Page 3 of 3

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 2:44 pm
by Hashi Lebwohl
aTOMiC wrote:Here is a real head kicker in this discussion in my opinion.

There is a component in the time travel debate that is frequently, but not always, ignored.

Suppose you had the ability to travel backward in time with a real world time travel device that obeyed the natural laws of the universe.

Traveling backward in time is not the only concern.
Your destination comes into question.

First of all if you simply engaged your device and traveled backward 75 years you'd end up exactly where you started only in the past. Three quarters of a century ago the Earth wasn't in the same position it is today so you start out with a real problem.

Where exactly was the Earth 75 years ago an how would you determine its location?

The Earth rotates, it also orbits the Sun. Our Solar System rides the great circular disk of the Milky Way galaxy and the galaxy itself is hurtling away from the origin point of the big bang.

For the achievement of creating the ability to travel backward in time the universe does not grant wishes.
Its not as simple as clicking your heels three times and just picturing your destination in your mind and poof you materialize in Europe circa 1939.

The Earth was located in a very specific location at any given time in the year 1939 and that location is very, very, very far from where it is today. With the gigantic ballet the matter in the universe is dancing at all times it would be extremely difficult to determine spatial coordinates for your time travel destination. I haven't even gotten into a discussion about whether the universe itself may be moving as well. Imagine that every body is affected by gravity. The wobble of distant stars helps us discover orbiting planets. Since there is no frame of reference, there is no way to know if or how fast the universe might be rotating around, confusing the location of the actual big bang point of beginning with respect to its actual location, not its relativity to all of the observable matter in the universe.

Sure go ahead and travel backward in time all you want. Its very likely that you'll end up in open space light years away from the nearest star let alone the Earth itself.

All I'm saying is you'd better bring a space suit with lots of oxygen. Provided of course you don't materialize inside a random star or are instantly sucked into a singularity.

Time travel isn't as much fun an idea if you go back in time to try to kill Hitler but Berlin, Germany is dozens of light years away and you have no idea which direction to go and no conceivable way to get there.
You are completely correct in your assessment--no one ever takes the motions of the Earth and Sun as they rotate around the galaxy into account. Typically, they often assume (for whatever reason) that you somehow maintain the proper momentum and spatial vectors when you travel but logic would state otherwise.

The only show I have ever seen that takes your spatial location into account was Red Dwarf. As you probably recall, they managed to retrofit a time drive onto Starbug--how they did that I am not certain buy Kryten was smarter than he looked...sometimes--and travelled back to the 14th century...in deep space.

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 3:22 pm
by Vraith
Hey, I take it into account!
I wrote: You could pop up in the middle of nothing, [most likely] or an asteroid or star that's passing by. You're "base" will have moved, though.
[If you leapt instantly only 1 second into the future, you would be about 20 miles behind and a quarter mile East of your starting point...and that is only counting EARTH's motion. Since the whole System is moving, and moving much faster, you'd be much farther away than that...closer to 150 miles...though still only 1/4 mile East, if I did it right.]

Heh, so 1 year is over 600,000,000 miles away [earth only...4.5Billion whole system...farther away than Pluto...if I did the math correctly]
I suppose if you have the tech to build a time machine, you'd have the tech to build a drive to catch up when you got then. At least if you took relatively short hops.
Over the years, I've run across a fair number of SF authors who have said one of the main reason they've never used time-travel [besides the fact they think it is overdone] is because of that problem...ways to overcome it, but couldn't think of good/interesting ways.
But, on the multi-dimensions and time thing further up thread.
Some people have played with variations on those things. The most recent I've seen was in Stephenson's "Anathem." It's really a minor point yet it makes the story possible. In that, by a not really explored/explained mechanism [though he suggests a couple views/possibilities] when beings build time machines, they don't work to go through time. To maintain the integrity of each universe's time/history, the result is a move to another dimension.
One of the things I liked about the work, though the real story is about the nature and relationships of those universes.

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 3:59 pm
by Hashi Lebwohl
Vraith wrote:Hey, I take it into account!
My mistake--I forgot about you. That was my mistake.

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 4:25 pm
by Vraith
Hashi Lebwohl wrote:
Vraith wrote:Hey, I take it into account!
My mistake--I forgot about you. That was my mistake.

Good thing I'm not simple minds[ed]
and always stay on topic
and couple other things
or I'd be all

Don't You
Spoiler
Huzzah! Just leaped back to the '80's ! :lol:

Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 8:20 pm
by Fist and Faith
My take is that time and space are inseparable. You can't ONLY go back in time. You go back through space as well. And, since this is all sci-fi, my theory is acceptable. :D