Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
In his excellent BBC lecture, the science of Dr Who, presented at the royal institution
London. Professor Brian ***
Discusses his wish to travel back into the past, so he could be present at Michael Faradays
own lecture on -the chemical history of the candle. - held in December 1860
referring to Einstein’s relativity, the warping of space, slowing of light clocks,
Minkowski’s interpretations of this , And the tipping of future light cones,
professor *** ends his talk by asking
Could we design some configuration of matter and energy
that would curve the light cones around so I could get back into my own past?
He concludes that at present The answer is... “we don't know".
"But nobody has been able to prove that space-time geometries
similar to this cannot exist, at least in principle.
Although most experts believe that they must in some way be forbidden.
But there's still the faintest possibility".
This video aims to resolve this issue by rechecking some fundamental assumptions, hopefully simplifying
the ‘some way in which they may be forbidden’ While also dispelling much of the confusion
and apparent paradoxes surrounding the theory of time
Fundamental to the talk is Einstein’s widely accepted and thoroughly tested theory of relativity
Amongst other things relativity tells us that objects for example ‘clocks’ will in fact
run more slowly than expected if they are in an area of strong gravity, or moving at
speed relative to an observer.
With these conclusions the professor explains that
Many scientists and in particular Albert Einstein “were forced to re-examine our intuitive
picture of space and time”
This led Einstein's colleague and tutor Hermann Minkowski to develop the idea of the light
cone to help visualise how 4 dimensional space-time might work
And to write his now-famous obituary for the simple tick-tock
of the clock. - "From henceforth, space by itself and time
by itself ---------------------------- “are doomed to fade away into mere shadows
"and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality. "
Given the TIME related challenges presented in the science of dr who, and
Seeing how relativity is critical to the conclusions, paradoxes, and questions presented, it makes
sense to re-check Einstein’s most basic assumptions,
So , We find at the start of the translated version of ‘ the electrodynamics of moving
bodies” he rightly states - we must be quite clear as to what we understand by “time”
Einstein then explains “If, for instance, I say, “That a train arrives here at 7 o'clock,”
I mean something like this: “The pointing of the small hand of my watch to 7 and the
arrival of the train are simultaneous events.”
. This at first seems to make perfect sense, but on closer inspection it may contain a
significant oversight with far reaching consequences, worth examining carefully.
Objectively we can see that all Einstein has actually described is the fact that an object,
be it a train on a track ,or a hand on a numbered dial can be in different locations, moving
or stopped, and that their locations can be compared.
But habitually we seem to see the location of a train on a track as being one thing
While the location of a hand on a numbered dial as being something to do with a thing
called time
But a clock Like a train is just a collection of matter
that intrinsically only proves matter can exist , move and interact where energy is
available
However we might still claim that even if there is no past, or even future, things still
take time to move. And without time the universe would be completely
static But this statement alone might be seen as
just invalid circular self confirming logic Consider
The statement … Things take TIME to move…
Things definitely move…
Therefore TIME definitely exists! Might seem ok
But logicaly it is just the same as saying - Things need MAGIC to move…
Things definitely move…
Therefore MAGIC definitely exists?
In other words one cant use the conclusion of a hypothesis as its own basis,
Things may indeed need time to move but the statement or declaration - things need time
to move – without supporting evidence proves nothing.
Either way It is important to note here, that whether he is right or wrong, Einstein has
only assumed here, that as an object is moving, or stopped , a thing called time also exists
, and is in some sense passing. We also note that he points to no actual proof
of this assumption in electrodynamics itself
The problem here is that we tend to naturally accept einsteins assumption that time exists
– without querying it , for the fundamental reason, that we , like Einstein, tend to instinctively
agree that “we can remember the past"
But scientifically , it seems fairly obvious, that however we personally feel about, or
describe it, a human memory, is in fact just a formation of matter held in our brains,
and as such, like the ink on a photograph , all memories intrinsically prove is that
matter can exist, move, and change, and in places be coaxed into stable physical formations.
Given that even our own personal memories prove only that matter can exist and change,
and that Einstein does not point to a proof that extra to this there is also a temporal
past existing or being created,
it makes scientific sense to check And dismiss if possible, Another option, specifically,
what if the matter in the universe just exists, moves changes and interacts?
In other words, What if there is absolutely NO ‘PAST’
Ever actually existing or created in ‘any way’,
‘any where’ At all?
What if things “JUST” move? simplistic, or far fetched as it may sound,
one should always check logical possibilities And in all my research into time no expert
seems to have considered this simple possibility, let alone considered and disproved it.
And specifically, concerning “the science of dr who” , the question
if things in the universe just exist and change -
Would this possibility be enough to Mislead us
Into wrongly assuming “the PAST”
Exists ? --- and yet still explain all our genuine scientific observations?
If this possibility is obviously wrong it should fall apart fairly quickly.
So to test this we apply it to special relativity and Einstein's famous light clocks
Here the great man shows us that a photon trapped so as to constantly bounce between
two parallel mirrors makes a simple and excellent clock,
he also shows us that - given that the speed of light is constant, the photon in a moving
light clock must travel diagonally to complete its ticks, and must therefore tick, or change,
intrinsically more slowly than expected.
this conclusion applies to all moving objects, and is not just theoretical, but proven throughout
science, and is for example fundamental to the accurate working of your in car GPS system.
Further more As professor *** explained - Einstein shows us, that at the speed of light itself
– such a light clock will in fact stop ticking – implying that time itself can even be
stopped
Special Relativity thus gives us the idea that if we could exceed the speed of light
–– we might be able to go back in time – such that professor *** could indeed meet
his heroes.
Though in the same breath the standard interpretation of relativity is said to protect us from actually
travelling back in time because of the speed of light barrier.
The problem here is that the light clock seems to scientifically prove that time can be slowed
down And if time can be slowed down, or even stopped
– then of course time must exist...
However, this may again be a questionable conclusion
If we consider the light clock objectively we can see that
Logically, a photon trapped between two mirrors, again only actually shows us that matter can
exist, move change and interact,
And while the device shows us a very unexpected dilation in its own rate of change, it alone,
in no way also demonstrates that as matter, or photons move, a thing called time passes,
or that a ‘past record’ of events is created or stored in another dimension.
In other words just calling an oscilating machine a clock, and claiming "time is that
which clocks measure"(Einstein) - in no way counts as a scientific proof there is a past
– or indeed a thing called time.
It is only if we assume time exists, that we conclude the device shows time passing,
and that this time thing may be dilated. If we only assume matter exists and changes - we
can see that perhaps just "rates of change" are dilated.
The key is to see that we may be so distracted and fascinated by these exciting, and genuine
conclusions, (that a moving device runs more slowly), that we automatically assume that
*all* the facts leading to them must be correct.
And thus we incongruently may be jumping to the conclusion, that we have also proven there
must be an invisible fourth dimension to the universe, flowing intangibly from an invisible
future to an invisible past
So what might a question like this mean if matter just moves and changes? ..... "Are
the doors to 'the past' firmly closed?".
Perhaps the answer is neither yes or no – because the question may invalid and misleading – wrongly
implying that “the past” definitely exists – and our only problem is can we access
it.
If there is no time or no past, then we still need to reinterpret the question and present
a working answer
To do this , Consider the actual live transmission of "Dr WHO Episode 1",
We may assume we cannot watch this original transmission because it is ‘over’ or in
the past.
And The time based interpretation of relativity suggests we can not go back in time to see
it is because we cannot exceed the speed of light.
But if we consider the situation without time, we still find relativities insights in to
the speed of light play a critical role
as professor *** himself explains , the actual transmission of the first dr who constantly
exists.
Scientific and common sense tell us it is presently an expanding shell of electromagnetic
waves , surrounding the earth about 470,000 billion km away, and with a thickness of around
1 billion km.
So , To watch this original transmission you need only accelerate away from the earth,
through , and past the transmission, and set up a tv with a very good aerial.
However although this episode still genuinely exists, it is also actually impossible to
watch it. – not because the episode is in a temporal past – and the light speed barrier
prevents us from going back in time
But purely because the transmission itself is physically too far away, and the light
speed barrier prevents us catching up with, it
If special relativity might not prove or require time, then what of the more complex findings
in general relativity
The fate of Rufus hound apparently doomed to a time distorted spaghettification as he
approached the distorted space time of a black hole leading to possible temporal paradoxes
might be simplified and understood in another way – without time - by considering another
similar scenario
Here we consider the famous wormhole billiard ball paradox.
In which it is suggested that a billiard ball might enter an area of distorted–space time,
ie wormhole
And continue through the distorted Space-Time
Such that it might exit the wormhole in the temporal past, and at a location and direction
allowing the ball to impact its earlier self.
The problem here is that thus the billiard ball might be able to come out of the past
and prevent its present self from ever entering the wormhole in the first place.
This is the kind of configuration of matter and energy that professor *** suggests - "nobody
has been able to prove cannot exist, at least in principle, although most experts believe
that it must in 'some way' be forbidden".
and, "Which might “curve the light cones around, so he could get back into his own
past".
However, bearing in mind again, the possibility that perhaps just matter motion, and warped
space exist, the following interpretation, and solution offers itself...
First we consider that like Rufus, the billiard ball is indeed 'spaghettified' as it enters
the intensely warped space of the WormHole,
But in this case the process continues such that the spaghettified billiard ball is thus
stretched to be both at the entrance and exit of the worm hole.
As this process continues further the ball is indeed able to meet and impact itself,
in countless different ways, but none that prevent its continuing entrance into the worm
hole Thus it is not the case that the “accessible
future of the ball ends up point to its own past”, but that the front of the ball , (technically
moving straight ahead in warped space), is able to impact its own rear.
So we can see that while in the Space-Time view “most experts believe certain Space-Time
interactions – (eg the ball preventing its own entry into the worm hole) - must in some
way be forbidden” – for unknown reasons
In the timeless version of the experiment, the interaction of the front of the ball deflecting
the rear of the ball from entering the wormhole is not forbidden by time, oe some "Chronology
Protection Conjecture" (S.Hawking), but by simple commonsense –object collision physics-.
And unless proof is given that extra to distorted matter and motion, time and a temporal past
actually exist, it would be unscientific to just assume any part of the ball exists in
'different times'.
Its interesting to note here that if there is no time, then there is no direction to
time, Events just happen in simple physical directions,
Then we see how On a subatomic or quantum scale matter may change between forms perfectly,
But an aggregate like a vase obviously smashes ‘irreversibly’ as it hits a flat surface
directly in its path. (I.e. "Classical Vs QM" time, becomes moot).
Therefore, as rufus heads for disintegration near a black hole it may well be true that
the rates at which things change along his spaghettified body vary tremendously, but
this may just be happening, with no part of him in any past, or future.
So in conclusion , what might all of this mean
To someone wishing to go back into the past and meet say Michael faraday
what of people, or objects that we know about, but which apparently no longer exist, surely
they are unreachable because they are in the temporal past, and thus proof of its existence.
Well first consider sitting in a closed room with a treasured photograph, and ceremoniously
burning it,
as you do so the photograph will disintegrate into minute particles of smoke and atoms,
but science will tell you the entire photograph is still in the room , and still visible if
you desire,
though not in a formation that resembles any similar mental image or memory of it you may
have. And again all this proves, is , that matter can exist, move , hold formations,
or disintegrate.
Conversely the idea that as the photograph burns some other perfect version of it in
some way exists and is automatically and safely drifting back into a fourth dimension, does
not seem to be observed, and should not be accepted as scientific fact unless actually
proven elsewhere.
As with many situations there's good news and bad news
The bad news is that likewise, we can consider that anything and anyone, including professor
faraday, is either integrated or disintegrated, or in either process.
The good news is that thus the matter and energy that makes up "Michael Faraday" in
fact always exists and unless proven otherwise is probably not also duplicated in a temporal
past.
This means there is no need for professor *** to prove the existence of time, and travel
back through it to meet him.
Instead, perhaps, the meeting is constantly always happening, though it is not as distinct
and tangible as the professor may have hoped.
If time exists the it is a truely amazing thing, but if it doesn't isn't it equally
amazing to think that the entire universe might be -genuinely- timeless?
For more information on the possibility of timelessness please check out the associated
lecture videos , website and ebook "A brief history of TIMELESSNESS".