Timeline for Is Time Travel Legal?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 5, 2022 at 14:23 | comment | added | D M | @sabbahillel You absolutely can pass a law prohibiting something which is not yet possible. There's no legal maxim saying "you have to let them do it once". | |
| Feb 14, 2018 at 19:21 | answer | added | hszmv | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 14, 2018 at 14:50 | history | protected | CommunityBot | ||
| May 14, 2017 at 9:06 | answer | added | Biggus Diccus | timeline score: -2 | |
| Nov 19, 2016 at 16:41 | comment | added | ohwilleke | Time travel is mandatory, and also one way, according to the laws of Nature which are unbreakable. | |
| Oct 4, 2016 at 3:02 | answer | added | davidgo | timeline score: 2 | |
| Oct 2, 2016 at 1:10 | answer | added | Aidan | timeline score: 10 | |
| Apr 19, 2016 at 16:19 | answer | added | user6726 | timeline score: 6 | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 22:56 | comment | added | sabbahillel | @Viktor I think that is the wrong analogy. There it was a fact that they did not know that rendered the attempted crime impossible. Here the question is would the legislature pass a law forbidding conduct that is impossible. An analogy is that someone tried to patent airplanes dropping torpedos at a time when airplanes could not drop them and torpedoes could not survive hitting the water. The court ruled he could not. Similarly the law could not be passed until time travel became (theoretically) possible | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 22:45 | comment | added | Patrick87 | Maybe not enough for an answer, but: if they ever become widespread enough that laws became necessary, bad actors could simply go back in time and assassinate those who voted for such laws, thus preventing them. Otherwise, there'd be no need for laws governing it in the first place. Of course it's likely any physically realizable time travel device would incidentally violate lots of other laws. | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 21:35 | comment | added | Viktor | @DaleM no that is clearly false. Laws don't have to make physical sense. You can ban attempted conduct. I don't see why one couldn't pass a law banning attempted time travel. | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 21:34 | comment | added | Dale M♦ | Go ask those questions on physics.se - something has to be possible by the laws of nature before you have to worry about the laws of man | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 21:33 | comment | added | Viktor | @DaleM what about traveling at 2 seconds per second? | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 21:33 | comment | added | Viktor | @DaleM what about the past? | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 21:33 | comment | added | Dale M♦ | Anyway, it's not impossible, we are all traveling into the future at 1 second per second | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 21:32 | comment | added | Viktor | @sabbahillel it is no longer a defense to (attempted) illegal conduct to argue it is factually impossible to do something, see United States v. Thomas. | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 20:47 | comment | added | sabbahillel | What basis would there be a law forbidding a non-existant technology that is currently listed as impossible? It would be like asking in 1887 is travel to the moon was legal. | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 20:07 | comment | added | childofsoong | The closest to a real answer I have for you is this: techland.time.com/2011/04/13/china-decides-to-ban-time-travel | |
| Apr 18, 2016 at 19:51 | history | asked | Viktor | CC BY-SA 3.0 |