Time travel is posibble or not ?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ngkamsengpeter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time Time travel Travel
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the feasibility of time travel, particularly in the context of general relativity and time dilation effects. It concludes that while traveling backward in time is conceptually flawed due to the violation of causality, general relativity allows for the theoretical existence of closed timelike curves. Prominent physicists, such as Kip Thorne, acknowledge time travel as a possibility within the laws of physics, despite the practical challenges posed by quantum gravity. The conversation emphasizes the need to rethink time travel not as a return to a previous state, but as a movement through spacetime.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of general relativity and its implications on spacetime
  • Familiarity with the concept of time dilation
  • Knowledge of causality in physics
  • Basic grasp of closed timelike curves
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of closed timelike curves in theoretical physics
  • Explore the concept of causality and its role in time travel discussions
  • Study Kip Thorne's contributions to the field of time travel and general relativity
  • Investigate the potential effects of quantum gravity on time travel theories
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the philosophical and scientific implications of time travel and general relativity.

ngkamsengpeter
Messages
193
Reaction score
0
Since theory of relativity predit time dilation effects . So does it mean that we can travel backwards or forward in time ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. It merely illustrates the concept is illogical. Travelling back in time is conceptually flawed. Strictly speaking, the atoms that compose your body would have to return to the position they occupied in the past [not to mention the atoms that compose your 'time machine'.] Otherwise, you would violate causality - the atoms composing you and your time machine would literally be in two different places at the same time! That, at best, is a logical impossibility.
 
Chronos said:
No. It merely illustrates the concept is illogical. Travelling back in time is conceptually flawed. Strictly speaking, the atoms that compose your body would have to return to the position they occupied in the past [not to mention the atoms that compose your 'time machine'.] Otherwise, you would violate causality - the atoms composing you and your time machine would literally be in two different places at the same time! That, at best, is a logical impossibility.
That argument doesn't make sense in terms of the spacetime viewpoint--the atoms that compose your body don't have to rearrange themselves into an earlier state, rather they just have to move to the region of spacetime where the earlier versions of themselves still were in that state, so the older version of you can interact with the younger version. Think of a block of solid ice with various 1-dimensional strings embedded in it--if you cross-section this block, you will see a collection of 0-dimensional points (the strings in cross-section) arranged in various positions on a 2-dimensional surface, and if you take pictures of successive cross-sections and arrange them into a movie, you will see the points moving around continuously relative to one another (in terms of this metaphor, the idea that different frames define simultaneity differently means you have a choice of what angle to slice the ice when you make your series of cross-sections). You shouldn't think of time travel as the points returning to precisely the same configuration they had been in at an earlier frame of the movie; instead, you should just imagine one of the strings curving around into a loop within the 3-dimensional block.

Time travel is allowed by general relativity in certain circumstances--the technical term used is "closed timelike curves"--so unless you think GR contains a logical contradiction, there can't be any logical inconsistency in the idea of backwards time travel. Of course, most physicists would probably bet that closed timelike curves, like singularities, will be eliminated by quantum gravity, but it's not clear that they will be yet, and a number of physicists (Kip Thorne, for example) take time travel to be a real possibility (in the sense of being allowed by the laws of physics, not in the sense of something we'd be able to do in the forseeable future).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
556
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
866
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
13K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K