Scientists Discover Time Teleportation

^ If you mean the black hole theory thing, then that I believe that wasn't even time travel per se. Very different from what this guys are doing (from what I manage to interpret of this article).

If it's something different I would very much like to read about it...

You can always travel to the future

Duh. That isn't time travel.

Duh. That isn't time travel.

Well, technically it is, depending on how far into the future you go.

You ARE traveling through time.

Well, technically it is, depending on how far into the future you go.

You ARE traveling through time.

unless you really want to argue what the phrase 'time travel' means at a base level you should find a word that looks a lot less like 'technically' and a lot more like 'trolololololol'.

Time Travel =/= existing normally under the current conditions of the physical universe relevant to you. Passing through time faster due to your relative speed doesn't actually get you further foward in time relative to anyone/thing else.

Example: Travel super fast around the circumference of a circle once for 4 minutes your time, it's been 3 minutes relative to your arrival depature point. How long were you gone? 3 minutes. To the future indeed.

EDIT:

What wikipedia has to say about time dilation: (What some people ITT think general realtivity allows one to achieve as a means of time travel)

Relative velocity time dilation

When two observers are in relative uniform motion and far away from any gravitational mass, the point of view of each will be that the other's (moving) clock is ticking at a slower rate than the local clock. The faster the relative velocity, the greater the magnitude of time dilation. This case is sometimes called special relativistic time dilation. It is often interpreted as time "slowing down" for the other (moving) clock. But that is only true from the physical point of view of the local observer, and of others at relative rest (i.e. in the local observer's frame of reference). The point of view of the other observer will be that again the local clock (this time the other clock) is correct and it is the distant moving one that is slow. From a local perspective, time registered by clocks that are at rest with respect to the local frame of reference (and far from any gravitational mass) always appears to pass at the same rate.[1]

Too bad time travel will never happen, because if it did happen, then we would see time travelers from the future, but that obviously didn't happen yet, so it'll never happen.

Travelling back in time is impossible, you'll face a paradox anyway.
Such as you travelling back to 1990 killing yourself, then why are you here? If you travel back to the 15th century, then who is your parents? You yourself?

It only permits travelling to the future as time is not consistent in every part of space.


--
What I can see now is only the basics, formula and theory. They might be able to do that for sub atomic particles, but for humans do you have any idea on the energy required? Hydrocarbon won't do any pomegranate, which will run out on 2040++ .

Good stuff to talk about whenever you're high! ''If you wanna get high, don't forget to bring a towel!''.

Time Travel =/= existing normally under the current conditions of the physical universe relevant to you. Passing through time faster due to your relative speed doesn't actually get you further foward in time relative to anyone/thing else.

Example: Travel super fast around the circumference of a circle once for 4 minutes your time, it's been 3 minutes relative to your arrival depature point. How long were you gone? 3 minutes. To the future indeed.

Hypothetically, if you took a journey around the universe and then back to earth at the speed of light for 100 years, you'll only feel like a few years or so have passed, but when you come back everyone else would have died off, and you'd still be alive.

You quoted Wikipedia, yet completely missed or ignored the section on muons having longer lifetimes under high velocities. You actually do get further in time than you could if you didn't travel at high velocities.

I still don't understand how time travel is possible. From the way I see it time is just a measurement that humans created, like inches or feet. Its a measurement of the earth's movement in the universe. One rotation of the earth is 1 day. 1 trip around the sun is a year. 1 hour = 1 day / 12. 1 minute = 1 hour / 60. 1 month = 1 year / 12. See what I am saying?

That's actually kind of cool, but like everyone else said, Time Travel is impossible and it won't happen. I don't know who made up the idea of this "Time Travel".
If you face a Time Paradox, would you or both yourselves die? Because I'm confused...

I still don't understand how time travel is possible. From the way I see it time is just a measurement that humans created, like inches or feet. Its a measurement of the earth's movement in the universe. One rotation of the earth is 1 day. 1 trip around the sun is a year. 1 hour = 1 day / 12. 1 minute = 1 hour / 60. 1 month = 1 year / 12. See what I am saying?

time is actually defined like this: 1 second is a certain number of vibrations of the nuclei of a certain atom.

Anyway, relativistical time travelling exists because of the postulate that you can't exceed the speed of light. From there it's quite easy to deduce that anyone travelling near the speed of light will leave behind the outside observers (meaning when they come back much more time would have passed for those observers). I will not include the mathematical demonstrations for this as it's more than likely anyone who's able to understand it has already seen it.

If anyone wants it I can present them, though.




On the topic of travelling to the past. According to my radioactivity teacher, some guy was solving the time dependant equation of quantum mechanics and arrived at a point where there were two possible results:

a) time is positive and so physics is not reversible (i.e. no way to go back in time) and there is anti-matter.
b) time is negative and so physics is reversible (i.e. you can go back in time) and there is no anti-matter.

He chose option a) which was latter proven to be correct by the observation of anti-matter particles so, sorry guys, no travelling back in time.

That's actually kind of cool, but like everyone else said, Time Travel is impossible and it won't happen. I don't know who made up the idea of this "Time Travel".
If you face a Time Paradox, would you or both yourselves die? Because I'm confused...

I don't understand why the same people who are saying Time Travel is impossible are asking to clarify time paradoxes etc. These disastrous Time Paradox scenarios are works of science fiction, seeing as there's never been such a case of time travel.