Sending Information Through Time

Love your idea. I've been having thoughts on similar lines. So some comments:

1) make influencing the numbers easy for your future self:
The source should be easy to influence, define and document your measuring method, your raw data to structured data conversion algorithm and the exact times you will be collecting data.

2) Collect data frequently, run the conversion immediately and record the converted output accurately in well labeled files. Also record the expected output in the same data files. Eg. The lottery numbers of the following weekend. Once you have recorded the expected output, make backup of the files in a number of different ways. Eg. Send to a gmail address, print out the real and expected results and put in safe or filing cabinet, Dropbox, or archival quality DVD.

Why? Imagine your future self 50 years from now with tech that could potentially do this, but it is untested. So you have to try something, beamin/modding/whatever a specifics lottery result to a specific time and place. You try a bunch of settings and compare the output you got vs the output you expected (which you cleverly recorded and documented a week later, 50 years ago, in some way that stood the test of time). You see it didn't work well, so you fiddle with some parameters or knobs or the vitamins you're taking, and try again.if you have lots and lots of test cases, you may need 1000s of experiments to get it right. And just imagine how hard it could be in 50 years to get the lottery numbers of this coming Saturday if you didn't record them and documented it all nicely.

3) I believe your planning, intentions and commitment also contribute a lot to the probability wave functions that will coalesce into the future. If the aren't separate time lines, you can model the universe at the last moment in time doing an optimal calculation backwards in time and finding a low energy (optimal, given some sense of optimal if there is a god) solution. You want to set things up so that the future in which this happens is part of this optimal solution. Writ down your intentions. Plan out a series of experiments and then stick to them even after you have won the lottery, so that your future self can leave some of the early experiments alone and populate them only once everything works. But unless you don't fully intend to, and then stick to the plan, that becomes an impossible solution to the ultimate reverse optimisation of the universe.

4) use a number of different ways in which the data is generated and stored for different sets of experiments. Eg. What about an analog radio that you record digitally and then look for sequences of 1000 bytes where the avg is higher than 66% of max and decode it as 1, lower thn 33% a 0. Run the same experiment for a few days, the change parameters. Record everything. Eg the exact location and orientation of the radio, the temperature, etc, exact time, anything you can think of.. You never know what could be making a difference. Repeat many times.

Your future self can then try something and check the output file immediately to see if it worked. If you have MANY instances a day, when in the future you sit down and perform the data send, See the results and twiddle. save all the results of the incorrect predictions as well. Any programmer can tell you you can only fix the bug if you can see it going wrong.

5) try mental techniques as well, other toys that can be useful are from Psyleron.org (I have no interest, but for the number of ppl I've put on to them I should be asking for commas!) I love my mind lamp. The reg-1 needs Mac and Linux drivers.

6) Buy at least 1 litter ticket per week decide on a system for deciding which results you will use. If a result you didn't use turns out correct, add an experiment run where you re-create the conditions of that experiment as closely as possible a number of times. Maybe 50 years from now getting the exact frequency is a problem.

7) don't be surprised to make a few small wins quickly that can finance lots of experiments and research. That would be a sensible approach for your future self to drive to achieve a low energy, high likelihood outcome.

Wow. Now I'm all inspired to try a few variations of this myself!

reply to post by asciikewl


Thanks for the suggestions, you offer many good ideas, especially about recording everything properly. Star for the help friend! And I hope you have success in your experiments!

reply to post by Stunspot


Yip, the faster than light thing. That outs a definite limit on the max distance the info could travel in a non accelerating frame of reference. But I don't think that puts any limit on the time experienced. To the relativity equations the direction of time is immaterial. If you think that sending info forward in time, by accelerating the carrier close to light speed eg.light in optical fibre , the time taken from the point of view of the light is basically zero. (from the point of view of the photon, the time between emission from a star and hitting your retina is zero, so forward acceleration in time we experience whenever we look at a star, should be symmetrical for reverse direction of travel). The small differences between our frame of ref and a true non-accelerating frame of red will add up over time and make it progressively more difficult.

About schroedingers cat: my cats are definitely observers. The superposition could only start once the cat has died

About recording to eg hard drive as counting as an observation, I have read of an experiment where the someone tested this and the outcome suggested the computer does not count as an observer. A quick look about has not turned up the reference, it could have been in the PEAR lab info (quite reliable I think), Talbots Holographic universe (somewhat reliable) or McTaggards the Field (popular compilation).

If this is true, I'd live to run an experiment to see exactly at which point of attention the observer effect kicks in.

Originally posted by tkwasny

Originally posted by voyger2
I believe, you can do this by sending information through your dream's.

edit on 30-7-2012 by voyger2 because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-7-2012 by voyger2 because: (no reason given)

Listen to your conscience. That "voice" is you in the distant future (hopefully distant) after you have died and is in the process of time dwelling inside the vessel which is your soul, trying to tell you what's best for you now that KNOW what's "on the other side". You are your "guardian angel".

edit on 30-7-2012 by tkwasny because: typo fix.

I understand the meaning of your consideration and I accept as a plausible one. I will add that, maybe, intuition can be closer to your argument.

Thank’s for the reply.

Obviously it's simple enough to send a message into the future, just put the message in a place where it is likely to last a long time and be found at some point in the future. For instance our posts on ATS will probably last a long time into the future and be read by future humans.

Technically that is not sending it to the future only allowing it to continuously remain in the present.

Originally posted by g0dhims3lf

Obviously it's simple enough to send a message into the future, just put the message in a place where it is likely to last a long time and be found at some point in the future. For instance our posts on ATS will probably last a long time into the future and be read by future humans.

Technically that is not sending it to the future only allowing it to continuously remain in the present.

And a future present from our current present is a future time. Each second we are alive we are travelling through time in one direction. A message created now that ends up in tact at some point in the future has travelled through time, it's just done it at the normal rate of time, it's didn't skip any period of time to reach its destination.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


Then it would have traveled with time and not through time. Otherwise we would all be time traveling at this very moment which by definition is true but out of context with what you describe about sending a note back in time suggesting moving at a different rate of time than what is normal.

reply to post by g0dhims3lf

Otherwise we would all be time traveling at this very moment which by definition is true but out of context with what you describe about sending a note back in time suggesting moving at a different rate of time than what is normal.

Now you're just being argumentative. That example of sending messages into the future has no bearing on the actual concept of receiving messages from the future, I was just merely pointing out sending messages into the future is not interesting in any way because it can easily be achieved, that is the only relevant context.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


Opposing views is what this site is all about, Im sure I can go through your post and conclude that you too are being argumentative (not going to). I was just pointing out that your two examples were not interchangeable as they were talking about two different forms of time travel. The only reason allowing a message to get to the what is considered the future at the time of the present in that way would be boring is because it is not instantaneous.

I've thought about this over the years... just some brain storming

You want a piece of energy in a black box to change at a certain time which would likely have to be predetermined... so you're sitting there at midnight august 30th when the black box in the future is supposed to be manipulating its piece of information so that it can be read by you in the form of some instrument attached to a screen, this portion of the machine would make it human readable.This is the only way that I could see it remotely plausible (not even fleshing out the black box at this point). If it was something that actually transmitted a signal then the earth would be in a completely different location and the receiver would never register it even if it would have worked... This is still a problem within the black box too though unless it would be a quantum computer (not susceptible to propagation delays in normal chips etc) where everything happens at once. If everything we see and can touch are just little pieces of 'strings' moving through time then a separate computer could calculate how to manipulate the black box to disturb it in a fashion that could be read in the past. So the root problem is really how do you disturb something that it changes the past... even if it comes down to observing things at a quantum level to change their present behavior it still doesn't reach into the past...

I feel like it should though somehow because of what I have read regarding breakdowns of time due to lack of conscious observance..

I dunno... fun to think about!

Love the ideas here. If you look at what we already have when it comes to technology it could be possible. When we request information via the internet we get it almost instantly however we can't receive it before we request it. Maybe by setting up an application which sends and receives data without us requesting it then transfer it faster than light you could possibly receive it in the past. E.g for the lottery numbers it would connect to the site, store the numbers and pass them back to display in the application in the past.

Since computers are designed to handle information, could it be possible to manipulate data in this way?

Just a thought. hope to hear loads more ideas on this.

this has already happened. information has been sent through time. i had specifically in mind quantum entanglement experiments where information about a no longer existing particle had effects on the measurement of a chain of particles in the present ending in the quantum information of the third particle from the past being changed because of the measurement in the present. that was an actual peer reviewed experiment.

additionally feynman and Wheeler's absorber theory has spooky action at a distance being explained by waves travelling both forward and backward in time to appear to instantaneous whilst still really obeying the light speed limitation of relativity.

applied to Mach's principle; inertia would be explained this way. inertia pushed back the instant you push on an object but inertia is a radiative field and should be limited to light speed or slower. but it is instantaneous.

in a related note: time travel can be paradox free: www.businessinsider.in...