Time travel is not possible right?

[Lorizael]

(Preface: If I come across as really arrogant or condescending here, I'm sorry. I'm genuinely curious about what I'm asking about, because it's something I really don't get.)

Blarg. You know, I've never really understood this phenomenon. Like, I think science is awesome, and I'm in school to study astronomy, and I'm curious about the unknown, and I want to know the answers to big questions, but I've really never understood why people do the kind of thing you're doing right now. That is, I don't know why non-experts (which includes me, btw) speculate wildly about this kind of stuff. We basically don't have the tools (mathematical expertise, data, sanity checks) to be able to come up with the right answers. And yeah, it might be fun to think about this stuff, but it's never seemed more fun to me to think about crazy speculation than to think about what we do know with relative certainty. And yeah, it might seem like I'm being close-minded and dismissing your random speculation, but it seems to me like speculation can sometimes detract from more plausibly fruitful discussion.

I can't imagine that paragraph is going to go over well with anybody.

[ricketyclik]

I can't imagine that paragraph is going to go over well with anybody.

I couldn't speculate. Let me run it through my Quark gluon plasma-o-scope so I can be motivated to theorise by the acquired data.

[My Hubby Loves Civ]

(Preface: If I come across as really arrogant or condescending here, I'm sorry. I'm genuinely curious about what I'm asking about, because it's something I really don't get.)

Blarg. You know, I've never really understood this phenomenon. Like, I think science is awesome, and I'm in school to study astronomy, and I'm curious about the unknown, and I want to know the answers to big questions, but I've really never understood why people do the kind of thing you're doing right now. That is, I don't know why non-experts (which includes me, btw) speculate wildly about this kind of stuff. We basically don't have the tools (mathematical expertise, data, sanity checks) to be able to come up with the right answers. And yeah, it might be fun to think about this stuff, but it's never seemed more fun to me to think about crazy speculation than to think about what we do know with relative certainty. And yeah, it might seem like I'm being close-minded and dismissing your random speculation, but it seems to me like speculation can sometimes detract from more plausibly fruitful discussion.

I can't imagine that paragraph is going to go over well with anybody.

No offense taken. My husband is the same way so I do understand and empathize. I am a dreamer, no doubt about that. My reasoning in diving into speculation is that it allows one and others to dig deeper into the knowledge-base known. Yes, there are many 'couch experts' online and I have gone down the 'pseudo rabbit-hole' a time or two myself. Why do I keep doing that? Simply the fact that ALL discussion produces fruit. True, I may not be recognized in the scientific world for my theories or inventions, but I do enjoy expanding my mind. I am a knowledge junkie.

[Donegeal]

I agree with MHLC. I do this all the time as well (trust me, there is often a lot of down time on 3rd shift). I think about something, come up with a theory then try to figure out why it hasn't already been done or isn't possible. I then think of a new theory with the new information and again research why it's wrong. Lather, rinse, repeat. There is an incredible amount of info on the net and one can learn a lot this way.

[Lorizael]

I dunno. To me, speculating wildly without the necessary experience or tools seems likely to take you down this path:

[Lorizael]

The overall point I'm trying to make here is that there is a tremendous amount of knowledge about the universe that is known which I don't know yet, so it seems silly to try to figure out the stuff no one knows before I figure out the stuff at least some people already know.

[My Hubby Loves Civ]

That's the beauty of having online discussions like these! Certainly, no single individual knows it all. By sharing knowledge, ideas, and questions, your knowledge increases. By tackling the unknowns, you cannot help but continually learn what is actually known. Even the actual physicists understand this that is why science is a collaboration of many, rather than one.

For example:

About 23% of our universe is dark matter. This favors the dark matter being made up mostly of some type of WIMP. However, the evolution of structure in the universe indicates that the dark matter must not be fast moving, since fast moving particles prevent the clumping of matter in the universe. So while neutrinos may make up part of the dark matter, they are not a major component. Particles such as the axion and neutralino appear to have the appropriate properties to be dark matter. However, they have yet to be detected.

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/educators/galaxies/imagine/dark_matter.html

One reads what is known, adds to what they know, and asks question that someone may have an answer to. Fast moving particles (aka: dark energy) actually repulse gravitation rather than attract it like it does with the slower moving particles of dark matter. So, naturally, my curiousity is in deducing whether these two are separate or actual cannot function without each other? Is one a chain reaction based on the other?

[DaShi]

The overall point I'm trying to make here is that there is a tremendous amount of knowledge about the universe that is known which I don't know yet, so it seems silly to try to figure out the stuff no one knows before I figure out the stuff at least some people already know.

Don't let the discoveries of other scientists bias you. Make your own Standard Model!

[My Hubby Loves Civ]

Armchair and Couch Enthusiastic Experts are welcome here!

Okay, getting back to time travel or near/faster than light speeds to seemingly travel through space/time. Obviously, we need the means to accelerate our energy source. I believe the research in plasma physics will assist us here.

In late 2014, researchers from SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory using the Facility for Advanced Accelerator Experimental Tests (FACET) published proof of the viability of plasma acceleration technology. It was shown to be able to achieve 400 to 500 times higher energy transfer compared to a general linear accelerator design.

The advantage of plasma acceleration is that its acceleration field can be much stronger than that of conventional radio-frequency (RF) particle accelerator|accelerators. In RF accelerators, the field has an upper limit determined by the threshold for Electrical breakdown|dielectric breakdown of the acceleration tube. This limits the amount of acceleration over any given area, requiring very long accelerators to reach high energies. In contrast, the maximum field in a plasma is defined by mechanical qualities and turbulence, but is generally several orders of magnitude stronger than with RF accelerators. It is hoped that a compact particle accelerator can be created based on plasma acceleration techniques or accelerators for much higher energy can be built, if long accelerators are realizable with an accelerating field of 10 GV/m.

It is this "wakefield" that is used for particle acceleration. A particle injected into the plasma near the high-density area will experience an acceleration toward (or away) from it, an acceleration that continues as the wakefield travels through the column, until the particle eventually reaches the speed of the wakefield. Even higher energies can be reached by injecting the particle to travel across the face of the wakefield, much like a surfing surfer can travel at speeds much higher than the wave they surf on by traveling across it. Accelerators designed to take advantage of this technique have been referred to colloquially as "surfatron"s.

More details here for those curious: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_acceleration


Or being solar winds are plasma, could we manipulate the Interplanetary Magnetic Field to accelerate us throughout the Solar System/s?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interplanetary_magnetic_field

[pchang]

How about you guys start considering this:

The standard model of the universe is based upon gravity being the only far acting force of the universe (G is proportional to 1/r^2). Our observations do not match this model and we have come up with theories of Dark Matter and Dark Energy to account for these differences.

However, 99% of the matter in the universe is in the form of plasma.
We have measured large currents flowing through the plasma between the planets of this solar system and there are indications of even larger currents flowing through the plasma between the stars in our galactic arms.
We know that long lines of currents result in magnetic fields that can act over long distances even more so than gravity (B is proportional to 1/r).
Electromagnetic forces can easily account for the forces necessary to keep the galactic arms rotating at a constant angular velocity and do not require the existence of Dark Matter or Dark Energy.
Why are Cosmologists not considering Electromagnetic forces and Plasma Physics in their models?

[My Hubby Loves Civ]

Standard astronomical modeling and theories attempt to incorporate all known physics into descriptions and explanations of observed phenomena, with Gravitation gravity playing a dominant role on the largest scales as well as in celestial mechanics and Stellar dynamics dynamics. To that end, both Keplerian orbits and Einstein's general theory of relativity are generally used as the underlying frameworks for modeling astrophysical systems and structure formation, while high-energy astronomy and particle physics in cosmology additionally appeal to electromagnetism electromagnetic processes including plasma physics and radiative transfer to explain relatively small scale energetic processes observed in the x-rays and gamma rays. In conventional cosmology, plasma physics is not considered to be the dominant force on most large-scale phenomena, although much of the matter in the universe is thought to be ionised or exist as plasma (physics)|plasma.

I agree with you that it should have another look, especially since CERNs recent discovery changing how they originally thought about the Big Bang.

[Lorizael]

In Feynman diagrams, electrons moving forward through time look identical to positrons moving backward through time. Since the interstellar medium is composed of ionized plasmas (evne if the scientists working for Big G try to hide this fact, as pchang astutely pointed out), which are negatively charged, it's possible that this material is actually positively charged stuff moving backward through time. And since this gravitating material is moving backward through time, it may reverse its gravimetric effects, causing repulsion instead of of attraction. Thus the source of the universe's accelerating expansion--dark energy--could be time-traveling anti-electrons. If we could harness it, we would be able to travel backward through time. And according to special relativity, anything moving faster than light can also create closed time-like curves (time travel), so we would be able to go faster than light as well. It's brilliant! Why hasn't anyone else figured this out yet?!

[ricketyclik]

It certainly sounds brilliant. But why do I get the feeling you're yanking our chains?

[Lorizael]

Because it's a giant, steaming pile of bull**** wrapped in a thin sheet of sciencey terms. Individual things I said are true-ish, but the whole picture makes not one lick of sense for a dozen different reasons that the average schmuck has no reason to know anything about. But if all you do is daydream about how awesome the universe could be, then you never learn enough to know why that sciencey thing you heard is dead wrong, and then you can never appreciate how awesome the universe actually is based on everything we really do know.

It's like coming to the conclusion that defensive backs are wave phenomena because they can be called for pass interference.

[ricketyclik]

Because it's a giant, steaming pile of bull**** wrapped in a thin sheet of sciencey terms. Individual things I said are true-ish, but the whole picture makes not one lick of sense for a dozen different reasons that the average schmuck has no reason to know anything about. But if all you do is daydream about how awesome the universe could be, then you never learn enough to know why that sciencey thing you heard is dead wrong, and then you can never appreciate how awesome the universe actually is based on everything we really do know.

It's like coming to the conclusion that defensive backs are wave phenomena because they can be called for pass interference.

No, that's bull****. You've proven that time travel is possible! I'm going out to the shed to knock up a time machine right now.

Now where did I leave that chicken wire...