regenerating

superscaper

BillScarab wrote: »

As for the Tardis struggling to enter the Medusa Cascade I thought it wasn't one second in the future but one second out of synch with normal time.

Exactly, if it was merely 1 second in the future even I can get there without a time machine. You just simply wait a second!!! Very different from being out of sync constantly.

D.K.

It is out of synch with the rest of the universe..it's windows download time. Never right

Enterprise_1701C

I reckon there is going to be a "split" regeneration - he will regenerate as another version of himself and the hand will regenerate as another Dr (maybe female).

My Dr Who is Peter Davidson - mainly because they filmed part of an episode where I was working and I got to meet him and get his autograph. I watched them filming (and yes the director was limp wristed!!) AND I went in the TARDIS!!! We were all very impressed, he had a brand new Porche with 4 miles on the clock!!

I reckon it runs Linux!

superscaper

Jane_Blackford wrote: »

I reckon it runs Linux!

I must admit it looks very open source to me.

PZH

superscaper wrote: »

Exactly, if it was merely 1 second in the future even I can get there without a time machine. You just simply wait a second!!! Very different from being out of sync constantly.

Erm - yes, but - if you waited for one second - then surely the part that was already one second ahead would still be one second ahead: therefore, you need a time machine ??

My head hurts.....

D.K.

Tenant is my Dr Who... but that accent?

No one has ever seen a time machine therefore it won't be invented.

Sorry

superscaper

phoodless wrote: »

Erm - yes, but - if you waited for one second - then surely the part that was already one second ahead would still be one second ahead: therefore, you need a time machine ??

That's not being 1 second in the future, that's being out of sync by 1 second. Not the same thing and not necessarily something that a time machine simply able to go along the ordinary timeline could solve.

Enterprise_1701C

If a time machine has been invented in the future then in theory that time machine could not travel back in time to before the time machine was invented because then it would not exist because it had not been invented till some time in the future. That's the theory that has been mooted anyway, though personally I think that it would simply cause said time machine to be invented at that time therefore we might wake up all of a sudden and find time machines normal!

Now I'm going to go and curl up in a little ball in a padded room.

superscaper

Jane_Blackford wrote: »

If a time machine has been invented in the future then in theory that time machine could not travel back in time to before the time machine was invented because then it would not exist because it had not been invented till some time in the future. That's the theory that has been mooted anyway, though personally I think that it would simply cause said time machine to be invented at that time therefore we might wake up all of a sudden and find time machines normal!

Now I'm going to go and curl up in a little ball in a padded room.

Well one current solution to general relativity that allows for time travel is the use of wormholes which along the lines of what you're saying the only time travel would be from the start of the creation of the wormhole, i.e. from the creation of the "time machine" onwards. There's nothing in physics preventing that kind of time travel but it doesn't allow travel further back than when it was set up (i.e. now or our past). The research area of time travel is also known as "closed time-like curves" in physics in case you spot it anywhere you know what they really up to!

marleyboy

Time is Static, we just flow through it, wether backward or forward, we cannot alter it, as its already there.