Time machines and rotating cylinders

In summary, the theory of general relativity suggests that time travel may be possible through the use of an infinitely long, dense, rotating cylinder. However, recent research has shown that this cylinder must be infinitely long in order to avoid violating the weak energy condition and creating closed timelike curves. This means that the cylinder must be infinite in length, and not just extremely long, in order for time travel to be a possibility. The theory was originally proposed by Tippler, but was later refuted by Hawking's chronology protection result.
  • #1
DaveC426913
Gold Member
22,496
6,167
GR allows for the possibility of travel in time by the space-dragging effect of an infinitely long, dense, rotating cylinder.

Q: Why does the cylinder have to be infinitely long?
A: It doesn't, an extremely long cylinder will do - long enough to eliminate "edge effects".
Q: Why even extremely long? Are we talking dozens/thousands/millions of light years? Would one light year be too short a cylinder? Ten thousand miles?

My question is less about how long it needs to be and more about why it has to be so long? i.e. How the does vast length of the cylinder affect the um ... effect?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
DaveC426913 said:
GR allows for the possibility of travel in time by the space-dragging effect of an infinitely long, dense, rotating cylinder.

Q: Why does the cylinder have to be infinitely long?
A: It doesn't, an extremely long cylinder will do - long enough to eliminate "edge effects".

Not according to more recent results. It really does need to be an infinite cylinder. There's a theorem due to Hawking published well after Tippler's original paper on the "rotating cylinder" time machine that shows that compact geometries (which includes finite cylinders as any finite geometry will be compact) can't be time machines (generate closed timelike curves) unless they violate the weak energy condition (have parts that have negative mass).

More precisely:

This is Hawking's ``chronology protection'' result
(Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 603), which shows that creation of
closed timelike curves from a compact region of spacetime
requires that the weak energy condition be violated.

My understanding is that Tippler's calculation that infinite rotating cylinders (which were easy to solve for mathematically) were time machines is correct, but the asumption that the finite solution also were time machines was not rigorously shown and is in fact incorrect.

See the thread on Mallet's time machine where this came up.

[add]
Note that the thread on Mallet's time machine is about Mallet's time machine, not Tippler's. The utility of the thread will be in providing some more discussion of the specific chronology protection result due to Hawking which shows that Tippler's time machine can't work if it's finite.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=42834&highlight=time+machine+Mallet
 
Last edited:
  • #3


A: The length of the cylinder is important because it needs to be long enough to eliminate any "edge effects" that could potentially disrupt the space-dragging effect. The exact length needed is not specified, but it would likely need to be at least several times longer than the diameter of the cylinder. This ensures that the cylinder is essentially a perfect, uniform shape, without any variations in density or rotation that could interfere with the space-dragging effect.

As for the specific length needed, it would depend on the specific parameters of the cylinder and the speed of rotation. A longer cylinder would likely require a slower rotation speed, while a shorter cylinder could potentially rotate faster. The key is to have a cylinder that is long enough to create a significant space-dragging effect, but not so long that it becomes impractical or impossible to construct.

In summary, the length of the cylinder is a crucial factor in creating a stable and effective space-dragging effect for time travel, but the exact length needed may vary depending on the specific parameters and limitations of the scenario.
 

1. How do time machines and rotating cylinders work?

Time machines and rotating cylinders are theoretical concepts that have not been proven to be possible. However, according to the theory of relativity, it is believed that rotating cylinders may create a gravitational force that could potentially bend space-time, allowing for time travel. However, this is just a speculation and has not been scientifically proven.

2. Can a rotating cylinder really create a time machine?

As mentioned before, rotating cylinders have not been proven to create a time machine. The idea is based on the theory of relativity, but it is just a hypothesis and has not been scientifically proven or tested.

3. Are there any real-life examples of rotating cylinders being used for time travel?

No, there are no real-life examples of rotating cylinders being used for time travel. The concept is still purely theoretical and has not been put into practice.

4. How would one go about building a time machine using a rotating cylinder?

Since the concept of a rotating cylinder as a time machine is still just a theory, there is no specific method or instructions for building one. It is not possible to build a time machine using current technology and scientific understanding.

5. Are there any potential dangers or consequences of using a rotating cylinder as a time machine?

There is no concrete answer to this question as the concept of a rotating cylinder as a time machine is just a hypothesis. However, some theories suggest that time travel could have serious implications on the fabric of space-time, potentially causing paradoxes or disrupting the natural flow of time. These are all purely theoretical and have not been proven or observed in real life.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
1K
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
578
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top