Search the Community

If Apollos DO why bother with the Joes when they could handle issues in simpler ways as outlined above? And you can have a fiction universe with wormhole technology without introducing time travel technology. If you must have a wormhole that acts as a vacuum cleaner to fetch the Joes space craft: why not let Joes travel in cryo on their regular route at slow speed? Let them be delayed or whatever. Year 4010 Apollos need to get the Joes spacecraft. Apollos open a wormhole to fetch the Joes. No need to open a wormhole to another time, with all the issues that implies, just a wormhole to a remote location. Then use the supernova idea to delay Joes traveling through the wormhole. -The AI on the automated Apollo rescue ship has to spend some additional time decrypting 1000+ year old military grade security systems on Joes ship? -Earlier malfunctions on Joes ship need repair to cope with the acceleration to leave orbit? Just present what kind of events that would fit a narrative and from there we can outline some "scientific looking" scenario that sound plausible enough to an average player. It depends. This is fiction, you can state any appropriate time and have a reason for the black hole and Joes to be at that specific location that the narrative requires.

So, no wormhole in the first place? I'll gladly welcome no time travel paradoxes at all (I also like the black hole idea*), but the Apollos DO have the wormhole tech, so, why not use it? Your reasoning is sound though. This means that I'll have to abolish entirely the Apollo's ability to create extra wormhole routes OUTSIDE of the 'Galileo III', as opposed to the 'Galileo III' creating one with itself as the entry point (just like in the endgame), for its OWN EXCLUSIVE USE (which is one of the 'core's powerful abilities’**, after all). I suppose it makes better sense, but I still feel the need to establish the "nothing can travel back, only forward" pseudo-scientific-sci-fi golden rule, otherwise we could still have time travel paradoxes, like the endgame resulting in the Apollos programming the 'Core' to create the wormhole and traveling back in time to, say... earth!?*** Now, the Apollos rescue spacecraft having a malfunction and being the only cause for them to wait more than the expected doesn't quite convince me. Possible solution: the Apollos simply had no way to know the black hole's category - size / gravitational influence / time affecting ratio -, which means that they would never now how much time they had spent in cryo sleep at the time of the Joes arrival - always ending up in shock (maybe they would have predicted a smaller type of black hole?). With both journeys - to and from the black hole - we're talking about a reaaally long time here - hundreds, thousands of years? What do you think?**** Too bad, I enjoyed the supernova idea and felt that we only needed small tweaks from that point forward, but I gave it quite a bit of thought and deemed your idea to be a better course of action. * It could feel as copycat of" Interstellar" though. ** I'm definitely not abdicating on this one. *** Hmm... 😅 **** I need closure on this one. 😌 I apologize to the others for talking about narrative specifics in this post that were only disclosed in private message with Ghideon, but it's enough to get the idea.

Ok But then the narrative and gameplay would not suffer from removing the time travel and introducing some other way? See my suggestion above, it allows for the same fiction but without time travel paradoxes. Worm holes opening to the past opens too may possibilities in my opinion. NPCs * having such powerful options but not using them makes them look kind of stupid. I think it is easier to remove time travel than it is to invent a set of golden rules that actually works and are logical. Assume "wormhole to the past" exists as in the game narrative. If I had such a device (in a game) I would: 1: Create a store room with useful things like one weapon, food, and medical stuff. Later, when I need things from the store room I do not get it from the store room directly, I fetch it from the store room via the wormhole to the past. That gives me endless resources. 2: Get help from the future. Before making a crucial decision I would put a note with each option in my desk. Then watch the wormhole, opening from the future, remove the notes containing the bad decisions. Then I would follow the decision on the one remaining note. The above points are just quick though experiments what the worm hole to the past, in a game, could allow. I would personally try to change the narrative to use some other means to get to the results needed. The point I try to make is that a narrative that allows the reader to think about such possibilities will look more like a universe ruled by magic** than ruled by science. *) Non player characters **) In works of fiction I have nothing against that. But in this case it introduces problems that Pmfr seems to want to avoid.

I gave this a second thought. If the goal is to reduce the non-scientific parts you could try a narrative that is more compatible with current cosmological models. I'll have to do some assumptions and then present the scenario. Assumptions: -The time travel and wormhole combination is not crucial for the plot. -Wormholes may be used in other parts of the game -Joes are in space 2050 -In year 4010 the Apollos need to contact the Joes as they were in 2050. -There should be an unexpected delay that Apollos did not intend Below is a sketchy outline of a fiction narrative that could be used as inspiration. If you find it useful we could add details and specify the unscientific parts to see if they are acceptable. Joes are traveling in cryo and by chance end up in close orbit around a rogue black hole. To a remote observer it looks like Joes time slows down, allowing Joes to orbit many decades. Joes, in cryo, does not experience anything special. Apollos have some reason to try to locate the Joes. For instance they may have old records of Joes spacecraft sending a distress signal that looks more and more red shifted. Apollos detect a redshifted signal from Joes craft and manages to interpret it. Apollos send a mission* to Joes location. The mission spacecraft, getting close to Joes orbit, is also affected by the black hole gravity.This means the Apollos, in their frame of reference, will expect the mission to take a longer time. Some malfunction occurs, the mission takes more time than expected, for instance a basic repair for a few days in the orbit at Joes location could take several years in the Apollos frame of reference. The mission successfully pushes Joes out from the grip of the black hole and they travel to Apollos. Result: from Joes perspective they have spent a few years in cryo but “jumped forward” in time many many years. From Apollos perspective the mission to bring Joes to Apollos required much more time than expected. A narrative based on the above could have the same outcome as opening a wormhole to the past time but it introduces fewer elements that are completely scientifically impossible**. *) The mission could be unmanned. **) There are still many issues of course but my intention is to present an idea that is "more compatible" with general relativity than time travel would be.

There are plenty of posts in these forums about time travel and the problems it poses: https://www.scienceforums.net/search/?&q="time travel"&search_and_or=or&sortby=relevancy Why don't you take a good look at them? You talk about time travel as if it were a familiar thing. How come? Are you coming from the future?

Has it ever occurred to you that the inherent paradoxes involved in time travel, such as any causality breaking or 'grandfather' paradox, suggest time travel is unreal ???

Sir then kick out grandfather paradox idea from everywhere as, in that you have taken if the person travels to his past then... it happens. So if you are telling time travel is impossible so why there is such a question assuming time travel to be real .?????

Sir but in grand father paradox it is taken that after time travel to past we will get that conclusion so why I cannot use time travel to past as possible. We cannot deny the possibility of time travel to past... So if that will be possible then my theory might be correct.

Forget about time travel. I wish ordinary travel were restored.

You can't prove multiple universes using time travel. First, you have to prove time travel. Good luck with that ...

1)Sir this is just an idea about a paradox and why this is not a speculation ,because I have taken time travel to past which may be impossible in practical but we have taken time travel to past as possible in grand father paradox so why not I can. And second is to influence your past may not be possible in reality but in grandfather paradox we have taken that the person kills his grandfather. It means he can influence his past. So I have taken those things in my paradox also. 2) Second thing is I had imagined this Paradox when I was 14 years old and now I am just 16 so I have not enough knowledge about modern and theoretical physics to use in it. I have just used the basic idea of grandfather paradox and got this conclusion . So till now I couldn't found any mistake in my theory.

If you could travel at all faster than light, multiple times in different directions, you could create paradoxes. I don't think the instantaneousness of it matters at all, unless you can apply it arbitrarily in different frames of reference. For a counter example without paradoxes (I think), if spacetime is multiply connected between A and B, where one connection is flat spacetime with a proper distance of 10 LY between A and B, and another connection is a stable wormhole between A and B, allowing instantaneous travel in either direction at any time t in one given inertial frame of reference---or in other words, you could instantly travel from A to B and back, and you could even have B earlier than A (or vice versa) in your frame of reference, but not so early that it's in A's past light cone, AND you can travel back from B to A, but never to an earlier time than you left A---then I think no causality paradoxes are possible without something more. Even though you can transmit information in 2 directions faster than light, and try to exploit the 2 different-length connections between A and B, there's no frame of reference in which information from an event at A can be sent to an earlier event at A. (Same with B and everywhere else.) The parameter t of the events never decreases. The difference here is, arbitrary travel at faster than light over great distances allows traveling to earlier times in both directions. HOWEVER, traveling through the wormhole I described is not traveling a great distance, and it can be done at low speed. So it's instantaneous travel, but not technically "moving faster than light". Just getting there faster via a shortcut. The difference is important because it's the changes in relative simultaneity across great distances that are exploited in (impossible) FTL time travel, and that doesn't apply to the wormhole here. I suspect it might not apply to the Alcubierre "warp" drive either. (Just a further thought on the example above. Say you tried to cause a paradox by switching between different frames of reference. You could start in one frame F such that a traveler leaves A in 2020, travels through the wormhole, and arrives at B "earlier" in your frame of reference. Then you could switch to another frame F' so that if the traveler leaves B just after it arrived, back through the wormhole, it can now arrive in a time at A that is "earlier" again than it left B, but in this other frame F'. However, you'll also find that in this new frame F', the first event where the traveler left A for B, is earlier (by the same amount) than the event of it arriving at B, and in this frame (like in any) you find that the traveler still arrives back at A after it left, without paradox.)

Imagine you are a time traveler and you can do time travel at any place .And imagine you are standing at a point and then start moving towards north and walk 3 steps from the origin point taking one second per point then travel to your 3 sec in your past. You will find your self standing at that origin point .And you will change the direction of yourself (the past one) 60° towards north west direction, and return back to your original present position. You will find another you in the same space time(your present point) in 60° west to you. As you and that image of your self is same from brain and mind he will also do the same thing and create another copy of himself so in this way there will be 5 another copy or image of yourself in the same time. Standing in one circle .But the Problem is now no one can say who was the first one to start this thing. As everyone has another copy before him in 60° degrees telling that I made you . And the second thing is where they came from????. I think It proves that there are parallel universes..... To be continued

Someone able to create a time travel wormhole from 2050 to 4010 would know better. It looks like a plot hole to me. A rational explanation is not really possible in mainstream science when time travel is introduced. Maybe this is possible in your game universe: While Apollos are in cryo the wormhole has a minor malfunction. The Joes end up in the wrong location in space and have to travel at "slow" speed to Apollos. If Apollos lack the food required even to have one operator awake it could be logical in the plot that they also were short on reliable parts for the automatic control of the wormhole.

Yes, it's not a problem as long as everyone understands a statement consistently. Even "traveling to someone's future" could be discussed without confusion if someone defined what that meant and everyone agreed on it. Combining this and OP's example: Say there are 2 events, A-2020 ("now" at A) and B-2020 ("now" at B). A ship (or message) travels FTL from A-2020 to B-2020. It travels from "the present" at A to "the present" at B (that is the present relative to the two events, in A & B's shared frame of reference). Then say B immediately accelerates away from A. In the new frame of reference, A's clock could "now" (according to B) read 2019. The event A-2020 is in the future of B-2020 in this frame. It's not in its future light cone, but in its elsewhere, and in the future relative to B's plane of simultaneity at B-2020. Then if B immediately sent a message instantly to A-2019 say, A in 2019 could receive information from A-2020, an event in A-2019's own future. In this example there's no mention of relative past or future until there's relative motion. Also, B receiving a message, accelerating, and sending a message, if done all at once, could be considered a single event. In both examples, the time travel requires two different inertial frames, with the corresponding two different ways that "now" or "instant" apply to the distant events. You send a message "instantly" using one frame's definition of an instant across space, and send another in a different definition of an instant. Also! in this example, B doesn't need to accelerate at all. If it were inertial and moving relative to A, the only change is that it doesn't agree with A about "now". In this case, the original ship or signal from A-2020 arriving at B-2020 (with B moving away from A and B saying that it is "now" 2019 at A), B can say that it originated from an event that has not yet happened in its frame of reference. However since that event's still outside of its future light cone, that alone doesn't violate causality yet.

We agree that it isn't scientific. Relativity allows for certain effects, but they seem to be un-physical. FTL motion, whether through wormholes, warp drives, or magic, allows for the superluminal transfer of information. ( in my example, reading Earth's history of the last 100 years, before seeing it unfold ) This causality break is un-physical. Pointing out the un-scientific and un-physical effects ( time travel ) of an un-physical initial cause ( FTL travel ) is kind of redundant. If I said that a massive object travelling at the speed of light has infinite energy, would you say that it's impossible for anything to have infinite energy ? Or would you realize that an impossible cause leads to an impossible effect, and it is the travel at c that is impossible ?

That's not for me to decide but as long as you don't claim that the "magic" exists I guess several aspects of the thought experiment fits in the mainstream sections. One way I think that paradoxes could arise in your experiment is due to relativity of simultaneity. If we had observers in relative movement of one another and they also could instantaneously jump 5 lightyears (not possible of course) that seem to allow time travel paradoxes. For instance combining Andromeda Paradox* and (impossible) instant travel and relative movement would allow observers to jump and arrive at different times and interact with, and cause events that are not allowed in theories of relativity. *) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rietdijk–Putnam_argument

Confirm you crazy scientists in time travel atrocities? Please do tell me how you people manage to talk about creating universes in real life without first the Holy Perfect original exister of existence? How many theories does it take to find this one fact about the holy father you fools? He used Jesus Christ! And many others but Jesus Proves he is king. Do you lunatics wan hear how christianity is more evident than any other religion? Have you fools ever asked what came before existence?! The holy father did! Why because there was no evil at the beginning to touch him! He's in everything, not at the back of the universe or the front, you need him to exist something... He's in your skin, he's just very patient... If this gets removed, you all will be going further away into possible perish whom choose to play God with your back to the God of the origin of existence... Challenge me you cowards at this topic! Challenge me! Einstein would and so would Stephen hawking!

If they found the actual time chemical make up or cosmetic diagnose for example. Theoretically understand how to manipulate it only back in time, as my theory going forward is far superior more dangerous if you fuck with the idea of time travel. Reason being is theoretically there is nothing scarred in the time continume forwardly, so yea... Say these crazy willing to die for the sake of science theoretically gain the cosmetic diagnosis and make up of time. They theoretically manipulate going back words in time. My theory is they would have to be stable and not move to even exist on a past time event, and theoretically they may not even be able to be present in the area they even start and end. Basically they would maybe able to get readings but that might be it, than theoretically they may have to reverse there manipulation out of the past in their designated line of travel. The data they would be able to gather may be as much as environmental reading and that's it, the data they would gather would not be able to actively allow there readings to see time be progressive but instead frozen. It can't be progressive theoretically because of the fact on their inability to actually be there physically. So is time travel even worth it if my theory is correct? And is the data they gain even enough or whatever? Also the reason in my opinion they have to reverse and clean up their travel is if they take the same path again it may not be an accurate reading like the first travel.

I am sorry to bother people here but can anyone debunk this silly argument I made. I am really not well right now. I am arranging to go and see a therapist and talk about my abusive childhood, but right now the thought of living that horrible excuse for a life over and over again is driving me mad. I'm honestly about to snap. A couple of things I'd like to know for sure. If the universe were to restart and matter where to be arranged in exactly the same way again, would our consciousness be exactly the same as before or would it be a mock up? Is time travel possible. Again I am so sorry to disrupt the forum with this. I just feel really, really terrible. Today has been my worst day so far.

In fact we can't time travel. I already made the request yesterday to a moderator for split it. It should come. Now I would know, I would open a new thread. Yes.

Again, this is not related to CTCs, and I fail to see how it relates to time travel. It is an off topic hijack. Start a new thread in Speculations. And be prepared to support it.

A wormhole and a closed time-like curve are very different topological constructs - though you could conceivably use wormholes to ‘build’ something that behaves like a CTC, at least in principle. I don’t know how to answer this - I cannot think of any way to time travel without creating a paradox. Even the mere presence of a time traveler would already create all manner of problems, never even mind accidental or intentional interference in events.

The are actually saying very strongly what youre pointing out in their own paper right after the 2 proofs on page 11: "4. Examples The above characterisation of process functions allows us to consider specific examples that cannot occur in an ordinary, causally ordered spacetime" is my layman understanding of this correct?: We can very much time travel without the risks of getting into the grandfather paradox with just a small exception - we can’t do it in our universe?

some physicists state or divide the time roughly to three parts. its surface...past and future (or I understood so). some other physicists describe more complex things on the issue. but nothing happens as all I can see. I am almost sure about these: 1) travelling past times (leaving the existing time) is not possible. 2) mentioning "time travel machine" is not only far away,but is also impossible. it is utopic. 3) all in all some sources that we could have consist of only belief about thats and state that travelling future was not as same as travelling to past times and was possible. but if you ask my own idea: I don't believe the possibility of such things. ......... (i.e. there are many void or valueless papers!)