Charlie Chaplin Time Travel: 1924 Hearing Aid? Time Traveler Cell Phone

cell phone in Chaplin film

Charlie Chaplin Time Travel: 1924 Hearing Aid? Time Traveler Cell Phone – Earlier on in the week it was reported that an Irish film maker believed that he had spotted a time traveller in the Charlie Chaplin film ‘The Circus’. In the clip, an elderly lady is seen walking along with a black device that looks like a mobile phone held to her ear and she appears to be talking into it. However, many people are now suggesting that the lady is using a hearing aid which was developed in 1924. However, other people have suggested that this doesn’t explain a few things.

Firstly, if it was a hearing aid, why was the woman talking into the device? Unless she was cursing it for not working properly. A lot of other things have been mentioned as possibilities, but none of them really seem to explain everything fully. Unfortunately, there is no way of having a definite answer.

If you have not yet seen the footage then you can take a look above. Maybe you have your own ideas as to what the mysterious object could be.

Share and Enjoy:

    Filed Under: Celebrity Gossip


    RSSComments (140)

    Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

    1. Jimmy says:

      She’s not holding anything. It’s your mind playing tricks on you, people nowadays are so used to the sight of a person in public speaking on a cell phone that that becomes the first thought. She either has dementia or is just a little off because she twitches her fingers while holding them up near her head – an eccentric lady with outrageous expressions is quite common.

      I think, since a film maker posted this, it’s either a clever advertisement for his own films which stir up peoples attention and interest in what he has to offer, or a purposeful hoax intended to just see what happens when people are told something. For example, the film maker told you it looked like a cell phone before you even saw the footage, so the viewer is looking for a person holding a cell phone, or the closest thing to it.

      • rochel says:

        how did you say that the film maker told her to look up and act like holding a cellphone?? mobile phone was never develop in that moment and maybe they don’t even know that “cellphone” is the name of the gadget that invented in the future?or they don’t even know that the peoples in the future may develop this kind of gadget, come to think of it, i believe that she’s a time traveler, everything is possible but few may notice it. there’s no other explanation to this,there is no signal for that mobile phone that’s why she is looking for the signal and i thought she also don’t know that she’s a time traveler because she looks like do not know everything in that place. i read book that about that, and it says that not only the time traveler can traveler, also the things that she/he is holding in that moment that she’s going to travel on time. i am very glad that time traveler exist, she is very unique and i am proud of her because she can survive, we don’t know, maybe she is traveling in our time holding a flying car?? want to see her, the movie “the time traveler’s wife” is one reason why i get interested to this gossip! c: leave a comment to me if you’re agree

        • Angry Exile says:

          how did you say that the film maker told her to look up and act like holding a cellphone?

          Jimmy didn’t say that. He said that the film maker in this clip, that is to say George Clark from Belfast, tells the viewer of the You Tube clip that it looks to him like someone on a mobile phone. That inserts the idea into the mind of the viewer and we latch onto the first thing that matches our expectation. It’s very similar to the idea of leading questions and why they are not permitted in courts. A fairer way would have been to say he’d seen something odd and to show the clip without comment before asking viewers to consider what it may have been, and then perhaps following a link where George could explain his time traveller on a cell phone theory – presumably a time traveller who can get a signal several decades before any networks exist but thinks having one won’t draw attention.

          Anyway, George is completely wrong. Clearly she’s talking to a little leprechaun that she’s trapped in a small, flat box and is trying to trick into revealing where his pot of gold is hidden. Come on, the evidence for it is just as good as for a time travelling mobile phone user, and I’m really disappointed that an Irishman failed to see it for what it really is. 😉

        • Adam says:

          You’re pretty illogical if you think that there’s any reason for time travelers to walking around in 1924. Even if it where an accidental time traveler, the time traveler would most likely not be on a film set, completely oblivious to the fact that she is standing in the middle of the set of an old time comedy movie, and would probably look at the camera, as it is natural human instinct to do so unless instructed otherwise. And it’s impossible to accidentally time travel- how would you do something by accident that the world’s top conceptual scientists don’t even have merely a rudimentary idea of how to do, or even if it is possible? And he was suggesting that the filmmaker (not the one in 1924, the one NOW, posting the video) already had given the you the expectation that you were going to find a woman talking on a cellphone, therefore the your selective perception subconsciously influenced you into the immediate presumption that she was in fact talking into a cellphone instead of some other, more normal activity for that time.

          I am ashamed to have spent so much of my precious time arguing over such a ridiculous topic (although i have nothing better to do) and so I bid you good day.

          • StevenB says:

            I agree with you and i would like to add one thing. How the hell could she be talking on a cell phone in 1924 when cell phone towers haven’t been invented yet. Unless she is communicating to her starship that slingshot itself around the sun to go back in time.

          • denke says:

            she aint own a feelms seht. weido.

        • aafds says:

          Why would someone from the future from us have a 20s phone or hearing aid?

        • anon says:

          i think you’re insane. or a troll.

      • Dayervid says:

        Woman invited to premier of the film. She sees very large silent film camera over the road. She covers her face with her hand but can’t extend her fingers fully because of her hat brim. As she is directly opposite the camera she turns and says something along the lines of “stop it” “stop filming me”. So much easier to believe than a mobile phone system that operates without mobile phone infrastructure.

        • Louise says:

          If you notice that just as she turns around at the end there is nothing in her hand at all. So covering her head and not wanting to be filmed seems to be the best explanation.

      • petiecutie says:

        actually it’s probably a dad is 88 & he laughed & mentioned back then the radio had a separate earpiece with an antenna to listen.

        • Carlie says:

          But when she turns around, she doesn’t seem to be holding anything at all. I honestly think it’s the collar of something she’s wearing underneath her fur coat. If you watch her shadow as she walks into the scene, you see that part pop up quickly, like a reflex. If it were a radio, she wouldn’t have had reason to move so quickly. The earpiece would have either already been at her ear, or she wouldn’t have reacted that fast, meaning, we would see the radio come up slower. If she were moving her collar up toward her face to keep it from the camera’s view, she would have likely been reacting out of fear, nerves, anger, or other emotions that elicit reflexive responses.

    2. caitlin says:

      Maybe it was a bit of a laugh to imagine a portable phone back then. Or since it was in the deleted scenes (i think), it was deleted because they realised an extra was moving wrong or wasn’t aware that they were filming and was talking.

    3. Dakotah says:

      Alright… so if its a phone wheres the towers or satellites and who is she talking too…? i donno

      Personnally i dont believe in time travel, but heres my take…

      1.) Today, the people researching time travel believe the only way to actually travel through time is by traveling through a worm hole. (imagine folding a paper in half and stapling it somewhere in the center… the paper is the universe and the paper clip is a worm hole… you would be able to travel back in time via the paperclip.) IF THIS IS POSSIBLE… unlikely, but if its so then radio radio waves (which DO travel through space) would be able to travel these wormholes… but again that would require ALOT of advance calculations to send and recieve signals so precisely… also these wouldnt be instantaneous due to the limits of traveling no faster than a radio wave which is the same as the speed of light.

      2.) Alternatively it could be a government official, no one knows for sure, but its a common rumor that the government is VERY far ahead of time in technology, but nothing is released until these new technologies positives and negatives are weighed… thats just a rumor though… some examples of this ACTUALLY HAPPENING is the internet… the internet was used long before the public was introduced to it. IT was used for military uses mostly, but it is believed to have began somewhere around 1950’s. This is around the time the first servers (per say) were created… So basically what im getting at is maybe the government was far ahead of the time and they had walkie-talkies at the time of the filming… although walkie-talkies were unknown to the public, and as far as history knows.

      3.) and finally maybe she was just insane and he/she/it was just talking to a small black box…? i donno

      Honestly it doesnt really matter, and it would be very cool to see sometime in the future someone prove my beliefs about time travel to be impossible. I would love to see me get proved wrong and this turn out to be an actual time traveler…

      P.S. Time travel is technically possible… It happens everytime an astronaut leaves earth, That is one of the biggest worries of Space travel… The further you go the slower the clock ticks… A trip to mars would take 3 years in time hear on earth, but it is estimated that astronauts would only age about a year… that is pretty crazy, but nothing to the scale of traveling BACK in time only traveling forward in time slower than everyone else… Which i guess is traveling back in time… hmmm

      The Universe is an Amazing Thing… Unfortunately we Don’t Nearly Understand it Enough!

      • cassie says:

        first off, i do not really believe in time travel, but it’s a nice thought that there might be powers in this universe which escape most of human knowledge. second off, you are a moron. if there is such a thing as time travel, the only thing traveling would be the person…not the cell phone towers and satellites.

        • Dakotah says:

          i never said anything about satellites and cell phone towers going through time… i merely said that if someone traveled through time it would be impossible to hold a cell phone conversation even if they had some intense cell phone technology. this is because radio waves travel at the speed of light… and when radio waves are sent into space (to mars for example it takes 3 minutes to get there and and 3 more to get back, when they control the rovers on mars they are making moves almost 6 minutes before they actually see their rovers move) they would not be able to instantly talk back and forth like we can today on earth

      • fred flintstone says:

        if you thought that you needed cell towers for a communication device to wor then you are to thick to pass judgement on the film, to put i tin terms for thick people like you how did star trek type communications take place? indeed when the iss passes over i can call the space station from a small 2 way radio on 145.800 mhz easily and the iss is 200 miles up so if said time travellers space ship was in orbit then its simple another way to look at it is your gps device the satelites in space it receives its signal from are 12550 miles away and thats a small device in you hand so then consider technology from say 1000 years from now and maybe another civalisation and you begin to realise you simply are not qualified to be posting your dribble on here.

      • J says:

        Actually (just to sharpen up your understanding of physics) the idea of a wormhole being used for time travel requires you think of the wormhole as a sort of tube in space. If you’re familiar with the game “Portal” then you essentially have the idea laid out. The tube can be of really any physical length (spacially in three dimensions. When you travel back in time you are accounting for this spacial dimension being such that the length of the tunnel (the distance between where one enters and one exits) is actually negative. It is therefore (theoretically) possible to have a wormhole that exists directly in the same spot at two separate times.

        For instance now and five years from now there is at a point in space, lets say its the size and shape to the door nearest to where you’re sitting but to not deal with the geometric shape on three dimensions (an irrelevant issue at this point) it is attached to your wall. Now just for giggles lets say that these portals were open for a full 24 hours at a time both on your birthday (sorry leap-year folks, real birthdays). If you are in your room when it appears both times (lets say randomly just for the sake of a simple experiment and as they are random natural occurrences with probability controlling both apparition and size this isn’t too far fetched) it will literally be like you are looking into your room from either perspective. Air, will exchange between the two and all things that can and do move (like air) will travel through the portals as though that wall the portal is composed of, were not there. Say you decided to play a game of catch with yourself and one of you threw a ball, the velocity of the ball is X. When you throw the ball through the portal from the future to the past, the ball is going the same speed through the entire distance of the portal (which is negative) so nothing needs to exceed light speed (the supposed “universal speed limit” obeyed by everything but Tachyons as far as I remember). The amount of time perceived to pass between the entering and exiting from relative past to relative future will be infinitesimally small but the actual time will be proportionate to the time passing between the two portals (in this case five years). As the entrance is in the same physical space (lets pretend the earth is stationary like a real wormhole would likely be) then the only distance traveled was a negative vector (direction specific measurement) of space-time where the “time” portion was actually negative in the going back and positive in the going forward. This allows for the physical distance to be indeterminate. A tunnel of “wormhole” could exist a mile long or it could be so short that the travel is instantaneous. It gets very confusing but Stephen Hawkings done a marvelous job of explaining this idea and the radiation feedback refutation of this idea in his discovery channel special and his books (specifically the “Universe in a Nutshell”). On a side note, he is catching criticism for the radiation feedback refutation as it discounts massive distances in space, as well as time from lessening the “feedback.” That’s aside from the point though.

        Technically, what you are referring to in your PS. (Einstein’s relativity) is a kind of time travel but you have it a bit vaguely. The idea is this: gravity dilates time by warping space-time (the “fabric” of the universe) and elongating the “time measurement so that it passes slower. So if gravity makes time what has this got to do with what you mentioned? Velocity has to do with everything you mentioned. I’m not sure what your math is for the three years to one thing but I’ll trust the source. Anyway, the idea is that movement of any kind, increases the conceptual mass of an object. That’s that whole E= mc^2 business. So say we have a ball that is perfectly still within earth’s gravity (and the earth is still) as well as an identical ball in non-gravitational space (perfectly still as well) The ball in space will be unaffected by earth’s time dilation such that it will age just a bit faster than the ball on earth. The difference will be less pronounced but may amount to a matter of years over the course of a century or so. Now lets say we have a two balls in space unoccupied by gravity, one is moving away from the other which is stationary. The velocity of the moving ball is affecting the balls gravitational effect by the principle of its energy. If the ball is going faster it has more energy, which when divided by the speed of light squared will give you the balls mass. This equation says that the ball gains mass as it gains velocity. This then means that the gravitational field of the object grows with it, which dilates the time it experiences. There is a proportional difference in time experienced between objects of different masses/velocities based off those masses and velocities and the possible gravitational fields acting upon them. I wouldn’t quite say it is full fledged time travel but time dilation is kind of like time travel in the fact that both are just warping the “time” dimension of space around a body in space.

        Frankly though, I’m too lazy to cover the idea of radio waves and the like, you seemed to cover that pretty well Dakotah. Good discussion.

    4. arcangel says:

      maybe this is the paradox how would you know. maybe shes the one who stopped Hitler….how do you know…

    5. eoghan says:

      if she’s a time traveller, who could she be talking to? Signal can’t travel through space, and there wouldn’t be any signal back then so she’s prob just itching her ear :p

    6. FreakingOutMan says:

      I’m freaking out, man!

    7. jack says:

      Here’s the real question…who the hell is she talking to on a mobile phone in 1924? Even if there’s another time traveller with another cell phone for her to speak with, what do you think reception was like in 1924? Is there a time-travelling AT&T tower, too?

    8. anon says:

      She’s just holding up her coat to protect her eyes and talking to someone else on or off the set.

      • dean says:

        The very 1st time I saw a mobile used in similar fashion on george st sydney back in 84 I said thinking they were talking to me..spose thats why the guy in front moved ahead so quickly…The nsw gov.had just closed the loony assylums…Now U all use them in public.. i do not say g’day any more in private…loose lips sink ships/lol/Love Dean..PS my last name is Chaplain…and yes I have always been ahead of my time…I’ll ring U do not ring me…

    9. John says:

      Its true that cellphones require an infrastructure so its unlikely to be that, but if she’s from the future then it could easily be some other type of communicating device. To me the woman doesn’t have the look of a crazy. Crazies who are talking to themselves are usually quite oblivious of whats going on around them while they chat, but this person appears to be taking in her surroundings quite normally. She’s definitely seems to be holding something because her fingers are held in an unnaturally rigid position and her hand doesn’t move substantially, relative to her ear. Speaking of the hand, that to me is the biggest indication that this is probably a man. You can always spot gender by looking at the hands. Even the manliest looking women will have softer female looking hands, and likewise the most feminine looking men, I’m talking a complete transsexual who is prettier than most girls – he will still have slightly too big hands. The woman in the clip has man-hands. Added to that is the way she walks, which looks a lot like how a man unused to wearing heels will have an odd center of gravity. Its only apparent at the normal frame rate though.

      Assuming this isn’t a hoax, a big assumption, then its hard to justify except by time-travel or some other equally cool possibility…

    10. dustin says:

      Well, one thing’s sure, it’s not an iphone4. Look at the grip she’s using. NO way she’d get a signal.

    11. Mimi says:

      If she really was a time traveler. some one equipped with the technology to TRAVEL FREAKING TIME! Why would they still be using something as primitive as a cellular phone? Its just not logical.

    12. John D says:

      Seriously… This is kinda cool, but it’s just footage of someone scratching their temple head as they walk. The person is old and is also chewing slightly, as older people tend to do sometimes.

    13. Addy says:

      When were tape recorders invented? Maybe she’s a detective following that guy and recording a memo for herself later. hahaha.

    14. Jay says:

      Obviously there are some of us that think that if this was a time traveler that wires and towers would still be a necessity to communicate. I think if they have the technology to travel through time, they probably have something that doesn’t need satelites and antennas.

      Anyways – I think its a lady covering her face so she doesn’t get caught on film and itching the edge of her hair in between the hat line, that’s why her knuckles are bent.

    15. midnightexpress says:

      I wonder who is she/he talking too… hands look kinda hairy.

    16. Sleep says:

      Uh what sort of reception did that cell phone get back in 1920? With no cellphone towers? Were there roaming charges?

      That’s sure as hell isn’t AT&T I can promise you that.

      • fred flintstone says:

        it always amazes me how thick people are thinking you need towers to communicate and use terms like signal wtf?

        • dean says:

          love it/friends and i use to try to communicate from the surface to the bottoms of mines with our mates….pre mobiles,,,it worked…tower me not rapunzel

    17. ThatOneKidOverThere says:

      OKAY……xD Why are we even giving this a second thought, (wait) why am I giving this a second thought? lol I guess we all just want to humor something hahahahaha ugh xD

      Well anyway, *if* she is a “time traveler” why did she go there? I’d go visit the dinosaurs! And talk on my phone there lol But honestly I don’t see anything in her hand…not saying that there isn’t anything there. o.o I bet you she knew that old dude walking ahead of her. Maybe it was her grumpy husband and she was like, “Oh Fred! I’m so embarrassed to be at this fancy premiere, better cover my face!” xD

      I don’t know, I mean, this theory of mine will probably be shot down waaay before time traveler will be lol

    18. rtravis says:

      Most plausibly she accidentally fell through a rip in the fabric of the space-time continuum back in the late 1950’s and is listening to a transistor radio while singing along to the pop hit, “Flying Purple People Eater”.

    19. Timmy says:

      She is twirling her hair bro. Notice you con’t see her thumb from the time she walks on screen. That’s because she is gripping her forefinger. Notice in the last second the ring and pinky finger move to reveal that there is nothing in her hand. This is ridiculous. Do you really think that if someone had the ability to travel back in time they wouldn’t have thought of waring an ear piece or think about the fact that they are walking around in public with an advanced piece of technology in their hand?

    20. what the? says:

      The film is from 1928, the article makes mention of hearing aids in 1924.
      As for hand held radios, none that i know of existed like that in ’28. some rudimentry types were around but nothing that small or without headsets.

      Just for the sake of discussion, 1928 would be a perfect time to drop in considering it was just before the 1929 crash, so someone with fore knowledge would have alot to gain, as someone mentioned, like the movie Time cop.

      • dean says:

        Right with u/some of us do not even know we do it…But at least major cities in Australia r getting desalination units…something I asked 4 30 years ago/always ahead of my time?….B careful what u wish 4…

    21. Who says there have to be cell towers? says:

      Or, more to the point, if it is in fact a time traveler, who says they must have been traveling from the year 2010, where we must rely on cellular networks to make mobile phone calls? It could be that in the future we develop something that doesn’t require a network. Or, she could be communicating on a 2 way radio like device talking to a partner and fellow time traveler. Or, you know, her orbiting starship.

    22. Ozchick says:

      whatever – best entertainment I’ve had in a while : )))

    23. Cindy says:

      She’s not holding anything, she just had one crabby hand up the the side of her face, and she’s yammering to herself like I’ve seen a million crabby old women do in public. She may have a pain in her face, she may have been shielding her face from the glaring sun coming from that side, since the angle of the shadows makes it clear that the sun would have been hitting her right in the left eye at that point, etc.

      The fact that her hand is curved and looks like it’s holding something in no doubt rheumatism…most old people at that age likely had gnarled up fingers from a lifetime of manual labor and later on rheumatism.

      Also WHO THE SHIT WOULD SHE BE TALKING TO, there were no satellites back then.

    24. Grede says:

      Now listen, i think this is great.
      I’d love it to be a time traveler, but… you know… you can’t really justify saying it’s the only reasonable option.

      However i’m amazed how many people manage to sound sensible, and then ruin it with ‘they had no satellites back then’. Come on. That makes no sense at all.
      You are telling people time travel is not possible because of a chronological problem? Well, yes, messing with time and all that is pretty much what time-travel would be about.

      Why don’t you bemoan the fact that youtube didn’t exist just yet in 1928, so it’s a shame there’s not more images?

      There are plenty good arguments around, you don’t need to make a complete fool of yourself by pointing at the lack of imaginary ‘cell towers’.
      Of course it won’t be a damn cell-phone, morons. But to people in 2010, a hand-held communications device is, well, basically a cell-phone.

      Sure, you could imagine being stranded (or purposefully sent) at a certain time, disguised to blend in, and having to contact fellow agents or whatever. But it’s still hard to believe it’d be caught by a few promo shots of a movie premiere.

      (yeah, last point, by the way : the video you’ve all apparently just watched explains unavoidably that the images come from a bonus segment on the movie premiere, not the fuken movie itself. To be fair, it’s still quite ludicrous, but not as much as filming this on set would have been)

      But then it wouldn’t be very insconspicuous to run around in drag talking to yourself… or why send a female that could pass for J Edgar Hoover?
      Such a beautiful mindfuck.

    25. dean says:

      whatever the mind of man concieves and believes it can on the moon? Revive Einstein/lets make it happen…Wormhole my atoms any time u like.

    26. Or Gen says:

      I don’t know about you all, but MY favorite pastime is listening to people who consider themselves experts on all things technology (because, of course, they got As in high school science and have seen every episode of Star Trek) deriding others as foolish, as they attempt to explain how an old woman scratching her face is a time traveler and how the technology would work.

      And don’t forget the fellow agent, you fools! There are ALWAYS fellow agents!

    27. Saraa says:

      I question what this is, but it has to be something crazyyy. There’s absolutely no way someone back then could just think to hold something to there face and talk. TIME TRAVELER !!

    28. Michael Knight says:

      Anyone consider that the “cellphone” is just black hair, and she’s stroking it back?

    29. Zach says:

      Consider this, unless that cellphone is somehow still linked up to the future, How the hell would she be talking to someone when cell towers or satellites haven’t been invented yet

    30. Ashley says:

      She wouldn’t get any reception because there wouldn’t be any towers.

    Leave a Reply