Philosophy Discussion Forums

Do you really believe in time?

They say time is more about position and speed, hence, space-time. Now I’m no scientist, but please hear me out on this.

Let’s start simple. Let’s say you had a favourite mug, and it was lost or broken. Instead of mending it, let’s say you recreate it perfectly, right down to the smallest subatomic level. Isn’t this a form of time travel? The proper way? What would be the difference between the two mugs if they are EXACTLY the same? Only their position from where they’re placed, right?

Isn’t the same true for people? If a person was duplicated, (not a clone), but perfectly duplicated; you’re sitting at the same breakfast table with them, isn’t this a form of time travel, the only thing making them different is that they’re not sitting in the same chair than you. What will make them different in time is if they start living separate lives.

So Let’s take it a step further. If you could duplicate a solar system at a time where the second world war was still raging; I mean the planets, people, everything is exactly the same … would they make the same choices. When you are there wouldn’t bestriding this planet, automatically put you in the past? Or would the whole solar system be different, because the rest of space is different?

Trying not to talk about parallel universes, but then what is a parallel universe other than something which is spatially different from our universe?

Thus, the question is: isn’t it more practical to manipulate space, through, example duplication, than trying to travel somewhere unreachable? Time seems to me to gravitate more around composition of things: memory, atoms, direction, speed, than the conventional time concept. So why not replicate what was lost – and is that time travel?

Whitedragon wrote:Do you really believe in time?

They say time is more about position and speed, hence, space-time. Now I’m no scientist, but please hear me out on this.

Let’s start simple. Let’s say you had a favourite mug, and it was lost or broken. Instead of mending it, let’s say you recreate it perfectly, right down to the smallest subatomic level. Isn’t this a form of time travel? The proper way? What would be the difference between the two mugs if they are EXACTLY the same? Only their position from where they’re placed, right?

Isn’t the same true for people? If a person was duplicated, (not a clone), but perfectly duplicated; you’re sitting at the same breakfast table with them, isn’t this a form of time travel, the only thing making them different is that they’re not sitting in the same chair than you. What will make them different in time is if they start living separate lives.

So Let’s take it a step further. If you could duplicate a solar system at a time where the second world war was still raging; I mean the planets, people, everything is exactly the same … would they make the same choices. When you are there wouldn’t bestriding this planet, automatically put you in the past? Or would the whole solar system be different, because the rest of space is different?

Trying not to talk about parallel universes, but then what is a parallel universe other than something which is spatially different from our universe?

Thus, the question is: isn’t it more practical to manipulate space, through, example duplication, than trying to travel somewhere unreachable? Time seems to me to gravitate more around composition of things: memory, atoms, direction, speed, than the conventional time concept. So why not replicate what was lost – and is that time travel?

You may find this hard to believe. I was thinking along similar lines when I constructed my sales system (to the point where I traveled backwards in time, conceptually speaking). So I can understand where you're coming from. People's choices can change.

PhilX

-- Updated August 9th, 2014, 1:18 am to add the following --

Whitedragon wrote:Do you really believe in time?

They say time is more about position and speed, hence, space-time. Now I’m no scientist, but please hear me out on this.

Let’s start simple. Let’s say you had a favourite mug, and it was lost or broken. Instead of mending it, let’s say you recreate it perfectly, right down to the smallest subatomic level. Isn’t this a form of time travel? The proper way? What would be the difference between the two mugs if they are EXACTLY the same? Only their position from where they’re placed, right?

Isn’t the same true for people? If a person was duplicated, (not a clone), but perfectly duplicated; you’re sitting at the same breakfast table with them, isn’t this a form of time travel, the only thing making them different is that they’re not sitting in the same chair than you. What will make them different in time is if they start living separate lives.

So Let’s take it a step further. If you could duplicate a solar system at a time where the second world war was still raging; I mean the planets, people, everything is exactly the same … would they make the same choices. When you are there wouldn’t bestriding this planet, automatically put you in the past? Or would the whole solar system be different, because the rest of space is different?

Trying not to talk about parallel universes, but then what is a parallel universe other than something which is spatially different from our universe?

Thus, the question is: isn’t it more practical to manipulate space, through, example duplication, than trying to travel somewhere unreachable? Time seems to me to gravitate more around composition of things: memory, atoms, direction, speed, than the conventional time concept. So why not replicate what was lost – and is that time travel?

You may find this hard to believe. I was thinking along similar lines when I constructed my sales system (to the point where I traveled backwards in time, conceptually speaking). So I can understand where you're coming from. People's choices can change.

PhilX

Thanks for the post, Philx.

I definitely agree with you that your method is more practical than trying to travel somewhere unreachable. But it definitely wouldn't be the same thing as travelling forward or backward in time either.

Your question about a duplicate solar system is an interesting one. Would things play out the same way? My view is that the farther out from that point in time in which you began with the new solar system, the more differently things would be. For example, let's say that we duplicated our solar system in the year 1935. The farther from 1935 we go in that duplicated solar system the more differently things would probably be. So WW2, being not too far in the future, would play out much more similarly than say the Iraq War. It's even fairly possible that the Iraq War might not happen in the duplicated solar system, but WW2 would be a virtual certainty. Why? Because as time goes by more incidental variables would "pile up" and accumulate more change. If we go out to the year 10,000 AD then the duplicated solar system might be quite different than our own. Go out 10 seconds and the solar system will still be virtually the same as our own.

Another interesting question in comparing a duplicated solar system to our own, besides "small incidental" variables giving different futures, is the question of forces. Life on Earth for a man at time = 0 in the duplicated solar system would be just a bit different than our own. Why? Because in your example you didn't stipulate that the rest of the Universe was exactly the same. A different Milky Way, and a different whole Universe, would exert a certain set of different influences on our solar system, which would also produce a different future, and even a slightly different present. Influences from outside of the solar system also affect life on Earth, although obviously their effect is less direct than influences coming from within the solar system.

Atreyu wrote:I definitely agree with you that your method is more practical than trying to travel somewhere unreachable. But it definitely wouldn't be the same thing as travelling forward or backward in time either.

Your question about a duplicate solar system is an interesting one. Would things play out the same way? My view is that the farther out from that point in time in which you began with the new solar system, the more differently things would be. For example, let's say that we duplicated our solar system in the year 1935. The farther from 1935 we go in that duplicated solar system the more differently things would probably be. So WW2, being not too far in the future, would play out much more similarly than say the Iraq War. It's even fairly possible that the Iraq War might not happen in the duplicated solar system, but WW2 would be a virtual certainty. Why? Because as time goes by more incidental variables would "pile up" and accumulate more change. If we go out to the year 10,000 AD then the duplicated solar system might be quite different than our own. Go out 10 seconds and the solar system will still be virtually the same as our own.

Another interesting question in comparing a duplicated solar system to our own, besides "small incidental" variables giving different futures, is the question of forces. Life on Earth for a man at time = 0 in the duplicated solar system would be just a bit different than our own. Why? Because in your example you didn't stipulate that the rest of the Universe was exactly the same. A different Milky Way, and a different whole Universe, would exert a certain set of different influences on our solar system, which would also produce a different future, and even a slightly different present. Influences from outside of the solar system also affect life on Earth, although obviously their effect is less direct than influences coming from within the solar system.

I am very in sync with what you’re saying, especially the part of space being different, as you rightly say, which I forgot to include. But let’s say the whole universe is the same, would there be any changes then? Is there something inherent in us, that would make us play out our roles differently despite exact conditions of all?