Could Gravitational Waves Allow for Time Travel?

In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of a space-time compression wave being created during a high energy event, which could allow for a particle to tunnel between the front and back ends of the wave. This could potentially lead to the observation of an event's consequences before the event itself, if it were to be "kicked" into a high enough energy level. However, the idea is based on misunderstandings of concepts such as quantum tunneling and the nature of space-time.
  • #1
yerty4235437y
17
0
it seems to me that during a high energy event that a space time compression wave would be created which would then normalize as it spread out. A particle on a back end wave would become close enough to the front end wave that it could tunnel between the two as "distance" is compressed. We already see quantum tunneling in nature, cite Ammonia.

with this line of thought, a "particle / unit of information state" could move between wave fronts as they are compressed.

The implication of that is an event's consequence could be observed before the event if it were to be "kicked" into a high enough energy level. If not before the event, at least a degree of the effects of an event happening at the same time as the event one the compression wave in space time normalized again.

While not strictly FTL an event could be received before it should arrive if c is the limit.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
yerty4235437y said:
A particle on a back end wave would become close enough to the front end wave that it could tunnel between the two as "distance" is compressed.
There is nothing to tunnel through. There is not even a potential barrier. And you can't beat the speed of light with tunneling anyway.
yerty4235437y said:
The implication of that is an event's consequence could be observed before the event if it were to be "kicked" into a high enough energy level.
No.
yerty4235437y said:
If not before the event, at least a degree of the effects of an event happening at the same time as the event one the compression wave in space time normalized again.
What does that even mean?
yerty4235437y said:
While not strictly FTL an event could be received before it should arrive if c is the limit.
It might be possible to deform spacetime in a suitable way if we find some way to create negative energy densities. This is the idea of the Alcubierre drive. Gravitational waves don't help, however.
 
  • #3
I am not trying to argue the c can be beaten. I am arguing that space time can be compressed in the same way it can expand. That a compressed wave front can transfer state information, and that when the frequency reduces as the waves lengthen that the information could be propagated forwards.

If the back end of an xray photon could effect the quantum state of the front end then as the universe red shits then the information at the front precedes that the back and by definition has to arrive in advance of c while never going faster that c because expansion (compression) of space time is not limited to c.
 
  • #4
yerty4235437y said:
That a compressed wave front can transfer state information
In the same way every other wave transfers information, sure. You don't even need anything in addition.
yerty4235437y said:
and that when the frequency reduces as the waves lengthen that the information could be propagated forwards.
The information is propagated forwards independent of the frequency.

Photons don't have a position operator, a "back end of a photon" does not exist. The back of a wave packet can influence the front in general - but only at the speed of light, so you have to slow the wave packet down to get such an influence. Otherwise (e.g. in vacuum) the back never influences the front.
 
  • #5
I can agree with all of that, but given we are talking about moving at c, if the distance was compressed it would be equivalent. In the same way light moves through ingress into a condensate and is "compressed / slowed down" on the way in, is it impossible that it could not effect the photon in front, which would then precede it as it speed up again as it left again.
 
  • #6
I think you will need to get SR down pat (c.f. your other thread) before going on.
You might also want to take a look at PF Rules on personal theories, while you're at it.
 
  • #7
yerty4235437y said:
I am arguing that space time can be compressed in the same way it can expand.

Spacetime doesn't compress or expand. It just is. Spacetime is a 4-dimensional geometry; it doesn't change, it just is.
 
  • #8
The OP is personal speculation based on misunderstandings. Thread closed.
 

1. What is FTL and how does it relate to gravitational waves?

FTL, or faster-than-light, refers to speeds that exceed the speed of light. Gravitational waves are ripples in the fabric of space-time that travel at the speed of light. Currently, there is no evidence or theory that suggests FTL travel is possible, and it is not related to gravitational waves.

2. Can gravitational waves travel faster than the speed of light?

No, according to the theory of relativity, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. This includes gravitational waves, which travel at the speed of light.

3. How are gravitational waves detected and measured?

Gravitational waves are detected using specialized instruments called interferometers. These instruments use lasers to measure tiny changes in the distance between two objects caused by the passing of a gravitational wave.

4. What are the potential applications of studying gravitational waves?

Studying gravitational waves can provide insight into the most extreme events in the universe, such as black hole mergers and supernovas. It can also help us understand the nature of gravity and potentially lead to new technologies, such as more precise navigation systems.

5. Is it possible to travel through space using gravitational waves?

No, gravitational waves are not a means of propulsion and cannot be harnessed for travel. They are a phenomenon that occurs in space and can only be observed and studied using specialized equipment.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
982
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
751
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
931
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
296
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
850
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
1K
Back
Top