Those would be philosophers, not scientists, and they didn't prove shit.
No, they're physicists.
Einstein's explanation of time travel was flawed anyway.
The paradox appears flawed by assuming a reference point remains in the same place over time. While a city on a planet remains in the same place on the planet, the planet and it's solar system continue to move over time. Five hundred years ago the planet may have been a light year away from where it is today in space time. To time travel, you would need more than this simplistic model to relocate to an earlier time and remain on a planet. It is not a static model. It is a fluid model.
At least there's one other smart person on this site.
god this shit is gay
You didn't even link to the actual article, nigger.
proving the illogical logical - post moved to conspiracy
According to Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity, time slows down more and more as a moving object reaches closer to the speed of light, at which point time stops completely, mass becomes infinite, and space contracts to a point in the direction of travel (all points come closer together). Following this reasoning, it has been popularly suggested, and even supposedly proven, that if a spaceship were to leave Earth and travel out into space at near-light-speeds for a period of time before returning again, there would be a measurable time discrepancy between the crew on the ship and the people on Earth, with the crew having aged more slowly than the people on Earth. This scenario is often used in explaining the strangeness of spacetime as it is understood within the Einsteinian framework.
There is a definite problem with this understanding, however, and this problem can be seen more clearly when we reconsider the basic premise to the theory of special relativity, which is that all things – including time – are relative. This means that the time differentiation between the spaceship and Earth must necessarily affect both the crew on the ship and the people on Earth equally, rather than just the crew, as is commonly understood. What scientists seem to have completely ignored is that if we can say that the spaceship is moving away from Earth at near-light-speed, then we can just as well say that Earth is moving away from the spaceship at the same speed. What is moving is relative to the orientation of the observer, and so the observers on the spaceship and on Earth must be equally affected. In other words, if the crew on the spaceship is aging more slowly relative to the people on Earth, then the people on Earth must necessarily be aging more slowly relative to the crew on the ship. The effect will be relative, rather than applicable from only one of the two reference points.
I wanna go back to 1938, and be Hitler's advisor
i wont even waste my time and click on the article...what a joke...i know
I did and your asumption is mostly correct; it's a waste of time, mostly.
They did not solve Jack Shit, but created a philsophical theory on a "plausible" inherent mechanism of inevitability in our reality; if A travels back in time to prevent B from doing whatever, then C will step up to fill the role of B.
Bullshit; the grandfather paradox is still in effect.
(post is archived)