Just because something can be described mathematically doesn't necessarily mean it's physically possible. It's entirely plausible that our existence is limited to this specific place and time. As I understand it, time travel to the future seems achievable through relativistic speeds or by utilizing strong gravitational fields.
However, my layman's theory for personal time travel to the past relies on a bit of chance. It suggests that if your current existence were to cease, your information could, by random chance, be 'picked up' by a "past" scientist recreating (random) life somewhere/when else (for whatever reasons). This wouldn't involve information transfer in the traditional sense, avoiding a break in causality, and would feel like the very next moment you experience after ceasing to exist here and now.
Of-course the chances for that happening would be crazy low but just the possibility of it seemed intriguing to me.
Bluestein•6mo ago
And here is where one asks the typical question: How would you know it hasn't happened already, etc., etc. ...
299exp•6mo ago
True. Although you'd need the context. For example we could see it from the other perspective, where we try doing it, whenever the tech allows. Thus proving there is a real possibility. Whoever we'd end up with will have small chances of "coming" from a possible future.
299exp•6mo ago
However, my layman's theory for personal time travel to the past relies on a bit of chance. It suggests that if your current existence were to cease, your information could, by random chance, be 'picked up' by a "past" scientist recreating (random) life somewhere/when else (for whatever reasons). This wouldn't involve information transfer in the traditional sense, avoiding a break in causality, and would feel like the very next moment you experience after ceasing to exist here and now.
Of-course the chances for that happening would be crazy low but just the possibility of it seemed intriguing to me.
Bluestein•6mo ago
299exp•6mo ago