Time travel has fundamental flaws with it

Take the theory that you can go back but not change anything - impossible. The mere fact that you GO back means you changed something. Be it the light/energy/sound you block from reaching its intended target, to the heat your body pumps out, to the oxygen you take in and the co2 you put out. By just being there you change something, so the "go back but not change anything" is flawed

Your 'each infinitely small step of time (from here on just refered to as a second) is a seperate universe' theory also has a glaring hole in it. If that is indeed true, then either all the universes were created at once, or the conservation of matter theory is wrong. Either way, you say you can go back and change the present. IMPOSSIBLE GIVEN YOUR THEORY. If each second is its own universe, then the universes aren't linked together. Meaning what changes in one, will *not* propagate to the next, as they are 'still' shots. This also means that you can't go back to one, as you will have altered a 'still' shot of the universe. Assuming you could alter the still shot, you will exist for a second in only one of the universes, and then cease to exist, as the universes are still shots, and time has already 'passed by' that universe

And thats ignoring the stupidly obvious question of why would there be infinite universes for each second of time? Everything else in this universe that has thus far been discovered either a) has a purpose, or b) is the result of something. Every theory of time travel I have seen (infinite universes, multiple dimensions, etc...) give no reason as to why. What would have caused it, or what reason would it have for existing

We need a physiological conversation subforum

To expand on Kllrnohj's post, I would like to further debunk the 'now' universe theory, as this would make motion an illusion. Let me explain, Imagine an arrow in flight, take a picture of it. Look at the still, one frame picture, the arrow is not moving, take another picture when the arrow is in another location, and again it is not moving in your picture, therfore, the arrow is not moving for an infinite amount of 'now's for the same reason, so we conclude the arrow never moves, however, obviously, the arrow has indeed moved. Making the 'now' universe's impossible.

To somebody who said it doesnt break matter/energy conservation laws to create anti matter and matter in equal amounts, i full agree with you, however I just wonder where we would get the stuff to make it in the first place. =P

Yes, but if you look at them in sequential order, like a roll of film, the 'now' universe, exists instantaniusly. Thus, disproving your post.

Psuedo, you coulda edited yuor post, then posted that you edited in SAX =D

Oh come on pseudo, if you imagine spacetime as a static 4-dimensional "loaf", everything is static at any given point along the time dimension, yet things do not remain static along the space dimensions if movement along the time axis is allowed.
Basically, what some18kanal0n3 said.

on the whole time travel issue i think that the future is happening at the same time as the present. And that they have already traveled back into time so they can not mess anything up. would explain better but it is a little difficult for me to explain my thinking of it.

So you are suggesting time moves through us, not we travel through time?

Sure, if you like. I'm certainly not offering any explanation for how we get the idea of time, though.

I agree with Lafferjm. The future is happening, the past is happening, it is always happening and always will happen.

btw everybody, I dont nessacarily beleive everything I say, I just say it to make people question what they beleive. To have some debating continuosly going, so its not a mutual agreement. because thats just not fun at all.

New Question I throw out: what shape is the universe

There's this thing called an edit button.

where did that come from exactly? I think we all know about the edit button.

You posted within 6 mins of yourself. Just edit and say that you edite foyur post in "$topic" through SAX. (I got ridiculed for posted 6 hours after myself a while ago =X ) Its not the first time you did it either. Anywasy, we've gotten way off topic. And I mean way off topic mates. And once again, I'm at the source ~_~... All new user names should be "watch out! I go off topic!" XD. Some one split this topic, yeh? (topic idea in Post Topic)

I haven't had tim to read through the thread, so I do not know if this has been suggested already, but I think that there is a different 'instance' of the universe for every infintismally (sp?) small unit of time.

So essentially there are infinite universes, each slightly behind the other...

Haha! See, kinda like my "still frame" statement in my Time and Parrallel Universes theory. (spending too much time typing in SAX, gotta type here!)

We don't live in a still universe, we move right? I was just sayin, the ones in back are produced at the lowest possible unit fo time. They still live and move.

I was watching Doctor Who today. The Doctor said, a new parralell universe is created at every decision, run the light, or stop? two universe will be created, or at least be different, yours and another. Heh, hard to explain, perfect the way he said it though

That is what i posted ages ago. YOU IDEA STEALER! jkjk

oo... well, blame the Doctor!

That actually sounds a lot like the "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics (yes, I'm a physics geek).

So I guess you didn't read my reasoning for why that is an utterly stupid theory either