Can We Use Space/Time Fabric to See the Past?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of using the space/time fabric analogy to explore the possibility of time travel and the implications of observing past events in the universe. Participants examine the relationship between wormholes, telescopes, and the finite speed of light in the context of seeing objects as they were in the past.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the space/time fabric analogy, often depicted in media, is not precise enough to align with actual physics and serves mainly as an analogy.
  • There is a suggestion that wormholes would be necessary to observe events from the past, such as seeing Earth as it was a year ago.
  • Others argue that telescopes cannot be used to see past events on Earth, as they only allow observation of distant objects as they were when their light was emitted.
  • A participant questions whether a telescope could act as a "wormhole" to observe past events, indicating a limited understanding of the concepts involved.
  • It is noted that the finite speed of light means that all observations are inherently of past events, regardless of the distance, and this applies even to nearby reflections.
  • Some participants mention that while wormholes might theoretically allow for time travel, they often involve conditions that are not physically realizable, such as negative mass matter.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the space/time fabric analogy and the feasibility of using telescopes to observe past events. There is no consensus on the implications of wormholes or the nature of time travel.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in understanding the relationship between observation, time, and the physical laws governing light and spacetime. There are unresolved questions regarding the nature of wormholes and their potential for time travel.

mgsullivan24
Messages
5
Reaction score
3
TL;DR
Is the space/time fabric analogy portrayed in movies and on YouTube consistent with actual physics and if so…
Common these days is explaining worm holes and the space and time correlation as a fabric which could allow for the fabric to be manipulated in a way that would allow for time travel. The way I’ve understood the concept is that you could fold the fabric to touch two different areas together and move between them which could allow you to revisit earth at a different place in time. Is that actually consistent with real physics?

If so, why don't we see earth and other objects in the places they were at during that time? Why can’t we look back to where earth was a year ago and see it existing at that moment in time?

Im sure I'm not even asking the question correctly but can anyone help me out here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mgsullivan24 said:
Is the space/time fabric analogy portrayed in movies and on YouTube consistent with actual physics
It's not precise enough to be either consistent or inconsistent with actual physics. It's just an analogy and doesn't really help you to make predictions.

mgsullivan24 said:
why don't we see earth and other objects in the places they were at during that time?
Um, because there aren't any wormholes near Earth?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50 and FactChecker
PeterDonis said:
It's not precise enough to be either consistent or inconsistent with actual physics. It's just an analogy and doesn't really help you to make predictions.


Um, because there aren't any wormholes near Earth?

A wormhole would be required to see only 1 year back? Ok what about a month? At some point isn’t a telescope essentially acting as a “wormhole”?
I guess I’m way way off on my very limited understanding of space and time.
 
mgsullivan24 said:
A wormhole would be required to see only 1 year back?
A wormhole is what you were asking about.

mgsullivan24 said:
At some point isn’t a telescope essentially acting as a “wormhole”?
You can't look at Earth with a telescope that's on Earth. With a telescope on Earth you can see distant objects as they were one light travel time ago; for example, you can see objects one light year away as they were one year ago. You can't change that; you can't adjust your telescope to see, say, Alpha Centauri as it was 2 years ago, or 6 years ago for that matter, instead of 4.3 years ago.
 
mgsullivan24 said:
A wormhole would be required to see only 1 year back? Ok what about a month? At some point isn’t a telescope essentially acting as a “wormhole”?
I guess I’m way way off on my very limited understanding of space and time.
You always see things as they were in the past because of the finite speed of light. Even if you look at yourself in the bathroom mirror your reflection is how you were a couple of nanoseconds ago, although on that timescale it's unnoticeable to humans. But this doesn't really have much to do with models of spacetime, it's a fact of life if you don't have some form of radiation that moves at infinite speed. Your information is always out of date. This is how instruments like the James Webb telescope "see back in time" - they can just see things further away, so they see light that was emitted a long time ago. You could only see our galaxy as it was a million years ago if someone had helpfully built a giant mirror half a million light years away half a million years ago.

Wormholes can, possibly, permit time travel in the "go back and shake hands with your younger self" sense. But such solutions to the equations tend to require something impossible like negative mass matter, so they're probably just a mathematical curiosity.
 
What is different about space? Why can't I use binoculars to look at the hawk that was in my backyard yesterday?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
751
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
373
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
4K