Or it raises further questions. What is the nature of the universe, quantum foam, quantum mechanics? Are we simply observing a quantum field? Then by observing that quantum field do we cause wave function collapse and rather than an infinite number of potentialities we end up observing a single potentiality that we call reality. Or is the the process in which we interpret light.It sounds like there's a bit of the question missing there mate.
It wouldn't be a different particle, that's the whole point of the Law Of Identity. It is unique and the fact if you apply time as a 4th dimension is (I think) irrelevant. If you take it back in time there are two identical particles which exist simultaneously from that point onwards. I've already explained that I don't understand quantum physics so you could be right or wrong and I can't argue with you so we reach a stalemate there. You may be aware of Deepak Choprah who waffles on about quantum physics a lot but the experts say he has no idea what he is talking about.I'm not sure that applies to time travel, as the new atoms are technically not the same particles. They have a different "timestamp" essentially, so they're a different particle.
Imagined quantised time, with every 3d (or multidimensional) position of every particle appearing in time-snapshots that when combined form a complete 4D (or multiD+t) image of the entire universe from the beginning to the end as a kind of 3D-printed solid object. A particle taken from later in the timeline and inserted earlier in the timeline would essentially be a different particle to the one representing the same particle further back in time. The fact that one of the particles of the "back in time" position later becomes a particle that travels back in time to the same point in time is irrelevant. The timeline of that individual particle is complete up to the point the particle goes back in time, after which it no longer exists in its "planned" (for want of a better phrase spur of the moment) existence, whereas back where it arrives, it is essentially a new particle that has a complete timeline for the rest of time after that moment. For a time, two versions of that particle exist but because of the t element, they're actually essentially different particles for the time they both exist in the same "frames".
Incidentally, in quantum physics it is quite a common thing for something to exist in more than one place at the same time. It's called Superposition.
So in saway this backs up my theory that theres no one travelled back as they would have come back and stopped TrumpYou'd think they would have aimed it for Trump's house if that was the case. Unless they were Russian, Indian or Chinese time travellers. That would make more sense.
But those things are happening at the same time, just the telescope spectators are watching a delayed programme?If you could travel quicker than the speed of light, yes.
At the moment I have a documentary on about the FA Cup in the 70's. If, say, a planet 40 light years away had powerful enough technology to take 'live pictures, but then I travelled to that planet on the final whistle.
As far as that planet is concerned, they're watching it live, but I would be searching for a betting shop to put money on Arsenal beating Man Utd 3-2 and Alan Sunderland to score the winning goal.
Good luck getting your clock to the speed of light.Its proven that a clock at ground level and a clock 12000 meters up is different as the clock at 12000 metres is 2 billionth of a second slower, so at 155 million miles up a clock there travelling at the speed of light would be 2 days where the clock at ground level is 2 yrs in the same time, ive got that worked out somewhere when i used to smoke that blue cheese, sure it was right tho
Wow. Just wow. That video. That man on stage is not a scientist. What a load of flowery new-age hippy waffle he spouts.It wouldn't be a different particle, that's the whole point of the Law Of Identity. It is unique and the fact if you apply time as a 4th dimension is (I think) irrelevant. If you take it back in time there are two identical particles which exist simultaneously from that point onwards. I've already explained that I don't understand quantum physics so you could be right or wrong and I can't argue with you so we reach a stalemate there. You may be aware of Deepak Choprah who waffles on about quantum physics a lot but the experts say he has no idea what he is talking about.
You wouldn't see the consequences at all.Going forwards yes. We are all doing it currently and it has already been proven that clocks (and therefore time) run slower when they travel at high speeds.
if it was possible to travel backwards in time we would already have seen the consequences.
Is what Pinza referring to with the Law of Identity, more to do with logic rather than philosophy?,,,,,As far as the Law Of Identity is concerned, I've read the Wikipedia page for it twice now since you mentioned it on this thread, and I can't see any reference to science in there at all, let alone time travel. I see plenty of philosophy, which is certainly interesting to read, but nothing scientific that I felt had implications on time travel.
Perhaps you have a link to an article that mentions the Law Of Identity in a time travel or quantum physics context?
If that's what he's saying then I wouldn't make the assumption that it necessarily applies to time travel, and I would refer you back to my "timestamp" comment a few posts back.Is what Pinza referring to with the Law of Identity, more to do with logic rather than philosophy?
A = A
So we have A or not A (The law of the excluded middle)
This is a tautology because it is true whether A is true or false
Meaningful theorems conform to this 2-valued logic
Axioms of 2-valued logic are tautological
Tautologies define the truth concept for all the sciences
Logical tautologies constitute absolute knowledge
Tautologies remain true in every context
Tautologies are self evident or self proving
Any theory of reality must possess absolute truth
That absolute truth must be the same as a logical tautology
Therefore definitional principles are required that relate logic to reality
I think what Pinza is saying that scientific theories must still conform to this logic.
As an example (I think)
Reality = Reality
Reality is self contained
Everything needed for reality is contained within reality
Reality could not be created by anything external to reality
Because that itself would be a part of reality
Therefore there can be no external creator god.
Reality = Universe
The Universe could not come from absolute nothing
Absolute nothing would have no potential
Therefore the universe came from Something
As the Universe/Reality neither came from an external creator nor Absolute Nothing
It can only have self-actualised
Reality = Universe
Reality is self contained
Therefore the Universe is self-contained
Yet space is expanding into nothing
This nothing is outside of space
So it is therefore outside of Reality/Universe
If Reality/Universe is self-contained
This is a logical fallacy.
So in the timestamp analogy with the example you gave all past, present and future states would co-exist but with different timestamps for each frame.If that's what he's saying then I wouldn't make the assumption that it necessarily applies to time travel, and I would refer you back to my "timestamp" comment a few posts back.
Essentially, the particle from our time being sent to another time isn't the same particle that exists in the other time period that will eventually become the one that goes back in time.
Nah, retrocausality is a completely different thing, and the experiment failed anyway so it still might not actually be a thing at all.So in the timestamp analogy with the example you gave all past, present and future states would co-exist but with different timestamps for each frame.
So theoretically, it would be possible to consider all past and all future states from the perspective of the present timeframe if information could travel in both directions of time?
I'm not quite sure if that is the same concept as the effect of a cause passing information faster than the speed of light so that it influenced the cause that I mentioned earlier.
I doubt if I could explain it. These issues raise more questions than answers for me. I'm not sure about the Terminator or Back to the Future type of physical time travel or the consciousness Quantum Leap but rather information transfer and processing.Then again if reality is simply drawing back the curtain and observing the quantum universe.....Nah, retrocausality is a completely different thing, and the experiment failed anyway so it still might not actually be a thing at all.
I guess it depends on what kind of time travel you're talking about. If it's like a Quantum Leap kind of time travel where your consciousness is jumping into someone else's body, then you have a totally different set of problems to a Terminator kind of time travel where everything within a sphere replaces everything in the same size sphere in the target time, and has a completely different set of problems to the Time Machine / Back To The Future method where you're in a vehicle of some kind.
I can't see how either the Law Of Identity or retrocausality would affect any of these types, like.
Maybe you could explain?