Travelling to the future (paradox)

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter alexmahone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Future Paradox
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of time travel to the future, particularly through the lens of relativistic effects as described in a Stephen Hawking documentary. Participants explore the implications of traveling at high speeds and the resulting differences in time experienced by observers in different frames of reference.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that both the time traveler (T) and the stationary observer (O) can be considered "right" in their respective frames of reference regarding the perception of time, but this leads to questions about the nature of their agreement when T returns.
  • One participant introduces the concept of the twin paradox, suggesting that the difference in aging is due to T being in an accelerating frame of reference while O is not.
  • Another participant notes that if T does not turn around and instead communicates with O, the implications of their time differences could be explored further.
  • Some participants argue that while T and O can agree on T being younger in a shared reference frame, this does not imply an absolute truth due to the relativity of simultaneity in different frames.
  • There is a suggestion that the engineering challenges of achieving significant time travel are the primary barriers, rather than theoretical impossibilities.
  • One participant mentions that even small movements result in time travel to the future, albeit at negligible rates, framing the discussion in terms of engineering feasibility.
  • Another participant reflects on the economic implications of solving engineering issues related to time travel, drawing parallels to historical space exploration funding challenges.
  • One participant expresses excitement about the possibility of future time travel from a physics standpoint, despite acknowledging its current impracticality.
  • A humorous reference to a webcomic is made, suggesting that even if engineering problems are solved, the outcomes may be unexpected or humorous.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the implications of time travel, the nature of frames of reference, and the feasibility of engineering solutions. No consensus is reached on the ultimate nature of time travel or the resolution of the paradoxes discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of time travel discussions, including the relativity of simultaneity and the differing experiences of time based on relative motion and acceleration. These factors contribute to the unresolved nature of the claims made.

alexmahone
Messages
303
Reaction score
0
Some time ago, I watched a Stephen Hawking documentary which said that you could travel to the future if you went at a fraction of the speed of light for some amount of time.

The explanation was this: Consider an observer O at rest. Let the time traveller be T. O sees T whiz past him and concludes that T's clock is running slower than O's. So when T stops (assume that he remains in the same geographic time-zone), O knows that his own clock will be ahead of T's and so T will get the impression that he has traveled to the future.

But now consider T's frame of reference. He sees O whiz past him and concludes that O's clock is running slower than T's. So when T stops, he thinks that his own clock will be ahead of O's.

Who is right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
alexmahone said:
Some time ago, I watched a Stephen Hawking documentary which said that you could travel to the future if you went at a fraction of the speed of light for some amount of time.

The explanation was this: Consider an observer O at rest. Let the time traveller be T. O sees T whiz past him and concludes that T's clock is running slower than O's. So when T stops (assume that he remains in the same geographic time-zone), O knows that his own clock will be ahead of T's and so T will get the impression that he has traveled to the future.

But now consider T's frame of reference. He sees O whiz past him and concludes that O's clock is running slower than T's. So when T stops, he thinks that his own clock will be ahead of O's.

Who is right?
They're both right but I'm sure the documentary pointed out that the traveler T has to eventually turn around and come back to observer O at which point they will both agree that T is much younger than O.
 
ghwellsjr said:
They're both right but I'm sure the documentary pointed out that the traveler T has to eventually turn around and come back to observer O at which point they will both agree that T is much younger than O.

Assume that T does not turn around. Instead, he whips out a phone when he alights and calls up O to ask the time. (Assume that the distance traveled by T is not much.)
 
It's a good question that everyone seems to think of at some point. I believe the difference is that both can agree that T is at some point in an accelerating reference frame whereas O is not. I'm pretty sure the proper name for your observation is the twin paradox which is not considered a true paradox.
 
If they both use the same reference frame in which they are mutually at rest, they will agree that T is younger, but that doesn't make it absolutely true because in the inertial reference frame in which T was traveling, or in other reference frames, there ages can be different. This is the issue of relativity of simultaneity.
 
Was this the doco that Hawking said, if you built a train track around earth, and the train went 186000 miles per second, in 150 years, the people will get out the train, and would've only aged a week, and thus you have time travel.
 
gopolks said:
Was this the doco that Hawking said, if you built a train track around earth, and the train went 186000 miles per second, in 150 years, the people will get out the train, and would've only aged a week, and thus you have time travel.

Exactly!
 
So basically what is keeping people from time traveling as someone on these boards pointed out, is just a engineering issue.
 
gopolks said:
So basically what is keeping people from time traveling as someone on these boards pointed out, is just a engineering issue.

Every time we hop into a vehicle or even walk, we are traveling to the future compared to someone who is at rest. However, we travel by a negligibly small amount. What's keeping us from traveling into the far future is an engineering issue.
 
  • #10
If the engineering issue is ever solved, then it will become an economic issue, just like the engineering issue of going to the moon was solved decades ago but the Apollo program was cut short due to economic factors and has never been funded since.
 
  • #11
Its the fact that it's possible to travel to future in terms of physics, I think that should excite people, even though it won't happen.
 
  • #12
Hi.
To the future it is easy, "Rip van Winkle", but impossible is to the past.
regards.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Of course, you realize that if the engineering problems were solved, what we get may be something like this:

http://www.xkcd.com/989/
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Conventionality of the One-Way Speed of Light
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
High School Understanding the Twin Paradox: Simplifying with a Clear Experiment
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
High School Relative rate of clock ticks on the radius of a rotating disc
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
Undergrad Can anyone clarify the relativistic twin paradox for me?
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
Undergrad Twin paradox, virtual clock on ship with Earth time, discontinuity
  • · Replies 115 ·
4
Replies
115
Views
9K
Undergrad How Does the Twin Paradox Apply to Light and Sound Waves?
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
Undergrad Reference systems and apparent counter-explanations on Twin Paradox
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Undergrad Twin Paradox: Who Is Right, A or B?
  • · Replies 137 ·
5
Replies
137
Views
11K
High School Time traveling in the future and in the past
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
Undergrad Twin Paradox: Aging Slower with Continuous Acceleration?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K