a solution to the time travel paradox

[russianspy1234]

@dreadwoe
Travel in time is usually meant to communicate a temporal displacement. Your examples retains the same temporal position resulting in a temporal displacement of 0. Aka not time travel despite the appearance to the traveler.

if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

[OldTrees]

@dreadwoe
Travel in time is usually meant to communicate a temporal displacement. Your examples retains the same temporal position resulting in a temporal displacement of 0. Aka not time travel despite the appearance to the traveler.

if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Prestidigitation is not Magic.
Illusion is not Reality.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Nothing more, nothing less.

[dreadwoe]

@dreadwoe
Travel in time is usually meant to communicate a temporal displacement. Your examples retains the same temporal position resulting in a temporal displacement of 0. Aka not time travel despite the appearance to the traveler.

if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Prestidigitation is not Magic.
Illusion is not Reality.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Nothing more, nothing less.

so by my belief, time travel is impossible.
it solves the problem of having paradoxes, which is the subject of the post.

OWNED

[russianspy1234]

@dreadwoe
Travel in time is usually meant to communicate a temporal displacement. Your examples retains the same temporal position resulting in a temporal displacement of 0. Aka not time travel despite the appearance to the traveler.

if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Prestidigitation is not Magic.
Illusion is not Reality.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Nothing more, nothing less.

well its important to know if it tastes like a duck too... i guess it depends on your goal, true time travel may well be impossible, but if there is something that for all intents and purposes gives you the same result then how much does it matter?  i mean, if i have a machine that can rearange every single particle in the universe to the state it was at some past point in time, thats not really time travel either, but it gets the job done.

[OldTrees]

@dreadwoe
Travel in time is usually meant to communicate a temporal displacement. Your examples retains the same temporal position resulting in a temporal displacement of 0. Aka not time travel despite the appearance to the traveler.

if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Prestidigitation is not Magic.
Illusion is not Reality.
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Nothing more, nothing less.

well its important to know if it tastes like a duck too... i guess it depends on your goal, true time travel may well be impossible, but if there is something that for all intents and purposes gives you the same result then how much does it matter?  i mean, if i have a machine that can rearange every single particle in the universe to the state it was at some past point in time, thats not really time travel either, but it gets the job done.

There are 2 rooms that are identical in every way except their location. I can travel to the lower one if it was merely the contents of the upper room that interested me. However I could not travel to the lower one if the location of the upper room was of interest to me.

If the job is to travel along a temporal dimension rather than a spacial one then rearranging the universe does not get the job done.
If the job was to simulate another moment in time then means other than time travel (like museums) would be sufficient.

PS: When not monkeying around with high velocities we travel through time at +1 second / 1 relative second. At high velocities this rate accelerates.

[theratiscool]

my idea it to travle to a nother inivers where the dameg u cose wont hurt u in the"futer" wear u once knew. its had to explain

[artimies7]

my idea it to travle to a nother inivers where the dameg u cose wont hurt u in the"futer" wear u once knew. its had to explain

Another universe would have the same physics, as it's just a different branch of our timeline. Another reality though, now that's different.

Also:

[theratiscool]

my idea it to travle to a nother inivers where the dameg u cose wont hurt u in the"futer" wear u once knew. its had to explain

Another universe would have the same physics, as it's just a different branch of our timeline. Another reality though, now that's different.

Also:

The point of a paradox is if u go back in time and kill your self, where would u be if u be to kill your self if your already dead cuz u killed your self. Lets say u disappeared after you shoot your self in the future like in the movies. Thats a "paradox" if u wana call it that. To avoid that you dont need to go beyond the 4th or 5th dimensionthat u say. Going to another univers and killing another will will and have the same affect of u disappearing.

Another universe is not a nother branch of our timeline unless u try to argue that when the big bang happendit gave "birth to space" than later came time. Makeing every secend in its own univers, to us it will look like photo shoots but realy look like we pesive it. physcisest have prove that wrong.

[artimies7]

Spoiler for Hidden:

my idea it to travle to a nother inivers where the dameg u cose wont hurt u in the"futer" wear u once knew. its had to explain

Another universe would have the same physics, as it's just a different branch of our timeline. Another reality though, now that's different.

Also:

The point of a paradox is if u go back in time and kill your self, where would u be if u be to kill your self if your already dead cuz u killed your self. Lets say u disappeared after you shoot your self in the future like in the movies. Thats a "paradox" if u wana call it that. To avoid that you dont need to go beyond the 4th or 5th dimensionthat u say. Going to another univers and killing another will will and have the same affect of u disappearing.

Another universe is not a nother branch of our timeline unless u try to argue that when the big bang happendit gave "birth to space" than later came time. Makeing every secend in its own univers, to us it will look like photo shoots but realy look like we pesive it. physcisest have prove that wrong.

I know the whole 'paradox' thing. It's just that you were unclear on what you wanted to imply.

Also: Your spelling is bad, and I can't understand you.

EDIT: In addition, I don't think your version of the whole 'where's the next universe' theory is the same as mine. Mine is a bit more complex than that.

AND ANOTHER THING: No appreciation for one of Tennant's few good lines?

[OldTrees]

AND ANOTHER THING: No appreciation for one of Tennant's few good lines?

That sentence got away from him.

[artimies7]

AND ANOTHER THING: No appreciation for one of Tennant's few good lines?

That sentence got away from him.

Runaway sentences often make the best quotes.

That doesn't necessarily mean that runaway sentences will always make the best quotes. Tennant had more runaway words than runaway kids in the Circe de Solei and I can't hardly remember any of them.

[theratiscool]

There is no version of 'the next universe'. This theory was presented by Kaku Michio. Compare his work with your independent theory.