• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Time Travel: Scientific Plausibility / Theories / Research

Is physical time travel possible?

  • Yes

    Votes: 15 53.6%
  • No

    Votes: 7 25.0%
  • "Dude! Where's my DeLorean?"

    Votes: 6 21.4%

  • Total voters
    28
Not Mere Terminology

I'm well aware of current physics and this in no way inviolates what I'm saying.

Your summation of my position is flawed only where you assert that it excludes the causality and apparent movement backwards; subjective is the key word, I'd say.

We're seeing it from our perspective this way but is this what's really happening? Or are we merely glimpsing a higher plane, as it were, of potentiality, whereon (or in) contradictory things mutually support one another?

as to a truly objective observer, quite right, you'd have to postulate going outside the All -- however, one CAN do this mathematically and conceptually, right? Set theory saves all.
 
well, i think this discussion has come to a natural end, unless anyone else feels like adding something. continuing this discussion drifts further and further off topic, and in to the areas of concepts of multidimensional physics, and pure maths. to keep on topic we would need to tie this all down to something experimentally proven rather than discussion on set theory and probability.

time travel is by most definitions, not outside of the bounds of possibility, but defining how is an impossible task without a better understanding of how space, time and dimensions work. anything else is just discussing how many angels can fit on the head of a pin.
 
Theory Versus Leery

Well I guess you told ME. lol

In truth, though, each flows into the other and I happen to side with Feynman and demand solid physical experimentation and evidence, at least, if not proof.

As for what the experiments you cite prove, or if they've even been interpreted correctly, time will tell, but only if we get further experimentation.

Given the sorry state of science funding and a theocratic government not only uninterested in science but hostile towards it, I wouldn't hold my breath.
 
Its hard not to believe that somewhere (area 51 for example) some secret black project funded with black money is not working on time travel. I think it would have to be going on somewhere here in the USA just because if its possible, we need to have some of the best brains working on it , "just in case". Who knows whats going on behind closed doors. Maybe, they have people working on fast particle accelaraters that do stuff like picking up radio waves that have not been brodcast yet (from the future) or such. :?:
 
On the Philadelphia Experiment thread, Ruff posted this link:
http://www.crystalinks.com/montauk.html

It's a long read and contains references to many Fortean topics, including time travel.

I'm not sure how flakey it is, but there's some heavy name dropping in it (Wilhelm Reich, Tesla, Von Neumann etc).

Near the end of this long screed is this little teaser:
Other experiments included time travel. No one has picked up a tangible future beyond 2012 AD. There is a very abrupt wall there with nothing on the other side. A working time vortex was created to the future.
2012? Now where have I heard that date mentioned...? :shock:
 
"I'm not sure how flakey it is"

Flakier than snow, dandruff and crumbly chocolate rolled into one.

The whole Eldridge thing has been quite thoroughly debunked by now (not least in Fortean Times) and the rest of it just gets further off-beam.

The time-travel theme was unheard-of until it was introduced in the 1984 film of the Philadelphoa Experiment. Since then it has become an established part of the mythos.

Anything with lines like: "The assistant director of NASA admitted that this came straight out of alien technology. He admitted this to the public. " as well as combining aliens, time travel, Nazis, mind control and Reich has to be admired for sheer nerve...but not factual accuracy.
 
No paradox for time travellers

Got this from new scientist website http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18625044.300

Please note that there appears to be a paradox already as the article is dated 18th June which at the time of posting is the day after tomorrow...

??????????????????????????????

No paradox for time travellers
18 June 2005
NewScientist.com news service
Mark Buchanan
THE laws of physics seem to permit time travel, and with it, paradoxical situations such as the possibility that people could go back in time to prevent their own birth. But it turns out that such paradoxes may be ruled out by the weirdness inherent in laws of quantum physics.

Some solutions to the equations of Einstein's general theory of relativity lead to situations in which space-time curves back on itself, theoretically allowing travellers to loop back in time and meet younger versions of themselves. Because such time travel sets up paradoxes, many researchers suspect that some physical constraints must make time travel impossible. Now, physicists Daniel Greenberger of the City University of New York and Karl Svozil of the Vienna University of Technology in Austria have shown that the most basic features of quantum theory may ensure that time travellers could never alter the past, even if they are able to go back in time.

The constraint arises from a quantum object's ability to behave like a wave. Quantum objects split their existence into multiple component waves, each following a distinct path through space-time. Ultimately, an object is usually most likely to end up in places where its component waves recombine, or "interfere", constructively, with the peaks and troughs of the waves lined up, say. The object is unlikely to be in places where the components interfere destructively, and cancel each other out.

Quantum theory allows time travel because nothing prevents the waves from going back in time. When Greenberger and Svozil analysed what happens when these component waves flow into the past, they found that the paradoxes implied by Einstein's equations never arise. Waves that travel back in time interfere destructively, thus preventing anything from happening differently from that which has already taken place (www.arxiv.org/quant-ph/0506027). "If you travel into the past quantum mechanically, you would only see those alternatives consistent with the world you left behind you," says Greenberger.

"This is a very nice idea," says physicist Avshalom Elitzur of the Weizmann Institute in Rehovot, Israel, who also suggests that further work in the area could help to clarify the nature of time itself. "Time is a very mysterious thing."[/url]
 
At one sci-fi convention I attended, a guest was Nicholas Courtney, the Brigadier from Doctor Who. In his honour they held a fun "Make a Time Machine" competition - silver foil, egg cartons, washing-liquid bottles ... that sort of thing.

My entry was a briefcase entitled "A Working Time-Machine". Inside was a functioning travel alarm clock, ticking away. While the briefcase was locked, I explained, the alarm clock could (with quantum theory) display any time. It's workings, therefore, were travelling through time.
Didn't win the competiton, miserable gits! :( :D
 
If time travel can only lead to events which have already been observed to happen, then the situation is called consistent;
this is the Novikov self-consistency theory of time travel, and eliminates the Grandfather paradox.

You can go back in time, but you can't kill your grandfather no matter how hard you try.
That is what these people are saying. Backwards time travel is deterministic, forward travel (and the normal passage of time) are probabilistic.

They also say that another solution would be that backwards time travel is impossible.

That is the second commonly quoted solution to the Grandfather paradox; impossibility (known as the 'boring physics' conjecture).

The other two main possible solutions are the 'Many Worlds' hypothesis, which seems to be going out of favour with quantum physicists;

and the 'radical rewrite' conjecture in which you can go back in time, rewrite history, but there is only one timeline which is rewritten by your actions (with a single blind loop representing the original unaltered timeline, which disappears).
I can't quite see how this would work in practice, but it seems to be the basis for many fictional time travel stories.
 
if you went back in time and changed it surley it would have changed in the present ,so any changes would be invisible :shock:
 
if you went back in time and changed it surley it would have changed in the present ,so any changes would be invisible

Well that depends on which of the four time travel conjectures is true.

If the first conjecture (the Novikov self-consistency conjecture) is correct, you go back in time but nothing you do can change the past. If you try to shoot your grandfather your gun jams, and so on. So when you go home nothing has changed.


If the second conjecture is correct, (the 'boring physics' conjecture) then your time machine doesnt work, so you can't go back anyway.

if the third option (the well-known Many Worlds Hypothesis) is correct, you can change history, and create a new timeline; if you go to the future of the new timeline, everything has changed, but your own original timeline exists somewhere in the multiverse, and you might one day be able to find it one day, perhaps by 'sliding' sideways through the many versions of history.

If the fourth option applies (radical rewrite) you can go back, change the world, but by doing so you destroy the timeline you came from, and create a paradox- your own personal history has been destroyed, and you never got into the time machine in the first place. So where did you come from?
 
couldnt it be true that if you went back in time you would then not exsist from that point in the present.
any changes you made in the past wouldnt afect your future self as you dont exsist there anymore as you now exsist only in the past
point being cant any preson who time travels to past future present only exsist in the current time frame and any paradoxical actions be eliminated by the fact that killing your own past self just means like a video recorder you rewrite all events from that point with your latter actions you would just be older.
why should there be any paradoxes or multiverses etc
why cant time be like a video recorder?
 
Yes, that is the way the radical rewrite interpretation of time travel works; but in that case, the time traveller appears from a future which does not exist, and never will because she has changed history to prevent it happening.

Ther could be an effectively infinite number of such acausal timetravellers if the rewrite theory is true, all coming from non-existent alternative futures which no longer will come to pass.
 
Eburacum45 said:
..There could be an effectively infinite number of such acausal timetravellers if the rewrite theory is true, all coming from non-existent alternative futures which no longer will come to pass.

Crikey! Now I understand the intracasies of time travel. Actually this explains a number of things!
 
has anyone never noticed how anthropocentric all these debates about what would happen if you went back in time and killed granny are?
What would happen if a tree was transported back in time and killed its parent tree?
Would anyone notice?
History is merely a series of things happening from a human perspective, and I suspect that time doesn't give a tinker's tittie for humans. :lol:
 
History is merely a series of things happening from a human perspective, and I suspect that time doesn't give a tinker's tittie for humans

If there wasn't such things as humans around to measure time would it still exist, as ford prefect said Time is an illusion, lunchtime doubley so....
 
ok so you travel back in time with the only thought.. must kill must kill..
lets face it its rare that anyone is killed,war torn countries aside,let alone someone you know
and even less likley is a relative popping there clogs
so its possible timetravlers are here right now with a bit of comon sense avoiding killing anyone..
making paradoxes even more rare and manageble,that is going futher back in time from the one previously visited and avoiding the death/event etc..
it would also make killing hitler as a youth stupid as it would create such a large paradox it would be unfathamable..
 
gellatly68 said:
What would happen if a tree was transported back in time and killed its parent tree?
Would anyone notice?

Well paradoxes apart, all that tree's descendents wouldn't come into existence, depriving other species of protection and food, people of firewood and tools, perhaps leading to premature deaths and creatures not being born. There'd be a cascade effect and eventually the future would differ from the one that would have been.

The size of the impact would vary: if trees were sparse there might significant changes. If it happened in the middle of the Amazon rainforest, the impact could be minimal.


Mind you, unless they're keeping secrets from us or have hidden talents, trees have even more evolving than us to do before they develop time travel. ;)
 
Does it really matter to everone if there are paradox's. I mean if someone goes back in time and kills Hitler as a youth then everone living after that time will not have experianced WW2 so it won't have mattered a damn that hitler was killed, no-one would be any the wiser. The only person who would have realized Hitler was dead and that subsequent history was wrong was the time travelling assasin. Heres a question if this was true could it be that Hitler was inevitable, maybe some future time traveller had went back in time several times killing various dictators in their youth only to realize that in the end someone always filled the roll?.
 
26 pages...

I may have even posted in them.

My thoughts can be summed up:

If Time Travel (backwards) will ever be possible then we should have encountered Time Travellers at every moment of our race's existence.

Warning: this argument is simple and glosses over many factors known and unknown - that said, it bears a kernell of truth.
 
Timble said:
gellatly68 said:
What would happen if a tree was transported back in time and killed its parent tree?
Would anyone notice?

Well paradoxes apart, all that tree's descendents wouldn't come into existence, depriving other species of protection and food, people of firewood and tools, perhaps leading to premature deaths and creatures not being born. There'd be a cascade effect and eventually the future would differ from the one that would have been.

The size of the impact would vary: if trees were sparse there might significant changes. If it happened in the middle of the Amazon rainforest, the impact could be minimal.


Mind you, unless they're keeping secrets from us or have hidden talents, trees have even more evolving than us to do before they develop time travel. ;)

The tree was a figurative tree. What I meant was, that to the universe at large, such paradoxes are utterly irrelevant, no matter how important we consider them from our anthropocentric view. We suspect that in some parts of the universe, some really weird things happen to spacetime: why not a few more?
 
rynner said:
Other experiments included time travel. No one has picked up a tangible future beyond 2012 AD. There is a very abrupt wall there with nothing on the other side. A working time vortex was created to the future.

2012? Now where have I heard that date mentioned...? :shock:

That's when we humans are wiped from the face of the planet by an alien race who resemble dimiutive Canadians and are armed with piercingly shrill voices.

Sorry, that's 2112...
 
Time travel via tasty snacks....mmmTARDIS

In NATURE

Gravity doughnut promises time machineMark Peplow
Movement into the past gets one step less improbable.

A doughnut: your ticket to the past?

One of the major difficulties of travelling backwards in time has just been solved, according to an Israeli theoretical physicist. And the solution, he says, is doughnut-shaped.

Trips in time have been theoretically possible ever since Einstein worked out that heavy masses can warp both time and space, and that objects travelling close to the speed of light tend to experience the passage of time more slowly.

Moving forwards in time is therefore easy. Certain short-lived cosmic particles, for example, can be seen on Earth. Their journey looks to us as if it has taken thousands of years, but the particle feels as though it has whipped across space in just a few minutes, and arrives on Earth before it has had time to decay. In effect, the particle has travelled into the future, living beyond its years.

But getting back to the past is more problematic. Researchers thought you would need all kinds of strange things to do this, including a neutron star (which we know to exist), worm holes (which we don't), and a kind of exotic matter that we can only imagine.

Time present and time past

This is where Amos Ori from Technion, the Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa, comes in. He says that according to Einstein's theories, space can be twisted enough to create a local gravity field that looks like a doughnut of some arbitrary size. The gravitational field lines circle around the outside of this doughnut, so that space and time are both tightly curved back on themselves. Crucially, this does away with the need for any hypothetical exotic matter.

Although it is difficult to describe what this would look or be like in real life, Ori says the mathematics reveal that every period of time between when the doughnut was created and the present moment would be somewhere in the vacuum inside the doughnut. All you need to do is work out how to get there.

In theory, it should be possible to travel back to any point in time after the time machine was built, reports Ori in Physical Review Letters1. One slight snag is that he has not worked out how to generate the gravitational doughnut, although he has some ideas. "It's wild speculation, but you may need to move large masses rapidly in a circular motion," Ori says.

An abstraction

"The paper is a welcome addition to the subject, and it does look like an improvement on the previous models," says Paul Davies, a theoretical physicist at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia, and author of How to Build a Time Machine.

The leading model of travel into the past involves zipping through a wormhole, which offers a shortcut between two distant points in space. If you could connect a wormhole between Earth and something very heavy, such as a neutron star, this would set up a time difference between the two ends. This is thanks to the fact that mass can warp space and time, such that a clock on the surface of a dense neutron star would run about 30% slower than it does on Earth.

But wormholes are tricky beasts, and need something to stop them collapsing under their own intense gravity. Kip Thorne, a theoretical physicist at the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, has speculated that some form of exotic antigravity matter would be needed to keep the wormhole open. Unfortunately for eager time lords, physicists have never seen anything like this.

A perpetual possibility

There are still difficulties to overcome with the doughnut model, however. Davis thinks that the instability of the compact vacuum core might be an insurmountable problem. "Closed time-like curves are inherently unstable against quantum fluctuations," he says. He expects a huge energy surge inside the doughnut would probably destroy it.

Ori agrees that energy fluctuations might be problematic, but thinks this is probably soluble. "Unfortunately it's not going to be in existence in our generation, or maybe ever," he says. Still, he puts the chances of ever being able to construct a time machine at 50:50.
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17544598/wi ... 9?GT1=9145


The urge to hug a departed loved one again or prevent atrocities are among the compelling reasons that keep the notion of time travel alive in the minds of many.

While the idea makes for great fiction, some scientists now say traveling to the past is impossible.

There are a handful of scenarios that theorists have suggested for how one might travel to the past, said Brian Greene, author of the bestseller, “The Elegant Universe” and a physicist at Columbia University.“And almost all of them, if you look at them closely, brush up right at the edge of physics as we understand it. Most of us think that almost all of them can be ruled out.”
Story continues below ↓ advertisement

The fourth dimension
In physics, time is described as a dimension much like length, width, and height. When you travel from your house to the grocery store, you’re traveling through a direction in space, making headway in all the spatial dimensions — length, width and height. But you’re also traveling forward in time, the fourth dimension.

“Space and time are tangled together in a sort of a four-dimensional fabric called space-time,” said Charles Liu, an astrophysicist with the City University of New York, College of Staten Island and co-author of the book “One Universe: At Home In The Cosmos.”

Space-time, Liu explains, can be thought of as a piece of spandex with four dimensions. “When something that has mass—you and I, an object, a planet, or any star — sits in that piece of four-dimensional spandex, it causes it to create a dimple,” he said. “That dimple is a manifestation of space-time bending to accommodate this mass.”

The bending of space-time causes objects to move on a curved path and that curvature of space is what we know as gravity.

Mathematically one can go backwards or forwards in the three spatial dimensions. But time doesn’t share this multi-directional freedom.

“In this four-dimensional space-time, you’re only able to move forward in time,” Liu told LiveScience.

Tunneling to the past
A handful of proposals exist for time travel. The most developed of these approaches involves a wormhole—a hypothetical tunnel connecting two regions of space-time. The regions bridged could be two completely different universes or two parts of one universe. Matter can travel through either mouth of the wormhole to reach a destination on the other side.

“Wormholes are the future, wormholes are the past,” said Michio Kaku, author of “Hyperspace” and “Parallel Worlds” and a physicist at the City University of New York. “But we have to be very careful. The gasoline necessary to energize a time machine is far beyond anything that we can assemble with today’s technology.”

To punch a hole into the fabric of space-time, Kaku explained, would require the energy of a star or negative energy, an exotic entity with an energy of less than nothing.

Greene, an expert on string theory—which views matter in a minimum of 10 dimensions and tries to bridge the gap between particle physics and nature's fundamental forces, questioned this scenario.

“Many people who study the subject doubt that that approach has any chance of working,” Greene said in an interview . “But the basic idea if you’re very, very optimistic is that if you fiddle with the wormhole openings, you can make it not only a shortcut from a point in space to another point in space, but a shortcut from one moment in time to another moment in time.

Cosmic strings
Another popular theory for potential time travelers involves something called cosmic strings —narrow tubes of energy stretched across the entire length of the ever-expanding universe. These skinny regions, leftover from the early cosmos, are predicted to contain huge amounts of mass and therefore could warp the space-time around them.

Cosmic strings are either infinite or they’re in loops, with no ends, said J. Richard Gott, author of “Time Travel in Einstein's Universe” and an astrophysicist at Princeton University. “So they are either like spaghetti or SpaghettiO’s.”

The approach of two such strings parallel to each other, said Gott, will bend space-time so vigorously and in such a particular configuration that might make time travel possible, in theory.

“This is a project that a super civilization might attempt,” Gott told LiveScience. “It’s far beyond what we can do. We’re a civilization that’s not even controlling the energy resources of our planet.”
 
The Time Traveller: One Man's Mission To Make Time Travel A Reality, by Ronald L. Mallett with Bruce Henderson, is published in August by Doubleday at £14.99.

From a long article about Prof. Mallett (who's been mentioned on this thread already):
http://tinyurl.com/24bj5t
 
The above mentioned article states:

If you were to walk into this 'timetunnel' - which would resemble a large vortex of light a few feet across - you could emerge at some point in the past. He thinks he can build a prototype machine in the lab, using today's technology, with funds of just $250,000 (£120,000).

FFS someone give him the money. Its not that much in the scheme of things and if he is right he can return your investment before you give it to him.

Unless of course ... he already has.
 
Say it isn't so!

I have enjoyed reading dozens of alleged occurrences of genuine, physical time travel on this site and would really, really like to believe that at least some of them are true. However, relatively recently, I encountered a considerable obstacle to my accepting that practical time travel as a layman such as myself imagines it is possible: if the Earth is constantly spinning and circling the Sun, and if the Sun is constantly moving through the Milky Way, and if the Milky Way itself is also constantly moving through the Universe itself, then it would seem right to assert that the Earth is never in the same space position twice. And if that is the case, then would not anyone who might enter into a time machine in, say, Florida and travel several years into the future reappear millions of miles away from the Earth, which would have since ten years past moved a great distance away from where it had been when the time machine vanished into the future?
The popular website Wikipedia's own entry on time travel addresses this very issue. However, the solution that follows it seems to consist of a cop-out that uses Einstein's brilliant Theory of Special Relativity to basically skirt the issue by asserting that spatial locations are completely relative and, therefore, irrelevant.
In order to accept that practical time travel is possible, must I be willing to sacrifice my understanding that our planet is not stationary in space? Say it isn't so! :confused:
 
Back
Top