I was watching TV and came across a show on the science channel that claimed time travel was possible. This guy claimed that by using an array of lasers he could induce a frame dragging effect on the space/time around a device allowing him to send particles back in time. He also claimed that when the device was complete it should be possible to recieve messages from the future. Just wondering if there was any truth to this.

Nah, you good at physics? they have sent data into the future (by very small times though) by using lasers, if you could put a person into a beam of light you could time travel but other than that no you cant. i dont really know the advanced stuff behind it. try looking at the newscientist.com website, i think thats where i seen it in there magazine. luck

if you could put a person into a beam of light you could time travel but other than that no you cant.

Yes, you can.

guess what, i'm time travelling right now. if i had a wormhole and a spaceship, i could go into the past.

Or into the future with a fast high-orbit plane.

We're all moving into the future by very small amount every very small amount of time...

 

One of the biggest problems I see with time travel is you have to add/remove mass-energy from one of the time periods and at that time period the universe which we all know can't be done, except I realise over very very small periods of time...

Well to go BACK in time you would have to travel faster the speed of light.

There is a formula that stops you doing that; i will give it to you when the [math] a [/math] tags are working.

 

As for wormeholes, i reckon we will discover a new physical law when trying this, one that prevents us from travelling back in time.

Found some links on the show I saw if anyone is interested.

http://www.discoverychannelasia.com/timetravel/feature3.shtml

http://www.walterzeichner.com/thezfiles/timetravel.html

It's hard to be sure, because these are journalists interpreting science and summarizing, but I don't think what is proposed is time travel in the sci-fi sense of the term.

 

It sounds like the particles will move more slowly into the future, because of the induced redshift. That isn't time travel anymore than the moving twin in the twin paradox. Time travels more slowly, so the particle will not have aged as fast. The novelty appears to be doing it with light.

I'm fairly new to scientific debate, but I have been reading a book to do with Eienstein's theory of relativity. Is it possible to time-travel by travelling faster than the speed of light or am I mistaken. However, this is not possible as Eienstein's formula E=mc2 (squared) shows that an impossible amount of energy would be needed to travel faster than light as light is pure energy. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Is it possible to time-travel by travelling faster than the speed of light or am I mistaken.

 

if one were to go faster than light then technically they would go back in time, however going faster than light (FTL) is impossible.

if you live in this universe then the rules of physics apply to you and therefore you cannot go FTL so you cannot travel back in time using that method...

Here is the formula then;

 

E=GMC^2

 

G= 1/1-Sqrt (V^2/C^2)

if V (velocity) = C (speed of light)

 

Then G= 1/Sqrt 1-1

 

or intinitity. Unless M in the Equation E=GMC^2 then E will always = infinity.

 

Now lets try above C

 

1/Sqrt 1-(V^2/C^2)

 

if we say V= 2C then we get 1/Sqrt 1-2, o dear.

As for wormeholes, i reckon we will discover a new physical law when trying this, one that prevents us from travelling back in time.

The point of using a wormhole is that it sidesteps those laws by creating a predeterministic effect->cause relationship between the mouths.

How do you know, have you ever been in a wormhole?

No*, but I've picked up a book.

 

 

 

 

* Actually it's perfectly possible that we all have. Or rather, a wormhole has been in us.

well when people were theorising; the Sun went round the earth.

 

Then people made observations and they found out they were wrong, that was the point I was making.

 

We dont know what laws govern wormholes, I suspect even if it would appear to avoid needing rules, that we will find it does need rules.

What if you were to send a particle going at .9999c in spiraling path around and area of space that was dragged in the direction of the partical. Would that allow for faster than light speed travel?

No, as far as i understand it the Graph is a curving one, it becomes harder and harder to pull a particle as fast as light, the faster you are, therefore no.

What about entanglement? The quantum effect? Have anyone managed to measure the speed of this?

quantum entaglement requires a classical means of communication to transfer the data (a laser is used in most recent exeriments) and therefore data is limited to the speed of the laser, which is the speed of light.

 

entaglement does not break the speed of light.

No, as far as i understand it the Graph is a curving one, it becomes harder and harder to pull a particle as fast as light, the faster you are, therefore no.

I've always wondered: How do we know this?

 

well when people were theorising; the Sun went round the earth.

Isn't it true that relative to the earth the sun is revolving around the earth?

We dont know what laws govern wormholes, I suspect even if it would appear to avoid needing rules, that we will find it does need rules.

Well, this is true. But things don't tend to be governed by rules that directly oppose their fundamental nature.

Hello, all.

I have been doing some research myself and have found that the speed of light is absolutely not a constant. How can something be considered a constant if it can be modified? In recent experiments light has been made to slow an incredible ( now credible!) amount by super-cooling the area around it. What does this mean for time travel? The amount of energy required for time travel is drastically reduced- to a very attainable amount per mass being sent through time. . . Or is relativity all wrong?

The speed of light is still constant, it's just that the atoms it hits absorb it and only very slowly re-emit it. The absorbtion and emission bits slow it down.

c is constant, which is the speed of light in a vacuum. The propagation speed of light through a medium is c/n, where n is the index of refraction.