• JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    7 months ago

    There’s an innumerable number of reasons no one showed up, only one of which is that backwards time travel isn’t possible.

    • lugal@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s by far the most plausible but sure, if you ignore Ockham’s razor, sure, it’s only one of many explanations

      • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        More plausible than there being rules around time travel that involve not attending parties? I think not.

        • lugal@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Tbf the important question is: assuming that backwards time travel is possible, will people attempt to the party. And there I would say, unlikely. And while I think backwards time travel is very implausible, the experiment itself proves nothing

          • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I thought in your original reply you were saying the most plausible thing was that there must be no time travel. This reply suggests otherwise, which I agree with.

            • lugal@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              I still do not believe in time travel so I think the most plausible thing is there is no time travel. But assuming time travel was possible, there would still be no one on the party. This doesn’t prove it but neither do I need any proof

      • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Exactly, they’d know a lot more accurately what happened too, which raises another point as to why no one comes back here - imagine gong somewhere that you know horrible things are happening to children but you can’t say anything or save them because of the timeline…

        Even if in the unlikely event Hawking didn’t know about it talking to him and not saying ‘that friend of yours epstine is a bad dude’ would be unbearable.

    • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      For example maybe you need a working time machine at your destination, such that the earliest point possible to travel to is the moment the first time machine was switched on.

    • meeeeetch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      News of his attendance at someone else’s party made all future time travelers give him a wide berth.

  • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    7 months ago

    Hawking concluded it is impossible because nobody showed up to his party. Zero thought was spent wondering if it was a party worth showing up to.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah, now that I think of it more, I can’t see a single good reason for a time traveler to show up at this party. Going back in time to prove the existence of time travel to the past has a very good chance of handing control of time travel away to people who can undo your existence without you ever being aware of it.

      Even if you just wanted a conversation with one of the brilliant minds in physics, it would be smarter to pick a random lecture or non-time-travel-themed party.

  • MashedTech@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    My theory is, time travel is possible but humanity went extinct before we got to that point.

  • ClockworkOtter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    Perhaps the time travellers came back as catering staff so they could polish it all off without having to engage in human interaction.

  • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I mean when time travel is invented the story will change and we’ll be reading about those visitors. Nobody has shown up at Hawking’s party yet.

    • Shampiss@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s the point though. It doesn’t matter when time travel is invented, only if it can be invented.

      If time travel is possible even 10 000 years in the future someone would almost certainly show up at Hawking’s party since they have a time machine.

      The fact that no one showed up it’s a reasonable argument that time travel is impossible

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s like somebody saying in 1912 that fax machines could never be invented because no printouts were magically appearing on their desk. The technology had to be invented before it could be used. If a time traveler has to step out of a machine, that machine has to be invented first. The idea is that backwards time travel would only be able to travel as far back as the invention of backwards time travel.

        That being said, from a physics standpoint I can absolutely see backwards time travel as being impossible. We can’t move negative distances across spatial dimensions, so why would we be able to move backwards in time?

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    [off topic]

    “The Big Time” by Fritz Leiber is one of my all time favorite novels. His time travel works on the principle of 'The Law Of Conservation Of Reality." There’s only one timeline, and it’s possible to change it, but it requires a lot of work.

    If you go back and kill baby Hitler, he’ll come back to life and no one will remember anything. It takes vast armies fighting thousands of secret battles to change one thing. But when a Big Change hits, look out!

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    It depends on the type of time travel rules. One theory suggest going back in time creates a branch in the time-space continuum, one where the time travel happened, one where it did not.

    With this branching time-space rule, there’s one timeline, where no time travellers appeared, and one where they did.

  • fidodo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    What if time travel requires an anchor so you can’t go backwards before the time it was invented?

  • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    A party with no bitches, just some nerd who doubts your existence and would spend time asking you stupid questions? No wonder no one came…

    Plus it would likely be taboo to visit the past because of how easy it’d be to spread future germs and get everyone killed.

  • stephfinitely@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Well, given what we have learned about Hawking, it’s not that shocking. Also, why would they reveal themselves like that.