Why Are There So Few Quantum Time Machine Models?

In summary, there are currently more time machine models based on general relativity theory than on quantum physics. However, in 2010, Seth Lloyd proposed that quantum mechanics could also support time travel through various counter-intuitive phenomena. Despite this potential, there are still only a few quantum physics based time machine models. Some scientists may avoid publishing on this topic due to fear of the Time Police, but others, like Kip Thorne, argue that it is not a feasible concept.
  • #1
avpol
19
6
As of today, there are plenty of time machine mathematical models based on general relativity theory (warp drives, wormholes), but few ones based on quantum physics. However, back in 2010, Seth Lloyd wrote: "quantum mechanics supports a variety of counter-intuitive phenomena which might allow time travel even in the absence of a closed timelike curve in the geometry of spacetime."
So, why are there so few quantum physics based time machine models if they may be promising?
Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Perhaps most quantum physicists have better things to spend time on?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes protonsarecool, Demystifier, hutchphd and 3 others
  • #3
But once they invent a time machine, they'll have all the time they want.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes protonsarecool, Demystifier, gentzen and 6 others
  • #4
avpol said:
So, why are there so few quantum physics based time machine models if they may be promising?
Promising for what? Actual time travel? The technical term for that concept is "horse manure"
 
  • Haha
Likes protonsarecool and DrChinese
  • #5
avpol said:
As of today, there are plenty of time machine mathematical models based on general relativity theory (warp drives, wormholes), but few ones based on quantum physics. However, back in 2010, Seth Lloyd wrote: "quantum mechanics supports a variety of counter-intuitive phenomena which might allow time travel even in the absence of a closed timelike curve in the geometry of spacetime."
So, why are there so few quantum physics based time machine models if they may be promising?
Thanks.
Can you point to some of those few models.
 
  • #6
avpol said:
However, back in 2010, Seth Lloyd wrote….
Link or other citation?
 
  • #7
Nugatory said:
Link or other citation?
Yeah I got sucked in. Here you go (from 2010):
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1007.2615
For the OP: their answer seems to be that absent Closed Timelike Curves somehow tunneling will will get you there. That's not a lot to go on...which answers your question I believe/
 
  • #8
scientists avoid publishing research on this topic due to fear of the Time Police
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd
  • #9
BWV said:
due to fear of the Time Police
Not to worry, they are way too busy chasing Time Bandits to bother with the scientists...

1644424200760.png

https://www.indiewire.com/2018/07/time-bandits-tv-series-apple-terry-gilliam-1201988626/
 
  • Like
Likes BWV
  • #10
hutchphd said:
Yeah I got sucked in. Here you go (from 2010):
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1007.2615
For the OP: their answer seems to be that absent Closed Timelike Curves somehow tunneling will will get you there. That's not a lot to go on...which answers your question I believe/
Thanks! He wrote about "a number of ways." Tunneling is just one of them:-).
 
  • #11
martinbn said:
Can you point to some of those few models.
Quantum physics based models? Seth's one, for example.
 
  • #12
phinds said:
Promising for what? Actual time travel? The technical term for that concept is "horse manure"
Say it to Mr. Thorne, recent Nobel Laureate;-). That his opinions are horse manure.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes Motore and weirdoguy
  • #13
<sigh>
 
  • #14
avpol said:
Say it to Mr. Thorne, recent Nobel Laureate;-). That his opinions are horse manure.
If you think that Kip Thorne believes anyone is going to build an actual time machine based on the wormhole metrics he has published, you are seriously mistaken.

(Also, his Nobel Prize was for LIGO, not for time travel.)

This thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman

1. Why is it difficult to create quantum time machine models?

Creating quantum time machine models is difficult because it requires a deep understanding of quantum mechanics, which is a complex and abstract field of study. Additionally, quantum time machines involve manipulating particles at the subatomic level, which is technically challenging and requires advanced technology.

2. Can quantum time machines really exist?

There is currently no scientific evidence that proves the existence of quantum time machines. While some theories suggest that they may be possible, the technology and knowledge to create them are still beyond our current capabilities.

3. How do quantum time machines differ from traditional time machines?

Traditional time machines are based on the concept of time travel, where one can physically move through time. Quantum time machines, on the other hand, involve manipulating particles at the quantum level to create a localized time loop. This means that only specific particles can travel through time, rather than a person or object.

4. What are the potential implications of quantum time machines?

If quantum time machines were to exist, they could potentially lead to paradoxes and disrupt the laws of causality. Additionally, they could also have significant ethical implications, such as altering the course of history or creating alternate timelines.

5. Are there any current research or experiments being conducted on quantum time machines?

While there is ongoing research in the field of quantum mechanics, there are currently no known experiments or studies specifically focused on creating quantum time machines. However, scientists are exploring various theories and possibilities surrounding the concept of time travel and quantum mechanics.

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Differential Equations
Replies
1
Views
708
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
963
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
7
Views
707
Back
Top