Why were no visitors from the year 2075 seen at the year 2000 celebration? They are waiting at the dentist's office in the waiting room of 1981!
There's no theoretical objection to building a time machine even to the past, Einstein considered this "at times". I believe if our record of where all the mass and energy was at a given day in history we might envision a giant machine that would use this ability, like a glorified 3d printer to revisit this age. The problem is not about the idea itself, rather it's about feasibility..The past doesn't exist now so the only way to reach it would be by building a giant machine to rebuild that moment in history, hence building a giant machine would be costly. Another problem would be where would this rebuilt world we replace the old with go if we could find a good enough record on which to base the old world after we build the machine? Lots of people would object to reduced resources! The common objections about paradoxes about time travel to the past themselves may not be disproof because there's contradiction in combination all around in e.g. Newton's Third Law, life, hot and cool, and in general.
The paradoxes would be possible without disproof of the machine Einstein considered. Consider going to an age of an older history (with me this would be easy I know somewhat!). If you go to the old age of say 1987 and you influence not being with parent so your life is reedited out a bit, you are just moving the "old you" to older times, and the older time from which you came is not in existence there so it has no influence. The "old you" there would just be mass and energy moved to another realm of space time without deep concern of the higher information about where you came from. (I think this is an error in information science or complexity, the assumption is that information is always mass and energy, if so it couldn't be created or destroyed, yet higher information is being changed all the time, a forest of wood can be a shelf, or a box the higher information is more ephemeral.) Time order wouldn't be necessary with the large machine. I believe if the world was changed in the past by the machine, this would reedit what would have been the future, even with contradiction of the higher information.
..
The large machine seems possible by the relocation of particles of energy and mass from one region of space and time to another guided by a stored record of the history on the month or hour the time machine would visit, by a glorified 3 d printer, the teleportation machine.. Events of matter and energy in space and time are all the world and us are made of, so if we know where by the history of a point where it was at a given time and move it there this is a simple time machine, to go to an ancient hour in history would be the same idea except on a large scale. As above, the big problem is that a world changing time machine would have to be built- to visit an ancient time the world would have to be rewound to have a place in time to visit since it doesn't exist now, and this would take a big machine.
Consider that a mere atom may change the whole course of history (the polio virus that made us stronger in World war II because of FDR's power of determination he may not have had without resistance to the illness that made him defend well, a barking dog is more of power than a sleeping lion).
The large machine seems possible by the relocation of particles of energy and mass from one region of space and time to another guided by a stored record of the history on the month or hour the time machine would visit, by a glorified 3 d printer, the teleportation machine.. Events of matter and energy in space and time are all the world and us are made of, so if we know where by the history of a point where it was at a given time and move it there this is a simple time machine, to go to an ancient hour in history would be the same idea except on a large scale. As above, the big problem is that a world changing time machine would have to be built- to visit an ancient time the world would have to be rewound to have a place in time to visit since it doesn't exist now, and this would take a big machine.
Consider that a mere atom may change the whole course of history (the polio virus that made us stronger in World war II because of FDR's power of determination he may not have had without resistance to the illness that made him defend well, a barking dog is more of power than a sleeping lion).
TIME AFTER TIME, REWIND MY AUDIO!
This and the other Relativistic Time Machine (my idea of slowing time in the lab by high speed electric fields relative motion, a sort of relativistic wind tunnel of the field) may also be of use for future space travel instead of hibernation for ages while waiting to reach other star systems.
In one type of classic machine the time traveller would have no options like a movie the same forward and in rewind. This would tell us nothing new since time without the machine allows volition, the main purpose of the big machine if it ever could be built would be as if to make it where the so more months might be ahead if you always sell your old Isabella the 27ths sofas..return to Sears next month!
To make it where the time machine visitor would go and convince Ferdinand and Isabella to stop Columbus, we would make changes in history and be able to prove or disprove what would have happened.
Carl Sagan comments that history would then be an experimental science. If volition is allowed for the time traveller he would go to the age to visit and history would be restarted at that hour and would influence the future. But the future he was from would be another future to which he could not return without a power wind fast foreword, without all the future returned to his own world by the time machine's read only fast forward alone from that point.
By changing history if just a bit in the time of the past he visited, he would be changing the world ahead if the masses motion was not influenced by the machine. Insubstantial changes in the flow of the events would multiply the months ahead in ways they wouldn't have otherwise. Complex combinations would be unique and the randomness of each restarted moment from the rewound age in history to be visited would be so by the usual physics of times flow.
Einstein's belief in a Spinozan cosmos was if we know the momentum of each particle, all that would be needed to find all the rest in a machine like universe would be simple. One reason I disagree with Einstein here here is because time at least with waves is not easily reversible.. simple particles, like pool halls and the big cash box are easy to time reverse, but not if the cash waves are complex. And if all is in quanta, all is unchanging, and where does all the change around us come from? My belief is there is a fundamental randomness, based on nonlinear waviness, more like gravity, more fundamental than the quanta. You put in one input, you get out five nonpredictable outputs in quantum science, this would make each result of Einstein's resetting the time machine also unpredictable, even if the setup was exactly the same. This would arise out of the basic nonlinearity of gravity and the low energy fields and this would make up the basic fields by overlapping complexity, an acceleration you set in one wave by particles and the waves cohere internally to give a different output each time.
(This relates to attraction via waves and repulsion by particles, waves being more fundamental to attraction since they are continuous and particles causing radiance by being discontinuous. To attract waves would have two sources and the wave is like a line that attracts by motion, the more motion by waving the wave, the more force is exerted by change in speed and frequency of the waves and work is done; repulsion takes place by particles, one mass throws the more solid weight and this causes recoil, first of the source and then the absorbed second radiant observer.
Einstein's belief in a Spinozan cosmos was if we know the momentum of each particle, all that would be needed to find all the rest in a machine like universe would be simple. One reason I disagree with Einstein here here is because time at least with waves is not easily reversible.. simple particles, like pool halls and the big cash box are easy to time reverse, but not if the cash waves are complex. And if all is in quanta, all is unchanging, and where does all the change around us come from? My belief is there is a fundamental randomness, based on nonlinear waviness, more like gravity, more fundamental than the quanta. You put in one input, you get out five nonpredictable outputs in quantum science, this would make each result of Einstein's resetting the time machine also unpredictable, even if the setup was exactly the same. This would arise out of the basic nonlinearity of gravity and the low energy fields and this would make up the basic fields by overlapping complexity, an acceleration you set in one wave by particles and the waves cohere internally to give a different output each time.
(This relates to attraction via waves and repulsion by particles, waves being more fundamental to attraction since they are continuous and particles causing radiance by being discontinuous. To attract waves would have two sources and the wave is like a line that attracts by motion, the more motion by waving the wave, the more force is exerted by change in speed and frequency of the waves and work is done; repulsion takes place by particles, one mass throws the more solid weight and this causes recoil, first of the source and then the absorbed second radiant observer.
Note that waves are lower energy like gravity, while particles are with more mass and momentum. This is why the IP of momentum transfer machines are considered to be a way to reach Mars in just a few weeks, by throwing the mass to the ship, and then the machine throws the mass to the cosmic shore. The interaction is stronger because the low energy waves are compressed enough to make the particles. Without the waves holding the systems together they would fizzle out to low density; thus gravity and waves are more fundamental even though particles are important.)
I believe if gravity is lighter than light it may move much faster than light as I say in my PHYSICS SYNOPSIS (see upper left of page) in my hopeful generalization of Maxwell's method, who Einstein admired the most in physics.
HISTORY By WAY of Neurons
These methods of travelling like by relative motion of the field in the relativistic wind tunnel or essentially, Einstein's consideration of the teleportation machine method above are not yet viable. The retrieval of the ancient light by consideration of Einstein's other ideas about it as I say above has some possible worth or perhaps a lot depending on the light. My favorite time travel method of these seems to be a more immediate method of finding the time, ancient time at any rate..
I believe if gravity is lighter than light it may move much faster than light as I say in my PHYSICS SYNOPSIS (see upper left of page) in my hopeful generalization of Maxwell's method, who Einstein admired the most in physics.
HISTORY By WAY of Neurons
These methods of travelling like by relative motion of the field in the relativistic wind tunnel or essentially, Einstein's consideration of the teleportation machine method above are not yet viable. The retrieval of the ancient light by consideration of Einstein's other ideas about it as I say above has some possible worth or perhaps a lot depending on the light. My favorite time travel method of these seems to be a more immediate method of finding the time, ancient time at any rate..
As found by the brain science of the 1920's each neuron contains all the memory of the entire brain. It was found that trimming the brains of lab mice showed no limit about memory.
So I believe sensors like MRI or other sensors to find the information in old neurons and revive eyewitness accounts of ages past for use e.g. in forensics, paleology, and to make cool computer simulations of ancient events, this may be the best machine of all that we may see here in the 21st century. CLICK HERE for more.
One of my motivations to find if the record could be found by the first method was how to get the information if it's there, to us here? Gravity waves or the EPR were my first idea because as I say I was in a hurry at the time! If they are possibly of high speed and somewhere near the energy of the matter waves, I reasoned these methods might be combined. One beauty of the light method is however about timing. To find the distant light if it interacts in the median zone where Einstein was both right and wrong about the light, say to find the light from 50 years ago, we find the light rays crossed at just 25 years out, this means there is no wait to find the light from that day, all we have to do is find the right angle if the interaction zone has enough information and is also readable!
For example if we want to find the information in light from 100 years before, we might look for light interacting with it from the distant regular source at just 50 light years out. And for 50 years we may look for the other sources that cross at that angle. This means angle may be important. Regular sources at the given angle would be a given by nature. We can't move them and only these ways to illuminate history may be how to know more about what was going on then, at least if other methods aren't enough to know. I'm only saying this is one way we may find out about history, this isn't the only way, but it may turn out to be useful.
(To build a giant optical telescope, we might use my idea of a rotating ray of light to sweep out the area of this "lense". The ray could have two standing waves that change the resilience of the medium, that is, the refraction and then another smaller sensor finds the light. This might be of worth for communications, finding the "perfect" record and also the lights of distant advanced civilizations, and for finding Earthlike worlds, all real cheap compared to a giant conventional machine. Another "cheap" method of building giant telescopes I envision may be to use giant gas filled lenses, much lighter and cheaper to orbit, and no doubt an optimal method of using arrays of them could also be of worth and these could help us heat worlds nearer for colonization, saving the earth from asteroid impact by ablation and radiation pressure to move the impactor, or even solving the onset of a future ice age.)
My belief is that if a good memory machine was available, even if the power source would need to be large like fusion, there would be no limit to how far the Big Machine could rewind all the way to the start of the Earth even, because it would be the simple process of finding the record, storing the info and then using it to build up the ancient age to visit with a giant decoder.
Some like Kip Thorne or Stephen Hawking who hope to use the relativistic speed of acceleration of black holes and other massive bodies as a time machine of sorts I think are limited by the lack of complexity of the massive fields.
.
I would think using neurons to find older eyewitness accounts of history would make a good ancient history simulator via a heads up type machine, ect. What to say to a historian, What's up? Or to an astronomer, "What's broadband?!"
A Perfect Record of History?
To visit ancient ages by computer simulation, another possibility (other than recreation of the past world of the Big Machine by the same method of the machine scaled up for giant use and so on) may be that the light reflected from the sun on any day in history at the speed of light mostly as an unchanged particle (or the image of distant stars would be changed or unseen) since it was reflected at that month in history so it might be retrieved and used to find what actually happened on that hour. I call this a Perfect History. This would then be put in the computer to make history computer simulations based on much more information than historians have laugh lines and old comic celebrations, (like the history kid who said let bygones be bygones, or astronomers who say see you around!) It may be lots cheaper than the Big Machine if they may find a way try to find this from radiance from the earth at any given day in history and use this information found to then make virtual historical visits with just usual cyber headsets and other such methods. Historian marms would love me, or optometrists who will see me now or dietitians, diet is good so I can walk through walls if my in box is jammed.
As promised my edit and improvement of this is about the use of two of Einstein's ideas;
Einstein predicted radiation pressure, and also that light is changed a bit in energy over great distance, one was the proven experiment yet the other wasn't. (I believe low energy light may change less with distance due to the Higgs' that act as stabilizers of the bosonic field; the low energy stabilization fields are at low speed like for the acceleration of gravity nearby for both particles of lower energy light, even so the majority of the two rays of energy have their energy stored in the Higgs' at slower speed relative to each other. Thus Einstein was wrong that the two high energy rays of light would impact instead of going right through each other, if no low energy field is present they being of high energy also might have radiation pressure.)
Since there is radiation pressure at high energy yet not at lower energy of the light, obviously beams of X Rays at right angles will have impacts of the particles like radiation pressure but low energy waves are without this. I would say the zone between the particles of light seen and the lower energy "real" light might both have the information of the record yet be enough like the high energy particles to interact with the light from two regular distant light sources where they cross and subtract out the signal from each enough to hopefully find the record or some of the record. (If the low energy light interacts less to hold the record of the history but still interacts enough to find it (as was to Einstein's dismay but perhaps he was also right here also!)) it will perhaps "erode" and with older light it would be more and more uncommon as the radius from the time in history increases. So the possibility of the "perfect" record may be more like a fossil, eroded, mostly there in times of good visibility, and so on.
A Perfect Record of History?
To visit ancient ages by computer simulation, another possibility (other than recreation of the past world of the Big Machine by the same method of the machine scaled up for giant use and so on) may be that the light reflected from the sun on any day in history at the speed of light mostly as an unchanged particle (or the image of distant stars would be changed or unseen) since it was reflected at that month in history so it might be retrieved and used to find what actually happened on that hour. I call this a Perfect History. This would then be put in the computer to make history computer simulations based on much more information than historians have laugh lines and old comic celebrations, (like the history kid who said let bygones be bygones, or astronomers who say see you around!) It may be lots cheaper than the Big Machine if they may find a way try to find this from radiance from the earth at any given day in history and use this information found to then make virtual historical visits with just usual cyber headsets and other such methods. Historian marms would love me, or optometrists who will see me now or dietitians, diet is good so I can walk through walls if my in box is jammed.
As promised my edit and improvement of this is about the use of two of Einstein's ideas;
Einstein predicted radiation pressure, and also that light is changed a bit in energy over great distance, one was the proven experiment yet the other wasn't. (I believe low energy light may change less with distance due to the Higgs' that act as stabilizers of the bosonic field; the low energy stabilization fields are at low speed like for the acceleration of gravity nearby for both particles of lower energy light, even so the majority of the two rays of energy have their energy stored in the Higgs' at slower speed relative to each other. Thus Einstein was wrong that the two high energy rays of light would impact instead of going right through each other, if no low energy field is present they being of high energy also might have radiation pressure.)
Since there is radiation pressure at high energy yet not at lower energy of the light, obviously beams of X Rays at right angles will have impacts of the particles like radiation pressure but low energy waves are without this. I would say the zone between the particles of light seen and the lower energy "real" light might both have the information of the record yet be enough like the high energy particles to interact with the light from two regular distant light sources where they cross and subtract out the signal from each enough to hopefully find the record or some of the record. (If the low energy light interacts less to hold the record of the history but still interacts enough to find it (as was to Einstein's dismay but perhaps he was also right here also!)) it will perhaps "erode" and with older light it would be more and more uncommon as the radius from the time in history increases. So the possibility of the "perfect" record may be more like a fossil, eroded, mostly there in times of good visibility, and so on.
One of my motivations to find if the record could be found by the first method was how to get the information if it's there, to us here? Gravity waves or the EPR were my first idea because as I say I was in a hurry at the time! If they are possibly of high speed and somewhere near the energy of the matter waves, I reasoned these methods might be combined. One beauty of the light method is however about timing. To find the distant light if it interacts in the median zone where Einstein was both right and wrong about the light, say to find the light from 50 years ago, we find the light rays crossed at just 25 years out, this means there is no wait to find the light from that day, all we have to do is find the right angle if the interaction zone has enough information and is also readable!
For example if we want to find the information in light from 100 years before, we might look for light interacting with it from the distant regular source at just 50 light years out. And for 50 years we may look for the other sources that cross at that angle. This means angle may be important. Regular sources at the given angle would be a given by nature. We can't move them and only these ways to illuminate history may be how to know more about what was going on then, at least if other methods aren't enough to know. I'm only saying this is one way we may find out about history, this isn't the only way, but it may turn out to be useful.
(To build a giant optical telescope, we might use my idea of a rotating ray of light to sweep out the area of this "lense". The ray could have two standing waves that change the resilience of the medium, that is, the refraction and then another smaller sensor finds the light. This might be of worth for communications, finding the "perfect" record and also the lights of distant advanced civilizations, and for finding Earthlike worlds, all real cheap compared to a giant conventional machine. Another "cheap" method of building giant telescopes I envision may be to use giant gas filled lenses, much lighter and cheaper to orbit, and no doubt an optimal method of using arrays of them could also be of worth and these could help us heat worlds nearer for colonization, saving the earth from asteroid impact by ablation and radiation pressure to move the impactor, or even solving the onset of a future ice age.)
My belief is that if a good memory machine was available, even if the power source would need to be large like fusion, there would be no limit to how far the Big Machine could rewind all the way to the start of the Earth even, because it would be the simple process of finding the record, storing the info and then using it to build up the ancient age to visit with a giant decoder.
However, because of no way to find the information about what was going on in the old ages before the Big Machine was built, I see no way rewinds could be achieved before when a big machine was built without more record because most of the information about the ancient ages can't be found, even if the information in the outward bound light was retrievable as I say may be possible herein, because it would be incomplete for half of the 24 hours the light was low frequency, and more information of worth is in other wavelengths than light..
Others have considered the possibility of finding the ancient light. If we actually were able to retrieve the light, we may improve from there, but like when a fossil is dug often much is not viable to find about the ancient life and no guarantee would be that just the right information to make the Big Machine reliable would be found.
Perhaps some other way than via the historic record in the light would be found for rewinding the Big Machine. Einstein believed the machine would not be able to travel before the information is encoded, and feasibility issues would be of import even if a power source like fusion were available.
If instead the machine, feasibility aside is essentially a 3d printer based on a good enough record, and these are the two main elements, Einstein was wrong because this has nothing to do with when the machine was built. Of course even so feasibility would be the main limit for a large machine.
However since it would have value to save the world from problems in ages ahead with a second option if a big enough power source were found there may be a good reason the world machine for our more advanced civilization would be of use.
Eric Lerner and others are inventing fusion motors that use imploding electric fields to generate force that fuses well with a much more controlled flow when the protons are imploded by surrounding atoms. I think the problem with surrounding atoms is they will fuse with the fuel generating radioactive waste, other inventors like me have devised cleaner methods (see the atomic spin motor ). For my bestselling reducing radioactivity site click here.
If the light is like Einstein believed, and a large source of the materials to rebuild the time to be visited with were achieved, and if a viable memories on the machine were achieved (in the time since the encoder was built) of where the machine could save to rewind was available, I think The Machine would be not impossible. Physicists aren't dumb, and I think the problem of having to rebuild an ancient world to revisit it is why physicists haven't already built a time machine that has any worth to reverse it. The use of a one man time machine that would reedit smaller regions than the world by these methods from the teleportation science being developed may have real value to stay in good wealth..
WILL SUPERMASSIVE BODIES EVER BE OF WORTH AS TIME MACHINES? Some like Kip Thorne or Stephen Hawking who hope to use the relativistic speed of acceleration of black holes and other massive bodies as a time machine of sorts I think are limited by the lack of complexity of the massive fields.
While my idea of using the relativistic wind tunnel to perhaps slow time in the lab nearer to us would be about relative field motion. Using massive fields would be more viable to us, at least to slow time. But using the field to speed it up or reverse time without a machine seems improbable.
Most of our information about our lives is of electric charges and electricity, so you can't reverse complex electricity with simple gravity of massive fields because gravity won't act on all the particles in an exact rewind method like The Machine.
In evolution, computers and most other genius, the motifs start simple and go complex, this is how we evolved. Being wavelike, a massive source of gravity in GWD is just a sort of blob of mass, the field of our life is much more complex and would have to use precise relocation of points of mass to cause the teleportation.
Gravity pulling down to onennes, being the opposite of thermodynamics that lifts us up in my ideas of General Wave Dynamics GWD reverses time in general, but not exactly; acceleration of complex nonlinear waves seem necessary to hold the cosmos together and in GWD they wouldn't be via the *slow* speed of light which isn't a wave uninfluenced from emission to absorption as by Einstein's belief so the speed is constant unlike the acceleration of gravity.. I believe acceleration won't fit relativity.
Gravity pulling down to onennes, being the opposite of thermodynamics that lifts us up in my ideas of General Wave Dynamics GWD reverses time in general, but not exactly; acceleration of complex nonlinear waves seem necessary to hold the cosmos together and in GWD they wouldn't be via the *slow* speed of light which isn't a wave uninfluenced from emission to absorption as by Einstein's belief so the speed is constant unlike the acceleration of gravity.. I believe acceleration won't fit relativity.
