Time travel will be possible

[eezablade]

Not reverse time travel (ie somebody arriving from thee future), but forward time travel. Sometime in the future, it will be possible to travel further into the future to bring back information, technology etc.
This thereby avoids the paradoxes which reverse time travel would incur.
Discuss

[rojash]

Errmm, if you travel into the future but backward travel is not possible, then how will you get back?

[WaldoMcFroog]

I'm travelling into the future right now. Regular timelord, aren't I?

[THECORBYLOON]

Is there not meant to be something about a Time Machine not being able to travel to a time prior to its invention, otherwise its travel would itself affect time &history? If the machine's inventor killed his father, he could prevent his own birth and......my head is hurting now and I need to have a quick rub down wi the AB Newsletter.....NURSE!

[mibn2cweus]

Isn't it about time we get a grip on the technology we already have? Moronic cavemen flying the friendly skies? Trigger happy children whose moral education amounts to "squeeze, don't pull"? Explosive care packages delivered by those who believe that the value of their own life is measured in the deaths of those who do not share their delusions?
If we cannot remember or fathom what took place in our recent past are we philosophically prepared to leap into the future? If time travel ever becomes a two way street will more technology bring with it the wisdom its use requires?

[Loosehead]

If a time machine is ever going to be possible then Labrokes would be full of time travellers cleaning up on sports results!

Gambling exists, so there never will be time travel QED.

[chazza]

I don't believe that it will ever be possible - for the simple reason that no-one has ever managed to come back from the future to tell us that it can be done!

[eezablade]

I think you have all missed the point;

There aren't people in Ladbrokes because forward time travel hasn't been invented, YET.

You wouldn't be able to travel to a time prior to its invention as you would only be able to go forward in time (and thereofore couldn't meet your father/ distant relative)

and chazza, people haven't come back because to tell us about it as I am talking about FORWARD time travel, into the FUTURE NOT the PAST

Now discuss the point, not a different one.

[THECORBYLOON]

eezablade say a machine has been invented and it's been in existance for a 1000 years, there will have been 100's of millions of folk who've lived during that time. Any one of them could travel back in time and kill an ancestor which in turn would prevent the traveller being born. The paradox still applies.

[eezablade]

they couldn't kill a relative as they couldn't travel back in time, only forward. I'm not sure why you don't understand.

I could travel to 2010, and return at the exact time I left. I wouldn't meet any ancestors as I would go forward.

Re-read and think.

[THECORBYLOON]

eezablade a time machine is invented in 2100. What stops someone living in the year 3100 travelling back to the year 2500 for example? It's 400 years AFTER the invention so according to the "rules," it's possible.

[eezablade]

"eezablade a time machine is invented in 2100. What stops someone living in the year 3100 travelling back to the year 2500 for example? It's 400 years AFTER the invention so according to the "rules," it's possible"

No it's not because they would still be going back in time.

Whenever it is invented, as each day passess, that day becomes history, it will never be reachable again.

The date of invention is irrelevent.

[THECORBYLOON]

If you can't travel back why did you say "I could travel to 2010, and return at the exact time I left. I wouldn't meet any ancestors as I would go forward?".

[eezablade]

because for 'going back' I refer to the original time of departure, so technically it wouldn't be going back in time, only returning to the original time. The forward visit would effectively be borrowed time, which would need be returned.

I first read about this in a fiction book by Dean Koontz, called Lightning.
It's well worth a read.

[THECORBYLOON]

So if I live in the year 2100 and travel to the year 3100 I can return to the year 2100, no problem. What if I pick up someone from the year 3100 and we both want to travel back to 2100? What happens to ma passenger?

[THECORBYLOON]

Have you admitted defeat on ma last question?

[eezablade]

Of course, but as you don't seem capable of understanding what I say there is no point keeping n about the same old point.

[THECORBYLOON]

It's not that I'm not capable of understanding the points you make it's just that they do not stand up to close examination. If your theory does not hold water that is not my problem.

You have said a person can travel back and return to their starting point, I am asking what happens to a person they pick up from the future if they both want to travel back?

[Zevon]

If anyone knows more about the practicalities of time travel or the paradoxes can they please put answers on my question regarding historical imperative and the actaul means of achieving time travel. Please?

corbyloon is also right, a time machine cannot travel prior to its invention, making claims about gambling and ladbrokes obsolte until one is invented, then you'd have time-gamblers.

According to current undertsnading of space-time if you picked someone up they could easily ttravel back with you, however the paradox would rely on historical imperative and causality. Basically would the universe care if someone jumped through time, does anything we do really matter? If it does then there would be problems, but if everything just accepts the change and carries on then it doesn't matter. Philosophical but important.

[Zevon]

The time of departure is irrelevant, waht matters is the date of invention and if you agree with the other worlds theory, what universe you are in.