A Physicist Has Worked Out The Math That Makes 'Paradox-Free' Time Travel Plausible

juanrga

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,786
No, and for the same reason that someone telling me that it is impossible for vehicles from other worlds, light years from our own, to visit us (note: I am not saying that this is happening, it is just a point of discussion). The reason is that it is based on our current understanding of reality, science and technology, and fails to fathom that there are many things which we just do not comprehend.

The problem with the many-world 'interpretation' is not that it postulates an infinite number of other worlds or unphysical split mechanism. The real problem is that the many-world 'interpretation' cannot describe the observations in this universe.

If entropy is always increasing, WHERE IS IT COMING FROM?

1) Entropy is not always increasing.
2) The second law is a statement about the production of entropy, not about entropy flows. So it doesn't come from anywhere.
 

HAL_404

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 16, 2018
Messages
1,053
so, as humans is it that we haven't screwed up things well enough in our own time? Now we need to go forward and backward and really make sure we get the job done?
 

cdabc123

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
2,969
Another random theory for this thread.

Going back in time is possible however in doing so one must scale through spacetime to the point where any action is not able to reach the point the travel initiated in a manner where the action would occur before the travel.
 

Jonnycat99

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
207
Do you believe that every concept or idea is true, even if they are not true, just because they could be true?
That is where your logic is leading.
No, but neither am I saying that just because we do not have scientific proof of something that it does not exist. Did bacteria exist before van Leeuwenhoek looked at them through the microscope?

...there is a point where I need to be realistic and begin building a consistent world-view based on the facts available to me. When new facts become available, I will reassess things.
Yes of course, but in the meantime you can still postulate about things which may exist without losing your scientific principles.

But there have not been any vehicles from other worlds...
Do you have evidence that there have not been? Of course not, because this is a logical impossibility. We do not however, (as far as we know as civilians) have proof that there have been, but this does not preclude that they could exist.

...nor have I seen evidence of extra-dimensions.
Nor has anyone else.

Am I supposed to ignore this, and assume that they exist, despite no evidence?
No, it is an entirely unproven theory, and you are free to consider it or to reject it outright. My argument is that accepting the former position does not violate the scientific principles within which we understand the world around us.
 

cdabc123

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 21, 2016
Messages
2,969
The spatial-void between present and past is what has been historically referred to as "Hell."

That is why many ancient religions would view Hell-like afterlives as a place of regret.

Time spent in the past is hell, and the journey there is worse.

Do not try to go into the past. You will not survive the trip, and if somehow you do, you will eternally regret it.

Focus on the present and future. That is where us mortals can influence the destiny of reality.

Your getting on peoples pointless speculation pretty hard for someone who brought us this wild speculation.
 

Chris_B

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 29, 2001
Messages
5,108
So does this make me any closer to being able to get the winning lottery numbers?
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
14,611
So does this make me any closer to being able to get the winning lottery numbers?
Welp the past week someone just hit the megamillions and power ball, both of which were pushing over 700 million. So I'd say don't worry about it for now ... unless it was you who got it, in which case keep developing that time machine!
 

Chris_B

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 29, 2001
Messages
5,108
Welp the past week someone just hit the megamillions and power ball, both of which were pushing over 700 million. So I'd say don't worry about it for now ... unless it was you who got it, in which case keep developing that time machine!


:p :ROFLMAO:
 

bonehead123

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
1,243
Well....

Now that we know that you know that we know that you know that we know that you know, perhaps we can just get on with it and go back & fix all the mistakes we humans have ever made, beginning with that slimy goo in the water puddle, and everything after that will be all fine & dandy when we return to the present, which will no longer exist by the time we get back, which means we will be coming back to the future, which won't exist yet unless we return to the exact picosecond when we left, which will no longer exist because we were gone for that brief moment....and so on & so on.....

HAHAHAHA...made ya look :)

Anyways, if you mess with time, you will have to answer to those triangle-shaped dudes who built the pyramids, and they won't be very happy about seeing you for the 18 billionth time......
 

variant

Gawd
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
908
The math would seem to disagree with you. However, its probably fair to say that practical time travel may not be possible.
There are a lot of useless theories that can hold up in mathematics that have no basis in reality.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
14,611
There are a lot of useless theories that can hold up in mathematics that have no basis in reality.
Yeah but unless you're an expert in the field or at least knowledgable in the subject then you're opinion means fuck all
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
641
The dark truth is that "free will" is a false concept.

A chain of cause and effect reach back to the origin of time, space, mass, and reality itself. This enforces hard determinism.
There is no known mechanism for attaining free will due to the existence of cause-and-effect based mechanics.

It can be seen that all proper causes have a proper effect, within chemistry and physics, as well as in life.
Even ideas like quantum observer concepts can likely be traced to mundane cause and effect at its lowest level.

The only way to defy determinism is to have improper causes or improper effects occur.
This is generally called, "magic."
The philosophical underpinning of your argument is very non-western.

Hard determinism has always seemed to be the refuge of folks who cannot accept that some stuff is just random. It is an attempt to make predictable that which is not. As if it was possible to work out an equation describing the beginning and know what happens at every step along the way from the beginning to the end of time... And thus Allah alone can know the truth (which, to crib one of your words, is merely another form of 'magic')

So - counter point: look at research showing that amazingly complex systems can arise from the application of a few simple rules. The system of systems that operate in this manner can be very unpredictable.

I find it much more likely that a bunch of relatively simple processes interact and result in the universe that we see, than any single pre-determined chain of causality restricts all that was or ever will be
 

juanrga

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,786
The dark truth is that "free will" is a false concept.

It isn't.

A chain of cause and effect reach back to the origin of time, space, mass, and reality itself. This enforces hard determinism.
There is no known mechanism for attaining free will due to the existence of cause-and-effect based mechanics.

"Cause and effect" doesn't imply determinism. An evolution can be both causal and non-deterministic.

It can be seen that all proper causes have a proper effect, within chemistry and physics, as well as in life.
Even ideas like quantum observer concepts can likely be traced to mundane cause and effect at its lowest level.

The only way to defy determinism is to have improper causes or improper effects occur.
This is generally called, "magic."

Neither chemistry nor biology embraced determinism and only a part of physics did (mechanics).

Determinism is a non-scientific concept.
 

serpretetsky

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,819
So - counter point: look at research showing that amazingly complex systems can arise from the application of a few simple rules. The system of systems that operate in this manner can be very unpredictable.
Why is this a counter point to determinism? Complex and chaotic behavior that arises from simple rules can still be deterministic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aegir
like this

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
641
Why is this a counter point to determinism? Complex and chaotic behavior that arises from simple rules can still be deterministic.
So - that's a pretty common argument forwarded by those physicists that believe in determinism. The argument goes along the lines that chaos does not really exist, it's merely a misperception based upon imperfect understanding. The problem is that were it possible to have enough information to truly eliminate any possibility of randomness, chaos, or unpredictability... you would have to be God (hence my earlier reference to Allah). You would not only have to have the information of every extant process and particle, you would necessarily have to have (and in fact have) the position and state of every particle that ever was, is or will be.

So ... as a concept, when you start at the 'small end' of the scale and say that things can be quantified, absolutely -- and then extend it all the way to 'everything, therefore, must be quantifiable and absolutely determinable from the beginning to the end' -- it's just not a sound or even usable idea.
 
Last edited:

serpretetsky

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,819
So - that's a pretty common argument forwarded by those physicists that believe in determinism. The argument goes along the lines that chaos does not really exist, it's merely a misperception based upon imperfect understanding. The problem is that were it possible to have enough information to truly eliminate any possibility of randomness, chaos, or unpredictability... you would have to be God (hence my earlier reference to Allah). You would not only have to have the information of every extant process and particle, you would necessarily have to have (and in fact have) the position and state of every particle that ever was, is or will be.

...and that beggars disbelief
That's not an argument against determinism, that's an argument that we will never have all of the information required to predict everything (assuming determinism is true).

There is currently no evidence to fully confirm or deny determinism. It's a possibility.

I personally believe we will never have enough evidence one way or the other. I think it will always be a philosophical question.
 

Aegir

Gawd
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
562
That's not an argument against determinism, that's an argument that we will never have all of the information required to predict everything (assuming determinism is true).

There is currently no evidence to fully confirm or deny determinism. It's a possibility.

I personally believe we will never have enough evidence one way or the other. I think it will always be a philosophical question.

It is indeed a philosophical issue at this point in time.

As for whether or not it is true or false, I don't think the answer depends on your perception or knowledge.
None of us here is likely to be able to answer it, because as mentioned, we do not hold knowledge of all reality all at the same time. We do not know the positions, velocities, and trajectories of all things, nor do we know how all things react with each other.

However, it is either true or false that each process is built upon smaller processes, all of which have their own internal consistency.
An overlapping area of multiple systems will create mathematical complexity beyond human comprehension.

The three body problem causes issues in modern machines. But the nigh-infinite body problem will give trouble to all things.

But if the internal consistency of each process is consistent, and can be broken down, and reformed up, then I would say that this is evidence of determinism. And the issue that will cause contention between us humans is hinging on the idea that some processes cannot be fully broken down.

But I would simply give a dark look and mention, that it is only not fully broken down during our current state of technology and human science. We are having a graphics card shortage, so don't tell me that this is the apex of human technology and that we are expected to understand all things.

Now, if a person wanted to begin to challenge me scientifically, I would ask them for proof that randomness occurs.

And they will NEVER be able to deliver this proof because time only flows in one direction.
Do not look at me like someone can somehow can show me proof using a ~really good~ argument.

They will never be able to go back to an event and show me it occurring in a way it did not occur.

It is literally impossible to ever show proof of non-determinism. Serious proof. Powerful proof. Compelling proof.
There is plenty of proof that we lack understanding. But proof that things can have alternative outcomes, despite only one outcome ever actually occurring? It is a logical impossibility unless you have some sort of TIME MACHINE.

I do not think that 21st century humanity is the pinnacle of knowledge and comprehension of reality.

There is so much more to know.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
641
... I think it will always be a philosophical question
Upon this we agree. People love these kind of debates. As evidenced by the phact that many go out and get whole Degrees in Philosophy just to end up with some measly Astrophysicist job at C.E.R.N., when what they wanted to do all along was grow long beards, drink coffee and debate unanswerable questions!
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
641
they are just running off of what has been coded into their DNA
Ever watch a dog trying to decide between two toys you've thrown? There is clearly some thought process going on - even if it's not thinking in English or German or whatever.


All animals think - we just don't like to think about that because we eat them.
 

cjcox

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
1,855
Fortunately for us, Dr. Fabio Costa traveled back in time, to late 2019, so that we could all be blessed through his time travel discovery, even though the doctor wasn't feeling particularly well at the time of his departure.

"It works!!"
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
641
Here is the thing - we don't know how many people have succeeded in time travel. (I've heard of a guy who popped back to Medieval times, only to find that the planet wasn't here yet).

I believe his last word was 'urk!'
 

travm

Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
831
Ever watch a dog trying to decide between two toys you've thrown? There is clearly some thought process going on - even if it's not thinking in English or German or whatever.


All animals think - we just don't like to think about that because we eat them.
Idk about you but dog is not on my menu.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
14,611
Ever watch a dog trying to decide between two toys you've thrown? There is clearly some thought process going on - even if it's not thinking in English or German or whatever.


All animals think - we just don't like to think about that because we eat them.
I once got into an argument with a fellow physics professor about physics being done by everyone in everyday life whether you're in a car judging when you need to start slowing down in order to stop by a certain area, to how much force you need to push down with your foot to walk up stairs instead of jumping up steps. I argued that even if you're not doing the math of it, at some level you learned physics and are applying it. His argument was that it's just instinctual and doesn't mean physics is being done. Of course I was largely a teacher, he was largely a researcher who probably wanted to believe what he's doing is quite unique and exclusive.

So yeah same idea, they think, just not at a level that we do.
 

undertaker2k8

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
1,031
I think half the guys here would just love to go back to Sep 16, 2020 to get on the 3080 launch early....
 

Bdonedge

Gawd
Joined
Jun 10, 2010
Messages
969
The dark truth is that "free will" is a false concept.

A chain of cause and effect reach back to the origin of time, space, mass, and reality itself. This enforces hard determinism.
There is no known mechanism for attaining free will due to the existence of cause-and-effect based mechanics.

It can be seen that all proper causes have a proper effect, within chemistry and physics, as well as in life.
Even ideas like quantum observer concepts can likely be traced to mundane cause and effect at its lowest level.

The only way to defy determinism is to have improper causes or improper effects occur.
This is generally called, "magic."

Nothing I am going to say is going to refute this point. However, I'd like to point out that "the beginning of the space, time and reality itself" is itself a paradox on cause and effect.
Therefor, there must be something we do not understand fully about cause and effect. It's possible that it's an "emergent" phenomena. Maybe not. Does this wiggle room give us the ability to add in freedom of the will? Probably not. My point is that there is technically some wiggle room, albeit very very little.
 

Aegir

Gawd
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
562
Nothing I am going to say is going to refute this point. However, I'd like to point out that "the beginning of the space, time and reality itself" is itself a paradox on cause and effect.
Therefor, there must be something we do not understand fully about cause and effect. It's possible that it's an "emergent" phenomena. Maybe not. Does this wiggle room give us the ability to add in freedom of the will? Probably not. My point is that there is technically some wiggle room, albeit very very little.

It's an issue of gaps.
The "beginning" might as well be a word for "we don't know what happened before."
Perhaps it's a subject for religion.
Or perhaps not. For life such as we, we are born, and we die. So the idea of a "beginning" is easy for us to grasp.

Reality might not work that way. A more accurate point of view of reality might simply be that "everything is happened at the same time" with that grammar structure as well.
 

gigaxtreme1

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Messages
3,551
Had to chime in. My thoughts are that micro-singularities are powerful enough to bend space time and break the chain of causality. Extremely powerful and dangerous. just a thought.
 

travm

Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
831
Am I the only one who sees the science in this about equal to flat earth logic?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aegir
like this
Top