-4
$\begingroup$

In regards to the concept of time travel, physical travel isn't possible or necessary. "Going" to other points in time, one would actually remain in the same place, not actually travel through space. You can set a clock backwards or forwards without moving it.

As I sit here typing, my body is in the same place, yet time is passing. If I had a time machine, I would only be able to set a date and hit "enter". Me, my laptop, and my seat would remain right here, though here may now be 100 years ago or 100 years in the future. "Here" 100 years in the future may be a barren field, 100 years ago it may have been a wood, but that is where I would be, without leaving my geographical position.

Thus, I believe the phrase "Time Travel" is ignorant. For want of a more accurate name, what would be a scientifically accurate new reference for this theory I have postured?

$\endgroup$

closed as unclear what you're asking by JBH, Vincent, EveryBitHelps, Aify, Renan Jul 31 '18 at 1:24

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ don't forget the world is moving fast around the Sun ! $\endgroup$ – Fattie Jul 30 '18 at 22:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Welcome to Worldbuilding.SE! We're glad you could join us! When you have a moment, please click here to learn more about our culture and take our tour. This question could be about worldbuilding, but I'm not sure what you're looking for. A name? Generally speaking, naming people/places/things is off-topic because it's so subjective. $\endgroup$ – JBH Jul 31 '18 at 0:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Reminder to Close Voters: the OP cannot improve their question if they are not made aware of its flaws. Please leave a comment explaining why you voted to close so the OP can edit with more information/clarifications $\endgroup$ – Dubukay Jul 31 '18 at 2:06
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Well, since "here" it's moving at about 10,000 mph in a complex dance of rotations, orbits, and linear velocity, any time machine that can deliver you to"here" at a different time must also be capable of movement in space. $\endgroup$ – pojo-guy Jul 31 '18 at 3:03
1
$\begingroup$

It depends, really, on how you think of time. So, "time travel" comes from the idea that time is like a 4th spacial axis that we are just incapable of perceiving normally.

Given what you've said, you might call it "time changing".

Another thing to think about is that if you go to a different point in time without moving in space, then the earth might move several thousands of miles without you, because it's hurdling through space pretty quickly.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Boxcartenant has given quite a concise answer that is essentially correct; I'm just going to provide a different perspective on the same idea.

If you look at the laws of relativity as they were described by Einstein (and refined by many others after him), you come across a concept called Spacetime. The idea is that the space we inhabit is really 4D, not 3D and that we are all moving through time as a physical dimension. Once you get your head sufficiently around this idea, other things leap out at you.

For one, the only reason we can remember in only one 'direction' is because of the second law of thermodynamics, or entropy. The universe decreases in order globally every time we lay down a memory by increasing order locally in doing so; the extra disorder being the heat we generate by using our brains. Entropy is the only physical law that does not seem to be symmetrical through time, but that is a topic for another question.

The point is, you're travelling through time right now; you're just traveling forward at 1x speed like us all. Can you change that speed? Sure. people who are travelling fast (higher level of kinetic energy) go through time slower than those with low kinetic energy (travelling at exactly the speed of light would slow it to zero, theoretically). Can you reverse it? We don't believe so as it would violate relativity.

Another point to consider. Many people believe that Spacetime could be a static construct; that is to say that nothing in 4D changes. We only experience it linearly because we are designed to do so. If that is the case, time travel would not only be impossible, but it would be pointless. You'd be completely unable to change anything.

Regardless of what you see on sci fi shows, a time machine would have to be able to move in all 4 dimensions for the reasons mentioned in comments and the first answer above; the Earth rotates to create day/night cycle, and orbits the sun. More than that, the Sun orbits Milky Way, which in turn orbits the local group...

Bottom line is that even if you stayed static in space relative to (say) the big bang and traveled a couple of hours, you could end up in space, in the core of the Earth. Either one would be a touch less than pleasant.

If (on the other hand) you're talking about travelling through time and staying in place relative to (say) the core of the Earth, it's still best to think of that as movement through a physical dimension. The best description I've ever read of this concept for beginners is the last chapter of '6 not so easy pieces' by Richard Feynmann, which talks about spacetime and how it works as a physical dimension (but better to read the complete book first so you get a feel for the underlying principles).

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

It is specifically because of the Earth's motion that functional "Temporal Transition Devices" must remain fixed to a single geographic location relative to the surface of the Earth. To be safe, these devices not only have to negotiate the complexities of temporal transition and balance the cosmic books in terms of entropy, they also need to adjust for planetary spin, orbital velocity, star drift and the ongoing expansion of corporeal space in all three dimensions.

An error in any one of these challenges can lead to catastrophic consequences, not only for the temporal wanderer, but also to others nearby. Objects emerging from temporal transition at a location which is already occupied by existing matter, can easily reach critical mass. When the object in question is human size, the result can be very reminiscent of the Hiroshima blast.

With so much at risk, no sane scientist would further complicate the device's function by adding in relative geographic relocation. Why bother, when you can simply set the destination time back a few extra hours and then travel to your destination by stage-coach or airplane.

The development of temporal transition devices is the clearest possible example of how the "Survival of the Fittest" maxim applies to scientists. Scientists who did not code fixed relative geographic location maintenance into their device operating systems, did not survive long enough to evolve past their mistake. We are just lucky that they didn't take the whole lot of us with them, when they proved that they were terminally unfit to survive.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.