What you are talking about, I think, is the concept of an "absolute space", and an "absolute time" - both of which no longer make sense after the Theory of Relativity.

BTW, many of the deductions of the Theory of Relativity seem to be based, in the first place, on the (assumed) impossibility of transfering information faster than light-speed.

No, I don't think time travel is possible, either. But the possibility of time travel, and of travelling faster than light, seem to be closely related (at least, for those who accept the Theory of Relativity as a valid description of Nature!)

>Hi Hilmar,
>
>I don't think time travel is possible. Time is the change in the universe in a flow of movement. To go back into the past would require the arrangement of every particle of matter back into some prior state, right down to every atom in the universe. Even if this could be done, it would require a reversing in the flow of the universe to achieve some prior state, as opposed to some quantum leap into another dimension.
>
>When I interpret the universe by observing it from light, I get a distorted picture. When I look around in the office, I see object in real time. If I walk outside and look up at the universe, I am seeing the past in different period of time, dependent on where I look. Maybe the light I observed from one star is billions of years old. If I glance over to look at another star, I might be seeing it as it exist ½ billion years ago. This mixing of past with the present is confusing and distorts the universe as a whole. Also, I cannot observe matter in the universe that is moving away from me at speeds of light, so there could be huge parts of the universe which exist, but are outside my range of perception. It is like certain sounds are outside my range of hearing; although, my dog might hear a high pitched sound very clearly. In such a case, I need some artificial tool to perceive the sound.
>
>With light only, I cannot observe the universe truly. I need some way to see the universe as a whole in real time, so I can see how each object of matter relates to all the other objects of matter, both as to it speed relative to me, and its direction of movement relative to me. To do this would require a sensory mechanism much faster than light. Even the most powerful telescope would not overcome the shortcoming of using light as the tool to interpret the universe.
>
>Here is a contradiction to highlight the dilemma:
>
>Until light is removed as the mechanism to see the universe, we will remain in darkness.
>
>Regards,
>
>LelandJ