The Man From 2036: John Titor, The IBM 5100 And the Nets Greatest Unsolved Mystery

[andy06shake]

Would he have created a new branch in time or just be following it as it would always have been?

But yes, every return to your present would be more like Sliders, always different. Sometimes almost your original but never exactly.

Well, according to the story, he claimed that time travel doesn't overwrite a single timeline.

But that each trip creates or moves you into a slightly different worldline.
 
He described reality as a set of parallel timelines that are similar but not identical.

So when he traveled to the past, he wasn't changing his own origin timeline, but entering a new branch with small divergences(around 1 or 2%).

Which i suppose, would loosely align with the many-worlds interpretation in physics.

So yeah, kind of like the premise to Sliders from what i can recall of the show.

[BeyondKnowledge]

Well, according to the story, he claimed that time travel doesn't overwrite a single timeline.

But that each trip creates or moves you into a slightly different worldline.
 
He described reality as a set of parallel timelines that are similar but not identical.

So when he traveled to the past, he wasn't changing his own origin timeline, but entering a new branch with small divergences(around 1 or 2%).

Which i suppose, would loosely align with many-worlds interpretations in physics.

So yeah, kind of like the premise to Sliders from what i can recall of the show.

But time is not like going back 50 years and remixing a song so there is a new version. You can have the old ones and the new one in the song collection.

Time is like having one copy with no backup. Any changes made in the past have always been there because that is how we all perceive it. Paralle time streams are just for working out theoretical navagation, much like space time only exists in mathmatics.

When one thing changes in the stream you are in, everything else in all streams after the cause are changed accordingly.
All streams are fluid and you can't go back unless you stop yourself from time traveling before you first did so.

[andy06shake]

But time is not like going back 50 years and remixing a song so there is a new version. You can have the old ones and the new one in the song collection.

Time is like having one copy with no backup. Any changes made in the past have always been there because that is how we all perceive it. Paralle time streams are just for working out theoretical navagation, much like space time only exists in mathmatics.

When one thing changes in the stream you are in, everything else in all streams after the cause are changed accordingly.
All streams are fluid and you can't go back unless you stop yourself from time traveling before you first did so.

He mostly argued for multiple worldlines, where traveling shifts you into a slightly different timeline rather than rewriting one fixed history.

As to changes in the stream you are in, affecting other streams, I would not care to speculate without a working time machine. 

Where space-time, being a mathematical model, is concerned.

Well, yeah, but it's meant to describe something physically real.

As to that last part, "you can't go back unless you stop yourself from time traveling before you first did so."

Seems like a paradox.

But i imagine paradox, or the creation of such, would be the main point of contention where time travel is concerned.

[chr0naut]

1st and probably the primary point is that we know the physics of time. It doesn't and cannot work like Titor suggested.

The second point is that we can now simulate computing devices and run them as virtual machines, which means that there's no reasson to travel back in time to get any previous, simpler model of computer. They can all be virtualized - even analogue and neural nets.

[andy06shake]

1st and probably the primary point is that we know the physics of time. It doesn't and cannot work like Titor suggested.

The second point is that we can now simulate computing devices and run them as virtual machines, which means that there's no reasson to travel back in time to get any previous, simpler model of computer. They can all be virtualized - even analogue and neural nets.

Yeah, as far as i can determine, nothing in established science supports Titor's style of branching controllable timeline travel.

It was a great story at the time, though. 

[chr0naut]

Yeah, as far as i can determine, nothing in established science supports Titor's style of branching controllable timeline travel.

It was a great story at the time, though. 

I think the multi-worlds hypothesis (Marvel and DC comics versions) were frequently referenced as explication of how various paradoxical situations could be bypassed.

Of course the easiest refutation of such ideas is that they would lead to instantaneous infinite bifurcations into 'newly calved' entire universes, leading to questions of where the mass and energies, required in such world building, would come from.

[BeyondKnowledge]

He mostly argued for multiple worldlines, where traveling shifts you into a slightly different timeline rather than rewriting one fixed history.

As to changes in the stream you are in, affecting other streams, I would not care to speculate without a working time machine. 

Where space-time, being a mathematical model, is concerned.

Well, yeah, but it's meant to describe something physically real.

As to that last part, "you can't go back unless you stop yourself from time traveling before you first did so."

Seems like a paradox.

But i imagine paradox, or the creation of such, would be the main point of contention where time travel is concerned.

I have never said there could not be parallel time branches. Only that as we precieve time, there is only one. 

The fact that the non traveling observer has only one timeline has to be considered. They could not possibly precieve any changes because to them everything is as it always has been. 

Now for the traveler, there is also one personal timeline. Their many adventures would not exist simultaneously like changing a TV channel but rather like painting a scene on canvas with paint. When you change part of the painting, you can't just go back if you decide you made a wrong decision. You could repaint that part again but it will not be exactly the same. But with time, one drop of paint can change everything on the canvas and not just where it hits the painting. 

And yes, spacetime is a mathmaticle model that is a simplification of real events that is only used to make the calculations easier.  It works in most cases but doesn't cover all events or actions.

[andy06shake]

I have never said there could not be parallel time branches. Only that as we precieve time, there is only one. 

The fact that the non traveling observer has only one timeline has to be considered. They could not possibly precieve any changes because to them everything is as it always has been. 

Now for the traveler, there is also one personal timeline. Their many adventures would not exist simultaneously like changing a TV channel but rather like painting a scene on canvas with paint. When you change part of the painting, you can't just go back if you decide you made a wrong decision. You could repaint that part again but it will not be exactly the same. But with time, one drop of paint can change everything on the canvas and not just where it hits the painting. 

And yes, spacetime is a mathmaticle model that is a simplification of real events that is only used to make the calculations easier.  It works in most cases but doesn't cover all events or actions.

Suffice to say, even if you could undertake such a journey, complications are apt to arise...

And pulling at threads is never a good idea.

Spacetime isn't just a convenient simplification through.

It's a well-tested framework that underpins General Relativity.

As to it working in most cases, certainly hope so, considering modern cosmology and astrophysics depend heavily on it.

Vital, but incomplete...

The ticket being a unified theory.

I wonder if that will ever materialise in our lifetime?

[quintessentone]

Suffice to say, even if you could undertake such a journey, complications are apt to arise...

And pulling at threads is never a good idea.

Spacetime isn't just a convenient simplification through.

It's a well-tested framework that underpins General Relativity.

As to it working in most cases, certainly hope so, considering modern cosmology and astrophysics depend heavily on it.

Vital, but incomplete...

The ticket being a unified theory.

I wonder if that will ever materialise in our lifetime?

For now it appears time travel by humans, in any measurable way, should still be relegated to the science fiction genre.

----

"Time travel is theoretically possible through the manipulation of spacetime, a four-dimensional fabric combining the three dimensions of space with time as the fourth dimension.  According to Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity, mass and energy curve this fabric, creating gravity, which can distort the passage of time. 
Time Dilation and Future Travel Traveling into the future is scientifically proven and occurs through two mechanisms:

• Velocity Time Dilation: The faster an object moves through space, the slower it moves through time relative to a stationary observer. For example, an astronaut traveling near the speed of light would age significantly slower than people on Earth. 
  
• Gravitational Time Dilation: Time passes more slowly in stronger gravitational fields. GPS satellites, which orbit in weaker gravity than Earth's surface, experience time slightly faster than clocks on the ground, requiring mathematical corrections for accuracy. 
  

Theoretical Past Travel Traveling to the past is far more speculative and faces significant theoretical hurdles:

• Closed Timelike Curves (CTCs): General relativity allows for solutions where spacetime curves back on itself, potentially allowing an object to return to its own past without exceeding the speed of light. 
  
• Wormholes: Hypothetical tunnels connecting distant points in spacetime could theoretically connect different eras if one mouth is accelerated or placed in a strong gravity field. 
  
• Causality Paradoxes: Past travel violates the law of causality, leading to paradoxes such as the grandfather paradox, where changing the past prevents the traveler's existence. 
  

While time travel into the future is a verified phenomenon of physics, traveling to the past remains a theoretical possibility constrained by unknown physical laws and energy requirements." (LLM)

[Byrd]

It's hard to believe that we're coming up on the 30th anniversary of this hoaxer (1998 was the first time he posted, and we were reacting to his posts over on ATS) ... and it's still around.

I was one of several at ATS who tracked him down to his residence.

From the laughable equipment pictures to the hilarious "need" for an old style computer because (from the first group of messages) to correct the Y2K computer problem and prevent a war, geeks and military folks around the world were constantly amazed that this had any sort of traction.