Time Travellers paper

[morganism]

Just noticed that the poker game led to a search for time travellers.

I have been thinking a bit about this, and my reasoning was depressing.

There are no time travellers here, because humans didn't survive.

Think about it.
If we had survived long enough to do extensive solar system exploration, then we prob would not have gone extinct, barring solar detonation.

since we havn't had anyone show up to warn us of major disasters, or political or biological hazards, again, we must assume we have gone extinct.

While depressing, this does show us a way forward.

We are not doing it right, we need to change our direction.

[geckzilla]

I'd argue you with you on this but you are clearly not all there.

[bystander]

How Can You Be in Two Places at Once When You're Not Anywhere at All

[Beyond]

Isn't this the second time it's been posted? I was expecting it to disappear, like the first time.

Bystander, what a memory A video from 1969 that i completely missed. Thanks to you, i am now almost completely missing it, and appreciating the completeness of my having missed it before, more and more.

[bystander]

I was and am a fan of Firesign Theatre, kind of a "radio" version of Monty Python.

[Beyond]

Ah, ok. I've been fortunate enough to miss most of Monty Python, although their skit in the 'Tribute to George', was pretty good. I did manage to catch some Benny Hill way back when my father was around. He used to like him. I thought he was ok. Better than some of the other stuff on TV. And then there was Tommy Smothers and the power of YO, but CBS didn't appreciate the power, i guess, so they pulled the plug. So us 'less ons' lost the power of YO, because of the 'more ons'. That's the way it went back then.

[geckzilla]

Oh brother, maybe if you hadn't missed most of Monty Python you'd actually be funny sometimes.

[Beyond]

Missed

[Nitpicker]

Missed

A hit and a miss. Beyond, you're the one saying that the asterisk computer is about to start hitting members:
http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=32728

[Nitpicker]

I'd argue you with you on this but you are clearly not all there.

Man walks into psychiatrist's office wearing nothing but plastic wrap. Doctor says: "I can clearly see you're nuts."

[Beyond]

Missed

A hit and a miss. Beyond, you're the one saying that the asterisk computer is about to start hitting members:
http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=32728

About to It already has. Ever hear of the 1040 too many connections error
Also, as of this post, there are 8999 members.

I wrote the word "missed ", because the Great gecko seemed to have left it right out of her post previous to mine.

:EDIT: I see the membership has just hit 9001.

[neufer]

To do list for a Time Traveler:

[list]1) Blend in with the crowd.
2) Kill grandfather.
3) Email RJN. [/list]

[Beyond]

Well, IF your Grandfather(s) is already dead, that makes the list 33% shorter. Unless, of course, you are the one that has to make him(s) expire.

[Chris Peterson]

There are no time travellers here, because humans didn't survive.

Your view is too small. If you control time, you also control space. If time travel is possible, we could expect to see travelers from anywhere and anywhen. Nothing special about humans. So if we take your assumption, it has to imply that not just humans failed to survive long enough to develop time travel, but that no sentient species in the Universe did.

A simpler answer is that time travel isn't possible.

[Beyond]

I think 'time travel' is about as possible as 'information' going faster than the speed of light. If you can't do the latter, how can you do the former

[Chris Peterson]

I think 'time travel' is about as possible as 'information' going faster than the speed of light. If you can't do the latter, how can you do the former :?:

Exactly my point.

I won't go so far as to say either are impossible, but if you're considering one, you have to consider it in the light of the consequences of the other.

[neufer]

I think 'time travel' is about as possible as 'information' going faster than the speed of light.
If you can't do the latter, how can you do the former

Exactly my point.

I won't go so far as to say either are impossible, but if you're considering one,
you have to consider it in the light of the consequences of the other.

Nothing necessarily prevents one from creating a wormhole at some point in space time, moving one end of the wormhole non-relativistically to some point in the future and then returning back to the original space time point through the worm hole.

. http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colber ... cyberspace

<<Kip Stephen Thorne (born June 1, 1940) is an American theoretical physicist, known for his prolific contributions in gravitational physics and astrophysics and for having trained a generation of scientists. A longtime friend and colleague of Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan, he was the Feynman Professor of Theoretical Physics at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) until 2009 and one of the world’s leading experts on the astrophysical implications of Einstein’s general theory of relativity. He continues to do scientific research, and is reported to have inspired the 2014 science-fiction film Interstellar.

Thorne was one of the first people to conduct scientific research on whether the laws of physics permit space and time to be multiply connected (can there exist classical, traversable wormholes and "time machines"?). With Sung-Won Kim, Thorne identified a universal physical mechanism (the explosive growth of vacuum polarization of quantum fields), that may always prevent spacetime from developing closed timelike curves (i.e., prevent "backward time travel"). With Mike Morris and Ulvi Yurtsever he showed that traversable Lorentzian wormholes can exist in the structure of spacetime only if they are threaded by quantum fields in quantum states that violate the averaged null energy condition (i.e. have negative renormalized energy spread over a sufficiently large region). This has triggered research to explore the ability of quantum fields to possess such extended negative energy. Recent calculations by Thorne indicate that simple masses passing through traversable wormholes could never engender paradoxes – there are no initial conditions that lead to paradox once time travel is introduced. If his results can be generalised, they would suggest that none of the supposed paradoxes formulated in time travel stories can actually be formulated at a precise physical level: that is, that any situation in a time travel story turns out to permit many consistent solutions.>>

[Doum]

So, since no one have create a wormhole yet, then it's obvious we cant have a visitor from the future. if any of you is aware of someone starting to create a wormhole, please tell me so i can start looking for visitor. (just in case)