All Contributors
Mr.Robbo
Avetzan1
Krayfish
A Guy OTI
TheReturnOfTheKing
• 1/10/2014

Time travel discussion

There's been a recent interest in time travel. This thread is for discussing the concept as well as its possible implementation.

Current stance

  • Right now, Omni 01 favors the Novikov self-consistency principle, or the stable time loop. That is, time is completely stable and the events of history cannot be altered.
  • While some theories of time travel involve parallel universes, Galactic Crucibles currently does not do this. Instead, parallel universes exist only because of the many-worlds theory.
  • At this time, there have not been any solid plans for implementing time travel, but that's what this thread is for. More info will be added to this first post once there's been further discussion.
0 16
  • Upvote
  • Reply
Mr.Robbo
Avetzan1
Krayfish
A Guy OTI
TheReturnOfTheKing
0
• 1/28/2014
Has this idea been given up on?
0
• 1/28/2014

I wouldn't say given up on, just that it has yet to be used. But as far as I can tell, this idea can be implemented whenever we need to.

0
• 2/6/2014

Pretty much how this works is, for example, your best friend dies, and you go back in time to save him. But when you save him, history is altered so you would have had no reason to go back in time in the first place. That's why you can't travel back in time. Travelling forward, however, is a different story.

0
• 2/6/2014

Guy, there are many theories, and that one is a paradox. Other solutions are available, such as a stable time loop, a branching universe, utter chaos, destruction and many more.

0
• 2/6/2014

Honestly, anything could happen. We can't really know until someone tries it.

0
• 2/7/2014

Then again, it's likely our children's children's children will still be waiting for time travel into the past to be invented. The best we can do at the moment is speculate.

0
• 2/7/2014

Kray, you do realise how stupid that sounds right? If we got time travel into any time period it would be irrelevant for when it is invented, as we could just work with any time period with the machine from the original future and hope we have got a universe where the best outcome happens (no fading, no death, but history can change to what we make of it. Basically the branching universe thing.)

0
• 2/7/2014

I meant to say that due to the potential complexities of time travel, it's probable none of us will live to see the verification of the many theories of time travel assuming it's even possible. That's why we can only make educated guesses in the mean time until someone either builds a time machine or travels back in time to meet us (which I said will probably be a very long time).

0
• 2/7/2014

That makes more sense, by the way, is anybody else having problems with wikia?

EDIT: Funny, as soon as I say it, it's fixed. Hope I haven't jinxed it just then... :)

0
• 2/9/2014

I should probably point out that solutions to time travel paradoxes are not just the subject of whimsical speculation. They can be tested out mathematically using current theories. We don't need try time travel to the past in practice (if it's possible) to find out what would happen (though physicists would probably want to do it anyway to back up their theories with evidence). For example, here is the paper in which the Novikov self-consistency principle is presented: (3397Kb).

Any uncertainty about the outcomes of these situations is usually due to the incompleteness of our theories (such as the struggle to reconcile relatiity and quantum physics, and the huge discrepancy between the observed value of the cosmological constant, and the value predicted by quantum physics). That's where places like CERN come in, using tools such as the famous Large Hadron Collider to prove or discount competing hypotheses.

Write a reply...