Not sure if we have this or not but when I was younger I thought of something I called futurenomics where we build sciences on the assumption we will be able to solve a certain problem in the future.

For example, in the past when we hadn't invented engines yet, we could assume we had them, and go on to invent and discuss new things that use engines. Eventually when science invented the engine it would bridge the futurenomics from the past and already be ahead of the curve somewhat.

I think in a lot of peoples minds paradoxes disprove time travel, but I wonder if there can't be a discussion that starts with the assumption of time travel and see what happens when the paradoxes become reality?

I'm under the impression that as you rationalize it, you induct it.

Makes perfect sense to this mind.

I ain't read a thread title this good in SMP since David Sklansky's "Curing and eating babies."

science gave engines, science doesn't approve time travel (in the past)

Q.E.D.

P.S. don't be stupid and post something like...science was wrong before what if it is wrong now regarding time travel. you are better than that.

Overall this would be a very inefficient way to do research and development. Just assuming something is possible doesn't mean that it is. Furthermore, even if (in this case) time travel is possible, there's no guarantee that research done would be relevant.

Then, even if time travel was possible, and the things designed for it were relevant, they would very likely all have to be redone to fit the reality of time travel anyway, since it's highly unlikely we could just guess exactly what it would be like.

Then you have to factor in that from a pure amount of work spent standpoint, it's just terrible, because you don't know what you're working with. To use the car example; building a car is far easier if you know what an engine is, and have one in your possession, than if it hasn't been invented yet and you're just imagining the object. Having the engine first gives you an effective "jumping off point" to guide your R & D.

All these things work against this method of research. I mean, you can drive from Boston to NYC by going through Chicago, but there are easier ways to go about it.

When we get into it, 'this mind', changes.


Link

its a foul not to link methinks, anyways, I'll be reading that thread today.



I'm able to show 'why' science proves it cannot happen even though it can.

We don't need things that we assume are impossible, we can have things we know are possible but we can't do. Perhaps things like this don't happen as much anymore, as we have the resources to do most things we know are possible. But we are able to see that in X amount of years such and such will be possible, so what things can we invent based on this future invention. I think its incredible efficient, and I think waiting for certain advances to begin working on certain technologies incredibly inefficient.

I'm not talking about physical inventions for time travel. I'm talking about the ramifications of time travel on the psyche, the individual, concepts of space and time, what it means to 'teleport', what memories are, the meaning of the past etc.

Yes but if you foreseen some sort of engine and decided it could be the size of a milk crate, you could build all sorts of machines with that same size compartment.

I think Da Vinci did things this way to some degree. Also humans haven't explored the possibility that we might accidentally stumble upon an invention for the present by studying futurenomics for the future.

Well then no worries, people have been doing this already for years in books like this one:

http://www.amazon.ca/Wisdom-Mystic-M.../dp/0139615326

I mean, the contents may or may not *cough* be total bull****, but it seems to be what you're looking for.

waiting..... (hope you touch the entropy problem)

No I'll try to give some examples, say for futurenomics sakes we had a time machine.

Now there some issues that arise with the plausibility of that and the boundaries that our magic invention has, but we will try to talk broad enough not to have to deal with the specifics .

So if we had a time machine that went back to year 1000, if it brought you back in time to the same place on earth you will have teleported because you are now in a different part of the universe since the earth has moved.

But if it brought you to the same position in the universe (relative to what I don't know) in a different time you could use the expanding universe to pick yourself up from the past or future and drop yourself in a different place. These are crude examples.

If we can invent or accept teleporting (which we could prob develop with sheer technology since we would now have 'infinite time' because we can teach future science to the past and redevelop it over billions of years) then you can fly because you can jump off a building and have people float you through the air by interfering with time travel. We begin to break down the laws of physics this way.

Also since we could transport mass there would be access to infinity energy even thought there is only a finite amount.

If you can change your past, then you really continue to live and change for all of time, so the person you are at this present moment isn't the person that you always have been or always will be at this present moment. So our take on what the individual is changes.

Medical science would eventually keep people alive for ever. Infinite would make sense in this way.

You could genetically modify yourself to evolve into something different, eventually anything you wanted.


I think a lot of things make sense like that. They are just example, I'm one mind brainstorming on the futurenomics of time travel, imagine two.

I touched on the why in the last post in the part about having infinite energy even though there is only a finite amount of energy.

As for entropy I'm watching some vids trying to catch up on all that, but to be honest I still need to learn about electricity, magnet, gravity. But I found a good 17ish hour overview im trying to get through.

Doesn't entropy refer to how things can't randomly be shaken into order? I might have the wrong word but I always thought about taking a small handful of pennies and shaking them in both hands and they all begin to line up.

The problem is we have no idea how time travel would work.

This is an issue with everything else we deal with in life, but not time travel. Time travel is different, it can be inducted.

My belief, or thesis or point, is that if you follow the idea of it far enough we will be able to define how it works and 'invent it'. Keep in mind, inventing it now, means that it always was here etc.

You guys may be laughing at him now, but 50 years from now futurenomics is going to be the next big area of research and newguy1234 will go down in history as the guy who coined the term.

That would make this a misuse of the concept of time then I wouldn't have done this in the 'past' and it wouldn't be me. Because we would take time travel further into the past and have it invented then. And if I was able to connect this thread with other threads I started, we would see that we are all connected and its a movement by the consciousness not 'newguy'