Show Mobile Navigation

10 Craziest Scientific Theories

Crazy is such an ugly word but how else can we describe these concepts? They each try to explain some aspect of our universe in a manner that just seems bizarre. Granted, most things in the universe are odd already, and we haven’t even begun to fully understand a fraction of it, but there’s something particularly disturbing about these theories. They express ideas that are too mindboggling and inconceivable, even for fellow scientists. While none of them have been verified or completely dismissed, we should still speculate because in a universe as crazy as ours, we just never know what might be true.


Ekpyrotic Universe

00042F0D-1A0E-1085-94F483414B7F0000 P62

The ekpyrotic scenario provides an alternative to the widely accepted Big Bang theory. It suggests that, unlike the Big Bang that began from singularity, our universe is one of a pair of universes that collided. The effect of the collision resets the universe. From there, it expands for billions of light years (the way we imagine the Big Bang occurring) until it contracts back to the Big Crunch. The speed and energy of that reduction creates another massive collision and the universe is reborn. The cycle continues for infinity.

Did you catch the crazy part? This theory states there’s another universe out there. That’s not too strange considering we accept the possibility of parallel universes. But if the ekpyrotic scenario is correct, our twin universe is right next to us in another dimension, separated by a distance less than the diameter of an atom. That’s close, even for siblings.


White Holes


White holes, unlike their black hole neighbors, have not been studied because they only exist in an extremely hypothetical situation. In fact, there’s not even a clear understanding what a white hole could be. Is it the other end of a black hole? Is it a wormhole? Is it something else entirely?

Generally, white holes are thought to spit out matter, much like black holes eat matter. For this to happen, the matter that passes through a black hole would have to be protected during the voyage, avoiding the process of merging into singularity. No white holes have ever been detected, up to this point, and no black holes have been seen without an event horizon (the guarding force around a black hole that prevents us from seeing them) that may show us just how matter passes through. To do that, white holes would have to break a few laws of physics and reinstitute some ideas that have been discarded; that’s asking a lot. Until then, white holes are best left for hypothetical ideas or naughty jokes.


Dark Energy is Murder

Dark Expansion-Lg

According to Professor Lawrence Krauss, every time we look at dark energy, we’re killing the universe. Now dark energy, as you may recall, makes up 70% of the universe. It answers for all the invisible peculiarities we see in deep space. It’s also one of the most perplexing concepts that’s becoming more accepted nowadays. Why wouldn’t we try to explore it?

He suggests that the Big Bang was initiated when strange high energy with repellent gravity decayed into zero-energy; it went from a false vacuum to an ordinary vacuum causing the universe to happen. Now in quantum mechanics, there is what’s called the quantum Zeno effect. It states that if an unstable object is observed regularly, it will never decay. Krauss argues then, that under the same principle, if dark energy is continuously observed, we are keeping it unstable and reducing the universe’s lifespan by forcing it back to that state when it was a false vacuum. With our interest so high in the invisible dark energy that makes up the universe, it seems unlikely that astronomers will stop studying it. If Krauss is right, we’re doomed.


Matrix Universe


Does anyone remember that little movie that came out a few years ago? The protagonist could stop bullets and see time slow down as he fought his enemies. It was called the Matrix. Did you catch it?

If you haven’t, (been living under a rock much?) go check it out, because it might provide the ultimate answer to the universe: we live in a computer program. It surely seems like science fiction to say that one day computers will become so powerful that they will be able to simulate consciousness, but as technology advances, that crazy thought could become reality. In a simulated world, we could be trapped in the mundane until death or live out fantasies and never even realize we’re hooked up to a machine. Hell, for all we know, we’re in a matrix universe right now. Time to start a rebel team and escape, don’t you think?


Universe is a Hologram

Focus-Italy Holographic-Universe

On the subject of the unreal, there’s another theory that suggests we’re not in an elaborate computer program but that much of what we think is the universe is nothing more than a hologram made by the universe itself.

The idea is when we look at the night sky, we’re seeing a wall with an image on it (that includes all the galaxies and stars). This holographic principle might explain why the universe appears grainy on the most basic of energy scales. Remember that a holographic image is created when an object is bathed by the light of a laser and a second laser jumps off the first’s reflective surface (which is then recorded). A third light illuminates the image to reveal the holograph. If changes to gravity waves is caused by patterns of light, than it would simulate what is, essentially, the process of creating a holographic image. If this was proven, then it would change most of what we think we know about the universe.


Black Hole Babies

User-846223 1173717150

We could be the child of a black hole. The idea is, when matter gets pulled into a black hole, it becomes so dense before reaching singularity, that the black hole might spit it back out and form a universe from that very same matter.

In other words, a universe with many black holes would have created many baby universes. We still can’t detect exactly where black holes are located in our universe (though we can estimate their location by recording the movement of stars and planets around them) but that might just be because we’re a baby universe, a product of another universe’s black hole with insufficient means. This idea supports the possibility of the multiverse where there could be an infinite amount of universes.


Many-Worlds Interpretation

4062393679 A5E633Ff0B

On the subject of an omniverse, the many-worlds interpretation takes a different approach explaining multiple universes. While I can tell you that this concept of quantum mechanics argues the objective reality of space but denies the reality of wavefunction collapse (or rather the condensing of physical possibilities into one single occurrence) but I go cross-eyed just thinking about that. Basically, the interpretation says for every decision we make, a new universe is born.

When you woke up this morning, did you brush your teeth? Another you may be living in a different universe where you didn’t, while you live in the universe where you did (I’m giving the present you the benefit of the doubt). After that, did you floss? Again, a separate universe exists depending on the outcome of your choice. Each decision then is played out in full until you come across another decision and another universe branches out from there. If this is the case, then there are an infinite amount of universes, each accounting for every person’s every decision.


Heat Death


The argument uses the second law of thermodynamics by stating that if the universe was infinite, it should also be infinitely old. Or to make that sound less daunting, a star one hundred light years away could only be there if the universe was at least one hundred years old (if the speed was constant, more on that later). So if the universe is infinitely old, heat death suggests everywhere should be the same temperature and there should be no stars in the sky because they all would have died out (or they should all be at the same cooled temperature).

The explanation: If the universe was infinitely old, then stars should be cool because they warmed their surroundings, making the temperature across the universe uniform. However, there are stars and the universe doesn’t have an equal temperature throughout (as detected by cosmic background radiation). This idea also only works if the speed at which the universe is expanding has remained constant because such ideas as cosmic inflation claim expansion is not always the same. When you have variables such as dark flow and dark energy also pushing and tugging on matter, heat death’s vision of a starless sky appears dim (slight pun intended).


Theory of Everything


The theory of everything will be the ultimate discovery. It would combine quantum mechanics and general relatively to solve all the riddles around us into a neat little package. It would be able to name all the physical constants in the universe, whether or not those constants vary over time, locate other fundamental elements in the unobservable universe (such as dark matter and dark energy), and so on.

But why mention it here? Well, to have a theory that would explain all the mysteries of a seemingly changing universe seems insane. Think of a screw trying to fit into hundreds of holes in a wall but every hole is a different size and shape and possibly in a different dimension or universe. That’s a big achievement but scientists hope to find a unified answer. The closest possibility we have right now is the M-theory, an extension of string theory.


Time Travel


What do Marty McFly, Dr. Who and Bill and Ted have in common? They’re time travelers. They were able to do the impossible and make the voyage through our perception of time. It should go without saying time travel comes with a whole universe of problems, making the possibility extremely unrealistic. Consider the following:

You go back in time and kill your father. Theoretically, you can’t kill him because then you wouldn’t be born to kill him. You do so anyway and it turns out, he isn’t your real father and you actually killed your step-father. You’re real father goes untouched and thus the past and present line up perfectly. Well, not yet. When you left the present to go into the past, there’s an issue about your body. Do you become a duplicate so you exist in your own present time and in the past or are you displaced from time itself and inserted in another? That also doesn’t make sense because if you follow the rules of what we perceive as time, you’d return to the past as a baby, if even that. What if you go back in time and kiss your high school crush, making him/her fall in love with you? That should alter the future where you lived by yourself that led you to go to the past in the first place. That kiss and its alteration of history keeps you from going to the past at all. If in that different chain of events you still go to the past to make it in time for that kiss, you’ll be trapped in a cycle. And consider that all these questions are only applicable if time is cyclical. If time is linear, your past, present and future aren’t constantly happening somewhere, making time travel impossible (there would be nothing to travel back to). If time was cyclical, this suggests that everything is preordained and you have no free will. What you think of as free will would already be recorded and whatever action you believe is different than the original action is actually the decision you were going to make anyway.

Don’t worry, I got lost along the way too. To simplify all this, we look to Stephen Hawking who provides us with one question that indicates whether time travel will ever be possible: Why aren’t we inundated with time travelers from the future? They should be here right now, knowing full well that we’re interested in such topics as time travel to explain just how they accomplish it from a future tens of thousands of years in the future. This isn’t the case because maybe this science fiction dream is just that: a dream.


    I Wish I Could Go Back In Time

    • @#$%!!

      If only you could have won the state championship? They sell time machine devices on the internet.

  • Great list. I've definitely considered #6 many times, didn't know such a theory existed. Raises many questions about the universe and life and all that fun stuff.

  • samfishers

    awesome list, very interesting and educative.

  • khalis


  • WillMcIntyre

    Pretty good. Didn’t Stephen Hawking say time travel was possible, only forward though?

    • It is possible to speed time up slow time down and reverse time (treat time as a dimension like length etc) in theory, we cannot do it in practice as of yet.

      The question Hawkins asks about assuming we could travel back in time why are there no time travelers here – assume it takes us 10,000 years to figure out how to do it – would you want to travel back 10,000 years to a time when man kind was bent on killing each other for no reason and being very good at attacking things we don't understand. I sure as hell wouldn't ;)

      • WillMcIntyre

        English, please?

        • In theory, Einstein's special relativity allows time travel into the future but not into the past. However, actual theories have been posed as to how **general** relativity could allow some sort of loophole that we could use to travel backwards in time. A lot of people who think they know a lot love to dismiss time travel to the past as if it were nothing more than pseudo-science from pop culture, but you will find a good number of reputable astrophysicists (Princeton's J. Richard Gott, Caltech's Kipp Thorne, just to name two of them) that have proposed ways to use some of the universe's theoretical properties under general relativity to travel into the past.

          But even if time travel into the past were theoretically possible, trust me, the technology that we would need to make it happen is waaaaaayyyy beyond us. And I don't mean us, you and me, I mean beyond humanity as a whole. Even forward time travel will be incredibly difficult to achieve and it will require lots and lots of resources, but backward time travel is just a completely different level.

          I loved the list, by the way.

          • Ricky

            only in the sense that modern computer technology was WAY beyond a resident of the ancient Egyptian empire.
            The human brain is and has always been far more complex and capable then we think it is, and there's nothing to suggest that humans haven't always been as intelligent as we are now.
            Hypothetically speaking, we could sequence the DNA from a 5000 year old skeleton, clone that person into existence, and if raised from "birth" into adulthood it would understand and utilize all of our technology at the same pace as a natural, modern-age human with comparable intelligence would. The idea that a caveman brought to the present would be completely perplexed by modern technology would only hold true as long as it took for us to learn a common language and explain that technology's functions and mode of operation to this hypothetical situation. Hell, when given a phone after being shown that we use the phone to talk into, that ancient person would quickly figure out through observation alone that to use this foreign tool he/she would need to talk into it…
            Sure it's inconceivable for us to manipulate time now, but that's only because there are steps that need to be taken between now and then that we haven't yet imagined. Whoever may come up with time travel in x amount of years will have the same brain and body with comparable intelligence of a present-day genius, only they would have also had the contributions of other geniuses proceeding them.
            Bohr and Einstein wouldn't have gotten as far as they did without Euclid or Archimedes, and Hawking or Kaku wouldn't be where they are without Einstein.
            While these men are all of exceptional intelligence, there's nothing to say that Einstein is any more intelligent than Archimedes, but there was a span of time for refinement and expansions upon the ideas/proofs laid out by Archimedes.
            Same could be said of DaVinci and Tesla…
            If DaVinci were born in the modern ages, there's no telling what great inventions would be created considering the intervening 500 years since his death.

          • Ricky

            *preceding, not "proceeding", i'm my own grammar nazi.

          • the mick

            lol !! but you also raised some very valid points. good stuff !

          • Good points. The thing is, unlike time travel into the future, which "only" requires us to find out a way to travel at speeds approaching the speed of light (which by any current or proposed technologies is practically impossible), time travel into the past would require us to find astronomical objects that have not been discovered yet, and not only that but also manipulate them in ways that either are impeded by the laws of physics or demand more resources that are available in the universe. I could be wrong, though. I mean, I don't know *every* theory that has been proposed as to how we could travel backwards in time, but the ones I've read about make it pretty impractical.

            You're right, though, in that we've come a long way in only a few thousand years. Give us a million more and we'll do wonders that we couldn't even conceive with our mindsets stuck in the present times, but then again there are things that are pretty much beyond us, because of the physical constraints of the universe. Wouldn't it be exceedingly interesting to somehow find out how humanity or any other civilizations will deal with the inevitable, ultimate fate of the universe, and how far we/they will go with technology?

      • Ashish

        Wat if there was no time travel until doomsday.. New human species had the technology needed to do time travel but they dont even know if we existed, why would they visit us??

    • Matt

      Stephen Hawking wrote a book called The Theory of Everything, check it out

  • Terrible list – the majority of the items are complex physics, with the usual crap like time travel added in. There is nothing in the slightest bit crazy about white holes or a grand unified theory. calling "The Matrix" a theory is a joke – it would be like calling Star Trek a documentry.

    The title should be 8 Scientific Theories I Dont Understand and 2 That I thought would get a laugh.

    • trinityenigma

      Ok I'm sorry, but from my understanding of this list whiteholes are completely hypothetical, but you say they are fine, not crazy and it is completely understandable to believe in something that no one has ever seen.

      However, the theory of time travel, well to you it is completely inexcusable to put it on the list.

      And then the Matrix theory that some actually do believe in- well thats just too crazy to be put on a list of crazy theories.


      • The "Matrix Theory" is not a scientific theory, if you can cite me the paper wherein the theory is described then please do.

        The theory that allows time travel and wormholes called general relativity can be read here :

        I called time travel crap not because it cant be done, but simply because people who don't understand physics like to cart it out as some sort of show pony.

        Also just for reference : the moment you disprove a theory it goes away the great thing about relativity and quantum physics is they stand up to experimentation time and time again and predict things that we have yet to observe. 40 years ago no-one had seen a black hole, we have now and relativity predicted it 70 years before we saw one. Scientific theories are not subjective they describe the truth and any real theory will provide empirical data to back itself up.

        • trinityenigma

          I will admit that The Matrix theory is really more philosophical where ever I come across it, and I'm not in the habit of reading scientific papers so it's not likely I'll come across any that mention the matrix any time soon.

          I really just wanted to point out that you had come across as very hypocritical in your post, but as you understand this subject much better than I do I'm sure you have your reasons. I'll be waiting with baited breath for your list on the topic.

        • MasterPo

          Actually no one has yet "seen" a black hole. Astronomers have only seen visible matter behave in a manner that they would expect it to if there were a black hole nearby. The problem with relativity and quantum physics is that relativity does not hold up at the quantum level and quantum physics do not hold on the macro level. This is why scientists are searching for the "Theory of Everything."

          • hunter

            i have seen a black hoe

    • Geraint, go to the website … you will find MANY PhD professors talking about ALL 10 of those items on the list … and considering them a possibility. There is nothing logically impossible with any of those theories, therefore they could be true. Sometimes you have to approach things PHILOSOPHICALLY rather than SCIENTIFICALLY. It's people like you that hinder progress by refusing to allow new ideas to come forth.

      • To suggest that existence as we see it is similar to that of "The Matrix" is ludicrous, it has no decent grounding in logic or reason, it is similar to the idea of God, or the idea of solipsism. It's pop philosophy, it sounds catchy, but has no substance. Of course these ideas are possible, but it is ludicrous to give them any mention in a list discussing scientific theories. This is purely my opinion on the matter, and I've no education in the matter, but it seems rather silly.

        And this omniverse thing, agaiin, I've no education in the matter, but to say that it's dependant on the choices made by any concious being is ridiculous. The universe is unable to think, it doesn't care about you, your decisions are irrelevant. What I take this theory to actually be trying to convey is that everytime a particle changes it's position, that due to the fact there is a probability of it existing at every other point in the universe, it does exist in all these points, and this could be described as other possible universes. But that is all by the by, the main point is that it has nothing to do with your decisions, that's silly.
        If anyone better read/thought on the matter wants to offer insight into that omniverse thing it would be massively appreciated! It's fascinating stuff!

        • Did you just call the idea of God, pop culture? lmfao

    • Anon.

      Just because it's complex physics doesn't mean it's crazy, and just because it's crazy doesn't mean it's wrong. Personally, as a physicist, I'm very surprised that string theory hasn't made this list, as it's definitely one of those theories where we're only half joking when we ask if whoever came up with it was on drugs. But, no matter how you cut it, non-newtonian physics usually get mind-bending enough that "our universe is a computer simulation" is almost plausible by comparison.

      Also, think of black holes – mass in zero space, something that's infinitely dense. Or think of the wave-particle duality of light, especially with the double-slit experiment – if you were to observe individual photons, they'd go through one slit at a time, but if you observe the waves, they go through both slits. The faster you travel, the slower time goes, and the more mass you have. Light changes in the presence of gravity. REALLY think about those things. Wouldn't they sound crazy if you hadn't always thought of them as accepted, proven scientific fact?

      • Bubble

        “the faster you go the slower time goes ” – is a load of bs
        I hate how ‘they’ name our world and everything in it ‘ time’
        I do not walk any slower no matter how many people on flight 200 fly overhead say I am in slow motion
        Distorted perseption is a mental disorder is it not ?, that is the only thing that changes..

  • henrysmyagent

    You can't read this list and not start questioning everything you think about our universe. I have the hardest time with time travel as I refuse to believe I do not have free will. If time is linear than my actions are preordained. If time is cyclical I could go back and change things, but in either case I will not have a perfect state of free will so my mind rejects the concept.

    • If time is linear than my actions are preordained.

      Why would you think that? Your actions and time have nothing to do with one another. There is no correlation between the two. Time before any given moment is gone. It no longer exists. The events that occurred may have been recorded, either physically or in our memories, but those moments in actual time are gone. Time ahead of a given moment has not yet occurred. Therefore it doesn’t exist either, but it will exist/occur, and it will occur regardless of what you do at said given moment. It will continue to occur and transpire even if you don’t exist at all, just as it did before you existed.

  • Kimani

    Great job,I love lists like this, mind expanders.
    One multiverse theory Ive always had is simple. No two people on our earth perceive the world in exactly the same way. Everybody has their own perception of things, ideas and how everything works. It is by these ideas that we make decisions and perform actions and thus create our own worlds in our heads/minds. Therefore you can say that we are living in a multiverse of approximately 7 billion universes.

    PS:This is much clearer in my head. Sorry.

    • WillMcIntyre

      What about the Pope, Dalai Lama, and all that religious stuff? I’m athiest, but what if those guys had a test of faith? :)

    • Lifeschool

      @ Kimani – I get you, and I agree – no two people ever see the same things in the same way. E.g, even if we all saw the same movie, or the same movie several times, each time the observer(s) would have a brand new and slightly different experience.

      In Fractal Worlds Theory, we each inhabit our own version of the world – the world according to us; which has developed though our interactions and experiences. That's not to say no two people can ever agree on anything, it basically means we are each in the centre of a world we created. And sometimes, yes, the world does revolve around us and our wishes, and sometimes, yes, we can become self centred – but only if we are looking from the inside-out (rather than noticing everybody else trapped in their own versions of the world – e.g. from the outside-in).

      Some people are heavily blinkered in their own world bubble, and certainly the more we prioritize ourselves over anybody else, the more blinkered (or blind) we can appear to the onlooker. I have a friend like that. He's so blind to the thoughts and feelings of others he's in his own universe! But perhaps one day we'll all realise our true idenity and give up the 'every man for himself' stuff. Well, it's an ideal I like to share.

      • >give up the 'every man for himself' stuff. Well, it's an ideal I like to share.

        We are not borgs.

        • @ bacanaso. Correct – and thank God we're not. But we are a global community – or I like to think so.

          • my bad for taking you out of context, thats cool I get what you are saying

    • Bob

      That’s very philisophical Kimani, but it has nothing to do with the multiverse theory. The perception of consciouss beings has nothing to do with the actual physical universe.

  • Love this list as much as I love the ambiguity of what the universe really is, which brings me to the point: Why is it full of scientific theories on the universe? Well then the title of the list should be changed, LOL. But anyway, I still love this lit. :)

  • rain

    I wish time travel would be possible.

    • I wish you learned your grammatical tenses.

  • godiva

    why is my mouth moving and why am i typing the words in my head? why do i hate avocados? why do i think the way that i do and why is there no chocolate in front of me? why are there rich people are how come there are more poor people? why do people do the things that they do and why am reading listverse??? why am i commenting here . .. why why why why why why .. ….

    • Lifeschool

      @godiva: Why? To answer all your eight questions together, 'Because it IS SO' (otherwise it wouldn't be so – which would negate the question). Rather Zen, but hey.

    • DevilsArchNemesis

      Coz you are adopted!

    • DrFrigmundPseud

      It might help to consider "why" to be more an 'operator' on questions than a true question itself.

      In my experience it is used to follow a line of inference towards degrees of greater complexity or simplicity.

      For example, if some omniscient entity explained that the universe was this way for such a reason you could still ask "why?", which would still seem to have meaning for you but be ultimately useless as a way to further the explanation.

      A NSFW example of this principle as described by comedian Louis CK:

  • These theories are crazy indeed…
    And yet so fascinating…
    Nice List, although I would appreciate if you added more theories from other fields of science like biology and chemistry, cause this list is mainly physics…
    So, a little variety would be appreciated..
    Good job though, the list is well-written… :)

  • your mom

    this list was so boring I barely made i t through the third entry. Sorry.

    • Why don't you get off this website and stop posting "boring" on every list that's published. Get a life.

    • What? is it a little too smart for your incompetent mind? Get a life troller

    • your mom was so boring I barely made it through the third entry. Sorry.

    • oliveralbq

      i wish 'your mom' had a wordpress account. (s)he says some incrediuosly stupid shit, and constantly gets an assload of negative rates.
      b ythe mathematic formula that intensedebate uses to figure out the 'reputation meter', im thinking 'your mom' might very well have graduated into quadruple digits on negativity.

      at some point the internets should implode.

      this is simiiliar to when i stayed in my house, on the beach, during katrina — i just wanna see what happens.
      you just dont run across many good implosions or spontanious combustions these days

    • ShoresLady

      If the purpose of this coimment is to make me feel superior to you it has succeeded beautifully, thanks,

  • KK007

    Also, time is relative and once a moment has happened, it's gone. It's sad that we can't travel back in time though cause that would be soooo fun.

    • Ricky

      time also moves differently at separate points in the universe and is also unique to each and every individual sentient entity. clocks may chug along at a more or less constant pace, but clocks are just a human invention to measure something that exists only in the general sense of the term "exists".
      Time isn't actually a physical thing, just the most well understood way of defining growth and decay.

      • Arsnl

        Time isnt a physical thing? What do you mean?
        ” well understood way of defining growth and decay.” well you only give a definition for the arrow of time but time is also part of maxwells equations and derived from that the propagation equation. And in propagation you dont have growth or decay but you do have a variable of time. I think time is a physical thing and i imagine physicist to think the same since they utilise the concept of spacetime.

      • Lifeschool

        @ Ricky: You got it.

  • Como

    "white holes are thought to spit out matter, much like black holes eat matter"
    Actually, although blackholes take in matter, they also expel matter and radiation.
    And, once they've reached reached a limit in matter "consumption", it is then expelled.

    Yes, its crazy theories, but it seems to me to simply be a Black Hole from another angle and period in time.

    Otherwise, enjoyed the list.

  • the time travelling thing was so confusing

    P.S nice name your mom

  • Magnumto

    Honestly, this is the first extremely interesting list that I couldn't read all the way through in one sitting. It's humbling that people understand this stuff to the extent they can write about it so that the unwashed masses who are unschooled in quantum physics singularities type stuff, of which I am one, can understand it (mostly). Extremely well written list in that respect, and it's interesting to me – it just makes my brain hurt this early in the morning (and I don't even have a hangaround, either). I WILL get through it, and be more likely to comprehend the subject the next time it comes up. Thanks, valentinedragon!

  • I love lists like this. Like stuff that'll make you question and scrutinize life itself, they're just so fascinating.

  • Ricky

    I've read articles concerning the possibility of time travel being possible ONLY if the multiple worlds theory is true. Basically it states that whatever paradoxes may arise can be explained by considering the fact that if there are an infinite number of universes based on each and every decision you can or will make, then you could hypothetically time travel to a parallel universe, kill your grandfather, but still have been born in an alternate universe to cross over to a different universe. However, there would be no guarantee that you could travel forward into time to return to your original present, and even if you could travel forward in time to your original present, you would be in another alternate, parallel universe. Using your example, you left from the universe where you brushed your teeth this morning, but you may return to the universe where you didn't brush your teeth this morning.
    Also, geneticists have started to posit the idea that we only have the illusion of free will, as it is appearing more and more likely that our genes don't just determine what traits we have, but also what our opinions, perceptions, preferences are like along with how we will make our decisions.
    I have my own theory regarding many of these ideas based on research I have done myself, but until I fully put it together and get it written out, I won't discuss it at any greater length.

    • Excellent post Ricky. The Many Worlds Interpretation is the most robust interpretation of QM and it does indeed resolve all the paradoxes of time travel. I wish more people understood it because it's a fantastic theory.

      I also believe our 'free will' is not merely a result of genetics but also a product of arguably deterministic quantum processes in our brains. We have no more free will than a pile of rocks.

      I'd like to hear your theories if you would consider discussing them informally?

      • Arsnl

        ” I wish more people understood it because it’s a fantastic theory”. I dont see it that robust. In any case its just an interpretation not a theory in its own right.
        I think more important is for more people to understand things that can actually be tested. Not some thing not all physicist agree upon. I mean how fast are these universes created. Do the create these universes on a marge scale or just locally cuz i read its local stuff. I dont see how it resolves time travel since time travel is a speculation and this multiverses are only speculations.
        Geesh when did the physics of measurable realities flew out the window?

    • Arsnl

      I wikied MWI and it says it creates only local universes (its a local theory). So travelling in time (as a human) to a local universe doesnt make much sense. And i dont think the theory gives ways to contact those separated universes.

      • emmettbrown88

        To save me trying to explain here, have a look at this

        MWI resolves time travel paradoxes because you can never travel back or forward to the same universe. If you go back in time and kill your father, you merely kill your father in a different worldline, ensuring you never exist in that universe. The universe you came from however, is still very real.

    • Lifeschool

      @ Ricky – Your points reminded me of the classic TV show Quantum Leap. In the show, the main character CAN travel back and forward in time, but cannot get back to his own – which implies that if someone were to enter parallel worlds in order to time travel, they may become 'lost in time' with no way to get back to the original time line. And that being said, the initial branch and subsequent world altercations may distort or corrupt the 'real' world (or the parallel worlds) to make it unrecognisable.

  • fazrin

    No global warming???

    Btw,i don’t think many-worlds interpretation is a scientific theory.

    • Many-worlds should really be described as a theory or, more precisely, a metatheory, since it makes statements that are applicable about a range of theories. Many-worlds is the unavoidable implication of any quantum theory which obeys some type of linear wave equation.

  • Arsnl

    The actual title is wrong. It should be theories in science not scientific theories. The difference? A scientific theory is a theory that makes predictions, predictions that can be tested. So what are the falsifiable predictions in ekpyrotic universe (which is part if m theory if im not terribly mistaken) or what are the predictions is matrix theory?
    I actually call bs on the matrix thingy Hell like Hawking said the universe could actually be 1 year old and it may come will all the memories that might seem its 15 billion years old. But adding more ideas that cant be tested isnt scientific. So the universe isnt 1 year old and it isnt a matrix movie. The same i think goes for the holograme thingy.
    I dont get it. Why arent real scientific theories interesting. Like quantum theory with its entanglement and others.

    • ShoresLady

      Your first three sentences provide a brilliant clarification.

  • Time Travel – the issue of the body is paramount. Time might be cyclical, but matter is not infinite. Time, space, matter and energy are all inseparably connected. Every part of matter and energy that makes up your present physical body existed in the past. ELSEWHERE…as in, all over the place, much of it in the sun even (eat a plant, you're eating part sunlight).

    Nearly every cell in your body is (teeth, etc., excepted) is replaced on average every seven years. The matter that made up your body as a child is ELSEWHERE. Gone. Tons of skin cells in land fills, and other long since rejuvenated body cells, flushed down numerous toilets.

    But let's say you're back into the past anyway. That is, you, meaning your body, or the atoms that make up your body, go back into the past (what else is there? No new energy or matter could be created in the process). Part of what makes up your body is now in the sun. Part of your atoms are/were also in trees, plants, fish, cows, rocks, and maybe even other peoples' bodies!

    Assuming all this energy and matter simply jumps out of their past positions to keep your "current" body incorporated, there is the further complication of WHERE all that matter is. Spatially, our galaxy is accelerating at a tremendous speed. Our Earth and solar system has made a lot of revolutions since whenever you're headed back to in the past. Does that (THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE) magically reverse itself so that you can be in the past, like Superman flying around the Earth so fast it somehow reverses time itself?

    Stephen Hawking, I have your answer. All the time travelers who might have tried, died. Instantly. But that doesn't mean it's not possible. Just messy.

    • I like your reasoning. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, but transmutes from state to state. I totally agree. I love the idea that some particle of the suns energy went through space and into a plant, and then was eaten by an animal, and then got absorbed by us – and will eventually be cleansed away down into the sea and the whole cycle startes again. It's one of my favourite philosophies from quite a while back. Of course this is perfectly rational in the 4th dimention, but at the quanum level, that very same particle never moved a millimeter in relative time and space – not even in the slightest – but carried on flickering in and out of existance – everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

    • ShoresLady

      Beautifully written response that gives the average reader a clear and vivid picture of matter's lifecycle. tt demonstrates how the '60s slogan 'You are what you eat' is a recipe (or in scientfic terms, a formula)not a metaphor. Thanks for adding this, hope you create a list of your own if you haven't already.

  • David

    for number 1…. MAYBE it's the same scenario as the high school crush. MAYBE time travellers have already come back to visit the past and teach us about the future of time travel, but then once they taught us, we would have already known so there was no need for the future people to come back and tell us…. infinite loop much??? gaarrr, maybe it's better that we don't know how to travel through time. i bet that would just confuse us even more.

  • Nice. They're all about astronomy/astrophysics. Not science in general.

  • fugly

    Thanks I thoroughly enjoyed the list, even though I don’t agree with some of your lines of thought. I think perhaps “Most bizarre” instead of “Craziest” would have been more appropriate.

    As to # 10, I suggest reading the short story “Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions” by Edwin Abbott Abbott. The story is about a three dimensional being making contact with someone living in a two dimensional world. You may gain a perspective into the possibilities of other dimensions. The story helped me to wrap my head around extra diminsions.

    As to #9. One possible theory would take to long to go into detail. It envolves anti-universes, anti-time, black holes and the big bang. The image representing yin and yang would be a close approximation of the interaction of the two opposing universes.

    As far as #2 is concerned, there are immutable laws that govern the macro and micro. Only our ignorance and lack of cognative developement keep us from unraveling the mysteries of the omniverse.

    As to #1. We all travel through time every nanosecond of every day. We are like a leaf floating down the river of time, and we have, as of yet, about as much control of our movement in time as the leaf. I won’t be as dismissive as the author of this article, but if we “go back in time” it could create a parallel reality that would necessarily branch off from our current timeline to negate the “Grandfather Paradox”. Perhaps there are no time travellers visiting our time because mankind with its intelligence and lack of wisdom have doomed us to extinction. Not a very nice idea but the truth isn’t always pretty.

    With the excepion of #2, I consider these as possibilities not probabilities. Again thanks for making me think.

    • ShoresLady

      I like your leaf metaphor, i want to be one of the multi-colored crimson and orange leafs dropped from a blazing Michigan maple in mid-October as the first cool winds chill spectators at a Friday night high school homecoming football game.

  • ceej

    here was me thinking the big bang theory might possibly make the list.

  • I love space and everything to do with it. Liked the list. Made me laugh when I got to the Matrix one. Some people will be believe in anything!

  • someone

    Can someone please tell me at what speed scientists believe the universe is expanding? Because I have a theory that goes like this. If the universe is expanding slower than the speed of light or not at all, then technically eventually the universe would appear to be completely bright white, or like one huge star surrounding us. This is because the light we see from stars has to eventually hit the edge of the universe right? Then it should reflect and come back to us, shouldn't it? And technically, if every star was created at the same time then one day the universe will suddenly turn bright white once all the light hits us.

    • someone else

      Not every star was created at the same time, regardless of speed of the universe…

    • Lifeschool

      @ someone: I think I understand your reasoning but this only makes sense if you imagine there is some force on the 'edge' of the universe which reflects light back. There is no such force as far as I know. There is no such 'edge' as far as I can tell. I seem to remember (but I could be inaccurate) that science says that galaxies drift exponentially – e.g. they move 'back' at the same relative speed/rate as the light moves 'forward'.

    • ELH

      There is no constant rate of expansion. The galaxies that are farther away from us are moving away from us faster than the galaxies that are closer to us. Its called redshift.

    • It's already been said, but I'll throw in my 2 ¢ worth.
      Not all of the Universe is expanding at an even rate. Some parts are expanding far more quickly than than other parts (relatively, the numbers are so huge that "quickly" and "slowly" lose any meaning we have ever applied them to anything in the day to day world).
      Since there is no even rate of expansion, there cannot be a rate given at which the Universe is expanding.

  • great list @Valentinedragon

    i like this kinds of lists, it tickles your imagination, challenges your beliefs and logic

    i hope more lists like this will come in the future

    • ShoresLady

      Pretty much puts a damper on my prioposal for "Top Soft Rock Hits of the '70s".

  • CommanderCoward

    Nice list! I really do think that the Ekpyrotic Theory is real (based on reading more about it and watching Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman). :)

    • the mick

      actually, this theory is, in part, is quite mainstream but it involves ONE universe expanding from a Big Bang and then recollapsing on itself and starting all over. I'm sure i read this in a Steven Hawking book, possibly 'A Brief History In Time'.
      Based on our own universe's measurable data, our universe is slowing down in its expansion but the time that it is estimated that it will start to collapse on itself is SOOOOO far away yet, something like 300 billion years (don't quote me on that..)

  • itsover9000

    You forgot macro evolution :)

    • reggae

      You are fucking joking, aren't you?

  • Catherine

    If you like this list you should watch the series of documentaries called "Universe" that was on the National Geographic channel. Very interesting stuff.
    Surely when it comes to time travel you would only be able to go back to the point of time when time travel was invented in the first place. If you went beyond that how would you get back home, unless your time machine travelled with you as well. Also with time travel would you be able to go forward in time to see your future. If not then you wouldnt be able to go back in time as you would get stuck!
    My brain hurts!

    • zachary

      discovery channel not national geographic.
      I’m like the only 8th grader in my town that studies quantum physics astrophysics, astrobiology and geo architechure.
      I figure if I start at a young age I’ll have more time to learn future discoveries.
      and sorry about my spelling I’m just a 8th grader.

  • calic

    … what? ._.

  • Fun list! I've heard #5 referred to as "kitchen sink universes", on the theory that graduate students in a higher universe used black holes in the lab sink to create our universe.

    #1 sounds like a plausible explanation of where my socks keep disappearing to.

  • Kon

    A lot of the comments are talking about the theories and I'm no scientist so I'll leave them to it. I have just this to say: 'Dr. Who'. Who? You mean 'the Doctor', right? ;)

  • TEX

    Physicists use a language to communicate – it’s called mathematics. This is how they develop ideas and communicate them to other physicists and mathematicians. It gets very complex, and I am not claiming to be a mathematician or understand it – but the beauty of it is that it can be explained to laypeople conceptually in a fashion that they might be able to grasp. Some of the ideas in this list have solid foundations in physics – meaning they are not the result of one person’s idea or work, but are founded upon solid theoretical work of many people current and past – these are not as crazy as the list title implies.
    Some things on this list are just pure grade A shite with no foundation at all – just supposition.
    I like the nature of this list because it makes people think and starts discussions.

  • Reggae

    These are hypothesis, not theories.

    • Shuffle

      A hypothesis is only a prediction of a result. So these are theories.

    • Wuzza

      Reggae is right. Hypotheses become theories if testing proves them correct.

      • andrestm

        Not necessarily. A theory can—and will, as is often the case—be proven wrong. A theory is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon that is consistent with the scientific method, but it is not an axiom. Take the superstring theory as an example. It is NOT simply a hypothesis (i.e., an "educated guess"), because there is some degree of evidence behind it, but it has NOT been proven correct either. Let's just be a little bold here and say that a hypothesis is more equivalent to a guess (an educated one) and a theory is more like a prediction (with a lot of background behind it). Time travel is not a mere hypothesis—neither is heat death. Let's not generalize and say that all of these things are theories, but clearly they're not all hypotheses either.

  • Tyler

    Black Hole Babies? That sounds like a cartoon title.

  • If i was a time traveller i would have a blue flying police box which is much bigger on the inside…….Oh wait a sec…

  • Sounds like a bunch of a holes making shit up.

  • the mick

    anybody know where i can buy a good, second-hand Delorean ??

  • Acula

    What about plasma cosmology? The idea that the Universe is primiarily gonverned by the electromagnetic force and not gravity.

  • Shuffle

    Maybe time travel is possible in theory, but humanity will die out before it comes anywhere near to producing the technology. Thats why we aren't flooded with time travelers from the future.

  • For anyone who hasn't heard of or just doesn't like the Many Worlds Interpretation, please read this:

    Many Worlds is the best theory we have so far to describe the fabric of reality.

    • zachary

      #1, #4, and #10 I am a firm believer of. There is alot scientist(astrophysicist) support of them. I also believe in this thing were anything and anything can happen theory I didn’t create it , nor do I know it’s name. It is where in the Universe, if it hasn’t happened yet it can still happen. It basically says The Universe is a huge pack of cards, some combinations are rare some are more common. It’s extremely basic Quantum Physics.

  • Adam

    The Matrix is completely ripped off of Plato's Allegory of the Cave. What lazy bum says "uhhh yeah the Matrix is real" without knowing anything about the history of it.

  • Dex

    Time traveling may be possible. And maybe the answer to why we don't have any visitors from the future is because time machine has been never invented because everyone died in 2012…

  • You only mentioned travelling to the past, but travelling to the future is possible.
    Einstein teached us that it is possible with his relativity theory.

    • everytime i go to sleep, i awake between 5 and 7 hours in the future

      therefore, my bed is a time machine.

    • ShoresLady

      'Teached us? English was a second language for Einstein, too.

    • I built a time machine, but it only goes one direction, at regular speed.

  • Squiz

    The only thing i would disagree with using as a time traveler per se- it's pretty obvious he's going between parallel universes- i mean he proves that much by finally dumping Rose's whiny ass in a parallel universe with both her parents. any alterations he's caused only end up ultimately affecting this parallel line so if there ever was a "true line" linear time line where he came from, it ultimately wouldn't matter because he can't affect that one. =)

  • timmy the dying boy

    #1: Better kill the milkman to be sure.

  • doc brown

    Most theories on time travel accept that travelling back in time is impossible, however traveling forward is a realistic possiblity.

    • Víctor

      I seriously don't see why we should be able to travel forward in time, but not backwards…

  • TEX

    Number 10 may not be too crazy – it is tied to a mathematical version of number 4 (which is, like it or not, mainly a thought experiment) and M-theory (Membrane!) mentioned in number 2. It’s all mathematical models of multiple dimensions that MIGHT explain certain forces resulting in energy and matter.

  • mike

    hi guys great list!! but i have another question the time travel pic is it a morph or is it an actual clock.. if it is a real clock where can i find it??

    • Víctor

      Seems like Photoshop to me. But it'd be cool if there was a clock like that.

  • kickass

    yea..everyone died in 2012 after which dinosaurs evolvd agn and ruled the earth. the best thing about this was that dinosaurs have pea sized brains and couldn’t make up crazy theories

  • Enjoyed the read, I think a person could have some fun with time travel.

  • metoo

    No, no, no, we're not a computer program or a hologram, we're a giant experiment being run by mice. Didn't anyone read (not see, read) "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"? When the experiment is finished they will bulldoze us to make room for a supergalactic highway. And the answer is 42.

    • Princess711

      HAHA :) your bluntnesss about this made me laugh out loud

    • Sorry, but I was busy reading the poem, "Ode to a small lump of grey putty I found in my armpit one mid-summer morning"

  • Víctor

    Some of these don't seem to be Scientific Theories. For example, the Matrix One, is not a Scientific Theory.

  • I wish I was a kid again so I can think to myself, what if nothing is real, what if everything is nothing?

  • Great list. Thanks.

  • One of the most overlooked problems with time travel is not just are we able to move freely through it but also, can we control where we wind up in the universe when we get there? The earth is moving around the sun which is moving with the milky way galaxy which is hurling through space at thousands of miles an hour. So, where we are physically in the universe at this time is nowhere near where we were, say, 50 years ago. If you tried to go back to your home town in 1960 you would probably wind up in the blackness of space or crash into some meteorite. But, alas, that brings up the whole space, time continuum debate.

    • Arsnl

      Your comment isnt valid cuz it would imply that there is an universal/absolute coordinate system and this is denied by relativity theory. Everything is local.

      • In a sense we travel back in time constantly.
        Every time we look up at the night sky, we are seeing back millions of years in time. Yet, as far back as we can see, we cannot see ahead one millionth of a second.
        Time travel would be infinitely cool, and with M-theory it even has a chance of working. The problems associated with it, however, are so numerous, and so enormous, that I seriously doubt that any reputable scientist will be willing to work on it.
        I can imagine the psychological impact of time travel might be something truly horrifying. And that is just one tiny item on minus side of why time travel isn't the good idea Sci-fi book writers have made you believe it is.

        • oliveralbq

          @segues: "I can imagine the psychological impact of time travel might be something truly horrifying"

          this is a thought i had years and years ago. it came to me, epiphany style, when i was watching back to the future — (and no — not when it came out and i was like 7) — but at a later date, on video.
          something about the premeses of that movie struck me as an intesting idea — not necessarily plausable, but entertaining nonetheless.
          i started thinking of exactly what it would be like to travel back and forth —
          of course, i was just daydreaming abou twhat differences would shock me or confuse me the most. eventually, i came to the realization that the cons heavily outweigh the pros — so much so, that by the time the movie was winding down, i looked at my *whoever* friend, girlfriend, whoever was there — and simply stated — if we were capable to time travel,, i dont believe i'd want a piece of that action.
          as you know i have masters in experimental psychology — as i was going through the analysis in my head, my brain cells were innundated by the notion that i would regret doing this almost instantly, and go through the rest of the experience think t myself 'what in the hell have i gotten myself into' — which is not exactly the mindset you'd hope if faced with this situation.

    • Princess711

      aahah good ol' space time continuum :) so confusing!

    • Trust me. If traveling through time some day becomes a possibility, calculating where the ship or whatever should land would be the least of problems. Think of it as the computers and the Internet. Go back in time and tell Galileo about them, he would probably say, "well but how are you going to power them? how are you going to keep the energy flow to the computer constant? that sounds impossible to me!" And he would have been right in pointing out that problem, but in reality, the Internet and computing are so much more complex than electricity that by the time we started using computers electricity was not really a problem. Time travel requires so many more calculations and stuff than locating the right coordinates for landing that there are many more problems to worry about, not that one.

  • OK, now my brain hurts… I'll have to read this again, I don't think I grasped half of it… but thanks for the list.

  • On the concept of time travel, didn’t someone say that you can only travel back to the time that the ‘Time Machine’ was invented?

    So we don’t have time travellers with us now (As far as we know) because we haven’t invented the ‘Time Machine’ for them to travel back to us with.

  • TEX

    Time travel cannot exist because time is an intrinsic property of matter, they are inseparable. To state the obvious, matter would not exist without the progression of time. To try to remove time from existence makes about as much sense as removing any of the three dimensions of solid objects – they would become infinitely thin – in other words it wouldn’t exist anymore.
    Relativity predicts time dilation and this has been confirmed experimentally a thousand times over – but it has to do with the altered rate of time through acceleration.

    We are all traveling through time – we have to be – in the direction (for lack of a simpler term) of the future. To accelerate that time would be to accelerate all surrounding space – net effect – absolutely nothing – you would never notice it. You could measure it RELATIVE to some other point, but your immediate surroundings wouldn’t change.

  • TEX

    Going back through time? The past is the past – in order to travel backwards means past time would have to be preserved some how – feel free to explain how it is preserved. What medium is it preserved in??? This implies the existence of what physicists call the “either” – they searched for it for years and years in the past experimentally – it simply doesn’t exist – there is no all pervasive media through which matter and time are traveling that would preserve a series of events in time. In other words the past is gone forever and the future has not occurred yet. and we are along for the ride with no station to get off at and no known destination or control of anything – make you feel helpless? Then go see a magician.

  • The picture accompanying #2 Theory of Everything makes it look like everything is radiating out of his crotch.
    It made the paragraphs below it seem so dirty… "little package" and "think of a screw"…

    • ha ha ha ha!
      Some guys I've known have thought that the Universe radiated from their crotch. Usually, it was the ones that had the least to offer.

  • Dave D

    The time travel thing was a mind freak.

  • Where's evolution? Oh that's right, it's in every scientific textbook of any repute in the civilised world because it's a fact.

    Dave D – I think you meant to say "mind fuck".

    • Arsnl

      I think you meant skull fuck.

  • #10 is actually my current favorite theory. It has been for the last year or so. It really isn't that ridiculously difficult to understand, on the face of it, although it does have a lot of questions to be taken on faith by the layman.
    What attracted me to it in the first place was that it eliminated the question of "What came before The Big Bang?"
    With the ekpyrotic scenario the answer is that the Big Bang, and what happens after, is eternal. The more correct name, the familiar name, for the ekpyrotic theory, is the Membrane Theory, or M-Theory, or 'brane-Theory.
    The two parallel universes are akin to two large two dimensional sheets. They are not quite flat. That is, they have waves or ridges in them, and when they are in the coming together phase, the little wave, or ridge, is where they touch, and *that* is where the new Big Bang comes from. Then the two parallel universes start their journey apart again, and the two universes begin to evolve once again.
    Who can't like a theory like that?

    • TEX

      I had defended that one also – I tie it into numbers 4 & 2. I don’t envisage it as two parallel universes though, I don’t like that image – I relate it to extremely close but different areas – things – sets of conditions (I’m trying not to relate every day perceptions to something that would impossible to explain in those terms) that “shifted” to create a sort of misalignment/contact that brought about changes that we now observe as expanding fields, energy, matter, and time.
      As they mentioned – I just can’t see a singularity at the beginning – but I admit this is just an intuitive but very strong feeling.

      • Arsnl

        Tex im terribly sorry im replying to one comment in another comment. Again im on a mobile and the replyes are very awkward here.
        “Effect can occur simultaneously negligible of distance.” entanglement does work instanteniously. Also hawking uses the arguement that at a quantum level a particle can travel faster than light so it can escape from a blackhole (and appear like a black whole is irradiating matter). Information cant travel faster than light. Even thought entanglement might give the impression that information can go faster than light, it is wrong. (they do some crazy explanations to prove that relativity is still valid).
        But either way i was talking about cosmological scales where one would apply relativity and ive also found this article
        So to this day information cant travel faster than light

        • TEX

          Arsnl – I was aware of Hawking’s loss of information problem but for some reason I never tied it to quantum coupled states which has obvious implications – shows how much I miss.
          I did read your link about superluminal communication – I was not familiar with that term, but am very familiar the concept of data transmission over distance through manipulation of one of the pair – there were a bunch of whack jobs applying for patents on that a few years back.

          I enjoyed reading about the conflicts between relativistic and quantum mechanical models that would prevent information transfer over faster than light distances – it depends on how you look at it as to whether it is definitive or not. I guess what it all comes down to, from my point of view, is the seemingly complete relativistic model now has some questionable aspects and the quantum mechanical models are very problematic, and becoming more so – shall we use the term “incomplete”.

          • TEX

            It reminds me of Max Planck working to unify the incomplete blackbody low and high energy models. He completed it by incorporating the then non-science of thermodynamics and finding a solution – with the fantastic side effect of introducing probabilistic math – pissing off Einstein and making Neils Bohr dance.
            That’s what it’s going to take, I think, something out of left field – it WILL happen – saddens me to think it might not happen in my lifetime. It took a long time to go from Newtonian to relativistic and quantum.

            Oh yeah – I was not familiar with counterfactual definiteness – thanks a lot – now I have something else to digest!

    • Arsnl

      Well as a vulgarization your comment does it really well. Thats what ive seen on documentaries on string theory. But the core problem is that it only makes hypothesis. It cant be tested with our current technology. So people that do it, do it like a some sort of religion. I remember a documentary about a prof from austin, texas that said string theory must be correct cuz such mathematical beauty cant be wrong. That is just a faith argument.
      As a theory I think m theory isnt even complete and i imagine it to be EXTREMELLY complexe to understand the mathematics of it. The soft spoken guy that made it (ed witten) got a fields medal and i googles a bit his maths achievements. You’d need a phd in mathematics to fully understand it. Topology, differential geometry etc. (im fully aware you already know these details since you said already you read about m theory)
      About your comment that we can see in the past. I think that even as the images taken by hubble etc are from the early beginnigs of the universe, they still are the current present time. We dont actually see the past because einstein said there isnt any simultaneous actions so those dust clouds can be formed in the shape of micky mouse “right now” but we will only know after 13 billion years. Simultaneity exits only in our mind, an invented notion.(that might also be the case for time travel)
      For me personally thinking about current well established physics is already mind blowing. How we humans invent notions and we think this applies for all the universe but in fact it may not be the case.

      • TEX

        Arsnl – not wanting to argue or get into M-theory – I have an intuitive feel for branes and membranes – but not string theory yet, it’s still a little young and green.

        But on the subject of simultaneity – you are probably wrong. I’m not sure about what part of Einstein’s ideas you speak of, today it works like this:
        Mass can never travel at the speed of light.
        Energy in a vacuum always travels at the speed of light.
        Effect can occur simultaneously negligible of distance.

        This last item is called nonlocality and came about form a prediction in quantum mechanics called quantum pairing, and it conflicts with relativity. It is one of the things which has led some physicists to consider things like string theory. – or you can look other places if you like – it has been VERIFIED experimentally. So – you might feel it doesn’t apply to your argument, but it appears that a reaction can occur instantaneously negligible of distance – which has major implications about the speed of light as a constant.

        • non-locality! Of course! I should have remembered it, but it really isn't germaine to the argument, as it affects only subatomic particles. So far as can be proven.
          It goes like this. You do something to subatomic particle "A", in NYC, simultaneously subatomic particle "B", in SF, is affected exactly the same way. So are are all the other subatomic particles. There is no communication system between them, no wires, and often no way of the people who have subatomic particle "B" in their possession to know the experiment is about to occur.
          Yet the affect happens every time.
          There is also the "Observer Effect", in which nothing happens until it is observed. It is the act of observing that causes the action.

  • Armadillotron

    It sounds crazy, but what about the old theory that the Earth and all things living on it, were created by Aliens? That the Human Race, was an experiment created, so that the Aliens could see how their experiment could turn out. That scentist, who rewrote Darwins Origin of Species suggested this, a few years ago.

    • Chris

      Sounds a lot like scientology.

  • bassbait

    In response to number 1:

    Here are the two ways that Time Travel could hypothetically work:

    Predetermined events: When you say "I'm going to go make a sandwich and put it back in time for myself to find it", then you would find it the first time (Bill and Ted did this: They decide where to put the keys, and the keys are already there, thus, they did it, and they WILL do it)

    Many Worlds: When you go back in time, no matter what, you create an alternate reality. Thus, no matter what you do when you travel back in time, you will not be able to travel back to exactly what you had before. For example:

    I go back in time and kill my parents and myself. Why am I not dead? Because that wasn't ME, nor were they my parents. They were that baby version of myself's parents. I lived in a reality where I was born, and traveled to a reality where I was killed. Thus, when I travel back to the present, I live in a reality where I don't exist, and will never be able to come back to my reality.

    And in response to Stephen Hawking's question:

    A.If we have Time Travel, we might be a lot smarter, and have technology to avoid being detected (because if we were detected, it would alter history. Also think: If we are as "advanced", as we are now, would we really be able to handle time travel? No, we'd be idiots about it, and a ton of wars would start. It would be the "time race", to see who can build more time machines and MAD would be a result).

    B.If we have time travel, it could be like Primer, where the farthest we can travel back is to when the machine was started.

    C.Maybe some people around us ARE time travelers. We don't know exactly who everybody is or where exactly everybody came from. For all we know, the people that disappeared in the Bermuda simply went back to their time period.

  • @#$%!!

    Notice for #2 the Unified Theory the center of the galaxy is the man's dick and balls.

  • Kelly

    Time Travel is an EXTREMELY complicated thing. In the old Beast Wars show, The Agenda part III, Beast Wars Megatron tries to kill Optimus Prime. He fails, of course. But, if he HAD killed him, it would have been a disaster. If Optimus Prime had died, The Original Megatron would still be alive. And he`d have won the war. So there would have been no Beast Wars Megatron. And the rest of the baddies wouldn`t exist either. It`s one of those weird paradox things.

  • time travel and alternate universes? you should youtube "imagining the tenth dimension". he actually sums all of that up pretty neatly, I think.

    • Arsnl

      I remember that video. Watched it last year. But it had one essential thing wrong about it. In m theory there are 10 dimensions of space and only 1 dimension of time. And 7 of those 10 dimensions are compact (curled tightly) so we cant see them. In the video it started to decribe multiple dimensions of time.

  • Awesome list! Wish the pic for #1 was a real clock! Also as a Doctor Who fan i have a huge dream of time traveling, but as you can see from some episode and this list, you have to be careful because of all the paradoxes that accompany timetraveling.

  • Matt D

    white holes for naughty jokes ha!

  • Ra ra ah ah ah

    Mind. Blown.

  • Juan

    Ricky, if the multiple worlds theory is true and it does in fact explain the paradoxes of time travel, would that also mean that people would only be able to travel back to one of their “alternate universes”? If people create a new universe with each and every decision they make, then how would be reassured that we travel into one of “theirs” as opposed to one of ours?

    • Juan

      Oops, switch the “theirs” and “ours” in that last sentence.

  • MasterPo

    There is also the theory that the universe is toroidal. It would become like the screen of the old Asteroids video game where if you go out far enough you will enter back in on the other side.

  • Ammaroc

    time travel does exist, they always say there are people who exactly look you but are different?

    also, there is a theory that we dont live on a planet, but in a planet.

    one of the best theory lists ive really seen so far. i just love outlogicing people and i do it with this many times.

    u really made my mind think, i could follow all good, but really great theorys here

  • Chris

    Why are there no time travelers coming back from the future? What if it's because we are all dead in 5, 6, 10 years from now? yikes!

  • Tribol

    awesome list and very well writen too, even stupid jerks that doesnt understand nothing about physics (like me) can understand this list :D
    ps:sorry by the bad english

  • Mabel

    Time travel may not be real, but it sure is fun to think about. Perhaps the alternate universes are where time travelers go.

    I would love to go back in time and meet Beethoven, Queen Elizabeth I, Abraham Lincoln and even people who aren't famous. What an education.

  • Dionysus

    This list is shown as a joke and it's not fair. People have spent years and decades and some of them make sense. Einstein demonstrated through Math the existence of White Holes. And I tend to believe him rather than the one who made this list.
    Newton thought gravity is instant, ergo faster than light. You could put him here and say he's dumb. Or Tesla who thought he could electrify the Ionosphere. These are the dumbest people ever aren't they? HAHA
    How about Big Bang? That theory is surrounded by 10 times more bullshit than the biblical theory.

    • Princess711

      but theories all depend on point of views and whatnot as well, saying that the Big Bang theoury, or biblical theories are bullshit, is your opinion and maybe not others

  • Princess711

    hollllyyy crap! longest comment ever!! are you a teacher or something?! my brain is now thoroughly sore :) interesting views/ explanation though

  • Arsnl said "About your comment that we can see in the past."…and then continued on.
    What I actually said was, "Every time we look up at the night sky, we are seeing back millions of years in time".
    And we are. It takes the light from those stars millions of lightyears to reach us, so what we are seeing is how they appeared millions of years ago. They could be dead and cold, dark and gone by now, and we wouldn't know it.
    That is all I meant by seeing back in time…because it is exactly, astronomically, exactly what we are doing.
    I don't think we're really saying different things here. I think we just understand it differently, so we're using different terms to explain it…at least, that's the feeling I get. I could be wrong. I often am.

    • Arsnl

      So difficult to reply on a mobile.
      Well since i dont study cosmology im just guessing here or doing things how i feel seem correct :-)
      ” so what we are seeing is how they appeared millions of years ago”…”They could be dead and cold, dark and gone by now, and we wouldn’t know it”
      Well i thought a lot about this. And i dont think that an universal “now” exists. The present is an instant a beam of light generated at that instant. So i think that the present dissipate/travels. It isnt an instant everywhere in the universe. Like if me and you we would meet and be in the same place and if we would set our clocks on the same time and say hey at 3pm ill send start my laser and if you were to go the moon (i get car sickens so you better go) and id start my laser at 3pm you would receivr that laser beam exactly at 3 pm even thought light needs a second to travel from me to you on the moon. You wouldnt get it at 3.01 but at 3.
      Thats what i think. So by my understanding that isnt exactly a now now for all the universe.
      :-) i thought about this again a bit. I am wrong if we define now as big bang 15 billion years. So yes. We are seeing things differently. My bad. Its strange. We can define the nows in different ways.
      Ps excuse me for my poor english. I see now i should have taken a special relativity class. Its not that obvious.

      • Arsnl, I will not excuse your english because it is NOT poor!
        I had no idea that english was not your native language. Any shortcomings in spelling/use of punctuation I simply put down to the fact that you were posting from a mobile device, and the difficulty of using them.
        I've loved having having this discussion with you and Lifeschool. Sharing ideas back and forth with intelligent friends is one of my favorite ways to pass the time…even when we have different views.

  • I LIKE THIS LIST! especially science is my favorite, and i like the Matrix thingy, it's like terminator 3 dont you think? like when computers start taking over the world, they take up machines and kill reamining people, start making the Resistance, dont you think? and P.S. The back to the Future trilogy is my favorite, i wished they could make more films, and yeah, the Doc "who" is actually Doc Emmett Brown, repeatedly called "doc" by Marty Mcfly, hehe nice list btw.

  • Amazing list!
    i luv these ones about science

  • Theodore

    Intelligent Design

    • Too retarded to qualify as a theory

  • #6 on the list – the universe is a hologram theory, makes me think of the movie "The Truman Show" with Jim Carrey.

  • Nick

    Awesome list!! i have always found time travel interesting.

  • Alencon

    Actually, #4 provides a potential answer to Hawking's question in #1.

  • Beert

    The errors in your writing are terrible. Why don’t you have somebody who speaks english rewrite your entries for you? It gives me a migraine. Seriously, nearly every sentence you write is seriously grammatical flawed. Could you please have somebody look at your stuff before you post it, or take a writing class. it makes you look like an idiot.

    • 1. "English" should be always capitalized.
      2. "Seriously grammatical flawed" doesn't make any grammatical sense—do you mean "grammatically flawed"?
      3. "Could you please have somebody look at your stuff before you post it, or take a writing class." Is that a complete sentence? Is that a question or a request? Don't you need a question mark at the end of that?
      4. "It" after the period should be capitalized.
      5. There should be a period after that thanks.

      I mean, if you're going to be a "grammar Nazi" at least have the goddamn decency to check your own writing. Oh, wait, I get it, this is a joke. Hahah! you almost got me there, pal.

    • Have you ever read the FAQ?
      Do you know what an "ad hominem" attack is, that it is prohibited by the premiere rule of this blog, and that you have just broken that rule?
      Not to mention that you have made a fool of yourself while doing so.

  • Top Kill

    This site rocks. If i could go back in time, i would trace and kill all haters. It is this stuff that gives birth to invention. And i have a theory: suppose the universe is an operating system. We would be the system utils coded using scripting languages. Planets would be major compiled programs. What about viruses, worms,trojans,spam,spyware etc? Those would be the haters. Terrible.

  • For #1 list about the predetermined action, I was also thinking of that. Maybe everything that had happened were meant to happen. Even if you think you have free will your actions are still preordained because the universe, divine intervention or whatever have decided for the individual already. Just my thoughts you can ignore it.

    On a different topic, people wouldn't understand the list because this list is only FOR one page so the author can't explain the theory fully. If s/he explains the theories with full details to the masses, we still couldn't understand these theories with all the scientific terms mentioned and this list will take 15 pages to explain these to us.

  • I'm also thinking what if when you 'time travel' you actually go to a different universe or perhaps a different dimension.

  • vri97

    His name is The Doctor. Dr. Who is the name of the show and a question people ask when The Doctor says "My name is The Doctor."

  • I talk about #1 a lot when I talk about time travel… It's sofa king hard to explain.

  • Mrs. Antichrist

    I've read theories that white holes form universe, ala the big bang, which is why space continues to expand. The theoretical inverse of a black hole would behave similarly to the big bang model, with the event horizon being the point past which you could never return to the original mass (black hole's event horizon is the point past which nothing, not even light, can escape the black hole's gravity, a sort of imaginary marker in space).

    Decent list, although the explanation of some of the technical aspects made me cringe (the definition of the event horizon, for instance — see above for the correct one; we can't see 'into' it because even light can't escape/be reflected, and our eyes work via picking up reflected light). Might want to do a bit more research next time.

    • Mrs. Antichrist



  • I'm having trouble understanding a lot of this… I feel stupid. :(

    • No reason to. I know a lot of people who do this kind of thinking on a daily basis who don't fully understand it. Physics is difficult enough without delving into theoretical science (which is what all of these theories are). If you really want to be confused, listen in on a discussion of theoretical temporal mechanics sometime.

    • Don't feel stupid.
      I needed the pronunciation guide just to get through your name.

  • Hey, I know this isn't scientific or anything, but it's,like, one of my many theories of how this all is and…yea
    Like, what if…..this is all just some kind of…imaginary or something, like, what if it all not really…real, I mean that would explain a lot of things (to me); I know, "If its all imaginary and not real then how are we here?' (or something like that, but another is that its all in,like, some kind of mind or something (I don't know how to explain it exactly), I mean, just…..What if? This place (our world, the universe, etc.) is really strange and a lot is unknown, you can't just blow off some kind of theory just because you don't like it (cause I really don't like this one ^, but it makes the most sense to me, even though if it were true a lot of my beliefs would change), you can just never REALLY know for sure….

    • Huh? Are you trying to say that the Universe and all of the planets, all of us, everything…is someone's dream?

      • Not that, but….I don't know how to explain it exactly, but it could be, like, ….not a dream of someone or something, but that its not exactly real….
        I really don't know how to explain it….
        but like, I told someone I know about my thought and she said "like that movie men in black 2 (or some movie like that), where the camera was zooming out and it was the earth and the universe then it all was in a marble that aliens were playing with", I don't know exactly what she said, but thats the basics
        I hope that was more….understandable or whatever ^^

        • Take Physics when you get to High School. The concepts will become clearer, and you will be able to both understand the basic ideas and relate them to others in a coherent manner.
          Right now, I think you are too influenced by bad movies to grasp the really difficult ideas put forth above (everyone goes through that stage, it's no biggie).

          • well, I am going to be taking next year(Im already in high school, 10th grade to be specific), and I know its not scientific or anything, its just a thought, cause, to me, not everything in the world or universe (or whatever else there may be) has to be/is scientific(or in other words, can't be explained, obviously).
            But next year I guess I'll be more….smarter on the subject (and possibly have more ideas on everything)

          • Not to sound like an ass…but if you want to sound credible and that you have thought about the subject for more than a minute then learn to communicate. Just helping.

          • Well, thanks, you don't sound like an ass(not exactly anyways). I know, but it is actually not very possible for me to explain, since its more …of a picture then words ^^

  • ShoresLady

    Thanks for a wonderful list despite leaving me feeling totally insignificant. Which may have been true befoire I read the list but that's a different issue, eh? Hawkins comment about the putative time-travelers and 'why aren't they here?" also asks "What if they're here but we don't know it" and the inevitable 'and what if Stephen H is one of them?" Personally, I just want to go back to 1972 and rework things from there.

  • darren

    Time travel – it is possible. Stephen Hawkings says it himself. We are all time travellers constantly moving forwards. We are prisoners, we cannot escape it. I think you mean to travel back in time is impossible. That I agree with.

  • bluesman87

    Man! this time travel debate is so hard to understand , it gives me a head ache! I have actually studied time travel and i used to beleive that it most likley worked according to “Terminator” rules as apposd to “back to the future” but then i saw “hot tub time machine” and im gonna have to go with that now .

  • KabirBhai

    All there comments on ‘time travel’ show only 1 thing, and that is our obsession with it. We all have regrets (those who dont are simply lying), we all want to change something or th other in our past. Somewhere they want to make different choices or do something which they they feel might give them a better today. Even i do. Everybody does. Thats why consciously or subconsciously, we want to debate th notion, th theory and th capacity of time travel.

  • roads? where we're going we don't need roads.

  • nautillus86

    Great list..I found the time travel and theory of everything interesting…
    keep up the good work..

  • I liked the list, although I kind of got lost at some places… On seeing the title, I was hoping for a few crazy theories from other spheres as well… But great list. Well done.

  • Choosilicous

    I have thought long about the point regarding time travel, and coincidentally everything I thought about came here. To me, there are two scenarios that I have thought about. One is where no matter how much you try to change the timeline, you can't, and the other is when you can change your own future, which both would mean that in anyway timetravel is in fact, impossible.

    The first scenario involves fate, where everything has been destined and just waiting to happen. Timetravel like this would not be very pratical because you should be able to repeat trying to change the past or future. You should be able to succeed changing the timeline at some point, which would mean that the principle denies itself, unless when fate has made sure that you cannot change your past, hence no one in the future has ever tried to go back to our time and successfully introduced timetravel.

    The second scenario is what most of us have thought about, one where you can actually change your history and futury. This principle self destructs in many ways and has deemed to be practically impossible. If it was possible, then shouldn't we have seen time travellers from the fututre coming to our time?

  • Choosilicious

    In both scenarios, the chances are when we go back in time, we would no longer exist in the present time unless we go bact to the present after that. The question is lets say for me, as a 15-year-old, if I go back in time 5 years. Would I be 10, as according to the principles of time, or 15 as common understanding? If I would be 10, then I could not possibly have went back in time more than 15 years, or I would simply vanish into the separate molecules that make up my bady, therefore I would never be able to go back to the present.

  • Very good list! Lots to think about there (and I was aware of much, but not all of it). Here's another scenario for you:

    Suppose that what we perceive as the universe actually exists only in our minds. That is to say, we (human beings) subconsciously control our surroundings by what we perceive to be true. Think of it as a cosmic computer simulation that directs things based on the unconscious whims of its many inhabitants.

    Allow me to use a basic scientific fact as an example. We know that all matter is made up of molecules, which are in turn composed of atoms, which are constructed of sub-atomic particles. But suppose that this is only true because someone said that it was and others began accepting this possibility as truth. Regardless of the real explanation, what we thought to be the case became the truth only because we perceived it as such.

    As a more extreme example, what if the only reason you can't breathe water is because you have been told for the whole of your life that you can't? Now you may say, "Well, all I have to do is believe that I can breathe water and go out and do it," but that won't work. It isn't enough for you to believe; you have to convince a majority of the populace of the world that you can do it.

    Think of it as though the subject were being put to a vote on a global scale. The question, "Can a human breathe water?" Most people, having been taught such, would say no. Thus, your belief that you can breathe water is outweighed by the fact that the vast majority of humanity believes that you can't. But in fact, humans spend the first nine months of their lives breathing water (well, not really; fetuses don't "breathe" at all, getting their oxygen supply from the mother via the umbilical cord).

  • me


  • You left out the goofy theory of evolution.

    • Welcome back, smithie. Last I recall, about a year ago, you went running off, sobbing about who knows what, melodramatically declaring that you wouldn’t be back. So what happened, did you miss us?

      • That's odd-I don't remember you. But from your post,your user name no doubt matches your IQ.

  • is it just me or does the ekpyrotic scenario not seem THAT 'far out'??

    • Go back and read the discussion between Lifeschool, Arsnl and me.

  • Anonymous

    scary.. :(

  • Maxx the Slasher

    To the author of this article:

    The event horizon (mentioned it the section about white holes) is NOT a barrier that prevents us from seeing black holes. The event horizon is the point of no return which, if passed, drags you towards the center of a black hole where you're crushed into a singularity, and the only thing that can escape the pull once past the event horizon is anything moving faster than the speed of light. That's why it's called a black hole, an that's why we can't see them with our own eyes: because light can't even shine out of one.

    Check your facts.

  • PV2_Webb

    u know speaking on time travel its completely impossible in the way people think. im my studies if time travel was possible using a machine then theoretically a person wouldnt be able to go farther back than before the machine was invented and if they could go farther back then they wouldnt be able to return because they went back before the machine was invented…idk thats what i thought about while in basic training and afghanistan

  • DJ Glenn

    If Time Travel is possible, they wouldn't come back to our time, and tell us, it would alter there future, and if that future would be so altered that they wouldn't exist, than it would be impossible for them to tell us, or they're just fallowing a rule. No changing the past. It would be wise NOT to come to the past, only to go to the future, because that's already going to happen, and won't change what's already happen.

  • J-Pag

    If dark matter is murder theory is correct, then everything that happens is all perception. Everyone would be collectively creating a reality that doesn't exist because how could dark matter not disappear based on our observation of it alone. Someone give me some food for thought

  • tremblingfingers

    My brain hurts

  • Shawn Samuel

    Apart of white holes, nice list

  • ColtonGris

    I don't see how we can call anything crazy at this point most people believe in the big bang theory and if they didnt i'm sure it'd be on this list as well people believe what they want

  • if you ask me most of these theories about the universe sound just as viable, if not more, than the big bang theory. they're not crazy at all, some just mix empirical science with spiritual, transcendent thought.

    if you want crazy, find something that's really made up by a madman, otherwise change the title

  • nicoleredz3

    I thoroughly enjoyed and lol'd at this list. About number 1; I still want a time machine.

  • The BEST list EVER!!!!!

  • shaymm09

    Number 6 is the craziest to think about in my opinion. However, I believe (from what I've read and watched recently) that it is plausible. Hell, Stephen Hawking admitted defeat (if you wanted to call it that) when arguing about it and eventually considered it a possibility.

  • shaymm09

    Another theory that I think is plausible and very interesting is the idea that small particles act in the same accord as mammoth particles…for instance, black holes and atoms. To me, this would mean that there is no true meaning to size, dimension, depth or mass…or that it would at least vary (from small to large, in both directions) to infinity.

  • Sorry, one more. I recently saw something about gravity and how it may not exist, or that it may not exist in the way that we perceive it–which is more likely. I claim that I have not read anything about this, but do find it very interesting and possibly quite true. If understood better (gravity that is) it could raise a lot more questions which would eventually lead to a lot more answers.

  • I think it's quite possible that all or any of these could be true or could happen. It just might be that we don't have the technology yet to understand.

    With Love and Gratitude,

    The Intentional Sage

  • ahdt

    The person that compiled this list is misrepresenting many of these theories. As many others have said, once one understands a bit about where we currently are in regards to our knowledge of how the universe operates, most of these sound quite reasonable. Most of these theories were proposed because the mathematics pointed in that.

  • Geliaebrina

    This might sound insane, but I was comfoted by nr 4 when my grandma died. If a new universe is made everytime a choice is made then somwhere out there a universe where she is still alive. And that thought actually made the grief prosess easier.

  • Larry

    Read what this nut has written:

  • Object

    Here's an interesting article on Cracked that refers to time travel realities. Check it out!

  • Tootie

    this makes my brain hurt :[

  • This list is too smart for me :( especially #1

  • Idioteque

    your next list should include the brain in the jar theory.

  • WhiteDragon

    If #4 is the case then I want to be conscious and living in that very thin line of universes where my life is perfect, my body is perfect and I've mad ALLLLL the right decisions…..

  • android

    interesting stuff on here but i was still dissappointed! I've heard of more than half this stuff in a junior college introduction class! booooo whats up listverse?!?! your lists aren't as amazing as they used to be!

  • Very interesting list!

  • Super sweet list. I enjoyed reading this.

  • icalasari

    I heard that a person got the math down and figured out how to make a machine capable of time travel, but it would be limited to going back as far as the machine existed…

  • Chris

    It's bizarre that I had the very same thought as Stephen Hawking. I have always said since I was about 12 years old that if time travel will ever be possible then it always would have existed.

  • Disciple

    #2……God made the universe, He hold it together. Easy explaination I think :)

  • Barrett

    Maybe time travel is possible, but only back to the point in time when it was invented (or perfected). EG: You need to build a time travel transmitter, but also a receiver.

  • eXoScoriae

    #3, The Heated Death Theory, seems remarkably short sighted. It seems to suggest that if the universe is infinite, and therefor infinitely old, then all stars should be burned out by now.

    That would be like saying that since the earth is 6 billion years old, everything should be dead.

    ie: it doesn't take into account that stars, just like humans, have life cycles. They form from nebulas and die in various manners from brown dwarves to super novas.

    Seems to be a huge hole in that line of logic.

    The hologram theory just sounds like a fancy version of Plato's allegory of the cave. I don't understand why that would be a theory, as there has never been anything observed to suggest that our reality is not real (same for the Matrix theory). In some of the comments I read i saw these being delineated as philosophical theories rather then scientific ones. From a philosophical stand point I would simply state that reality is whatever we perceive it to be. Living in a "matrix" would be no less real to us then what ever world our consciousness actually existed in. Basically, a dream is real to you until you realize its a dream. So while it is conceivably possible, I don't think it makes much difference anyways. Hell, if the world was actually like the Matrix, I'd stick with the virtual side of things. Zion sucked =)

  • Kinsense

    For all of you wondering why we haven't had any time travelers from the future, it's simple and a lot of you even stated it in your response. You cannot travel back in time, only into the future. So if the time machine was invented in the future, it could only travel further into the future. If they came back in time, which isn't possible, and taught us how to build time machines, a paradox would be created because then if we had the technology there would have been no point in them coming back from the future to give it to us.

  • Joe

    Read Roundworld 3 – Darwin's Watch (Terry Pratchett) to find out exactly what White Holes are before you explain they cant exist.
    Regarding time travel, youre gonna have a whale of a time reading this book, because it explains your number 1 "crazy" theory too. Its impossible to travel back past the point of the time travelling machines manufacture.

  • Someone

    Traveling back in time may make you more likely to travel back in time, never stop you from traveling back in time. Causality should still rule a temporal paradox.

  • Sean


  • Sean


  • Sean


  • Sean


  • Sean


  • calvin51

    Time doesn't even exist. If time existed, every single second of my life exists in an alternate universe, somehow being stored and paused in an exact replica of our own universe. There would be not millions, billions, or trillions of universes… There would be literally an INFINITE amounts of universes.

    Not only that, but the laws of conservation of mass and energy prove that you can't create or destroy matter or energy. If this is so, then time can't exist because it would imply that matter and energy would have to be created in order for time to enter the picture.

    Even if time somehow existed, we couldn't travel through it. To travel time, you would instantaneously transfer whatever matter and energy you are made up of from whatever it was originally was during the time period. This would cause total chaos as the present would change due to the matter and energy you are now made up of in the past not doing what it originally was intended to do.

    The fact that you are somehow changing matter and energy into what makes up your existence in the smallest unit of time possible (I know, it's ironic) in the past would be impossible. And traveling into the future would have the same effect.

    • Lizardmancalcos

      Woh long did it take for you to type this?

  • All items 1 – 10 are false. Theory of Evertything is feasible to provide answer, but on question: "How did materialized part of the universe appear?" (not the Universe self, as one has no creator – simply is), however definitely not by means of combination of QM and GR. First of all science must get rid of scientific myths. The universe is finite and in addition to that it structure is simple, however not penetrable to the sufficient degree due to obvious limitation of scientific development. The more complicated theories, the more improbable are.

  • RaptorQueen

    Love the stuff!

    Keep it up ;)

  • jason

    the problem with the multiverse theory is what makes something a decision, every single thing you do is a decision . even the slightest movements, not just to brush or not to brush. i can do any number of slight movement variations with my body, so i guess it truly is: crazy.

  • LordMoMo

    UFO's could be the time travellers -time travel is possible if a person is capable of not wishing to change anything and also if time stopped as we travelled and we never stayed more than the length of the day it would be possible. And as for the device to transport you a machine made and run by light that is capable of holding matter, which shouldnt be too hard to make seeing as the human race manages to play with dark matter combining it with luminous matter which is light and also would that imply we can create our own smaller universe?anyways to sum it up light alters time so it is possible…

  • A_6

    time travel to the future is still possible!

  • LostMusicalMeanings

    Time is a paradox and an illusion

  • whateverman

    I wish i could go back in time and not waste my time reading this list

  • Hervidor

    Ok, so it felt like forever but when I opened my eyes, and went back before the post I just wrote!
    Let me tell you, though, now I am confused. I mean, do I have to write the first comment from the future again? Or will it just appear? IDK…. uh Time Travel kills my brain. Don’t try it.

  • Hervidor

    OK, so I ordered this magical time traveling glove from online. Just close your eyes, wear it and repeat the time of day and date and crap and yo’ll go there. I’m pretty sure this crap is fake, but I’ll let you know.

  • Louis Morelli

    Fun List! It is missing a theory, “The Universal Matrix/DNA of Natural Systems and Life’s Cycles”. The author shows a model where the building block of galaxies is an exactly template for a base-pair of nucleotides, then he went to the whole Universe and saw that everything , from atoms to galaxies to cells to brains and included all life’s cycles are made by a formula designed as a diagram of software, the Universal Matrix. Then, there are these suggestions:

    1) There is no evolution. What we are seeing and thinking that is evolution are merely steps in a big process of reproduction, because the Universe is under genetic reproduction.

    2) There was no origin of life. The seven properties of life were found at the ancestral systems, like atoms and astronomic systems. So they are alive, only not expressing all properties.

    3) The author shows a model where all things our body do, the astronomic bodies also do, in mechanic way. Then there is a mechanical version of sexual intercourse, pregnancy, reproduction, all with spheres and vortexes in the space.

    And many more weird suggestions…

    Ok. He, who is me… I am testing the models and taking every new scientific discovery as right prevision and evidences and enlisting it in the website: http://theuniversalmatrix,com . I believe that the theory has something wrong but till now nobody found anything. Could you be the first end the demolitor of that theory?

    • Louis Morelli

      Oh… the other weird thin that the author discovered is that there is no – the opposite of all people think – link with ,com. The scientifc proof is that if you click the link above, it will not work. The right that works is .com , like in Sorry…

  • trenton

    If time travel was possible I would defiantly make i time travel dellorian and go back in time to the movie set of back to the future.

  • Amanda

    This is very interesting but to me it seems like fake evidence especially since i am a christan women.

  • Marianne

    Very interesting list : D It’s amazing how people can think of these theories, just reading them blows my mind a little haha.

  • Charlotte

    Mainly only confined to Physics, but a nice list anyway

  • hemanth

    the more i think the more i wanna know,the more i wanna know the more i get dissatisfied with the present scope….anyway good list there

  • Avurai

    But they can’t have time travelers revealing themselves to us. If time truly is cyclical, they’d have to make sure we don’t find out about time travel until we’re supposed to (which I’m guessing is when time travel is actually invented). If they were to tell us about themselves, that could interfere with how the events were supposed to occur. So there could be time travelers around us right now who’re keeping their mouths shut. And those who don’t, well, the universe could take care of them and ensure a stable timeline by having them get locked up in mental institutions.

  • Lizardmancalcos

    White holes could be real, they would have repelsive gravity and onlt exsest for a very short time, like an explosion. Sounds like a super nova, both sphereical and GRB. Black holes are ither spherical or disk like. The disk like black holes could blow chunks in 2 opisite directions, so one could say those are both black and white holes.
    The exellerating expansion of the universe makes me think there is a stable giant white hole in the center, or end of the universe. And if at the end of the universe, an antimater universe could spew from the other side.
    Think about it.

  • rswendyb4


  • freehold chiropractor

    I’ve learn some good stuff here. Definitely value bookmarking for revisiting. I surprise how much attempt you set to create this kind of wonderful informative site.

  • Alex

    I think the multiple world theory is the answer to possible time travel, that’s just what I think though

  • Amory

    Unfortunately your perception of time travel is slightly biased due to your ignorance, but I’ll give you an “A” for effort

  • Cristiano

    Very interesting! Every day brings new mysteries that science can not explain, leaving only theories. Check out other myths, legends, mysteries and theories on the site:

    Thank you!