|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
 Posted - 04/22/2006 : 13:19:12
|
Make a note, and set your time machine for the time coordinate of May 8, 2005, 02:00 UTC, space coordinate of 42.360007 degrees north latitude, 71.087870 degrees west longitude.
The convention was held at MIT.
According to the Wikipedia article: quote:
The convention included lectures on various aspects of time travel from three MIT professors: Erik Demaine, a MacArthur "genius grant" winner, Alan Guth, an Eddington Medal winner for theoretical astrophysics, and Edward Farhi, winner of numerous MIT teaching awards. A De Lorean DMC-12, the car featured in the Back to the Future trilogy, was also on display, near the "landing pad" located at the exact coordinates advertised.
All time travelers from the future are welcome to attend, without having to observe any dress code. The organizers request only that clear proof of a future origin, such as demonstration of technology far beyond that which is contemporary in 2005, be presented. An invention that solved a pressing problem in 2005, such as a cure for AIDS or cancer, or a working strategy for solving global poverty, would be particularly welcome.
No time travellers were verified as having attended.
Cool! I plan to have attended, as soon as I do some final debugging of my space-time transference control software.
BTW, is anyone familiar with the work on time travel by Dr. Ronald L. Mallet, and is both willing and able to comment upon his plans to build a time machine, and to discuss the objections of his critics -- all in layman's terms? Is there anything "real" to all this?
I'm personally far too ignorant to understand the physics involved -- including strange terms such as "pathological spacetime" -- or the convoluted math, but I naturally find the topic very fascinating.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
Edited by - HalfMooner on 04/22/2006 13:52:15
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2006 : 14:41:08 [Permalink]
|
Time travel is a fascinating topic. My understanding is that there are several scenarios under which time travel would be possible but they always involve some sort of exotic physics or material with fantastic physical properties.
Of course in a trivial sense time travel happens all the time. We are all travelling into the future at a rate of one second per second after all. Relativity can change this rate in other reference frames but you'll never actually go backwards in time since you're limited by the speed of light.
Interestingly some interpretations of quantum theory involve particles travelling backwards (as well as forwards) in time. A positron can be considered a time reversed electron and so on. If correct this would be limited to the quantum scale however, just like entanglement is. |
 |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2006 : 15:15:16 [Permalink]
|
One thing I think I understand about Ron Mallett's proposed time machine is that (if it works) it would allow transport through time only within the time frame of the machine's continuous operation. Thus, if the machine were first turned on in January of 2010, and was kept continuously powered up until December of 2015, the range of time traveling would be limited to those dates.
Interestingly on a human note, Mallett's pondering of the idea of someday actually building a time machine was first motivated by the death, at a young age, of his father. Ron thought that it would be wonderful if he could build and employ a time machine to "go back" and save his Dad. The time machine Mallett now proposes to build, however, would not have the capability to reach any time period earlier than its activation.
Ron Mallett's story might make a fine movie script.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2006 : 21:36:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
One thing I think I understand about Ron Mallett's proposed time machine is that (if it works) it would allow transport through time only within the time frame of the machine's continuous operation. Thus, if the machine were first turned on in January of 2010, and was kept continuously powered up until December of 2015, the range of time traveling would be limited to those dates.
Well that expains why no time travellers showed up for that convention then. 
Actually thats a common resriction on "realistic" time travel. If a time travel machine could send you back to a time before it's activation it would be very strange. Kind of like a train that only goes from Boston to New York dropping you off on Mars.
My own thinking is that while time travel is not expressly forbidden by the laws of physics any functioning time machine would generate an exponential feedback loop that would instantaneously render the machine inoperable.
quote:
Interestingly on a human note, Mallett's pondering of the idea of someday actually building a time machine was first motivated by the death, at a young age, of his father. Ron thought that it would be wonderful if he could build and employ a time machine to "go back" and save his Dad. The time machine Mallett now proposes to build, however, would not have the capability to reach any time period earlier than its activation.
Ron Mallett's story might make a fine movie script.
Seems like an interesting fellow. I don't know anything about him unfortuanatly. Obviously I rather doubt that he's going to be able to invent a working time machine, but like you say it would make for a great script. |
|
|
|
Paulos23
Skeptic Friend
USA
446 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2006 : 07:41:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
One thing I think I understand about Ron Mallett's proposed time machine is that (if it works) it would allow transport through time only within the time frame of the machine's continuous operation. Thus, if the machine were first turned on in January of 2010, and was kept continuously powered up until December of 2015, the range of time traveling would be limited to those dates.
Interestingly on a human note, Mallett's pondering of the idea of someday actually building a time machine was first motivated by the death, at a young age, of his father. Ron thought that it would be wonderful if he could build and employ a time machine to "go back" and save his Dad. The time machine Mallett now proposes to build, however, would not have the capability to reach any time period earlier than its activation.
Ron Mallett's story might make a fine movie script.
There have been several books using this idea HalfMooner. I will have to check my library at home for one that I can refer to you.
Edit: Found it online. Kaleidoscope Century
|
You can go wrong by being too skeptical as readily as by being too trusting. -- Robert A. Heinlein
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. -- Aldous Huxley |
| Edited by - Paulos23 on 04/24/2006 08:01:19 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2006 : 18:40:20 [Permalink]
|
Dave W. pointed out: "Deja vu: 'Time Travel Conference?'" Oops. Well, I wasn't around this joint back in mid-2005 when that was posted by Cunieformist. I should have realized notice of the convention/conference would have shown up here.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2006 : 18:47:25 [Permalink]
|
I wasn't chastizing you, Half. Perhaps I should use more winkies:
Seriously, I didn't even remember that old thread, I just ran across it while looking for something else. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2006 : 18:53:41 [Permalink]
|
I didn't take it personally, Dave. I'd run into the Wikipedia article on the convention quite by accident, too. It was interesting to see the earlier comments on the subject. It was almost like an alternate time-line version of this thread.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2006 : 19:13:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by HalfMooner
I didn't take it personally, Dave.
My post wasn't even intended to generate an "oops." I just thought it was funny. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 11:34:45 [Permalink]
|
If I were to enter my time machine and go back in time say 20 minutes then there would be 2 of me at that time. If I then wait 19 and again enter the time machine and go back 19 minutes there would be 3 of me. I could do that until there was a whole platoon of me(s). It would be kind of like I was manufacturing people out of nothing. We all would have EXACTLY the same memories and experiences, yet we would be completely different individuals thinking different thoughts.
This seems like it should be violating some or several physical laws.
But wait as we caught up to the present I guess you would see the whole platoon of me(s) entering the time machine and dissapearing. Could one of me refuse to enter the time machine, and therefore not go back in time which means that me would not exist to not enter the time machine.....?
I hate thinking of time travel it hurts my cranium.... |
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 16:28:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by furshur
If I were to enter my time machine and go back in time say 20 minutes then there would be 2 of me at that time. If I then wait 19 and again enter the time machine and go back 19 minutes there would be 3 of me. I could do that until there was a whole platoon of me(s). It would be kind of like I was manufacturing people out of nothing. We all would have EXACTLY the same memories and experiences, yet we would be completely different individuals thinking different thoughts.
This seems like it should be violating some or several physical laws.
But wait as we caught up to the present I guess you would see the whole platoon of me(s) entering the time machine and dissapearing. Could one of me refuse to enter the time machine, and therefore not go back in time which means that me would not exist to not enter the time machine.....?
I hate thinking of time travel it hurts my cranium....
Yeah you've essentially hit the nail on the head. Any time travel machine would result in an instantaneous, infinite buildup of matter and/or energy. So while time travel may not be strictly impossible one of its effects would be to destroy the time travel machine before it can actually be used. Kinda weird actually. |
|
|
|
sts60
Skeptic Friend
141 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 18:52:26 [Permalink]
|
Any time travel machine would result in an instantaneous, infinite buildup of matter and/or energy.
Well, sure, but this can be easily explained by *cough*mumblevirtualmumblequantum*net*particle*mumbleflux*entropy,ah,delocalization. It's all perfectly simple, harumph.
Dr. Mallett's story reminds me of the movie Frequency. Which features a brief appearance by physicist Brian Greene speaking on behalf of the plot device.
Oh, and it was nice seeing you at the conference when I go. |
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 19:24:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by sts60
Any time travel machine would result in an instantaneous, infinite buildup of matter and/or energy.
Well, sure, but this can be easily explained by *cough*mumblevirtualmumblequantum*net*particle*mumbleflux*entropy,ah,delocalization. It's all perfectly simple, harumph.
Dr. Mallett's story reminds me of the movie Frequency. Which features a brief appearance by physicist Brian Greene speaking on behalf of the plot device.
Oh, and it was nice seeing you at the conference when I go.
Heh, yeah I will have enjoyed seeing you there as well.
I don't think I've seen Frequency I'll have to check it out. I thought Butterfly Effect was quite good also.
There are some interpretations of quantum mechanics (such as the many worlds interpretation) that avoid infinite energy buildup and can resolve time travel paradoxes so I suppose that allows some leeway for Hollywood to explore time travel without being accused of perverting science. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 19:36:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by dv82matt
There are some interpretations of quantum mechanics (such as the many worlds interpretation) that avoid infinite energy buildup and can resolve time travel paradoxes so I suppose that allows some leeway for Hollywood to explore time travel without being accused of perverting science.
If I remember correctly, because the presence of any other of the "many worlds" is untestable in principle, then any hypothesis that they actually exist is, itself, a perversion of science. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
sts60
Skeptic Friend
141 Posts |
Posted - 04/27/2006 : 19:37:20 [Permalink]
|
| Now, since when has Hollywood given a rat's a** about perverting science? And on that curmudgeonly note... good night. |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
