# Time Travel..... Impossible??!?!??

#### Eflex tha Vybe Scientist

Registered Senior Member
I havent had the opportunity to check out the new flick called The Time Machine, but I did read the book.

Before thinking of Time Travel, I believe I have to first consider what time is.

Spacetime (in my opinion) is infinite.
We can express this pattern by thinking of a Pretzel.
The Pretzel of Infinity!

Space and Time all wrapped up into one great big Pretzel.
Therefore, can I construct a machine and travel back to Before I was born and kill my grandfather?

Yes.

My reasoning is simple.
Because Spacetime is infinite, there are infinite possiblities for the outcome of all events.

therefore, If I did travel back in time and killed my grandfather, I could still exist.

what do you guys think???

I happen to believe that the Grandfather Paradox is probably what caused the big bang, because if you kept going back & wiping yourself out from history, and re-existing again and again, all the universe quantas from a mutiworld perspective would be "Beyond" radioactive.

Last edited:
Originally posted by Stryderunknown
I happen to believe that the Grandfather Paradox is probably what caused the big bang, because if you kept going back wiping yourself out form history, and re-existing again and again, all those universe quanta from a mutiworld perspective would be "Beyond" radioactive.

Goodness..

So who was the person that was doing the initial time travelling?

I had to edit my last post due to a few errors (spelling and syntax errors)

I mentioned in another thread (I think it was SCFI: Sliders)

I mention how that if a change occurs, it doesn't create a parallel from that point but "Changes track", during this change of track is where the quanta's overlay.

This can mean that if a world is formulated in 50 years time, that parallel world exists today, but we can't move to it as it's on a different track that's only defined by it's future junction point.

Spacetime (in my opinion) is infinite.

The curvature of spacetime is postulated to be infinite within a black hole according to Schwarzschild.

But the jury is still out as to whether the universe is finite or infinite. The problem is determining if the universe has more or less critical mass density of gravitational material. Scientists are showing evidence that neutrinos may have a slight amount of mass. The amount of Dark Matter in the universe is not completely known as well. However, based on this evidence it appears scientists are moving closer to the theory that the universe is finite.

I know this thread will probably be moved eventually because of it's nature.

(Q), what do you speculate on something similar to a quantum jump but on a larger scale, for instance a large wormhole that pulled material from a future point and spouted it right back to the big bang, possibly emitting some of the material on route.

Would this not mean that the Universe is ever expanding, and infinite purely because all the universe quanta can cycle around and accumilate through the amount of multiworlds that exist.
Spouting all it's syphoned material near enough back to a singularity. (of course it's easy to mention that the first input of mass into an empty space, meeting a parallel doing exactly the same with a time distortion would infact remove the singularity. and mean that a "First" blackhole "Exit" wouldn't exist anymore. Perhaps the reason for not finding any.)

I know this thread will probably be moved eventually because of it's nature.

Good point. It should be in Pseudoscience.

what do you speculate on something similar to a quantum jump but on a larger scale, for instance a large wormhole that pulled material from a future point and spouted it right back to the big bang, possibly emitting some of the material on route.

This is difficult to comment. Wormholes don't really exist. They are only speculated by mathematics.

Would this not mean that the Universe is ever expanding

There is other evidence to suggest the Universe is ever expanding.

and infinite purely because all the universe quanta can cycle around and accumilate through the amount of multiworlds that exist.
Spouting all it's syphoned material near enough back to a singularity. (of course it's easy to mention that the first input of mass into an empty space, meeting a parallel doing exactly the same with a time distortion would infact remove the singularity. and mean that a "First" blackhole "Exit" wouldn't exist anymore. Perhaps the reason for not finding any.)

Sorry Stryder, no habla espanol.

(Q),

Wormholes do exist. Although people have been theorising about gigantic blackholes devouring planets and asteriods, there are smaller versions that particular "hush hush" science groups play with using laboratory equipment.

(Afterall there are people recreating the BIG BANG, so why would a wormhole be left out?)

Wormholes are even used through electromagnetic stiffening and Super-conductors... Take for instance a Quantum computer. (I mean a real one not the make named so)

I would mention a piece of Science-fiction to give you a clue (Q) but I know how your are so wrapped up in marking Fiction with Fact and Fact with Fiction. (I'm still trying to work out if it's a character trait or you just suffer from Meglomania)

I'll mention it anyway, "QuantumLeap", alright I give it purely fictional for a storyline, but what of the create of supercomputers that not only parallel process but quantum jump.

The sort that can get answers for questions before the question has even been parsed. (Fractal algorythms should give you a clue)

Stryder

Wormholes do exist.

The following excerpt came from the website graciously supplied by Eflex. Thanks Eflex.

Schwarzschild wormholes certainly exist as exact solutions of Einstein's equations.However: When a realistic star collapses to a black hole, it does not produce a wormhole... The complete Schwarzschild geometry includes a white hole, which violates the second law of thermodynamics (see above); Even if a Schwarzschild wormhole were somehow formed, it would be unstable and fly apart....

The first claim is based entirely on mathematics. Please refer to the "Howevers" for further clarification.

I would mention a piece of Science-fiction to give you a clue (Q) but I know how your are so wrapped up in marking Fiction with Fact and Fact with Fiction. (I'm still trying to work out if it's a character trait or you just suffer from Meglomania)

Some members here are hell-bent (no pun intended) on debating science and religion. The Q has made his views on that quite clear.

The Q is adamant in regards to what appears to be science and what appears to be pseudo-science, crank, crackpot, ooga-booga, etc... ad nauseum. I will do whatever it takes to stand my ground when it comes to this issue.

As far as character traits are concerned, those can be summed up with a song by Denis Leary. I think it is called "I'm an Asshole." Have you heard it? It describes the Q quite nicely.

But I think most here have come to that conclusion already. hehe

btw - Great job on your new avatar.