English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

8 answers

A proposed time-travel machine using a traversable wormhole would (hypothetically) work in the following way. One end of the wormhole is accelerated to nearly the speed of light, perhaps with some advanced propulsion system, and then brought back to the point of origin. Due to time dilation, the accelerated end of the wormhole has now aged less than the stationary end, as seen by an external observer; however, time connects differently through the wormhole than outside it, so that synchronized clocks at either end of the wormhole will always remain synchronized as seen by an observer passing through the wormhole, no matter how the two ends move around. This means that an observer entering the accelerated end would exit the stationary end when the stationary end was the same age that the accelerated end had been at the moment before entry; for example, if prior to entering the wormhole the observer noted that a clock at the accelerated end read a date of 2005 while a clock at the stationary end read 2010, then the observer would exit the stationary end when its clock also read 2005, a trip backwards in time as seen by other observers outside. One significant limitation of such a time machine is that it is only possible to go as far back in time as the initial creation of the machine;

2007-07-14 14:50:21 · answer #1 · answered by Colin M 1 · 2 1

No. Consider the logistics of it. Everything would have to be put into the exact same place it was at whatever time to which you wish to go back. Think of the detail involved in placing all the thumbtacks and odds and ends in your drawers back where they were yesterday before you rummaged through looking for the Scotch brand tape. Also, consider that massive bodies such as stars and planets would have to be moved back to where they were in the past. The input of energy would be huge considered from a standpoint of the law of conservation of energy.

2007-07-14 21:29:28 · answer #2 · answered by Russell 2 · 0 0

Any machine that processes forward in time has a thermodynamic limit in possible efficiency. For one that would achieve the opposite function in a time reversal, that would necessarily be violated as a hyperefficient machine. As an example, if you were to go back in time, somewhere in your body, you have interior and surface cells approaching thermal equilibrium with advancing entropy. If you were to reverse the process, you would violate fundamental physics.

2007-07-14 21:38:21 · answer #3 · answered by jcsuperstar714 4 · 0 0

Yes,absolutely. Travelling back in time occurred on many occasions in various Star Trek episodes. Many of the technological advances seen in Star Trek, such as the cell phone (i.e. communicator) , compact disc, the PDA ,and the personal computer have become reality within the past generation, therefore I believe that time travel will one day also be a reality.

2007-07-14 21:54:13 · answer #4 · answered by W E 2 · 0 0

Quantum physics has proved that particles can actually go forward in time. It's believe that going back in time is an impossibility. You just never can tell however. We are learning so much so quickly that the impossible today is possible tomorrow.

2007-07-14 21:19:47 · answer #5 · answered by Spade, Sam Spade 6 · 1 0

No. Once a moment is over, it's gone. There's no going back to it. Time marches on. The past would have to still be in existence with the same moments being relived. The past is forever lost to us. We can only read about it, memorize it or hear stories on it. Make a movie of your life. That's the only way you'll see it again.

2007-07-14 23:08:37 · answer #6 · answered by Deborah P 2 · 0 1

There are at present no working theories on how this could be achieved.
So the most optimistic answer is: no one knows.
The most pessimistic answer is: it is impossible because time travel would violate physical laws of nature.

2007-07-14 21:13:27 · answer #7 · answered by Vincent G 7 · 2 0

So far its believed to be immpossible, as it would break the laws of physics.

2007-07-14 21:21:23 · answer #8 · answered by Colezy 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers