Sci-Fi Is Science Fiction real?

Imzadi

Imzadi
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Location
USA
Physicists say that there is NO LINEAR TIME. They say that everything happens all at once. It is a difficult concept for me to wrap my mind around. However, that would explain why, as a child, I told my mother that "the Gypsies were my people" and that I used to be "a friend of Leonardo Da Vinci". Children are aware of past lives before society tells them not to talk about such things. It also explains why I could predict some events. :cool::cool::cool::cool:
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Location
Pennsylvania
Physicists say that there is NO LINEAR TIME. They say that everything happens all at once. It is a difficult concept for me to wrap my mind around. However, that would explain why, as a child, I told my mother that "the Gypsies were my people" and that I used to be "a friend of Leonardo Da Vinci". Children are aware of past lives before society tells them not to talk about such things. It also explains why I could predict some events. :cool::cool::cool::cool:
Oooh, I just recently came across an article in Discover magazine that you might find interesting.

Is the Future Already Written? | DiscoverMagazine.com

In short, not everybody agrees with Einstein's block universe. From a sci-fi fan perspective it's an interesting debate to follow because if at the quantum level the future has not yet occurred then how is forward time travel from the present possible? With Ellis, if time travel is possible then one could go back in time and then back forward in time but only up to the most current moment. Instead of "Back to the Future" it'd be "Back to the Current".
 

Tom

An Old Friend
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Location
Gulf Coast
I think that time is always relative to the observer.
To give sentience to every form of matter in the Universe from the sub-atomic quark to the most massive super-giant star. The sub-atomic quark would live its entire life-time sensing its own time in a fraction of a nano-second where white dwarf star might sense its own life-time passing at a relative rate but encompassing billions of years. Either might fathom our time sense as agonizingly slow or brilliantly brief.
On Earth, the crustal plates are moving. With reference to geological time scales they are very active but to us they are still.

As I have explained before, time-travel must also be space travel. The entire Universe is dynamically moving. Not only is erosion and crustal plates moving, the Earth is rotating and wobbling, the Earth is revolving around a barycenter with the Moon and circles the Sun on a barycenter. The Sun is not only circling the Galaxy it moves up and down on it's plane within the Galaxy. The Galaxy is revolving around its barycenter with the Local Group of Galaxies and moving within the Virgo Cluster which is moving within the Virgo Supercluster and all that is moving within the Universe great expansion.

To move in time, with any significant span, all the movement of everything would have to be calculated to the exact distance for the time span involved. Short spurts, which have already been done, do not require destination calculations because the movement is in relative proximity. Extended time jumps in years or decades or millennia would take ever increasing computations for a subject to arrive at a specific location.

On the subject of Forward or Backward time jumps, Forward is the only possible direction one could jump. From a future time one could only jump back to the current location/time. You could not jump back to when you left because the dynamic motion of the Universe has moved that point. The Earth is not at the same place it was one year ago, not even relatively close. If you tried to jump backward you would materialize in space or perhaps within another celestial body.

The movie Parallels and the TV Show Sliders were not time travel. They were probability dimensional travel movies that did not deal with time. One defect in those depictions is that even those jumps could result in a jump to a Earth that no longer is or has had its movement changed. My point is, there could be an argument that one can past jump to a different dimension where the Earth is actually at which wouldn't work.

Time is relative to the observer.
 

Guest50131

Scout
Joined
Feb 14, 2015
Physicists say that there is NO LINEAR TIME. They say that everything happens all at once. It is a difficult concept for me to wrap my mind around. However, that would explain why, as a child, I told my mother that "the Gypsies were my people" and that I used to be "a friend of Leonardo Da Vinci". Children are aware of past lives before society tells them not to talk about such things. It also explains why I could predict some events. :cool::cool::cool::cool:
Physicists regard the world in one way. Marketers another. Botanists another way.

Me, I have learned to listen to what Physicists say like a grain of salt. They are trying to 'define' reality through their own experiential lens, which is only part of the picture.

For me, I can tell you definitively there's linear time, and there's areas where linear time does not exist. This isn't contradictive nor is one more right than the other, it's conditional. and the observational point of view is but one subjective condition which makes it conditional.

That's interesting you made those comments about Da Vinci and the Gypsies. The gypsies are well known for being 'loose' with sex, so I suppose we all have a bit o gypsy in all of us.
 

Guest50131

Scout
Joined
Feb 14, 2015
Oooh, I just recently came across an article in Discover magazine that you might find interesting.

Is the Future Already Written? | DiscoverMagazine.com

In short, not everybody agrees with Einstein's block universe. From a sci-fi fan perspective it's an interesting debate to follow because if at the quantum level the future has not yet occurred then how is forward time travel from the present possible? With Ellis, if time travel is possible then one could go back in time and then back forward in time but only up to the most current moment. Instead of "Back to the Future" it'd be "Back to the Current".
I enjoy the article conceptually, but for me I look at the future like this:

There's the planet's past, present, and future which is - relatively speaking - static. Hitler died due to a gunshot wound to the head in World War 2, Back to the Future came out as a movie in 1984 or so, and Eddie Murphy died in a car accident in 2011 and Paul Walker did in an eerily similar accident not two years afterwards. As for Earth's future timeline - it includes it's destruction around the year 5.5 billion AD due to a solar flare, Zefram Cochrane's first warp flight on April 5th, 2063. and a couple other fixed possibilities

Then there's my future. Where that's largely unwritten. I'm undergoing a metamorphosis from human to my immortal form as Q and have been for the last 4 years, so that's written. I know I will be able to flit through time and space at thought, but I will place emphasis of it to those watching with a snap of my fingers. Other than that, I also know I will come across or develop technology which will permit me to do the flitting through space and time PRIOR to me regaining my abilities.

Now observationally, from 'the outside', I know that I am watched from alternate realities on television shows, virtual reality simulations, holodecks, and other digitally based media, and i am also read about in books, magazines and more as I make choices on a real time basis - and there are other ways I may not fully comprehend that many people in alternate realities regard me as fiction in this world I call fact.

Einstein's block universe is in part, true. Just like the Flat Earthers - there's a place for them as well and their concepts were and are perfectly valid as well.

In any case, I regard science fiction as 'feedback' from A future, not THE future, but A future. They introduce ideas and concepts, I personally filter much of it and dismiss a lot of it as stories I have no desire incorporating in my reality. Sometimes there's important things - technologically, psychologically, philosophically I include after watching these other 'futures'.

Similarly. I regard the past that I am told through stories as 'A past' which led up to this moment. I have a two chosen past timelines that contributed to who I am, Earth has one primary past timeline and infinite other timelines which contributed to the now.

And while scientists try so hard to regain credibility after utterly losing it as the flip flop between dualistic states of matter and anti matter were mirrored with society and democrats vs republicans as well as concepts of religion with the devil and god - and sooo much more.

This dualistic. Contrasting perspective. Has to mature. me. I'm a part of this planet's maturation process, but quite frankly, whether it ends in the entire planet destroying itself in a Terminator war or through a conversion process to becoming Borg, or it is a much happier contrast with something fun, playful, and enjoyable which I currently can't imagine, i sincerely don't care which direction 'this planet's future' takes because I know MY future which is no longer intertwined with the fate of this planet I call Earth.

No matter the case. Linear time does exist in some places and does not in others. Block universes exist in some places and does not in others. Big Bang is relevant in the construction of some universes and not in others. The future is written in some universes, and is somewhat in this one so i can be here, but not so much so to leave me without choice.

My question to you is. Without citing articles. Draw me a picture of your universe, temporally.

Mine and yours do NOT have to look the same and there is NO contradiction with this.

There are, after all, infinite potential universes ...
 
Top Bottom