That's like saying that diamonds are time travelers because they don't degrade if you leave them alone.
This is factually incorrect. Diamonds are made of carbon and their atoms decay and interact with the world like anything else. They just operate on a different time SCALE than we normally observe. Also it's kind of intentionally diverting the conversation because the concept of time travel is meaningless to something that can't conceive of time.
But bucky was periodically woken up so what is his "biological age"
Tough to say specifically. It would be a combination of all the time periods he was active, plus probably some degree of additional aging if you assume the freezing/unfreezing process isn't instant and/or takes an additional toll on the body.
OmnipotentBagel on
0
Options
TrippyJingMoses supposes his toeses are roses.But Moses supposes erroneously.Registered Userregular
I think time travel should involve messing with the space-time continuum somehow, in a way which cryogenically freezing someone explicitly doesn't.
I think time travel should involve messing with the space-time continuum somehow, in a way which cryogenically freezing someone explicitly doesn't.
Why? Even the space-time continuum as a broad concept is just an abstraction we create to help make sense of the world. It always comes back to what systems are interacting. If you calculate, for example, the rate of decay of cells in a body that was cryogenically frozen in the sense we're discussing, that math will look the same as it does on someone who simply disappeared and point A and reappeared at point B.
since Cap probably wasn't frozen on his birthday, his biological birthday should not be July 4th anymore.
Also he was frozen on a leap year and unfrozen on the year before a leap year, so there's gonna be an additional offset there.
This is true. Or, at least, his age would be offset. I imagine he'd still celebrate July 4 because most people prefer to celebrate the calendar anniversary of the day they were born as opposed to their actual aging process itself. Normally that distinction doesn't come up, but here we have it.
Now that I think about it, I really want to see Cap's planner where he has all the important stuff marked out. "Birthday (celebration)", "Birthday (technically)", "Day I was frozen", "Day I was thawed out", "Day I became Captain America".
since Cap probably wasn't frozen on his birthday, his biological birthday should not be July 4th anymore.
Also he was frozen on a leap year and unfrozen on the year before a leap year, so there's gonna be an additional offset there.
This is true. Or, at least, his age would be offset. I imagine he'd still celebrate July 4 because most people prefer to celebrate the calendar anniversary of the day they were born as opposed to their actual aging process itself. Normally that distinction doesn't come up, but here we have it.
Well it comes up for people who were born February 29th. In those cases you kind of have to go to the formal recursive definition of birthday as "365 days after my last birthday, or 366 days after my last birthday if it is a leap year and it is February 29th or later in the year".
So in short you have to celebrate it March 1st.
If you're IDing someone who was born on February 29th and it's February 28th on the year where they're gonna turn 18/21, you should deny them.
since Cap probably wasn't frozen on his birthday, his biological birthday should not be July 4th anymore.
Also he was frozen on a leap year and unfrozen on the year before a leap year, so there's gonna be an additional offset there.
This is true. Or, at least, his age would be offset. I imagine he'd still celebrate July 4 because most people prefer to celebrate the calendar anniversary of the day they were born as opposed to their actual aging process itself. Normally that distinction doesn't come up, but here we have it.
Well it comes up for people who were born February 29th. In those cases you kind of have to go to the formal recursive definition of birthday as "365 days after my last birthday, or 366 days after my last birthday if it is a leap year and it is February 29th or later in the year".
So in short you have to celebrate it March 1st.
If you're IDing someone who was born on February 29th and it's February 28th on the year where they're gonna turn 18/21, you should deny them.
But now I'm the pedantic one.
That's exactly why my grandmother got to celebrate her 50th wedding anniversary at something like 18 years old.
So what I'm taking from this is that sleeping vampires are time travelers.
Nope.
They still presumably have brain wave activity, and while the aging process is different for them, they're still digesting and processing the blood that grants them their youth.
This wouldn't be an issue if majority came at 16 or 20, which would also be a nice round number that makes sense!
Well, it would be an issue for people born February 29th, 2080 (or 2080, or any XX80 other than 1980 in the case of majority being at 20).
God, some super scientist really needs to slightly alter Earth's orbit so we can be free of this nonsense once and for all.
All told, we're actually kinda lucky that years happen to be so close to accurate to a quarter-day as they are.
Imagine if years were actually 365+pi squared days long
figure that out
0
Options
GustavFriend of GoatsSomewhere in the OzarksRegistered Userregular
edited April 2016
I still love Doctor Who's approach to time travel and continuity. It's frankly impossible to have a strict continuity when you have at least half a dozen time travelling cultures going around and constantly changing things.
Gustav on
0
Options
WACriminalDying Is Easy, Young ManLiving Is HarderRegistered Userregular
Yes, Steve and Bucky were each unchanged by the passage of time. But hypothetically, they could have been changed during the passage of time if someone had, like, come up and drawn a dick on their forehead while they were frozen. So even though they were unchanged, they were not actually immune to change from outside forces during their "travel", which...seems central to the concept of actual time travel, in my opinion.
+4
Options
StraightziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered Userregular
Yes, Steve and Bucky were each unchanged by the passage of time. But hypothetically, they could have been changed during the passage of time if someone had, like, come up and drawn a dick on their forehead while they were frozen. So even though they were unchanged, they were not actually immune to change from outside forces during their "travel", which...seems central to the concept of actual time travel, in my opinion.
So do you also discount any form of non-instantaneous time travel?
Frequently in time travel media, time is seen as being similar to a river that is accessible in a time machine as a form of physical space. Especially when we're talking like, time-traveling vehicles, like the phone booth from Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure. Events can occur in that non-time period, therefore those aren't time travel?
Straightzi on
0
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
Of all the incredibly stupid conversations we've had in this thread I think this might be the most civil?
Yes, Steve and Bucky were each unchanged by the passage of time. But hypothetically, they could have been changed during the passage of time if someone had, like, come up and drawn a dick on their forehead while they were frozen. So even though they were unchanged, they were not actually immune to change from outside forces during their "travel", which...seems central to the concept of actual time travel, in my opinion.
Hmm, this is a good argument, although I've definitely seen more traditional time travel scenarios where the act of actually jumping through time still had an impact on the traveler in some way.
Of all the incredibly stupid conversations we've had in this thread I think this might be the most civil?
Well done
You might say it was a
civil war
Goddammit.
Also, I guess the non-instantaneous time travel argument is a good one. I didn't think about that. However, in those situations, aren't the travelers still (usually) immune to anyone/anything that isn't traveling with them?
Posts
This is factually incorrect. Diamonds are made of carbon and their atoms decay and interact with the world like anything else. They just operate on a different time SCALE than we normally observe. Also it's kind of intentionally diverting the conversation because the concept of time travel is meaningless to something that can't conceive of time.
The sum of all of the time he spent defrosted
Tough to say specifically. It would be a combination of all the time periods he was active, plus probably some degree of additional aging if you assume the freezing/unfreezing process isn't instant and/or takes an additional toll on the body.
since Cap probably wasn't frozen on his birthday, his biological birthday should not be July 4th anymore.
Also he was frozen on a leap year and unfrozen on the year before a leap year, so there's gonna be an additional offset there.
Why? Even the space-time continuum as a broad concept is just an abstraction we create to help make sense of the world. It always comes back to what systems are interacting. If you calculate, for example, the rate of decay of cells in a body that was cryogenically frozen in the sense we're discussing, that math will look the same as it does on someone who simply disappeared and point A and reappeared at point B.
https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
This is true. Or, at least, his age would be offset. I imagine he'd still celebrate July 4 because most people prefer to celebrate the calendar anniversary of the day they were born as opposed to their actual aging process itself. Normally that distinction doesn't come up, but here we have it.
Also YAY Doctor Strange trailer!
Well it comes up for people who were born February 29th. In those cases you kind of have to go to the formal recursive definition of birthday as "365 days after my last birthday, or 366 days after my last birthday if it is a leap year and it is February 29th or later in the year".
So in short you have to celebrate it March 1st.
If you're IDing someone who was born on February 29th and it's February 28th on the year where they're gonna turn 18/21, you should deny them.
But now I'm the pedantic one.
Well, it would be an issue for people born February 29th, 2080 (or 2080, or any XX80 other than 1980 in the case of majority being at 20).
Esad Ribic Image title? I'm IN
Steam
That's exactly why my grandmother got to celebrate her 50th wedding anniversary at something like 18 years old.
God, some super scientist really needs to slightly alter Earth's orbit so we can be free of this nonsense once and for all.
This is the dumbest question I've ever read.
Of course vampires are time travelers.
Nope.
They still presumably have brain wave activity, and while the aging process is different for them, they're still digesting and processing the blood that grants them their youth.
Almost, but as far as I know, vampires are still cognizant while sleeping.
Wait, do vampires dream of undead sheep?
All told, we're actually kinda lucky that years happen to be so close to accurate to a quarter-day as they are.
Imagine if years were actually 365+pi squared days long
figure that out
So do you also discount any form of non-instantaneous time travel?
Frequently in time travel media, time is seen as being similar to a river that is accessible in a time machine as a form of physical space. Especially when we're talking like, time-traveling vehicles, like the phone booth from Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure. Events can occur in that non-time period, therefore those aren't time travel?
Well done
Hmm, this is a good argument, although I've definitely seen more traditional time travel scenarios where the act of actually jumping through time still had an impact on the traveler in some way.
You might say it was a
civil war
Okay I was literally just about to make the same joke. Everything else I could forgive, but this is too far.
No, the best thing you'll have ever heard is how they'll fight it:
Sunspot had AIM create a Jaeger just for this sort of situation.
And it requires a crew of 6 so I guess it's got a bit of Zord/Voltron thrown in. Teamwork!
I could applaud or I could erase you from history
Or maybe both
Steam
Goddammit.
Also, I guess the non-instantaneous time travel argument is a good one. I didn't think about that. However, in those situations, aren't the travelers still (usually) immune to anyone/anything that isn't traveling with them?
If you destroy Simon, there will be no one left to stop me. You will create a monster greater than what came before.
I actually like this less? Seems a little forced.
Serves me right