Time Travel and Parallel Universes can’t exist because they are based on the view that a self truly exists in the past, present, and future. There are multiple world systems but that’s different from the idea of parallel universes which says that there are multiple versions of you in parallel universes. It assumes that a self exist here and in other universes. The idea of time travel assumes that a self exists in the past, present and future. If time travel was possible, a person would be able to go to the past with their physical body and talk to their past self, which is based on the view that a self simultaneously exists in the past and also in the present and two versions of yourself could talk to one another. Recollecting past lives is different from time traveling because one is just recollecting the past, not physically traveling and talking to your past self or others and having new conversations with them.
Sarvastivadi doctrine is all dharma exist all the time (past, present, future) - Google Search
If so, past, present and future can’t be different. How can they be? Such question was (probably) never asked, so no answer for that.
If the past, the present and the future are the same, how is it possible to travel to the past or future?
Sarvastivadi view is that the self is not changing, but constant and permanent.
Then, the self cannot have the past or future that do not exist at the present. That is why they see the past and the future exist right now.
I can imagine a robot time travelling. And a robot in parallel universes. So I don’t buy your logic.
Hello Venerable Sir,
A robot time traveling is also not possible because of the same reason. It assumes that the world exists in ultimate reality when it doesn’t. The world is just ultimate materiality. All physical matter are just kalapas and in each kalapa there are the earth, water, fire, air, color, smell, taste and nutritive essence which are all arising and perishing very quickly. The past has already ceased so it doesn’t exist at the same time as the present. It’s not like this: humans from 2026 are living their life and at the same time humans from 2020 are also living their life in two different worlds/timelines. Those two times can’t coexist because the past has already ceased. It also wouldn’t make sense for there to be two version of an Enlightened Being(one who is Enlightened and one who is not yet enlightened) existing at the same time.
Time traveling assumes that there is a permanent essence. When one breaks down the world and people into ultimate reality: there are just ultimate materiality and mentality.
There are just kalapas which are still not ultimate reality.
These in each kalapa are ultimate reality and are arising and perishing very quickly
- Pathavī (Earth): Hardness, solidity
- Āpo (Water): Cohesion, fluidity
- Tejo (Fire): Heat, coldness
- Vāyo (Air): Motion, pressure
- Vaṇṇa (Color): Appearance
- Gandha (Smell): Odor
- Rasa (Taste): Flavor
- Ojā (Nutrition): Nutritive essence
The mind arises and perishes even quicker. There are mental processes which consists of mind moments and in each mind moment there are mental factors that do their own function. There is the bare knowing of an object. There is perception, feeling, attention, one pointedness, and other mental factors.
There is no permanent self or world or timelines.
The past has already ceased and the future has not arrived yet. It’s possible for one to see a vision of the past or future but the past and future don’t exist at the same time as the present. It’s not possible for someone or something to travel to the past or future.
It’s one thing to speculate whether time travel (whether for humans or robots, etc.) is theoretically possible, and another thing entirely to speculate if humans could ever get to a place where they could create such technology in the first place at all. After all, humans are led by attachment, aversion, and ignorance. This is why we have so much war, conflict, and so on. Just look at this thread for context:
The Ancient World, which had trade routes spanning thousands of miles without which it’s societies could not have reached the heights they did, collapsed in 1177 BC and we enetered a dark age. Rome collapsed in 476 AD and we enetered a dark age. Every empire has collapsed. Because of complexity meeting our attachment, aversion, and ignorance, if we are highly dependant on each other due to trade, our civilizations will collapse. Creating such technologies necessitates being in collaboration for very long periods of time as a necessary prerequisite to develop the necessary knowledge, store it, develop technologies, etc. Why should we entertain the idea that society could ever collectively get to such a point before resetting itself again? To me it is just as fantastical as speculating about time-travel itself, imo. But it is usually only historians that don’t think that “Star Trek is next Tuesday”.
In sum: I doubt we’ll ever make it there.
That said, I am enjoying the discussion.
R
as noted by @HappinessSeeker and @Dhamma001 time travel is not possible.
The nature of all dhammas is that they arise and cease. They are there for an instant and then gone, never to reappear. This entire material universe from a second ago has utterly disintegrated.
Because there are the causes for the production of new materiality, that may be very similar to the fallen away matter, it seems as if things remain: a delusion hard to get beyond I think.
Very useful to reflect often on this, the beginning of developing of anicca-sanna.
General relativity allows time travel to the past.
Time travel to the future is already possible just by special relativity. The personal time of a person or observer or thing that travels near the speed of light is slower than those travelling far below the speed of light. That’s how they arrive in the future, that is more time has passed for other things than the one travelling.
But there’s bending of space and time, so that there can be arrival at a time before one sets out. Especially any travel faster than light, which is implied by some of the teleportation powers in the canon to be faster than light. So one cannot have one without the other. If one admits anything with information can travel faster than light, one has to admit time travel to the past according to special relativity. And special relativity is much more solid footing compared to general relativity.
For parallel universes, there’s already one form which is needed in the Buddhist cosmology viewpoint. That is infinite past. Given a finite set of possibilities for material things to position themselves and finite range of velocity, limited by Planck scale physic and quantum, it’s a given that certain arrangements of matter would repeat infinitely if we go back far enough in time.
So it makes sense that the Buddha would say that a lady had cried over her dead daughter by the same name 500 times already in the past. They can also be of the same physical shape, down to the same moles. One stream of living being being reborn, even the chances of being human is small, had ready been to a lot of shape of human beings, non-binary, the most beautiful girl in the world, the most handsome man, the worse looking too. The strongest and weakest, some infinitely many times.
So there’s no aprior reason why these configurations cannot be repeated for parallel universes. Given that there’s infinite past Buddhas who had liberated infinite past arahants and there’s still unenlightened beings, we need some sort of multiverse to house infinite “initial” sentient beings.
Hello, Bhante. I don’t think this is true time travel per se , but more of a traveler potentially using time dilation to their advantage. There are a number of problems with this, as you know. The first being that we do not have materials that could withstand traveling that close to the speed of light, and definitely not beyond it (as anything with mass cannot physically do that). The second is that the bodies of living beings cannot withstand traveling that close to the speed of light either. So even if it were theoretically possible*, it would be a moot point unless those seemingly insurmountable obstacles were somehow overcome.
But imagining we could get to that point, it appears it would still be the same nāma and rūpa for the travelers, arising in the same continuum, based on the same conditions. The only thing is that for the travelers, time would appear to have moved much quicker, and for the observers, much slower. This may be because time is simply a concept, and is not real in the ultimate sense. And the salient point would be that it would be the same nāma and rūpa arising in the same continuum in all cases—nothing different there, as it is simply time dilation. 
*An example would be travellers hypothetically travelling close to the speed of light to a location that is light years away. They would arrive at their desired location in what would functionally be weeks or months to them. To any outside observers who did not travel at those speeds, though, much more time would have appeared to pass—possibly hundreds or even thousands of years.
In summary, perhaps it is possible in theory, but there is no evidence that it is possible practically. Secondly, the technology to do it would be a long way off, and we will almost definitely not make it there as a civilization either (who knows how much longer we will make it). And perhaps most importantly, since it appears to be only time dilation, this would not appear to contradict or violate anything in the Abhidhamma.
It’s just science fiction.
R
You’re just mentioning about time travel to the future, not mentioning about the more controversial time travel to the past. There is nothing you wrote about time travel to the future which is troublesome. It is what it is, unlikely to be practical anytime soon, high tech and so on.
However, I sense there’s a motivation to put even time travel to the future down. I wonder why.
Is there some expectation or hope of something relating to time travel and parallel universes?
Well said, Venerable.
Further, time dilation can fulfill a great deal of the mechanics that usually are associated with time travel and is demonstrably real.
I mentioned this already. I pointed out that objects with mass cannot travel faster than the speed of light. All matter has mass excpet for some massless bosons like gluons which are never found free in nature. This means that sentient beings and spacecrafts can never travel faster than the speed of light. That means that they can never appear to travel backwards in time. Travelling faster than the speed of light is necessary for that, and to do so, you must not have mass.
Respectfully, Bhante, because it is simply impractical. Humans cannot travel close to the speed of light either, which is what would be needed to do it. Our bodies would not be able to withstand it, we do not have the technology to make us travel close to those speeds, and there are no materials which could withstand such travel either.
Not really, not from my end. If you find it interesting to think about, that is fine. I am a much more practical thinker. As an example, I know, for one, that I possess mass.
R
I recommend reading up on alcubierre drive, wormholes, expansion of the universe carrying galaxies, and various other time machine like things in general relativity then.
Practical is not my concern, as the title of this topic is exist or not, which I take it as if it is possible, it can exist, however impractical it can be.
Who knows of advanced psychic powers can manipulate the quantum foam to gather together negative mass enough to make FTL possible.
Very interesting. Thanks, Bhante. I would agree that perhaps with psychic powers it could be achieved.
R
Respectfully, once we are parsing what is actually time travel proper versus just using relativity to advantage it becomes a purely semantic argument. Relativity allowances alone are deep into time travel territory unless parsed into pure semantics. Once we are into pure semantics it’s a matter of opinion and no longer a rational debate.
The semantics aren’t the point here, Zans. You can call it time travel, or just call it using time dilation to your advantage. Either way, it is impractical. That’s the point.
Perhaps with psychic powers a person could gather enough dark matter into themselves to cancel out their mass and be massless (but then maybe they will cancel themselves out of existence?). They would also have to do that inside a scientifically designed craft and do the same for it. Then maybe they could travel faster than light. Or they would then have to use their psychic powers to propel their now massless body at that speed somewhere (and why would they do this?).
I knew this was going to turn into a science fiction discussion. Why did I know that? Becuase, I now repeat myself like a broken record: sentient beings have mass, beings with mass cannot travel faster than the speed of light, nor can they witshtand traveling very close to the speed of light, nor do we have materials that can withstand it. It is completely impractical, etc.
You guys can continue discussing this fantasy all you like. I have to admit that I am done with it. I say that respectfually because I enjoy the company of everyone in this thread. Thanks for the disccussion.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/impractical
R
If an argument is purely semantic, then it is no longer a disagreement about objective scientific matters, but about definitions and framing.
The Venerable @Paññādhammika seems to be arguing from an objective scientific perspective. Once it is reframed by you as purely semantic you are talking past each other.
Firstly, he did not object to my framing it as people simply using time dilation to their advantage. I can only assume that he can speak for himself and that he would have objected to my doing so if he wanted to. Secondly, I already explained, in my last post, that it doesn’t matter to me which terms are used. I said, “you can call it time travel”. It’s a non-issue for me and it is very, very far from the main point for me (read: call it time travel all you like. I won’t disagree and my main points are still the same). Is that clear enough for you?
Thirdly, I had left the discussion in a place where the Venerable and I could both agree on something and leave it at that, until it was restarted again, for some reason, for this discussion about semantics.
Also, Zans, I had already announced that I was respectfully leaving the discussion. Now is everything cleared up for you on the semantics issue? I hope I have been 100% clear that you can call it “time travel” all you like and that I will not object to that.
R
Time travel to the future is not controversial.
Time travel to the past is in question and the more miraculous one. Whatever semantics thing for time travel to the future, it does not matter because it already happens to muons from cosmic rays, and other particles in particle accelerators.
Dark matter is not the same as negative mass. Dark energy maybe closer, but still I think not the same.
On parallel universes, there’s many different types of multiverse, there’s the quantum many world and infinite space universe type.
Given some assumptions, they are almost the same.
The infinite space universe is that beyond the observable universe radius, there’s still more space. And at each point in the universe, the boundaries of the observer universe is a sphere centred on that point. So if we go far enough, we get 2 sphere of observable universe, next to each other, not overlapping. And then for a universe which is spacial infinite, there’s infinite number of this observable universe bubble. As the argument used previously, there is a limited about of position and velocity space for matter in this finite volume of observable universe to arrange itself in.
So go far enough in space, we are bound to meet an observable universe which has the exact same configuration as ours, limited by quantum uncertainty measurements. Same history etc.
There’s no surprise to find a human of the same name, having the same DNA, same looks, basically almost the same mind (maybe different in very far past lives). There’s nothing in this scenario which contradicts no self doctrine. That person with the same name and body as me, doing exactly what I am doing now is not me. This body is also not me. Whatever the 5 aggregates arrange themselves to be, they follow natural laws. There’s no self to be found anywhere there.
So the doctrine of no self doesn’t place limitations on how the 5 aggregates function except that nothing can be permanent.