No seriously; Can we, maybe, go to the past?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spirit
  • Start date Start date
Spirit
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,

Perhaps it has been asked many times in the past, so please forgive me, and I appreciate your effort in helping me;

In simple words: Can someone travel to point A the future, sees something, then come back to a certain point 'B' that is considered in the past of point A, and tells people what has happened there.

I know there is a lot of science fiction about it, but I really want to know what real science speaks about it.

[For example, 2+2=5 will never happen, no matter how advanced science will reach, I think. Since it's bounded to logic, too...etc]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not an expert, but there are various mathematical theories that say that time-travel is possible, but those are not realizable because of physical concerns like practical generation of energy required.

There are some people looking into building signaling devices, so that even if you couldn't go back in time as a whole you might be able to send a message back in time. Try looking into the laser time-machine thread also in this forum.
 
If I get a chance to go to the past, I'll be sure to sabatoge the romantic relationship between my mother and father (i wouldn't want to kill them, but that would be a method of doing it) and see what happens.
 
rbj said:
If I get a chance to go to the past, I'll be sure to sabatoge the romantic relationship between my mother and father (i wouldn't want to kill them, but that would be a method of doing it) and see what happens.

The literature does discuss this issue somewhat, but of course human beings are too complex to model with physics. Similar paradoxes can be set up with billiard balls, however. A good (though technical) place to start is

http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v44/i4/p1077_1
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top