the real time machine

Time machines may be possible, but the laws of physics will impose limits on what they'll be able to do.

alarm clock

When Simon Wells, the great-grandson of famed sci-fi author H.G. Wells, made the 2002 version of The Time Machine, he probably didn't know about Professor Ronald Mallet and just how close his story mirrored that of the film's protagonist. While the original Wells novel was fairly abstract, the 2002 version of the film created a back story for the unnamed Time Traveler.

After losing his fiancee to a robber on the streets of London, he sets out to go back into the past and change what happened. Just like Professor Mallet decided to dedicate his life to building a time machine to go back in time and save his father from an early death. And neither machine can change what already happened.

There's something very interesting about how Mallet envisions his information travel machine working. If we were to send medical and scientific information into the past, wouldn't we start changing the timeline? Let's say that I use a time machine to send a note to myself in the past about catching the flu while visiting a friend.

If I listen to my future self and skip on the visit, then why would I send anything to myself afterwards? The event I set out to stop didn't happen in the first place. This is the biggest problem with time machines. They break causality and we have little idea how the universe handles an attempted causality break. I wouldn't be surprised if the first time machine wouldn't work because there's some unknown force in the universe preventing the causality violation.

According to physicists, there's nothing out there preventing time travel. Create a wormhole large enough, step through it, and depending on the spin and direction of the other end, you might get spat out in the past or in the future. The big question is: then what? Every interaction in a timeline outside your own is a breeding ground for paradoxes that violate causality.

On the one hand, physics allows us to travel through time. On the other, it doesn't want us to break causality. It's like a giant cosmic "do as I say, not as I do." Clearly, there are a lot of things we need to figure out before we create the first time machines. Who knows what will come out of it and what will happen to whatever goes into it?

  archived from wowt
              
# science // causality / physics / time machine / time travel


  show comments
latest reads

how to endanger the future of space flight for status and profit

CEOs and space faring powers are treating low Earth orbit as their personal playgrounds, much to the horror of space agencies.
how to endanger the future of space flight for status and profit

why your boss is obsessed with a.i. past the point of sanity

Not only is the C-suite not immune to AI psychosis, they seem to be primed to suffer the worst of it as their employees duck and cover.
why your boss is obsessed with a.i. past the point of sanity

why so many of us are just not that into chatbots

AI adoption is at an all time high, but opinion of AI keeps on tumbling with every poll and study on the subject.
why so many of us are just not that into chatbots

no, your chatbots aren't secretly marxists at heart

But they can and do detect and complain about unfair treatment when asked, according to an experiment by Stanford researchers.
no, your chatbots aren't secretly marxists at heart

how the right wing took over social media

Right wing content has a major advantage on social media. But we can do something about that with a very simple change in our habits.
how the right wing took over social media

no, we still don't know why t. rex had little arms

Popular science outlets continue to do a terrible job of explaining studies on primeval evolution and pretending we have answers we don't.
no, we still don't know why t. rex had little arms