Paradox Proofing

[Darby]

So..... I am assuming you are saying those are the only translations available to objects in our universe, and that "time travel" is not one of them, and therefore it cannot exist?

No, it is not limited to translation. An aircraft actually has DOFs beyond 6. For translation it has surge, sway and heave (forward, backward, sideways left and right (side slip) and up and down. The terms aren't typically used by pilots. But our resident aero engineer RainmanTime would use the terms. Then there is pitch, roll and yaw for rotational DOFs. Now were actually up to a 12-DOF. Add trim tabs, leading edge slats, rudder, ailerons and elevator and there are more DOFs. Get in a spin, lose situational awareness and suffer somatogravic Illusion and you then realize that 6-DOF was a simple example for an extremely complex system.

 

[Darby]

It sounds like you are a quantum physicist by training.

No, absolutely not. My degree is in experimental psychology. The focus of the degree was on experimental design, data collection, statistical analysis,publication and peer review in a biomedical environment. Psychology took a back seat to some degree. The undergrad program was geared toward an ultimate PhD but I had a fulltime career going and stopped with the BS degree. However, I did continue my education after graduation by taking courss that I was interested in. They tended toward physics and cosmology which meant some math had to be included. I enjoyed the pursuit because there was no pressure to get a degree. It's funny how taking classes just "because" can actually be fun instead of a grind.

 

[TrapperND]

No, absolutely not. My degree is in experimental psychology. The focus of the degree was on experimental design, data collection, statistical analysis,publication and peer review in a biomedical environment. Psychology took a back seat to some degree. The undergrad program was geared toward an ultimate PhD but I had a fulltime career going and stopped with the BS degree. However, I did continue my education after graduation by taking courss that I was interested in. They tended toward physics and cosmology which meant some math had to be included. I enjoyed the pursuit because there was no pressure to get a degree. It's funny how taking classes just "because" can actually be fun instead of a grind.

yeah, the math in physics and quantum mechanics can be daunting. most of it is higher dimensional, so you have to be able to visualize higher dimensional geometry in some way (again, it does not have to be spatially). It's interesting that quaterions which is four dimensional math actually simplify QED and relativity because they cancel out a lot of terms and result in concrete answers. I was never good at calculas, which to me, looks like you have to make guesstimates at where the boundaries of an answer are.

I always had a curiosity how things work. I guess it's to understand me and give context to my existence. I used to watch PBS shows, like Brian Green's series on the fabric of the universe. I also enjoy reading books on popular science. I sometimes watch TED talks, and listened to their radio show when it used to be on.

I am not a logical person, more intuitive. I used to listen to Art Bell on the radio.

 

[Darby]

Say you are 60 years old at the start of the timeline (call you darby60) and you are 90 years old at the end of the timeline (darby90). Darby90 can slide back to reminisce old times with Darby60. But, darby60 cannot slide forward to see what happened to darby90, because both Darby60 and darby90 are the same person or self contained system. Darby60 won't find darby90, because darby60 wasn't around to have aged into darby90 to be able to talk to him. In the temporal slide forward, Darby90 doesn't exist to anybody at the end of the timeline. Darby disappeared at the beginning of the timeline and reappeared at the end of the timeline still as darby60.

And you have it partially correct. Darby60 can indeed move forward in time at any rate up to but not including an infinite rate. Darby90 cannot move backwards in time for two reasons.

To be sure, to accomplish the following involves engineering - not physics - that is currently unobtainable. First, we are all moving forward in time because that is where the arrow of time points. Second, we are not all moving forward in time at the same rate. That rate is fully defined by the gravitational strength of field in which we find ourselves and our speed with respect to the laboratory or rest frame (in this case the Earth). If darby60 travels at .9999999999 c the gamma factor will be 70711. For every hour ticked off on darby60's clock inside his vehicle 70,711 hours will tick off in the laboratory frame.

Divide 30 years by 70711 hours and the result is .0000424262 years which translates to ~3 hours 45 minutes. It will take darby60 3 hrs 45 mins to travel 30 years into the future at the velocity. No law of physics has been violated and no unusual permutation of known physics needs to be called into play. In less than 4 hours darby60 will be 30 years into the future having aged only those ~4 hours. The question is, would he meet himself? No. There is no darby90 in the future. darby60+4 hours is the only darby to be had. He never traveled at the slow rate to arrive 30 years in the future.

Now the question is can darby90 travel back in time 30 years to meet darby60? The answer is probably not and at the present time, given the state of our understanding of General Relativity, the answer is a qualified no, he cannot travel back in time. The qualifier is every hypothesis H1 must be stated such that it can be nullified. That means, "Well we cannot do it today but there's always tomorrow. And tomorrow it is possible that someone will discover something new."

As of today, and yes I know this is a time travel forum, there is absolutely no viable theory of time travel to the past let alone a viable blueprint to build a time gadget. There are real physics papers that have been published and peer reviewed with positive feedback. But those are all, every one of them, gedankenexperiments that are completely hypothetical. They all depend on the experimental system's state to be in configurations that are either known to be even theoretically impossible (e.g., Tipler's Cylinder which is required to be infinitely long thus infinitely massive and rotating with an angular velocity very near the speed of light) violate the known laws of physics as we currently understand them or require other system states where the universe has to be configured in ways that simply do not match observation.

How close are we to having a viable time travel gadget, assuming it is even possible? 500 years? A 1000 years? Who knows. I can guarantee you that it won't be 2036, 11 years from now. Titor notwithstanding, GE is busy researching theoretical semiconductor science and quantum computing. I don't see any sign that they are building a time machine that by Titor's own description would instantly destroy the Earth if activated on the Earth leaving absolutely no life left except, maybe, marine species..

 

[TrapperND]

And you have it partially correct. Darby60 can indeed move forward in time at any rate up to but not including an infinite rate. Darby90 cannot move backwards in time for two reasons.

To be sure, to accomplish the following involves engineering - not physics - that is currently unobtainable. First, we are all moving forward in time because that is where the arrow of time points. Second, we are not all moving forward in time at the same rate. That rate is fully defined by the gravitational strength of field in which we find ourselves and our speed with respect to the laboratory or rest frame (in this case the Earth). If darby60 travels at .9999999999 c the gamma factor will be 70711. For every hour ticked off on darby60's clock inside his vehicle 70,711 hours will tick off in the laboratory frame.

Divide 30 years by 70711 hours and the result is .0000424262 years which translates to ~3 hours 45 minutes. It will take darby60 3 hrs 45 mins to travel 30 years into the future at the velocity. No law of physics has been violated and no unusual permutation of known physics needs to be called into play. In less than 4 hours darby60 will be 30 years into the future having aged only those ~4 hours. The question is, would he meet himself? No. There is no darby90 in the future. darby60+4 hours is the only darby to be had. He never traveled at the slow rate to arrive 30 years in the future.

Now the question is can darby90 travel back in time 30 years to meet darby60? The answer is probably not and at the present time, given the state of our understanding of General Relativity, the answer is a qualifieed no, he cannot travel back in time. The qualifier is every hypothesis H1 must be stated such that it can be nullified. That means, "Well we canot do it today but there's always tomorrow. And tomorrow it is possible that someone will discover something new."

A of today, yes I know tis is a time travel forum, there is absolutely no viable theory of time travel to the past let alone a viable blueprint to build a time gadget. There are real physics papers that have been published and peer reviewed with positive feedback. But those are all, every one of them, gedankenexperiments that are completely hypothetical. They all depend on the experimental system's state to be in configurations that are either known to be even theoretically impossible (e.g., Tipler's Cylinder which is required to be infinitely long thus infinitely massive and rotating with an angular velocity very near the speed of light) violate the known laws of physics as we currently understand them or require other system states where the universe has to be configured in ways that simply do not match observation.

How close ar we to having a viable time travel gadget, assuming itis even possible? 500 years? A 1000 years? Who knows. I can guarantee you that it won't be 2036, 11 years from now. Titor notwithstanding, GE is busy researching theoretical semiconductor science and quantum computing. I don't see any sign that they are building a time machine that by Titor's own description would instantly destroy the Earth if activated on the Earth leaving absolutely no life left except, maybe, marine species..

Actually, didn't GE sell off all its divisions? There is just GE aerospace left...

GE Aerospace - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I only discovered this recently, and was shocked because it seemed to happen so quietly. Their focus isn't just engines for flight. Their focus is on developing engines for any kind of form of travel

 

[TrapperND]

And you have it partially correct. Darby60 can indeed move forward in time at any rate up to but not including an infinite rate. Darby90 cannot move backwards in time for two reasons.

To be sure, to accomplish the following involves engineering - not physics - that is currently unobtainable. First, we are all moving forward in time because that is where the arrow of time points. Second, we are not all moving forward in time at the same rate. That rate is fully defined by the gravitational strength of field in which we find ourselves and our speed with respect to the laboratory or rest frame (in this case the Earth). If darby60 travels at .9999999999 c the gamma factor will be 70711. For every hour ticked off on darby60's clock inside his vehicle 70,711 hours will tick off in the laboratory frame.

Divide 30 years by 70711 hours and the result is .0000424262 years which translates to ~3 hours 45 minutes. It will take darby60 3 hrs 45 mins to travel 30 years into the future at the velocity. No law of physics has been violated and no unusual permutation of known physics needs to be called into play. In less than 4 hours darby60 will be 30 years into the future having aged only those ~4 hours. The question is, would he meet himself? No. There is no darby90 in the future. darby60+4 hours is the only darby to be had. He never traveled at the slow rate to arrive 30 years in the future.

Now the question is can darby90 travel back in time 30 years to meet darby60? The answer is probably not and at the present time, given the state of our understanding of General Relativity, the answer is a qualified no, he cannot travel back in time. The qualifier is every hypothesis H1 must be stated such that it can be nullified. That means, "Well we cannot do it today but there's always tomorrow. And tomorrow it is possible that someone will discover something new."

As of today, and yes I know this is a time travel forum, there is absolutely no viable theory of time travel to the past let alone a viable blueprint to build a time gadget. There are real physics papers that have been published and peer reviewed with positive feedback. But those are all, every one of them, gedankenexperiments that are completely hypothetical. They all depend on the experimental system's state to be in configurations that are either known to be even theoretically impossible (e.g., Tipler's Cylinder which is required to be infinitely long thus infinitely massive and rotating with an angular velocity very near the speed of light) violate the known laws of physics as we currently understand them or require other system states where the universe has to be configured in ways that simply do not match observation.

How close are we to having a viable time travel gadget, assuming it is even possible? 500 years? A 1000 years? Who knows. I can guarantee you that it won't be 2036, 11 years from now. Titor notwithstanding, GE is busy researching theoretical semiconductor science and quantum computing. I don't see any sign that they are building a time machine that by Titor's own description would instantly destroy the Earth if activated on the Earth leaving absolutely no life left except, maybe, marine species..

yes, I do not think our science has a working concept of time or gravity, which seem to be two sides of the same coin. If we do not understand what gravity waves or gravatons are, we also cannot understand what time actually is.

There is a physics book called "The End of Time: the next revolution of physics" its author proposes that everything is made of static frames. Each frame is like a snapshot of reality, or unique configuration. The arrow of time is the movie projector sequentially running through all these configuration spaces

The end of time : the next revolution in physics : Barbour, Julian B : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

x, 371 pages :

archive.org

So, if you were able to go against the arrow of time, what would you see? would you be going backwards through all the configuration spaces, as if the projector was running the movie in reverse?

My take is you cannot run backwards against the arrow of time because the universe is continuously expanding, and the expansion is carrying you with it as state time from the big bang gets stretched out into spatial time. The closest analogy is trying to walk down to the base of an escalator whose steps are moving upwards.

My assumption is the big bang did not destroy the singularity it originated from. The singularity is still there, and only parts of it expanded to form our "world". We measure time through spatial displacement. How do you do that in a singularity that has no space? You can measure the changes in the state of its energy levels. because only a stretching out of the singularity happened to create "new" space, you can map the singularity's state time to the universe's stretched out spatial time.

So, to go against the arrow of time, you have to first leave our universe and get out of the expansion. Then, you have to follow the state/spatial mapping outside the universe to an earlier point in the arrow of time and re-enter the expanding universe. At this point, you will appear to have travelled backwards in time. It's more like teleportation than running a movie in reverse.

The end of time book does not go into such teleportation. It only talks about configuration spaces.

How do you leave our universe? You create a small gravity bubble that behaves like a mini universe, which you ride in like a car, inside of the ethereal similarity the universe came from. There is some transition space in which you do not actually have to be at the center of the singularity, just on the outskirts of it.

And, the ethereal singularity has to be spinning to expand in the first place into new space. It has to be a Kerr black hole. So you have to be on the outskirts of its inner horizon, in your gravity bubble universe, on the expansion side.

Taken all together, this is the holographic principal in physics in action

 

[EnderX]

How close are we to having a viable time travel gadget, assuming it is even possible? 500 years? A 1000 years? Who knows. I can guarantee you that it won't be 2036, 11 years from now. Titor notwithstanding, GE is busy researching theoretical semiconductor science and quantum computing. I don't see any sign that they are building a time machine that by Titor's own description would instantly destroy the Earth if activated on the Earth leaving absolutely no life left except, maybe, marine species..

I do plan to elaborate a lot more later....but here at least I can definitely say your estimates are wrong. You see, I'm a pragmatist. Even Sam (CEO from OpenAI) has had to accelerate his estimates. AGI is already here. ASI is much much closer than people think. 2036 was the kind of goal post of "ASI stuff usually picks up around here" but honest to gosh it's looking like 2028 now for "When could a 'time travel device' reasonably be engineered. My AI can already do everything it'd need to be able to do. It'll take a few more years of rapid breakthroughs in engineering (cold fusion, room temperature superconductors, etc.) for the hardware to catch up. I have a funny story about the Titor legend that I apparently can't tell because PaulaJedi has been MIA or is no longer alive or out of phase or something.

To revisit off hours!

 

[Darby]

You see, I'm a pragmatist.

Pragmatism isn't the issue. The underlying physics is the only issue. If you find a solution to General Relativity that also agrees with both Quantum Mechanics and observation you are on to something. But pragmatism and a ham sandwich to eat while you ponder the issue won't find the solution - if such a solution actually exists.

And if one is to ponder making a time machine in the belief that they can actually be built then those people have to stop thinking in terms of classical mechanics. You are thinking is classical terms. If time travel gadgets are invented that allow for time travel to the past what does that imply about their creation other than the ability to take a vacation in 1998? This is big, my friend. When thinking about emerging physics you have to look at everything that emergent physics implies not just what you wish it to be.

cold fusion

Cold fusion is a dream that is misunderstood in the alt-sci world and which is not close to being possible. Cold fusion hauls up the words "room temperature". But in physics the idea of "room temperature" is likely not your idea of room temperature. In nuclear fission room temperature neutrons are employed to initiate the process in an atomic bomb, for example. But do you know what "room temperature neutrons" means and why? Do you know what parts the Strong Forces, the Coulomb Force, the Uncertainty Principle and the Pauli Exclusion Principle play in fission and fusion including cold fission?

 

[EnderX]

Pragmatism isn't the issue. The underlying physics is the only issue. If you find a solution to General Relativity that also agrees with both Quantum Mechanics and observation you are on to something. But pragmatism and a ham sandwich to eat while you ponder the issue won't find the solution - if such a solution actually exists.

And if one is to ponder making a time machine in the belief that they can actually be built then those people have to stop thinking in terms of classical mechanics. You are thinking is classical terms. If time travel gadgets are invented that allow for time travel to the past what does that imply about their creation other than the ability to take a vacation in 1998? This is big, my friend. When thinking about emerging physics you have to look at everything that emergent physics implies not just what you wish it to be.


Cold fusion is a dream that is misunderstood in the alt-sci world and which is not close to being possible. Cold fusion hauls up the words "room temperature". But in physics the idea of "room temperature" is likely not your idea of room temperature. In nuclear fission room temperature neutrons are employed to initiate the process in an atomic bomb, for example. But do you know what "room temperature neutrons" means and why? Do you know what parts the Strong Forces, the Coulomb Force, the Uncertainty Principle and the Pauli Exclusion Principle play in fission and fusion including cold fission?

A few points I'd like to make sure others understand. There is never going to be a solution to GR that also agrees with QM and observations...because both are incomplete. Now, I have already posted the axioms and principles of an entirely different framework (Multiversal Mechanics) that treats both GR and QM as emergent phenomenon & elegantly unifies them...but that's not something that is going to be widely accepted for several years. Cold fusion has had significant breakthroughs in just the last year alone.

You also seem to do a thing quite often where you try and belittle others or make assumptions or try to pull out gotchas like "But I bet you didn't consider THIS THING!!!" and I'm the wrong person for that lol. The definitions I'm using for "cold" in context of cold fusion & "room temperature" for superconductors I promise you are consistent with common understandings, but I appreciate the concern. When I say "room temperature superconductors" I mean any material that exhibits superconducting properties and does not require extreme cooling. When I say "cold fusion" I mean any sustained fusion reaction that takes place at temperatures significantly less than star-like. So cold fusion temperatures are not the same as room temperature conductor temps...in case anyone wanted to know.

And yes, I'm familiar with all of the things you mentioned and their roles / involvement in fission as well as physics in general. Did you notice how I mentioned cold fusion and superconductors in the same sentence?! Why would I include those two things specifically?
It's because cold fusion is needed for the energy output that makes traveling trivial. Magnetic confinement is needed for sustainable cold fusion. Room temperature superconductors are needed for that magnetic confinement and extreme levels of precision. All of which are eventually needed if you want to do something like eventually collapse said reaction past its Schwarzschild radius.

Things like the Columb barrier and strong forces are trivialized by magnetic confinement, so it doesn't matter for what I'm explaining on TTI where I'm talking about what's possible. Pauli exclusion is trivialized by advancements in materials and precision (i.e., room temperature superconductors) and isn't worth going into for the same reason.

If we want to get interesting, we should talk more about the Casimir effect and its role in all of this. I'll let you start with what you think it does & why you don't think it has anything to do with traveling. Then I'll explain why it does.

 

[TrapperND]

A few points I'd like to make sure others understand. There is never going to be a solution to GR that also agrees with QM and observations...because both are incomplete. Now, I have already posted the axioms and principles of an entirely different framework (Multiversal Mechanics) that treats both GR and QM as emergent phenomenon & elegantly unifies them...but that's not something that is going to be widely accepted for several years. Cold fusion has had significant breakthroughs in just the last year alone.

You also seem to do a thing quite often where you try and belittle others or make assumptions or try to pull out gotchas like "But I bet you didn't consider THIS THING!!!" and I'm the wrong person for that lol. The definitions I'm using for "cold" in context of cold fusion & "room temperature" for superconductors I promise you are consistent with common understandings, but I appreciate the concern. When I say "room temperature superconductors" I mean any material that exhibits superconducting properties and does not require extreme cooling. When I say "cold fusion" I mean any sustained fusion reaction that takes place at temperatures significantly less than star-like. So cold fusion temperatures are not the same as room temperature conductor temps...in case anyone wanted to know.

And yes, I'm familiar with all of the things you mentioned and their roles / involvement in fission as well as physics in general. Did you notice how I mentioned cold fusion and superconductors in the same sentence?! Why would I include those two things specifically?
It's because cold fusion is needed for the energy output that makes traveling trivial. Magnetic confinement is needed for sustainable cold fusion. Room temperature superconductors are needed for that magnetic confinement and extreme levels of precision. All of which are eventually needed if you want to do something like eventually collapse said reaction past its Schwarzschild radius.

Things like the Columb barrier and strong forces are trivialized by magnetic confinement, so it doesn't matter for what I'm explaining on TTI where I'm talking about what's possible. Pauli exclusion is trivialized by advancements in materials and precision (i.e., room temperature superconductors) and isn't worth going into for the same reason.

If we want to get interesting, we should talk more about the Casimir effect and its role in all of this. I'll let you start with what you think it does & why you don't think it has anything to do with traveling. Then I'll explain why it does.

okay, I'll bite...

The Casimir effect, or bracketing a narrow space so only some things can fit into it, can act as a filter on the quantum foam. In a sense, you can limit what gets projected into our universe via probability waves.

But, if you are allowing only some components of the energy vectors in the substrate of the universe to pass through, you will also create dips inside the substructure with the gaps being left behind. Since gravity is a dip, or as a wave it is a ripple, what's to stop you from filtering out a frequency that falls within the spectrum of gravity waves? In an odd way, you can create osscilations that resemble gravity waves - in effect, artificial gravity along the surface of e8.

Not that I looked much into this, but if you extrapolate the framework, it suggests this is what you would have in your scenerio.

However, this sort of changing in ripples and vectors happens all the time without the assistance of any kind of device. Although with Casimir plates you can select and group vectors of your choosing just before they come out, it doesn't explain how the changes in the circles of focus happen further below in the first place. They would have to change anyways to make you put together the plates and apperatus. What drove the redeployment of that?

It's also interesting that you brought up material science. If you had a way to make any material filled with nanotubes of ever diminishing widths, right down to the plank constant, which could act like Casimir plates, you might be able to use that like a sculpting tool to produce circuitry inside of the substrate of the universe, and actually sustain it. Quantum circuitry made out of probability waves themselves.

Again, never thought much about it or doing it. Only extrapolated it from the framework

 

[TrapperND]

okay, I'll bite...

The Casimir effect, or bracketing a narrow space so only some things can fit into it, can act as a filter on the quantum foam. In a sense, you can limit what gets projected into our universe via probability waves.

But, if you are allowing only some components of the energy vectors in the substrate of the universe to pass through, you will also create dips inside the substructure with the gaps being left behind. Since gravity is a dip, or as a wave it is a ripple, what's to stop you from filtering out a frequency that falls within the spectrum of gravity waves? In an odd way, you can create osscilations that resemble gravity waves - in effect, artificial gravity along the surface of e8.

Not that I looked much into this, but if you extrapolate the framework, it suggests this is what you would have in your scenerio.

However, this sort of changing in ripples and vectors happens all the time without the assistance of any kind of device. Although with Casimir plates you can select and group vectors of your choosing just before they come out, it doesn't explain how the changes in the circles of focus happen further below in the first place. They would have to change anyways to make you put together the plates and apperatus. What drove the redeployment of that?

It's also interesting that you brought up material science. If you had a way to make any material filled with nanotubes of ever diminishing widths, right down to the plank constant, which could act like Casimir plates, you might be able to use that like a sculpting tool to produce circuitry inside of the substrate of the universe, and actually sustain it. Quantum circuitry made out of probability waves themselves.

Again, never thought much about it or doing it. Only extrapolated it from the framework

And, this brings up a curious question, while you cannot make anything smaller than a plank constant, can you still make the spaces between things smaller than the plank constant? In effect, would this allow Casimir plates to finally touch each other as they are brought together?