Now this guy here thinks time travel will be a reality sometime this century, and it also says that the possibility of time travel using this method will be verified within a decade.
So think of this, you could go time traveling, and from what this is suggesting, if all goes well time travel will soon be popping out of science fiction into reality.
I personally think messing with nature is just too complicated.
Time is a side effect of memory. It’s the remembrance of inter-relationships in respect to perceived experience. It is not a thing; it has no substance. All of reality happens in the current moment; the past exists in essence only as an idea.
Is that explanation the latest fad Scottish? I miss the days of time being a full circle and everything’s happened already. 
Time is a side effect of memory. It’s the remembrance of inter-relationships in respect to perceived experience. It is not a thing; it has no substance. All of reality happens in the current moment; the past exists in essence only as an idea.
Bollocks, time is a dimension. Just like the spacial dimensions.
Oh and this isn’t new. I heard this guy explaining it on TV years ago.
The main problem with something like this is to distort space takes a hell of a lot of work. We are talking big lasers here. BIG lasers.
As a side note, I am pretty sure that his machine will not overcome the ‘cauchy horizon’, in other words you can only send something back in time at most to the point where the time machine began to exist/was switched on.
This forestalls the question of “if it is possible, why haven’t we heard from time travellers yet?”.
ian
I’ve heard of this. It’s very intriguing. Sounds too good to be true to me.
The main problem with something like this is to distort space takes a hell of a lot of work. We are talking big lasers here. BIG lasers.
In order to send a human back, yes. But for atomic/subatomic particles, it’s doable (sez Mallet). Mass distorts spacetime, but mass is equivalent to energy. Apparently, the amount of energy needed for a small distortion of spacetime is MUCH less if the velocity of light is reduced (probably will still need high-power lasers though). This is now possible. However, it’s questionable whether this will work, because reducing the speed of light in a medium is very different to reducing it in a vacuum. So… only one way to find out !
As a side note, I am pretty sure that his machine will not overcome the ‘cauchy horizon’, in other words you can only send something back in time at most to the point where the time machine began to exist/was switched on.
This is true. Still very intriguing though. If you can send even subatomic particles back you effectively send information. Messages from the future… spooky.
I don’t really believe that “Many Worlds” interpretation though. I think that just points to a lack of understanding of quantum physics. So that idea aside it’s difficult to see how to resolve time travel paradoxes that could result even with sending messages back through time.
Actually I did read of a story (bathroom reader) that one person from MIT decided to prove that time travel was possible by holding a time travelers convention. He figured people in the future would know about this and would travel back in time to attend, the big day came and no one showed up.
I don’t know wether or not people interpreted it as time travel never to be possible.
They always say that and it makes me think of the film strips from the 60s about how by the year 1997 scientists predict little Billy will be staying with his family on their moon condo.
But it’s always nice to be hopeful. Afterall, they said computers were going nowhere, and well…
-Laurifer
Dimension \Di*men"sion, n. [L. dimensio, fr. dimensus, p. p. of
dimetiri to measure out; di- = dis- + metiri to measure: cf.
F. dimension. See Measure.]
- Measure in a single line, as length, breadth, height,
thickness, or circumference; extension; measurement; –
usually, in the plural, measure in length and breadth, or
in length, breadth, and thickness; extent; size; as, the
dimensions of a room, or of a ship; the dimensions of a
farm, of a kingdom.
[Webster]
Dimension is a function of distance. Distance is a function of time. Time is a function of the memory of relationships. They are perceived in reality as verbs, not nouns. When you travel a distance, you only understand it because you have transversed distances before. Every time your mind is assessing a distance, it is comparing that with going from one point to another point some other time(s) in the past. It’s comparing “this” happening to memories of similar events. All of these events require motion of some kind. They are essentially systems of equations. They are, in fact, only memories. There is no time or distance in the “now”.
The reason why time is considered the 4th dimension is because there has to be a minimum number of four “things” in order to define a system in three dimensional space. This is the smallest number you can have to provide an “inside” and an “outside”; encapsulation; a conception. Distance can’t exist without time. In order to make perception definable outside of a witness (which is impossible, by the way), time has been looked upon as part of the system and not a prerequisite.
Awesome.
They always say that and it makes me think of the film strips from the 60s about how by the year 1997 scientists predict little Billy will be staying with his family on their moon condo.
[/quote]
A major hurdle to space technology is costs, once they get the so-called space elevator running it should alleviate that a little bit, they’re also thinking they could use the new scramjet engines being developed to rocket a craft into space. But it’s already been here and done in an earlier topic.
The same logical explanation could also be applied to robot maids, it was not only a lot more complex then expected but there was also little to no demand for consumer robotic maids decades ago.
I’m no expert, but this seems foolish to me. They say that to make time travel with all the other possibilities would require massive amounts of mass; how are we going to get that much energy? And let’s define massive amounts… According to the other theories, such as the rotating cylinder, it specifies that the cylinder has to be infinite in length and extremely dense throughout the whole thing. All the other mass related ones say the same thing. How are they going to have infinite amount of light? And if they do bend space-time, what of it? Gravity is only a distorsion of space-time, so I think that what they’ll find is artificial gravity.
By the way, time is only an axis, just like the X, Y, and Z axis’ we are all familiar with. That is why it is refered to space-time, because time is part of space, beleive it or not.
What I’m interested in is tachyons, and the possibilities with them. I think tachyons are the only hope for time travel. Any way you look at it, even with this theory, you can only travel forward, so I don’t see how we could find time travellers here in their past.
Didn’t you read the article?
Black holes, wormholes, and cosmic strings – each of these phenomena has been proposed as a method for time travel, but none seem feasible, for (at least) one major reason. Although theoretically they could distort space-time, they all require an unthinkably gigantic amount of mass.
Mallett, a U Conn Physics Professor for 30 years, considered an alternative to these time travel methods based on Einstein’s famous relativity equation: E=mc2
This theory doesn’t say it will need vast amounts of mass, so that limitation would be kicked out.
Wether or not this can happen depends on if Einstein was right about his theory.
Did you read my post? We would then have the problem of having “an unthinkably gigantic amount of mass,” gotten rid of, but what about an unthinkably gigantic amount of energy? We still have that problem.
EDIT:
By the way, E=mc2 means that the amount of energy an object can turn into is more on a number scale than the amount of mass. Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared. The speed of light is 182,282 miles per second, I would hate to see what that is squared. That times the amount of mass is the amount of energy you’ll need, so obviously you would need far too much energy than it’s worth. You’ll need more than a super nova.
Well if you’d read my post you would have seen that Mallet claims slowing down light greatly reduces the energy requirement. Certainly I would think to quite doable levels in the lab for sufficiently small particles. That’s meant to be the clever trick that this approach uses to overcome the fantastic energy/mass requirements that other approaches do indeed require. Now I don’t pretend for a minute to understand just why slowing down light is meant to have this effect (well, not in anything other than hand-wavy explanations at any rate), but that’s definately the crux of the matter. So there. 
Tachyons, as I understand them, are purely hypothetical. Oh and yes, I think they will indeed find gravity in this approach (paper is titled “weak gravitational field in a ring laser” or something).
Any way you look at it, even with this theory, you can only travel forward, so I don’t see how we could find time travellers here in their past.
No. You could use Mallet’s machine it to travel backwards (that’s the whole point of it) to the point was switched on. Drop a particle in on end and it will spiral back into the past. Alas though, it seems there is no way by any scientific theory to travel back before the machine is created.
The reason why time is considered the 4th dimension is because there has to be a minimum number of four “things” in order to define a system in three dimensional space.
Nonsense. The minimum number is three. Time is invoked as a dimension for reasons of general relativity (i.e. gravity), not for any mumbo-jumbo philosophy pyschobabble claptrap about memory. Sorry. But you might be right about the flow of time not existing.
Time travel…lol
Intriging but very impropable.
Time, its just something we created to show the decay of something.
Time is only a perception, it doesn’t exist and is irrelavent. Time only became a deminsion when Hollywood wanted to make time travel movies, as well as books and such.
Tachyons, as I understand them, are purely hypothetical. Oh and yes, I think they will indeed find gravity in this approach (paper is titled “weak gravitational field in a ring laser” or something).
Yup, plus if they do exist it is highly unlikely that they could interact with anything.
The speed of light is 182,282 miles per second, I would hate to see what that is squared.
Worse, you’ll be working in m/s, so its 300,000,000 squared. This is why nuclear power is so, well, powerful.
Time is only a perception, it doesn’t exist and is irrelavent. Time only became a deminsion when Hollywood wanted to make time travel movies, as well as books and such.
Or when physicists wanted to describe reality.
Time, its just something we created to show the decay of something.
We didn’t create time. If you want to argue about the direction of time and entropy then be my guest, but realise that time does exist in the same way that left and right do.
Wether or not this can happen depends on if Einstein was right about his theory.
We’ve tested it pretty damn far and it hasn’t let us down yet. Gravity probe B will tell us more, but I think it’s all gravy.
Any way you look at it, even with this theory, you can only travel forward, so I don’t see how we could find time travellers here in their past.
Nope, this theory you can go backwards. The problem is that it is only for a tiny amount of time (ludicrously small). So, to test it you send a particle that decays really quickly, and its lifespan will be altered quite a bit.
They say that to make time travel with all the other possibilities would require massive amounts of mass; how are we going to get that much energy?
A power station. We can already send particles at 99.9 (9?) % of the speed of light. It takes a lot of energy, but these particles aren’t exactly big.
Dimension is a function of distance. Distance is a function of time. Time is a function of the memory of relationships. They are perceived in reality as verbs, not nouns. When you travel a distance, you only understand it because you have transversed distances before. Every time your mind is assessing a distance, it is comparing that with going from one point to another point some other time(s) in the past. It’s comparing “this” happening to memories of similar events. All of these events require motion of some kind. They are essentially systems of equations. They are, in fact, only memories. There is no time or distance in the “now”.
Im glad scientists don’t agree with you.
I’m not talking about how we percieve something, I’m talking about reality. If you want to think that only perception exists, then fine, but you won’t be able to use that idea to do anything useful except maybe write poems about teenage angst.
Ian
We didn’t create time. If you want to argue about the direction of time and entropy then be my guest, but realise that time does exist in the same way that left and right do.
Of course my right could be your left. Where does quantum physics play into this direction of time and entropy? Because technically there is no right or left in an 11 deminsional universe.
I think, that even if someone would figure a way how to travel time no one would believe it. My theory on the subject goes like this:
Someone tells you he has invented a time machine. You as him to prove it and he says: okay, I’ll go and alter the history a bit. He goeas and changes the the chosen part of history and comes back and tells you about it. You look at him like he was a nutcase and say: but it has always been like that.
Only one who would know the history has been aötered would be the man who altered it. Everyone else would adjust to believe everyhting is as it should be, the native americans welcomed the spaniards whit AK-47’s.