• 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
Re: Say it isn't so!

BlueMoonRising said:
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:
You are misunderstanding 'space' here: space is NOT a fixed arena in which things happen - it can only be defined by distances between things, which (as Einstein pointed out) are relative to states of motion between the 'things'.

You are, it seems, thinking of 'space' as defined by Newton.

Since Einstein, all positions and velocities are relative to each other - space is not an objective thing, but subject to each person's observations of it.

I've not looked at the Wiki piece you mention as I write this, so as to give my 'off-the-cuff' response....
 
Yes, I understand Einstein's assertion that spacial locations can never be defined with certainty. But how does that assure that the hypothetical time machine would vanish and reappear at the "same" place (relative to the Earth)?
Now, allowing here for the term Universe to be defined as a physical place currently expanding in otherwise empty space, what if we "enclosed" the Universe, as it is at this very instant, with eight imaginary balls that were stationary, such that the Universe is enclosed within a cube; beyond these 8 points is empty space into which matter has not yet spread. We don't, of course, but imagine that we did.
Now and, admittedly, only now, could we define "where" the Earth is at any particular moment. It is in this hypothetical scenario that my original question takes place.
 
BlueMoonRising said:
...
Now, allowing here for the term Universe to be defined as a physical place currently expanding in otherwise empty space, ...
The problem being that the usual physical definition of the Universe is actually of a physical 'space' which is expanding. There is no "otherwise empty space" for it to expand into, it is the empty space, itself, which is expanding.

To the observer, like being part of the skin of an expanding balloon, extended into 4, or more, dimensions. The expanding balloon skin being the Universe and all that it contains.
 
So the universe (or space??) does not expand into but just keeps expanding??
 
That's pretty much it, yeah.
 
There's always a 'but'... It goes without saying!! ;)
 
New model 'permits time travel'
By Julianna Kettlewell
BBC News science reporter

If you went back in time and met your teenage parents, you could not split them up and prevent your birth - even if you wanted to, a new quantum model has stated.

Researchers speculate that time travel can occur within a kind of feedback loop where backwards movement is possible, but only in a way that is "complementary" to the present.

In other words, you can pop back in time and have a look around, but you cannot do anything that will alter the present you left behind.

The new model, which uses the laws of quantum mechanics, gets rid of the famous paradox surrounding time travel.

Paradox explained

Although the laws of physics seem to permit temporal gymnastics, the concept is laden with uncomfortable contradictions.

The main headache stems from the idea that if you went back in time you could, theoretically, do something to change the present; and that possibility messes up the whole theory of time travel.

Clearly, the present never is changed by mischievous time-travellers: people don't suddenly fade into the ether because a rerun of events has prevented their births - that much is obvious.

So either time travel is not possible, or something is actually acting to prevent any backward movement from changing the present.

For most of us, the former option might seem most likely, but Einstein's general theory of relativity leads some physicists to suspect the latter.

According to Einstein, space-time can curve back on itself, theoretically allowing travellers to double back and meet younger versions of themselves.

And now a team of physicists from the US and Austria says this situation can only be the case if there are physical constraints acting to protect the present from changes in the past.

Weird laws

The researchers say these constraints exist because of the weird laws of quantum mechanics even though, traditionally, they don't account for a backwards movement in time.

Quantum behaviour is governed by probabilities. Before something has actually been observed, there are a number of possibilities regarding its state. But once its state has been measured those possibilities shrink to one - uncertainty is eliminated.

So, if you know the present, you cannot change it. If, for example, you know your father is alive today, the laws of the quantum universe state that there is no possibility of him being killed in the past.

It is as if, in some strange way, the present takes account of all the possible routes back into the past and, because your father is certainly alive, none of the routes back can possibly lead to his death.

"Quantum mechanics distinguishes between something that might happen and something that did happen," Professor Dan Greenberger, of the City University of New York, US, told the BBC News website.

"If we don't know your father is alive right now - if there is only a 90% chance that he is alive right now, then there is a chance that you can go back and kill him.

"But if you know he is alive, there is no chance you can kill him."

In other words, even if you take a trip back in time with the specific intention of killing your father, so long as you know he is happily sitting in his chair when you leave him in the present, you can be sure that something will prevent you from murdering him in the past. It is as if it has already happened.

"You go back to kill your father, but you'd arrive after he'd left the room, you wouldn't find him, or you'd change your mind," said Professor Greenberger.

"You wouldn't be able to kill him because the very fact that he is alive today is going to conspire against you so that you'll never end up taking that path leads you to killing him."

Greenberger and colleague Karl Svozil introduce their quantum mechanical model of time travel on the ArXiv e-print service.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4097258.stm

Background on Sum over Histories here:
http://www.einstein-online.info/en/spot ... index.html
 
imho its more likley that the only form of timetravel possible is being able to remove an object from time,the same way you can remove weight from an object(in space).the said object will not travel back in time but stand still like removing it from a flowing river.once it rejoins time it appear exactly at the time it left ,the same way an object wont weigh any less after being weightless.

the obvious benefits are to not being subject to time are vast but imo wont lead to any form of "back to the future"type scenarios

why would it be possible to go back?its more likly to be that you simply stand still in normal time untill you decide to rejoin it.very handy if you want to travel very long distances though.
 
I suspect that if time travel is possible, then forwards, or backwards, won't be the problem, it will be travelling sideways through possible pasts and futures that will be the problem. Getting back to one's own time-line might be very tricky.

That way, changing the past might well be possible, in one time-line, or other, well within the realms of quantum possibility and no unlikely quantum time-loops necessary.
 
Clearly, the present never is changed by mischievous time-travellers: people don't suddenly fade into the ether because a rerun of events has prevented their births - that much is obvious.
Is it? Imagine for a second that someone could go back in time and "erase" someone. The timeline would alter to reflect the fact that that person didn't exist (or at least didn't exist beyond a certain point). Therefore anyone who had knowledge of that person would no longer have knowledge of them (since they never existed in the new timeline), therefore you wouldn't know that they had disappeared.

My knowledge of space-time continuums is fleeting at best, so if anyone can point out the flaw in my logic I'd be happy to learn... :?
 
Zoffre said:
Clearly, the present never is changed by mischievous time-travellers: people don't suddenly fade into the ether because a rerun of events has prevented their births - that much is obvious.
Is it? Imagine for a second that someone could go back in time and "erase" someone. The timeline would alter to reflect the fact that that person didn't exist (or at least didn't exist beyond a certain point). Therefore anyone who had knowledge of that person would no longer have knowledge of them (since they never existed in the new timeline), therefore you wouldn't know that they had disappeared.

My knowledge of space-time continuums is fleeting at best, so if anyone can point out the flaw in my logic I'd be happy to learn... :?

Hence the "Many Worlds" theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation
 
Zoffre said:
...

My knowledge of space-time continuums is fleeting at best, so if anyone can point out the flaw in my logic I'd be happy to learn... :?
No man is an island entire of itself; every man
is a piece of the continent, a part of the main;
if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe
is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as
well as any manner of thy friends or of thine
own were; any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom
the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.


John Donne
 
Lots of comments at link.

Time travel theory avoids grandfather paradox
http://www.physorg.com/news198948917.html
July 21st, 2010 in Physics / Quantum Physics

P-CTC time travel

This figure shows CTCs through (a) conventional and (b) post-selected teleportation. Image credit: Seth Lloyd, et al.

(PhysOrg.com) -- The possibility of going back in time only to kill your ancestors and prevent your own birth has posed a serious problem for potential time travelers, not even considering the technical details of building a time machine. But a new theory proposed by physicists at MIT suggests that this grandfather paradox could be avoided by using quantum teleportation and "post-selecting" what a time traveler could and could not do. So while murdering one’s relatives is unfortunately possible in the present time, such actions would be strictly forbidden if you were to try them during a trip to the past.

The model of time travel proposed by Seth Lloyd, et al., in a recent paper at arXiv.org arises from their investigation of the quantum mechanics of closed timelike curves (CTCs) and search for a theory of gravity. In simple terms, a CTC is a path of spacetime that returns to its starting point. The existence of CTCs is allowed by Einstein’s general relativity, although it was Gödel who first discovered them. As with other implications of his theories, Einstein was a bit disturbed by CTCs.

In the new paper, the scientists explore a particular version of CTCs based on combining quantum teleportation with post-selection, resulting in a theory of post-selected CTCs (P-CTCs). In quantum teleportation, quantum states are entangled so that one state can be transmitted to the other in a different location. The scientists then applied the concept of post-selection, which is the ability to make a computation automatically accept only certain results and disregard others. In this way, post-selection could ensure that only a certain type of state can be teleported. The states that “qualify” to be teleported are those that have been post-selected to be self-consistent prior to being teleported. Only after it has been identified and approved can the state be teleported, so that, in effect, the state is traveling back in time. Under these conditions, time travel could only occur in a self-consistent, non-paradoxical way.

“The formalism of P-CTCs shows that such quantum time travel can be thought of as a kind of quantum tunneling backwards in time, which can take place even in the absence of a classical path from future to past,” the researchers write in their paper. “Because the theory of P-CTCs relies on post-selection, it provides self-consistent resolutions to such paradoxes: anything that happens in a P-CTC can also happen in conventional quantum mechanics with some probability.”

However, the scientists note that prohibiting paradoxical events would cause unlikely events to happen more often. These “strange and counterintuitive effects” arise due to the nonlinear nature of P-CTCs. Like a movie hero who always manages to escape seemingly imminent death, the grandfather would always somehow manage to survive his grandchild’s murderous plots. “Some little quantum fluctuation would whisk the bullet away at the last moment,” Lloyd explained.

In addition to prohibiting the grandfather paradox, the P-CTC theory also has the advantage that it doesn’t require the distortions of spacetime that traditional time travel theories rely on. These spacetime distortions probably only exist in extreme environments such as inside black holes, making these theories nearly impossible to realize.

Although post-selected computations are nonlinear and have not yet been shown to be possible, some studies have shown that quantum mechanics may be nonlinear and allow post-selected computations, which would potentially make quantum computing a very powerful technique. Such a computer could more efficiently solve a complex problem containing lots of variables by running all possible combinations of values and post-selecting only the combinations that solve the problem. This strategy would work much better than the classical strategy of trying different combinations until you get one that works. On the other hand, other studies suggest that quantum mechanics must be linear, in part due to the seemingly impossible things that post-selection allows.

Still, the scientists hope that future investigations will reveal whether or not their theory is correct. They explain that the effect of P-CTCs can be tested by performing quantum teleportation experiments, and by post-selecting only the results that correspond to the desired entangled-state output.

“P-CTCs might also allow time travel in spacetimes without general-relativistic closed timelike curves,” they conclude. “If nature somehow provides the nonlinear dynamics afforded by final-state projection, then it is possible for particles (and, in principle, people) to tunnel from the future to the past.”

More information: Seth Lloyd, et al. "The quantum mechanics of time travel through post-selected teleportation." arXiv:1007.2615v2
via: The Physics ArXiv Blog and Science News
 
I started (back when Virgin had the range) writing a Doctor Who novel, in which turned out that the TARDIS had a quantum computer at its heart that enabled it to navigate the time lines...
 
Timble2 said:
I started (back when Virgin had the range) writing a Doctor Who novel, in which turned out that the TARDIS had a quantum computer at its heart that enabled it to navigate the time lines...

Thats MY idea. I'm going back in Time to kill your grandmother.
 
More on that theory after an experiment. Chart at link.


Time travel experiment demonstrates how to avoid the grandfather paradox (Update)
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-gra ... radox.html
March 1st, 2011 in Physics / General Physics

This graph shows that, as the accuracy of the quantum gun increases (from 0 to 180 degrees) so that it is more likely to flip a qubit’s state, the probability of successful self-consistent teleportation (red dots) decreases. While the theoretical probability of teleportation of qubits in opposite states is zero, the experimental probability of qubits in opposite states (blue diamonds) is about 0.01. Image caption: Seth Lloyd, et al. ©2011 American Physical Society.

(PhysOrg.com) -- Among the many intriguing concepts in Einstein’s relativity theories is the idea of closed timelike curves (CTCs), which are paths in spacetime that return to their starting points. As such, CTCs offer the possibility of traveling back in time. But, as many science fiction films have addressed, time travel is full of potential paradoxes. Perhaps the most notable of these is the grandfather paradox, in which a time traveler goes back in time and kills her grandfather, preventing her own birth.

In a new study, a team of researchers has proposed a new theory of CTCs that can resolve the grandfather paradox, and they also perform an experiment showing how such a scheme works. The researchers, led by Seth Lloyd from MIT, along with scientists from the Scuola Normale Superiore in Pisa, Italy; the University of Pavia in Pavia, Italy; the Tokyo Institute of Technology; and the University of Toronto, have published their study in a recent issue of Physical Review Letters. The concepts in the study are similar to an earlier study by some of the same authors that was posted at arXiv.org last year.

“Einstein's theory of general relativity supports closed timelike curves,” Lloyd told PhysOrg.com. “For decades researchers have argued over how to treat such objects quantum mechanically. We believe that our theory is the correct theory of such objects. Moreover, our theory shows how time travel might be accomplished even in the absence of general relativistic closed timelike curves.”

In the new theory, CTCs are required to behave like ideal quantum channels of the sort involved in teleportation. In this theory, self-consistent CTCs (those that don’t result in paradoxes) are postselected, and are called “P-CTCs.” As the scientists explain, this theory differs from the widely accepted quantum theory of CTCs proposed by physicist David Deutsch, in which a time traveler maintains self-consistency by traveling back into a different past than the one she remembers. In the P-CTC formulation, time travelers must travel to the past they remember.

Although postselecting CTCs may seem complicated, it can actually be investigated experimentally in laboratory simulations. By sending a “living” qubit (i.e., a bit in the state 1) a few billionths of a second back in time to try to “kill” its former self (i.e., flip to the state 0), the scientists show that only photons that don’t kill themselves can make the journey.

“P-CTCs work by projecting out part of the quantum state,” Lloyd said. “Another way of thinking about closed timelike curves is the following. In normal physics (i.e., without closed timelike curves), one specifies the state of a system in the past, and the laws of physics then tell how that state evolves in the future. In the presence of CTCs, this prescription breaks down: the state in the past plus the laws of physics no longer suffice to specify the state in the future. In addition, one has to supply final conditions as well as initial conditions. In our case, these final conditions specify the state when it enters the closed timelike curve in the future. These final conditions are what project out part of the quantum state as described above.

“Although one would need a real general relativistic CTC actually to impose final conditions, we can still simulate how such a CTC would work by setting up the initial condition, letting the system evolve, and then making a measurement. One of the possible outcomes of the measurement corresponds to the final condition that we would like to impose. Whenever that outcome occurs, then everything that has happened in the experiment up to that point is exactly the same as if the photon had gone backward in time and tried to kill its former self. So when we ‘post-select’ that outcome, the experiment is equivalent to a real CTC.”

To demonstrate, the scientists stored two qubits in a single photon, one of which represents the forward-traveling qubit, and one of which represents the backward-traveling qubit. The backward-traveling qubit can teleport through a quantum channel (CTC) only if the CTC ends by projecting the two entangled qubits into the same state.

After the qubits are entangled, their states are measured by two probe qubits. Next, a “quantum gun” is fired at the forward-traveling qubit, which, depending on the gun’s angle, may or may not rotate the qubit’s polarization. The qubits’ states are measured again to find out if the gun has flipped the forward-traveling qubit’s polarization or not. If both qubits are in the same state (00 or 11), then the gun has not flipped the polarization and the photon “survives.” If the qubits’ states are not equal (01 or 10), then the photon has “killed” its past self. The experiment’s results showed that the qubits’ states were almost always equal, showing that a qubit cannot kill its former self.

The scientists noted that their experiment cannot test whether an actual CTC obeys their new theory, since it is currently unknown whether CTCs exist at all. In the future, they plan to perform more tests to better understand time travel paradoxes.

“We want to perform the so-called `unproved theorem paradox' experiment, in which the time traveler sees an elegant proof of a theorem in a book,” Lloyd said. “She goes back in time and shows the proof to a mathematician, who includes the proof in the book that he is writing. Of course, the book is the same book from which the time traveler took the proof in the first place. Where did the proof come from? Our theory has a specific prediction/retrodiction for this paradox, which we wish to test experimentally.”

More information: Seth Lloyd, et al. “Closed Timelike Curves via Postselection: Theory and Experimental Test of Consistency.” Physical Review Letters 106, 040403 (2011). DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.040403

Copyright 2010 PhysOrg.com.
.

.
 
I've found a new book called INTERVENTION - How Humanity from the Future has Changed its own Past. Published this year, it's written by Alan Butler, who has written several other books on Fortean fringe topics.
Publisher's description:

Everyone who thought time travel was pure fantasy or theory will now have to think again, as this amazing book demonstrates that humankind's origins, evolution and historical turning-points have been planned in the future - follow Alan Butler as he persuades us that without the reality of time travel we would not be as we are today.

http://books.telegraph.co.uk/BerteShopW ... 1780283883
Many key events in the history of humankind show evidence of having been intended by human beings from the future, who took specific actions that would steer the world in a particular direction. This 'intervention' theory is based on sound mathematical and scientific arguments, consistent with Einstein's demonstration of the possibility of time travel.

Time travellers - some of them anonymous, some celebrated in history - have made alterations to our planetary and global environment (the creation of the Moon, the extinction of the dinosaurs) that were necessary to allow us to exist and to develop as an intelligent species. They have also left us markers that show what steps we need to take to progress further.

All these interventions were placed retroactively within the 'timeline' for future generations, not for those immediately affected. Key interventions include: The creation of the Moon If the Moon did not exist, nor would we. The author demonstrates that the Moon was built to make it possible for the Earth to become an incubator of life.

The metal revolution The development of humanity's mastery over metal is a mystery, since the required temperatures for smelting metal exceeded anything that Neolithic man would have needed for any purpose. So how and why did smelting start? Add to that the fact that the first usable metal, bronze, is an alloy of copper and the much rarer tin and we begin to see the scale of the puzzle. Intervention supplies a convincing answer.

The megalithic yard Neolithic peoples created a sophisticated, fully integrated system of measurements based on the actual size and mass of the Earth - a 'marker' for future scientific developments, surfacing again, apparently out of the blue, in 18th-century Washington, DC.

But the most spectacular revelation lies in our future. By looking at the mathematics underlying many of the inventions, we discover, with unexpected precision, when our first contact with our future selves will happen. This will occur within the lifetime of most readers of this extraordinary book. :shock:

http://www.thebookpeople.co.uk/webapp/w ... tId=310420
I've only just started the book - I'll let you know how I get on! ;)
 
And by a spooky coincidence, I find this on iPlayer:

Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel

Comedy about three ordinary blokes who hold the fate of the world in their hands when they discover a rift in the space-time continuum in the gents' of their local pub.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... me_Travel/

Duration
79 minutes

First broadcast
BBC Two, 10:30PM Sun, 1 Aug 2010

Available until
1:24AM Sun, 11 Nov 2012
 
rynner2 said:
Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel

Comedy about three ordinary blokes who hold the fate of the world in their hands when they discover a rift in the space-time continuum in the gents' of their local pub.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... me_Travel/
That was brilliant! Very amusing and thought-provoking, with a good cast of likeable characters.

And don't switch off when the credits start to roll - watch till the film finally stops!
 
You go from point a to point b in the space of 1 second. Then you go back to point a but speed up enough to travel from a to b instantaneously. What happens if you go even faster? The only possibility then would be to arrive at b at an earlier time, assuming of course faster than light travel is even possible.
And what is the opposite effect, how do you travel forward in time? What is the opposite of speed? I wonder if absolute motionlessness somehow slows time, we all experience the feeling of time dragging whilst waiting for an appointment, or time 'flying' whilst we are rushing around. But I wonder if complete motionlessness actually results in a sort of time travel. The numeorus cases of frogs and even a pterodactyl trapped inside rock might support this theory, maybe somehow they have been slowed down, much like meditation allows practitioners to slow their heartbeat (if we accept the general premise that certain species have a certain number of heartbeats in their life, this theoretically extending their life).
 
rynner2 said:
I've found a new book called INTERVENTION - How Humanity from the Future has Changed its own Past. Published this year, it's written by Alan Butler, who has written several other books on Fortean fringe topics.
I've now finished the book. The writer's style is rather diffident, but he introduces some interesting ideas, particularly regarding the megalithic yard and other measurements, including those involving the size and movement of the moon. (In fact he summarises these in an appendix, and there are certainly some thought-provoking coincidences there.)

However, I cannot see that it supports his theory about time-travelling descendents from the future. He claims they've somehow caused great events, such as artificially creating the moon, billions of years ago, yet he often weakens his argument by saying they can't actually change anything recorded in history. (Luckily the Moon has long been recorded in history... ;) ) Nor does he spell out exactly why they have to carry out interventions.

But he does give one interesting prediction, that those of you much younger than me might like to note in your diaries: somehow, in 2022, on the 27th of March, the time-travellers will reveal themselves in the middle of the President's Park in Washington DC. (This park used to be known as Ellipse Park.)

The book covers a lot of history, and several of the usual Fortean suspects, so some of you might like it for your Fortean bookshelf. But for me, the author attemps to cover too wide a canvas without really nailing down his premises.
 
Hachiminh said:
You go from point a to point b in the space of 1 second. Then you go back to point a but speed up enough to travel from a to b instantaneously. What happens if you go even faster? The only possibility then would be to arrive at b at an earlier time, assuming of course faster than light travel is even possible.
You are quite right that faster-than-light travel would cause time travel to occur- but it is not a simple matter of going back in time if you go faster-than-light.

Relativity says that if you travel faster than light then in certain frames of reference you will see things occur in a different order to someone who does not travel faster than light. But you will still be moving forwards in time from the point of view of most of the rest of the universe.
This page examines the question in exhaustive detail.
http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_ ... eparadoxes
 
eburacum said:
Hachiminh said:
You go from point a to point b in the space of 1 second. Then you go back to point a but speed up enough to travel from a to b instantaneously. What happens if you go even faster? The only possibility then would be to arrive at b at an earlier time, assuming of course faster than light travel is even possible.
You are quite right that faster-than-light travel would cause time travel to occur- but it is not a simple matter of going back in time if you go faster-than-light.

Relativity says that if you travel faster than light then in certain frames of reference you will see things occur in a different order to someone who does not travel faster than light. But you will still be moving forwards in time from the point of view of most of the rest of the universe.
This page examines the question in exhaustive detail.
http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_ ... eparadoxes

Thanks for the link, it looks well beyond me at the best of times, but I'll have a look tomorrow when hopefully I am less tired! I don't think time travel would ever work like the almost instantaneous teleportation type occurence portrayed in films, they seem to forget that if it did work that way, chances are they would end up in space many miles from earth, or if they were extremely unlucky right in the middle of an asteroid!
 
I am not hiring him; at least not in this Reality.

It's the way he describes it, that's like.. "Ooooh look there's a paradox over there" the way you might point out a cow in a field while on a train journey. :?
 
Hachiminh said:
Eboracorum said:
You are quite right that faster-than-light travel would cause time travel to occur- but it is not a simple matter of going back in time if you go faster-than-light.

Relativity says that if you travel faster than light then in certain frames of reference you will see things occur in a different order to someone who does not travel faster than light. But you will still be moving forwards in time from the point of view of most of the rest of the universe.
This page examines the question in exhaustive detail.
http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_ ... eparadoxes
Thanks for the link, it looks well beyond me at the best of times, but I'll have a look tomorrow when hopefully I am less tired!
I wouldn't bother! Physicsguy just says "If FTL travel is possible, then we'd get paradoxes left, right and centre".

But all that is just pissing in the wind, as relativity does not allow for FTL travel in the first place! There are mathematical rules in relativity for the addition of velocities, and the sum is never FTL.

If I consider myself to be at rest in my Frame of Reference I might see a space ship travelling away from me at 0.9 times light speed, c. An observer on that ship might see another ship, also travelling away from him at 0.9 times c. So what is the speed of this second ship relative to me? More than 0.9 times light speed, but still less than c!

We could extend this chain of speeding ships as far as we like, but the fastest of them all will still be travelling at a 'gnat's crotchet' less than c relative to me.

This all sounds odd, because we are used to living in a world where speeds are well less than c, and the mathematical rules of relativity simplify to a simple addition of velocities.

The other way relativity 'bans' FTL travel is by considerations of energy. It takes energy to accelerate an object, but this acceleration also increases the mass of that object, so even more energy is required for further acceleration. As the object approaches c, the energy required for further acceleration increases beyond any practical limit, and we never achieve c.

Again, all this is logically and mathematically consistent. The maths of Special Relativity is actually quite simple. General Relativity is much more complicated, and develops into a theory of Gravity. Even so, AFAIK, GR does not allow of FTL travel either.
 
I've only had my time machine for a year and I'm already bored with it .. I probably won't bother getting it.
 
Punxsutawney Phil doesn't looks utterly perplexed. That's how I feel when reading articles about time travel.

Current physics tends to see space-time as a sort of block, through which our consciousness travels. I suspect that outlook in itself eradicates the possibility of time travel.

The grandfather paradox puzzles me. You go back, kill your progenitor, yada, yada, yada. But, events can only move through space-time at a certain rate, so the 'world' from which you came is unaffected by your grand-patricide. In other words, you don't vanish from existence, because you come from a reality in which you were born. This isn't a parallel universe. There is just a different version of the world with which you're familiar 'following' your world up the timeline. So, this alternate world, doesn't have you in it, so you couldn't go back, so another world is created in which your grandfather wasn't killed, so you were born, so another version of the world follows the previous one up the timeline, in which you did go back and kill your grandfather, and so on. The Universe doesn't care that all these alternate worlds are following each other through four dimensional space. But it doesn't go on forever. Quantum differences in each version of the world will tend to select for a world in which your time machine explodes, or just doesn't work, or you discover drugs and girls and don't build one in the first place. Eventually, a consistent world will emerge, because the system will always conserve to its lowest energy level. The problem is, if you go back in time, or forward again to your starting point, you can't be sure the world you arrive at is what you expect.
 
Back
Top