Time travel, its possibility, and its representation in the media

Over the past several decades, the topic of time travel has been considered and discussed by physicists, philosophers, journalists, presenters, and lay people. Movies have been made that feature time travel as the main plot or as one of the essential elements of the movie plot.

Some of these movies were entertaining or pleasant, but that does not mean that these movies are accurate or that time travel is possible.

Time travel, whether backwards or forwards, including changing or turning back time, is essentially a speculative, theoretical extrapolation of existing physical theories such as the theory of special relativity. Without getting into all the details or into long philosophical considerations, I esteem that time travel is not really possible or realistically doable.

Various explanations or interpretations have been provided in books or textbooks concerning time travel.

In some good textbooks dealing with the theory of relativity, it is pointed out that experiments have been carried out and have verified the time dilation equation (for example, expriments with muons, with mu mesons, …), but it is also indicated that the phenomenon is called apparent time dilation. In a similar way the phenomenon of length contraction is called apparent length contraction.

Let’s analyze as examples one or two movies featuring time travel and related effects in their plot.

In the movie Superman I starring Christopher Reeve, Superman turns back time as an emotional reaction to the death of Lois Lane. This type of action can be realistically described as a useless, naive action going against the rules of physics.

The scene in the Superman movie seems to assume that the entire world consists of planet Earth. How about “turning around” the solar system, or around the Galaxy, or around the Local Group of galaxies, and so on.

Turning back the rotation of the Earth could very well have devastating effects on everything and everyone on the planet. Not to mention the gravitational perturbations and disturbances affecting the Moon, the planets, the entire solar system, and beyond.

I think it would have been better if the writers had told the story differently, without killing Lois Lane or having Superman “turn back time”.

Time travel has been used and abused in sci-fi movies, and in movies or tv series by DC comics and Marvel comics, as some sort of deus ex machina or ultimate solution to fix everything or to set everything straight. Regrettably, this does not add to the accuracy or credibility of these movies. It also does not make them more realistic or convincing, even when exercising or trying to apply one’s suspension of disbelief.

In the movie Interstellar, physicist Kip Thorne worked out the equations that depict the path of light waves traveling through a wormhole or around a black hole. The visual effects in the film are based on the gravitational theory and the field equations of general relativity.

“Interstellar” is based on generally accurate existing theoretical and scientific concepts like neutron stars, spinning black holes, accretion disks, and time dilation.

Wormholes are theoretical physical entities that are considered to be like tunnels or shortcuts through the geometry of spacetime, connecting different parts of the universe.

According to the story in the movie, a crew of space explorers travel on an extra-galactic journey through a wormhole. They reach on the other side another solar system with a spinning black hole for a sun.

The spaceship’s destination is Gargantua, a supermassive black hole with a mass 100 million times that of the sun, located about 10 billion light-years from Earth. Gargantua rotates at 99.8 percent of the speed of light.

The movie refers to five-dimensional reality, and five-dimensional space is described in the movie as a form of extra-dimensional “tesseract” where time appears as a spatial dimension. The movie plot mentions and uses the concepts of time travel and time dilation.

I want to note that while this movie uses mostly accurate existing theoretical notions in physics, I think that the concepts of time travel and time dilation are nevertheless debatable theoretical and speculative consequences and extrapolations of physical theories such as the theory of relativity, that time travel cannot physically happen, and that it can generally be clarified by other explanations, such as being an apparent effect. In this sense, I think the use of time travel and time dilation diminishes the preciseness and undermines the realistic, plausible character of the movie.

Considering the possibility that in the future rigorous scientific experiments are made and these experiments prove the possibility of faster-than-light speeds and travel, the effects, nature and consequences of faster-than-light speeds should be carefully studied, but I don’t think time travel will be one of those consequences.

Then perhaps new equations, new explanations or new physics rules or laws would have to be formulated. Or perhaps the speed of light would be somewhat viewed like the speed of sound as a limiting speed representing a certain type of singularity. In any case, these are just speculations or general ideas at the present time.

To conclude (again), I think time travel (to the past as well as to the future ) is not possible and will not happen.

A way of proving this could be found not only in physics or in the physical or natural sciences, but also in the objective study of the structure and the rules of (human) historical events, and the realization that there are ‘laws’, patterns and regularities which govern these events.

There will be regrettably no “quantum leap time travel machine”, and no “quantum realm time machine”, these expressions illustrating how the word “quantum” is inaccurately used as a hype word in a attempt to add a veneer of “scientificity” or plausibility to the movies using them. Nobody will be able to travel in time to kill this or that person, or to change history. The Terminator will not and cannot be sent back in time, neither to save nor to kill John and Sarah Connor. The time machine in the eponymous novel by H.G. Wells is not feasible and will not work. The DC comics character the Flash will sadly not be able to change and reverse timelines, or to travel back in time to change past events. I could go on mentioning other examples, novels, works and movies, but I think I got the idea across.

The last several decades witnessed a craze or a fad for entertaining movies involving or dealing with time travel, but I consider that time travel movies, or in general movies that rely on time travel as a plot twist, plot device or as a deus ex machina to solve everything, lack scientific accuracy, and I suggest that moviemakers increasingly stop using time travel altogether, because in the future or in the next decades these types of movies will be viewed or assessed negatively.

Connections and relations between Noah and essential ancient deities, part 2, conclusions and notes

I will continue my exposition and analysis started in a previous post about the links between Noah and the chief god(s) in ancient cultures and religions.

In addition to his scientific contributions, Isaac Newton was known for his interest in occult topics, and for his particular or peculiar religious convictions. That said, he had some insights about the history of ancient religions, and expounded ideas and opinions that were held by scholars and authors during the 17th century and earlier centuries.

Newton expounded his views and ideas about the history of religions mostly in his manuscript document entitled ‘Theologiae gentilis origines philosophicae’ (Philosophical Origins of Gentile Theology). The contents of this document are discussed in the book Never at Rest, a Biography of Isaac Newton, by Richard Westfall:

“The ‘Origines’ started with the argument that all the ancient peoples worshiped the same twelve gods under different names.The gods were divinized ancestors-in fact Noah, his sons, and his grandchildren-though as this religion passed from people to people, each used it to its own ends by identifying the gods with its own early kings and heroes.[…] All peoples worshiped one god whom they took to be the ancestor of the rest. They described him as an old and morose man and associated him with time and with the sea. Clearly, Noah furnished the original model of the god called (among other names) Saturn and Janus. Like Noah, Saturn had three sons. Every people had a god whom they depicted as a mature man, the god they held most in honor. They had translated Ham into Zeus, Jupiter, Hammon, and others.”

Another book explaining Newton’s views is NEWTON AND RELIGION, Context, Nature, and Influence, edited by James Force and Richard Popkin:

“The ‘gods’ of pagan antiquity Newton identifies with Noah and Noah’s descendants. Noah and his sons are first idolized by their people as gods and, ultimately, identified with, especially, planets. Newton argues that Noah is ultimately deified as the god Saturn.”

In light of the authors, texts and documents mentioned in this post and in the related previous post, it can be seen that the identification of chief ancient deities with biblical characters centers around Noah and his children. Sometimes Noah is described as the equivalent of Cronus/ Saturn, sometimes he is identified with Ouranos, or with Zeus/Jupiter.

I think the best and most accurate description of Noah is to identify him with Zeus or Jupiter. Zeus or the other names by which he was known (Jupiter, Amun-Ra, Marduk, Baal, …, with some small differences or variations in their attributes, roles, and characteristics) as a supreme god in Antiquity was revered, followed or worshipped during many centuries. It is the most plausible explanation that the important and essential biblical character named Noah is the same person as the essential supreme deity known as Zeus or Jupiter, and also known by other names. Moreover, let us note that some authors identified the supreme god Ahura Mazda with Zeus, and that the chief Hindu god Indra has many common characteristics with Zeus.

Thus it can be stated that the story of Noah is the Biblical or monotheistic version of the story of Zeus or Jupiter, or equivalently, the Biblical character or figure Noah is the monotheistic version of (and the same person or original historical figure as) the non-monotheistic or polytheistic character and deity called Zeus or Jupiter.

It it possible to provide some additional explanations and clarifications.

The ancient Hebrews, their scribes and priests, or the followers of the (mainly monotheistic) Biblical religion in Antiquity and many others very likely knew about the connection between Noah and the deity called Zeus, Baal or Jupiter. This connection was more and more forgotten with the passing of years and centuries, notably in the centuries following the beginning of the Christian era. It is possible to argue or note that the conflicts or disagreements between the ancient monotheistic followers of the biblical religion and the (mostly polytheistic) people around them (from the ancient Egyptians and the Canaanites to the Greeks and Romans) were similar to the conflicts and disagreements between the followers of Islam, who viewed Jesus as a very important prophet, and the followers of Christianity, who regarded Jesus as the divine son of God and equal to God.

These connections and relations became somewhat blurred and unclear with time, causing some confusion, and leading various authors in the last few centuries to surmise and write that either Noah or his son Ham or his son Japheth could be identified with Zeus/Jupiter.

A man lived in the ancient past about two millennia before the start of the Christian era. This great man initiated new innovative teachings and ideas, and accomplished important deeds, which included piloting a ship that was unique in its kind and represented a great technological achievement. There were possibly a few animals on the ship, or not. The animals were mostly the results of posterior modifications and embellishments of the story. There was possibly a local flood or some local floods at the time when the ship sailed, but the limited knowledge of geography people had at that time, and later transmissions, embroiderings, added metaphorical elements and retransmissions of the story described the flood as global. The followers of this man gave different interpretations to the story of his life and actions, depending on their different mentalities, views and perspectives. Some increasingly revered him after he died, and many deified him with members of his family, giving him different names in different places, such as Amun-Ra, Baal and Zeus. Some also viewed him as a great man, prophet and patriarch.

About six centuries after the passing of this man, another man named Moses and his followers, inspired by earlier narratives of the ship and the flood, interpreted the story of this earlier important patriarch and described it in a strictly monotheistic way, calling him Noah.

The same thing happened two thousand years after the passing of the one who was later named Zeus (or Noah) to the great man named Jesus, who gave new innovative teachings for his time. The followers of Jesus interpreted his story in different ways and directions in the following centuries, many revering him and deifying him. And Christianity as the religion with Jesus as its head progressively replaced the religion having Zeus or Jupiter as its head.

About six centuries after Jesus, his story was interpreted in a strictly monotheistic way by the founder of Islam and his followers, who regarded Jesus as a very important prophet. It is to be noted that Noah and Jesus are regarded as two of the five greatest and most important prophets in Islam.

Patterns and regularities can be noticed in the progress of historical events described above, which can be explained by taking into account notions such as the periodical or cyclical return of events, and the transmutation or inversion of values, related to the philosophical ideas of Nietzsche.

In ancient cultures the great flood was justified by the decision and will of the relevant supreme god. In the Bible the flood was explained by the will of the biblical monotheistic god. The flood was explained by Christians as the result of the will and involvement of the Christian God and Jesus. And so on.

Some additional variations in the biblical account of the story of Noah can be explained.

I analyzed the story of Prometheus in previous posts. Prometheus was plausibly someone who stole fire from Zeus (or Noah) by envy, hubris and greed years before the ship sailed or was navigated, and was held accountable and punished. The story of Prometheus is not mentioned in the Bible, in the same way as the story of a character like Judas Iscariot is not mentioned in the Quran.

Since it was not appropriate for the man who was deified as the supreme god Zeus (or Marduk or Jupiter) and who ordered the Deluge to be the pilot of the ship, the story was modified and the man who piloted or navigated the ship was described as someone else, named Deucalion or Utnapishtim.

I mentioned elsewhere that people in Antiquity had a more permissive view of sexuality and were not inconvenienced by incest. For example, ancient Greeks used to celebrate annually the “Hieros Gamos” or holy marriage between Zeus and his sister-wife Hera. This importance given to endogamous marriage explains why the parents of Zeus, Cronus and Rhea, were depicted in ancient stories as brother and sister, even if in real history they were not necessarily siblings. The supreme god was supposed to be fertile and sexually active in Antiquity. By contrast, Christianity highlights or emphasizes the importance of chastity and virginity; this explains the insistence on the virginity of the mother of Jesus in the centuries following the start of the Christian era.

---

Taking into consideration the results and conclusions reached in this post, I want to give some remarks about the god of war game, which I alluded to in an earlier post.

The god of war game is distorting ancient stories, religions and cultures, inciting the misunderstanding or possibly the hatred of these cultures.

From the arguments in this post, it can be seen that this is a pointless game that is not only portraying badly ancient gods and deities, but is also killing a deity like Zeus, who is the non-monotheistic version of the story of Noah. Effectively the non-biblical version of Noah is being killed in the game, and nobody seems to comprehend this.

Perhaps players of the game don’t care about anything except pushing buttons and destroying all that can destroyed in the game, or perhaps some players have other religious backgrounds or think they are killing bad gods or “demonic” versions of ancient characters. The game depicts the killing of gods of the Greek pantheon and the Norse pantheon. If in the future this game involves for example killing ancient Egyptian gods, this would be somewhat ridiculous, since Amun-Ra and other Egyptian gods are the equivalents and the Egyptian versions of Zeus and other Greek gods.

I think the best attitude is to try to be neutral and try to understand other cultures. One does not have to follow or like someone like Zeus, Odin or Hercules, but one also does not have to portray them badly and show then getting killed.

I also think this game will not have good consequences, and that it is playing with things that should not be played with.

Connections and relations between Noah and essential ancient deities, part 1

Noah in the Bible, Deucalion in ancient Greek stories and mythology, and Utnapishtim in ancient Mesopotamian stories are figures or characters associated with a story of a global flood, being the only survivors (along with some other people, depending on the version of the story) and all connected to a supreme god (or gods) who warned them and helped them survive the flood.

The story of the ship and the flood was mentioned in ancient religions such as the Sumerian, Mesopotamian and Greek religions (with some modifications), always in relation to the supreme deity.

Something that has been forgotten in the last one or two centuries is that several authors in the past stated or thought that Zeus or Jupiter was the same person as one of the earliest most important patriarchs and prophets mentioned in the Bible, his story having been modified to comply with biblical monotheism.

There are many things and facts about ancient stories and cultures that became forgotten and misunderstood.
Judaism and Abrahamic religions have their early foundations and origins in older narratives and religions that had chief gods like Amun Ra, Marduk, Baal and Zeus, who were equivalent deities and represented effectively the same supreme god with different names in different places.

I will give a general exposition of the opinions and statements of these early authors, and present my conclusions according to my readings, observations, and analysis.

Reviewing the opinions of ancient authors or authors from previous centuries, one notices that they sometimes make different inaccurate comparisons, equivalences or identifications between deities or characters, but these identifications usually center around a few specific figures. The works and opinions of these authors may sometimes be described as not compatible with modern criteria of scholarship, but they contain useful historical information and views that were transmitted, sometimes with modifications, throughout the centuries.

Jacob Bryant (1715–1804) was an English scholar and mythographer. The following lines are taken from the first volume of his work A New System or Analysis of Ancient Mythology:

“[From the evidence of ancient authors and historians, it is found that] the Deluge was the grand epoch of every ancient kingdom. It is to be observed, that when colonies made anywhere a settlement, they ingrafted their antecedent history upon the subsequent events of the place. And as in those days they could carry up the genealogy of their princes to the very source of all, it will be found, under whatever title he may come, that the first king in every country was Noah. For as he was mentioned first in the genealogy of their princes, he was in aftertimes looked upon as a real monarch; and represented as a great traveller, a mighty conqueror, and sovereign of the whole earth.”

Here are statements by Bryant from the third volume of the same work. Note that there are more accurate, modern explanations of the origin and meaning of the name of Zeus:

“Noah was the original Ζευς, Zeus, and Dios. He was the planter of the vine, and the inventor of fermented liquors: whence he was denominated Zeuth, which signifies ferment, rendered Ζευς, Zeus by the Greeks. He was also Dionusos, interpreted by the Latines Bacchus, but very improperly. Bacchus was Chus, the grandson of Noah; as Ammon may be in general esteemed Ham, so much reverenced by the Egyptians.”

The lines below are from the work of William Howitt (1792–1879), entitled The History of the Supernatural in all Ages and Nations, and in all Churches, Christian and Pagan, demonstrating a Universal Faith:

“[Referring to the ancient Phoenician author Sanchoniatho or Sanchuniathon] In the remains of the Cosmogony of this historian of the Phoenicians, we have the mythology of that people, presenting the clearest testimony of the derivation of the Greek mythology from it. The Phoenicians, the great traders to western Europe, carrying their ideas as well as their wares everywhere, planted them all around the Mediterranean, and much farther west. Danaus and Orpheus are said to have carried much mythologic knowledge from Egypt to Greece; but the Phoenician mythology bears a still greater resemblance to the Greek theogony. […] Dagon, the brother of Cronus, is evidently Noah, for he came up out of the water. Cronus had also three sons, Zeus, Belus and Apollo.

[…] we find, from Central Asia, the same gods under different names, and what is more remarkable, the same primal doctrines of a triune and yet one God surviving everywhere under the most multifarious disguises. Probably these truths were the more strongly imprinted on the ancient mind, Noah, whom they deified, having three sons, whom they had come to regard as a reappearance of Adam and his three sons, Cain, Abel, and Seth.”

There is also mention of the writings of the ancient Chaldean or Babylonian author Beros(s)us about Xisuthrus (Noah) who was warned by Cronus-Enki about the flood. Berosus was mentioned and quoted by early historians such as Eusebius of Caeserea and Josephus. He was also cited by authors such as Pliny the Elder, Seneca the Younger, and Pausanias.

It is also possible to cite the ancient Egyptian priest Manetho, who was cited by later authors, and who wrote that “the first king of Egypt belonged to the tribe of Cham [Ham], Noah’s son; he was Pharaoh, who was also called Naracho”.

According to some other authors, Noah was identified with Ouranos, Noah’s son Ham was identified with Cronus or Saturn, and Zeus was identified with Mizraim the son of Ham. Some also idendified Noah’s son Japheth with Zeus/Jupiter, probably because of a superficial comparison between the letters and the names of the characters.

This post and my conclusions will be continued in a second part.