time as well. Therefore, if I was to throw my mom into the black hole, the hole would trap all of her molecules infinity years after I threw her in because she remains trapped. Therefore, if I was to enter the black hole, I would find her, but not in her solid form, in the form of many broken up molecules. This isn't as cool time travel as I would like, but since I haven't looked into it too much, it is the only theorem I can wrap my head around! Perhaps using some advanced tech, we could recreate my mom's molecules into a solid person, after all, mass can't be created or destroyed according to the previously mentioned Coulombs Law.
    A good debate is not judged by bias, but in the context of the debate, where objectivity is key and rationale prevalent. 


  • agsr said:
    I think it's certainly unlikely, and I don't see how we can do it with current understanding of science and current technology.
    That said, I am not ready to rule it out forever.  It's likely that new twist on technology will develop down the road that will make it possible. 
    It may take hundreds or thousands of years to advance technology enough to do this.  
    I think time travel could be possible if one person manages to move at the speed of light or survives a black hole, but we would as previously said a lot of technological advances, like the formation of new elements that can withstand the vacuum or space or a faster traveling engine for space, so that we can explore more planets or at least get the funding for such research.


    You mean for Mass to move at the speed of light, right? Heck, Einstein said that Mass is moving 182,282 times the speed of light in his E=MC^2 equation, so according to his equation, right now we are actually experiencing the past 186,282 times "before" the Big-Bang.

    In other words if a "Big Crunch" would happen at exactly 14 Billion year ABB (After the Big Bang) we would have to wait 186,282 Big-Bangs (or 186,282 14 billion years) to arrive at our "present".

    I love time travel, as much as I loved Star Trek, Star Wars and other science fiction shows.

    As for exploring more planets, .. NASA artists are working on them as we speak. I like that Tatooine-like planet they've been exploring.




     https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/kepler/news/kepler-16b.html
    I mean just how many trillions of dollars does it take to come up with more sci-fi planets? 


    EmeryPearsonErfisflat
  • NopeNope 324 Pts
    edited January 19
    Evidence Many scientist agree that nothing can travel at the speed of light (or speed of causality) if it is traveling faster or slower then the speed of light. The speed of light is like a barrear. Motion is relative but the speed of causality will always be the same a around you. You can be going 99% the speed of light and shoot a beam of light infront of you and it will go the speed of light in caparison to you. Also time will slow down but going faster then the speed of light.... I don't know how you would do that. Of course you could bend space to get some where befor light does but that is not time travling it is just bending space. Fun fact the surface one neutron star has been found going 25% the speed of light around 764 rotations a second.
    Their are a lot of cool planets out their. One of my favoret ideas is the idea of two stars orbiting a planet. : )
  • Nope said:
    Evidence Many scientist agree that nothing can travel at the speed of light (or speed of causality) if it is traveling faster or slower then the speed of light. The speed of light is like a barrear. Motion is relative but the speed of causality will always be the same a around you. You can be going 99% the speed of light and shoot a beam of light infront of you and it will go the speed of light in caparison to you. Also time will slow down but going faster then the speed of light.... I don't know how you would do that. Of course you could bend space to get some where befor light does but that is not time travling it is just bending space. Fun fact the surface one neutron star has been found going the 25% the speed of light.
    Their are a lot of cool planets out their. One of my favoret ideas is the idea of two stars orbiting a planet. : )


    Thank you @Nope ;

    Let's be realistic here, look how the "idea" - speed of light came about:
    The first recorded discussion of the speed of light (I think) is in Aristotle (around 1620) where he quotes Empedocles as saying the light from the sun must take some time to reach the earth, but Aristotle himself apparently disagrees, and even Descartes thought that light traveled instantaneously.  Galileo, unfairly as usual, in Two New Sciences (page 42) has Simplicio stating the Aristotelian position,

    "The first real measurement of the speed of light came about half a century later, in 1676, by a Danish astronomer, Ole Römer, working at the Paris Observatory.  He had made a systematic study of Io, one of the moons of Jupiter, which was eclipsed by Jupiter at regular intervals, as Io went around Jupiter in a circular orbit at a steady rate.

    The first camera was invented almost 200 years later around 1816 by Nicéphore Niépce, so here is Ole Romer plotting dots with a pencil of their god Jupiter that he was made to believe was a planet, and those dark spots, moons, and he used this to do what?
    To measure the "speed of light"
    NOT to see if light had speed, but with the already indoctrinated blind-faith belief that light already had a speed, so he was measuring "light-speed", .. recording his results with a pencil on paper.

    The light-speed idea was just philosophers fantasizing about magical places where their gods were, up there in the physical heavens and they adapted mathematics to prove their point. I can use mathematics to prove any point I want to make, all I have to do is to put the stars at a distance where they prove my math, and call them "planets" and have one of my Religious artists draw up how that planets surface looks like. Just like they do with our sun and the moon; they put our sun at a certain distance, and then enlarge it to where it fits with what we see. It's all magic with mathematics. After hundreds and hundreds of years, they are still correcting the "math" to fit  better with what we see, .. especially now that we the common-folk have better, and better telescopes.

    You said: "Fun fact the surface one neutron star has been found going the 25% the speed of light", .. and of course you can show me the math to prove it, correct!? "See that tiny speck of light, .. that's a neutron star, yep, and look, it's traveling at 7451.28 m/p/s, .. obviously, just like our calculations predict", .. LOL

    First of all, relative to what is this sci-fi Neutron star traveling at 7451.28 m/p/s?
    EmeryPearson
  • First of all,
    * what evidence do we have that the stars in our heavens that our ancestors used to travel by, are really planets?
    - they were named after pagan gods, so they have to be. Besides, we have thousands of artist rendered images of them, including their surface, and many, many movies that reveal that they are planets. Didn't you watch "Lost In Space"?

    * that the moon is a physical dirt ball that was ripped off of earth billions and billions of years ago?
    - NASA said so, and they had some of their men land on it, and brought back dirt and rocks that is just like we find here on earth. What more proof do you want? One of those rocks is a petrified wood we can find all over the world, if that doesn't coincide with our giant impact hypothesis, the co-formation theory and the capture, pull in, spin around and hold a big rock at 238,900 miles from us for billions of years facts, then nothing will because you hate science!

    * That the sun is 93 million miles away?
    - because it's 432,288 miles wide, now do the math yourself, .. Duh!?

    * That man can go in our second heaven where the stars are?
    - See how those spoiled and proud Rich billionaire German kids at NASA shoot up rockets, well that proves we can go to earths second heaven where the stars are, and visit our gods like Mars, Jupiter and the moon, OK!? That's where you taxpayers billions of dollars spent ISS is, in star-heaven, didn't you see the live-feeds? It's where the filthy rich NASA-children do a lot of scientific experiments like; back flips and the water-squirting experiments!? This is why we ask for more funds, like extra trillion dollars for the next few years to keep the Rich-German children ISS science lab open, for more back flips and water squirting science experiments. How do you think the technology for your cell phone came about? Yep, .. it was the back-flips.

    * That light has speed?
    Does Jupiter have 666 moons of which some go in elliptical orbit around Jupiter or not? Well, there you go, this proves that light travels at 'C'.
    "But I thought that light travels at 186,282 m/p/s?"
    A. We don't like to use actual numbers to define the speed of light, 'C' works much better in our equations. In some cases, like the answer to the Big Picture, we even square C, like so: C^2.
    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • Hello?
    Hello? Hello? Hello?
    Is there anybody in there?
    Just nod if you can hear me
    Is there anyone at home?
    Come on now
    I hear you're feeling down
    Well I can ease your pain
    Get you on your feet again
    Relax
    I'll need some information first
    Just the basic facts
    Can you show me where it hurts?
    There is no pain you are receding
    A distant ship smoke on the horizon
    You are only coming through in waves
    Your lips move but I can't hear what you're saying
    When I was a child I had a fever
    My hands felt just like two balloons
    Now I've got that feeling once again
    I can't explain you would not understand
    This is not how I am
    I have become comfortably numb

    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • Evidence said:
    Hello?
    Hello? Hello? Hello?
    Is there anybody in there?
    Just nod if you can hear me
    Is there anyone at home?
    Come on now
    I hear you're feeling down
    Well I can ease your pain
    Get you on your feet again
    Relax
    I'll need some information first
    Just the basic facts
    Can you show me where it hurts?
    There is no pain you are receding
    A distant ship smoke on the horizon
    You are only coming through in waves
    Your lips move but I can't hear what you're saying
    When I was a child I had a fever
    My hands felt just like two balloons
    Now I've got that feeling once again
    I can't explain you would not understand
    This is not how I am
    I have become comfortably numb.

    Pity you can't do the guitar riff.
    Evidence
  • I don't think it likely. Time travel to the past would break causality, creating all sorts of paradoxes, as would traveling faster than the speed of light.

    Time travel to the future on the other hand is reasonably possible. You merely need acceleration for that.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_paradox
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    I don't think it likely. Time travel to the past would break causality, creating all sorts of paradoxes, as would traveling faster than the speed of light.

    Time travel to the future on the other hand is reasonably possible. You merely need acceleration for that.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_paradox
    @EmeryPearson why did you mark my post above "irrelevant"?

    Paradoxes;
    The only paradoxes time travel can created is imaginary ones, just like the idea "time travel".

    Time travel by acceleration;
    Now I have been asking this for a very long time regarding time, and what happens to it traveling near or at speed of light, .. and never get a straight answer, or is completely avoided? So I kindly ask you guys here again:

    Let's use the Twin Paradox, where one of the twins takes off on a NASA Interstellar Spaceship to the Dagobah system, .. this Space-twin cranks up NASA's New Gravity-engines that run on compressed vacuum, and get's up to 99.9% of the speed of light.

    Q. Who is 'time-dilating', the twin still on earth, or the twin in the NASA-spaceship?

    Can ANYONE answer me this? You can use the results of the Hafele and Keating experiment which was a test of the theory of relativity In October 1971 to go back in time, .. and according to them, they did, and the proof was right there in the atomic clocks, .. or so they say!? If you use the Hafele & Keating experiment, tell me why their clocks showed less passage of time over the clocks on the ground?

    Thank you.
  • averyaproaveryapro 126 Pts
    I think it will be possible. Right now, currently in early development stages, I think it will be impossible to actually see anything in real form. I think it would start out as a molecular travel where you only can see things on a molecular level. However, I think it could happen, but I don't think it should happen. We have one timeline right now which is our own course of history without any time traveling. However, if people were to go back and time and change the timeline and change history, we would have a lot of alternate timelines which could change the entire course of time. Also, let's say someone went back in time to World War 2 and ended having the Germans win the war. We would have an alternate timeline where the Nazis win WW2 but just having that timeline would change our current timeline. Also, we wouldn't be able to change it back and restore history and the current timeline unless we would go back to the exact time and change the events back to normal. Time travel to the past is overall not a good idea. 
    Evidence
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    averyapro said:
    I think it will be possible. Right now, currently in early development stages, I think it will be impossible to actually see anything in real form. I think it would start out as a molecular travel where you only can see things on a molecular level. However, I think it could happen, but I don't think it should happen. We have one timeline right now which is our own course of history without any time traveling. However, if people were to go back and time and change the timeline and change history, we would have a lot of alternate timelines which could change the entire course of time. Also, let's say someone went back in time to World War 2 and ended having the Germans win the war. We would have an alternate timeline where the Nazis win WW2 but just having that timeline would change our current timeline. Also, we wouldn't be able to change it back and restore history and the current timeline unless we would go back to the exact time and change the events back to normal. Time travel to the past is overall not a good idea. 

    Hello @averyapro I agree that time travel is possible, but only in the sci-fi Matrix that people have been made to believe we live in today, .. but not in Gods created reality.
    Time, and time-travel is only real in this sci-fi reality.

    The Nazis did win, they came and took over the US, then the whole world, it was called "Operation Paperclip", and gave Americans an alternate reality sci-fi space to live in. They changed the Bibles history where it says: "God created the Heaven and the Earth" with the Religious doctrine; "Something out of nothing, and then a Big-Bang, and wha-la, the rest just created itself!"

    They have turned man into an evolving animal, an ape, and continue doing experiments on us the same way scientists used to on animals before. Todays experiments on us are done through;
    * Chem Trails,
    * Microwave Cell phone towers,
    * HAARP,
    * Radiation and chemo therapy,
    * different drugs on the streets,
    * poisons in our water,
    * the destruction of morality (GLBT Agenda) where people are dying of all kinds of sexually transmitted diseases, where millions are dying throughout the world yet no longer allowed to be mentioned in the media!

    So they didn't loose the war, but now can proceed with the whole world that they labeled; animal human population, while keeping us working and paying for our own experimentation, and extermination. Just like in the movie "The Matrix" we have been rendered docile (in a cocoon) given smart phones, TV-reality shows to live in when we're done working to feed this demonic horde, this machine void of empathy.

    We don't have to go back in time to change history, we can do it here and now, and @Erfisflat is doing a good job bringing us back to the Flat Earth, which brings us right back to our Infinite Creator God. So we no longer have to live in an imaginary sci-fi Matrix that was created by Satan and his minions.

    To change the past, we have to act now, because just like tomorrow, the past is Now!

    God bless you.
    Erfisflat
  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 120 Pts
    edited May 17
    @Evidence

    "The only paradoxes time travel can created is imaginary ones, just like the idea "time travel"."

    Time travel isn't imaginary, you merely need acceleration in relation to another object.

    "Q. Who is 'time-dilating', the twin still on earth, or the twin in the NASA-spaceship?"

     Both. Time dilation is a difference in the passage of time in relation to two or more objects. In your senario, an object is stationary in comparison to one going near C. Resulting in a time dilation in relation to those two objects.

    If your looking for the specific math you use Lorentz transformation to find the difference between two objects.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation
  • someone234someone234 572 Pts
    Like I said on createdebate, You can travel to the past it's the future you can't.
    EmeryPearson
    Be tomorrow's hero, not today's idol.
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    edited May 17
    @Evidence

    "The only paradoxes time travel can created is imaginary ones, just like the idea "time travel"."

    Time travel isn't imaginary, you merely need acceleration in relation to another object.

    "Q. Who is 'time-dilating', the twin still on earth, or the twin in the NASA-spaceship?"

     Both. Time dilation is a difference in the passage of time in relation to two or more objects. In your senario, an object is stationary in comparison to one going near C. Resulting in a time dilation in relation to those two objects.

    If your looking for the specific math you use Lorentz transformation to find the difference between two objects.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation

    @EmeryPearson - Time travel isn't imaginary, you merely need acceleration in relation to another object.

    Imagine two objects in space, .. two ships A and B distancing from each other with greater and greater speed. So which "object/ship" is time-dilating? better yet, which ship is accelerating away from the other?

    Evidence asked; "Q. Who is 'time-dilating', the twin still on earth, or the twin in the NASA-spaceship?"
    EmeryPearson - Both.

    So both twins are time dilating?

    Time dilation is a difference in the passage of time in relation to two or more objects. In your senario, an object is stationary in comparison to one going near C. Resulting in a time dilation in relation to those two objects.

    The distance between the two ships (with clocks on them) is increasing, we can see and measure that. According to Einstein, speed is relative, so for the twin 'A' on earth, the brother 'B' is accelerating away from him, and according to Twin 'B' in the ship it's the twin 'A' that's accelerating away from him. The twins are 'distancing' away from each other at the same rate.

    My question is: On what basis does Mother Nature and Father Time choose which person is to age less (time dilate), and which one is stationary since both are distancing away from each other!?

    Thank you.
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    edited May 18
    Like I said on createdebate, You can travel to the past it's the future you can't.

    @someone234 - how would you travel to the past and not the future? Time is imaginary. We can have two clocks, one, an hour slower in a day from the other. What effects will any of that have on reality as we know it?

    Thanks.
    EmeryPearsonErfisflat
  • someone234someone234 572 Pts
    @Evidence via a machine or naturally occurring entity that enables that to happen.
    EmeryPearsonErfisflat
    Be tomorrow's hero, not today's idol.
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    @Evidence via a machine or naturally occurring entity that enables that to happen.

    @someone234
    The machine will stay where it's at, and so will anyone sitting in it. And if the entity you mean God, He is both Infinite and Eternal, .. so He IS the past, present and the future.

    Here is what Jesus told us about changing the past: "Repent", make right the wrongs we've done, and stop doing them, .. thus changing the future.
    EmeryPearsonErfisflat
  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 120 Pts
    edited May 18
    @Evidence
    "Imagine two objects in space, .. two ships A and B distancing from each other with greater and greater speed. So which "object/ship" is time-dilating? better yet, which ship is accelerating away from the other?"

    This is a misconception, an inertial reference(Object) doesn't appear dilate unless in comparison to another inertial reference.
    Which one is dilating is based on which inertial reference your observing from.

    If your observing from Earth, it appears if time is nearly stopped on the ship, if your observing from the ship, the passage of time has accelerated on Earth. There is no Father Time or Mother Earth, there is only the inertial reference your measuring from.

    The Lorentz transformation for example requires two inertial references to calculate, if you are to use a singular reference as you suggest, you will measure no dilation.
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    @Evidence
    "Imagine two objects in space, .. two ships A and B distancing from each other with greater and greater speed. So which "object/ship" is time-dilating? better yet, which ship is accelerating away from the other?"

    This is a misconception, an inertial reference(Object) doesn't appear dilate unless in comparison to another inertial reference.
    Which one is dilating is based on which inertial reference your observing from.

    If your observing from Earth, it appears if time is nearly stopped on the ship, if your observing from the ship, the passage of time has accelerated on Earth. There is no Father Time or Mother Earth, there is only the inertial reference your measuring from.

    The Lorentz transformation for example requires two inertial references to calculate, if you are to use a singular reference as you suggest, you will measure no dilation.
     @EmeryPearson .. I said "two ships distancing from each other", .. which is why I got banned from other Debating Sights because I used the word "distancing" which I guess is not allowed in physics, because it destroys hundreds of years of Science Fiction rhetoric of Globe Earth that's spinning and twirling through space, along with that Big-Bang theory, and Einstein's famous E=MC^2 nonsensical equation.

    Tell me this, what is the difference in Velocity between an anchored Aircraft Carrier sitting still on the water, and a jet that takes off from it traveling at 300mph?
    Remember I asked for the Velocity between the: "anchored Aircraft Carrier, and the Jet", .. just like the Hafele and Keating experiment.

    If your observing from Earth, it appears if time is nearly stopped on the ship, if your observing from the ship, the passage of time has accelerated on Earth.

    What you're talking about is this imaginary "time", using a magic trick to give credibility to Einstein's Relativity which has been twisted by pseudoscience to justify the BB-theory.  Since everyone knows that traveling 400mph from point A to point B takes less time than traveling 3mph, you guys call this "Time Dilation"


    <They just erased everything I wrote passed this. The hell with you guys, the hell with debating, God has abandoned us and allowed the Germans and their god to rule over us!>
    EmeryPearson
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    But I'm not giving up, ..

    @EmeryPearson said; The Lorentz transformation for example requires two inertial references to calculate, if you are to use a singular reference as you suggest, you will measure no dilation. 

    Do you know what the Lorentz Transformation BS is? It's: The faster you travel, the less time it takes to get there. When you reach 'instant', .. time stops, .. well Duh!

    Only they call this (faster you go, less time it takes) "time dilation", and 'Instant' they call the "speed of light", which is NEVER used as 186,282m/p/s but with the letter C. This way all their formulas they show college kids work, using 'C' for speed of light, not the actual numbers.
    EmeryPearson
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    xMathFanx said:

    Time Travel to the Past is Impossible

    "Time travel into the past, which is what people usually mean by time travel, is a much more uncertain proposition. There are many solutions to Einstein's equations of General Relativity that allow a person to follow a timeline that would result in her (or him) encountering herself--or her grandmother--at an earlier time. The problem is deciding whether these solutions represent situations that could occur in the real universe, or whether they are mere mathematical oddities incompatible with known physics. No experiment or observation has ever indicated that time travel is occurring in our universe. Much work has been done by theoretical physicists in the past decade to try to determine whether, in a universe that is initially without time travel, one can build a time machine--in other words, if it is possible to manipulate matter and the geometry of space-time in such a way as to create new paths that circle back in time."           -ScientificAmerican.com

    See these short sources:  

    2.  
    3.  


    The fundamental question of this debate is, "Is it possible to time travel to the past in a "Back to the Future" type format?" That is, could you travel into the past and meet your parents before you were born? Could you travel back to the "Wild West"?, ect., ect.

    Thoughts?
    @xMathFanx
    Time travel to both the past, and the future is possible, .. to the past, just do everything slower, you will be always behind.
    To the future, move fast, real fast and you'll be always ahead. The Lorentz Factor shows that the faster we travel, time dilates, meaning the more time you will have on your hands.

    Twin Paradox Experiment:
    Twin A take the plane from LA to NYC flying at 400 mph, while his brother twin B walks at 3.5mph

    Twin A is there in 7 hours
    twin B in 800 hours

    Twin A has 793 hours in the future to do as he wishes while waiting for his brother to arrive.
    So according to Einstein's Relativity and the Lorenz Transformation, if Twin A was to travel at the speed of "instant" (AKA 'the speed of light'), time for him on this trip would have stopped, and he'd be there in no-time, and he would have to wait in the future 800 hours for his brother to arrive.
    ErfisflatEmeryPearson
  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 120 Pts
    edited May 18
    @EmeryPearson .. I said "two ships distancing from each other", .. which is why I got banned from other Debating Sights because I used the word "distancing" which I guess is not allowed in physics, because it destroys hundreds of years of Science Fiction rhetoric of Globe Earth that's spinning and twirling through space, along with that Big-Bang theory, and Einstein's famous E=MC^2 nonsensical equation."

    Your change in wording is irrelevant, your still describing acceleration. Velocity and acceleration is realitive to which object your measuring from. This is again, a lack of comprehension. 

    "What you're talking about is this imaginary "time", using a magic trick to give credibility to Einstein's Relativity which has been twisted by pseudoscience to justify the BB-theory.  Since everyone knows that traveling 400mph from point A to point B takes less time than traveling 3mph, you guys call this "Time Dilation"

    Time is not imaginary, else you could not measure it. Events would be unable to proceed or precede each other. This is pretty basic stuff.

    "Do you know what the Lorentz Transformation BS is? It's: The faster you travel, the less time it takes to get there. When you reach 'instant', .. time stops, .. well Duh!"

    This is incorrect. You've already stated that that the Hafele and Keating experiment showed time dilation. If the Lorentz Transformation isn't accurate, your claims wouldn't be possible, they wouldn't have been able to mathematically demonstrate how to convert relative time from one location to another. Were you wrong then, or wrong now?

    "Only they call this (faster you go, less time it takes) "time dilation", and 'Instant' they call the "speed of light", which is NEVER used as 186,282m/p/s but with the letter C. This way all their formulas they show college kids work, using 'C' for speed of light, not the actual numbers."

    Do variables in algebra also confuse you this much? The use of letters in math can be difficult to grasp I know, but that doesn't invalidate science.
    ErfisflatEvidence
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    @EmeryPearson .. I said "two ships distancing from each other", .. which is why I got banned from other Debating Sights because I used the word "distancing" which I guess is not allowed in physics, because it destroys hundreds of years of Science Fiction rhetoric of Globe Earth that's spinning and twirling through space, along with that Big-Bang theory, and Einstein's famous E=MC^2 nonsensical equation."

    Your change in wording is irrelevant, your still describing acceleration. Velocity and acceleration is realitive to which object your measuring from. This is again, a lack of comprehension. 

    "What you're talking about is this imaginary "time", using a magic trick to give credibility to Einstein's Relativity which has been twisted by pseudoscience to justify the BB-theory.  Since everyone knows that traveling 400mph from point A to point B takes less time than traveling 3mph, you guys call this "Time Dilation"

    Time is not imaginary, else you could not measure it. Events would be unable to proceed or precede each other. This is pretty basic stuff.

    "Do you know what the Lorentz Transformation BS is? It's: The faster you travel, the less time it takes to get there. When you reach 'instant', .. time stops, .. well Duh!"

    This is incorrect. You've already stated that that the Hafele and Keating experiment showed time dilation. If the Lorentz Transformation isn't accurate, your claims wouldn't be possible, they wouldn't have been able to mathematically demonstrate how to convert relative time from one location to another. Were you wrong then, or wrong now?

    "Only they call this (faster you go, less time it takes) "time dilation", and 'Instant' they call the "speed of light", which is NEVER used as 186,282m/p/s but with the letter C. This way all their formulas they show college kids work, using 'C' for speed of light, not the actual numbers."

    Do variables in algebra also confuse you this much? The use of letters in math can be difficult to grasp I know, but that doesn't invalidate science.

    @EmeryPearson Your change in wording is irrelevant, your still describing acceleration. Velocity and acceleration is realitive to which object your measuring from. This is again, a lack of comprehension.

    Please explain how measuring two objects 'A' and 'B'  'distancing' each other is wrong?
    If you measure from 'A', then B is moving, .. if you are measuring it from 'B', .. then it's 'A' moving, irrelevant which is stationary, or if both are traveling at different speed away from each other.

    Time is not imaginary, else you could not measure it. Events would be unable to proceed or precede each other. This is pretty basic stuff.

    Wait, are you serious? Do you really mean that: "Events would be unable to proceed or precede each other"?? That if we never used the word "time" you believe everything would stop?
    As I said, "events will proceed whether or not you are measuring it. Time is not real, events happen!".
    Look, when we say "one year", we mean about 365 sun rises, right? When I tell my kids: "School!", they know it's 8 hours of sitting in different classes studying different subjects, right? We are not measuring 'time', but sun ups, to sun ups that we call days, .. and classes where kids study, events. We just call it "time", but the actual events exist with or without measurement, or whether or not we call it "time". And yes, this IS pretty basic stuff.

    Evidence said: "Do you know what the Lorentz Transformation BS is? It's: The faster you travel, the less time it takes to get there. When you reach 'instant', .. time stops, .. well Duh!"
    This is incorrect. You've already stated that that the Hafele and Keating experiment showed time dilation.

    Yes, the Hafele and Keating experiment shown time dilation like Siegfried & Roy shown their white Tigers disappear on stage. In both cases these are typical German magic tricks, and both making a lot of money.

    If the Lorentz Transformation isn't accurate, your claims wouldn't be possible, they wouldn't have been able to mathematically demonstrate how to convert relative time from one location to another. Were you wrong then, or wrong now?

    Anything that has to do with the BB-Expanding Vacuum, Spacetime Fabric is science fiction, they are all distorted real science observations. Yes, we can measure speed by two objects distancing from each other, but time dilation and the other "special relativistic effects"  is science fiction. Just like calling stars 'planets', and giving them names of pagan gods. "Mars" is a star, not a god-planet.

    Here is a good example of the Lorentz distortions; take a ten-speed bike

    Image result for show pic of a bicycle describing the parts

    now make the 'chainring' into a clock.
    Now put it in 1st gear and paddle one rotation per second.
    The bike will travel about 10 feet per rotation (per second)
    Now put it in 10th gear, and paddle. We will get about a foot per rotation (per second)
    This is what Lorentz "transformed" time and speed into; the faster the bike moves, the slower the time (chainring) moves. And in 10th gear, the slower the bike moves, the faster the time (chainring) passes.
    Lol, see how easy it is to use real science to create science fiction? And now we can add this also to the plethora of "distorted evidence" for time travel and time dilation.

    Do variables in algebra also confuse you this much? The use of letters in math can be difficult to grasp I know, but that doesn't invalidate science

    Oh no, I'm not confused using algebraic variables, .. I just don't like it when it's used to hide the truth, and there is a huge difference between something traveling at 34,700,983,524 m/p/s and something traveling at 'C'.

    Here is the truth:
    E=MC^2
    Einstein specifically said that nothing, or no thing can travel faster than light, yet here he has Mass traveling at 186,282 times faster than the speed of light, .. or 34,700,983,524 m/p/s. What principalities and powers of darkness made this Jew in Jew-hating Germany state something like this?
    Could it of been the German created, Godless NASA, or more like SATAN universe where humans are labeled; animals?
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 271 Pts
    From my understanding, while Relativity Theory does not explicitly prohibit time travel, quantum mechanics is inconsistent with it. In particular, the many worlds interpretation (which, as a consequence of Bell's theorem, is valid, provided quantum mechanical predictions are correct) breaks in the assumption of possible time travel: if the time was invertible, then by traveling backwards the infinity of world lines would be created, timelines that did not exist before time travel was conducted. This is problematic on many levels - but even dismissing the theoretical problems, it does mean that the probability of traveling back in time as we understand it is infinitesimally small, even if a time travel machine existed. With exactly 100% probability the timeline you would find yourself in would be different from your past, so, rather than traveling back in time, you would travel to a different world with different past, different present and different future.
  • EmeryPearsonEmeryPearson 120 Pts
    edited May 24
    "Please explain how measuring two objects 'A' and 'B'  'distancing' each other is wrong?"

    It's not? This describes velocity. From that statement I know they are moving a speed in relation to each other, and a basic direction, opposite of one another. Velocity is speed and direction. I have no issue with your wording, I am unsure why you believe I do. 

    "Wait, are you serious? Do you really mean that: "Events would be unable to proceed or precede each other"?? That if we never used the word "time" you believe everything would stop?"

    You stated time did not exist. I am operating off your premise. Time is independent of human existence, so the word is irrelevant.

    "As I said, "events will proceed whether or not you are measuring it. Time is not real, events happen!"."

    This is nonsense, if events can proceed, then you've measured some sort of chronological order. You're contradicting yourself.

    "Look, when we say "one year", we mean about 365 sun rises, right? When I tell my kids: "School!", they know it's 8 hours of sitting in different classes studying different subjects, right? We are not measuring 'time', but sun ups, to sun ups that we call days, .. and classeswhere kids study, events. We just call it "time", but the actual events exist with or without measurement, or whether or not we call it "time". And yes, this IS pretty basic stuff."

    You measured time in multiple times here. You're doing all the work for me. :wink:

    "Yes, the Hafele and Keating experiment shown time dilation like Siegfried & Roy shown their white Tigers disappear on stage. In both cases these are typical German magic tricks, and both making a lot of money."

    Are you able to provide a mathematical model to better explain why we observe relativity? Without one, there isn't much reason to discard the Lorentz transformation, as it works. You can accurately describe the dilation between two interial references with it. 

    "Anything that has to do with the BB-Expanding Vacuum, Spacetime Fabric is science fiction, they are all distorted real science observations. "

    And your rejection of them is based of emotion, rather than Evidence. Which is a bit ironic considering your name.

    "Yes, we can measure speed by two objects distancing from each other, but time dilation and the other "special relativistic effects"  is science fiction"

    https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.7951
    Time dilation has been affirmed multiple times. Without evidence to the contrary, there's no particular reason to believe this to be true.

    I am not able to make sense of your bike example. A better example would be a stationary bike, and a moving bike. Limited to two reference points, the stationary bike would perceive time as passing slower, the moving bike would perceive time as passing faster. 

    "Oh no, I'm not confused using algebraic variables, .. I just don't like it when it's used to hide the truth, and there is a huge difference between something traveling at 34,700,983,524 m/p/s and something traveling at 'C'."

    This is not how math works. c represents a value, not a letter. This is a high-school level explanation on how letters came to be used in math.
    https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/how-did-letters-become-part-math-409016

    "Einstein specifically said that nothing, or no thing can travel faster than light, yet here he has Mass traveling at 186,282 times fasterthan the speed of light, .. or 34,700,983,524 m/p/s"

    This is incorrect c = 186,282 Mps, not 34,700,983,524 Mps.
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    "Please explain how measuring two objects 'A' and 'B'  'distancing' each other is wrong?"
    It's not? This describes velocity. From that statement I know they are moving a speed in relation to each other, and a basic direction, opposite of one another. Velocity is speed and direction. I have no issue with your wording, I am unsure why you believe I do. 

    Great, so we agree that all we have is two atomic clocks "distancing" each other, correct?! They could be both moving away from each other, or one could be moving and the other standing still like in the Hafele and Keating experiment, in either case the clocks are distancing from each other, .. right?
    So tell me; if there is no difference between one clock in the Airliner that Hafele and Keating is on traveling away from the clock that's on the Base on the ground, or if the Base with the clock in it was moving away from the plane that Hafele and Keating was sitting in on the ground at the airport. In both cases all we have is the two clocks "distancing" each other. Now tell us why one of the clocks (in either the plane, or on the base) would experience time dilation?

    "Wait, are you serious? Do you really mean that: "Events would be unable to proceed or precede each other"?? That if we never used the word "time" you believe everything would stop?"
    You stated time did not exist. I am operating off your premise. Time is independent of human existence, so the word is irrelevant.

    Please explain how "time" would exist without clocks, or us counting, measuring events?
    What do you think time meant for Adam and Eve when they were living in Eternity?

    Genesis 3:8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden.

    There is no time mentioned in the Bible in the Garden, because just as God in creating, Adam and Eve lived by events: "Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day". These events could vary by millions of todays fallen mans "years" that don't exist, but in eternity, time is irrelevant, useless. It only exists because we are dying, so God invented a way for us to keep track of events, sun dials, clocks, but these don't measure, or create time.
    Tell me, .. If I had a slow watch, you think I will be able to do more in a day?
    Just like measuring three feet off a piece of wood, the wood exists, but not the "three feet". There is nothing that you can do with "three feet", just as there is nothing you can do with if I gave you 8hours of time.

    "As I said, "events will proceed whether or not you are measuring it. Time is not real, events happen!".
    This is nonsense, if events can proceed, then you've measured some sort of chronological order. You're contradicting yourself.

    Events happen, and by saying events proceed, you are counting them, this is how time exists, counting, keeping track of "events", we just call them time. The events are real, look: "event, event, event", now we can count them and we can say we have "three events, oh let's say; 1 hour long". Which could you use, the event, event, event, .. or the three hours?
    Do you think the six days that God took to build up the world again were all the same? That God has a set time for a Day?
    Of course not. With God, a day could be like a thousand years for us! God listed six events, no time involved whatsoever.


    "Look, when we say "one year", we mean about 365 sun rises, right? When I tell my kids: "School!", they know it's 8 hours of sitting in different classes studying different subjects, right? We are not measuring 'time', but sun ups, to sun ups that we call days, .. and classes where kids study, events. We just call it "time", but the actual events exist with or without measurement, or whether or not we call it "time". And yes, this IS pretty basic stuff."
    You measured time in multiple times here. You're doing all the work for me. wink

    I measured events, not time. Time doesn't exist, but "measuring events" do. We just call it time, .. are you so dull? Here, let me give you six feet, see if you could buy some 'time' with it? Wait, I'm sorry I called you dull, you may not had any basic education, and what little you did learn was public MK-Ultra. This is not your fault.


    "Yes, the Hafele and Keating experiment shown time dilation like Siegfried & Roy shown their white Tigers disappear on stage. In both cases these are typical German magic tricks, and both making a lot of money."
    Are you able to provide a mathematical model to better explain why we observe relativity? Without one, there isn't much reason to discard the Lorentz transformation, as it works. You can accurately describe the dilation between two interial references with it

    Really? Then tell me why the atomic clock in the airliner that Hafele and Keating was riding in supposedly had less time on it than the clock on the ground Base? Both clocks were "distancing" from each other, so why did one record less time, and not the other?

    "Anything that has to do with the BB-Expanding Vacuum, Spacetime Fabric is science fiction, they are all distorted real science observations. "
    And your rejection of them is based of emotion, rather than Evidence. Which is a bit ironic considering your name.

    I reject lies because I see no evidence. I am not "Evidence", .. "I seek evidence"  with substance. 


    "Yes, we can measure speed by two objects distancing from each other, but time dilation and the other "special relativistic effects"  is science fiction"
    https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.7951
    Time dilation has been affirmed multiple times. Without evidence to the contrary, there's no particular reason to believe this to be true.

    Time dilation has NEVER been affirmed, it's as science fiction as gravity is, and NASA's moon landing was. You, nor anyone on earth so far could even explain why one clock that's distancing away from another would experience some Twilight Zone effect like time dilation? Why?
    Why one and not the other, huh?
    You see, you can't explain, because you need this BS special relativistic garbage to keep the Billions and billions of dollars rolling in to NASA and to CERN, so they can have the money to destroy the earth and humanity!

    I am not able to make sense of your bike example. A better example would be a stationary bike, and a moving bike. Limited to two reference points, the stationary bike would perceive time as passing slower, the moving bike would perceive time as passing faster.

    I shown you the magic trick in Einstein's special relativistic effects that tried to prove that time was real. As I shown you that there is no reason for two clocks distancing each other, that one should whack out and show less time than the other?
    I'm still waiting for you (or anyone) to give a reason why this should happen?

    Here, how about this, maybe this will wake you up from the MK-NASATAN-Ultra hold on you?
    Spread out your arms wearing a watch on each arm, and then slap both your hands together at let's say 10mph
    Now do the same thing, hitting your palms together with the same speed, only have one hand standing still.
    What different effect did you notice? Did one of your watches show less time?
    Which one?

    "Oh no, I'm not confused using algebraic variables, .. I just don't like it when it's used to hide the truth, and there is a huge difference between something traveling at 34,700,983,524 m/p/s and something traveling at 'C'."
    This is not how math works. c represents a value, not a letter. This is a high-school level explanation on how letters came to be used in math.
    https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/how-did-letters-become-part-math-409016

    You said: "This is not how math works. c represents a value, not a letter."
    So now 'C' is not a letter?
    As for letters being part of math, so can beads in a wire be part of math, .. did you know that? It's called the abacus, starts with an 'A'.

    "Einstein specifically said that nothing, or no thing can travel faster than light, yet here he has Mass traveling at 186,282 times fasterthan the speed of light, .. or 34,700,983,524 m/p/s"
    This is incorrect c = 186,282 Mps, not 34,700,983,524 Mps.

    Oh man, you have been way too MK-Ultra'd, can't teach you anything. So not only are you unable to tell me why; one clock from two clocks distancing each other would run slower, but C is not a letter, and C^2 is not 34,700,983,524 m/p/s!?

    Do you even know what Einstein's 'C' stands for? It stands for the "speed of light"., and does NOT stand for 186,282mps. Speed Of Light, .. 'C', where the value can vary anywhere from zero, to 186,282 m/p/s.
    https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=99111&page=1

    Please notice that in the above article (and many other science articles) the "speed of light" is given a value of 186,000m/p/s that's 282 m/p/s slower than in other science articles on the speed of light, because the value of "C", as I said, can vary greatly, so the only thing that stays the same is the 'C'.
    We can assign G for gravity, doesn't mean it exists.
  • EvidenceEvidence 665 Pts
    In conclusion, not only is Time Travel not possible, but time doesn't even exist, it's not a real 'thing' that you can walk back and forth on, fold, nor does it cause things to happen, .. time is not real, just as space, the way the Big-Bang story has it as this supposed expanding vacuum full of alien worlds and planets named after pagan gods is not real.

    God is real, The Only Possible Infinite and Eternal Creator "I Am", .. and that He created the Heaven and the Earth. Heaven a Spiritual realm (labeled as 'up') where God has His throne, and Earth as a physical realm (labeled as 'down') which He calls his "Footstool". Then, (as we read in Genesis) when earth was in chaos covered in  the abyss of water, God cleaned it up, and created two smaller heavens; the air where the birds fly (our atmosphere) and the heaven where the stars are.

    Time travel, Einstein's Special Relativity, gravity, the vacuum Space-fabric and so on,  is a thing of science fiction, which today is maintained by pseudoscience, propagated by the all-powerful One World Religious cult that includes the Vatican, NASA, CERN, Space-X, UN and hundreds of other smaller sister scientific organizations whose Leaders openly worship Satan. Using their LUCIFER telescope, they observe demonic activity in earths supernatural realm, specifically keeping their eye on the sun, their sun-god which is then interpreted by Christian Diviners who got their degree in Divination from accredited Jesuit built Schools of Divinity and Trinity Colleges.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch