Time Travel

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Mad Doug Biker

Just a damaged guy.
Location
Craggy Island
I'd go back to Edward I's time with some antibiotics and wotnot and ensure that his son Alphonso survived.

Mainly because it would be cool to have a king Alphonso instead of the tedious procession of Edwards.

Also because he would rule in place of his brother Edward II. Without Edward II we wouldn't have the 100 years war or the Wars of the Roses. But we undoubtedly would have had some other wars instead so it would be fun to see what. Maybe the 200 years war and the Wars of the Weasels. Who knows?

Alphonso would become a more popular name. We'd have had prime minister Alphonso Heath and actor Alphonso Phonsohonso.

But it wouldn't be fun, because our history would include The 200 Years war and The War Of The Weasels. Nobody would have heard of the 100 years one or The War Of The Roses, so you'd never know about them to compare. Instead, there would be someone on an internet forum saying it would be fun to imagine the wars if Edward II had become King.

Once changed, why would you even remember and even think of helping Alphonso? He'd have survived.
The history would be totally different, so why would you know to go back in the first place?... Therefore, King Alphonso would never have happened as you wouldn't know to go back and help... Do you see the Paradox? 😆

THAT said, Alphonso would have been a great name. Maybe even, we might be seeing the Coronation of 'King Alf' in May and what would the papers say if he did anything daft?

Yep... Alphonso's Bonzo!
 
Last edited:

Mad Doug Biker

Just a damaged guy.
Location
Craggy Island
Alphonso would become a more popular name. We'd have had prime minister Alphonso Heath and actor Alphonso Phonsohonso.

I've long thought a King Jullian would be rather fun to be fair.
 

Mad Doug Biker

Just a damaged guy.
Location
Craggy Island
I'd go back to Edward I's time with some antibiotics and wotnot and ensure that his son Alphonso survived.

Mainly because it would be cool to have a king Alphonso instead of the tedious procession of Edwards.

Also because he would rule in place of his brother Edward II. Without Edward II we wouldn't have the 100 years war or the Wars of the Roses. But we undoubtedly would have had some other wars instead so it would be fun to see what. Maybe the 200 years war and the Wars of the Weasels. Who knows?

Alphonso would become a more popular name. We'd have had prime minister Alphonso Heath and actor Alphonso Phonsohonso.

Actually, I guess you could do it IF you happened to be in the right place at the right time and had travelled back and forwards enough in time to know who to speak to and when, but, still, the fabric of time and space would have been changed.
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
Actually, I guess you could do it IF you happened to be in the right place at the right time and had travelled back and forwards enough in time to know who to speak to and when, but, still, the fabric of time and space would have been changed.

How do you know I didn't? I just went back and killed the perfectly healthy Alphonso. Now I've come back and no one has heard of the Wars of the Weasels. I'm really confused. What are these "Wars of the Roses" you are on about?
 
Speaking of kings, if I couldn't go motor racing back in time, then I'd like to go back and see what Richard III was really like.

IMHO he was no better or no worse than any of his contemporaries, and well, politics was done by the sword, not over those awfully civilized despatch boxes by former journalists and lawyers all hurling creative insults at one another...
 

FishFright

More wheels than sense
Not trying to put a downer on a very noble ambition but.....

Trouble with that is about six months later someone would probably make up some other reason just to kick off about something.

With it being a pivotal point in history I'm interested what changes would ensue. I agree that with all the tensions and intrigues at the time I doubt it would lead to a long lasting peace.
 

MontyVeda

a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
We are constantly travelling through time.
Tick follows tock follows tick.....
that's travelling with it, rather than through it. :becool:
Time travel?
Where from and where too?
The Earth is moving
The point in space I am at NOW will be 20 miles away from where I am NOW
Space-time travel gets really interesting.
I began writing a story based on this clear fact... the first people who went through the machine just disappeared. No trace, nothing, nada, zilch. It took a while to discover that where they'd all travelled to was somewhere out in space, or inside a mountain which meant to avoid certain death, the motion of the whole universe had to be taken into account... at which point my brain began to implode and i shelved that idea :blush:
 

Mad Doug Biker

Just a damaged guy.
Location
Craggy Island
that's travelling with it, rather than through it. :becool:

I began writing a story based on this clear fact... the first people who went through the machine just disappeared. No trace, nothing, nada, zilch. It took a while to discover that where they'd all travelled to was somewhere out in space, or inside a mountain which meant to avoid certain death, the motion of the whole universe had to be taken into account... at which point my brain began to implode and i shelved that idea :blush:

Yes that's the other thing and something that I have long thought about - The machine would need to have some sort of safety GPS type mechanism built in, otherwise you could appear on a railway track just as a freight train passes or something like you appear in outer space, etc as mentioned.

This is something films never address.
 

colly

Re member eR
Location
Leeds
that's travelling with it, rather than through it. :becool:

If we travel 'with' time why would we age? Maybe 'time' simply passes us and we do no travelling at all. Maybe all time , past and present, is happening at all once and we only perceive the present. The present being ephemeral, because as soon as we consider it another 'present' is already upon us.
Or maybe there is no past or future, just the present. Or even there is no 'present' just the past and the future.

Maybe, and this is definitely a strong possiblity............................I am talking out of my arse.
 

Oldhippy

Cynical idealist
Physics as we currently understand it and assuming Einstein's Special Therory of Relatively does allow for time travel to be feasible with the right technologies but if you moved backwards in time ten minutes or a 1000 years it would not mean you've travelled in actual distance, merely time so would be in the same spot where you were prior to moving in time. To actually physically move in time to a different point thereby moving through space and time would entail something like the Starship Enterprise which can create a vacuum around itself and create a 'bubble' protecting the crew and using a Warp Field Generator to achieve propulsion exceeding the Speed of Light and effectively 'folding' space.
 

SpokeyDokey

67, & my GP says I will officially be old at 70!
Moderator
Physics as we currently understand it and assuming Einstein's Special Therory of Relatively does allow for time travel to be feasible...

Is this correct? It's a long time since I read up on AE's amazing conclusions & predictions and I don't recollect this.

I thought it was more about time passing at different rates, for observers of an object moving at speed, based on their location ie aboard the object or not.
 
Top Bottom