View Full Version : In what time?
Free Spirit
10th September 2004, 21:53
People imagining time machines and impossible things, but lets say you have the chance to go in the time you desire to travel to, In what time would it be and if so, Then why? (I asked this question in one of the treats but no one seems to have seen it or something!)
-Beatle Kat I think I could guess why you would go back in the 60’s but it would be interesting to read your views of what you find extraordinary in those times?
RedAnarchist
10th September 2004, 21:55
I read somewhere that any workable time machine would have to be the size of a galaxy. I read it in a book quite a while ago, so i dont know anything about this theory.
cormacobear
10th September 2004, 22:18
Well they figure if you opened a wyrmhole inside a black hole or vice versa ,if anything could survive the pulling and pushing preasures (nothing could) you could travel back in time but not forward. It's theoretical physics and reading it is like drinking sand, so I don't I just read the inside flap of the dust cover. ;)
I would go back to Ceasars Rome, at the hieght of the empires wealth, influence, and power. With todays science a carefull individual could likely rise to the uppermost levels of power in 15 or twenty years. At that point you could steer the empire to educate the populace, and end economic dictatorship. With modern knowledge and limited use of modern weaponry, the empire could easily be protected from without and within, allowing a near utopia to develop and endure. Hopefully with the results that the people of the rest of the world seeing this remove their rulers and move down the same path.
Now if I hadn't lost that wyrmhole in the laundry last week I'd be set. :blink:
redstar2000
14th September 2004, 01:48
It's been done...called, I believe Lest Darkness Fall.
A bright guy from the mid-20th century finds himself in Rome c.600CE and cleverly manages to stop the descent into the dark ages.
The prototype of such stories (as far as I know) is Mark Twain's A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court...another bright guy who tries to build a modern society in a primitive era.
I suspect that even if it were possible, travel into the distant past would never be a popular option. Aside from the language difficulties (how's your Babylonian?), there's the little matter of a whole bunch of really nasty bugs that you have no natural immunity to.
Don't forget your suitcase of antibiotics. :D
:redstar2000:
The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas
Urban Rubble
14th September 2004, 02:30
Well, my Babylonian is fine, thank you for asking Restar.
So this is what passes as philosophy these days ?
I can't believe you guys are acting like Time Travel is something new and unheard of. They've been selling time machines on the internet for years. Now they just send you the plans: Click here (http://www.futurehorizons.net/time.htm) and scroll down
truthaddict11
16th September 2004, 06:13
Originally posted by Urban
[email protected] 13 2004, 08:30 PM
Well, my Babylonian is fine, thank you for asking Restar.
So this is what passes as philosophy these days ?
I can't believe you guys are acting like Time Travel is something new and unheard of. They've been selling time machines on the internet for years. Now they just send you the plans: Click here (http://www.futurehorizons.net/time.htm) and scroll down
i cant believe people actually spend money on "time machines" not even the machines but the fucking plans! id like to meet the people who do buy those things.
Funky Monk
21st September 2004, 23:46
I quite like this argument, "with my knoweldge of science"
Please explain exactly what knowledge of practical science you have and how you would be able to make use of it in this primative society.
To be honest, if i could go anywhere, anywhen and with anything i'd go back to 1930s Germany, shoot Hitler in the head and take my chances with the potentially catastrophic alternate future.
Postteen
22nd September 2004, 20:12
I think it's obvious indeed why I'd like to go to the 60's,but ok,I'll make it clearer.
First of all I'd like to live in th 60's only if I lived in England or in the US,for I could go to the concerts of all the brilliant artists of that period of time.(I mean if I lived in Italy for example it would be useless.)Apart from the concerts and the chances to meat the singers, I could experiment on LSD and all the drugs that were legal back then.I could also live in a commune,and see how the hippie life was.In addition I would take part and be a part of all the movements of the 60's like the sexual or the ecological one(that one started in the 60's).I could be a real feminist and not shave my armpits(actually not shave at all).All that psychedelic atmosphere is so attractive to me....
However when I think about it deeper,I remember that generally people and especially in America,were anti communists.So, if I had to sucrifice my ideals in order to live in the 60's,I'd refuse because If I had not to be a communist I just wouldn't be me.
T_SP
22nd September 2004, 20:34
I'd go back to Russia and the time of the Oktober revolution!! I imagine that must have been an incredible thing to witness!!
Or I'd go back to Austria and shoot Hitler as a little kid! :D
NovelGentry
22nd September 2004, 22:12
I think most people who hang in the IRC channel (live chat) already know this... I'm going back in time to present Che with my laptop so he can use it to better serve the revolution.
Comfort
23rd September 2004, 00:12
i'd go back to two weeks ago and not speed on 156th street. Damn Photo Radar!!!
Comfort
23rd September 2004, 00:16
[QUOTE]
maybe instead of shooting Hitler you could just befriend him and see if he turns out better. plus if Hitler was dead, America was playing isolated, would Stalin have done something as crazy as he was? who knows?
LSD
23rd September 2004, 01:33
maybe instead of shooting Hitler you could just befriend him and see if he turns out better.
Oh, yeah, if he'd only had a friend....
Guess what, he had friends, they didn't much like jews either. NO ONE did. I think there was a little more going on than you realize, he did manage to win a national election, so in short, it wasn't just him.
plus if Hitler was dead, America was playing isolated, would Stalin have done something as crazy as he was? who knows?
Umm.. America did "[play] isolated", then there was this little thing called "Pearl Harbor". In all likelyhood if indeed Stalin had "done something", Roosevelt would have found an excuse to get involved (probably the same one he did use).
Palmares
23rd September 2004, 07:49
Originally posted by
[email protected] 11 2004, 07:18 AM
Well they figure if you opened a wyrmhole inside a black hole or vice versa ,if anything could survive the pulling and pushing preasures (nothing could) you could travel back in time but not forward. It's theoretical physics and reading it is like drinking sand, so I don't I just read the inside flap of the dust cover. ;)
Physics can be a tricky thing. I've read physics that says you can only travel forwards in time (unless you count travelling back to the starting point of one wormhole relative to the other as travelling backward).
Also, survivng the pulling, etc of thw wormhole is irrelevant, but rather you would need to travel at the speed of light so as to make you speed fast enough relative to other things.
I dunno. It's very theoretical.
You know Stephen Hawking argues that travelling into the past is highly unlikely given the fact we don't experience it now (that is, there are no time travel 'tourists' in the pressent from the future).
ComradeChris
24th September 2004, 16:47
Originally posted by Lysergic Acid
[email protected] 23 2004, 12:33 AM
Umm.. America did "[play] isolated", then there was this little thing called "Pearl Harbor". In all likelyhood if indeed Stalin had "done something", Roosevelt would have found an excuse to get involved (probably the same one he did use).
Socialist countries probably would have had the whole Eastern Pacific rim. Part of the reason the US dropped the bomb, was to beat the Soviets to the punch, so they wouldn't socialize Japan.
ComradeChris
24th September 2004, 16:47
Originally posted by Lysergic Acid
[email protected] 23 2004, 12:33 AM
Umm.. America did "[play] isolated", then there was this little thing called "Pearl Harbor". In all likelyhood if indeed Stalin had "done something", Roosevelt would have found an excuse to get involved (probably the same one he did use).
Socialist countries probably would have had the whole Eastern Pacific rim. Part of the reason the US dropped the bomb, was to beat the Soviets to the punch, so they wouldn't socialize Japan.
ComradeChris
24th September 2004, 16:47
Originally posted by Lysergic Acid
[email protected] 23 2004, 12:33 AM
Umm.. America did "[play] isolated", then there was this little thing called "Pearl Harbor". In all likelyhood if indeed Stalin had "done something", Roosevelt would have found an excuse to get involved (probably the same one he did use).
Socialist countries probably would have had the whole Eastern Pacific rim. Part of the reason the US dropped the bomb, was to beat the Soviets to the punch, so they wouldn't socialize Japan.
ComradeChris
24th September 2004, 16:52
If I could go back in time, I think I would go back in time inciting revolutions among the peasants thousands of years earlier than they happened. Go back to Egypt, free the slaves. Do the same in Russia, Britain, France, and every other post-Roman state.
ComradeChris
24th September 2004, 16:52
If I could go back in time, I think I would go back in time inciting revolutions among the peasants thousands of years earlier than they happened. Go back to Egypt, free the slaves. Do the same in Russia, Britain, France, and every other post-Roman state.
ComradeChris
24th September 2004, 16:52
If I could go back in time, I think I would go back in time inciting revolutions among the peasants thousands of years earlier than they happened. Go back to Egypt, free the slaves. Do the same in Russia, Britain, France, and every other post-Roman state.
Comfort
24th September 2004, 19:23
its true it wasn't just Hitler, Germany (and lots of the world) have always been anti-semetic. but it was Hitler that got into power and pushed the holocaust. when i say befriend him i don't mean all sappy like he had no friends i was just throwing out another way instead of death.
Comfort
24th September 2004, 19:23
its true it wasn't just Hitler, Germany (and lots of the world) have always been anti-semetic. but it was Hitler that got into power and pushed the holocaust. when i say befriend him i don't mean all sappy like he had no friends i was just throwing out another way instead of death.
Comfort
24th September 2004, 19:23
its true it wasn't just Hitler, Germany (and lots of the world) have always been anti-semetic. but it was Hitler that got into power and pushed the holocaust. when i say befriend him i don't mean all sappy like he had no friends i was just throwing out another way instead of death.
LSD
24th September 2004, 20:28
its true it wasn't just Hitler, Germany (and lots of the world) have always been anti-semetic. but it was Hitler that got into power and pushed the holocaust.
True.
when i say befriend him i don't mean all sappy like he had no friends i was just throwing out another way instead of death.
Again, he had friends... it didn't help.
Realistically, there is very little anyone (save meybe the Vienna Art Academmy) could have done.
LSD
24th September 2004, 20:28
its true it wasn't just Hitler, Germany (and lots of the world) have always been anti-semetic. but it was Hitler that got into power and pushed the holocaust.
True.
when i say befriend him i don't mean all sappy like he had no friends i was just throwing out another way instead of death.
Again, he had friends... it didn't help.
Realistically, there is very little anyone (save meybe the Vienna Art Academmy) could have done.
LSD
24th September 2004, 20:28
its true it wasn't just Hitler, Germany (and lots of the world) have always been anti-semetic. but it was Hitler that got into power and pushed the holocaust.
True.
when i say befriend him i don't mean all sappy like he had no friends i was just throwing out another way instead of death.
Again, he had friends... it didn't help.
Realistically, there is very little anyone (save meybe the Vienna Art Academmy) could have done.
Free Spirit
25th September 2004, 10:06
However when I think about it deeper,I remember that generally people and especially in America,were anti communists.
If you were a communist in the 60's, hippies wouldn't mind, only those that didn't want any hippies or communist or even anarchists to exist... In fact a lot of hippies today seem to be very much involved with communism. And for not a long time ago I saw John Lennon in a magazine dressed kind of like Che Guevara with a sign that said, "Dress revolutionary" (John was a hippie/ Buddhist/revolutionary but what about a communist?), so how big was the difference between the hate in America towards hippies and communists? It's a hate coming from quite the same people!
:ph34r:
Free Spirit
25th September 2004, 10:06
However when I think about it deeper,I remember that generally people and especially in America,were anti communists.
If you were a communist in the 60's, hippies wouldn't mind, only those that didn't want any hippies or communist or even anarchists to exist... In fact a lot of hippies today seem to be very much involved with communism. And for not a long time ago I saw John Lennon in a magazine dressed kind of like Che Guevara with a sign that said, "Dress revolutionary" (John was a hippie/ Buddhist/revolutionary but what about a communist?), so how big was the difference between the hate in America towards hippies and communists? It's a hate coming from quite the same people!
:ph34r:
Free Spirit
25th September 2004, 10:06
However when I think about it deeper,I remember that generally people and especially in America,were anti communists.
If you were a communist in the 60's, hippies wouldn't mind, only those that didn't want any hippies or communist or even anarchists to exist... In fact a lot of hippies today seem to be very much involved with communism. And for not a long time ago I saw John Lennon in a magazine dressed kind of like Che Guevara with a sign that said, "Dress revolutionary" (John was a hippie/ Buddhist/revolutionary but what about a communist?), so how big was the difference between the hate in America towards hippies and communists? It's a hate coming from quite the same people!
:ph34r:
che's long lost daughter
25th September 2004, 19:54
I'll go back during the second World War when my country was under Japan and beat the hell out of those Japanese soldiers using their own bayonettes which of course I would have stolen from them because they treated our women like shit. Does anyone know the story of The Comfort Women?
che's long lost daughter
25th September 2004, 19:54
I'll go back during the second World War when my country was under Japan and beat the hell out of those Japanese soldiers using their own bayonettes which of course I would have stolen from them because they treated our women like shit. Does anyone know the story of The Comfort Women?
che's long lost daughter
25th September 2004, 19:54
I'll go back during the second World War when my country was under Japan and beat the hell out of those Japanese soldiers using their own bayonettes which of course I would have stolen from them because they treated our women like shit. Does anyone know the story of The Comfort Women?
che's long lost daughter
25th September 2004, 19:56
Of course I would like to be back during Che's time just to be able to see him and fight for the revolution with him.
che's long lost daughter
25th September 2004, 19:56
Of course I would like to be back during Che's time just to be able to see him and fight for the revolution with him.
che's long lost daughter
25th September 2004, 19:56
Of course I would like to be back during Che's time just to be able to see him and fight for the revolution with him.
Free Spirit
25th September 2004, 22:56
Yes I've heard of it. This is what I picked up during a research about it!
--A majority of the women who provided sex for Japanese soldiers were forcibly taken from their families, or were recruited deceptively. Sometimes family members were beaten or killed if they tried to rescue the women, most in their teens. Once the women arrived at the comfort station, they were forced to have sex, typically with 20 to 30 men a day. If they resisted, they were beaten or killed.
A majority of the 80,000 to 200,000 comfort women were from Korea, though others were recruited or kidnapped from China, the Phillipines, Burma, and Indonesia. Some Japanese women who worked as prostitutes before the war also became comfort women.
Many women became sterile from the repeated rapes. Women who became pregnant or infected with a sexually transmitted disease were given a shot of the antibiotic terramycin, which the women referred to as "Number 606." "The drug made the women's bodies swell up and would usually induce an abortion,"--
horrible....
Free Spirit
25th September 2004, 22:56
Yes I've heard of it. This is what I picked up during a research about it!
--A majority of the women who provided sex for Japanese soldiers were forcibly taken from their families, or were recruited deceptively. Sometimes family members were beaten or killed if they tried to rescue the women, most in their teens. Once the women arrived at the comfort station, they were forced to have sex, typically with 20 to 30 men a day. If they resisted, they were beaten or killed.
A majority of the 80,000 to 200,000 comfort women were from Korea, though others were recruited or kidnapped from China, the Phillipines, Burma, and Indonesia. Some Japanese women who worked as prostitutes before the war also became comfort women.
Many women became sterile from the repeated rapes. Women who became pregnant or infected with a sexually transmitted disease were given a shot of the antibiotic terramycin, which the women referred to as "Number 606." "The drug made the women's bodies swell up and would usually induce an abortion,"--
horrible....
Free Spirit
25th September 2004, 22:56
Yes I've heard of it. This is what I picked up during a research about it!
--A majority of the women who provided sex for Japanese soldiers were forcibly taken from their families, or were recruited deceptively. Sometimes family members were beaten or killed if they tried to rescue the women, most in their teens. Once the women arrived at the comfort station, they were forced to have sex, typically with 20 to 30 men a day. If they resisted, they were beaten or killed.
A majority of the 80,000 to 200,000 comfort women were from Korea, though others were recruited or kidnapped from China, the Phillipines, Burma, and Indonesia. Some Japanese women who worked as prostitutes before the war also became comfort women.
Many women became sterile from the repeated rapes. Women who became pregnant or infected with a sexually transmitted disease were given a shot of the antibiotic terramycin, which the women referred to as "Number 606." "The drug made the women's bodies swell up and would usually induce an abortion,"--
horrible....
ComradeChris
1st October 2004, 00:05
Originally posted by
[email protected] 24 2004, 06:23 PM
its true it wasn't just Hitler, Germany (and lots of the world) have always been anti-semetic. but it was Hitler that got into power and pushed the holocaust. when i say befriend him i don't mean all sappy like he had no friends i was just throwing out another way instead of death.
I was told in my University History class that Hitler never actually ordered the killing of the Jews. He wanted them out of state, and in concentration camps. And deaths in concentration camps are inevitable. Hitler was actually planning the war while most of the genocide was occurring. He probably got numbers, but like my Prof also said, many people die in concentration camps. Not to mention the Holocaust was big business for the people doing it. Massive creamatories were being purchased, railway being built just to take them out of state, also made them slave work.
But, massive amounts of hate is all you get with different religions. Religion probably causes the same number of wars as going for land, prestiege, resources, etc.
Rasta Sapian
7th October 2004, 02:10
probebly the iron age, somewhere in europe or eurasia, it sounds adventurous enough i supose
gaf
15th October 2004, 17:27
i'll try middle ages(the dark ones)
where men were rude but direct and the world so big,and wild.yeah definatly the place to be .life would have been short but powerful.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.