would to go BACK in time......

**Cheviac2K** · 06-09-2008, 05:29 PM

In the sixties it was IBM, bet on Secratariat in the seventies, and invest in Microsoft in the eighties. Heh, oil in the mid 2000s!! That with my electronics background and jack of all trades (master of many) would get me a much wealthier life. Happier? Don't know.

**GTP231** · 06-09-2008, 05:33 PM

1929 for me. Nope

**Nhra Firebird** · 06-09-2008, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by GTP231

1929 for me. Nope

you might not need to go back in time to see it. lol

**FSANE** · 06-09-2008, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by GTP231

1929 for me. Nope

You would probably do what your kitty in your avitar is doing.

**FSANE** · 06-09-2008, 06:47 PM

Spaz

**bodyman5000** · 06-09-2008, 08:55 PM

I can do math, I sure as @#$% don't want to go to 1924 so I picked a different year. As this thread is pure bulls anyway I don't feel the need to follow the rules.

**86 IROC-Z** · 06-09-2008, 09:16 PM

1938.

Hell yes I would go back, my car would actually be fast!

**ls1ya** · 06-09-2008, 09:28 PM

i used to say i would go back to the 70's, california smoke pot, do shrooms, do coke, do acid and grow up to be like most of your parents and grandparents good honest people who had fun when they we're young now their either professionals or professional druggies. but all i wish i could go back to is 3 years ago so i could have been better at being a big brother cuz my little bro. is in jail for 2 more years. and then it changed to number one, going back 1 1/2 years ago when i still lived at home. i lost my mom suddenly. and i felt like damn i was doing good, being a good son with a good job, and being somebody in the world and then she died in one week from a kidney infection out of nowhere and i felt like if i had been at home still i could have done something.

**JoshieDoom** · 06-09-2008, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by Spaz

time travel is impossible... it will and can never happen... or we would be currently flooded with tourists fro the future...

thats true as hell

**Smkn_TA** · 06-10-2008, 05:15 AM

That is the most genius thing I have ever heard.

On a side note, I read an article in a science magazine about a device that in theory enabled time travel, but only back to the point at wich the device was built. So if it was built in 2012. Wallah, that is as late as you could go. It was some kind of race track loop in wich one accelerated past the speed of light or something or other. I forget.

rapter34 · 06-10-2008, 05:35 AM

Originally Posted by Smkn_TA

That is the most genius thing I have ever heard.

On a side note, I read an article in a science magazine about a device that in theory enabled time travel, but only back to the point at wich the device was built. So if it was built in 2012. Wallah, that is as late as you could go. It was some kind of race track loop in wich one accelerated past the speed of light or something or other. I forget.

did it look like this?

**Nastyfoot** · 06-10-2008, 05:39 AM

I'd be back in 1913 and my girl would be an old school puritan with the first shaved pussy.

Imagine the predictions you could make? People would be scared shit of you for your worldly insights.

**Nastyfoot** · 06-10-2008, 05:41 AM

Originally Posted by Spaz

time travel is impossible... it will and can never happen... or we would be currently flooded with tourists fro the future...

explain lawdog then.

**johnd** · 06-10-2008, 05:46 AM

Thanks, I'll pass. I've had my life saved by technology far to modern to insure my survival during that time period.

rapter34 · 06-10-2008, 05:52 AM

here comes the inner nerd again but its something to ponder. 'Time travel" is said to occour if you could get going faster than the speed of light. the speed of light, occording to general relitivity, states teh speed of light is as fast as matter can travel. now if matter can only go the speed of light how is the visiable universe, in the best estimates, 93 Billion light years across yet only 14 billion years old? According to general relitivity in 14 billion years matter should only have been able to go 28 billion light years in diamiter. not saying there is any practical means for humans to go faster than the speed of light but it just shows we still have a lot to lern.

Nerd sesion over

**B34M3R** · 06-10-2008, 08:35 AM

Raptor:

Time flux. Its a proven "theory".... The faster you go the slower time travels. One of the reasons that the speed of light is supposedly the fastest anything can travel is because at that speed time stops. Also, it happens to be where matter turns into energy.

The 93 billion "light years" is what it seems like from our perspective, because a light year is the distance light travels in a year.... from OUR perspective... that does not make it an absolute.

rapter34 · 06-10-2008, 08:47 AM

yes it does but if light has been travling for 93 billion light years to reach us on earth in a time span of 14 billion it stands to reason that there has to be a process that alowed this to happen. Most likly in the early formation of the universe. and time flux only works as a matter of persepctive also time flux only works up to the speed of light for the one in persepective. meaning if you where going towards a black hole rapidly incresing in speed until you hit the speed of light at the event horizon time would stop for you and you would never plunge into the black hole. However a ship wating you from far away would see you fall into the black hole. Time is only warped around the perosn under the high volocity. thise of us in normal space time still view things at a constant speed. so time flux really does not show that you can go further in a given time its is simply the persective of time it takes you to get there.

Hope that made scence but bascally we view objects 93 billion LY away. in a universe 14 billion years old. our perpective stays the same viewing both events.

**B34M3R** · 06-10-2008, 08:55 AM

Oh and there is also the little problem that lightspeed + lightspeed doesnt equal lightspeed x 2

Since there is nothing faster then the speed of light, there is a general paradox reguarding being able to measure the distance in "lightyears"... I am fairly sure that a lightyear is actually the number of kilometers light travels in a year from our perspective... thats where the difference comes from. (IE: A lightyear is NOT nessicarly the distance light travels in a "year")

**B34M3R** · 06-10-2008, 08:58 AM

You have to take into effect that our galaxy and solar system have been moving away from the opposite side of the universe for a long time, and that time has been reduced by our "speed", so its only from our perspective that the galaxy has been around 14 billion years....

rapter34 · 06-10-2008, 09:00 AM

a light year is the distance that light travels in a vacuum (space) but yes light travels slower on earth because of resistance and heat. so a light year is the distance that it travels.