Spoiling your sci-fi with facts and or obvious problem solvers.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Ok, so, obviously due to the Waffle Iron thread, I've been watching some time travel flicks.

Now lets ignore the whole fact that travel to the past is probably impossible (we're traveling into the future right now) since we can't break the light barrier nor come up with any conceivable way to do so without cheating, which will also negate other relativistic effects, such as travel back in time.

So, Marty shows Doc the flyer about the clocktower being hit with lightning. There's supposedly an exact time involved.

Except not really. A minute contains sixty seconds. A bolt of lightning lasts maybe 2 seconds tops. I mean, it's fucking traveling at light speed.

Now, even with the information that they know the minute that lightning strikes, there is no possible way to know that window of time to channel it from the clock tower, let alone calculate to the second the DeLorean (Irish made car, btw) hits the wire while hitting exactly 88.8 mph.

Why it has to be 88.8 of a measurement of non-metric and therefore non-scientific time is also irrelevant.

So Marty can't get back to 1985.

Or can he?

Turns out Doc is just making things unnecessarily complicated, as evidenced by the fact that he tore up Marty's letter. If your lab assistant saw to it to break your rules by telling you about the future, it must be for a damn good reason. And it is. Marty left about a minute and a half after Doc's death. At that point, human history was in no ways affected one way or the other. It's not like going back in time and killing Hitler, coming from 2012.

No wonder the time machine was Doc's only successful invention. He's too retarded to see the obvious solution.

Gas up the DeLorean. All the way just to be safe. Also tell Doc about global warming. No one wants that except Republicans. Then, roll up to the wire running from the clock tower so that a connection is made. Throw the DeLorean in neutral, well before lightning strikes. Accelerate to 88.8 miles per hour. Put the DeLorean into cruise control. Tailgate. Tell Doc about the future so he doesn't have a choice but to listen. Get back in the car, crack open a Miller Highlife since it's product placement and wait for 1985 to happen.

Also disregard the problems I brought up with this in the Jenne and Khara womp thread.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Bump. I doubt this was it, but, hey. Fun.

[Pope Lecherous]

In Serenity, the Reavers.  How can they travel through space and actually make it anywhere?  I kind of imagine the larger ships requiring a crew almost like a naval vessel.  How can bloodthirsty, cannibal, raping machines cooperate to go anywhere or do anything? Don't get me wrong, i love the movie and the series.  This is just one thing that kind of raised a few questions.  Perhaps they could have went more in depth about Reavers after their origins were revealed?

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Also annoying about BTTF: If I travel through a wormhole connecting the same point in space at two different time coordinates, wouldn't I just pop out into the blackness of interstellar space, since Earth is not actually at the same coordinates now that it was in 1985?

[Don Coyote]

Also annoying about BTTF: If I travel through a wormhole connecting the same point in space at two different time coordinates, wouldn't I just pop out into the blackness of interstellar space, since Earth is not actually at the same coordinates now that it was in 1985?

Because of quanta. When Doc Brown cracked his head and invented the flux capacitor he unconsciously designed it to manipulate particles and forces that don't exist except when they do and thereby trick the universe into cheating on itself.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Also annoying about BTTF: If I travel through a wormhole connecting the same point in space at two different time coordinates, wouldn't I just pop out into the blackness of interstellar space, since Earth is not actually at the same coordinates now that it was in 1985?

You're 169% correct.  There have been HUNDREDS of time machines invented.  Their inventors are all flash-frozen hemmorage lumps out in space somewhere.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Also annoying about BTTF: If I travel through a wormhole connecting the same point in space at two different time coordinates, wouldn't I just pop out into the blackness of interstellar space, since Earth is not actually at the same coordinates now that it was in 1985?

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,28930.msg1034359.html#msg1034359

and this is what Marty would have seen:
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,28930.msg1153301.html#msg1153301

[Remington]

Time Machines in general:

"Let's go back in time and change the past" doesn't work. For example, going back in time and killing Hitler is impossible, because Hitler wasn't killed by you. If you could change the past, the past would have already been changed: you can't change things because you didn't. Also, even if you manage to change some horrible event in the past, the change would result in present-you having no motivation to build a time machine and go back to make the change, because it wouldn't need to be changed. It's a paradox. The only real way to change the past and maintain a stable time loop is to change things so that the end result is identical to having no change at all, at least until the point at which you go back in time.


For example, you could save someone in the past from dying with advanced technology/whatever, but you would have to hide them away and replace them with a believable stand-in, thus allowing history to take the course it already has (and giving you the motivation and reason to build a time machine and go back in time). Only once you returned to the present day with the saved person in tow could you reveal their existence.


Does that make sense at all? I'm not sure I articulated it very well. It's also assuming a single-timeline model, instead of a model where a person going back in time causes a split in the timeline, beginning as soon as they make changes.

[Freeky]

Makes sense to me.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

Time Machines in general:

"Let's go back in time and change the past" doesn't work. For example, going back in time and killing Hitler is impossible, because Hitler wasn't killed by you. If you could change the past, the past would have already been changed: you can't change things because you didn't. Also, even if you manage to change some horrible event in the past, the change would result in present-you having no motivation to build a time machine and go back to make the change, because it wouldn't need to be changed. It's a paradox. The only real way to change the past and maintain a stable time loop is to change things so that the end result is identical to having no change at all, at least until the point at which you go back in time.


For example, you could save someone in the past from dying with advanced technology/whatever, but you would have to hide them away and replace them with a believable stand-in, thus allowing history to take the course it already has (and giving you the motivation and reason to build a time machine and go back in time). Only once you returned to the present day with the saved person in tow could you reveal their existence.


Does that make sense at all? I'm not sure I articulated it very well. It's also assuming a single-timeline model, instead of a model where a person going back in time causes a split in the timeline, beginning as soon as they make changes.

PARALLEL UNIVERSES. YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID.

But apparently, because physicists are assholes who can't have any FUN, time travel is somehow a violation of all kinds of terrible shit like "the laws of reality."

[Telarus]

But I can still go back and retroactively retire if it gets in the way of my Presidential bid, right?

[LMNO]

Time Machines in general:

"Let's go back in time and change the past" doesn't work. For example, going back in time and killing Hitler is impossible, because Hitler wasn't killed by you. If you could change the past, the past would have already been changed: you can't change things because you didn't. Also, even if you manage to change some horrible event in the past, the change would result in present-you having no motivation to build a time machine and go back to make the change, because it wouldn't need to be changed. It's a paradox. The only real way to change the past and maintain a stable time loop is to change things so that the end result is identical to having no change at all, at least until the point at which you go back in time.


For example, you could save someone in the past from dying with advanced technology/whatever, but you would have to hide them away and replace them with a believable stand-in, thus allowing history to take the course it already has (and giving you the motivation and reason to build a time machine and go back in time). Only once you returned to the present day with the saved person in tow could you reveal their existence.


Does that make sense at all? I'm not sure I articulated it very well. It's also assuming a single-timeline model, instead of a model where a person going back in time causes a split in the timeline, beginning as soon as they make changes.

PARALLEL UNIVERSES. YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID.

But apparently, because physicists are assholes who can't have any FUN, time travel is somehow a violation of all kinds of terrible shit like "the laws of reality."

So, in this universe, you get into your time machine, and disappear.  Nothing seems to happen.  "Must not have worked", they say.

But for you, this happened.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

HOLY FUCKING SHIT IT'S REMINGTON!!!!

HOW'S IT GOING DUDE?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

And, yeah, that makes sense Rem. Which brings up another interesting thing. Terminator franchise. If Sarah and John succeed in preventing Skynet from being created, how the hell is Kyle Reese going to come back in time and fuck Sarah? Matter of fact, I think I recall Kyle saying he was born after Judgment Day. It's possible that John's grandparents met as a result of being in the extermination camps. By preventing Skynet from being built John is creating a backwards grandfather paradox. Backwards since he exists prior to his father's conception.

This is, of course, is neatly taken care of in Terminator 3 and the Sarah Connor Chronicles by saying that Judgment Day has been postponed.

Except there's still the problem with how Kyle's parents met, and how they made sure to fuck at the exact right time for the exact right sperm to fertilize the exact right egg. Unless there is Fate and the Connor family and Skynet just enjoy playing time chess.

Also, if Skynet was any sort of thinking computer, instead of sending the T-1000 to go after John, he would have sent it a week before the T-800 and Kyle arrived. The T-800 was just a decoy. BWAHAHAHAHA

[Remington]

Time Machines in general:

"Let's go back in time and change the past" doesn't work. For example, going back in time and killing Hitler is impossible, because Hitler wasn't killed by you. If you could change the past, the past would have already been changed: you can't change things because you didn't. Also, even if you manage to change some horrible event in the past, the change would result in present-you having no motivation to build a time machine and go back to make the change, because it wouldn't need to be changed. It's a paradox. The only real way to change the past and maintain a stable time loop is to change things so that the end result is identical to having no change at all, at least until the point at which you go back in time.


For example, you could save someone in the past from dying with advanced technology/whatever, but you would have to hide them away and replace them with a believable stand-in, thus allowing history to take the course it already has (and giving you the motivation and reason to build a time machine and go back in time). Only once you returned to the present day with the saved person in tow could you reveal their existence.


Does that make sense at all? I'm not sure I articulated it very well. It's also assuming a single-timeline model, instead of a model where a person going back in time causes a split in the timeline, beginning as soon as they make changes.

PARALLEL UNIVERSES. YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID.

But apparently, because physicists are assholes who can't have any FUN, time travel is somehow a violation of all kinds of terrible shit like "the laws of reality."

But then that's not time travel... it's dimensional travel! Ha!