If time travel was possible, and I went six months into the future, would I be floating in outer space?

Question

This question arrives from the obvious fact that the earth revolves around the sun. Six month from now this point in space that all of us are in will be on the other side of the sun from our new perspective at that time. So if I left from this point in space into the future, would I end up where earth is now, not where earth will be. Furthermore, if I went exactly one year into the future, earth still would not be at this particular spot because our entire galaxy is spinning, once again leaving me to arrive in a point in space where Earth was, not where it will be in a year from now. Thoughts like these make me believe that time travel will never happen. Does anyone think that my logic is flawed?

Answer 1

it depends on the supposed technology or mode of time travel. For example, if I intend to send a radio message from one place to another, not only I need a transmitter, I need a receiver as well. So, if I have a time machine with me presently, and there is a "receiving station" someplace in the future, then that's where I go, even though the transit seems but a moment to me. Now, there's the Star Trek "teleportation" mode, where the machinery is on the ship, and the traveler is sent to a remote location per coordinates. Notice that coordinates are always necessary, sometimes even necessitating small devices to send the coordinates back to the ship. Likewise, a time machine sending someone would require exact knowledge of where he is going, including location, and, yes, good foresight on knowing where planets would be would be a plus. it's not any different from sending a rocket to the moon, knowing where the moon would be when the rocket arrives is a good idea. Now, HG Well's "Time Machine" shows a guy climbing into his machine and travelling through time as if he were in a ship at sea. Now, so long we're out in the left field of science fiction speculation, I don't think it's hard to imagine that such a machine, being bound to earth by reason of gravitation, could continue to be bound at the same location even as it travels through time, as in that story. What's wrong with that? Why necessarily the force of gravity suddenly disappear because one is now "travelling through time"? If one adopts the many-worlds hypothesis of quantum interpretation (or parallel worlds), it's not hard to imagine that a time traveller is flitting between the worlds, basically staying at the same location, but only nanosecondly "seen" by dwellers of the different worlds as the traveller whizzes by. And finally, for any time machine to suddenly find itself "frozen at location (x,y,z) in space" upon entering time travel would be in violation of one of the most fundamental tenets of relativity theory, and that is there is the absence of any absolute frame of reference. Certainly there's all kinds of problems and paradoxes involved in time travel, but to assume that we'd end up frozen at some spot in space doesn't seem like something we should presume unless shown why it should be.

Answer 2

Well you ARE traveling in time. So, since you're not floating, then there is a possibility that you would continue to be pulled along with everything else here on this old planet.
IF your question is: given an exact spot (as determined by the fixed stars say), what will be occupying it 6 months from now? I think it is fair to say that it won't be anywhere within 50,000 miles of Earth. On the other hand, momentum is conserved so what would happen if you stepped out of a "hole" on Earth where it is 6 months from now? Wham! Wouldn't be much left of you, I believe. Problem is that time and space is relative, just ask Einstein. So, asking "what if" questions without a little more concrete mechanism to describe the "how" is fairly open-ended.
What if the time travel was just "stasis" where every electron, proton, photon, and quark in your body just froze for 6 months. Either you would continue to interact with gravity (Higgs field) and be held onto earth, or would speed away into space,. But what if you were held in a locked room? Well how could you not interact with the matter in the walls, floor and ceiling and still be confined? Which brings up the interesting question of you sinking into the EArth once your matter is non-interacting if it still has Weight. So which of the 6 forces of nature do you want to eliminate, and how?
Sounds positively supernatural to me!

Answer 3

The writer Michael Moorcock speaks of a "Multiverse" where infinite possible realities, time-lines intersect on a treelike structure. If TIME TRAVEL were possible I posit it would create such a structure where every possibility is played out and if one were to alter ones time-line the original time-line would still exist and continue to it's logical end. So like all philosophical pursuits time travel is probably just a way to create more questions than answers and is equally dangerous either direction. I once dreamt of jackboots from the future creating a jump-window from the year 2329 to the year 1997 where I was and kidnapping me for genetic research. In my dream I recall years of time yet only an hour had passed when I awoke sweaty and parched to get a glass of water. The dream ended when I jumped from a penthouse apartment of the chief government science officer where I was being kept as a pet of sorts. Was this just a dream or did I supersede scientific law by pure force of will not to be a tool of a fascist regime? If you jackboots are watching, I am still waiting for a rematch. Life is but a dream.....

Answer 4

I know that I can travel into the future. It will only take me 6 months to move into the future six months from now. On the other hand if I travel through space at close to the speed of light I can experience a very short interval of time while others experience 6 months. In that way I could step out of my time machine anywhere withing a half light year 6 months from now.

Answer 5

This is the first time I have read such a concept, but it makes sense in a way.

The one thing that comes to mind with time travel is that it would either require cosmic travel at, near, or above the speed of light; or, if it could be accomplished in a seeming stationary state, would it be that the travel through time would take the same path as would be taken by the same revolutions around Earth's axis, path through the solar system, and path through the cosmos as in the non-time travel?

Interesting question.

Answer 6

If you point yourself where you need to be after six months in future will surely solve your problem.
Time travel would be possible only if you are travelling at the speed of light and if you do travel at that speed you need to know where you are going.

Answer 7

yes you are wrong because both space and time are not fixed they are like everything - relative to something else. Earth will be in this spot relative to everything around it. Even if the entire solar system moved 100 meter.

Answer 8

Very interesting point. I'm guessing that time travel will be able to be limited to being across time, rather than needing to account for other variables such as space etc...But wow, excellent point.

Answer 9

Ahh...that be logic right there. But say scientific discoveries actually make time travel possible. A coordinate system will be planted into the time travel system to avoid those problems. =)

Answer 10

If you went six months into the future, wouldnt you be standing where you would have been if it was six months in the future and you didnt time travel?