Earlier quoted context omitted.
"An important assumption going into the theorem is that neither Alice nor Bob is allowed, in any way, to affect the preparation of the initial state" The assumption is that the past can't change the future, which it obviously can to any observer. You change what you do today and it will change the future. If the two particles are entangled, one particle would change the initial state of the other wouldn't it? Sort of…
The point of the no-communication theorem is that if you transport one half of the entangled pair to Alice, and one half of the entangled pair to Bob, neither of them can use measurements on their half of the entangled pair to communicate. It's forbidden by QM as we know it. If Alice can affect the initial state, of course she can use that to communicate something to Bob, because half of that state then gets transpor…
Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
91–100 of 106 posts
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
"so almost nobody has tried, and nobody expects it to work because it that's not how entanglement is understood to work." Thank you. I'm thinking you have schrodinger's box, you have particles set inside it you know are all entangled with other particles in the future. You read the initial 'code'. Can you change the particle from on/off? What happens if you eliminate a particle in the future that is entangled with a…
IE could you do an experiment with two boxes of quantum entangled particles, one box is read, the other box in a 'sealed room' for a set amount of time. If the entanglement through time is possible, and altering a entangled particle so it's sister particle responds is possible, would there be a chance that when you changed the entangled particle in the sealed room after it was unsealed it would change the particle in…
Altering the particle (as far as anyone knows) breaks the entanglement. The person on one end can measure their particle, but that doesn't tell them anything about whether or how the other one was altered.
Once you observe your particle, you've collapsed the wavefunction of the entangled pair. But- crucially- it's not possible to observe the wavefunction itself, so nobody else can tell whether it's collapsed. That is, if I measure my particle, I have no idea whether the particle on the other end will or has already been changed or observed, and I can't know. It just gives me a random value and collapses the state if it hasn't already.
It's only in retrospect that you can detect entanglement; the values you get upon observation of the pairs are correlated once you have both sets of values to compare. But until then you just have a bunch of white noise, and it's not possible (this is the no-communication theorem) to make any sense of that white noise.
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#93This is like saying we will never fly a plane. Do you really think people in the 1200's could fathom a phone or the internet or access all information that ever has been on a device that fits on your phone? Its incredibly naïve to think that time travel isn't possible purely based on "laws of physics".
It’s not just the laws of physics. If you assume the past cannot be changed then you can’t physically interact with it, and you can’t even observe it (observation is interaction). And if you assume the past can be changed then the universe makes no sense and all discussion is futile.
The universe may not make a lot of sense, but there is some sense in it.
Futility of discussion: I can certainly understand anyone feeling like that after the last two years. But don't give up hope!
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
"An important assumption going into the theorem is that neither Alice nor Bob is allowed, in any way, to affect the preparation of the initial state" The assumption is that the past can't change the future, which it obviously can to any observer. You change what you do today and it will change the future. If the two particles are entangled, one particle would change the initial state of the other wouldn't it? Sort of…
The point of the no-communication theorem is that if you transport one half of the entangled pair to Alice, and one half of the entangled pair to Bob, neither of them can use measurements on their half of the entangled pair to communicate. It's forbidden by QM as we know it. If Alice can affect the initial state, of course she can use that to communicate something to Bob, because half of that state then gets transpor…
https://www.npr.org/2021/11/09/1053851755/blue-velvet-and-qu...
Dean Stockwell, actor from Quantum Leap, reported dead today.
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
When clock travel faster than speed of light it catches up with the previous light showing clock earlier time. That is time travel as observed (assuming observable anyway). For observable the clock will stay fixed and then disappear as no light will ever bounce back from the clock to observer.
> When clock travel faster than speed of light it catches up with the previous light showing clock earlier time. I can just record the clock and replay the record. It makes back-in-time travel much simpler then.
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#96I don't understand why backwards time travel is even a thing. This is how I've thought of it: Assume you have a clock with two atoms A and B some distance apart which interact somehow with mechanism C using waves, fields or whatever, which move at light speed. This interaction between A and B happens at some rate. You test the clock at rest using your arbitrary reference clock, a pendulum swinging at some rate. You o…
When clock travel faster than speed of light it catches up with the previous light showing clock earlier time. That is time travel as observed (assuming observable anyway). For observable the clock will stay fixed and then disappear as no light will ever bounce back from the clock to observer.
For example, the atoms A and B would at some point interact with a past C (once catching up to this "wavefront" or whatever you want to call it while travelling). How does this make sense, when the interaction already happened? I think this would mean that the old interactions (C) from the past would be repeated against A and B, but A and B would not be in the same state as earlier (since they were changed by the original C).
In any case, this would not be time travel in a "time dimension".
For example, if one superluminally "jumped" 1 lightyear and waited 1 year while observing the origin, you'd eventually see yourself "jumping". But still, it would be just looking at past emissions, not actually travelling in time.
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When clock travel faster than speed of light it catches up with the previous light showing clock earlier time. I can just record the clock and replay the record. It makes back-in-time travel much simpler then.
Not quite. In this case, if you recorded the event of a faster than light particle and then played it back, each subsequent playback would show the particle having arrived earlier and earlier. Your reference point wouldn't change, but the past would.
Let's say you've a magical superluminal laser.
The laser is turned on 20 lightyears away now, you see the dot appear immediately, instead of 20 years later (because it was magically superluminal). But of course no laser dot would appear before the other side turned on the laser.
Wouldn't the recording just show the same thing over and over again?
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not quite. In this case, if you recorded the event of a faster than light particle and then played it back, each subsequent playback would show the particle having arrived earlier and earlier. Your reference point wouldn't change, but the past would.
But why, why would this change the past? Let's say you've a magical superluminal laser. The laser is turned on 20 lightyears away now, you see the dot appear immediately, instead of 20 years later (because it was magically superluminal). But of course no laser dot would appear before the other side turned on the laser. Wouldn't the recording just show the same thing over and over again?
If that were the case, each moment of the future would be further changed by the, (I don't know if this is the correct term but it seems appropriate) "temporally equidistant" moment in the past.
If that were the case, eventually the recording of the laser dot would not show a laser dot at all as the laser dot would have been fired before the video was recorded.
In the case of your magical superluminal laser, from your perspective what would happen is that it would show up and then appear to retreat at light speed back to its source 20 years later, right? But that's magic. If a laser actually traveled backwards in time then it would continue to do so until it ceased traveling backwards in time, so each moment forward would be a moment where the past was changed a little bit more by the equal backwards movement in time.
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#99Doesn't the grandfather paradox necessarily assume only a single dimension of time? And 1D time leaves no room for decision branching. So it necessarily also assumes a lack of free will. Which then gets into an irreducible problem of arguing semantics. But if free will exists, then time must be multidimensional. Multidimensional time agents could then go back and kill their own grandfathers. They'll then be traveling…
Can you elaborate on this? I don't see why free will contradicts 1D time.
Re: Time Travel: Probability and Impossibility
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why, why would this change the past? Let's say you've a magical superluminal laser. The laser is turned on 20 lightyears away now, you see the dot appear immediately, instead of 20 years later (because it was magically superluminal). But of course no laser dot would appear before the other side turned on the laser. Wouldn't the recording just show the same thing over and over again?
My assumption would be that the laser would move into the past at the same speed that we move into the future, so that might be the issue. If that were the case, each moment of the future would be further changed by the, (I don't know if this is the correct term but it seems appropriate) "temporally equidistant" moment in the past. If that were the case, eventually the recording of the laser dot would not show a lase…
Suppose you have a magical superluminal laser. Whatever you point it at (with a direct line of sight), no matter how far away, will be lit up with the laser at the moment you push the button.
That laser beam will appear at the location you pointed it however many light years in the past it would have taken for light to travel to its destination and then return over time to the moment you fired the laser.
From the moment your superluminal laser is operational and verified to be working, how many alternate timelines are collapsing out of probability every moment you either are or are not pushing the button?
If you push the button, you instantly change the past, right? The universe suddenly becomes a universe where a laser, that from the local time observers viewpoint, suddenly appeared out of nowhere and then flew off at the speed of light to your location.
The change may be minuscule (a 5mw red laser light touching on the surface of the moon with no observer is such a small variation as to be essentially negligible in the grand scheme of things after all) but it could also be massive.
For instance, lasers have a radius that they spread out from over a distance. No laser is perfectly uniform that we are currently capable of creating. This laser collimation problem is well known and apparently impossible to correct for.
So, there are 2 ways this could go. If it worked the exact same way forwards as backwards, then no big deal, a few photons from 20 light years away seem to appear out of nothing and zip away. But if this magical laser fires and arrives 20 years in the past with its starting intensity, then that creates some problems.
In the first probability, the laser light will then fly back and begin dispersing normally, spreading out across its arc radius as it reverses to its source and then somehow the massive, multi-light year spread of light all converges simultaneously at the moment the button is pushed (this is the good ending), or alternatively, the amount of energy needed to arrive collimated at the destination is enormous, and since nature abhors a vacuum the universe will provide the needed energy, the laser drawing more and more energy in during the return trip to account for the arc difference over the distance.
If the former happens, that will be an interesting thing to see as light moves at truly infinite speeds for the moment immediately before the button is pushed. Poof! Magic, no harm, no foul.
If the latter happens, then things get really funky.
If you fired a 1 watt laser 20 light years away, then the laser will have to travel 300,000,000m/s * 31557600 light-seconds * 20 = 18,934,560,000,000,000,000,000 meters, or roughly 19 sextillion meters (for simplicity). Lasers spread out by a multiplier of roughly 1x per meter of distance. So the laser that arrived in the past at 1 watt would have necessarily required 19 sextillion watts of power.
The most powerful laser in the world hasn't even been built yet but is estimated to be able to draw 100 petawatts of power, or 1^17. Your laser would be 1.89^22, or 5 orders of magnitude more powerful than that.
It would start out arriving harmlessly at its destination, probably bright enough to stun someones eyes, and then begin a light speed return trip through normal time back towards its source, increasing its power with every second on its way back until, at the infinite moment right before the button was pushed arriving at its destination with nearly 2,000,000 times the amount of energy produced by the entire planet's electrical grid all focused on a single point.
Needless to say, some very interesting things might happen should you ever push that trigger. It is difficult to imagine what those things would be but I'm guessing if all you got was a gigantic explosion that might be all for the best. That much energy density in such an infinitely small location might be enough to destroy the city, or the continent, or wipe out all life on the planet, or possibly jump start the second big bang. I don't have enough knowledge to know for certain, but your magical laser might possibly be the death of the universe.
For every moment that you do not push the button, potential timelines of existence flare out of the range of possibility. But the moment you do push the button, you potentially create an entirely new timeline where an insanely powerful and unstoppable force of nature began hurtling at the speed of light towards a very specific destination, ultimately destroying everything in its inexorable path, a tidal wave of energy, a laser tsunami crashing towards a lens operated by the tip of your finger.
All I can say is that thank God you didn't point it at Betelgeuse (642.5 light years away)