Time Travel Into the Past Might Be Possible (Not Requiring the Help of God)

"And how would the government make sure that they left?..." The people could all adopt the same identity. Plastic surgery could be very advanced in the centuries to come. "By your definition of time as a dimension, it would have to be spontaneous, occurring throughout the 'fourth dimension' all at once, because it all affects each other, like dominoes, but faster than the speed of light...." The air was displaced, which is exactly what would happen if you moved from one plane to another. It would switch places with when you once were when you began time-travelling. Also, perhaps there is some factor of time travelling through itself, like, "When something disturbs time at one time, then this disruption ripples through the future from that time twice as fast as normal time itself." Thus, if someone in the future managed to learn that a ripple was coming using some advanced technology, he could stop the person from initially going back in time, stopping and undoing the ripple. The domino effect doesn't necessarily have to be destructive; it could just cause changes to the future. "Conservation of Mass states that mass can't be created or destroyed; Conservation of Energy states that energy can't be created or destroyed. By turning it into the other, it is 'destroyed' There must always be the same amount of matter in a closed system. This would change that." The people who wrote these laws wouldn't be aware of the process of changing matter into energy, as first described by Einstein. http://en.wikipedia.org... According to Einstein's theory, mass is energy, energy is mass, and there'd simply have to be a certain equation relating all energy and all mass. "Nowhere in any definition is there any rule that you can go through all dimensions forwards and backwards. It only mentions time in mathematics, which is not always applicable to life. You have no argument." And your argument still fails to be backed up. I say that your claims that time cannot be reversed are unfounded, as you have no sources or real reasoning to back them up. "That was a Sumerian-Akkadian translation dictionary. It didn't have definitions, just words in different languages. That is a different type of dictionary, which would not have defined any words such as 'sun'. You say that we now know that the Sun used to be a big shining disk in the sky. Definitions are not worthless, ever. I just used one for dimension, refuting your argument. It works here to remove any argument about going back in time. You can't 'reverse-transverse' time." That was a typo. Sorry. Anyways, they still thought of the Sun as something it wasn't. But they were wrong. Just as you might be wrong now. And as I already said, because you might be wrong, this allows the possibilities of a lot of stuff, which results in the possibility of time travel backwards. "My point is that your point is meaningless. In that case, you say that anything is debatable? So your existence is debatable? Whether or not you are here legally is debatable? This means that calling something debatable adds nothing to this argument. This does not mean that we can allow for the possibility of time travel." Not everything is debatable. Just the things where neither side can agree and neither side can prove their point. Such as most of the ideas we are discussing. And whenever a statement can go either way, it is in my favor, because it allows for possibilities, which are all I need. "Our three dimensions (height, width, and length) are gone through by movement. This movement always travels through time at the same rate, but through space at a varying rate. The two are not related in any way." According to some theories, which are always in my favor, the faster you are going, the slower time passes. Movements might not always go through time at the same rate. Space and time are related. Time can be manipulated. "For obvious reasons, I can conclude that you are not a dictionary. You can't define things reliably like a dictionary can. http://www.merriam-webster.com...... define: to determine or identify the essential qualities or meanings of Definitions define everything by definition. That you can not sanely argue against." But I can argue that definitions are not always right. And possibilities are always in my favor. "Time vanishes just as quickly as it is created. It just ceases to exist. It is like in a Word Document, without the Undo. It knows what is it at any given time, but not what it was. It knows what it is because it is on the screen, being used, as everything in the universe is at any given moment." Actually, I think that is like a Word Document, but with the Undo. You give no reason why to disable the Undo button, so I'm just going to allow for the possibility of it still being there. "By your definition of time, it exists at all times, so this time would travel through all dimensions at once, being in the same group of dimensions. It would be instant. If we use my definition, I win, through reasons previously stated with my definition. Take your pick on which to argue." There is a different individual time out of the dimension of time at any given time. This is not necessarily "instant". I'll pick the fact that there are a number of possible definitions for time, including both mine and yours, and possibilities are always in my favor. "In conclusion, I have rebutted all of your theories every time. I would like to add one more final counter. In your definition, time is still there, all at the same... time? You can see how this is ironic beyond either any definition or possibility, right? This defeats its own purpose. It can't be in more that once place at the same time. You still haven't beaten my time-space-rupture point. If you dare say that it would be in a different universe, that has no interaction with our current one, then it is not going back in time; it is going to a universe that is like it in any way." My definition: "a nonspatial continuum that is measured in terms of events which occur between past and present and future" Every moment is its own time, just like every point has its own depth. Time is just another dimension. And you haven't proved that it would rupture. I argued that it could simply be a ripple of change, and you didn't refute it. I will dare to say that it might be a different universe, and you would still be going back in time. Here is my explanation: Say that you have a coordinate plane where X represents time, and Y represents the value of alternate universes. You are on (2009,0). Now, say you travel back in time ten years. You translate 10 years to the left. However, in doing this, you cross into alternate universe 1. You are translated one universe up. You traveled through time and alternate universes; thus, you traveled through time. Conclusion: Every one of your arguments still allows for the possibility of time being traversable, thus allowing for time travel backwards. You give no reason to exclude an Undo button. My fourth dimension storage hypothesis still stands. You give no reason for time to be purely one-way. You talk about time tourists, but I have come up with many brilliant solutions to this problem, including alternate universes, new identities, and energy. You have failed to refute these properly. Thank you, and thank you to the voters who read this. Vote PRO, because possibilities are in my favor, and my opponent has allowed for MANY possibilites. Campbell's chicken, noodle soup. Poss-i-bili-ties.