My Hypothesis On why Time travel Is Impossible

[Nedersong]

This hypothesis was actually inspired by "The langoliers" in which people traveled back through time trough the Aurora Borealis, written by Stephen king. And I like the story and the movie adapation was very close to. Dean Stockwell is in it.

But my unproven hypothesis is this: time travel is impossible? Why?

Because in order for it to be possible, all matter would have to exist somewhere, and we'd need an indredibly large amount of information to calculate the right co-ordinates to get to it. possibley exponentially more information that it would require for a transporter to work.

And where would all that matter go? Would the universe have enough room to store an infinite amout of matter?

No, I think it would have to be destroyed in order to make room for growth.

And that's why I think time travel is actually impossible.

This particular hypothesis is a very difficult one to express in proper scientific terms because you'd have to consider that every single ounce of matter would have to exists and be stored elsewhere, as well as every single lifeform. So we'd have an incredibly large amount of copies of ourselves somewhere in the universe at every single moment in our lives, from birth on up to our current age. And all of that has to be stored somewhere, and how would it be stored and where would it be stored?

It may seem like an off the wall idea, but then again, so is the big bang and evolution.

At the very least it is something to consider.

 

[Bacl]

Very interesting, but you are running off the theory that IF time travel were possible THEN all points in time would exist somewhere, hence the idea that we'd need space for all the matter.

Very interesting indeed, but have you considered that perhaps only the present moment exists? What if there is is only now, but what had happened and what is going to happen are still real, only they have already occurred or have yet to occur? That means we only need space for the matter of our present moment, and once you say, get up from your chair and move to the living room, then you no longer exist in the chair.

BUT...given that theory, it still could be possible to travel through time, where you could move yourself at a speed that would literally travel back to when the matter HAD existed in the state, but then you will have in essence unwritten the present.

 

[anti-matter]

The whole idea of time travel is totally bogus and juvenile.

Think it trough for a minute ...if it were possible they'd be no end of the mischief making of higher powers over their subordinates ...and even the higher powers have someone looking over them.

 

[Brian]

Assuming for a moment that space is not infinite, Bacl makes a good point about present, past and future moments. Given infinite time (the 4th dimension) future and past, infinite space is not necessary. Each moment is its own universe along that dimensional axis, an infinite collection of finite spaces.

My brain hurts.

 

[anais]

Because in order for it to be possible, all matter would have to exist somewhere, and we'd need an indredibly large amount of information to calculate the right co-ordinates to get to it. possibley exponentially more information that it would require for a transporter to work.

This reminds me of the Krenim timeship from Year of Hell. They ran calculations on all the matter in their vicinity in order to change the space time continuum, but could never get it right since they could not account for everything that effected their region in space, let alone the rest of the universe.

 

[Haytil]

I find your argument confusing and non-sensical. I suspect you're glossing over a lot of explanations that are in your head, but not being verbalized. You probably have a better idea of what you mean - it simply sounds like you're rambling the second half of an argument whose first half you've already internalized.

Because in order for it [time travel] to be possible, all matter would have to exist somewhere

All matter would have to exist somewhere. I agree that all matter DOES exist somewhere (that's what matter is - it exists, otherwise it's nothing).

Why is this a necessary requirement for time travel? Why isn't this a condition already satisfied by the fact that the universe clearly exists?

and we'd need an incredibly large amount of information to calculate the right co-ordinates to get to it.

The right co-ordinates to get to WHAT? What are you getting to? Why are you calculating anything? What does calculation have to do with the physical possibility of time travel?

possibley exponentially more information that it would require for a transporter to work.

Why are you talking about transporters? Aren't you talking about time travel?

Already you've lost me. I don't know what you're talking about. Could you please explain, in a logical and consistent manner, what you're trying to argue? Take it slow, this isn't stuff that's all that easy to communicate in text form in the first place.

 

[Haytil]

The whole idea of time travel is totally bogus and juvenile.

Think it trough for a minute ...if it were possible they'd be no end of the mischief making of higher powers over their subordinates ...and even the higher powers have someone looking over them.

What do you mean by higher power?

We have mathematical arguments about the feasibility of time travel. There is no math supporting the existence of higher powers.

You tell me then....which is more juvenile?

 

[Brian]

I think the "all matter must exist somewhere" bit is a confusing shorthand where the OP is trying to say that, for example, if you drive your car from point A to point B over an hour, then that car exists at an infinite number of points along the A-B line, only at different times along the infinitely divided hour.

 

[Haytil]

I think the "all matter must exist somewhere" bit is a confusing shorthand where the OP is trying to say that, for example, if you drive your car from point A to point B over an hour, then that car exists at an infinite number of points along the A-B line, only at different times along the infinitely divided hour.

Ok, I'm not really sure how that relates to the greater argument as a whole, but...

...nothing exists on an infinite number of points on a world-line, because space and time is discrete, not continuous. There are a large number of points between Events A and B (in both time and space), but the discreteness of space means that this number is less than infinity.

 

[anti-matter]

The whole idea of time travel is totally bogus and juvenile.

Think it trough for a minute ...if it were possible they'd be no end of the mischief making of higher powers over their subordinates ...and even the higher powers have someone looking over them.

What do you mean by higher power?

We have mathematical arguments about the feasibility of time travel. There is no math supporting the existence of higher powers.

You tell me then....which is more juvenile?

Look through those pictures Hubble has discovered...you think those 12billion light years apart galaxies look alike by coincidence?

 

[Brian]

I think the "all matter must exist somewhere" bit is a confusing shorthand where the OP is trying to say that, for example, if you drive your car from point A to point B over an hour, then that car exists at an infinite number of points along the A-B line, only at different times along the infinitely divided hour.

Ok, I'm not really sure how that relates to the greater argument as a whole, but...

...nothing exists on an infinite number of points on a world-line, because space and time is discrete, not continuous. There are a large number of points between Events A and B (in both time and space), but the discreteness of space means that this number is less than infinity.

Space and time are discrete?

Half the distance (or time) between A and B. Half that. Half that. You can do that forever. Granted, to levels we can't measure, but that's the definition of infinitesimal.

The whole idea of time travel is totally bogus and juvenile.

Think it trough for a minute ...if it were possible they'd be no end of the mischief making of higher powers over their subordinates ...and even the higher powers have someone looking over them.

What do you mean by higher power?

We have mathematical arguments about the feasibility of time travel. There is no math supporting the existence of higher powers.

You tell me then....which is more juvenile?

Look through those pictures Hubble has discovered...you think those 12billion light years apart galaxies look alike by coincidence?

No, by physics. And chemistry.

 

[Haytil]

Look through those pictures Hubble has discovered...you think those 12billion light years apart galaxies look alike by coincidence?

No, they look alike because the same laws governing their formation apply to both sides of the universe. Nothing to do with higher powers.

Evidence of a higher power would be if they DIDN'T look alike. Then that'd be evidence that higher powers were dicking around, creating things at their whim.

 

[Deks]

The whole idea of time travel is totally bogus and juvenile.

Think it trough for a minute ...if it were possible they'd be no end of the mischief making of higher powers over their subordinates ...and even the higher powers have someone looking over them.

What do you mean by higher power?

We have mathematical arguments about the feasibility of time travel. There is no math supporting the existence of higher powers.

You tell me then....which is more juvenile?

Look through those pictures Hubble has discovered...you think those 12billion light years apart galaxies look alike by coincidence?

Is it such a problem to imagine the possibility that a random event can have commonalities at least on the surface (external look) throughout the cosmos, while internally, things would be quite different?

While I don't deny the possibility of extremely powerful external influence (like extremely advanced aliens) ... it's also quite possible and likely no 'higher power' had a play in things.

 

[Haytil]

Space and time are discrete?

Half the distance (or time) between A and B. Half that. Half that. You can do that forever. Granted, to levels we can't measure, but that's the definition of infinitesimal.

You can keep halving distances and time scales in mathematics, but it looks like there's a physical limit to how often you can do that in the real world.

Various approaches to a theory of Quantum Gravity (including, but not limited to, string theory) all seem to indicate that space and time are discrete.

 

[Brian]

^ Thanks, something new to read up on!!

 

[Lindley]

Assuming for a moment that space is not infinite, Bacl makes a good point about present, past and future moments. Given infinite time (the 4th dimension) future and past, infinite space is not necessary. Each moment is its own universe along that dimensional axis, an infinite collection of finite spaces.

My brain hurts.

Actually, that sounds remarkably similar to the Compactness Theorem. I have no idea if that's actually related, but I thought I'd mention it.

 

[scotthm]

At the very least it is something to consider.

I also find the topic of time very interesting.

I remember reading an article a couple of years ago about a young man named Peter Lynds who came up with a way to think about time that caught my interest. I'm no mathematician or physicist, so I can't expertly review his papers, but I found them interesting.

Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia:

Other implications of Lynds' work are that time does not flow; ...and that Stephen Hawking's theory of imaginary time would appear to be meaningless, as it is the relative order of events that is relevant, not the direction of time itself, because time does not go in any direction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Lynds


... and the opening paragraph from one of his papers:

Based on the conjecture that rather than the second law of thermodynamics inevitably be breached as matter approaches a big crunch or a black hole singularity, the order of events should reverse, a model of the universe that resolves a number of longstanding problems and paradoxes in cosmology is presented. A universe that has no beginning (and no need for one), no ending, but yet is finite, is without singularities, precludes time travel, in which events are neither determined by initial or final conditions, and problems such as why the universe has a low entropy past, or conditions at the big bang appear to be so “special,” require no causal explanation, is the result. This model also has some profound philosophical implications.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0612/0612053.pdf


...along with a link to his web site if you're interested in reading more:

http://www.peterlynds.net.nz/


I really can't say if he's on the right track or not, but I think it's interesting reading.

---------------

 

[JNG]

So we'd have an incredibly large amount of copies of ourselves somewhere in the universe at every single moment in our lives, from birth on up to our current age. And all of that has to be stored somewhere, and how would it be stored and where would it be stored?

They'd be stored in the universe as it existed at that moment. I'm tempted to add "where else?"

An overabundance of stuff is certainly not a major obstacle to time travel, due largely to the discreteness (erm...discretion? ) already commented upon.

There are plenty of other obstacles, but I suspect that when it all shakes out, there *will* be time displacement--but not offering the range of possibilities often seen in fiction. Either waves will interfere destructively and limit outcomes, or the John Titor-espoused "many worlds, no going back to the exact same one" setup will be in effect. It's wild speculation, of course, but hey, my "hunch" about the nature of the universe is worth as much as the next guy's, and it's fun to speculate.

 

[Zachary Smith]

Time travel is CLEARLY possible. In fact, it is impossible to NOT travel through time. We are doing it right now--1 second PER second into the future. The question is NOT "IS time travel possible" because it IS. The question is, rather, can we control the direction and speed with which we TRAVEL through time.

 

[think]

Space and time are discrete?

Half the distance (or time) between A and B. Half that. Half that. You can do that forever. Granted, to levels we can't measure, but that's the definition of infinitesimal.

You can keep halving distances and time scales in mathematics, but it looks like there's a physical limit to how often you can do that in the real world.

Various approaches to a theory of Quantum Gravity (including, but not limited to, string theory) all seem to indicate that space and time are discrete.

(true but half a brain is better then nun at all) so - all joking aside> there is only illusion and in that or within them one may be able to limit oneself if one likes to other wise No.