More Science! Is Time Travel Really Possible? Meet the "Time Travel Brother," Dr. Ronald Mallett

[RolandCuthbert]

I was going to do this earlier but I got side tracked. Then someone posted a question about time travel. I just wanted to write about the real research being done in this area. Of course, it is "possible". Nothing in Einstein's theories prevent you from moving forwards or backwards in time. But this freedom of movement that we experience in space was ruled out in time because of deductive reasoning. In theory, you could go back into the past and kill your grandfather, but then you not be born, therefore preventing you from killing your grandfather and so on.

But let's cast aside these issues with classical world and talk about the quantum world. And that's where the research of one Dr. Ronald Mallett is kind of interesting. Dr. Mallett was playing around with this notion that at the smallest distances, time loses is distinctiveness from space. That you can move forward and backwards in time under those conditions.

So you might ask what does this have to do with a time machine. Well, what Dr. Mallett proposes is if at the smallest distances you could create a vortex by using a machine that could create an anchor in space time, you could theoretically send back elementary particles to the past to send a message.

Perhaps you could warn people of some catastrophic event or some issue people could avoid. But I just wanted to get the conversation going about the actual research being done in this area. Dr. Mallet has been on the talk circuit for years trying to get funding for his research. If he doesn't get it, it won't matter. Sooner or later, some one is going to take up the reins and try to move forward with the project.

Dr. Mallett's info;

https://physics.uconn.edu/ronald-mallett/

[WalterRadio]

"Nothing in Einstein's theories prevent you from moving forwards or backwards in time."
But the second law of thermodynamics prevents negative time on a macro scale.

"smallest distances"
I was reading Feynman's QED again a few months ago. Due to the uncertainty principle, electrons can go back through time, but it is such an insignificant delta t, that it has no practical application. Due to the limited scale, the second law is not violated.

[RolandCuthbert]

Hey, that might be true. But, there are theories on large gravitational anomalies that seem to violate the second law. Like Black Holes. But in terms of a practical application, we couldn't do it for centuries even if we had a theory.

So I was just focused on what Dr. Mallett was trying to do. To send back a single particle with a certain spin. If you could then find a way to send a stream, you could send messages.

As for creating a time machine that could affect the classical world, well, that is a conversation we could have. Knowing what we know about this universe, yes, it would violate the second law. . . but we don't know if such an act would be resolved in some other area of the universe or. . . multiverse. . . take your pick.

Were you that guy who mentioned the phrase "locally open" in the Boltzmann Brain's thread?

[cherryphi82]

Hmm... I'm not exactly great at physics, so I can't discuss the specifics of the science, but yes, I believe time travel is possible. I just wonder how *far* you can travel back and forth.

[RolandCuthbert]

Yeah. Dr. Mallett's theory is that he can build a machine that could create an anchor. Then he could always send back a message from the future to a time of his choosing in the past. It is a very interesting theory, involving creating a vortex of space time, similar to a rotating black hole.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MWUyRNUS3U

[cherryphi82]

Very interesting!!!

[cherryphi82]

I wonder how time travel would influence a person's consciousness. Like, you know how social media affects us, but what would those factors with time travel be...

[RolandCuthbert]

Unknown at this point. We could talk about what could happen if we time travel forward or backwards in the classical world. But that is something that is really far off. We really don't know what would happen if we were to send someone to the past. The future is much easier. But there are less paradoxes. Going into the past, well. . . that could have some profound effects.

If you met yourself, what would happen? Would that even be possible? Perhaps you would end up in a splinter universe where you didn't exist, therefore there would be no paradox. Then there is this crazy paradox.

If time travel eventually becomes possible, then it has already happened. Do you understand what I mean? If someone discovers how to do it in the classical world, even a million years from now, then they have traveled back and forth an infinite amount of times. And they would have affected history in a infinite amount of ways. But. . .

I will continue in the next post.

[RolandCuthbert]

But we are unable to perceive change to the present or the past because we are stuck in this reference frame. It is kind of like traveling near the speed of light. Because of your frame of reference, you have no idea that time is passing at a fraction of what it is ticking at in other frames. So you perceive nothing. Like in "Interstellar". Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway are on the surface of a planet for a few minutes. But when they get back to the ship in orbit, over 23 years had passed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p98tvNzEYpE

[WalterRadio]

"I believe time travel is possible"
How do you overcome the Second Law of Thermodynamics with your belief?

[RolandCuthbert]

@WalterRadio I didn't see this post. But I think you understand my views on entropy, etc. This could be resolved in another area of the universe or multiverse. We just don't know. But I tend to think this is not possible in the classical world because of the laws of thermodynamics and conservation.

But Dr. Mallett isn't trying to do anything but send an elementary particle back in time.

[cherryphi82]

Thank you for MHO, @RolandCuthbert :)

[CoffeeWC]

I find time travel difficult to comprehend.

[RolandCuthbert]

I think it is hard for any human being.

[meowcow]

Well, we already know that we can slow the flow of time for two entities. If one person is on the ground, and another flies in a supersonic jet non-stop for a year, the person on the jet will have experienced less time pass by (but only by a fraction of a millisecond).

Time is malleable, and so I would say time travel is possible in a theoretical sense. However, humans will never be able to time travel. Humans are squishy little things that die very easily. A car crash going 40 km/h is sufficient to kill a human being.
In order to truly bounce around in time, the speed of travel would probably need to reach the speed of light. The g-force would mean death, long before you get to such speeds.

[RolandCuthbert]

Yeah, I don't know if humans will ever be able to. I don' t know if Mallett's theories could be adapted to send a human back. But I don't know if that is all that important right now. Just being able to send a message back would be remarkable.

[JudgmentDay]

Even if it ever were to work and become a reality, and that's a very very big "if", then that time machine is gonna be very expensive and tightly regulated. Wonder if he plan to release a "DeLorean" limited edition of the machine whenever it becomes available. As for sending messages, I guess we can then send winning lottery numbers to our past selves then? Or maybe the correct answers to all the exams we had ever taken? Seems like sending messages into the past is the most that "time travel" is limited to.

[RolandCuthbert]

Oh yes for now, that is the only real goal that we can conceive of. It is hard to figure out a way to create a vortex like this that could affect the classical world. He is talking about something on the level of elementary particles. The physics permits it. But he needs investment. They need to build an apparatus that can generate much larger concentrations of energy. Then at the smallest scales focus laser light to create this "swirling".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpxhh809ocE

[RolandCuthbert]

Ah one more videos. These are all quick. Just a few minutes apiece.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgUbWkiWNCo

[Guanfei]

Time paradox would fuck this up.
Simply put, the ressources needed to go back in time would be gigantic, therefore you'd need a real, good reason to go back.
So, let's imagine it's possible, and you decide to do it. To kill Hitler for example. You go back, kill the guy and then...
Well then the future change. Hitler never rose to power, therefore the reason to kill him disappear, therefore you don't go back in time, which means you don't kill him, he rise to power, history happens, so you go back in time to kill him... and so on.
As soon as you change the thing you had to change, in the future you won't have that reason to come back, and you won't change it, which in the end make it useless.

[RolandCuthbert]

There are two assumptions you make. One, you assume that your ability to perceive the universe is without error. Of course, we know this to be a ridiculous assumption. There is so much more to the universe than what we can perceive. Secondly, you don't seem to acknowledge because of this lack of ability for us to understand an infinite universe or multiverse, that this problem with killing Hitler could be resolved elsewhere in this "system".

In other words there is a theory, and a lot of physicists have contributed to it, that says that everything that could happen does happen. That every decision, outcome, etc. happens in reality. But we can only perceive a particular history.

Dr. Hawking, the Grand Design

http://publicism.info/science/grand/4.html

[Hungry_Shark]

I completely believe in time travel.

Although I'm not sure that human beings can make time machine or can do time travel.

For me time travel is about god. And only god can do such a thing.

[RolandCuthbert]

Well, the practical application for us is sending back elementary particles to send a message in binary code. We aren't talking about something too crazy. Dr. Mallett simply wants to create a very small area of space time at the size of elementary particles. He wants to create a vortex of space time. Then set an anchor in the present that would always be anchored at that point. Then he can send back a message to any point going back to that anchor.

As for sending a person back, that appears to be out of the question. But yes, God. . . God exists without time. He exists before time. . . and after time winks out of existence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWnoMaSgYPY

[MarkRet]

Our physical bodies are trapped in this timeline. To travel time, we'd have to leave our physical bodies behind. If we do that, how do we get back?

[RolandCuthbert]

Who says our physical bodies are "trapped"? Are you talking about the law of conservation of mass and energy. . . or something else?

[MarkRet]

I think our bodies are confined to this dimension and timeline, and our spirit is attached to that body. If you were to time travel back to one year ago, and encountered yourself from that time, which one would be the real 'you'? You can't occupy two spaces at the same time, or I should say, your spirit can't occupy two bodies at the same time. When we die, our spirit leaves the body, which is trapped in this dimension and timeline. Without a physical body, our spirit might be able to travel time, but it would no longer have a physical body to connect with this dimension.

[RolandCuthbert]

So the only thing I can conclude is that you are talking about the law of conservation of mass/energy. Well, if this issue of you going back in time is resolved by a mutli-verse or by a universe that could correct this imbalance, that won't violate that law.

For instance, "many-worlds" would simply say when you go back in time, you create another universe.

As for the stuff about when you die, I can't speak to any scientific theory about that.

[Josht13]

how could you time travel backwards? once you have some kind of hole in space-time you could surely only travel to the point it was created and beyond

[RolandCuthbert]

Right, that's what he is talking about. And it isn't a "hole". It is an anchor. He creates a vortex of space time. He "weighs" anchor at a particular point and then he can always send a message back up until that point in space time via elementary particles.

It is kind of like the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment. You have seen that right? But with that experiment you send a message to the past by manipulating Quantum Entanglement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6HLjpj4Nt4

[Josht13]

I went to a lecture on him (I think, he does it to save his dead dad right?) and while it was interesting and I understand the experiment in the video that only means changing/sending a message and not travelling

[RolandCuthbert]

Right. That's exactly what he is saying, he is talking about sending particles back. I thought I was clear in my response to you and in my "Take".

But anyway, you don't really think that sending back a person in time would be possible in. . let's say a thousand years or so, do you?

I mean, we were only talking about him creating a wormhole on a microscopic level. At the level of elementary particles.

I have no idea as to how you could get enough power to create a stable wormhole big enough for a human walk through it.

Dr. Kaku theorized that such a machine would have to be built in space. Because there is no way we could harness that much power on earth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X02WMNoHSm8

[Josht13]

Yeah I understood your response it's just in the mytake you mentioned backwards time travel which I now realize was on about the video experiment and I thought you meant physically doing it was possible which atm the concensus is no unless something major came along to change physics as we know.

[RolandCuthbert]

There is nothing physics that prevents time travel to the past. I think by showing you can send elementary particles back in time, it proves that is possible. The issue is how could you get a wormhole big enough for a human to go through it.

That is something we don't know, because we cannot even conceive of building something that is that powerful. Kaku talked about harnessing the power of large gravitational disturbances like a neutron star or black hole. . . if you believe such things exist.

[Josht13]

well I'm not a physics student all I remember is a few professors saying it wasn't at their lecture and took their word.

[Deathraider]

Well the idea of time travel is currently not known as of yet, due to the fact that we don't have a quantum theory of gravity to describe what happens in a black hole.

[RolandCuthbert]

Uhm. . . I don't understand what that has to do with Dr. Mallett's research. He isn't trying to create a black hole. He is using high energy lasers to try to cause a rotation of space time.

[Deathraider]

I'm trying to explain how we know how to time travel on paper. Also we are not even close to being able to rotate spacetime technologically, nor do we know how time travel would work without a theory of everything.

[RolandCuthbert]

What in the world?

Explain the rotation of space time? Near a rotating black hole, space time rotates. We know this based upon Einstein's theories, which have been proven correct time and again. Mallett's research is based upon Einstein. But in Mallett's theory he is trying to use high energy lasers to create this rotation. The problem is, he has no funding. Perhaps a few years from now, some engineer will pick up where he left off and create some workable experiments based upon his research.

I am not sure what you are driving at. This kind of research isn't any different than other types that have produced wonderful technologies like GPS, etc. which are based upon Einstein's theories of relativity.

[Deathraider]

No, that's actually a false analogy. And it's not like we could distort spacetime like a black hole could.

[RolandCuthbert]

Spacetime is distorted all the time. I don't think you understand the physics.

The distortion near a black hole is substantial. Basically almost the breaking point. Remember, the distortions near a black hole don't allow for you to travel to the past. The distortions cause time dilation to the point where centuries can go by if you get near a black hole.

Mallett was researching a way to get space time to swirl. And if he could create a rotation, theoretically, he could "weigh" anchor at a particular point in space time and always come back to that point if he wanted to.

So as you see, that has nothing to do with black hole physics. The only comparable situation you could be referencing. . . because I don't think you know enough about the subject. . . is when two black holes are in close proximity to each other. In theory, they could orbit each other in such a way that a person entering this system could come out of it before he initially went in.

[Deathraider]

Not to mention time paradoxes.

[monkeynutts]

Yeah the applications are so varied, you ever seen a flick with denzel Washington called Deja vu, one of my favorites, plus the back to the future trilogy, awesome.

[RolandCuthbert]

Oh yeah, I saw that one! Paula Patton was gorgeous!

Anyway, you threw me off. Haha!

But yeah, just focusing on the smaller application of sending a message in time back might be possible.

[Anonymous]

If it is then it's likely to be to far beyond the human mind's limited understanding at this stage in our evolution.

[RolandCuthbert]

Did you read the "Take"? It isn't very long. We are not talking about H. G. Wells. Only in transporting elementary particles, which theoretically, tunnel through space and time constantly.

[BeHappy1985]

Hit me up when this becomes more than a theory.. Because atm its just a meh from me..

[RolandCuthbert]

Could be a while. I just wanted to get some discussion going about discoveries in science and some of the incredible things will be able to do in a few decades.

[BeHappy1985]

Could be never xD

[BeHappy1985]

Theories aren't really discoveries.

[RolandCuthbert]

Well, I mean I don't know why you stopped by. With the LHC they had hoped to develop teleportation. The project only called a cool 10 bil. If you don't develop a theory and get the funding to test it, then it never comes to fruition.

Mallett needs funding so I post about his research in various forums and threads. Maybe someone cash will write him a check.

http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~mallett/main/main.htm

[BeHappy1985]

Nah, I don't think so...

[RolandCuthbert]

i0.kym-cdn.com/.../BYE_FELICIA.jpg

[BeHappy1985]

http://www.beanos.com/img/FX021.jpg

[Sabretooth]

i just need to go back 8 years the day of my summer break to stop myself from taking it

[RolandCuthbert]

:D

media.giphy.com/media/vWDrezW0rMjmM/giphy.gif

[Sabretooth]

You're not supposed to take the summer off at GED

[vannanas]

if it is possible would someonenot have gone back in time in this timeline already?

[RolandCuthbert]

How do we know that time travelers have not traveled back already?

[vannanas]

but they would be recorded in history right?

[RolandCuthbert]

This issue was brought up by my genius WalterRadio in a different way.

But let's discuss this using your analogy. There are people now in our society claiming they are from the future. How would you know they are or aren't? And if the human race gets to the point where it has survived and it is intelligent enough to build a time machine, why do you think they would reveal themselves if they went back in time?

Did you see the movie "Interstellar"? The human race became so advanced, they could manifest time as a spatial dimension and travel back in time. They helped Matthew M. communicate with his daughter in the movie so he could send a message to the past.

When you start talking about time travel, things get really, really weird.

But I want to restate, Dr. Mallett's equations do not allow for you to go back into the past any further than when you first turn on his machine.