How Time Travel Is Possible!

[MuniAddict]

A cool theory that explains how time travel can occur.:cool:

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/575845/

[adjuggler]

but then again it never happened... we would know :) lolz at paradoxi

[Goats_On_Unicycles]

I've read about how you can go back in time, thoretically. It's crazy to say the least.

I wants to do it, Lol.

[tobbogonist]

Time travel is has always been possible but you can only go forward at the speed of life.

[oneisenough]

wow...i want to see what comes of this...i couldn't really follow the mathematical/scientific end of it, but i could see what they mean with the future messages...pretty cool.

[Tyler_N]

neat

[beeper]

Time travel is has always been possible but you can only go forward at the speed of life.


Erhm, speed of light, but yea.

I don't quite support what this person is doing.. I think he should let time be.. Because if he does actually successfully build this machine, there is a 50% chance that it will be completely unstable, and we won't be able to control it.
There is also a 50% chance that it will be a remarkable milestone in science, and will be a success, but that is assuming we can control, and contain the machine. I'm sorry, but that is not a percentage I would be willing to act upon.

This person possibly has the power to potentially ruin the earth for everyone..


We don't know for sure if it will work, probably not, but if it does, we just might be screwed.

[adjuggler]

Erhm, speed of light, but yea.

I don't quite support what this person is doing.. I think he should let time be.. Because if he does actually successfully build this machine, there is a 50% chance that it will be completely unstable, and we won't be able to control it.
There is also a 50% chance that it will be a remarkable milestone in science, and will be a success, but that is assuming we can control, and contain the machine. I'm sorry, but that is not a percentage I would be willing to act upon.

This person possibly has the power to potentially ruin the earth for everyone..


We don't know for sure if it will work, probably not, but if it does, we just might be screwed.
Dude if he is going to do it, it has already been built. You can't stop what is and already will be. But we know now, people haven't come back in time and told us how to go forward. (again we'd know)

[glen]

Erhm, speed of light, but yea.

I don't quite support what this person is doing.. I think he should let time be.. Because if he does actually successfully build this machine, there is a 50% chance that it will be completely unstable, and we won't be able to control it.
There is also a 50% chance that it will be a remarkable milestone in science, and will be a success, but that is assuming we can control, and contain the machine. I'm sorry, but that is not a percentage I would be willing to act upon.

This person possibly has the power to potentially ruin the earth for everyone..


We don't know for sure if it will work, probably not, but if it does, we just might be screwed.

Haha, wow! Care to explain where you got your statistics from?

[catinabag1]

this is the current theory. don't bug me. lol.

time travel by traveling at the speed of light is impossible because we have mass. only things that are massless can travel at the speed of light because your mass increases as you get closer to the speed of light. as you approach the speed of light, your mass approaches infinity and therefore takes an infinite amount of energy to accelerate you further. the only way to travel through time is by wormholes but they are highly unstable, collapsing the instant they form. they only way to produce a stable wormhole is to enlarge a theoretic subatomic sized black hole and stabilize it using dark energy. this seems HIGHLY improbable to me and also produces random results. i don't see time travel as an option. as adjuggler has said, if time travel was possible, people would travel back to our time and we would know that time travel exists. in fact time travel and the rest of our technology could have been invented thousands of years ealier if we could travel back in time and share our technology with past civilizations. since we don't currently have haven't had time travel, it can not exist.

[monkeyman]

You can get infinite energy...you just need to use complex numbers. My teacher showed me how.

[tobbogonist]

Erhm, speed of light, but yea.



what? no! speed of life.

beeper.

[catinabag1]

You can get infinite energy...you just need to use complex numbers. My teacher showed me how.
are you threatening me?!
http://www.blowing-kisses.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/normal_db_beavis_cornholio1.gif

[kington99]

what? no! speed of life.



agreed, I am always travelling through time

[mcnuggets300]

Erhm, speed of light, but yea.

I don't quite support what this person is doing.. I think he should let time be.. Because if he does actually successfully build this machine, there is a 50% chance that it will be completely unstable, and we won't be able to control it.
There is also a 50% chance that it will be a remarkable milestone in science, and will be a success, but that is assuming we can control, and contain the machine. I'm sorry, but that is not a percentage I would be willing to act upon.

This person possibly has the power to potentially ruin the earth for everyone..


We don't know for sure if it will work, probably not, but if it does, we just might be screwed.
assuming these things to have a 50% probability is quite erroneous. we know nothing/not enough to make these predictions. the only way i can see someone successfully going 'forward' in time is through the tried and true 'faster you go, slower time is for you' method. However, to achieve a speed great enough to take any significant effect on the time differential would be one of the greatest scientific leaps this century.

[catinabag1]

assuming these things to have a 50% probability is quite erroneous. we know nothing/not enough to make these predictions. the only way i can see someone successfully going 'forward' in time is through the tried and true 'faster you go, slower time is for you' method. However, to achieve a speed great enough to take any effect on the time differential would be one of the greatest scientific leaps forward this century.
ya it would be a huge scientific leap to defy the impossible. the only way to travel at the speed of light is to have no mass, then you are always traveling at the speed of light. if you could convert your body to pure energy you acould travel through time but you would no longer be matter, and would therefore not be human and wouldn't know you traveled through time.

[mcnuggets300]

this is the current theory. don't bug me. lol.

time travel by traveling at the speed of light is impossible because we have mass. only things that are massless can travel at the speed of light because your mass increases as you get closer to the speed of light. as you approach the speed of light, your mass approaches infinity and therefore takes an infinite amount of energy to accelerate you further.

energy also goes to infinite when you approach the speed of light, however, if you are not actually AT the speed of light, the time difference would still be quite significant. this method has been experimented on, where 2 atomic clocks were synchronized. One stays on earth while the other takes a ride in a space shuttle for however much time. this speed difference meant that the atomic clocks DID have a measurable time difference between them (However minute it was...). This time difference was achieved at the relatively low speeds (compared to the speed of light) of orbit.

in reply to the other part of your post, concerning wormholes-
wouldnt you simply die if you approached/went through a wormhole? space curves in ways we cannot comprehend, if you entered it, there would be a period where you are cut in half or ripped apart by gravity?

[catinabag1]

energy also goes to infinite when you approach the speed of light, however, if you are not actually AT the speed of light, the time difference would still be quite significant. this method has been experimented on, where 2 atomic clocks were synchronized. One stays on earth while the other takes a ride in a space shuttle for however much time. this speed difference meant that the atomic clocks DID have a measurable time difference between them (However minute it was...). This time difference was achieved at the relatively low speeds (compared to the speed of light) of orbit.

in reply to the other part of your post, concerning wormholes-
wouldnt you simply die if you approached/went through a wormhole? space curves in ways we cannot comprehend, if you entered it, there would be a period where you are cut in half or ripped apart by gravity?
if you travel at the speed of light you can navigate time. and yes you are right about the clocks.

if the wormhole is big enough you can pass through without being stretched like spaghetti just like flying into a big black hole. a small black hole would stretch you into a thin noodle but a big black hole wouldn't

[samwii]

confusing stuff. wouldnt it just be much more sensible to wait for technology to be at its peak? I dont exactly want to be squished by a black hole...

[Hazmat]

are you threatening me?!
Yeah what he said.
http://www.gr8dbznet.com/Images/ssj10goku.jpg

[Hazmat]

confusing stuff. wouldnt it just be much more sensible to wait for technology to be at its peak? I dont exactly want to be squished by a black hole...
1) +1 on that.
2) Which is when??? :confused:
3) Well you could have/make one of these. (http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/back%20to%20the%20future.jpeg) :p

[MuniAddict]

If you can "fold" space then you can travel from one point to another, possible faster than the speed of light. It's like 2 dots at opposite ends of a piece of paper. Draw a line to connect them-let's say a 10" line represents 10 light years in distance. If you travel staright along the line there's no short cut. *Fold* or curve the paper so the dots touch eachother and you get the idea. But then actually folding space is another "matter", lol.

[thejdw]

Whst ever happened to the machine being built that smashes particals together at the speed of light?

[Emile.m]

If you can "fold" space then you can travel from one point to another, possible faster than the speed of light. It's like 2 dots at opposite ends of a piece of paper. Draw a line to connect them-let's say a 10" line represents 10 light years in distance. If you travel staright along the line there's no short cut. *Fold* or curve the paper so the dots touch eachother and you get the idea. But then actually folding space is another "matter", lol.

thenth dimension video? :p

[MuniAddict]

Another way to travel-to the future-would be when/if cryogenics is ever perfected. At death they freeze you in liquid nitrogen, then in 100, 200, 1,000 or w/e years when they find the cure for what killed you, then they can bring you back to life.:cool:

If it was 1,000 years later you would probably wake up and then die from a heart attack at the shock of what the [totally unrecognizeable and alien looking] future would look like!:eek:

[Into the blue]

If you can "fold" space then you can travel from one point to another, possible faster than the speed of light. It's like 2 dots at opposite ends of a piece of paper. Draw a line to connect them-let's say a 10" line represents 10 light years in distance. If you travel staright along the line there's no short cut. *Fold* or curve the paper so the dots touch eachother and you get the idea. But then actually folding space is another "matter", lol.

That Sam Neill fella in Event Horizon explained it quite well.

Then it all went a bit pear-shaped.

[beeper]

Haha, wow! Care to explain where you got your statistics from?

Well, 50% covers two possibilities... It could go wrong, or it could be successful.. Are there any other possibilities? I don't think there is a medium in this situation.

[ivan]

Chances are probabilities, not just possibilities If you go out for a ride, there's a possibility of you breaking your tibula(wherever it is). There's also a possibilty of you not breaking it. Does that mean you have a 50% of breaking your tibula when you ride? Regardless of what you do?

[beeper]

Chances are probabilities, not just possibilities If you go out for a ride, there's a possibility of you breaking your tibula(wherever it is). There's also a possibilty of you not breaking it. Does that mean you have a 50% of breaking your tibula when you ride? Regardless of what you do?


No, but that's opening the playing field by quite a stretch. You could break your neck, your toe, your finger, anything.. If you narrow it down, it is just weather you injur yourself while on a unicycle, or dont injur yourself at all. The same could be done with this situation.. Its just a matter of HOW he screws up the earth, much like HOW you would injur yourself on a unicycle.

[ivan]

I'm sorry, it just doesn't work like that. We know nothing of time travel(at least not enough to make it actually work), therefore we can't predict that it's gonna screw up the earth. Because we don't know the time travel mechanism. We just have some various half-complete concepts. Therefore, we can't tell what it would actually do.

Secondly, to the point of probabilities: one example of a 50-50 probability is tossing a coin. It's only got two sides to land on. If one side is where you injure yourself unicycling and the other is where you finish your ride unhurt, then go toss a coin ten times(ten rides) and see how many trips to the hospital you make for those ten rides. Then look back at your last ten rides and see how many times you injured yourself there. Unless you're a complete rubbish rider, your 50-50 chance of injuring yourself theory doesn't work.

Read up on basic probabilty theory, then come back.

[glen]

No, but that's opening the playing field by quite a stretch. You could break your neck, your toe, your finger, anything.. If you narrow it down, it is just weather you injur yourself while on a unicycle, or dont injur yourself at all. The same could be done with this situation.. Its just a matter of HOW he screws up the earth, much like HOW you would injur yourself on a unicycle.

Ouch. This is painful for my brain, and I've been studying thermodynamics all morning.

Like ivan said, you can't just assign probabilities based on the number of outcomes. That only works if the odds are actually equal. For example, the chances of getting heads on a single coin toss is 50%, same for tails.

This is not one of those situations. You need to know waaaay more about the machine before you can start making up probabilities of success.

Also, what do you even mean by not being able to "control" or "contain" the machine? When you turn on your computer, do you ever worry that you might lose control of it, and that it will eventually destroy the universe? That stuff only happens in movies. In real life, you have an e-stop.

Considering that many many many people have claimed know how to create time machines, and 0% of them have succeeded to date, if I were to guess at his chances of success, I would say they are vanishingly small. If simply creating a machine ensured a 50% chance of success, I'd take a stab at a time machine too....that means there a 100% chance of one of us making it work, right?:cool:

[beeper]

I'm sorry, it just doesn't work like that. We know nothing of time travel(at least not enough to make it actually work), therefore we can't predict that it's gonna screw up the earth. Because we don't know the time travel mechanism. We just have some various half-complete concepts. Therefore, we can't tell what it would actually do.

Secondly, to the point of probabilities: one example of a 50-50 probability is tossing a coin. It's only got two sides to land on. If one side is where you injure yourself unicycling and the other is where you finish your ride unhurt, then go toss a coin ten times(ten rides) and see how many trips to the hospital you make for those ten rides. Then look back at your last ten rides and see how many times you injured yourself there. Unless you're a complete rubbish rider, your 50-50 chance of injuring yourself theory doesn't work.

Read up on basic probabilty theory, then come back.


Relax.

This is my point of view. You are free to believe whatever you want, as am I.

My point of view is that if the time machine *assuming it will work* is turned one *once* there is a 50 - 50 Chance of it either messing up the earth, or being a success. You are describing the occurance of the coin flip to be repeated many times. If the time machine is turned on, then off, then on then off, and repeated, then yes. The 50-50 is brought down quite a bit.

But I doubt they are going to turn on the time machine, watch it work, then keep flipping it on and off for about 10 tries. Once the time machine is on, going by this man's theory, we might be SOL in the future if a mistake is made. In 2038, say we are threatened by a nuke. We have people send the nuke back in time, because we have the ability to do so. It will mess up the earth, destroying every moment past the moment of when the nuke was sent back to.

I'm not saying we are stupid enough to do that, but it is an example of how the earth could be messed up with this machine.

Who's to say that when he turns the time machine on, Our future selves don't come back to us in time, over populating the earth? OR, that may not happen..

With ONE turn on of the machine, there is a 50% chance, that it could help us, or hurt us.. If there is another possibility, then please let me know.

That is all I am trying to say.

[ivan]

All I'm trying to say is that you're confusing probability and possibility, which are completely different things, as has been explained before. And you're making predictions about the behaviour of some machine that doesn't even exist in theory. And that future selves coming down and takin ouh jaaahbs is straight out of South Park.

And remember, there is objective truth in maths. It's not your point of view on probabilities, it's just a mistake in your understanding.


This discussion is so pointless, why do I actually even read it?

[Jerrick]

Relax.

This is my point of view. You are free to believe whatever you want, as am I.

My point of view is that if the time machine *assuming it will work* is turned one *once* there is a 50 - 50 Chance of it either messing up the earth, or being a success. You are describing the occurance of the coin flip to be repeated many times. If the time machine is turned on, then off, then on then off, and repeated, then yes. The 50-50 is brought down quite a bit.

But I doubt they are going to turn on the time machine, watch it work, then keep flipping it on and off for about 10 tries. Once the time machine is on, going by this man's theory, we might be SOL in the future if a mistake is made. In 2038, say we are threatened by a nuke. We have people send the nuke back in time, because we have the ability to do so. It will mess up the earth, destroying every moment past the moment of when the nuke was sent back to.

I'm not saying we are stupid enough to do that, but it is an example of how the earth could be messed up with this machine.

Who's to say that when he turns the time machine on, Our future selves don't come back to us in time, over populating the earth? OR, that may not happen..

With ONE turn on of the machine, there is a 50% chance, that it could help us, or hurt us.. If there is another possibility, then please let me know.

That is all I am trying to say.

This machine isnt a coin.

[monkeyman]

Relax.

This is my point of view. You are free to believe whatever you want, as am I.

My point of view is that if the time machine *assuming it will work* is turned one *once* there is a 50 - 50 Chance of it either messing up the earth, or being a success. You are describing the occurance of the coin flip to be repeated many times. If the time machine is turned on, then off, then on then off, and repeated, then yes. The 50-50 is brought down quite a bit.

But I doubt they are going to turn on the time machine, watch it work, then keep flipping it on and off for about 10 tries. Once the time machine is on, going by this man's theory, we might be SOL in the future if a mistake is made. In 2038, say we are threatened by a nuke. We have people send the nuke back in time, because we have the ability to do so. It will mess up the earth, destroying every moment past the moment of when the nuke was sent back to.

I'm not saying we are stupid enough to do that, but it is an example of how the earth could be messed up with this machine.

Who's to say that when he turns the time machine on, Our future selves don't come back to us in time, over populating the earth? OR, that may not happen..

With ONE turn on of the machine, there is a 50% chance, that it could help us, or hurt us.. If there is another possibility, then please let me know.

That is all I am trying to say.

So is there always a 50% chance of rain? It could either rain, or not rain. Also, every second, there is a 50% chance of nuclear war breaking out. It either could happen, or could not happen. You could also be having a heart attack every other second (after all, it could happen, or it could not happen).

I'm not trying to attack you, but you're not looking at probability the right way. I think you have a basic understanding of how it works (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt) but you're just assigning arbitrary values to the possibilities of something happening. We don't know anything about time travel, and so we can't assign reasonable probabilities to anything happening. You're basically just making stuff up.

[glen]

This is my point of view. You are free to believe whatever you want, as am I.
While you're looking up "probability", look up "subjectivity" and "objectivity".

Also just a note: The machine (supposing it worked) would send single particles, not bombs, so that's not really a rational fear.

[beeper]

So is there always a 50% chance of rain? It could either rain, or not rain. Also, every second, there is a 50% chance of nuclear war breaking out. It either could happen, or could not happen. You could also be having a heart attack every other second (after all, it could happen, or it could not happen).

I'm not trying to attack you, but you're not looking at probability the right way. I think you have a basic understanding of how it works (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt) but you're just assigning arbitrary values to the possibilities of something happening. We don't know anything about time travel, and so we can't assign reasonable probabilities to anything happening. You're basically just making stuff up.

My point was based on the fact that we don't know exactly what would happen, so it was a very innacurate guess. There is still no proof as to what the chances of that ARE, so I just went with 50-50, because that is (to me at least,) the only fair way of assuming in this situation.

That wasn't the origional point I was trying to make though.

Im just saying that since the odds are unknown, I don't trust this guy to just mess with time like that. (if it does work)

[feel the light]

Time is not a noun, and it can never be a destination. It is a theory we use to organize our brains. It is a theory of world understanding we use by comparing one repetitive motion to another motion, that is all it is. A yard stick for comparing motions.

I know I had a past. A year ago I wrote a post, just like I remembered, and it is still here. Yet I totally deny there is "really " a past. Time is as arbitrary as any yard stick. I remember once being 3 feet tall. Perhaps I should invent a magic yardstick, so I can go back in dimension until I am 3 feet tall. After all, I have a 3 feet tall past. Yet the idea of climbing into a yard stick just sounds stupid.

The time machine sounds less stupid, because of Einstein's theory that time on a space capsule would slow (relative to earth time) the faster it went, and time would stop at the speed of light. Movie writers then followed this logic, to give us the famous theatrical device that when you go faster then the speed of light, you go back in time. 100 good movies and about 1000 lame ones later, the majority would agree with the statement " Einstein predicts you will go back in time when you exceed the speed of light". People except this as fact.

Actually, Einstein said you gain mass as you approach light speed, in such a way that it is impossible for anything but light to go that fast. The movie makers justly left out that dull fact, threw in a few good caveman age dinosaurs for good measure, and that is the state of public education in the USA.

In sum, IMHO, no time machine can ever work, because time is only a tool of the human mind. Outside our heads, it is always the same day !:) Time is knowing how far something will go that is traveling at a fixed speed . Going back in time makes no more sense then trying to use a yard stick to change your size. The world has changed, the past into the present, and there is no way to make the universe run in reverse. As Hawkings rightly pointed out ,"there is no way you could get people to go the the bathroom. "

[Gilby]

I have a time machine in my bathroom. Most people call it a mirror, but it allows me to view the past even if that past is a very small fraction of a second in the past.

[uni57]

I'm not trying to attack you, but you're not looking at probability the right way.Hey, either he's right or he's wrong. Same with you. Right? So, you each have a 50/50 chance of being right. Now, with those odds, are you still so sure of yourself? :)

[hobo_chuck]

the only way to travel at the speed of light is to have no mass
But you CAN still travel large fractions of the speed of light and thus warp space-time enough that you get to watch the sun go supernova as you hurtle through the cosmos:D

[MuniAddict]

I have a time machine in my bathroom. Most people call it a mirror, but it allows me to view the past even if that past is a very small fraction of a second in the past.Better time machine is a telescope. Hubble can see billions of light years into the past-so if it focuses on a galaxy that is a billion light years away, it's taken the light from that galaxy one billion years to reach us, so what we are seeing now is what that galaxy looked like one billion years in the past! (I know, I used "billion" a lot lol!)

[zfreak220]

I have a time machine in my bathroom. Most people call it a mirror, but it allows me to view the past even if that past is a very small fraction of a second in the past.we could theoretically see farther into the past if we got a large enough mirror that had the closest we could get to 100% reflection of light and put it a couple of lightyears away and use a telescope to view our reflection. We would be able to see however many years the mirror was in lightyears away behind the current moment.

[MuniAddict]

we could theoretically see farther into the past if we got a large enough mirror that had the closest we could get to 100% reflection of light and put it a couple of lightyears away and use a telescope to view our reflection. We would be able to see however many years the mirror was in lightyears away behind the current moment.A light "day" would be plenty far, and much more within reach of possibilty. Then we could see what we did the day before!:p

[ivan]

I have a time machine in my bathroom. Most people call it a mirror, but it allows me to view the past even if that past is a very small fraction of a second in the past.
You don't need a mirror for that. Anything you see is seen through reflection of light. Light takes time to travel. And then it takes time to be processed by the eye and the brain. So, it's always the past that you're looking at.

Then we could see what we did the day before!:p
Or we could film it like ordinary people.

[SqueakyOnion]

The ability to travel back in time would make decisions meaningless. This complicates, and perhaps completely destroys, free will.

No thanks, even if it were possible.

[john_childs]

The ability to travel back in time would make decisions meaningless. This complicates, and perhaps completely destroys, free will.

No thanks, even if it were possible.
Haven't you ever watched Star Trek. They cover that. There are infinite parallel universes. The infinite parallel universes cover all possibilities of everything that can happen. Somewhere out there, there is a parallel universe where I won the lottery. Lucky me! Free will stays intact.

[Rubix]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2sp-clMk8s&feature=related

While its obvious with the tattoos and the nose, it may be his father. One way to disprove this would to see a picture of his father. Of course, since time travel can not be explained or rationalized, most would say this guy is lying. Although, if you look at certain distinguishing marks, he is, more than likely, isn't.

And you can't forget about the Phildelphia Experiment of the 1940s. It is said an entire destroyer was teleported from Philadelphia to Norfolk, VA, and back within a few minutes. 5 men were fused to the ship. Some were missing altogether. The Navy refuses any of this has happened. But here is a link I've found. Goes to show...anything is possible.

http://www.unsolvedmysteries.com/usm909.html

[uni57]

Haven't you ever watched Star Trek. ... Somewhere out there, there is a parallel universe where I won the lottery.I find it hard to believe that somewhere out there is a parallel universe where I have a beard. No way. That debunks the whole theory in my opinion.

[SqueakyOnion]

Haven't you ever watched Star Trek. They cover that. There are infinite parallel universes. The infinite parallel universes cover all possibilities of everything that can happen. Somewhere out there, there is a parallel universe where I won the lottery. Lucky me! Free will stays intact.

I guess I missed that episode :p

I've watched a lot of Star Trek Voyager, Next Generation, and Enterprise, but not a lot of the original...

[MuniAddict]

I find it hard to believe that somewhere out there is a parallel universe where I have a beard. No way. That debunks the whole theory in my opinion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEWwDCww_B8

"Captain Kirk, I shall consider it.":cool:

[mcnuggets300]

Another way to travel-to the future-would be when/if cryogenics is ever perfected. At death they freeze you in liquid nitrogen, then in 100, 200, 1,000 or w/e years when they find the cure for what killed you, then they can bring you back to life.:cool:

If it was 1,000 years later you would probably wake up and then die from a heart attack at the shock of what the [totally unrecognizeable and alien looking] future would look like!:eek:
liquid nitrogen would make your death more complete, the freezing of your flesh would cause crystals to form in the cells, so that with defrosting comes the ripping of your cells, essentially, you end up mushy, very mushy.
Its the same with freezing vegetables or fruit, if you freeze it over too long or make it too cold, its detrimental.

And its not REALLY time travel, but neither is traveling close to the speed of light, you are in existence the whole time, just in a different and almost unnatural state, rather than blinking from one time to another.

[mcnuggets300]

I'm sorry, it just doesn't work like that. We know nothing of time travel(at least not enough to make it actually work), therefore we can't predict that it's gonna screw up the earth. Because we don't know the time travel mechanism. We just have some various half-complete concepts. Therefore, we can't tell what it would actually do.

Secondly, to the point of probabilities: one example of a 50-50 probability is tossing a coin. It's only got two sides to land on. If one side is where you injure yourself unicycling and the other is where you finish your ride unhurt, then go toss a coin ten times(ten rides) and see how many trips to the hospital you make for those ten rides. Then look back at your last ten rides and see how many times you injured yourself there. Unless you're a complete rubbish rider, your 50-50 chance of injuring yourself theory doesn't work.

Read up on basic probabilty theory, then come back.
yeah, thats what i meant too, but much more articulate.

[uni57]

the freezing of your flesh would cause crystals to form in the cells, so that with defrosting comes the ripping of your cells, essentially, you end up mushy, very mushy.You aren't by any chance a Larry Niven fan, are you? (he's a science fiction writer)

Sounds like you are describing a "corpsicle" from his A World Out Of Time novel.

[Borges]

I find it hard to believe that somewhere out there is a parallel universe where I have a beard. No way. That debunks the whole theory in my opinion.
It only works for possible options. There is no universe where gravity is reversed or you have a beard or anything else that goes against the laws of nature.

[Hazmat]

It only works for possible options. There is no universe where gravity is reversed or you have a beard or anything else that goes against the laws of nature.
and you know this how??? :confused:

There are a lot of things that people still haven't discovered about our infinite (if not endless) galaxy. So there maybe a slight chance of there being another us somewhere out there.

[Borges]

and you know this how??? :confused:.
Star Trek!

[monkeyman]

our infinite (if not endless) galaxy.

...