Tell me more ×
Philosophy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for those interested in logical reasoning. It's 100% free, no registration required.

It is an accepted theory that time travel could not be possible because of causality ( besides other things ) and so goes the grandfather paradox. To me it sounds like they are trying to make a very complex situation into a very narrow minded understanding, so as to understand why it cannot be possible. "we cannot do this so lets create an answer to our loaded question"

Causality is real and a very serious problem in the attempts of time travel. What if there was a way to transverse space-time? There was this particle machine that made your atoms vibrate in such a way that it sent you to a higher dimension , one which allowed the ability to enter dimensions from another time? I figure if this was the case time would not explode in on itself ( or reality ) if you had to meet your grandfather because of the inherent nature of the space-time structure. So just like the reflex action in the body or the force of a magnet so you would not be able to in any way, shape or form interact with anything or anyone what would effect the future outcome, or disrupt the overall constant of the certain space-time structure.

So you would never be able to meet your grandfather, the stable nature of being in that time-space would never allow the ability for either you or your grandfather to make contact, or at least not the type of contact that would prevent your future existence. I can even imagine that nature itself would would destroy the time traveler before such an action could take place. So in time travel mode you are both dead and alive until the vibrational frequency comes to a point where it cannot continue based on the travelers current "forward" projection in that space.

Now i bet u are saying " What about chaos theory?!! " And yes that would be a good question which would lead me to hope that all of time is a constant, and not a passing of moment to moment. If you are going to time travel then it technically has already happened to the extend that you have already gone back in time but are still going to be going back in time. This kinda removes the idea that we are in control of our "destiny".

Maybe destiny is on a higher dimension plain then this 4d reality..

Anyways .. time travel into the future should be possible regardless of causality, or maybe even in the transporting process of going back on time you become invisible. That would not be that ideal though because of the inability to interact on any "real" level , but i can compromise if i must.


I am sorry I did miss posting an actual question.

The question would be ( and this is in hypothetical land ppl ) If we knew time travel was possible would you risk traveling back or forward in time even at the expense of altering your complete natural reality constant? So u could come back in time but in doing so you would have to accept that everything is the product of predestination .So the act of traveling back in time creates your complete structured destiny where as others who do not can still play out their chosen destiny if they so choose.

share|improve this question
4  
Is there a question hidden in here somewhere? – Michael Dorfman Nov 13 '12 at 14:33
Have you taken any physics classes? Time travel is not possible, and it would violate causality. – glebovg Nov 13 '12 at 16:31
1  
I am new to philosophy.stackexchange.com but it seems like everyone is just downvoting almost all of the questions and all the answers. I know voting is a feature of philosophy.stackexchange.com, but there is not need to downvote reasonable questions and answers. – glebovg Nov 13 '12 at 23:33
1  
@glebovg - There does seem to be a stint of heavily downvoted questions recently, but it's not always like this. You just joined at an awkward moment. :P – stoicfury Nov 14 '12 at 6:12
3  
@gerdi - Questions have to be questions; this isn't the place for discussions. What you wrote is interesting, no doubt, just take it over to chat. ^_^ If you have a specific question though somewhere in that thought wall, we'd certainly accept it. :) – stoicfury Nov 14 '12 at 6:14

closed as not constructive by Michael Dorfman, DBK, stoicfury Nov 14 '12 at 6:14

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, see the FAQ for guidance.

1 Answer

Have you taken any physics classes? Time travel is not possible, and it would violate causality. This is not just a conventions. It is not possible philosophically, mathematically, or physically. Perhaps, you need to take a chaos theory class at your math department also. You cannot base your arguments on some layman's book on physics or mathematics. Destiny has nothing to do with chaos theory. By the way, the word theory here is a mathematical term. In this case, theory does not mean a supposition. In math, a theory is just a collection of theorems about the same topic. It seems like your understanding of dimensions and time is also full of misconceptions. If there are extra dimensions as predicted by M-theory, we are actually living in such a universe, but we simply do not observe other dimensions. Extra dimensions explain why gravity is so "weak" and why we cannot detect gravitons -- they "escape" into extra dimensions.

share|improve this answer
"Have you taken any physics classes? " .. ill sorry this is not the physics channel is it .. i think you might be lost. – gerdi Nov 15 '12 at 10:35
@gerdi It's really important that we try to express criticisms constructively; remember that we're all here to learn! Just in passing -- I would encourage you to clarify your question a bit further. You might want to check out the FAQ to get a sense for appropriate scope and tone of questions; structuring a question as asking for a poll of opinions is not the most constructive way to frame an issue for this community. – Joseph Weissman Nov 15 '12 at 16:57
@JosephWeissman I did read the faq and i have edited my post to include a question which i do understand was a mistake on my part. However this post is closed , which is fine. I dont see how my first comment to this answer should have been deleted and I dont see how the answer to this question was in any way constructive besides been critical based on scientific method. The answer could be correct had this been the physics channel .. but it is not. – gerdi Nov 16 '12 at 8:59

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.