Future or Past

[*~NeoAdamus~*]

If ppl of the Future went back into the past then they influence the past thus making the Future the past and the past the Future. But The future that influence the past has to have a future yet that influence reshapes the future.

My question is if the future does indeed influence the past through some sort of time machine etc. then which comes first

wait, now i sound crazy............

[Zook]

I look at it this way, you can't go to the future b/c it hasn't happened yet.
If you go back to the past you can't alter anything or else you won't be able to return to the present.

[*~NeoAdamus~*]

Originally Posted by Zook

I look at it this way, you can't go to the future b/c it hasn't happened yet.
If you go back to the past you can't alter anything or else you won't be able to return to the present.

not if you have a time machine or something that can rip through time itself.

To the past, i am the future and if i go to the past to stop JFK from getting shot i can easily speed to the future only to see that the world has changed. Because you're in past the future hasn't existed but in the time you previously did, you altered the past to change the future reversing the roles of past and future, so now the future is past and the present is the future and the past that had passed

uh oh......loop hole

[Zoidberg!]

It's just like the Grandfather Time Paradox:

A man goes back in time to kill his grandfather. His does so, but, then he wasn't born. So his grandfather is alive, which makes the man alive to kill his grandfather.

Aw, screw explaining it. Here is the wikipedia entry.

[*~NeoAdamus~*]

The grandfather paradox is a paradox of time travel, first described by the science fiction writer René Barjavel in his 1943 book Le Voyageur Imprudent (The Imprudent Traveller).[1] The paradox is this: suppose a man traveled back in time and killed his biological grandfather before the latter met the traveller's grandmother. As a result, one of the traveller's parents (and by extension, the traveller himself) would never have been conceived. This would imply that he could not have travelled back in time after all, which in turn implies the grandfather would still be alive, and the traveller would have been conceived, allowing him to travel back in time and kill his grandfather. Thus each possibility seems to imply its own negation, a type of logical paradox.

An equivalent paradox is known (in philosophy) as autoinfanticide — that is, going back in time and killing oneself as a baby — though when the word was first coined in a paper by Paul Horwich it was in the version autofanticide.[2]

The grandfather paradox has been used to argue that backwards time travel must be impossible. However, a number of possible ways of avoiding the paradox have been proposed, such as the idea that the timeline is fixed and unchangeable, or the idea that the time traveler will end up in a parallel timeline, while the timeline in which the traveler was born remains independent.

that truly is a paradox

to kill myself as achild i will not exist in the future but..........my head hurts

[Ecstasy]

Aren't you just oh-so philosophical and intellectual.

[*~NeoAdamus~*]

well philosophy has been one of the basis in are intellectual development as ppl.

to question something is a part of being human

[Snow Candy]

I'd say both because the past helps us know about what we as a present day must know so we can help our future or whatever. If that makes sense. I like the technology of the future though but I like the history of the past. So I'm going both. I hate just choosing just one.

Edit: I think the future can help us see what we done in the past to shape the future better. No idea, really. XD

[Omni Terra]

Watch the films Back to the Future. They explain it well. If someone were to go into the future they would go to the most probablr future in that timeline. As in you will go to the future of if everything today stays on track. If you go to the past and even talk to someone you influence the future which is your present which would put you in an alternate timeline.

[*~NeoAdamus~*]

Kinda like the butterfly effect.

[KingBlade]

If thats the case and if we do have a person from the future changing the past, they would be only trapped into the universe that they shaped and formed by the changes they made. Since going into the past and changing it, has shaped their future therefore changing the flow of the universe and entering a universe that is completely different from the beginning.

[*~NeoAdamus~*]

Yeah, i believe the like was somewhat established with planet of the apes. Messing with time is like poking at a bubble. Time flow is sensitive the slightest touch can alter anything.

I remember reading a story in which a guy and his friends went to a hunting place where they were able to go back in time and hunt dinosaurs. But they had to be careful what they touched and what they killed. Im not precisely sure on how the story went exactly, but the guy did something and when he came back to his original everything was different, even the oxygen and he started to go crazy, and the other hunters figured out the problem and shot him, or something like that...........