Past time travel

[Kairos]

science is how we understand things its not how things ARE kairos for me atleast science is a man made this a human prospective you know there is always a better theory like a better model for a same phone.

That is not what science is. Science involves creating models that make falsifiable predictions that are tested. If the predictions are falsified, then you need a new model. A better theory in that sense is just a better model of whatever it is you are studying. But the model must make falsifiable claims. The woo woo ideas of multiverses and strings are not falsifiable. They cannot be verified or even tested. That's not science. It's just metaphysics, really.

 

[deliriousScientist]

I know what are you saying i know theory is developed so that it could be changed in upcoming time but you see not everything can be presented as theory its just how things are nature is cruel sometimes and we must accept it nature protects its secret itself and we are just a 3 dimensional brain which understand things in 2D so we just cant say that time travel is impossible science is a man made thing we give meaning to it we must change our way of thinking just as we did in the quantum mechanics which predicts the mass of the electron only 0.00008% accurate but still we gamble on it and most of the scientist are focused on quantum instead of relativity because relativity is hard to understand i am only trying to defend that time travel is possible.
miniature black holes are real the earth itself if compressed into a size of a marble ball will become a black hole of very small size this tells us that the big black holes in center of galaxy is living from many agies and had devoured reality many times thats why its size is bigger and it never gets small because problem is that scientist cant figure out why the event horizen only get bigger not small but now we know even that get figured our because of the hawking radiations we can make a miniature black hole in a fusion reactor who knows it not mandatory that it can only be formed in LHC black holes are 100% possible relativity is proved in many different ways recently i guess on 14 september 2015 we first time discovered that gravity is really ripples in the space time fabric so it concludes that there is possible that a highly dense object can produce massive ripples and a distortion in space and TIME so black holes are possible take and example of neutron star they also distort space and TIME and also its just dont make sense that space and time are unified and we can only move freely in space there are multiple dimensions out there which we cant see because at some places the space is distorted that much that dimension is so small our eye cant see it

i know what you are trying to say that is corrent without even a doubt i know all of that every theory is a hypothesis and is developed so that it can be changed in the future and i know that the theory is dead if it dont predict anything but you know sometimes you just know itself that something is not right there are many evidences to the fact the titor was correct it cant be a coincidence with that you no know one might have even imagined that newtons theory was wrong all along it still hard to believe and there it is.


SORRY IF YOU FOUND ANYTHING WHICH HURTS YOU
~delirious

 

[Kairos]

It's not even a legitimate theory. There is nothing to test. It's non-verifiable and not real science.

 

[Sonix]

Just a general note: Science has to deal with the testable and verifiable and as such is limited to evaluating only those hypotheses that meet that criteria. But being untestable or unverifiable in itself does not make something not so - it just makes it unprovable. It is a limit marking the boundary of our knowledge, not a limit marking the boundary of what may be.

 

[deliriousScientist]

i agree with you sonix

 

[Kairos]

I don't have a problem with people engaging in philosophy and metaphysics. I like theology and metaphysics myself, as well. But I don't disguise my religion as "science" in order to try to fool or brow-beat people into accepting my otherwise unproved and unverifiable religious conjectures. This multiverse woo woo is nothing more than atheists engaging in theology and metaphysics -- i.e. creating their own religion out of whole cloth -- but they can't even admit that's what they are doing so they pretend like this is "science". No, it really is not. American physics is basically in a dark age because of this atheist nonsense.

Maybe it's true; or maybe not and I am right about about there being only one universe. Not sure how you prove any of that kind of thing. That's all metaphysical discourse. Keep it separate from science. I understand why atheists feel the need to believe in this type of thing. I just think they need to be honest about it.

I don't happen to believe in multiverses. Neither do I appreciate when people act like it's just "science". No, it certainly is not.

 

[samzeman]

Some theories can't be tested easily until we make a discovery of a new phenomenon. For example, theoretically in our current widely accepted model of particle stuff, a monopolar magnetic particle is possible, but we haven't found one or a way to make one yet. That doesn't mean scientists discount that theory, it just means they are waiting on proof or disproof, and as with many theories, they'll take it as a given that nothing is 100% proved for now, in some areas at least.

The metaphysics behind a model is important because it can be used to predict how things will interact; if the prediction is right, that means the model is more likely to be correct, and so more conclusions can be drawn about what might be hypothetically possible. For example, gravitational waves were supported by the theory / model of relativity (and originally hypothesised in 1905 even) before the invention of lasers in 1960. Einstein didn't discount the gravitational waves just because there was no way to test for them at the time, nor because he couldn't even imagine how to test for them. He just tested all the parts of the model he could, and predicted what other interactions were untestable. Since then, we've found that it holds up elsewhere too, with gravitational waves specifically, using technology Einstein didn't know would exist.

The effects around perception and the collapse of a waveform are due to one of a few possible situations, with the many-worlds theory being the one most people like, for obvious reasons, but with the other ones being listed on this page: Wave function collapse - Wikipedia

It's equally likely that there are multiple splitting worlds at each point in which a decision is made, as any other of the quantum theories, at the moment as far as science in general can see. We are just waiting on someone to devise an experiment which can prove or disprove any of the theories. The claims are falsifiable, almost all claims are, but we just don't have the method yet, just as Einstein didn't have ways to falsify his predictions of gravitational waves, nor could he have ever predicted what form that experiment would take. And yet, it was still science.

The many-worlds theories did come from an experiment. They can, eventually, probably be falsified or verified. It's a theory, and if we /could/ falsify or prove it entirely, it would be a knowable fact. A theory is an educated guess. The degree to which the guess is educated differs. It's okay to have a theory that you think you might be able to falsify or verify eventually, but you can't yet.

 

[Kairos]

That's not a theory. A monopole is a conjectured possibility from a theory we have not disproven. Black holes were like that too until we finally observed them.

The multiverse conjecture (it's not a theory for the love of God stop calling it that) is the result of a particular interpretation of the mathematics of quantum physics. There are other much more plausible interpretations. It's not a prediction of quantum physics like a black hole is prediction from special and general relativity.

 

[samzeman]

It's like if we'd developed a bunch of equations around a few measurable experiments involving gravity and the speed of light, and then made a model out of them. Except that is what we did, and it turned out to be right.

That's a direct parallel to developing a bunch of equations around a few measurable (and sketchy) experiments involving perception and waveforms, and then making a model out of them. Or in this case, making like 8 credible models and predicting how they differ in certain situations. For example, if time travel is possible.

 

[Kairos]

There are zero experiments that confirm or corroborate the multiverse conjecture. It's a not a theory. It's an interpretation of the mathematics of quantum physics. Not even a very plausible one either.