No bullshit - I am from 2039 and I'm here to help you

As a matter of pure science I would like to know who here believes that time travel is a real possibility?

I do.

For those of you that answer no I have no further questions, but for the folks that believe it may be possible I would like to suggest that "IF" time travel is possible then you may want to consider that the people well into our future may have made that discovery and are visiting our time now.

One of the problems I have with the multiple timeline theory is: If going back in time splits off a new timeline at the point of exit/entry, how does one actually end up on a timeline where the time traveler arrives from somewhere (somewhen?) else? It's like the reverse of the "quantum immortality" thought experiment mixed with a bit of Solipsism, but with an extra dose of circular logic.

The alternative (time travel via CTCs) means you can only go back as far as when the CTC was created, but you might be able to get around this if some of the ideas concerning cosmic strings are correct. After all, you'd only need to send a single self-assembling seed machine back to the early universe, and you then have access to all of time and space. A potential reason for a lack of visible time travellers is because they don't remember seeing time travellers in their past and want to avoid a paradox. (Assuming it's even possible to create one if you tried)

The simpler alternative is they were wrong about cosmic strings, or the multiple timeline problem above is correct. We won't really know until we create the "first" time machine or acquire one from an existing time traveller.

The other observation is that I have not heard from anyone else that has come into contact with being that are not human.

For this reason I will soon bid you all farewell.

Define contact?
 
I think everyone wants proof rather than an explanation of the machine. I, like others would like to see a photograph of the machine.

In terms of your theory Michael, as soon as the first Worldline is created a near infinite stream of Worldline are created and generated at that very moment, and the generated number rises exponentially as time progresses. Thus a minute is far to long

Do you know if the later, released machines will have the tracking function?
If so, don't you think your government could use this information to create time police and hold a temporal machine monopoly? (Like if someone wants to veer off onto a Worldline where a particular famous person never existed, and governments use this to keep the technology to themselves, like what Obama is doing with guns)
OK, here is a good question, how come heat forms around the machine?
When will you show us proof such as photos of the machine?
 
Hello. I come from 2039 and as you may have seen in John Titor's preductions, future looks bad, but I'm here to try and change it. I'm not like Titor. I will be happy to answer any questions to prove I'm from future and I need to get my message heard.
Okay, people, it has become clear to me that nothing I’ll say could convince you I’m from future, but maybe I shouldn’t be angry because when I imagine myself in 2014., I wouldn’t believe a ‘time traveler’ no matter what. I’ll be able to leave at Sunday and I’ll do so. Now I’ll reveal everything you could find interesting I know about time travel.
When the guy with The Walking Dead profile picture asked me do I believe in the worldline theory, I said I do, but I do not think it works like you may think. I could never believe that every good man is a bad man in another worldline because I’m a Christian. My friend once described me how he thinks worldlines function:
For every minute that has passed in the universe history there is a different worldline. During the first minute of the universe history there was one worldline:
@ (that’s the symbol I’ll use)
During the second minute of universe history, another worldline was created.
@@In the second, original worldline was 1:01 minutes in universe history and in the first there was 0:01. You get where I’m going? So he thinks that, when we time travel, we go to the worldline in which de desired time is happening now.
This is not a completely believable theory because that would mean that divergences are based on the worldline which has time travel and that is not only one worldline and some worldline can’t be divergent on two different ways.
Are there sets of worldlines with different divergences?
divergence 0.3 - @@@@@@
divergence 0.2 - @@@@@@
divergence 0.1 - @@@@@@
divergence 0.0 - @@@@@@ (of course, there are divergences between 0.1 and 0.2, this is simplistic)
My time machine is not like something from Back to the Future. It’s closer to TARDIS. It’s a big, white box with a tough door (you know, those doors on spaceships, no air can get through them). On the top of it is a shining cone which is connected to the power supply, a device on the right of the machine. On the left is an X-ray vent connected with a lot of big and smaller devices around the machine. There are also some things in the rear, connected with the console in the middle, which has a LOT of cables connected to it. There’s not very much space around, but there is enough to sleep if you would travel far in the past. There are also some sensors all around the top of the machine which scan the environment and help the machine blend in it. As I stated, you cannot always go anytime. It’s a wormhole thing, you gotta have the right wormhole to travel somewhere. When you travel to past, you must go back to your time. You do not return to the very moment when you set off. You return in the time where as much time has passed as that has passed for you on your travels (if you want to return to the very time you set off, you won’t return to your worldline – yours has moved on.
Maybe it’s smart to mention that these 10 machines aren’t the first ones ever produced – government had them before, but not everyone could’ve used them, just scientists when they need something from past.
These 10 models aren’t final models, they’re test models. Final models will look much better (not so much cables everywhere). I can only use this until the September of 2039 (it was June when I left off). I had to sign a contract and take full responsibility for everything that happens to me on my travels. Before that machine sets off for somewhere it sends a signal to the base saying when and where I go. It also sends a signal when you return. This is used to help people if they get stuck somewhere and to monitor them. Somewhere in 2040’s scientists plan on mass producing time machines.
I told you I’m here to warn you about the possibility of nuclear war and raise the awareness of the dangers that nuclear weapons bear. I pray to God that nuclear war doesn’t happen in this and many other worldlines.
I wouldn’t just mess around with stuff like nuclear war just to scare people. If you don’t believe me, that’s OK, but please, don’t post on this thread.


I'M A WOMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I disagree that it's because we've become jaded or pissy towards these kind of people. I honestly think it's just that you can only show up with your hands empty so many times before it's just plain boring.
Well, the Titorites have died down a lot over the years, the craze has about run out. Thus you din't see as many copycats.

Now it's all about Ancient Aliens. There could be a time-travel fable in that.

Cue Eddie Pengaly.

Harte

It's actually starting to pick up again. Lots of Titor mentions on Twitter and Youtube daily.
 
As a matter of pure science I would like to know who here believes that time travel is a real possibility?

...

For this reason I will soon bid you all farewell.

With my limited understanding of the physics required, I believe it to be possible. Perhaps not practical, but possible.

There are comments in this thread and elsewhere that chastise people like me for being closed-minded and presenting a persona that would "drive time travelers away". Comments saying we need to be welcoming of those kinds of folks because "you just never know"...

I get the feeling that many people here don't really know what being open-minded means, and how it's very different from just blindly accepting what someone tells you. This video illustrates the approach I try to take when presented with things like this:

 
I do not want you or anyone else to blindly accept reports of highly strange issues, but I am suggesting that we all turn down the smart ass remarks directed toward to people willing to put their ass on the line by sharing what they may know to be true.

I do not assume that your intentions are anything but honestly good.

Just think before we speak and if you think the person is full of banana cream pie...just think and do not speak.

Trust me, other people are thinking the same without saying a word.
 
As a matter of pure science I would like to know who here believes that time travel is a real possibility?

...

For this reason I will soon bid you all farewell.

With my limited understanding of the physics required, I believe it to be possible. Perhaps not practical, but possible.

There are comments in this thread and elsewhere that chastise people like me for being closed-minded and presenting a persona that would "drive time travelers away". Comments saying we need to be welcoming of those kinds of folks because "you just never know"...

I get the feeling that many people here don't really know what being open-minded means, and how it's very different from just blindly accepting what someone tells you. This video illustrates the approach I try to take when presented with things like this:

I do not disagree with the video that you posted. That video explains how "believing" or "disbelieving" is open-minded in comparison to "accepting" or "rejecting" things without evidence. If Will expressed a belief in time travelers and didn't make any claims like "Time travelers must be real!", this wouldn't show close-mindedness. From my perspective, Will never implied that he believes in time travelers. He was merely proposing the idea to remain respectful to those who make time travel claims. Respectfulness and open-mindedness are two completely different things. I personally agree that we should be respectful toward those who make time travel claims (as I expressed in a previous post) and I don't believe in time travelers.

As Num7 explained in his forum rules post, he mandated parallel topics for debunkers to maintain productivity in the original thread: "This way people who enjoy the original topic will be free to ask questions, discuss and engage in the "story" of the thread without getting their posts repeatedly ripped apart by someone who doesn't buy it." By being respectful, we can encourage everyone to continue to engage in the story, so I will continue to take my respectful approach.
 
As a matter of pure science I would like to know who here believes that time travel is a real possibility?

...

For this reason I will soon bid you all farewell.

With my limited understanding of the physics required, I believe it to be possible. Perhaps not practical, but possible.

There are comments in this thread and elsewhere that chastise people like me for being closed-minded and presenting a persona that would "drive time travelers away". Comments saying we need to be welcoming of those kinds of folks because "you just never know"...

I get the feeling that many people here don't really know what being open-minded means, and how it's very different from just blindly accepting what someone tells you. This video illustrates the approach I try to take when presented with things like this:

I do not disagree with the video that you posted. That video explains how "believing" or "disbelieving" is open-minded in comparison to "accepting" or "rejecting" things without evidence. If Will expressed a belief in time travelers and didn't make any claims like "Time travelers must be real!", this wouldn't show close-mindedness. From my perspective, Will never implied that he believes in time travelers. He was merely proposing the idea to remain respectful to those who make time travel claims. Respectfulness and open-mindedness are two completely different things. I personally agree that we should be respectful toward those who make time travel claims (as I expressed in a previous post) and I don't believe in time travelers.

As Num7 explained in his forum rules post, he mandated parallel topics for debunkers to maintain productivity in the original thread: "This way people who enjoy the original topic will be free to ask questions, discuss and engage in the "story" of the thread without getting their posts repeatedly ripped apart by someone who doesn't buy it." By being respectful, we can encourage everyone to continue to engage in the story, so I will continue to take my respectful approach.

I think I've been respectful.

Posting "dude, you're totally full of shit. Tits or GTFO" is disrespectful; pointing out flaws in a story in order to give the OP an opportunity to address them is not.

We can get in to semantics about what is and is not debunking, but the spirit of Num7's rule (which I helped come up with and articulate) was that people who want to go full-bore on a guy (posting paragraph upon paragraph of evidence against a claim) need to do so in their own thread.

The purpose was not to keep all the head-nodders and enablers in the original thread and all the people who notice flaws or question someone's veracity in another, but to designate a place where people could rip someone's claims to shreds without dominating or breaking the conversation for others. I've not done that, nor do I intend to. My two posts were enough to satisfy my hypothesis that this guy is lying.

Expecting any and all "something smells fishy here" posts to be shuttered away in some secondary thread that everyone can ignore is counter to the purpose of this site.

Edit -- Being respectful does not mean we need to fall all over ourselves making someone feel welcome just because they have a half-baked story and want a laugh. If someone has something to share, they'll share it. After all, they did bend the laws of space and time to get here, right? Is jokingly referring to this guy as the dad from the Brady Bunch really going to scare someone like that off?
 

Top